Topic: Unpopular Gaming Opinions

@Th3solution I would possibly argue against the idea that it is bad for gaming. Firstly, I think it does free to play very well. Regular content drops and even stories, no pay to win elements, and being free means it is hugely accessible.

Also I think it is a good polished product and if it get consoles bought and young ones into gaming then great.

That said, I agree in that it’s not for me. Firstly because I tried it and got my ass kicked by like a six year old and I can’t be bothered to invest the time to git gud, but also because there is no incentive to keep me playing.

@Rudy_Manchego Perhaps it’s a bit harsh of me to say it’s bad for gaming. It’s more like it’s ...folly to think this is what gaming is. Like it’s not really representative of the craft, and newcomers don’t understand that. Similar to how I felt about the Wii when every grandma and grandpa got one to play Wii Sports with their grandkids. It was good to get people into the hobby who never had interest before, but it didn’t really sell traditional gaming to those people, I don’t think. People came in just to see what all the fuss was about and after a time it failed to be sustainable to the casual market. The competition, Sony and Microsoft, developed their own move controls hoping to get a piece of the pie. The whole thing died out eventually and we were left with basically the same core audience for gaming we had before, albeit Nintendo was a lot richer for it. And props to them, and props to Epic also for making money on Fortnite. I’ve no issue with that. I just foresee many startup Battle Royale games coming in and vying for market share and eventually failing and the genre dying off. I guess it’s not bad for gaming if it brings in revenue, but it’s misleading as to what the gaming community is at its core.

Lol, reading this I’m pretty sure I’m over analyzing it, but that’s my unpopular opinion. 😋

@Th3solution TBF, Sony was developing what became Move before release of the EyeToy on PS2.

I don't think that many additional releases (on console at least) will be trying the milk the Battle Royale teat. Perhaps if Fortnite wasn't FTP they would - but since it has such a console monopoly and with the AAA franchises throwing their own BR modes in with their next releases, I really don't think there's much time for any new contenders to make a mark.

If anything though, it does show that people are still keen for a general type of online gameplay. So for that, I hope that PS3 greats like Warhawk and M.A.G. are revisited.

@KALofKRYPTON Yeah, I never played MAG or Warhawk. Wasn’t MAG just a lot like PUBG? Maybe it was before it’s time because I recall it kind of failed commercially.

@Th3solution Oh yeah - it bombed! Killed off Zipper Interactive too sadly.

MAG was great though, but your team mates really needed a headset (which there was a distinct lack of on PS3 players at the time), or at least to be on message.

The gameplay was largely objective based over a few different modes. The biggest was Dominion. 256 players, 128 per side but split down to squads of 8. You'd have a squad leader and another player in charge of 4 squads up to a command role for the whole 128 side.
You'd complete your squad objectives which drew you ever-closer to the centre of the map. Honestly, when M.A.G. clicked - it really was brilliant. When it didn't, it was usually because you'd have half of the players trying to do a run & gun and ignore objectives or the squad leaders.

It picked up a bit again when it was released in Japan, but it became pretty much impossible to get a dominion game going in way too short a time.

@RogerRoger I always appreciate your gift for articulating things in the most perfect way. 😁 I completely agree and your comment is right in line with my thinking and experience.

Fortnite is not for me personally, but if people genuinely enjoy it and it makes them happy then good for them. I do agree that the creep into mainstream consciousness - to the point that people assume you must be a Fortnite player - is a little annoying, but like most gaming fads it will probably pass. Funny thing is, for some years many publishers (cough EA cough) have been saying that traditional single player games are dead, yet those experiences are stronger than ever. If Fortnite happens to be a thing, I don't care if I can still play what I enjoy.

@RogerRoger I think that's just a reflection of society and what's popular. You dress up as anime and video game characters? That's weird man. You paint your body blue with the numbers of your favorite football player, wear a silly hat, and scream at the game until you can't even talk the next day? That's some team spirit!

@Jaz007 One of my favourite tweets from the last few days:

"American sports fans: De-fense! De-fense!
British sports fans: All right lads, I’ve just worked up a song to the tune of Debussy’s Clair de Lune about an opposing player’s drink driving charge, ill count us off:"

Here’s one: a games primary purpose does not have to to be fun. It’s needs to be engaging and quality, but not necessarily fun. Being artistic or telling a story can come first. Movies don’t need to be fun, songs don’t need to fun, books don’t need to be fun, and if we want games to be considered on the same level artistically as them, we need to remove the notion that’s all that matters in a game. Don’t get me wrong, it’s fine to have Just Cause that’s nothing but fun, but not all games need to have that main objective.
Persona 5 helped me understand this better. The artistic depth of the game is nuts, as well as the quality of the story and characters. There was definitely fun to be had, but that didn’t drive the games quality as the main part. Fun didn’t make it the greatest game ever made, the art and story did. I think games that just aren’t fun to be play should be made.

@Jaz007 seems fair. Sounds like Flower or Journey or most walking simulators. They're all about the art and story, not much fun in those games. I don't tend to enjoy them but I respect what they're about and what they represent.

@Th3solution I don't get the Fortnite love either. I played it a little bit a few months ago and found it a bit dull. But a lot of its popularity seems to be with school kids and these things just snowball with them as people don't want to miss out on it.

Epic have kind of tapped into that as well with the emotes and dance moves which have become just as much of a thing. Then footballers play/stream the game and do the dance moves to celebrate goals and it just keeps going.

I'm not sure CoD sticking in a BR mode will make a huge difference. As people have said, being FTP (but then cleverly making you pay every couple of months for the passes) is a big selling point, plus the cartoony graphics seem to help rather than some gritty mix of brown and grey.

I blame Drake for the popularity of Fortnite.

Played it for a couple of hours earlier in the year which was enough for me.

These things come and go. I'm sure people will still play it just like they still do in World Of Warcraft, Dota, League of Legends and Overwatch. But it just won't be crazy popular as it is now and you won't hear about as much.

DOOM wasn't a good game, it was repetitive, the controls were floaty and it was kind of bland to look at, kind of generic

@FullbringIchigo Which Doom? I wasn't overly impressed with the latest Doom and it felt so old-school with no 'real' story to it. The only thing that kept me going to the end was the desire to complete the game. The glory kills, whilst cool to begin with, got repetitive really quickly. I know its on the other side of the spectrum of FPS games to Wolfenstein but I much prefer that to Doom. I wouldn't say it was a 'bad' game - more 'average' at best as it at least 'worked' as intended - well if you don't count the MP which was really poor by modern FPS standards - at least when I played it near to launch...

Both franchises were very similar with Doom taking the Wolfenstein format but with a different setting and enemy type. However, modern day Wolfenstein is now very different with a emphasis on Story. Its also a great example of a game that still embraces its roots whilst also bringing it up to date. Doom to me felt much more like the Original Doom with fancier graphics and the Glory kills - the map maybe a bit more varied, less 'boxy' with better verticality but the principal is still very similar - even the 'locked' room until you slay everything crops up a lot in this. The Glory kill reward, ie Ammo, health etc seem out of place - these demons sprouting out Ammo etc despite not having 'weapons'. There was a fair few levels that required back tracking too so once 'cleared' of demons, they were very empty.

I may be in a minority, but I actually think Doom 3 was better. It still had the 'classic' Doom thing of hidden rooms, demons and the BFG of course but also wove a narrative into the game - much in the same way that Wolfenstein has done. I do think that Doom has a great potential for Story too rather just be a 'mindless' shooter.

Maybe it is 'refreshing' for some to have a mindless shooter that's old school, with no 'story' as story can be subjective and often requires much more of scripted journey, character development, side characters, cut-scene etc. Its much easier to strip that out and go back to basics, have a 'vague' progression using 'environmental' design to allude to progression but really its the same 'level' with increasingly difficult or more enemies but better guns to deal with them with a different backdrop and occasional 'boss' room thrown in.

The new Doom looks like it will be more of the same in essence and whilst I will probably end up buying it as I have been playing Doom since the original released on PC, its not a game I am willing to buy on Day 1 or at full price either. A new Wolfenstein is a 'pre-order' for me by comparison...

@BAMozzy the last one that was released sorry, i should have made that more clear

DOOM 2016 is easily the best shooter I've ever played. It's pure fun.

With that said, I also enjoyed DOOM 3. It just... isn't a good DOOM game. As a FPS/survival horror mashup, though? Pretty neat.

1-CDPR makes the works of companies like Bethesda look like amature hour.

2-TW3 is still the pinnacle of RPGs as a whole & its storytelling,amazing side quests & interesting characters & world have yet to be outmatched.

3-Ubisoft is a horrible company who's got lots of good ideas on paper , but sucks at executing them & with the exception of the SC franchise,the Rayman games & the upcoming BGAE 2 , note that I didn't play the original ,they couldn't make a good game even if their life depended on it.

4-Sony's actually the only one out of the big 3 who pushes the boundaries in terms of graphics & good storytelling & overall their hardware's got the best exclusives.

5-Finally, survival horror games should go back to their roots & evolve the 3rd person formula with fixed camera angles , similar to Until Dawn, keep in mind that I enjoyed games like RE7 & The Evil Within.

I'd have to agree that I'm much more into the 3D Sonic Games, just think they're more fun, when done right of course, which sadly isn't often. Sonic Adventure 2 battle is the gold standard for me.

I would also have to agree that Last of Us was good but not a masterpiece. Played it once, never felt the need to again. I think the Uncharted games are much more fun.

Also would have to agree that Xbox controllers are overhyped. They're not bad, just not perfection as many people say. Can't stand the triggers, and also can't stand the names for the buttons. LB and LT....get outta here. The original Xbox controller is one of the worst I've ever played on though, have to say.

@AshSilverChair95 I would agree that the Witcher 3 pushed the open world RPG genre beyond anything Bethesda has done in recent years but that was their first 'Open World game and Bethesda really only brought out Fallout 4 a few months later. I do agree though that Fallout 4 felt 'old' after W3 but games like Fallout 3 & New Vegas, Oblivion and Skyrim (unless on PS3) were still at the top of their field. No doubt CDPR will continue to push the open world RPG but its too early to tell whether Bethesda will close the gap after the Witcher 3.

Ubisoft can be very good. Assassins Creed was great, then dropped off butt came back with one of the 'best' games of 2017. Rainbow Six: Seige seems very popular too - not my thing personally but is still going strong. They have tried at least to bring 'new' franchises as well as keep some fan favourites going - unlike EA and Activision who seem to be relying on a 'few' existing franchises and use 'Micro-transactions' to boost profits. Instead of taking a chance on a new franchise, invest in actually making games, they would rather scale down game development and increase the ways of getting more money from their fans. Ubisoft, whilst they may have some 'micro-transactions' have also given us 'new' IP's like Watchdogs, For Honour, the Crew, Steep, the Division, Ghost Recon: Wildlands and Skull & Bones - as well as numerous 'small/indie' type games like Child of Light, Valiant Heart, Grow Up, Trials and spin offs, Toy Soldiers etc. All while still bringing us more established franchises like Far Cry, Assassins Creed, Just Dance, South Park etc. Maybe not all your 'preferred' genres or games but at least its a 'variety' of genres. I am not saying they are the 'best' 3rd party publisher but at least they bringing us a lot of options and most are 'decent' within their genre even if they are not necessarily Game of the Year contenders.

As for Sony, they are helped by the fact that their 'base' console is the most powerful on the market. The Switch is not capable of pushing 'graphics' because of the hardware limitations and so have to be more 'artistic' in their graphical design rather than push the boundaries. MS are also limited more so than Sony because the XB1 is significantly less 'capable' than a PS4. You also have to consider that, apart from Turn 10 and Forza, their other 'big' studio's are relatively new. 343 and the Coalition were 'formed' after Bungie left and Epic moved on from Gears. Naughty Dog, Sucker Punch, Guerilla Games etc have been well established and making games for Sony for many years.

As for story telling, Sony studios have had some 'decent' stories to tell but I wouldn't say they have necessarily pushed any boundaries at all and I have played a lot of great story driven games with less predictable plots and better scripts. Arguably Ninja Theory's Hellblade pushed more boundaries by takling Mental Health in such a great way. Stories are of course subjective and resonate differently with people. They can be enhanced or negatively impacted on by game-play and other factors - if you can't put up with the clunky controls of 'Until Dawn' then you may not experience the full story. Sony also have made games to their 'strengths' and MS make games to their 'strength's' too in a way with a 'focus' on online with a campaign option. If you look at MS's 'big' franchises, they are well known for their online modes where as Sony's are more known for their Single player story.

Its no secret that Sony has the 'best' exclusives but that is helped by having a LOT of studio's and able to release a LOT more games. They are also able to build their games for the 'highest' spec in the base PS4 where as others have built to the 'lowest' spec - whether that's an XB1 or low-end PC - devices with lower RAM speeds, lower GPU capability and so can set the 'minimum' bar higher. That being said, Gears 4 is still a technical showpiece and holds up very well against Sony's games too. Whether you enjoy the game-play or story is irrelevant when you are just looking at the technical aspect of the visual presentation and performance. Also the Forza franchise holds up very well too against GT Sport - especially the newest ones.

As for Horror Survival, I must admit I do like the 3rd Person perspective with games like Dead Space for example but one of the best Horror Survival games this generation, Alien Isolation, also proved that first person perspectives work very well - perhaps even better because you can't see enemies behind you before they attack, can't corner glitch and see things your character can't or wouldn't see - you are actually seeing exactly what the character can see and that makes it much more intense, more 'horror'. I am not saying that 'all' Horror Survival games should be First Person but I do think that there is a place for both 3rd and 1st person perspectives in this genre.

@AdamantiumClaws The Xbox controller is considered the 'best' because the asymmetrical layout means that the Left thumb fall naturally on the the left thumbstick and as you don't need to constantly remove the Thumb to use the D-Pad, its in the most natural position for long term play. Because its a more natural position, you also have better control - its been proven time and time again and why professional gamers who play for hours and hours every day prefer them and why all but Sony use that layout. As for the naming, the LB, LT etc are self explanatory - Left Button - referring to the shoulder Button, Left Trigger etc. Its much 'easier' than L1, L2 and L3. The triggers are superior too - especially compared to any controller from Sony prior to the DS4 which in fairness, actually have a great angle and feel more like triggers. Its also why a LOT of FPS games used the 'shoulder' buttons to Shoot as the 'default' but I hated playing racing games on the PS3 because the trigger angles, the silly little horns to hold and symmetrical layout caused my hand to cramp up after a very short time. The symmetrical layout isn't an issue on the DS4 because they added more bulbous 'grips' and much better trigger angles but its still less 'natural' even though its by far the best Sony controller for comfort and long term use - to give credit where credit is due. MS's 'Duke' certainly wasn't the worst in my opinion. There have been a lot of controllers, joysticks etc that are 'worse' in the history of gaming. Granted it was 'oversized' and relatively weighty too but I at least found it 'comfortable' to use - I do prefer the smaller controllers though but the N64 'Trident' wasn't 'better' just as an example...

Whether any of my opinion here is 'unpopular' - maybe within the PS fanboy base, then so be it.