Duke4.net Forums: What are the most controversial opinions you hold about video games? - Duke4.net Forums

Jump to content

  • 15 Pages +
  • « First
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

What are the most controversial opinions you hold about video games?

User is offline   Person of Color 

  • Senior Unpaid Intern at Viceland

#421

View PostOook, on 23 June 2014 - 03:20 AM, said:

I think I've completed both.
I mean, of course it's a good game (flying with Tails is just awesome), but I think it became too complex, too slow; I prefer the diabolic speed of Sonic 2 levels. And for a more thoughtful gameplay, watching every step, I prefer the first Sonic.


S3&K requires more skill to maintain speed, which is why I prefer it.



Quote

I had invested hundreds of hours of obsessive play in ME & ME2 before ME3, so I was really, really into the story. I even preordered the special edition (and it's been the last time I do that, I learn from lessons), I was very excited for meeting again all the characters, see what happened with my choices, how the story ends and, of course, for playing a great game.
But after about just ten hours of gameplay, I quit it for months. I still was far from achieving the ending (I know how to play it so I look for every quest, for every dialogue -I always saved everyone who could be saved) but I already felt it all bland. Something was rotten in the game, it wasn't half good as the second (of course, I didn't expect anything as the first). Everything was the same, as I wanted, but it wasn't the same, it was worst.
So, even if I was one of the first starting the game and feeling its crappery, the great ending polemic caught me unknowing the end and, as I already had suspended my game, I kept waiting for the extended free DLC to have the "true" ending since my first playthrough. I never did a second, and still don't fell like I want to. The ending was meh for me, but at least Shepard managed to be a god, which was what I wanted since the beginning, so it was just okay for me; nothing great, nothing awful. But the game itself is very far from the excellence of the previous iterations.

Of course it has many good things, but I felt it as letdown even without knowing the ending, it's a problem in the gameplay itself -the writing is ok for me. Perhaps it's just the sound effects, which are incredible dull and no weapon has sense of impact, or how boring is to kill the same human enemies again and again and again.
I should try the DLC, perhaps when the next ME gets closer and it restores my interest in the saga.


All the DLC in ME2 has strong links to 3, save for Firewalker. All the DLC in 3 is required or else it's a half assed game, and the ending will feel incomplete. Except for Firewalker all of this DLC contains important plot points and some of the best moments in the entire series. That's literally 25 hours of content total, between two games (10 in ME2 and 15 in ME3) that create plot holes in 3 if you don't play them. It's long enough to be it's own game. Isn't EA a great company? Don't give them a fucking cent.

You can get ME2 DLC packs off TPB that integrate with Steam ME2. Your account won't get banned from Steam because all DLC purchases go through BioWare's system. They can't really ban you either...just set up your firewall to block ME2.

This post has been edited by Protected by Viper: 23 June 2014 - 07:34 AM

0

User is offline   Person of Color 

  • Senior Unpaid Intern at Viceland

#422

New controversial opinion: Command and Conquer 3 had the best gameplay in the series.
0

User is offline   The Commander 

  • I used to be a Brown Fuzzy Fruit, but I've changed bro...

#423

Fuck off cunt.
0

User is offline   Jeff 

#424

View PostProtected by Viper, on 22 June 2014 - 07:48 AM, said:

Also that ending is my favorite ever, but you gotta really pay attention to everything (including the codex) and be emotionally involved for it to matter. That final Synthesis scene with Liara and EDI made me totally break down and cry. It was written hardcore fans who were also REALLY intelligent and observant, so a lot of people don't understand or like it.


Indeed. Best ending ever.

Spoiler


This post has been edited by Jeff: 24 June 2014 - 08:27 AM

0

User is offline   Person of Color 

  • Senior Unpaid Intern at Viceland

#425

Indoctrination Theory? Come on man, it's bullshit, and even Bioware has done everything possible short of outright saying it's bullshit.
0

User is offline   Jeff 

#426

View PostProtected by Viper, on 25 June 2014 - 07:24 PM, said:

Indoctrination Theory? Come on man, it's bullshit, and even Bioware has done everything possible short of outright saying it's bullshit.


That first link (from someone who works there) says that is what it is supposed to be. As well as all the other stuff (PAX videos, tweets of Bioware messing with people's heads, multiplayer trailers that wave it in front of us, forum posts by multiple developers themselves stating it is perfectly valid explanation, etc, etc). Short of saying the words "it's true", I don't know what other proof people need. There is a mountain of information in the game to suggest this. Not just a couple things here or here. I'd be happy to discuss this in the other thread, but most people would think I'm nuts.

This post has been edited by Jeff: 25 June 2014 - 09:45 PM

0

User is offline   Jblade 

#427

Believing in the indoctrination theory gives Bioware far, far, far too much credit (this is the same developer that brought you DA2 and made the "we want the call of duty audience" catchphrase)
1

User is offline   Jeff 

#428

View PostJames, on 26 June 2014 - 01:18 AM, said:

Believing in the indoctrination theory gives Bioware far, far, far too much credit


In the same way that the council refused to believe the Reapers existed until they showed up at their front door. Like I said, it was meant to be pretty obvious.

Quote

(this is the same developer that brought you DA2 and made the "we want the call of duty audience" catchphrase)


As I said in an earlier post, catering to the "core gamer" or fanbase isn't profitable in this day and age. If Bioware wants to stay in business they have to open their doors a bit.

This post has been edited by Jeff: 26 June 2014 - 06:19 AM

0

User is offline   Person of Color 

  • Senior Unpaid Intern at Viceland

#429

View PostJames, on 26 June 2014 - 01:18 AM, said:

Believing in the indoctrination theory gives Bioware far, far, far too much credit (this is the same developer that brought you DA2 and made the "we want the call of duty audience" catchphrase)


This. ME has some great writing, but Mac and Drew couldn't pull off this shit, period.

Like I mentioned in another thread even the central theme and lore of ME, in all it's awesomeness, is just a more fleshed out, superior, finished version of FreeSpace. Drew is the guy who lifted so much from Volition's carcass.

Also, if you want unconventional opinions, I think Mac is a better writer than Drew.

View PostJeff, on 26 June 2014 - 06:14 AM, said:

In the same way that the council refused to believe the Reapers existed until they showed up at their front door. Like I said, it was meant to be pretty obvious.


That's the video I was talking about earlier. You can read into it however you want, but I detect multiple hints of sarcasm.

ME's ending was a deep philosophical, emotional endpoint, and a well done one. It wasn't a dream sequence. One of the chief problems with indoctrination theory is that it uses developer oversights as proof it's real. Such as Shepard grabbing someone else's gun. Or the green Krogan gun in Synthesis. Or the spread of the energy as seen through the Milky Way. ME3 was born as a half assed rushed product. It took a year of expansions and another 15 hours of gameplay for it to be a contender for best game of all time. Indoctrination theory doesn't want to recognize this, because it would make so much of it invalid.

This post has been edited by Protected by Viper: 26 June 2014 - 09:11 AM

1

User is offline   Jeff 

#430

View PostProtected by Viper, on 26 June 2014 - 09:09 AM, said:

One of the chief problems with indoctrination theory is that it uses developer oversights as proof it's real.


I would be willing to bet people didn't read the codex entry titled indoctrination before doing the ending sequence. Or the one called harvesting, which goes into detail what Reaper harvesting is. Like I said, unless it's made painfully obvious, people aren't going to believe it. That's fine.

Quote

ME3 was born as a half assed rushed product. It took a year of expansions and another 15 hours of gameplay for it to be a contender for best game of all time


I don't really buy that. It'd be nice to take as long as you want in order to finish something, but most people who claim games are rushed have never worked under a deadline before. Hell, a lot of gamers think deadlines shouldn't even exist and you should be given as much time and money in order to finish the game. I just think people are looking for perfection in every game that is made. This game was good, but I don't expect perfection every time.

Look at DNF. They started over 3 times or so, and they still weren't able to finish the game. If I remember the quote "so what do you think of the game Duke? Was it any good? Yeah, but after 12 fucking years, it should be"! That's what would happen if there wasn't any deadlines. We haven't heard a word about HL3 from Valve. Not even sure if they are working on it.

I have deadlines at work. I can't just take my sweet time doing my job in order to make it the best thing ever. It would be nice, but it's not going to happen. I kind of have to meet it halfway between best thing ever, and somewhere in between.

As the Illusive Man once said "it's always a matter of resources". You have to work with what you have. Bioware rolled out what they were going to do with the game before hand, then was given the appropriate funds in order to make game based on how much they figured it would cost. Like any project, you plan it out before hand, then build it. Not, build it and ask for money as you go. Any business is the same way. They all have budgets and deadlines to meet. Can't print money so that everything is perfect every time. Look what happened with the economy. It's just like those people who lived beyond their means and bought stuff they couldn't afford. If your budget doesn't allow for war asset cinematics (or anything else for that matter) they will have to be cut from the game. Or anything else for that matter.

Back in the day, there was tons of stuff left out of games. Unfinished levels and other ideas that never came to be.

I recall certain things were cut from ME2 and resurrected in ME3 somewhere.

This post has been edited by Jeff: 26 June 2014 - 10:03 AM

0

User is offline   Jblade 

#431

Quote

Also, if you want unconventional opinions, I think Mac is a better writer than Drew.

Part of his stuff sucks (like fucking Kai-Leng) but he knows how to make likable people (even if they are fairly one-dimensional) I like Liara, but she is a bit of a clusterfuck of character development. Garrus is literally a Shepard fanboy and they pulled the whole 'man meet me at the bar shepard!' thing out of their asses because he was nothing like that in the first game. I still like him of course! But they played pretty loose with the characters so they would be likeable first and realistic second.

I've read the books by Drew, he had greater vision but his work is very dry. The first game feels the most grounded and the most realistic, but it didn't have the same kind of flair to it that the later games did (apart from the ending which was the most exciting out of the 3 to me) I haven't read the last one though, apparently that one was so fucking terrible they stopped selling it.

I want to replay the trilogy on PC but there's no way I'd want to pay full price for all the DLC and I live in the UK which is fairly draconian when it comes to pirating stuff (even though I've already bought it all once anyway)

Anyways as Viper said, it's all fine to try and draw links between inconsistencies but ultimately a ton of stuff gets overlooked in games. Shepard uses a specific gun because it would of been too much work to make every pistol usable in those sequences (and of course it could of fucked with balance) as proof of that I actually remember if you use the Scorpion on the mars mission at the start you can't even finish the last sequence as the robot will kill you before you can kill it, everytime.

Quote

As I said in an earlier post, catering to the "core gamer" or fanbase isn't profitable in this day and age. If Bioware wants to stay in business they have to open their doors a bit.

I have no problem with the initial bit, but it was a fucking stupid idea to actually try and aim for COD's audience with a fantasy role playing game where you're expected to spend a significant amount of time talking to people and looking at menus. To me that's a sign some people there simply did not actually know what they were doing.

This post has been edited by James: 26 June 2014 - 03:10 PM

1

Share this topic:


  • 15 Pages +
  • « First
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic


All copyrights and trademarks not owned by Voidpoint, LLC are the sole property of their respective owners. Play Ion Fury! ;) © Voidpoint, LLC

Enter your sign in name and password


Sign in options