Unpopular Gaming Opinions

Just reminded me seeing the Transistor thread below, I really did not like Bastion, specifically the camera angle and its combat

.ak wrote: »

When did the dialogue for the MGS series become so fake deep/anime like? I remember playing MGS1 and then 2... at the end of 2 it got a bit deep, with the whole patriots thing, but before that the longest bits of dialogue was usually the bosses.

I still love the MGS games, but I find it's a far cry from the first two in the series. Now it's mostly long cut scenes - which in fairness are often epic - and very squeeky bum-time gameplay, which is also cool but the gameplay in the first two games mixed it up enough to keep you interested, it wasn't all stealth, like the RPG scenes or the sniper scenes or cool boss battles.

It was definitely during the second one. The frequent interruptions from Rose to talk about their relationship during the game upped the cheese massively from the first game. It suddenly occurred to me when I played at home and my sister was in the room and told me it sounded utterly ridiculous and I found myself unable to disagree. It was also the game that turned the story into an excessively convoluted mess that I never would have understood a fraction of without various wikis and videos on the topic.

I think the 3rd was really indulgent though. I had never before or since played a game that took a good 45 minutes of watching before you got to do anything.

I'm kind of conflicted because while the game seems to have no idea how to make the most of its medium with it's extended soap-opera dialogue and pontificating, the part near the end of MGS2 where everything gets turned on its head seemed like a stroke of genius to me.

C14N wrote: »

2) Sigint is left very undeveloped in MGS3 but he's important in the lore. I don't know if you've played the first but he's

the DARPA chief who dies at Shadow Moses and he's one of the 5 founding members of the PATRIOTS. He created the AIs that get brought up a lot in MGS2 and MGS4.

.

I hate that reveal so much. I am firmly in Retro's camp of hating MGS 4 with a never ending passionate fire of hate. And that reveal is one of the elements of why I hate it.

I loved MGS 3 and i loved the characters, yes like Seantheman said most of the codec calls are pretty useless, but I actually found calling them and getting the story tangents of them talking about james bond and godzilla interesting and fun, MGS 3 was the the beginning of the transitioning the codecs out of the mgs games like they were in 1 & 2. 3's notion was to use up all your necessary codec calls in the first chunk of each major mission segment and then avoid using them for crucial gameplay elements at all from then on, they just became interactive encyclopaedias of the mgs universe after that point.

sure the first 20 minutes can be annoying but after that was out of the way you could ignore it or when bored or curious call up for odd bits of chat and possible inspiration to try something in game.


compared to MGS4 the codecs in 3 were a blessing. 4 had those f*cking evil 20-40 minute briefing segments that were the most painful numb inducing boring inventions in a mgs game. The codecs in 4 were even more useless then they were in 3 cause there were no tangents and there was no function to them either, worse they brought back Rose and put her in your codec.


But yeah with that angry tangent out of the way. I liked the casual nature of your support team in 3, felt very much of the time and fitting of the sort of james bond vibe they went with in 3.

But 4....
God damn it I'm all angry again over that piece of ****.

Seems like liking MGS4 is actually the unpopular opinion.

It is deeply flawed, but I still enjoyed it. The gameplay in the first two acts was great, though not long enough and didn't carry over into the last three acts. The story/script/cutscenes were generally poor, but there were some great moments. The whole game was fan-service, though it went completely overboard in some respects.

Overall, I enjoyed playing it. The weakest of the main 4 games, but enjoyable nonetheless.

C14N wrote: »

I also like MGS4 but I played it out of context, it was the first MGS game I ever played more than maybe an hour or two of. I had no idea what was happening in the story at all, I just liked the stealth gameplay.

MGS really is an oddball series of games. I'm not sure if it's trying to be taken seriously or if it's sort of tongue-in-cheek almost all of the time. Ever since I read Ben Crosshaw's Extra Punctuation column a few weeks ago I can't help shaking the same perception of it that he had:

"Metal Gear is like the weird kid who hangs around with your circle of schoolfriends and is tolerated because he does entertaining things, like the time he punted a sleepy bullfrog into the girl's changing rooms. "

The trouble is with the success of MGS1, Kojima hasn't really had anyone to reign him in. The concept behind playing as Raiden and the whole Big Shell section and how it's similar to Shadow Moses yet completely different was genius, though poorly executed (the section where you rescue Emma but have to stop every 5 steps for a f*cking codec conversation despite there being nobody else there was a worse crime against computer games than anything MGS4 did imo).

MGS3 was amazing, though the story of it has been sh*t on by MGS4 and MGS:Peace Walker.

MGS4 just went so over the top with everything though. And the trailers for The Phantom Pain haven't done anything to quell my fear that there's no-one saying to Kojima "Are you sure about that?". Kojima is like a bad taxi-driver. He takes the longest and most complicated route to get to a simple destination.

Homeworld games have aged poorly.

I'd agree with you re: GTA V but I can't play it to find out. If only I'd known about the "Can't be bothered loading, why not play a different game instead?" issue, I'd have saved myself a few quid. :rolleyes:

Grimebox wrote: »

Fallout 3 is really, really ugly. I tried to play New Vegas about a year or two back and I couldn't get over how its colour pallete was taken straight out of Quake 1.

I wouldn't say this is unpopular. Everyone I know admits that Fallout 3 looks like a turd sandwich visually with horrible character animations (Skyrim was barely an improvement), it's just that people look past that because it's impossible to polish things up for such a massive and detailed map.

CiDeRmAn wrote: »

I loved GTA III on the PS2 but it was Vice City that was the best of show for me.
All titles since are, as you suggest, just ploughing the same field.

A game like Red Dead Redemption however counters that by feeling brand new, all my childhood dreams watching westerns on the telly made real, or at least real enough.

But don't let a dislike of nostalgia blind one to the other perfect games of the past.
From Pacman to Ico, from Galaga to Super Mario World, these are games that remain essential, quite independent of mere subjective recollections.

I would say his point about nostalgia was less that he's criticising the original old game and more criticising re-treading it repeatedly with new instalments. Mario Galaxy was good because it was a fresh spin on the franchise. Personally, I found NSMB Wii to be a very stale nostalgia-exercise in comparison (although I'm aware it gained popularity outside of fans of the originals).

Finished the walking dead played it on the vita it was only ok in my opinion not a game of the year to me