Your video game hot take(s) thread

[Bob_McMillan]

The first step would be to not make it a cover based shooter.

See, that's the hot take: I WANT it to be a cover based shooter. Because they don't really exist anymore. At least, they're not nearly as popular as they used to be. I still maintain that cover based shooting can be fun, if the devs bother making it so. I can't remember which Uncharted it was, as I played the collection (probably 2 though), but I thought they were able to design a fair number of encounters where you just couldn't sit behind a wall and wait for enemies to come to you. I recall some parts of Mass Effect 3 being the same, with Banshees teleporting behind you to stick a thermal clip up your butt.

​

My "problem" with Vanquish is that its a movement game first, shooter second. Kind of like Saints Row 4. Shooting a dude consists of getting your reticle on them and left clicking. Which is fine, but if you removed all the advanced movement, it would be a pretty shit game. Same if you removed bullet time from Max Payne. I want a third person shooter that can rely mainly on its shooting mechanics to be good.

 

[Gordon_4]

Since we're talking Uncharted...

We need a good third person, cover based shooter that's focused on the actual shooting. No fucking crammed in optional stealth, RPG mechanics, open world bullshit, puzzles, etc etc. I thought Uncharted 4's gunplay was quite good, but I was never really able to get used to it because I either felt guilted into killing most enemies with neck snaps or the game was more interested in having me climb over picturesque environments.

So basically, a Doom 2016/Eternal for third person shooters.

At the risk of being uncreative, I've always thought the third person perspective would have loaned itself really well to squad based military shooters. Like I assumed that the Three Days in Fallujah game would have been like that. And I seem to remember some old PS2 games that were similar, Full Spectrum Warrior and SOCOM I think.

 

[Kyrian007]

That game was so ambitious. It has so many mechanics in it that really are unique and inventive for the time but it was only on the Game Cube, had bad voice acting (on top of compression distorting the voice files) and was probably too ambitious to get a good rapport going. Such a shame.

Baten Kaitos. I have never played a game that was so fresh and original, that had so many flaws. It was a mesmerizing mix of genuine genius and terrible ideas. I could not help but love it, even the awful stuff. Decent sound design overall, but some huge flaws in that with some bad effects here and there and the worst voice acting throughout. Some truly lovely background and mood music, interspersed with some really strange choices here and there and the worst battle music ever composed. A really intriguing story populated with some of the most stock and ripped off characters ever put in one game. For every really good decision they made an equally awful choice... it is a MUST play as far as I'm concerned. I got really into the card collecting and card crafting, mixing 2 cards in one hand during a battle yielding a 3rd more powerful card as a reward... amazing idea. Having cards that are consumable healing items "go bad" and rot as if they were actual fruit... not a good idea. Combining that card with another that acts as a preservative and produces a better healing item with a longer "shelf life..." again, amazing idea that makes up for the "expiration date" flaw.
And at a time when every game was brown. And gritty, and drab, and so utterly grimdark... here came Baten Kaitos with such a vibrant art style it was like a unicorn chundered rainbow cotton candy directly into your eyeballs. I agree that 2 was a better game than the original. But it lacked that insanity that made the original so special. The names say it all. Baten Kaitos 2 was called "Origins." One of the most stock, boring sequel names you can call any sequel. The full title of the first game... "Baten Kaitos: Eternal Wings and the Lost Ocean." Too long, what the hell does it even mean... its perfect.

 

[Specter Von Baren]

They dropped the supernatural elements since Drake's Deception (other than the swarm of man eating beetles). There were no genies, and everything from the city was just hallucinogens in the water of the dead civilization. The lack of supernatural elements does not bother me in Unchrarted 4. It's Sam and Nadine that piss me off. Lost Legacy I would not have cared either way about supernatural or non-supernatural elements. I only care about Chloe.

Plus, these games were always doing in the wizard in some form. The El Dorado is some giant gold casket/sarcophagus filled with an ancient zombie virus. The blue sap heals people and turns them in to roided out drug attics with blue skin, when they consume too much. Thief's End and Lost Legacy were just the "logical conclusion". I would not have a problem with it, but I bet my glorious golden ass that lot's of people would have bitched and moaned about going full supernatural with the series.

007: Gold Ass

 

[Specter Von Baren]

Baten Kaitos. I have never played a game that was so fresh and original, that had so many flaws. It was a mesmerizing mix of genuine genius and terrible ideas. I could not help but love it, even the awful stuff. Decent sound design overall, but some huge flaws in that with some bad effects here and there and the worst voice acting throughout. Some truly lovely background and mood music, interspersed with some really strange choices here and there and the worst battle music ever composed. A really intriguing story populated with some of the most stock and ripped off characters ever put in one game. For every really good decision they made an equally awful choice... it is a MUST play as far as I'm concerned. I got really into the card collecting and card crafting, mixing 2 cards in one hand during a battle yielding a 3rd more powerful card as a reward... amazing idea. Having cards that are consumable healing items "go bad" and rot as if they were actual fruit... not a good idea. Combining that card with another that acts as a preservative and produces a better healing item with a longer "shelf life..." again, amazing idea that makes up for the "expiration date" flaw.
And at a time when every game was brown. And gritty, and drab, and so utterly grimdark... here came Baten Kaitos with such a vibrant art style it was like a unicorn chundered rainbow cotton candy directly into your eyeballs. I agree that 2 was a better game than the original. But it lacked that insanity that made the original so special. The names say it all. Baten Kaitos 2 was called "Origins." One of the most stock, boring sequel names you can call any sequel. The full title of the first game... "Baten Kaitos: Eternal Wings and the Lost Ocean." Too long, what the hell does it even mean... its perfect.

Mhm, mhm. Exactly. Perfectly stated.

 

[BrawlMan]

My "problem" with Vanquish is that its a movement game first, shooter second.

While shooting is mostly easy, both can't work without the other. Second, the game is still challenging. Plus, your melee makes it more than different enough than your standard shooting fare, or the dream game you desire. Plus, the game is a 3D bullet hell shooter, so you need the robust movement. Otherwise, it would be impossible to aim, dodge/move, and shoot properly without re-doing in a way that does not work, or make the game lose it unique mechanics. Removing any of that would make the game another generic face in the crowd.

Which is fine, but if you removed all the advanced movement, it would be a pretty shit game.

That can be said of any games with advanced movements or great mechanics that removed from their core designs. I really don't know what your trying to say here. This is game all you're getting from a tired genre, where little was done to differentiate. Your only other options are Returnal (PS5 only) and Warframe. The first is 3D bullet hell with no cover and is a rouge-like. The second game is multiplayer only and cover has little factor. So your options are very limited. Your only other option is the Gungrave GORE. These games never had cover mechanics, but you get two meters: a shield meter that regenerates, and a health meter.

 

[BrawlMan]

And gritty, and drab, and so utterly grimdark... here came Baten Kaitos with such a vibrant art style it was like a unicorn chundered rainbow cotton candy directly into your eyeballs.

Baten Kaitos came out in 2003. Not every AAA game was grimdark and brown....yet. There were plenty of games with color before and afterward. Especially on Gamecube. The make everything brown phase really did not start until after Gears and RE4. Even then most 6th generation games have color.

 

[hanselthecaretaker]

See, that's the hot take: I WANT it to be a cover based shooter. Because they don't really exist anymore. At least, they're not nearly as popular as they used to be. I still maintain that cover based shooting can be fun, if the devs bother making it so. I can't remember which Uncharted it was, as I played the collection (probably 2 though), but I thought they were able to design a fair number of encounters where you just couldn't sit behind a wall and wait for enemies to come to you. I recall some parts of Mass Effect 3 being the same, with Banshees teleporting behind you to stick a thermal clip up your butt.


My "problem" with Vanquish is that its a movement game first, shooter second. Kind of like Saints Row 4. Shooting a dude consists of getting your reticle on them and left clicking. Which is fine, but if you removed all the advanced movement, it would be a pretty shit game. Same if you removed bullet time from Max Payne. I want a third person shooter that can rely mainly on its shooting mechanics to be good.

Ok that’s understandable, but the cover would have to be destructible where logically possible and enemies would need to be able to flush you out otherwise, via ‘nades, flanking, etc. I think Uncharted at its best did this in a few places across all the games, where you felt like you were never really safe in shootouts and had to keep moving. I also liked the way you could soften them up by running at them with gunfire and melee kicking them in the face or something to finish them off. I think there was a trophy for something like that actually.

 

[Kyrian007]

Baten Kaitos came out in 2003. Not every AAA game was grimdark and brown....yet. There were plenty of games with color before and afterward. Especially on Gamecube. The make everything brown phase really did not start until after Gears and RE4. Even then most 6th generation games have color.

It still came out at the right time to combat that though. Most people really only discovered Baten Kaitos later... like a Game Stop or Wal Mart discount rack, or after hearing about it word of mouth from someone who discovered it on a discount rack. And even if like me you were kind of ready for it and got it early on, a replay of it was for several years a great way to combat what would be the prevalent design esthetic for the next whole generation of games.

 

[BrawlMan]

It still came out at the right time to combat that though.

Plenty of other games already did that, unintentionally or not. Most of them in the unintentionally category.

Most people really only discovered Baten Kaitos later... like a Game Stop or Wal Mart discount rack, or after hearing about it word of mouth from someone who discovered it on a discount rack. And even if like me you were kind of ready for it and got it early on, a replay of it was for several years a great way to combat what would be the prevalent design esthetic for the next whole generation of games.

While true, I never cared much for the game to begin with, nor most other RPGs at that time. As I mentioned before. I didn't like overly long games back then, and I don't like games there are too long for me now. So I can already tell you me and my late teens still wouldn't have bothered getting the game way better when more people were discovering them at GameStop or Walmart.

Also, there were plenty (not all) of games during the 7th generation, big or small, that are either full of life, color, or completely anti-brown/grey. Hell, there were some or a few that mocked this design trend or subverted it.

 

[Specter Von Baren]

I think we need to either change how reviewers describe a certain thing or try to change perception of that thing, the thing being technical or graphical deficiencies in a game.

So I've been playing Rune Factory 5, Harvest Moon style game with a fantasy emphasis and combat. I've been a fan of the series since the first game so maybe I have a bias in favor of this series.

The point: I had heard a reviewer give the game a 6/10 or something (yes I know scores don't matter, I'm making a different point) and the reason was because of some graphics issues and a 1 second delay for inputs. Now I notice the graphical issue of there being slow down when loading into a place with a ton of stuff, but this is just 1-2 seconds before it resolves itself and looks fine. As for input delay, I haven't noticed any. That doesn't mean there isn't any input delay, maybe there is but I'm not noticing it because this isn't the kind of game where that's relevant.

Now objectively, these are issues with the game that should be pointed out to potential buyers, but I also feel like there should be a BUT thrown into these kinds of things about whether it is likely to actually feel detrimental to the experience or to the audience, because it might just be because I grew up in a time when slow down was just something all 3D games had, high profile ones included, but a short bit of slow down as an area loads isn't a big deal to me, and as I said, maybe there is an input delay, but I haven't noticed it because of the type of game this is.

Maybe this isn't a hot take because maybe this just goes into how score reviews are dumb, just wanted to get it off my mind.

 

[Specter Von Baren]

It still came out at the right time to combat that though. Most people really only discovered Baten Kaitos later... like a Game Stop or Wal Mart discount rack, or after hearing about it word of mouth from someone who discovered it on a discount rack. And even if like me you were kind of ready for it and got it early on, a replay of it was for several years a great way to combat what would be the prevalent design esthetic for the next whole generation of games.

Something else about Baten Kaitos, does it kind of feel like one of those Chinese big, theatrical, martial arts, plays? I don't know what they're called. The look and story of the game kind of feels like a theater play (the wires would fit right in for flying too) and the way characters turn to the screen to talk to the player feels like actors turning to the audience like they did for Peter Pan.

 

[BrawlMan]

Something else about Baten Kaitos, does it kind of feel like one of those Chinese big, theatrical, martial arts, plays? I don't know what they're called. The look and story of the game kind of feels like a theater play (the wires would fit right in for flying too

Wuxia/Wire-Fu. Speaking of which....

​

 

[Specter Von Baren]

Wuxia/Wire-Fu. Speaking of which....

​

Yup, that's it.

 

[BrawlMan]

Maybe this isn't a hot take because maybe this just goes into how score reviews are dumb, just wanted to get it off my mind.

Speaking of reviewers and scores, any of them that said Gungrave Overdose is better than the original, did not play the game all the way through. Yeah, it is longer, but it is not a good thing, when their bugs, hit detection issues, and the game is full of padding and tedious platforming or gimmicky sections. In a game, that is mainly about shooting. Say whatever you will about the original, but it is meant to be an arcade style action game that is meant for high score and playing on harder difficulties. It's simple, but fun and has actual depth on how to score big points and when to taunt after doing something cool.

I noticed that a lot of these "official" old reviews don't go much in to detail, why Overdose is better than than GG1. Other than, Overdose was $19.99 at launch vs. Gungrave's $49.99 at launch. I've said this before and I will keep saying it until the end of time: "A short game with a great gameplay loop, hook, or replay value is better than game that is stretched and padded with tedium, for little reason, other than to fill a suppose quota!". Also, unskippable cut-scenes! Now to be fair, I did not buy Gungrave until 2007 when it was $4 at one of my former local Game Stops. I would have paid $40 had I realized sooner how good the game is, but I was distracted and invested in so many things, that I am just glad I was able to get it. I still have fun with the game and bust it out every now and then. Overdose I got around 2012 for $11 through Amazon, and did not like the game like I thought I would. It still sits there doing nothing on the shelf. Nowadays though, both of these games are expensive. More so the first game on the second hand market. Overdose you can find $30 or less, but GG can cost you $70 at the cheapest price alone! We need ports of both games. More so the first game; the second game is only there for legacy and story connection.

I'll let this guy give out all the details of my rant.

​

 

[Specter Von Baren]

Speaking of reviewers and scores, any of them that said Gungrave Overdose is better than the original, did not play the game all the way through. Yeah, it is longer, but it is not a good thing, when their bugs, hit detection issues, and the game is full of padding and tedious platforming or gimmicky sections. In a game, that is mainly about shooting. Say whatever you will about the original, but it is meant to be an arcade style action game that is meant for high score and playing on harder difficulties. It's simple, but fun and has actual depth on how to score big points and when to taunt after doing something cool.

I noticed that a lot of these "official" old reviews don't go much in to detail, why Overdose is better than than GG1. Other than, Overdose was $19.99 at launch vs. Gungrave's $49.99 at launch. I've said this before and I will keep saying it until the end of time: "A short game with a great gameplay loop, hook, or replay value is better than game that is stretched and padded with tedium, for little reason, other than to fill a suppose quota!". Also, unskippable cut-scenes! Now to be fair, I did not buy Gungrave until 2007 when it was $4 at one of my former local Game Stops. I would have paid $40 had I realized sooner how good the game is, but I was distracted and invested in so many things, that I am just glad I was able to get it. I still have fun with the game and bust it out every now and then. Overdose I got around 2012 for $11 through Amazon, and did not like the game like I thought I would. It still sits there doing nothing on the shelf. Nowadays though, both of these games are expensive. More so the first game on the second hand market. Overdose you can find $30 or less, but GG can cost you $70 at the cheapest price alone! We need ports of both games. More so the first game; the second game is only there for legacy and story connection.

I'll let this guy give out all the details of my rant.

​

I would say that the original is a "worse" game because on normal difficulty it's stupidly easy. But I'd also say that the original is more about style and looking cool than being a challenging game. Part of the fun is to just hold down the shoot button and watch Grave go through his entire shooting animation. Overdose drags and I've never felt inclined to try the other two characters, but I'd also say that as far as gameplay goes, it's much more of a game than the original. Bosses in the original mostly just keel over before you while something like the Fangorum fight in Overdose was an actual hurdle for me to overcome. It shares a lot of similarities with Zone of the Enders with how the first and second games differ.

 

[BrawlMan]

I would say that the original is a "worse" game because on normal difficulty it's stupidly easy. But I'd also say that the original is more about style and looking cool than being a challenging game. Part of the fun is to just hold down the shoot button and watch Grave go through his entire shooting animation.

Play on Hard or Kick-Ass Mode, you will notice a big difference. I know they can be unlocked until after each harder difficulty, but the game is short, so it is not too big a deal. They intentionally did this, so players could enjoy the story and setting.

it's much more of a game than the original.

Debatable. If I am not having fun, the levels drag, and most of the bosses are not good, then I'd sooner go through the first game a million times, than pick up the sequel. Being much of more a "game" is not much better, if it is that big a chore to play.

Bosses in the original mostly just keel over before you while something like the Fangorum fight in Overdose was an actual hurdle for me to overcome.

Some bosses are fun in Overdose, but are either tedious to fight and challenging for the wrong reasons, or completely boring and generic. While the bosses weren't all perfect in Gungrave, they still had some type of connection to Grave's past, or have distinct designs and personalities. I am more so talking about the head syndicate bosses after the first two stages. Overdose has some great bosses, but it does not make up for the 2/3 lack of quality bosses in the majority of the game. Not worth going through terrible bosses to get a few good ones in the last third or quarter of the game. The bosses all kept it simple in original, while somewhat challenging. Bunji is actually challenging your first time through GG, or harder modes, because he does so much more damage. Gotta stay on top of him. He is still the best boss fight in the entire franchise.

 

[Specter Von Baren]

Play on Hard or Kick-Ass Mode, you will notice a big difference. I know they can't be unlocked until after each harder difficulty, but the game is short, so it is not too big a deal. They intentionally did this, so players could enjoy the story and setting.

Debatable. If I am not having fun, the levels drag, and most of the bosses are not good, then I'd sooner go through the first game a million times, than pick up the sequel. Being much of more a "game" is not much better, if it is that big a chore to play.


Some bosses are fun, in Overdose, but are either tedious to fight and challenging for the wrong reasons, or completely boring and generic. While the bosses weren't all perfect in Gungrave, they still had some type of connection to Grave's past, or have distinct designs and personalities. I am more so talking about the head syndicate bosses after the first two stages. Overdose has some great bosses, but it does not make up for the 2/3 lack of quality bosses in the majority of the game. Not worth going through terrible bosses to get a few good ones in the last third or quarter of the game. The bosses all kept it simple in original, while somewhat challenging. Bunji is actually challenging your first time through GG, or harder modes, because he does so much more damage. Gotta stay on top of him. He is still the best boss fight in the entire franchise.

See, this is kind of what I was talking about. There's the "objective" on paper, quality of describing a game but then there's the "how does it actually feel" side of it. On paper I'd say Overdose is a better game but in practice the original is a more enjoyable game.

 

[BrawlMan]

See, this is kind of what I was talking about. There's the "objective" on paper, quality of describing a game but then there's the "how does it actually feel" side of it. On paper I'd say Overdose is a better game but in practice the original is a more enjoyable game.

Overdose would be a much more enjoyable game, if they either: peppered the human sized/remaining syndicate bosses much better throughout the campaign, instead of throwing them all in last stages. Or better yet, cut out all the padding together, and do what the first game did and have a pseudo boss rush game, a la No More Heroes. The first two stages are warm up bosses, and the rest are the syndicate bosses. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Overdose and No More Heroes 2 suffer the same problem of throwing a whole bunch of enemies or gimmicky section for the sake of extending run time and "dollar value per hour". Overdose being the worst obviously. Fuck that section with the respawning enemies, if you fail to make the "correct" jump and the floor keeps spawning suicide bombers and respawns enemies you already cleared out! GORE looks like it is going back to the design of the first game, so hopefully we get a great arcade game that is straightforward and not full of bad design decisions of Overdose.

 

[Specter Von Baren]

Overdose would be a much more enjoyable game, if they either: peppered the human sized/remaining syndicate bosses much better throughout the campaign, instead of throwing them all in last stages. Or better yet, cut out all the padding together, and do what the first game did and have a pseudo boss rush game, a la No More Heroes. The first two stages are warm up bosses, and the rest are the syndicate bosses. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Overdose and No More Heroes 2 suffer the same problem of throwing a whole bunch of enemies or gimmicky section for the sake of extending run time and "dollar value per hour". Overdose being the worst obviously. Fuck that section with the respawning enemies, if you fail to make the "correct" jump and the floor keeps spawning suicide bombers and respawns enemies you already cleared out! GORE looks like it is going back to the design of the first game, so hopefully we get a great arcade game that is straightforward and not full of bad design decisions of Overdose.

Is... Is the blond, twintailed action girl supposed to be Mika? Please tell me they didn't turn Mika into something so generic...