Your video game hot take(s) thread

[Drathnoxis]

I am not disputing, just curious on a weird supposed take.

So then you agree that the only two kinds of video games are ones where you can jump off a moving elevator and ones where you cannot. Quite sensible of you.

There's a spot in Demon's Souls 3-1 (Prison of Hope) where you can mantle over a ledge. This is the only time you do this in the game, and the spot is not marked in any way, and there's no way to know that you can interact with that spot unless you walk up and rub your face on it.

It's been a long time since I've played Demon's Souls so I don't remember that, but I don't think that really affects the point I was making. Lord knows I wasn't making the claim that Soulsborne games are perfect.

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

So then you agree that the only two kinds of video games are ones where you can jump off a moving elevator and ones where you cannot. Quite sensible of you.
It's been a long time since I've played Demon's Souls so I don't remember that, but I don't think that really affects the point I was making. Lord knows I wasn't making the claim that Soulsborne games are perfect.

You were making the point that the soulsborne games make it clear at a glance what you can interact with, and I'm pointing out cases where that's not accurate.

 

[BrawlMan]

So then you agree that the only two kinds of video games are ones where you can jump off a moving elevator and ones where you cannot. Quite sensible of you.

Not being to jump off an elevator is not a bad thing. Depends on what you're going for and how it's done. Not sure why it's that big a deal for @Johnny Novgorod. Which was why I asked him, and no response so far.

There's a reason why the term elevator action sequence exists. Besides, many of the best elevator moments are ones where you can't jump from moving elevators. The best ones are usually from the brawler genre, where you can throw people off the elevator. Streets of Rage 1, 3, & 4, TMNT III: Manhattan Project, Double Dragon Gaiden, and The Simpsons Arcade game. Resident Evil 4 and RE4R let's you shoot guys off the elevator, if you're positioned right have the proper weapon. Usually a shotgun. Even the games where you can't throw throw people off are done well usually.

 

[Drathnoxis]

You were making the point that the soulsborne games make it clear at a glance what you can interact with, and I'm pointing out cases where that's not accurate.

Was that my point? Thanks for clearing that up, I thought it was a little different, but I guess I was wrong.

 

[BrawlMan]

Time stamped.
​

 

[Old_Hunter_77]

Two takes inspired by my current playing FF7:Rebirth:

1- World exploration that involves obstacles you have to figure your way around can be a great thing. A big open world where you can go wherever can be a great thing. But generally putting them together is NOT a great thing, it is time wasting and annoying for no good reason other than to waste the player's time.
Despite my personal dislike of the Breath of the Wild it absolutely delivers on the "open world" thing because you can really just go anywhere. Elden Ring is almost like that- at least the basic mechanics of getting around is solid and fast and fluid. It prevents true freedom by putting oddly disparately difficult enemies together (e.g., the lobsters in Lake of Lurnia make genuine exploration of that game impossible for me) but at least there's a horse and a jump button.

So- big and easy or small and hard, but not big and hard, please. That feels like Skyrim or even older such games where you're walking around a mountain forever being not sure of which rocks or ledges the game will let you scale. There's no reason for that now. Marvel's Spiderman games are beloved because you can just go wherever the hell you want, and it fits that game. It's also why I'll continue to play AssCreeds- I can just go to places without pulling my hair out.

2- Difficulty spikes are usually disparaged for a good reason- there's a different between a spike and an... incline, maybe?
The last boss of Sekiro is often cited as one of the hardest bosses of all time and yes it sure took me a while but it really just the logical conclusion of what game before- you have to still do your parries and dodges and reads and the same lightning stuff as Genichiro. It's hard because it's long but it doesn't do anything fundamentally different than before (Demon of Hatred is the real bullshit difficulty spike in that game).

Most recently the ending sidequests of FF7 I posted about in that thread and the ultra-superhard fetch quest x 100 in Everspace 2 introduced stupid spikes. I believe this happens as a deliberate, cruel mechanism to take advantage of the player's investment in order to quicksand them into the game, a form of emotional hostage. Of course i wanna see how it ends, but they want to say "over 100 hours of game time!" Sure when 20 of them are spent youtubing walkthroughs to get around their horseshit.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

Here's a hot take: maybe you shouldn't spoil that your game has LGBT stuff in it if the discovery or realization of said LGBT stuff is integral to the plot. I'm actually specifically thinking of Pride Month sales and the like. By featuring games like Celeste and Unpacking they're basically spoiling the big twist - or a twist, anyway - which voids the effect of the storytelling.

I played Celeste blind and of course going in you think it's just a cute but punishing platformer in the vein of Super Meat Boy. The first twist is that it's character-driven and it's about anxiety and/or depression. The second twist is more nuanced but in my interpretation has to do with the protagonist accepting her trans identity. Something that is so much more effective when you're sharing that journey at the same time with the character, instead of knowing ahead of them. An LGBT tag works against the plot, and I'm glad I played the game not knowing. Just seems like that's how it's meant to.

Then there's Unpacking, which I saw featured in one of those Pride Month sales, effectively spoiling a super important part of the story (in a game where piecing the story yourself is the whole point). It's a great, chill little game in which you catch glimpses in the life of a person. The story is essentially about creating your own place in life rather than finding it or accomodating to someone else's, but this is framed in such a way that the search itself is a crucial part to get to that point all the same. This is a lovely message. And I won't say how, but the roadmap becomes super predictable as soon as you see the game tagged LGBT and reach a certain point in the story, about halfway through.

And for the record I don't think this is typically an issue concerning most games with an LGBT tag, since games are rarely about sexuality or sexual identity. But when they are, is it better to showcase it to the public in the interest of visibility, or is it better to preserve the story's integrity and let it unravel unspoiled, as it is the point?

 

[BrawlMan]

ere's a hot take: maybe you shouldn't spoil that your game has LGBT stuff in it if the discovery or realization of said LGBT stuff is integral to the plot. I'm actually specifically thinking of Pride Month sales and the like. By featuring games like Celeste

To be fair,Celste came out in 2018. It's been 6 years now, so some type of spoiler is going to happen now. It's pretty much almost common knowledge about the main character being trans. I can't speak for the other game.

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

And for the record I don't think this is typically an issue concerning most games with an LGBT tag, since games are rarely about sexuality or sexual identity. But when they are, is it better to showcase it to the public in the interest of visibility, or is it better to preserve the story's integrity and let it unravel unspoiled, as it is the point?

When you need to forestall the "AHHH they're shoving it in my face crowd"....

 

[XsjadoBlaydette]

have seen certain themed sales do that a couple of times with movie plot twists too. recently-ish remember an empowering women themed one having a few where was thinking "wait wasn't the twist that it was empowering and you just be spoiling it here?"


That penny yoyo combo platformer game is pretty great, fun and almost there, but the colour scheme is kinda disagreeing with some indescribable primal area of the sense cabbage that am wish dearly for merely that useless filter option they put in all the other games that I now no longer believe are useless. that was past me, they're dead now. come back filter options plz I forgive you!

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

When you need to forestall the "AHHH they're shoving it in my face crowd"....

You mean these sales pull double work as warnings to bigots?

To be fair,Celste came out in 2018. It's been 6 years now, so some type of spoiler is going to happen now. It's pretty much almost common knowledge about the main character being trans. I can't speak for the other game.

I'm a stickler for spoilers. It's my cross to bear.

Besides it's not like this megaton franchise where the original "secret" has dissolved across the sequels.

 

[Old_Hunter_77]

Here's a hot take: maybe you shouldn't spoil that your game has LGBT stuff in it if the discovery or realization of said LGBT stuff is integral to the plot. I'm actually specifically thinking of Pride Month sales and the like. By featuring games like Celeste and Unpacking they're basically spoiling the big twist - or a twist, anyway - which voids the effect of the storytelling.

I played Celeste blind and of course going in you think it's just a cute but punishing platformer in the vein of Super Meat Boy. The first twist is that it's character-driven and it's about anxiety and/or depression. The second twist is more nuanced but in my interpretation has to do with the protagonist accepting her trans identity. Something that is so much more effective when you're sharing that journey at the same time with the character, instead of knowing ahead of them. An LGBT tag works against the plot, and I'm glad I played the game not knowing. Just seems like that's how it's meant to.

Then there's Unpacking, which I saw featured in one of those Pride Month sales, effectively spoiling a super important part of the story (in a game where piecing the story yourself is the whole point). It's a great, chill little game in which you catch glimpses in the life of a person. The story is essentially about creating your own place in life rather than finding it or accomodating to someone else's, but this is framed in such a way that the search itself is a crucial part to get to that point all the same. This is a lovely message. And I won't say how, but the roadmap becomes super predictable as soon as you see the game tagged LGBT and reach a certain point in the story, about halfway through.

And for the record I don't think this is typically an issue concerning most games with an LGBT tag, since games are rarely about sexuality or sexual identity. But when they are, is it better to showcase it to the public in the interest of visibility, or is it better to preserve the story's integrity and let it unravel unspoiled, as it is the point?

Interesting!
I'm gonna push back a little, or maybe it's more a bit of a devil's advocate here...

Celeste: it's interpreted the way you say and that interpretation is true I think but it's subtle and it's not the point.
Unpacking: I don't think the nature of the end-game "relationship" re: gender is important as much as generally the emotional state of the protagonist.

All this to say- the reason these games are associated with pride months is because they are embraced and beloved by LGBTQ+ gamers. And the reason may be plot, theme, abstract imagery... whatever.
I mean it's kind of like Cher being a gay icon even though she's not gay and has actually said some mean things about gays in her past IIRC. It's that gap between art and the artist and whatnot.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

Interesting!
I'm gonna push back a little, or maybe it's more a bit of a devil's advocate here...

Celeste: it's interpreted the way you say and that interpretation is true I think but it's subtle and it's not the point.
Unpacking: I don't think the nature of the end-game "relationship" re: gender is important as much as generally the emotional state of the protagonist.

All this to say- the reason these games are associated with pride months is because they are embraced and beloved by LGBTQ+ gamers. And the reason may be plot, theme, abstract imagery... whatever.
I mean it's kind of like Cher being a gay icon even though she's not gay and has actually said some mean things about gays in her past IIRC. It's that gap between art and the artist and whatnot.

Sure, maybe it's on me for taking too long to get around to a game. And obviously these games being openly embraced and celebrated by a community is more important than preserving them as secrets for the enjoyment of newcomers like me just getting around to them.

(I played Celeste a few years go, by the way).

The Cher analogy I don't get though. This is more like, if Netflix decided to tag movies according to what kinds of plot twist they're going to have. "Movies where it was all a dream", "Movies where the good guys lose". That kind of thing. If I see Celeste in a Pride Month sale and then I boot the game blind and the game makes a big mystery about what kind of trauma or anxiety the protagonist is dealing with, that's already more or less forgone.

I think ultimately having the game spoiled by the theming of the sale (do the publishers even get a say on that?) is kinda the lamest way to get a game spoiled. Like seeing a random thumbnail on YouTube or whatever is fine, that's inevitable. But the name of the sale itself doing the spoiling...

 

[Gergar12]

This is somewhat related to politics/news but mostly isn't. I don't particularly appreciate how Sony's PS5 is the only console people buy in the high-performance console business, Monoplies aren't good for the market. Yes, it kills needing to buy 2 consoles, but the console exclusives are cringe anyway, even if you buy 2 to 4 consoles, gaming platforms, etc. In this modern world who the fuck has time to play all of them enough. the PS5 and PS6 need more competition, and with the Switch being niche and PCs being still pretty low return on investment vs just buying a PS6 or PS5 it means Sony can jack up prices and make the gaming eco-system worse for everyone.

 

[meiam]

This is somewhat related to politics/news but mostly isn't. I don't particularly appreciate how Sony's PS5 is the only console people buy in the high-performance console business, Monoplies aren't good for the market. Yes, it kills needing to buy 2 consoles, but the console exclusives are cringe anyway, even if you buy 2 to 4 consoles, gaming platforms, etc. In this modern world who the fuck has time to play all of them enough. the PS5 and PS6 need more competition, and with the Switch being niche and PCs being still pretty low return on investment vs just buying a PS6 or PS5 it means Sony can jack up prices and make the gaming eco-system worse for everyone.

Isn't the switch outselling the PS5? How is that niche?

I would agree with you a couple of console generation ago, the dominant PS1/2 led to the disappointing PS3. But nowaday gaming PC that can rival a console can be gotten for the price of a console (cheaper if you build it yourself and watch for good deal) and PC gaming has gotten so much easier between steam and standardization of parts.

 

[Gergar12]

Isn't the switch outselling the PS5? How is that niche?

I would agree with you a couple of console generation ago, the dominant PS1/2 led to the disappointing PS3. But nowaday gaming PC that can rival a console can be gotten for the price of a console (cheaper if you build it yourself and watch for good deal) and PC gaming has gotten so much easier between steam and standardization of parts.

PC gaming is more expensive and has fewer AAA games at least when they launch for example FF7 Rebirth.

 

[Drathnoxis]

This is somewhat related to politics/news but mostly isn't. I don't particularly appreciate how Sony's PS5 is the only console people buy in the high-performance console business, Monoplies aren't good for the market. Yes, it kills needing to buy 2 consoles, but the console exclusives are cringe anyway, even if you buy 2 to 4 consoles, gaming platforms, etc. In this modern world who the fuck has time to play all of them enough. the PS5 and PS6 need more competition, and with the Switch being niche and PCs being still pretty low return on investment vs just buying a PS6 or PS5 it means Sony can jack up prices and make the gaming eco-system worse for everyone.

The competition hasn't exactly been good for consoles either. Consoles used to have free online multiplayer before Xbox poisoned the well with their money grubbing schemes and it spread like herpes to Nintendo and Sony.

 

[Old_Hunter_77]

lol no you can't buy/build a PC that rivals a current-gen PlayStation or XBox, not if you're building a scratch and not if you're using legal means to acquire parts. The appeal of PC gaming is that after your initial build you can upgrade parts- so doing the equivalent of PS4 to PS5 should be cheaper than a console gamer buying a whole new console. But even that's sketchy now with the fluctuating market for graphics cards.

I'm not sure I understand the point about PS5 dominating the console market other than the general sentiment we all can get behind that monopolies are bad. But where's the monopoly here? XBox exists! Sure if you're plugged into gaming news all the time like we are all we hear is about how Microsoft is dead in the water and XBox is becoming extinct but... well, the darn consoles still exist and sell plenty.

If they are less appealing to more consumers than the rival PS5 because of their lack of exclusives, that's not monopoly that's them not making as many good exclusives. I am usually not the one to cite "the marketplace" and "vote with your wallet" cliches but that does seem to apply here no?
I also don't understand the "console exclusives are cringe" part- are you saying that the very idea of their being exclusives to be cringe, or that Sony's exclusives are cringe?

If the former, yeah instinctively I probably agree and that I just prefer ease of use for consumers. It would be nice to just buy a game machine and play any game you want on it. On the other hand there are benefits to exclusives- not having to worry about building and testing for so many different form factors allows high-performance games to come out more quickly, I would think. I do wonder if Ghost of Tsushima would have been that great if it also had to work on PCs.

If the lattter- that the games are cringe- I know there is a hardcore PC gamer sentiment that shits on Sony's exclusives, that "cinematic" single player narrative action game type that includes lots of accessibility and guided experiences for players. That to me just smacks of the same type of snobbery and gatekeeping of any art form, like music dorks who hate pop music or film snobs who decry anything from a major studio or with special effects. And yeah also I am 100% a fan of Sony exclusive game types, I like my "handholding" and maps with icons sometimes and pretty looking story games. *shrug*

 

[BrawlMan]

not sure I understand the point about PS5 dominating the console market other than the general sentiment we all can get behind that monopolies are bad. But where's the monopoly here? XBox exists! Sure if you're plugged into gaming news all the time like we are all we hear is about how Microsoft is dead in the water and XBox is becoming extinct but... well, the darn consoles still exist and sell plenty.


If they are less appealing to more consumers than the rival PS5 because of their lack of exclusives, that's not monopoly that's them not making as many good exclusives. I am usually not the one to cite "the marketplace" and "vote with your wallet" cliches but that does seem to apply here no?

I also don't understand the "console exclusives are cringe" part- are you saying that the very idea of their being exclusives to be cringe, or that Sony's exclusives are cringe?

That's part of the problem with xbox. Yes they're still there in exist, but they really don't have any worthwhile exclusives and Microsoft keeps shooting themselves in the foot. They keep selling their game pass and online and hoping they'll cost you fine just with that alone. The fact that some of their exclusives are no longer exclusive or they allowed a few on the PlayStation store takes this even further.

I've rarely ever been against exclusives. Exclusives are important, but they also have to be good in time spent on them. Another problem Microsoft is that they spend a little time on these or spend too much time and waste everybody's time turning out a mediocre product. Both console makers trying to go all in online services and fairly and causing more layoffs didn't help anybody at all but the
guys at top.

the lattter- that the games are cringe- I know there is a hardcore PC gamer sentiment that shits on Sony's exclusives, that "cinematic" single player narrative action game type that includes lots of accessibility and guided experiences for players. That to me just smacks of the same type of snobbery and gatekeeping of any art form, like music dorks who hate pop music or film snobs who decry anything from a major studio or with special effects. And yeah also I am 100% a fan of Sony exclusive game types, I like my "handholding" and maps with icons sometimes and pretty looking story games. *shrug*

I 100% agree with you on that. I will say what most of you Sony exclusives they do give you the option to turn off the compass or map icons off. So for those I truly want to challenge for to be truly immersive world, you're given the option to turn it off and make it harder for yourself.

 

[hanselthecaretaker2]

The worst part about Sony’s most recent exclusives for me is just the general rate of interruptions there are to the gameplay for cutscenes/dialog choices/walk n talk/ etc. Yes it’s usually very nice eye candy which is entertaining the first time especially, but probably 80% or so of whatever is going on during all this isn’t something I’m going to remember by the time the credits roll anyways. It’s kinda like short form of the saying about 10% learning retention from high school.

This is exacerbated somewhat by a story-driven games that seem to be getting longer and longer. Trying to mimic the film format, but the difference is film storytelling is continuous and generally only 2-3 hours. Even then I probably couldn’t always give a detailed summary of everything that happened without going back to certain parts. Although hell, maybe my brain’s busted/distracted/etc. by the unrelenting flow of real world stuff.