Your video game hot take(s) thread
- Thread starter Dany_the_penguin
- Start date
Agreed. You got the re-release on Switch? I got a physical copy. I should pop that back in later.
I got the remaster off Xbox Game Pass. I actually prefer the original so far (better music,) but the gameplay is still just as frenetic and satisfying as ever.
Really? The version I have on Switch pretty much have all the same original songs as the PSP original. Unless there was an update I didn't know about when it comes to different console versions.
Ninja Warriors (Again) is the best brawler on SNES ever made. Yes, even better than Turtles in Time (SNES). Yeah, it don't have co-op, yada yada! The game was built for single player in mind. It was one of the first brawlers to have fighting game style inputs. The 2019 remake took this even further. Each character plays completely differently, and have large move sets that rivals even Streets of Rage 2. Technically, this game does have more moves than SOR2. Ninja Warriors pretty much showed how mediocre, average, or run-of-the-mill most brawlers were on the SNES console. Also, it was one of the few SNES brawlers to actually allow more than 3 enemies on the screen for the player to pummel.
I actually never minded the lack of a merchant character in Resident Evil 5. Certain people like Yahtzee whined and bitched about it, because that's all they do. It makes sense with the more serious direction. Besides, the banter between Chris, Sheva, Josh, and all the other characters more than make up for it. Especially when it gets to the parts with Wesker. I praise Capcom for not doing a lazy repeat of the Pirate Merchant, nor bringing a substitute in. Also, they probably didn't want money or time on another character model, and I don't exactly blame them. It's never good idea to repeat an idea or character type so many times, because the uniqueness is gone. Speaking of merchant characters in an over the shoulder horror game: I always preferred Tatiana in Evil Within 2.
So how about that game that's coming out that has checkpoints which respawn enemies, parrying, resources you lose upon death and have to reclaim at that spot, and big bosses with two phases? No, not that one- the other one like that. No... the other other one. No, the one set in historical times east Asia... or maybe I'm thinking of the 2D one... or the meta-cartoony one... or one of the other of a few set in historical times east Asia...
Eh... hey what about the upcoming big Ubisoft style big open world with maps with icons and repetitive bandit camps and view towers? Wait... which one is that- oh, there actually isn't one?
(Now before you yell Assassin's Creed at me- you only assume it will be like that because of the previous games and it certainly might me but nothing revealed in the marketing- which includes gameplay- points to that, so we don't actually know yet. Same with Star Wars Outlaws. Ghost of Tsushima 2 is the closest thing but I don't even remember if that has been officially announced yet let alone given a release window).
"Soulslike" has now replaced "Ubisoft formula" as the go-to lazy game design model, the kind that's design to extend (waste) gameplay time. Because bashing your head at the same freaking boss over and over can be just as time wasting as clearing similar bandit camps.
Eh... hey what about the upcoming big Ubisoft style big open world with maps with icons and repetitive bandit camps and view towers? Wait... which one is that- oh, there actually isn't one?
(Now before you yell Assassin's Creed at me- you only assume it will be like that because of the previous games and it certainly might me but nothing revealed in the marketing- which includes gameplay- points to that, so we don't actually know yet. Same with Star Wars Outlaws. Ghost of Tsushima 2 is the closest thing but I don't even remember if that has been officially announced yet let alone given a release window).
"Soulslike" has now replaced "Ubisoft formula" as the go-to lazy game design model, the kind that's design to extend (waste) gameplay time. Because bashing your head at the same freaking boss over and over can be just as time wasting as clearing similar bandit camps.
At least Tsushima and the Norse GoW games let you turn off all markers and map indicators for "true immersion". Even before either game starred. I know some of the recent AC games let you do so now, but I don't know which ones. Tsushima 2 has no official announcement yet.
It's exactly why i'm excited for Phantom 0. While having a Souls inspired level design, there are no re-spawning enemies with checkpoints. And you attack with the face buttons. Your parry functions more like it does in MGR and DMC3-5, than anything Souls.
I kind of saw this coming and called it out back in 2015 of the genre either getting stale in some regard with the clones, or people getting tired of them like they did with call a duty. I think the only reason the soul's clones don't get as much slack is because most of them are trying something different in some capacity or don't try to screw consumers over with pay behind the wall and blocked dlc or cut content charged at astronomical prices. Whenever there is a dlc expansion, it's made with a lot of love and care and as almost as big as the base game. Though that's usually From Software that getd this right on a consistent basis.
Last edited:
That too obviously, but many people are just as motivated, because they weren't getting screwed out of their money. With difficulty being either secondary or a mere bonus to them. I will say that there was such an overly hypersensitive backlash casual gaming back in the late 2000s/2010s, that these people think they changed something major, but changed absolutely nothing at the same time. Casual gaming still exists, but if you want a difficult game, you really don't have to search that hard for it, nor do they have to be Souls style. This has been proven time and time again, but there are those who don't get it or are so stuck in the Souls Hemosphere that they can't think or play anything else They live and breathe Dark Souls or its clones, while at the same time mock those not interested in those specific games. Yet they won't try anything else, because " It's not the same nor hardcore enough!". Some of the YouTube loudmouths going on about Souls are the most special games or genre ever made. While either down playing other genres or mocking people for going to different genres of play.
Last edited:
The main reason Soulslikes fall short is because the main thing they take away from what inspired them is *teh difficulty*, along with other design quirks (soul stain, respawned enemies, etc.). Miyazaki has stated with almost every game that making games *DIFFICUULLLLT* for the sake of itself has never been the main focus. Rather it’s the sense of accomplishment by overcoming obstacles, of which there’s always been ways to make easier. Maybe not as much in Sekiro but that’s an exception to the Soulsborne rule as it was more of an action focused game vs one with character builds, summons, greater leveling abilities, etc.
V-Rising has killed me more from lack of a pause option so gotta leave the character snuggled in tree shade while I bugger off, but inevitably get distracted by all sorts of life stuff on the way, only to return to an in-game smouldering pile of ashes and a disapproving respawn button prompt cause the time of day system did it's thing or a roaming band of wankers did their thing and come on am playing single player here, they still won't give us a break!
Exploration, interesting creature design and atmosphere too. I honestly think the series should promote the weirder parts of their worlds upfront a bit more so people aren't seeing just generic fantasy imagery alongside a steeper difficulty curve and feel the effort may not be worth the time investment if it's only gonna bs what they've seen a dozen times before. It wouldn't even require much, perhaps only a slight adjustment of lens during promotional planning.
"Serious direction"? With Ricardo, Excella, Jill in a purple catsuit, Wesker's eveything, and boulder punching?
Would a merchant have made the game better? Considering the job they did on the other characters, probably not. But I doubt they left him out due to an attempt at being more serious. Lack of a merchant is the least of that game's problems anyway.
Yes. Those few things aside. The game is still self-aware; don't get me wrong, but it's much more serious in tone in comparison to RE4. Wesker is always awesome in this game.Serious direction"? With Ricardo, Excella, Jill in a purple catsuit, Wesker's eveything, and boulder punching?
The only character I dislike in RE5 is Excella. I don't hate her exactly comma but dhe's nothing more than a stooge with tits.
It's still a great and awesome game. We already know about the tribal people. If a remake ever happens, Capcom will,
Know what to do next time by not doing that.
I despise Soulslikes because, by and large, they derive their "difficulty" from making the player figure out the one exact multi-step procedure the devs want you to follow to beat their bosses- and if you make any sort of misstep, well, start over and git gud, scrub.
Maybe I'm tainted by my first Soulslike game being the first Dark Souls.
They gotta do something to keep the filthy casuals out! From Software did it for you! For me! For the best and most important parts of humanity! For the true GAMERS! What would you have, if they didn't make you and us learn the true suffering before victory? What will you have after 500 games that are not Souls like, @The Rogue Wolf? What will you have?!/sarcasm
The funny thing is, it's often considerably different. There's an official FuturePress guide that even makes a point of stating that cheesing bosses is perfectly acceptable. It's partly why so many people will have their own idea of what the easiest or most difficult boss or section of a game was, because the progression can be very malleable. The caveat is yeah, sometimes it takes time to find, which is why wikis and all that are there to help save it as a sort of discretionary "fuck it" button.
Honestly, bosses aren't even that hard when it comes down to it. The fact that if you face them with two other buddies you can chop them into kindling shows there's really not that much to them.
What really makes it suck (besides the bad camera and lock-on) is all the bosses that require certain consumeables to make them manageable. Like the Blood Starved Beast in Bloodborne. Eat a pellet to not get poisoned just by being near him. Oops, you got killed, now you have 6 pellets left. Hope you can beat him with that amount, because your supply won't respawn when you die, so if you used them all up during your last failed attempt they're gone, and you'll have to farm them again... and again. Sounds like fun, donnit?
tbf to Elden Ring, a game I shit on all the time here, I think one of the reasons people love it and claim- usually to the point of exaggeration- that it's more accessible is that there are often multiple ways to beat a boss. It's also kind of one of the reasons I personally like the game less. I mean you can be a mage and zap them from far away and let your gost buddies chip away, or you can unga bunga, and stuff in between. And while that was true to some extent in Dark Souls it's more so in Elden Ring. Personally I prefer the "git gud" one way approach- IF the actual gameplay is great like in Sekiro. But if you watch the good streamer and challenge runs you'll see all kind of wacky ways people come up with to take down bosses.
Ok this one is kind of political so feel free to skip and I don't wanna get into a whole thing but I think it's an actually important thing to be aware of and think about.
Families of victims of the Uvaldi school shooting are suing a few companies that are involved in marketing firearms to minors. Activision is included along with gun manufacturer and Meta.
Uvalde Families Accuse Instagram, ‘Call of Duty’ and Rifle Maker of ‘Grooming’ Gunman - The New York Times (nytimes.com)
The reaction among gamers is predictable- they're pissed that anyone is blaming their beloved vidyer gems for mass shootings. The emotional instinct is understandable- we all have lived through bullshit blame-casting by feckless politicians and concern trolls groups who, indeed, falsely and stupidly blame video games for various social problems among youth including mass shootings. Of course I agree that was always bullshit.
My "hot take" here is simply that this isn't that and I simply encourage anyone interested to read and think about the lawsuit with an open mind. We all know that folks just don't read things about the news- this isn't just gamers this is unfortunately across the demographic board. So please don't just roll your eyes and complain about "politicians blaming video games."
Basically that argument here is that these companies are violating laws that are supposed to prevent marketing firearms to minors. I think unless you're a gun nut extremist most of us agree that's ok? Like how cigarette and liquor manufacturers are supposed to not do that. Most of the lawsuit argument in court seems to have been around how the gun seller builds their web site to skirt around those protections and goes into a detail about how the guy that did that Uvaldi shooting got email notifications to complete his AR-15 purchase as he was literally turning 18. Where Meta (instagram) and Activision (Call of Duty) come in is the related marketing of these weapons. The attorney representing the families makes a very clear distinction between CoD specifically and not to blame or call out video games or even violent video games as a whole.
That is it to say- it's addressing gun culture, marketing responsibility, and corporate accountability. And it's a private lawsuit not the gubmit. I think it's worth considering with care and not just dismissing.
Families of victims of the Uvaldi school shooting are suing a few companies that are involved in marketing firearms to minors. Activision is included along with gun manufacturer and Meta.
Uvalde Families Accuse Instagram, ‘Call of Duty’ and Rifle Maker of ‘Grooming’ Gunman - The New York Times (nytimes.com)
The reaction among gamers is predictable- they're pissed that anyone is blaming their beloved vidyer gems for mass shootings. The emotional instinct is understandable- we all have lived through bullshit blame-casting by feckless politicians and concern trolls groups who, indeed, falsely and stupidly blame video games for various social problems among youth including mass shootings. Of course I agree that was always bullshit.
My "hot take" here is simply that this isn't that and I simply encourage anyone interested to read and think about the lawsuit with an open mind. We all know that folks just don't read things about the news- this isn't just gamers this is unfortunately across the demographic board. So please don't just roll your eyes and complain about "politicians blaming video games."
Basically that argument here is that these companies are violating laws that are supposed to prevent marketing firearms to minors. I think unless you're a gun nut extremist most of us agree that's ok? Like how cigarette and liquor manufacturers are supposed to not do that. Most of the lawsuit argument in court seems to have been around how the gun seller builds their web site to skirt around those protections and goes into a detail about how the guy that did that Uvaldi shooting got email notifications to complete his AR-15 purchase as he was literally turning 18. Where Meta (instagram) and Activision (Call of Duty) come in is the related marketing of these weapons. The attorney representing the families makes a very clear distinction between CoD specifically and not to blame or call out video games or even violent video games as a whole.
That is it to say- it's addressing gun culture, marketing responsibility, and corporate accountability. And it's a private lawsuit not the gubmit. I think it's worth considering with care and not just dismissing.
Last edited: