Unpopular Opinions

[Dango]

Fuck Skyrim
Fuck Dark Souls 2
Fuck Mass Effect 2. Bioware hasn't made a good game since Mass Effect (That includes Dragon Age: Origins, fuck that game).
Fuck Grand Theft Auto 5, it plays like shit
Fuck Borderlands 2
Fuck Wolfenstein: The New Order
The original Bioshock is boring, the shooting is stiff, and the game plays generally very clumsily.

Resident Evil 6 is a great game

 

[Dalisclock]

That's like saying "I know how the US Army and Marines will deploy their forces because I've studied a lot of Norman Rockwell paintings." It's idiotic to the nth degree, and made him less "brilliant" in my mind, and more of a Marty Sue villain who was beyond fault.

I can only imagine what Thrawn would have thought if he had looked at Dali or Matisse, or one right after another. Try drawing conclusions from that.

 

[das_n00b]

-being a working class minority REALLY IS FUCKING TOUGH.
-smoking weed feels great and I shouldn't be made to feel like a criminal for it.
-you don't need a large social circle to lead a rich, fulfilling life.
-starting a family does not complete your life.
-Intelligence isn't always dictated or defined by the capacity to conform in an institution of power (universities, government agencies, the judicial system...).
-polygamy is perfectly human.
-sometimes, violence IS necessary.

 

[Carzinex]

-i feel that all marvel and dc comics are now being targeted at a new audience rather than me and thats ok
-all star wars expanded universe was trash, just as the new stuff seems to be(han solo has a wife?)
-mass effect 3 was a good game(at least after extended cut, didnt play before that)
-bioware has turned into a fantasy dating simulator game developer with a tacked on hero narrative if Inquisition is anything to go by.
-identity politics is exclusionary not inclusive

 

[McMarbles]

I find Superman, a guy who holds down a regular job has normal relationships with human beings, and is just trying to make the world a better place, inherently more relateable than a tormented billionaire who's always the best at everything (This REALLY annoys me; Mr. Miracle SHOULD be the better escape artist, John Henry Irons SHOULD be the better engineer, Richard Dragon and Lady Shiva SHOULD be better fighters, Dick Grayson SHOULD be a better acrobat, but no one is ever allowed to outshine Batman; the only thing he should be the best at is detective-ing, and even then, Ralph Dibney should give him a run for his money) and has been brooding over his dead parents for twenty years.

Looking back, I think Man of Steel wasn't really that bad of a movie.

Some of what Cartoon Network's running today is better than any of the shows that would be considered its "classics". I would take Steven Universe, Adventure Time, and Over the Garden Wall over even the good seasons of Dexter's Lab or PPG.

Hershey's makes terrible chocolate. I'm amazed anyone likes that garbage.

I don't care how "dead" they are, I like JRPGs.

Curb Your Enthusiasm is just plain not funny.

I'm thoroughly sick of zombies.

 

[happyninja42]

I don't mind there being an actually competent villain, hell I want those in stories. My issue with Thrawn was how he was so infallible. The way he was described, as knowing intimately, the military strategies of a culture, simply because he looked at their damn pottery or paintings is absolutely idiotic. That's like saying "I know how the US Army and Marines will deploy their forces because I've studied a lot of Norman Rockwell paintings." It's idiotic to the nth degree, and made him less "brilliant" in my mind, and more of a Marty Sue villain who was beyond fault. And yeah, the way he died, if he's so damn brilliant, why didn't he see it coming? I admit as a kid my level of tolerance for stupid in books was WAAAAY lower than it is now. I've become way more critical, but even then, as a kid I was rolling my eyes and saying "oh come on! That's bullshit!" when Thrawn would flawlessly defeat some group because he studied their finger painting. xD

Its been quite some time since I read the books, so I could be wrong, but wasn't it implied that that was a lie on his part and it could have just been something he claimed for the sake of his own image?

I dunno, maybe? It's been decades since I read it too. I don't recall it being a lie he perpetuated, but that he was genuine when he said he knew them by their art. *shrugs* I've purged most of that series from my brain, and I read it as a young teen, so my recollection is spotty.

That's like saying "I know how the US Army and Marines will deploy their forces because I've studied a lot of Norman Rockwell paintings." It's idiotic to the nth degree, and made him less "brilliant" in my mind, and more of a Marty Sue villain who was beyond fault.

I can only imagine what Thrawn would have thought if he had looked at Dali or Matisse, or one right after another. Try drawing conclusions from that.

I know right?! xD I think this is mostly due to the common sci-fi stereotype for aliens of them always being the same. Very very few races depicted in scifi are as varied and diverse as humanity. They all have one culture, one religion (maybe with some different sects), one look, etc etc. Which makes them all seem like some kind of hive being. Whereas humans, hell we're so diverse it hurts the brain. I get why scifi writers do this, as it's easier/quicker to describe 1 aspect of a new species, instead of developing a full, fleshed out race with all the diversity it would develop over time. You'd need a whole book for each one. So you distill them down to the most significant "non-human" traits to describe them. This lessens them in my opinion, but I understand it as a necessary evil of writing. Still, it allows bullshit like Thrawn to grow, and justify his stuff through some "knowing their art, means I know the race" crap. Which just doesn't work at all. *gets off his Fuck Thrawn soapbox, and stops derailing the thread now* xD

 

[Callate]

People who feel they know everything about someone based on one article of clothing have more issues than people wearing fedoras.

 

[Silvanus]

-Heath Ledgers Joker was a terrible joker, because it wasn't even the joker. No blame on the actor himself more on the direction and style those movies took. I mean the joker would ever disguise his getaway vehicle as a school bus and blend in to a crowd, blending in has never been a phrase you'd associate with the joker.

Really? He does it in the comics, depending on the writer; the characters all change drastically writer-to-writer, but Joker's certainly blended in when needs must in the source material.

 

[cthulhuspawn82]

-Heath Ledgers Joker was a terrible joker, because it wasn't even the joker. No blame on the actor himself more on the direction and style those movies took. I mean the joker would ever disguise his getaway vehicle as a school bus and blend in to a crowd, blending in has never been a phrase you'd associate with the joker.

I also agree that his Joker wasn't very "Jokery". I know the reason for this is that Christopher Nolan looked at all the eccentric joker antics, e.g. poisoned pies and "joker toxin", and thought they were too "stupid" and "corny". If you listen to these non-Marvel directors, they all talk like that. They all talk about how they changed this or that thing from the comic because it was too campy/corny/dumb/etc. I'm not a fanboy who demands absolute accuracy, but it is sad to hear directors talk about how "campy" and "stupid" their source material is. It makes you wonder why they are allowed to direct the movie.

 

[El Camino of Rampage]

Here's one:

Movies are, on average, an order of magnitude better than video games if we're judging by artistic merit. Like, it's not even close.

 

[Silvanus]

Here's one:

Movies are, on average, an order of magnitude better than video games if we're judging by artistic merit. Like, it's not even close.

Where d'you rank books/literature?

Do you think it reflects badly on movies as a medium that so much of their subjects are adaptations of subjects from other forms?

 

[Ishal]

Here's one:

Movies are, on average, an order of magnitude better than video games if we're judging by artistic merit. Like, it's not even close.

I think you'll only find people disagreeing on certain genres. For instance, I don't think what qualifies as schlock for movies is any significant order of magnitude better than schlock for video games. It's just schlock.

On most everything else? Yeah. Shouldn't really dispute that. Movies are a vastly older medium than games. They aren't even close, and shouldn't even be close. That said, current movies and film are circling the drain of artistic merit. I think film peaked a while ago, and has been plateauing or in decline ever since.


OT: trying to think of a few more... hmmm

- Games aren't a good medium for telling stories. Telling stories. If they focus on that and let everything else slip, they're a failure in my eyes
- Persistence is more valuable than talent, genius, and education. Any of these without persistence will not count for much.
- Almost all media has a target audience, but to let that dictate what you can or can't like. Or, what you should and shouldn't like is moronic. If you like it, great. Who cares what it's targeted at. Shouldn't matter, since if you like it there was something that drew you in anyway
- People think being overly sarcastic is a quality that is loved. Wrong. Being sarcastic is rude and shows you have a poor sense of humor
- Games Journalism is dying, this is a good thing. Whatever takes it place might be flawed, but it's going to be a hell of a lot better than what we currently seem to have.
- The more you westernize and anime, the better it gets.
- Romance being shoved into everything in media and culture is stupid. I'm sick of seeing it everywhere.
- Extra Credits are hacks, who have nothing insightful to say about games or the medium.
- Film is one of my least favorite mediums for entertainment. Theaters suck, as does the way films are released.

 

[Twintix]

I guess I might've figured out another unpopular opinion. Dunno if it's unpopular around here, but anyway:

I can't stand crime shows on TV. I really can't. Whenever my mom starts watching any of them, I can stomach them for a few minutes before I give up and walk away. I mean, she can watch them if she wants, but I don't enjoy them. Almost all of them follow the same formula and almost all of them are about a bunch of moronic unlikeable twats that can all go die or go mute or something just to make them shut the fuck up.

The only ones I can let slide on this note is Whitechapel, which managed to actually interest me, and CSI, because while it's stupid and unrealistic, it is at least aware of how campy it is from what I remember. But then there are shows like Criminal Minds and STALKER, which supposedly have better writers but are somehow even more formulaeic than CSI. It's always the same; There's a serial killer on the loose and he has murdered so many people without flinching except for this one girl (And it is always a girl) who he's suddenly taking his sweet-ass time with, and just when he's about to kill her, the police burst in and stop him from claiming another victim.

Just once, I'd like to see the police being too late to stop a serial killer in a crime show. Just once. Just something different. The reason I can't even watch them anymore is because it has gotten to the point where I just exclaim "Oh my FUCKING GOD, just FUCKING KILL HER ALREADY!", which makes me worried that I might be turning into a sociopath. That, or it's my anger issues flaring up.

 

[karloss01]

I enjoyed Duke Nukem: Forever; sure it was pretty damn rough and out of time but what did you expect? it's a game that was stuck in limbo for thirteen odd years, of course it wasn't going to be a Triple A title.

 

[El Camino of Rampage]

Here's one:

Movies are, on average, an order of magnitude better than video games if we're judging by artistic merit. Like, it's not even close.

Where d'you rank books/literature?

Up there with movies, painting, music, and most other art forms. Video games just haven't come near that average level of artistic merit. Personally I've always thought that the reason for that isn't because games are so young, but because games are made by more STEM/right brained people. Filmmakers were figuring out ways to use film for artistic expression basically right away, and the same goes for photography. Games on the other hand were primarily just cool pieces of software, and the people creating them were more interested in making new, more complex systems than exploring any greater meaning. Basically, games are made primarily by engineers, not artists, whereas in basically any other art form it's the other way around.

Do you think it reflects badly on movies as a medium that so much of their subjects are adaptations of subjects from other forms?

I don't think so. A good movie is a good movie. And plenty of other forms of art use adaptations - just think of how many paintings of scenes from the Bible there are.

 

[Snotnarok]

I've said it here before on the Escapist, I don't like Zelda: Ocarina of Time

It lacks story, interesting characters and relies mostly on gameplay which I'd normally say is fine but being RPG, at least in part it needs something more to drive you through hours of game- some of it very tedious. I've been questioned up and down for such a blasphemous opinion: yes I grew up with it, yes I played it at the time, yes I had a 64, yes I saw the twist at the time, yes it was interesting and all but best game ever? Hell, no.

A few interesting events here and there didn't make for a killer game to me. I think Majoras Mask is better ...though I don't like playing it.

The thing that really puts the nail in the game for me is Megaman Legends came out around the same time and it had FAR more interesting characters and even had you caring about the antagonists! They were funny, interesting and it was just a fun game with a similar idea. It also managed to hold up better because of it's visual/graphical style choice. Even games prior on earlier systems had better story and story telling. Later on Twilight Princess in my mind is a far superior game than OoT.

I'm not saying anyone is wrong for enjoying it but I'm sick of people insulting me for not liking a game or liking others more. It's an alright game but I was never blown away.

 

[Reasonable Atheist]

The 911 attacks were justified. Being totally complacent in what your country is doing des not make you innocent.

"They hate freedom" is the stupidest utterance i have ever heard.

Everyone knows a cornered woumded animal is the most dangerous.

 

[SidheKnight]

*Puts on Epic Flame Armor*

Here it goes:


Man Of Steel was actually a good movie. (Though very flawed).
I have no problem with Midi-Chlorians.
Linkin Park was a great band (up to and including Meteora, latter albums went downhill).
The Hobbit did well in splitting the movie into three parts (two would have worked too, I guess, but I like it as it is).
Avengers "Age Of Ultron" was not that good.
Assassin's Creed I (yes, One) was a great game, and superior to its successors in many aspects (The second best in the series after AC II).
Ang Lee's Hulk (The one with Eric Bana) was the best live action adaptation of the Hulk (or at least, it got the 'tone' of what I believe is the core of the franchise right). Eric Bana is the best live action Bruce Banner (though Ruffalo is pretty close).
Iron Man 3 sucked. Everything with that movie is wrong. Everything. (Except removing the shrapnel in Tony's body with the Extremis, that was good).
Pretty much the same goes for Iron Man 2 (Except for the final fight, the only thing that kind of redeems that movie).
Thanos is not an interesting villain. At all. (And his motivation is really stupid i.e: being in love with death).
Arrow was a better show in seasons 1 and 2, when it was more serious and grounded.
Smallville was a pretty good (for its time) show (though flawed). It doesn't deserve all the hate it gets.
Batman Begins is as awesome as The Dark Knight. One of the best superhero movies of all time. Severely Underrated.
Game Of Thrones (the TV show) is vastly inferior to the books (A Song Of Ice And Fire).
The same goes when comparing the Harry Potter movies to the books.
And the same is true again for The Lord Of The Rings.
The Hobbit movies, however, are vastly superior to the book


At this point, I'm probably less popular than Prohibition in the 1920's.

 

[Maraskeen]

I tend to distrust monopolies and be instantly wary of anything that's too widely acclaimed. As such, it always bugs me when people are praising Valve for Steam. I think they're just as interested in making money as EA is- they just have different methods and way better PR- and definitely not some kind of champion of the players.

I have a soft spot for BioWare that often leads me to defend decisions they made that are widely seen as bad - yes, even that one.
Come to think of it, as a general rule I don't think we, as players, are entitled to anything. To me vidya games stem from an artistic vision before anything else, as flawed as this vision can be. Of course we have every right to rant and argument if we think it sucks, but ultimately any incentive to modify things in a game should come from the creators themselves, and not be motivated by the audience.

I find Kaidan Alenko charming, and not annoying in the least.

I prefer Fallout 3 to Skyrim.

Intolerant atheists:
1) do in fact exist.
2) unnerve me at a very visceral level, as they do not even have the excuse of faith for being douches to people not thinking the same way as they do.

Windows 8 is still mostly useless as an OS, and I'm not optimistic about Windows 10.

There's no such thing for me as a 'bad opinion', and 'keep your opinion to yourself!' is one of the stupidest sentences one can tell in my book. I'd rather be shocked or dumbfounded than encouraging censorship.

Québécois French is damn sexy.

(That's an unpopular opinion where I'm from. And I think that'll be all.)


ETA:

Personally I've always thought that the reason for that isn't because games are so young, but because games are made by more STEM/right brained people. Filmmakers were figuring out ways to use film for artistic expression basically right away, and the same goes for photography. Games on the other hand were primarily just cool pieces of software, and the people creating them were more interested in making new, more complex systems than exploring any greater meaning. Basically, games are made primarily by engineers, not artists, whereas in basically any other art form it's the other way around.

That might have been true for games in the past, but what about nowadays? Several dev teams now have writers and artists as permanent residents, and a number of titles being released in recent years have had a definite artistic and/or narrative focus. One could argue that this distinction isn't so clear anymore.
Or am I misunderstanding you? Your point seems to be that games started (and still are, in a way) as products being made for a practical purpose (building software, creating intricate systems) rather than any explicit artistic value, but... it seems to me that it's been the case in a lot of other arts, as well. Many poems and plays we know where commandited by such-and-such patrons, and had the writer going through the motions. Most of the fugues we and concerti we listen to were composed as pure technical exercise. Not all of our art was or is intended as such, and I'm definitely certain that not all of the people others consider as being artists create with the purpose of a greater meaning.

(I'm not trying to fuel any controversy, or somesuch; I'm genuinely interested in your point of view and the reasons causing you to make this distinction, seeing that I myself am one of those people unable to hierarchise in any way when it comes to arts.)

 

[Dr. Crawver]

The 911 attacks were justified. Being totally complacent in what your country is doing des not make you innocent.

"They hate freedom" is the stupidest utterance i have ever heard.

Everyone knows a cornered woumded animal is the most dangerous.

Justified I'd disagree with. No act like that by any group or nation can be justified with any merit.

Understandable however, you'd have me on that. I understand why they did it, I may well have even cheered if I was in their countrymen's shoes (though I'd hope not), but justified is a little too far.