Your most Unpopular Media Opinion

Dreiko_v1legacy

New member
Aug 28, 2008
4,696
0
0
Kodomo no Jikan is a deep coming of age story worth reading solely for the characters and plot.


People freak out over the fanservice elements too much but it's just intended to be comedic and not actually sexual because that's just a type of Japanese humor that's normal.


The actual char development in that series is extremely well-done (as it is written by a woman who has daughters, who had experience being a girl and is also raising her girls) hence if you actually try to read it with an open mind and no prejudice you can find a lot to love.
 

Neurotic Void Melody

Bound to escape
Legacy
Jul 15, 2013
4,953
6
13
Hawki said:
Xsjadoblayde said:
WESTWORLD!!

It's not perfect. But it's fucking brilliant.
That's unpopular?

Well, anyway, Westworld is pretty damn awesome.
It's no way near popular enough. Which was my precise thinking when first viewing Breaking Bad and everybody I asked never heard of it. Granted, this is in non-internet circles.
 

Addendum_Forthcoming

Queen of the Edit
Feb 4, 2009
3,647
0
0
Mechamorph said:
Star Trek never did it for me, that kind of Utopianism is patently unrealistic. Humans are bastards who can rise above their base desires but for the whole species to basically go hippie? No way in hell. Not in a million years. Star Trek is making the assumption that given a matter replicator, most people would not simply make enough drugs to get high forever or use a holodeck as their personal masturbatory fantasy generator.
The Federation is a utopia? TNG depicted the Federation pretty awfully. Forced migration of a group of Native American colonists seeking to keep their culture alive. Allowing ridiculously powerful crime syndicates (like the Orion Syndicate) to basically own slaves, occupy entire star systems, and even skirmish into Federation space regularly ... yet thd Federation does nothing about it.

Arguably the only reason the Federation allows it is because they buy the pergium from places like Sapporo despite their slave trading. Also, I'm pretty cashed up and an occasional drug user. Yet I don't just do lines every hour of the day.

And I imagine precisely for that reason, holodecks would be restricted areas. Designed pretty much for just training simulators. I mean they seem to have entire planets deficated to pleasure. Holodecks for pleasure would seem to be only useful for ships expecting extending time at duty with limited capacities for shore leave.

The problem with your argument is it lacks relative argumentation. Our world, now, is a pretty 'Star Trek utopia' to someone 500 years ago. Democracies!? 'Police' officers that serve the public!? Due process!? Ending debtor prosons!? MOBILITY RIGHTS!?

After all, Thomas Hobbes believed that democracies would be inadequate for protecting civil liberty, that you needed a hypothetical absolute monarch to demand and enforce them to the exclusion of any populist means to annul... He'd think our democracies are 'utopian stupidity'. That was just over only three centuries ago.

ST is 200 years in the future. Best not to discount what we might achieve by then in terms of civil liberty.

Public education, universal healthcare... advanced capitalist marketplaces survive them. Voting for women. Age and invalid pensions. Ending conscription. Public housing. And so on...

And sure... in 200 years the future to us now will look like some Star Trek utopia, and there be two people on the neuronet ... one saying Dimension Quest utopianism is stupid, free g-mods and neuroprosthetics is a fantasy because people are jerks... and another person telling you how garbage it was back in the 20th century.

I do agree however that we won't likely ever meet alien life that matches our intelligence.
 
Sep 24, 2008
2,461
0
0
Phoenixmgs said:
ObsidianJones said:
The Following will be a Rant over my most Unpopular Media Opinion, my hate for Batman. But please, share your thoughts about your most unpopular opinion in regards to Media.

I hate Batman due to fans.
I just don't get why people let other people ruin things they like. I literally have no idea what any fandom of the things I cherish are like. Firefly is my favorite show, I have no clue what the fandom is like or how they are even perceived, I couldn't care less.
I explained in my post.

I personally don't care what people enjoy. Everyone should like what they do. Everyone loves chocolate and I can't stand the stuff. But I want them to like chocolate. Same thing with Cheese.

But that's where the problem comes in.

Since everyone LOVES cheese, Cheese is everywhere. Literally, I'm regulated to maybe a quarter of a menu when I go out to eat because everyone tries to sneak cheese into almost every menu item. That's the problem I have with Batman due to his fans. Because there are so many fans of Batman, they try to put him in more where he doesn't belong.

They keep touting him to be a normal human, but a normal human that can keep up with Gods, Robots, and Amazons. And not only keep up, but outpace them regularly.

Hawkeye and Black Widow know they can't keep up, so they don't go for the end goal and help from the sides. Fine. I get that. Everyone has their place due to what they can do. But because no one in fiction is as popular as Batman now, Batman gets center billing and characters become dumber so Batman can win or at least compete.

-See my comment about Superman's Super Speed. If he can run in Super Speed, he can process things much faster. Why let Batman drop a grenade at all?

-Darkseid has world ending Omega Beams that he regularly uses to destroy anything that even bothers him without moving a muscle. It's basically his version of hello. What Does Darkseid do when they HAVE to shoehorn Batman into the final fight of Brainiac-Merged Darkseid (literally probably the most powerful version of him up to that point)?

He throws him casually. Not through a Building. Not his amazing Omega Beams that are neigh impossible to dodge by the fastest of people and most agile of all beings (but yet, human Batman can do it). Not grab Batman with one hand and pulp him easily with his ungodly power. Just a casual hip toss.


-Batman beats the shit out of all of the Turtles at the same time [https://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/3/39001/3017529-tmnt.jpg]

-Batman beats the Hulk by kicking the INVULNERABLE HULK SO. DAMN. HARD [https://i.pinimg.com/originals/4b/80/1a/4b801a69da4cd2271f5b1491c9af015a.jpg]... that the Hulk feels it and is forced to gasp for breath, breathing in knock out gas [https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-ceddb00685ebda6ecc8a07bb4b7f651b-c].

To put that in perspective. Here's the Hulk getting hit twice by Thor with Mjolnir and not slowing down or even being really phased. [https://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/123441/3423515-sh+vs+thor+annual+2001++%282%29.png]

Fuck, Batman vs Superman is literally a movie because people wanted to prove how much better Batman is since they wanted their hero to usurp the position of top billing Hero in the DC universe.

I don't care if fans love anything more than anything else. But when writers, producers, and developers start putting nerf hammers down on the entire universe so that thing or character can get more focus, it's a middle finger to everyone else who might like anything else in that universe. Too bad you're not on the hype train. Watch your unpopular get inexplicably wreck by the New Hype.

Batman ruins fiction because everyone wants him to win. That's why the fans matter in this case.
 

Neurotic Void Melody

Bound to escape
Legacy
Jul 15, 2013
4,953
6
13
ObsidianJones said:
Phoenixmgs said:
ObsidianJones said:
The Following will be a Rant over my most Unpopular Media Opinion, my hate for Batman. But please, share your thoughts about your most unpopular opinion in regards to Media.

I hate Batman due to fans.
I just don't get why people let other people ruin things they like. I literally have no idea what any fandom of the things I cherish are like. Firefly is my favorite show, I have no clue what the fandom is like or how they are even perceived, I couldn't care less.
I explained in my post.

I personally don't care what people enjoy. Everyone should like what they do. Everyone loves chocolate and I can't stand the stuff. But I want them to like chocolate. Same thing with Cheese.

But that's where the problem comes in.

Since everyone LOVES cheese, Cheese is everywhere. Literally, I'm regulated to maybe a quarter of a menu when I go out to eat because everyone tries to sneak cheese into almost every menu item. That's the problem I have with Batman due to his fans. Because there are so many fans of Batman, they try to put him in more where he doesn't belong.

They keep touting him to be a normal human, but a normal human that can keep up with Gods, Robots, and Amazons. And not only keep up, but outpace them regularly.

Hawkeye and Black Widow know they can't keep up, so they don't go for the end goal and help from the sides. Fine. I get that. Everyone has their place due to what they can do. But because no one in fiction is as popular as Batman now, Batman gets center billing and characters become dumber so Batman can win or at least compete.

-See my comment about Superman's Super Speed. If he can run in Super Speed, he can process things much faster. Why let Batman drop a grenade at all?

-Darkseid has world ending Omega Beams that he regularly uses to destroy anything that even bothers him without moving a muscle. It's basically his version of hello. What Does Darkseid do when they HAVE to shoehorn Batman into the final fight of Brainiac-Merged Darkseid (literally probably the most powerful version of him up to that point)?

He throws him casually. Not through a Building. Not his amazing Omega Beams that are neigh impossible to dodge by the fastest of people and most agile of all beings (but yet, human Batman can do it). Not grab Batman with one hand and pulp him easily with his ungodly power. Just a casual hip toss.


-Batman beats the shit out of all of the Turtles at the same time [https://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/3/39001/3017529-tmnt.jpg]

-Batman beats the Hulk by kicking the INVULNERABLE HULK SO. DAMN. HARD [https://i.pinimg.com/originals/4b/80/1a/4b801a69da4cd2271f5b1491c9af015a.jpg]... that the Hulk feels it and is forced to gasp for breath, breathing in knock out gas [https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-ceddb00685ebda6ecc8a07bb4b7f651b-c].

To put that in perspective. Here's the Hulk getting hit twice by Thor with Mjolnir and not slowing down or even being really phased. [https://static.comicvine.com/uploads/original/12/123441/3423515-sh+vs+thor+annual+2001++%282%29.png]

Fuck, Batman vs Superman is literally a movie because people wanted to prove how much better Batman is since they wanted their hero to usurp the position of top billing Hero in the DC universe.

I don't care if fans love anything more than anything else. But when writers, producers, and developers start putting nerf hammers down on the entire universe so that thing or character can get more focus, it's a middle finger to everyone else who might like anything else in that universe. Too bad you're not on the hype train. Watch your unpopular get inexplicably wreck by the New Hype.

Batman ruins fiction because everyone wants him to win. That's why the fans matter in this case.
Most comic-book writing is dumb logic. Not for critical thinking. I would recommend not wasting the neurons over it too much. (But I understand what you mean about Batman's fan/plot armour).
 
Sep 24, 2008
2,461
0
0
Xsjadoblayde said:
Most comic-book writing is dumb logic. Not for critical thinking. I would recommend not wasting the neurons over it too much. (But I understand what you mean about Batman's fan/plot armour).
I AM A GEEK AND A NERD, YOU CAN NOT TELL ME WHERE TO PUT MY UNYIELDING CRITICISM!!!!

But no, you're absolutely right. I'm fully aware of inconsistencies. But that's even more why I am so bugged by the fans. Because they can't say in one breath "I love Batman because he's a normal human" and then "He would easily be able to beat a Space God!!!!" and expect me to take them or anything they stand for seriously again in life.
 

Mechamorph

New member
Dec 7, 2008
228
0
0
Addendum_Forthcoming said:
Mechamorph said:
Star Trek never did it for me, that kind of Utopianism is patently unrealistic. Humans are bastards who can rise above their base desires but for the whole species to basically go hippie? No way in hell. Not in a million years. Star Trek is making the assumption that given a matter replicator, most people would not simply make enough drugs to get high forever or use a holodeck as their personal masturbatory fantasy generator.
The Federation is a utopia? TNG depicted the Federation pretty awfully. Forced migration of a group of Native American colonists seeking to keep their culture alive. Allowing ridiculously powerful crime syndicates (like the Orion Syndicate) to basically own slaves, occupy entire star systems, and even skirmish into Federation space regularly ... yet thd Federation does nothing about it.

Arguably the only reason the Federation allows it is because they buy the pergium from places like Sapporo despite their slave trading. Also, I'm pretty cashed up and an occasional drug user. Yet I don't just do lines every hour of the day.

And I imagine precisely for that reason, holodecks would be restricted areas. Designed pretty much for just training simulators. I mean they seem to have entire planets deficated to pleasure. Holodecks for pleasure would seem to be only useful for ships expecting extending time at duty with limited capacities for shore leave.

The problem with your argument is it lacks relative argumentation. Our world, now, is a pretty 'Star Trek utopia' to someone 500 years ago. Democracies!? 'Police' officers that serve the public!? Due process!? Ending debtor prosons!? MOBILITY RIGHTS!?

After all, Thomas Hobbes believed that democracies would be inadequate for protecting civil liberty, that you needed a hypothetical absolute monarch to demand and enforce them to the exclusion of any populist means to annul... He'd think our democracies are 'utopian stupidity'. That was just over only three centuries ago.

ST is 200 years in the future. Best not to discount what we might achieve by then in terms of civil liberty.

Public education, universal healthcare... advanced capitalist marketplaces survive them. Voting for women. Age and invalid pensions. Ending conscription. Public housing. And so on...

And sure... in 200 years the future to us now will look like some Star Trek utopia, and there be two people on the neuronet ... one saying Dimension Quest utopianism is stupid, free g-mods and neuroprosthetics is a fantasy because people are jerks... and another person telling you how garbage it was back in the 20th century.

I do agree however that we won't likely ever meet alien life that matches our intelligence.
Well this is the thread for unpopular opinions isn't it? ;)

No, I do not think that the Federation is a Utopia, rather that the underlying assumptions behind its foundational philosophy is Utopian, as in the philosophy not the state of being.

The thing is the changes you ascribe to our "utopian" state vis a vis people from hundreds of years ago are not all new things. Democracy is from Ancient Athens, police officers have been around one way or another in some form for quite a while as well (albeit not always employed by the State), due process was arguably part of the Code of Hammurabi (circa 3000BC Sumeria), debtor prisons still exist albeit part of the larger penitentiary system (go ahead and default on all of your debts, see what happens. Especially outside of a Western Liberal Democracy) and mobility rights had long been a thing although not necessarily extended to everyone; an Imperial Roman citizen for example could move from Italy to Hispania with relative ease.

Public education? Several civilizations had them. Universal healthcare? Made possible only through modern advances in medicine, before that it was one part superstition, one part hope and one part empirical method. Many of society's changes over history are predictable given how our technology evolved. Now riddle me this, what do you think post-scarcity would do to the people? We can make practically anything given a replicator. We can go anywhere on a planet with a transporter, we can live any fantasy through a holodeck, anti-matter supplies all the energy we need and work? Does the Federation even have money? To buy what? How would you even prevent people from building holodecks? All it takes is one guy leaking the plans on their version of the internet and a replicator can make the parts if not the holodeck wholesale for an industrial sized relicator. There is a reason why many episodes of Star Trek's earlier incarnations had to handwave away reasons for their technology not to work just to maintain dramatic tension.

Just holodecks, transporters and replicators alone would remove most of the manufacturing, logistics and resource extraction jobs. Increasingly powerful computers would take care of a lot of white collar jobs too. What does this do for employment in the Federation? What sort of work do most people do? It looks like it would mainly be skilled labour, the ultimate knowledge economy. And the fact of the matter is that it would very difficult to generate enough jobs for the seven billion we have on Earth let alone the population in some sci-fi future.

Yes, we have drug addicts today. Now imagine that your drugs were free, made to order in the comfort of your house. Any hit you want. Any time you want. What if you had no job or a part time job? Or one that was undemanding or boring? Holodecks are also free to use if you want to decline recreational biochemistry. We are beginning to see the cusp of free, endless on-demand entertainment but the modern internet is small potatoes compared to Star Trek's technology. I dunno, but throughout history give the people consequence free indulgence in luxury and they will. Many Chinese dynasties fell because the Emperor was too busy playing with concubines rather than governing. Imperial Romans were not even found in the Legions by the end of the Empire. They were busy mimicking the Epicureans and their vomitoriums.

Also it is not a particularly good argument to say that just because modern society does not look like older society this would somehow entail that the Federation would exist just because it's not the same as our society. That's akin to a false equivalency statement. More pertinently society had seen relatively little change for quite some time during the High Middle Ages. So there was change, just that it was in slow spurts. If we are speaking speculatively, there is an argument to be made that we are reaching a plateau where our breakneck technological advancement will slow down to a relative crawl. I have even seen some academics believe that we are headed towards technological stagnation with refinement of existing technologies being the norm rather than important new innovations popping up every few years.
 

Neurotic Void Melody

Bound to escape
Legacy
Jul 15, 2013
4,953
6
13
ObsidianJones said:
I AM A GEEK AND A NERD, YOU CAN NOT TELL ME WHERE TO PUT MY UNYIELDING CRITICISM!!!!

But no, you're absolutely right. I'm fully aware of inconsistencies. But that's even more why I am so bugged by the fans. Because they can't say in one breath "I love Batman because he's a normal human" and then "He would easily be able to beat a Space God!!!!" and expect me to take them or anything they stand for seriously again in life.
I doubt your geek/nerd status...do you have your official documents and photo verification??
Fandoms are curious emergent social structures...sort of like mild variations of cult thinking perhaps, far less threatening and enveloping (mostly), but no less illogical. Could be why I avoid looking into them for my own preferred material. Batman has become a victim of its' own pop-culture status it would seem.
 

PsychedelicDiamond

Wild at Heart and weird on top
Legacy
Jan 30, 2011
1,682
401
88
I think Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice is one of the best, if not the best superhero movie ever made. But we've been over this.

I think Star Wars: A New Hope is the only truly great Star Wars movie. Some of the other ones are pretty good but New Hope set a standard they never lived up to.

Oh: Lord of the Rings is extremely overrated and for the most part doesn't hold up that well. It's a simple story weighed down by a wealth of overly complicated lore, mostly underdeveloped characters that lack in genuine humanity, a depiction of various fantasy races that carries some rather unpleasant connotation from a modern perspective (There's a reason rightists keep using it for their shitty memes, folks) and a lot of extraneous details that make what's ultimately a simple adventure story a pretty clunky read.

Surprisingly, I still enjoy The Hobbit a lot. Shame about the movies.
 

Marter

Elite Member
Legacy
Oct 27, 2009
14,276
15
43
bjj hero said:
Can you really say its better than commando? I love the rock as much as the next man but arnie in his prime?
The Rock isn't in this one. He was only in the first one.
 

Chessrook44

Senior Member
Legacy
Feb 11, 2009
558
1
23
Country
United States
In my eyes, MLP:FIM and Firefly are of exactly the same quality.

Not bad, but not good enough to keep my interest.

BRING IT.
 

kitsunefather

Verbose and Meandering
Nov 29, 2010
227
0
0
I find the Witcher 3 and Dragon Age: Inquisition so boring that I can't play them. Maybe they get extraordinary after the first hour, but I can't make it that far. While I play, all I can think about is all of the other things I could be doing with this time.
 

Neurotic Void Melody

Bound to escape
Legacy
Jul 15, 2013
4,953
6
13
Oh...I absolutely hate Geralt's (from the Witcher series) voice acting. It's such a drag on an otherwise great game. I've heard that voice actor in other work and he sounds exactly the same, it's not an artistic choice, it's a damn restriction. You can be gruff, sardonic and uncaring without being monotone...many actors have done this. Perhaps they had to stick with the original guy for the fans, I dunno. But it's really frustrating to be dumped with such a bore for the whole experience. It leads to boredom for me personally.
 

Canadamus Prime

Robot in Disguise
Jun 17, 2009
14,334
0
0
CrazyGirl17 said:
-I prefer dubs over subs. I don't mind subtitles, but I'd prefer to not constantly watch the screen all the time.
Me too. I hate reading subtitles. They often go to fast for me to read and I hate missing most of the action because my gaze is fixed on the bottom 1/3 of the screen.
 

Super Cyborg

New member
Jul 25, 2014
474
0
0
Xenoblade Chronicles has some interesting ideas, but falls very short which the final act of the game killed most of my enjoyment of the game. Most of the characters feel like they are introduced, then shoved into the background until late in the game where something involving them allows them to have a bit more screen time. Shulk is just a bore throughout the entire game, and I can't understand how people find him so interesting. The battle system just isn't for me, and late game I had to be levels above a boss to stand a chance, which caused me to grind so much that the final boss never touched me. Throw on top one last twist for stuff I didn't care for, I was just glad the game was finally over when the credits rolled.
 

Pseudonym

Regular Member
Legacy
Feb 26, 2014
802
8
13
Country
Nederland
Fuck star wars, all of it. Except possibly rogue one because I haven't seen it. The prequels are generally disliked for understandable reasons. The first trilogy might have had good special effects for its time but that is no reason to like it now. Even then, I prefer my movies to have some kind of substance to them beyond looking nice.

The first movie is poorly paced and dull and has an entirely unlikable and incompetend protagonist who wins the day through sheer magic and being the chosen one. Is Lucas a calvinist or something? Besides that everyone besides jedi and sith are portrayed as dumbfucks.

Second movie was alright, mostly because it doesn't have to have a good ending and is hence allowed to follow logic and causality. This means Yoda calls out Luke on being useless, suggest replacign him with Leia and the hopelessly underpowered rebels get stomped. Good, makes sense and seeing Luke and Han it's hard not to root for their demise. Unfortunately, Han goes after Leia in this movie and it is creepy as fuck.

The third movie mostly plays out the story towards some kind of conclusion. They decide to give Luke at least something to have it make sense that he is the chosen one by having him be a pacifist at the worst possible times and this works out through family ties and unconvincing writing. Also, the movie kills Yoda. This is unfortunate for two reasons. The first is that it makes no sense whatsoever, dude is 900 years old already, how did he suddenly get this old and weak? Poor writing, obviously. Secondly, Yoda displays the kind of competence and coherence that I expect average people to have (+powerful magic). With him dead I am looking at largely the same group of dipshits who blundered their way through the first movie.

On the positive side, and this is fairly controversial, when I watched Jim Sterling play 'PLAYING HISTORY 2: SLAVE TRADE' it didn't look as tasteless to me as it apparently did to most people. It wasn't a brilliant game either but it looked like decent educational software to me. I thought slave tetris neatly contrasted the mundane task of efficiently filling a ship with the vileness of the fact that we are filling it with actual people regardless of their needs as human beings. People seem to have grasped how painful this contrast was but held it against the developer for some reason. The dev removed slave tetris since it was controversial and as a result distracted people from the educational points of the game.
 

Neurotic Void Melody

Bound to escape
Legacy
Jul 15, 2013
4,953
6
13
Pseudonym said:
Fuck star wars, all of it. Except possibly rogue one because I haven't seen it. The prequels are generally disliked for understandable reasons. The first trilogy might have had good special effects for its time but that is no reason to like it now. Even then, I prefer my movies to have some kind of substance to them beyond looking nice.

The first movie is poorly paced and dull and has an entirely unlikable and incompetend protagonist who wins the day through sheer magic and being the chosen one. Is Lucas a calvinist or something? Besides that everyone besides jedi and sith are portrayed as dumbfucks.

Second movie was alright, mostly because it doesn't have to have a good ending and is hence allowed to follow logic and causality. This means Yoda calls out Luke on being useless, suggest replacign him with Leia and the hopelessly underpowered rebels get stomped. Good, makes sense and seeing Luke and Han it's hard not to root for their demise. Unfortunately, Han goes after Leia in this movie and it is creepy as fuck.

The third movie mostly plays out the story towards some kind of conclusion. They decide to give Luke at least something to have it make sense that he is the chosen one by having him be a pacifist at the worst possible times and this works out through family ties and unconvincing writing. Also, the movie kills Yoda. This is unfortunate for two reasons. The first is that it makes no sense whatsoever, dude is 900 years old already, how did he suddenly get this old and weak? Poor writing, obviously. Secondly, Yoda displays the kind of competence and coherence that I expect average people to have (+powerful magic). With him dead I am looking at largely the same group of dipshits who blundered their way through the first movie.

On the positive side, and this is fairly controversial, when I watched Jim Sterling play 'PLAYING HISTORY 2: SLAVE TRADE' it didn't look as tasteless to me as it apparently did to most people. It wasn't a brilliant game either but it looked like decent educational software to me. I thought slave tetris neatly contrasted the mundane task of efficiently filling a ship with the vileness of the fact that we are filling it with actual people regardless of their needs as human beings. People seem to have grasped how painful this contrast was but held it against the developer for some reason. The dev removed slave tetris since it was controversial and as a result distracted people from the educational points of the game.
Disney was the best thing to happen to that franchise, I wholeheartedly believe. (Star Wars, not Slave Trade, haha! Oh dear).
 

Arnoxthe1

New member
Dec 25, 2010
3,374
0
0
I liked the second and third Pirates of the Caribbean films a lot. Don't think they deserved really any of the flak that they got. Although yes, they are a bit different in feel from the first one.

Halo 5 isn't just bad, it's literally insultingly bad, and no, I will not shut up about this.

Randomly-generated Diablo-style loot as seen in WoW/Diablo/etc. is awful and needs to be kicked out of gaming for good.

Marter said:
The Scorpion King 3: Battle for Redemption is the best movie of forever.

It's only an unpopular opinion because most people haven't seen it.

:)
Review link? (Assuming you wrote a review for it.)

erttheking said:
Half-Life and Portal are ok. Just ok.

Metroid Prime 2 Echoes was the best of the Prime Trilogy.
It's understandable to not see what made Half-Life so great in this modern day. Unlike some classics, it hasn't aged very well. It's very much a "you had to have been there" kind of game. Portal was seen as awesome though due to the innovative portaling concept itself and the humor just made it better. I am curious though about your opinion of Half-Life 2 and Portal 2.