Your video game hot take(s) thread

[BrawlMan]

During the Max_Dood/YoVideoGame stream: Kenny/Unroolie, I love ya and you're a great guy, but that the whole "nobody wants an open world race game" is bull and cut the crap. He doesn't like Burnout Paradise. To him and the rest of the crew, it's a great racing game, but a horrible Burnout game. I disagree heavily on the latter. It's not my favorite one, but the game is in my top 5. Sitting at #4. Besides, Need for Speed Most Wanted (2005) says hello, and no one cried about that game being open world and still gets praised for it and its police pursuits. I prefer traditional racing games myself, but I am not above and open world racer that is done right. BP aged better nearly all of the AAA racing games from 8th generation, so you're argument is invalid

 

[hanselthecaretaker2]

During the Max_Dood/YoVideoGame stream: Kenny/Unroolie, I love ya and you're a great guy, but that the whole "nobody wants an open world race game" is bull and cut the crap. He doesn't like Burnout Paradise. To him and the rest of the crew, it's a great racing game, but a horrible Burnout game. I disagree heavily on the latter. It's not my favorite one, but the game is in my top 5. Sitting at #4. Besides, Need for Speed Most Wanted (2005) says high, and no one cried about that game being open world and still gets praised for it and police pursuits. I prefer traditional racing games myself, but I am not above and open world racer that is done right. BP aged better nearly all of the AAA racing games from 8th generation, so you're argument is invalid

This deserves two thumbs up, just to be clear. 2005 MW and BP were pretty much the template for doing it well.

 

[Bob_McMillan]

The SD card port on my girlfriend's Steam Deck broke. The ejection mechanism was fucky, and somehow managed to break the SD card itself. Apparently, a known issue.

She ordered an SSD as a replacement. Now she's struggling with a screw that became stripped and can't install the new storage. Also a known issue.

I've really enjoyed playing on her Deck this past year, definitely turned my opinion on handheld PCs around. But this was exactly what I was worried about when she first considered buying one. We don't live in a country where Steam sells them directly, so getting it serviced is a problem. Given that Valve is, well... Valve, I really did not expect them to have the experience to put out a well built appliance. What they hell do they know about hardware?

They still overall exceeded my expectations with how well the Deck turned out, but in retrospect, my girlfriend really should have been more patient and avoided being an early adopter.

EDIT: I realized that this doesn't really sound like a hot take, but after trying to help her find a solution, there sure are a lot of redditors who would rather believe that people can't use screwdrivers properly than admit that Valve was at fault here.

 

[BrawlMan]

​

 

[Phoenixmgs]

You're really going to bring up original God of War, where your weapon attacks fill half the arena you're fighting in, making it nearly impossible to miss just based on the hitbox of your attacks, and the Batman Arkham games, where hitting the wrong person in a crowd actually happens all the time? Like I literally could not count the number of times in Arkham Knight that I would try to punch a normal mook and instead it would target the guy with the shield next to him.

I mentioned GOW and Batman because of how the camera is zoomed out and there's tons more enemies so it is somewhat difficult to aim with the left stick at the exact enemy you want to hit. Yes, in GOW attacking a specific enemy usually isn't an issue at all because it's that you're usually fighting a mob of weak enemies with a weapon with tons of sweeping range to it or a few stronger enemies. In Batman, I can hit the enemy I want most of the time (though it's mainly to do the special attacks on the more difficult enemies and it sucks when you do a special on like the most basic thug enemy). Again, the point is those games have zoomed out camera and tons more enemies whereas Souls doesn't have that issue. You shouldn't be targeting the wrong enemy with a soft-lock much like how a game like Bayonetta doesn't really throw a high number of enemies at you and you never attack the wrong enemy.

You have a game like Monster Hunter with similar feeling combat as Souls and it has lock-on but nobody uses it while you can pull up like any Souls video (walkthrough) and people are constantly using lock-on. Don't you think there's a reason unique to Souls for that that can be fixed?

Because your thumb does more than just turn the camera?

Except your thumb is sitting on the face buttons waiting to dodge on a split seconds notice.

You don't need the camera perfectly centered when dodging or attacking really either. The point is that in Souls people don't use lock-on for camera centering purposes. The real reason people use lock-on is like I said to make sure you hit the enemy and because lock-on switches to the controls. Every game when you hold the left bumper to pull up a shield automatically changes the movement controls whereas Souls doesn't. Even in a shooter, you hold left bumper to aim your gun, your movement switches. Souls makes you hit lock-on to do that.

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

You have a game like Monster Hunter with similar feeling combat as Souls and it has lock-on but nobody uses it while you can pull up like any Souls video (walkthrough) and people are constantly using lock-on. Don't you think there's a reason unique to Souls for that that can be fixed?

Once again, the Souls combat is the way it is because the levels are designed for you to be able to fight in much more awkward spaces. In Monster Hunter you are almost always fighting in wide open arenas.

Please show me one instance in Monster Hunter where you have to fight on a bridge or platform the width of your character or smaller.

Soft lock would not work in the souls games because it doesn't give you the necessary control to do something like fight in the chapel rafters in Anor Londo. Soft lock works by moving your character or your camera for you, and you don't want either of those things when precise movement is actually necessary.

I am tired of explaining this to you.

 

[hanselthecaretaker2]

He’s just refusing to understand/acknowledge the need for free 360 degree movement independent of the camera in Souls games while being able to raise a shield. If he could at least start there maybe we’d get somewhere here lol.

 

[Ezekiel]

MGS3 with the "modern" orbital camera is lame. The areas are designed for the cinematic cam. Most go from south to north, with buildings facing south, east or west. The original cam provides easier access to the face buttons, where the primary actions are. Going into first-person view is not this hassle the naysayers claim. You do it very quickly. The game accommodates the limited view by making enemies first question what they see at a distance and investigating if you move more. "Huh? What's that?" The orbital cam is visually boring, letting you see LESS, showing off the low res textures and simple geometry more.

The play times on my first ever Kerotan and Foxhound runs last year didn't come close to what's on YouTube, partly because I didn't look up their secrets (and only started looking up Kerotan locations when the bike chase started), but I prided myself on never making it easier with the orbital camera.

 

[Casual Shinji]

MGS3 with the "modern" orbital camera is lame. The areas are designed for the cinematic cam. Most go from south to north, with buildings facing south, east or west. The original cam provides easier access to the face buttons, where the primary actions are. Going into first-person view is not this hassle the naysayers claim. You do it very quickly. The game accommodates the limited view by making enemies first question what they see at a distance and investigating if you move more. "Huh? What's that?" The orbital cam is visually boring, letting you see LESS, showing off the low res textures and simple geometry more.

First of all, wrong. Secondly, you can switch from original to modern at the press of a button - it doesn't replace the original.

A third-person stealth game without a controlable camera is bloody stupid. In the previous games the radar had your back, but in MGS 3 you don't even get that, so any area that the original camera isn't focused on is a huge blind spot that you need to put way more effort into checking than if Snake could just easily pivot his head i.e. control the third-person view.

 

[Ezekiel]

Because of human nature, the orbital camera actually replaces the cinematic one. Players use the cinematic one a minority of the time because the orbital cam is just easier. But the challenge is deliberate. The levels and myopic enemies are built for that camera. Therefore, the orbital cam has to be disabled completely in the pause menu. It's the only way to beat the temptation and not miss any of the attractive camera work.

 

[hanselthecaretaker2]

The industry is at a point where design limitations are mostly irrelevant, but it doesn’t automatically make every game well designed. While the older MGS games and the like kinda did wonders around limited tech and were certainly playable, I gotta say the 3D camera opened up some neat doors.

 

[Casual Shinji]

Because of human nature, the orbital camera actually replaces the cinematic one. Players use the cinematic one a minority of the time because the orbital cam is just easier. But the challenge is deliberate. The levels and myopic enemies are built for that camera. Therefore, the orbital cam has to be disabled completely in the pause menu. It's the only way to beat the temptation and not miss any of the attractive camera work.

The enemies aren't designed for that camera, since they can spot you off-camera. And neither are the levels designed for it. The grid-like set-up of the levels are no longer a thing like it was in MGS1 and earlier, and the radar, which explicitly functioned as a work around for how close and rigid the camera was, is gone too. Add to that how much more complicated the action controls are and it's no wonder most people immediately switch to actually being able to look around themselves like a regular human, let alone a trained soldier.

 

[BrawlMan]

Gungrave GORE being made easier after all its patch updates is not a bad thing. Some fans complained about making things "too easy"; especially in the Switch port (this pretty much has it where you can't die from platforming at all by removing all of it or making invisible walls to keep you from falling). That version I have not played, but when your difficulty is based off a bad platforming sections that insta-kill you, your character being too slow and constantly hit-stunned, or having a level where the early section can one kill you because of some dumb lasers, that is not good difficulty design. I am glad Iggymob went out of their way to improve the game and listen to proper fan feedback. It does make you wonder what the hell they were doing since the game's announcement back in 2018, or why it was released in such a glitchy mess loaded with fake difficulty. I'll take a big fixes over no fixes at all.

The Gungrave series aren't known for hardcore difficulty. There is challenge, but the first game especially is meant for casual play. The less said about Overdose, the better, but I hate that game. It's difficult for the wrong reasons and it's not worth multiple playthroughs. I couldn't even finish my first playthrough and sold the game.

 

[Ezekiel]

The enemies aren't designed for that camera, since they can spot you off-camera. And neither are the levels designed for it. The grid-like set-up of the levels are no longer a thing like it was in MGS1 and earlier, and the radar, which explicitly functioned as a work around for how close and rigid the camera was, is gone too. Add to that how much more complicated the action controls are and it's no wonder most people immediately switch to actually being able to look around themselves like a regular human, let alone a trained soldier.

The enemies wouldn't be that near-sighted and inept if it wasn't for the cam. MGS4 was the first built for an orbital cam, and naturally has levels that aren't so much on this south to north path like in 1 and 3. Eastern Europe goes in all directions. Middle East is pretty varied too. Buildings in 4 also aren't so frequently on a grid.

 

[Ezekiel]

On top of that, you have the camo system, of course. Can lie down right in front of enemy. Game is so forgiving already. Suppressors everywhere. No reason to play on easy mode with orbital cam.

 

[Casual Shinji]

The enemies wouldn't be that near-sighted and inept if it wasn't for the cam.

Yet they still have the ability to spot you off-camera before you can spot them. Also, nearly all game enemies were inept back then, so no, they weren't made purposely inept. As a matter of fact starting with MGS2 they were designed NOT be inept, doing such things and calling in for back-up, looking in hiding spots, following tracks, and sending in clearing squads.

On top of that, you have the camo system, of course. Can lie down right in front of enemy. Game is so forgiving already. Suppressors everywhere. No reason to play on easy mode with orbital cam.

You can also just run through every map in the game, triggering alerts, and shaking all of that off once you reach the next cutscene. But that's not why you play the game - you play the game to interact with its mechanics, and when you play a third-person stealth game that doesn't allow you to move the camera it makes it less satisfying to interact with those mechanics.

 

[Ezekiel]

So quickly look in FPV; what's the problem?

"Less satisfying to interact" is subjective. I still see it all. Have to look in FPV more, but the cinematic cam also does a ton of work for me, showing more a lot of the time than a closed-in cam possibly can. Corner peak (pressing on wall and holding L2/R2) helps too. And you can lean and rise with the analog buttons/triggers in FPV. Use your tools. Level design, enemies, tools, it's all balanced for that original cam.

They're purposely inept in a few ways, including poor vision, poor hearing, slow patrolling, speaking to themselves. When did I say they don't do anything right?

I can see through the window that there is a soldier in the other room. Impossible in "third person." You also know where the enemies are from the stereo/surround sound. I could see your point if they didn't always say things like, "Huh? What's that?" If the camo system wasn't so generous. Or if the buildings were placed diagonally rather than north to south.

 

[Ezekiel]

Speaks about satisfaction of interacting with mechanics, when primary mechanics and item uses are mostly on face buttons, which can't be as easily accessed when using the new cam that came a year later, because the thumb is occupied more with one so close and not scripted for you. Guess you really like the claw grip.

 

[Casual Shinji]

"Less satisfying to interact" is subjective. I still see it all. Have to look in FPV more, but the cinematic cam also does a ton of work for me, showing more a lot of the time than a closed-in cam possibly can. Corner peak (pressing on wall and holding L2/R2) helps too. And you can lean and rise with the analog buttons/triggers in FPV. Use your tools. Level design, enemies, tools, it's all balanced for that original cam.

Cool if you want to play that way, you do you. You don't have to use the modern camera, I don't have to use the classic camera.

They're purposely inept in a few ways, including poor vision, poor hearing, slow patrolling, speaking to themselves. When did I say they don't do anything right?

I didn't say you said that. You claimed they were inept on purpose to offset the camera, when they were always this inept even when you still had the radar.

Speaks about satisfaction of interacting with mechanics, when primary mechanics and item uses are mostly on face buttons, which can't be as easily accessed when using the new cam that came a year later, because the thumb is occupied more with one so close and not scripted for you. Guess you really like the claw grip.

Like that wasn't the case even with the classic camera. Post-MGS1 these games have always been claw grip games, 'press and hold 5 buttons in order to lean out of a corner and shoot a guy' games.

 

[hanselthecaretaker2]

Cool if you want to play that way, you do you. You don't have to use the modern camera, I don't have to use the classic camera.

I didn't say you said that. You claimed they were inept on purpose to offset the camera, when they were always this inept even when you still had the radar.
Like that wasn't the case even with the classic camera. Post-MGS1 these games have always been claw grip games, 'press and hold 5 buttons in order to lean out of a corner and shoot a guy' games.

I think MGS4 especially loaded on the mechanics being the first game on PS3 and IIRC it still had pressure sensitive buttons. These were the coolest thing about these games’ controls and I don’t know of much besides this series that used them to good effect.

I recall the most complicated mechanic being something like grabbing an enemy for a shield and shooting at someone else, which involved R1/L1, Triangle if you wanted 1st person for easier aiming, and right stick to actually aim.

For as ridiculous as MGS4 wound up being with its story trying to wrap everything up, the gameplay especially in the first half of the game was overall top notch. V expanded on this in terms of stuff to use and freedom of approach, but mechanically it took a step back from 4.