Your video game hot take(s) thread
- Thread starter Dany_the_penguin
- Start date
I don't understand this "old game bad" mentality when it comes to people my age or younger, hell even older, than me (game journalists especially, but that's a topic I won't get in to here). There's legit people who don't touch old games because they're "too old," even though there's functionally nothing wrong with them; the controls are responsive, graphics are clear enough to understand what's going on, and the game is enjoyable. And logically it doesn't make sense to have that thought process, anyways. That's like saying apple pie is bad because it dates all the way back from the 14th century.
Last edited:
- Apr 1, 2009
- 15,387
- 4,183
- 118
- Gender
- Whatever, just wash your hands.
Ok, you either need to say what you mean about games journalists here or just not say it cause shit like this is how we got shit like trump. Throwing out a random truism without any explanation or context. Plus, usually I see gaming sites applaud the classics all the time.
I prefer Doom PS1 over the PC versions of Doom I & II.
That's nothing new, and has been an issue with almost any medium. Gaming is no exception. Is this really hypocritical coming from the same people who played GTAV, Minecraft, or COD for over a decade and still counting.
Last edited:
I've always disagreed with the notion that OG Painkiller and the Serious Sam (The 1st & 2nd Encounter and II at the time of their release) are better Doom games than Doom 3. The take feels more like a petty take started by Yahtzee and a few other disgruntled fans who didn't like Doom 3 or its expansion, Resurrection of Evil, at the time. I know Yahtzee has changed his opinion on Doom 3 back in 2012 and loves the game, but if his original take changed I don't know nor really care. Doom 3 itself is still a great Doom game and isolated game in its own right.3 was just doing what Doom 64 already did, though I feel D64 did better.
I would love some statistics on the market for all these reissues/remakes/remaster.
Every time I try to play one of a game where I didn't play the original, it's like I'm getting the worse of all game worlds- the jank and discomfort of old games with the bland looks of many newer games.
Most of the positive coverage of these games are from fans of the original.
I tried playing RE4 and it was so ugly and boring and uninteresting to actually play. And, you know, that's fine, because I'm effectively playing a 20(?) yr old game or whatever, and that's on me, but it was nice being reminded of how far games have come with better character modeling, gameplay mechanics, and area design.
Same experience with Dead Space remake. The screenshots I see of Oblivion and Silent Hill 2 remakes- new versions of more like 20 yr old game look like... 10 yr old games.
The primary audience, at least the most logical, is fans of the original who get a version they can revisit with some graphical and QoL improvements. And that's great for them! But I wonder what is the audience for those that never played them and don't care.
And even if you never played them, why would you care? I imagine it would be an enthusiastic gamer hobbyist who wants to experience first hand something that was important in the field, like a recent cinema buff going back to watch old silent movies.
So I'm just curious how many of the players of the remake/master games are newcomers to those games and actually enjoy them.
Every time I try to play one of a game where I didn't play the original, it's like I'm getting the worse of all game worlds- the jank and discomfort of old games with the bland looks of many newer games.
Most of the positive coverage of these games are from fans of the original.
I tried playing RE4 and it was so ugly and boring and uninteresting to actually play. And, you know, that's fine, because I'm effectively playing a 20(?) yr old game or whatever, and that's on me, but it was nice being reminded of how far games have come with better character modeling, gameplay mechanics, and area design.
Same experience with Dead Space remake. The screenshots I see of Oblivion and Silent Hill 2 remakes- new versions of more like 20 yr old game look like... 10 yr old games.
The primary audience, at least the most logical, is fans of the original who get a version they can revisit with some graphical and QoL improvements. And that's great for them! But I wonder what is the audience for those that never played them and don't care.
And even if you never played them, why would you care? I imagine it would be an enthusiastic gamer hobbyist who wants to experience first hand something that was important in the field, like a recent cinema buff going back to watch old silent movies.
So I'm just curious how many of the players of the remake/master games are newcomers to those games and actually enjoy them.
A lot more than you realize. Remakes and remasters work just as great for the new audience as does the old ones. Especially if those newer audience members don't have the older consoles and games, and/or are too expensive to buy now, or copies goes out of print.
Look at this:
REVII and RE2R have sold 15+million, and RE3R, Village, and RE4R all sold 10+ Million.
Remakes do have their uses and they bring in new audiences. Especially when those remakes are done great or well and marketed correctly.
SH2R
Konami Hails Silent Hill 2 Remake After Hitting 2 Million Sales Milestone - IGN
Konami has hailed the success of the Silent Hill 2 remake after it shot through the 2 million sales mark.
Most people wouldn't know about this obscure SNES remake of an arcade game, getting an even better remake on 8th gen consoles and PC.
Last edited:
>
REVII and RE2R have sold 15+million, and RE3R, Village, and RE4R all sold 10+ Million.
https://gamerant.com/resident-evil-4-remake-sales/
Remakes do have their uses and they bring in new audiences. Especially when those remakes are done great or well and marketed correctly.
>
I'm sure they do. I'm just curious about the scale.
Of the 25 million RE franchise remaster sales, I wonder how many were purchased by people who played the originals (and in those days people would share physical copies and buy used so I don't even think it's possible to know this).
Mine is less of a hot take and more of a just wondering aloud about stuff take.
REVII and RE2R have sold 15+million, and RE3R, Village, and RE4R all sold 10+ Million.
https://gamerant.com/resident-evil-4-remake-sales/
Remakes do have their uses and they bring in new audiences. Especially when those remakes are done great or well and marketed correctly.
>
I'm sure they do. I'm just curious about the scale.
Of the 25 million RE franchise remaster sales, I wonder how many were purchased by people who played the originals (and in those days people would share physical copies and buy used so I don't even think it's possible to know this).
Mine is less of a hot take and more of a just wondering aloud about stuff take.
I played the RE2 Remake without ever playing the original. I thought the gameplay was solid and didn't feel like I was playing an old game, though that was literally the point of that remake. I never played the original because even at the time when it originally came out, I didn't think the gameplay was good (static camera and tank controls). I liked the police station section of RE2 but not anything after and it felt really generic. Also, the game took itself too seriously and didn't lean into any cheese at all. It didn't really know how to have fun with itself essentially. I never got the point of the RE4 remake as you can play that today and it's great. You really just need to remap some buttons on the controls because the left stick was actually used to aim in the original game. RE4 was like the 1st actual 3rd-person shooter with modern controls so it didn't feel weird aiming with the "wrong stick" since you weren't used to modern TPS controls obviously.
Not everybody can adjust to the controls of the original RE4, so I don't blame Capcom for the remake. Especially when you can't move and shoot at the same time. RE5 gets around this with the partner system and allowing Chris and Sheva, to have more melee options than Leon could at the time.
RE4R worked out for them and then some. So now Capcom got money coming from all directions and all sides. So people can play the original or both or how are they choose to. People who go on about how RE4 didn't need to be remade, but they remade it and there's nothing else anyone can do about it. The franchi has new fans and all the more happy for them.
RE4R worked out for them and then some. So now Capcom got money coming from all directions and all sides. So people can play the original or both or how are they choose to. People who go on about how RE4 didn't need to be remade, but they remade it and there's nothing else anyone can do about it. The franchi has new fans and all the more happy for them.
I believe most of the ports/re-releases fixed the control issues, literally just need to remap a control or 2.
Even with that in mind, many new people and new gamers have trouble controlling a character that can't move and shoot at the same time. You can put a bunch of they added this in the modern ports (which is true), but it's still hard to get down for many newcomers. Everybody's different and not built the same way. What works for you or me, doesn't work for a majority of people getting into these games for the first time.
It's why many people were praising OG Dead Space's controls over RE4 and especially RE5 at the time. Issac can move and shoot at the same time in a RE4-System Shock 2 blend of a survival horror game.
Last edited:
I don't get the issue with needing to move and shoot, it increases the tension a bit, it's a horror game and not a shooter. Plus, even in shooters your normally have to stop and shoot anyways to have any kind of accuracy.
Everybody is different. Every person has a different skill set or mindset. Control standards change and quality of life improvement happens. Deal with it. I really don't care how you can't figure this out. Not everyone is you, nor does it make you special for figuring out the controls and getting them down to a tee. That's you and about 1,000 others at best over the entire population of any large first world country.
Most people in real life don't care and want whatever option is the easiest and most convenient when it comes to controls.
Most people in real life don't care and want whatever option is the easiest and most convenient when it comes to controls.
Last edited:
How don't you get that every game is developed with mechanics for the game that it is? I don't expect or require shooter controls in a horror game much like I wouldn't expect or want inventory/resource management in a game like Vanquish. Everyone was just fine with the controls in RE4 as it is considered one of the best games ever made.
On to much more important matters.
Sterling raised a good point earlier this week. No game is for everyone, yet a majority of games are made for everyone in mind. This applies to most people in the world. It is something I know you can agree with @Old_Hunter_77.
Sterling raised a good point earlier this week. No game is for everyone, yet a majority of games are made for everyone in mind. This applies to most people in the world. It is something I know you can agree with @Old_Hunter_77.
Last edited:
Noita is one of the best games ever made. It's pixel physics simulations are fantastic, the wand crafting has enormous variety and customizability, and there is so much extra secret content that you could beat the game ten times and not even see half of what the game has to offer. It's actually amazing just how much there is to the game. It's downright tragic that we will never see another game from the same development team.