Game issues you're sick of hearing about

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT
 

Mass Effect 3's ending: I was already sick of this when it first occurred. After all it was blown waaaaaaaaaaaaay out of proportion. "Retake Mass Effect"? How the FUCK do you retake something that was never yours to begin with? Explain that one to me if you can.

Console Vs PC: What difference does it make what platform you game on as long as you have a good time gaming?

Console Vs. Console: See Above.

"Casual" Gaming: News Flash! Casual gaming is not a new thing, it's existed for YEARS. Ever see those CD-Roms hanging off the side of the shelves in the PC game section of Best Buy or whatever? Yeah those were CASUAL GAMES. Now go pick your socks up off the floor where they just blew off.

New Troll:
Opinions as facts.

DoPo:
"It doesn't stand up to today's standards"

MXRom:
The console-pc 'war'

bafrali:

You don't have to be like every acclaimed game. So don't nag others about how wrong they are for liking their favourite game because it didn't cure your cancer.

You hate games because they are popular? You are a massive tool sir.

I full-heartedly agree with all four of you. Those are the "issues" we see endlessly brought up that continue to diminish my respect for the gaming community.

Sure, people complain about Always-On DRM, online passes, corporate/publisher bullshit, over-priced content, and other such things. And that's fine. Those complaints may become tiring to hear over and over but at least they're genuine fucking complaints.

But the perpetual nature of the things you four listed grates my nerves to no end. They are pointless, illogical, and down-right idiotic. Worse still, the people often perpetuating them are the more pretentious and conceited amongst us. Often leading those "debates" to being filled with insults and rude banter. Thus contributing to the general image of the gamer as a "man-child".

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Along with those things listed above, I would only add people "white-knight-ing" companies in the industry. Often saying things like, "Stop complaining and hating on them. They're not evil. They're a company. They exist to make money."

Well no shit. Of course they're not "evil" and of course they're in this business to turn a profit. However, that does not lessen the atrocious nature of the bullshit they pull on us on a regular basis.

Besides, they're big, multi-billion dollar corporations. I really don't think they need some random poster on a tiny corner of the internet to "stand up" for them.

That if we just eliminated every wacky and fun game like SR3 and lollipop chainsaw, the industry would be all serious and respected and stuff.

First off, you don't know that and second, I don't want to have to abandon video gaming in favor of watching trailer racing on youtube. I play games to have wacky fun, why should I have to give up my favorite hobby? So a bunch of dicks can sit around playing heavy rain 2 and drooling at the seriousness and respectability and credibility of it all?

I mean, heavy rain 2 will probably get started after beyond two souls, and there's a million indie devs out there right now trying to make more story focused games anyways. Hell, I think Walking Dead has almost amassed more followers than jesus. Eliminating COD and fun wacky games like lollipop chainsaw and SR3 will not fix the industry. Get over it.

People (erroneously) labeling things as "HARDCORE" and "Casual".

People fascination over a game's "Graphics" rather than it's "Aesthetics".

The PC vs. Console fights are obnoxious to say the least. Yes, PCs are more powerful than consoles, everybody knows that.

Also, the "they dumbed it down for the casuals" stuff has gotten beyond old.

All of them. All of what's been mentioned so far. Well, "probably", that is, because I didn't read all of the comments - I'm sick of hearing about them. I don't care. I'm playing this game these days which I will not even mention and it's pure FUN.. alas, "fun" doesn't seem to exist around here. I'm sick of of "fun" being nothing to talk about.

DoPo:

shadow skill:
Gamelay>graphics. It really is quite ignorant, recently we have had a bunch of threads about Cevat Yerli because he dared state the obvious truth that defies the orthodoxy. People act like God of War or Mirror's Edge would be worthy of note without all the things that go into the graphics. At worst Yerli didn't use the best phrasing but the content of what he said was entirely accurate.

Yes, obviously that is 100% truth. I'll no go play Minecraft to admire the beauty there. I think I might continue with some Might and Magic 7 - I've got a save I haven't booted up in a while.

image

Gorgeous, just gorgeous. I can't imagine playing it for anything but the looks.

It doesn't occur to you to actually consider the idea that part of the reason that God of War can be said to stand above its peers within its' genre is that it has the visuals to support its' theme of theme of brutality? You think it would have the same level of impact if it didn't show things like brain casings and intestines? Would Mirror's Edge even with all of its problems be as good at simulating running if it didn't do things like blur the world around Faith as she picked up speed to give players a better sense of motion?

There are quite a few reasons why X-Blades isn't considered in the same breath as any of the top games within its' genre and the lack of visual appeal of the combat is one of them. I mean look at this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h6NXYhFcmO0 and compare it to this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lu53VOcYgH8&feature=share&list=PLF012CC16F3C66DC8

X-Blades and DMC have almost identical features but one happens to feature animations that are orders of magnitude better than the other. This helps the combat not be boring. In other words between these two games which both have you doing the same sorts of things the edge goes to the game with the superior visuals.

Bayonetta is very close to DMC in terms of combat design (Having the same initial creator and all.) you think it would work if it animated (Had the visuals of) X-Blades?

shadow skill:

DoPo:

shadow skill:
Gamelay>graphics. It really is quite ignorant, recently we have had a bunch of threads about Cevat Yerli because he dared state the obvious truth that defies the orthodoxy. People act like God of War or Mirror's Edge would be worthy of note without all the things that go into the graphics. At worst Yerli didn't use the best phrasing but the content of what he said was entirely accurate.

Yes, obviously that is 100% truth. I'll no go play Minecraft to admire the beauty there. I think I might continue with some Might and Magic 7 - I've got a save I haven't booted up in a while.

image

Gorgeous, just gorgeous. I can't imagine playing it for anything but the looks.

It doesn't occur to you to actually consider the idea that part of the reason that God of War can be said to stand above its peers within its' genre is that it has the visuals to support its' theme of theme of brutality? You think it would have the same level of impact if it didn't show things like brain casings and intestines? Would Mirror's Edge even with all of its problems be as good at simulating running if it didn't do things like blur the world around Faith as she picked up speed to give players a better sense of motion?

There are quite a few reasons why X-Blades isn't considered in the same breath as any of the top games within its' genre and the lack of visual appeal of the combat is one of them. I mean look at this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h6NXYhFcmO0 and compare it to this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lu53VOcYgH8&feature=share&list=PLF012CC16F3C66DC8

X-Blades and DMC have almost identical features but one happens to feature animations that are orders of magnitude better than the other. This helps the combat not be boring. In other words between these two games which both have you doing the same sorts of things the edge goes to the game with the superior visuals.

Bayonetta is very close to DMC in terms of combat design (Having the same initial creator and all.) you think it would work if it animated (Had the visuals of) X-Blades?

And it doesn't occur to you that not everybody is solely focused on the shiny? Because neither Minecraft, nor M&M7 look remotely appealing, however the gameplay is superb. Dwarf Fortress should be the poster child of "Visuals aren't all encompassing", too. Simply put, while there are games that bank on looks, not every game is one, and not every gamer cares. Claiming otherwise is a lie of the highest calibre, as many games continue to prove - Hotline Miami? I utterly loved it. FTL? Meh to look at, an absolute joy to play. Cthulhu Saves the World? It's a 16 bit 2D RPG and a very pleasant experience. Crysis? Very pretty, however, I never bought any of them because they were boring.

So do if really think that visuals are all important and they are the only thing that can keep my attention, then how come they...don't? And how come games that don't look as nice exist at all - after all, there shouldn't be any market for them. Or, is it perhaps that looks are not that important as you claim - not everywhere, not all the time?

EDIT: also, I don't that with X-Blades shifting the blame onto looks is necessary - from what I've seen, the game is boring and a bit shit. The protagonist comes off obnoxious and unlikable. The game not topping off charts is not really surprising.

There are so many it would be easier for me to pick a topic I didn't hate.

This award will have to go to the PC vs Console X vs Console Y. So much bullshit can fit into so little space on these threads and it's all because of overbearing asses that have no empathy for people who are into different things/think everyone should game the same way they do. Short answer of what I'm sick of:

"Hurr! Everyone should PC game! Mid-range PC's are cheap! Only morans can't use PC's!"
It will never be as simple as turn on and play with a pc. Never. Nerver ever. I like pc gaming, but I can't rely on it. And some people just don't know and don't care to learn even basic pc stuff. And a mid range gaming pc, IS a console right now. And they cost $250.

"The Wii U will fail cause its just like the Wii but with no casual support!"
We should probably wait until the damn thing has been out for a year to say that

"The Wii U won't fail! There's a good Mario game for it and Nintendo says it will get better!"
See above

shadow skill:
Gamelay>graphics. It really is quite ignorant, recently we have had a bunch of threads about Cevat Yerli because he dared state the obvious truth that defies the orthodoxy. People act like God of War or Mirror's Edge would be worthy of note without all the things that go into the graphics. At worst Yerli didn't use the best phrasing but the content of what he said was entirely accurate.

Also this. God forbid you try to praise a game or assume it was worth playing on graphics alone. Its not all about graphics but good graphics can make a game

Nadia Castle:
Hell Sonic Adventure wasn't even a good game when it was released (WORST HUBWORLD EVER!).

But... but... My nostalgia tells me I loved that game and thought the Hubworld was cool... Honestly, its weird to play it again later and see Sanic -a blue anthropomorphic hedgehog- run up to people and talk like it ain't no thing

DoPo:
Yes, obviously that is 100% truth. I'll no go play Minecraft to admire the beauty there. I think I might continue with some Might and Magic 7 - I've got a save I haven't booted up in a while.

snip

Gorgeous, just gorgeous. I can't imagine playing it for anything but the looks.

Aww, common!
We almost had a whole page of people posting complaints and shit without anyone telling them they were wrong!
I thought this might be a miracle thread!
Oh well, guess not =/

OT: Any complaint about anything really. I'd rather just enjoy the game most of the time. Granted that's hypocritical of me 'cause if I hate the game I really want to vent about it - like Sim City and its embarrassing amount of bugs.
Really, I hate opinions that disagree with my own and won't acknowledge that its largely just a difference of opinions. I hate unfounded calls of things being 'dumbed down for the casuals', but I also hate it when things are legitimately dumbed down for 'wider audience appeal', or because current gen consoles couldn't handle them being what they were meant to be.
I hate hearing about how Mass Effect 3 sucked for reasons I don't agree with, but I also hate hearing the it was amazing when really it did suck. Hard.
I hate people who try to insist consoles are better than PCs because they're cheaper/easier, when that's false, and people who claim PCs are better than console's 'cause they're more powerful and customisable, with neither realising that it depends on the person buying said system. PCs are cheaper and easier for me than consoles. They always will be. Deal with it. Likewise I have friends that could not get a PC if they wanted to because it'd be too expensive for them.
I'm sick of people hating companies like EA, but I'm also sick of the corporate apologists that'll defend every move they make with "They just exist to make money", as if that has any bearing on whether I should accept it or not.
I'm sick of sexism arguments full stop. Its just over the top with how far both sides take things.
Used games sales and backwards compatibility I also hate. Know what? I game on a PC, and we're doing fine without used games. Yeah, we've got the best backwards compatability around, but I've also got a PS1 and PS2 because screw backwards compatibility, I've got redundancy. I get some people like it and can save money off it, not having it isn't the end of the world that everyone should care about though.

scorptatious:
Let's see here...
"Consolefied" Or whatever term it is.

This implies that people who mainly play on consoles are dumb. And that any issues a game on the PC has is because the developers created it with the console players in mind. One example would be TotalBiscuit's impression video on Defiance in which he claims that the developers made it so you can only hold two weapons at a time because of console players.

Eh, its more of a "Consoles can't handle that sort of thing, so its taken out for an equal experience on both platforms". Less to do with the gamers, more to do with the hardware, most of the time.

And to the developers who actually do believe console players can't handle more than two weapons, you're just making up excuses because you're too lazy to either incorporate a two weapon system into gameplay properly (like Halo's system which makes it that certain weapons are better against shields while others are better at taking down foes) or just give all the weapons to the player.

Or they feel that having to hold down a button to select a weapon from a large list interrupts the flow too much, and they'd rather just have quick transition between a couple of weapons rather than a slower transition between a large number.

Thinking about it now, Bioshock 1 and Infinite seem to have almost complete opposite ways of handling weapons and plasmids. The first game allows you to hold all the weapons you find but only a limited amount of plasmids, while Infinite does the opposite. Huh.

Really?
I had more plasmids in Bioshock 1 than in Infinite. I think. Electro Bolt, Incinerate, Winter Blast, Sonic Boom, Target Dummy, Telekinesis, Enrage, Hypnotise Big Daddy, Cyclone Trap, Insect Swarm and Security Bullseye. 11 Plasmids.
Bioshock Infinite: Possession, Devils Kiss, Murder of Crows, Shock Jockey, Bucking Bronko, Charge, Undertow, Return to Sender. 8 Vigors.
They were fixed and you always had all of them [Provided you found/bought them].
Then there were the Gene Tonics and Gear, which you did swap around dependent on what you wanted, but Bioshock let you have 4 of a certain type of Gene Tonic, with 3-4 types, from memory, whilst Infinite only let you have 4 pieces of gear.

Infinite focuses more on use of Vigors than Bioshock's use of Plasmids, largely 'cause they combo well and are more fun to use, but there was more Plasmids/Gene Tonics in Bioshock than Vigors/Gear in Infinite that you could hold at one time.

People complaining so much the complaints become tiresome does not in any way whatsoever influence the validity of their complaints.

Doesn't mean there's not a few topics I'm sick and tired of hearing about, even though they've kind of got a point.

DoPo:

shadow skill:

DoPo:

Yes, obviously that is 100% truth. I'll no go play Minecraft to admire the beauty there. I think I might continue with some Might and Magic 7 - I've got a save I haven't booted up in a while.

image

Gorgeous, just gorgeous. I can't imagine playing it for anything but the looks.

It doesn't occur to you to actually consider the idea that part of the reason that God of War can be said to stand above its peers within its' genre is that it has the visuals to support its' theme of theme of brutality? You think it would have the same level of impact if it didn't show things like brain casings and intestines? Would Mirror's Edge even with all of its problems be as good at simulating running if it didn't do things like blur the world around Faith as she picked up speed to give players a better sense of motion?

There are quite a few reasons why X-Blades isn't considered in the same breath as any of the top games within its' genre and the lack of visual appeal of the combat is one of them. I mean look at this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h6NXYhFcmO0 and compare it to this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lu53VOcYgH8&feature=share&list=PLF012CC16F3C66DC8

X-Blades and DMC have almost identical features but one happens to feature animations that are orders of magnitude better than the other. This helps the combat not be boring. In other words between these two games which both have you doing the same sorts of things the edge goes to the game with the superior visuals.

Bayonetta is very close to DMC in terms of combat design (Having the same initial creator and all.) you think it would work if it animated (Had the visuals of) X-Blades?

And it doesn't occur to you that not everybody is solely focused on the shiny? Because neither Minecraft, nor M&M7 look remotely appealing, however the gameplay is superb. Dwarf Fortress should be the poster child of "Visuals aren't all encompassing", too. Simply put, while there are games that bank on looks, not every game is one, and not every gamer cares. Claiming otherwise is a lie of the highest calibre, as many games continue to prove - Hotline Miami? I utterly loved it. FTL? Meh to look at, an absolute joy to play. Cthulhu Saves the World? It's a 16 bit 2D RPG and a very pleasant experience. Crysis? Very pretty, however, I never bought any of them because they were boring.

So do if really think that visuals are all important and they are the only thing that can keep my attention, then how come they...don't? And how come games that don't look as nice exist at all - after all, there shouldn't be any market for them. Or, is it perhaps that looks are not that important as you claim - not everywhere, not all the time?

Oh please just quit while you are ahead no really. First off Yerli is talking about how the animations can serve as ques to the player that enemies are in bound not just how good the grass looks. I bring up God of War because it is one of the best examples of using visuals to support the thematic elements in the games. That is not about being shiny, that is about having the visuals to support what one is trying to accomplish.

It only seems to be people like yourself that are interested in shiny. If someone wants to really simulate hunting a better simulation would want to have the level of detail necessary to show things like snapped twigs etc. That way you don't have to make X-Ray vision buttons. Gameplay is therefore complementary to graphics neither is actually of greater or lesser importance. Hell he doesn't even say that graphics are 60% of the package this is what he actually says:

The better the graphics, the better the physics, the better the sound design, the better the technical assets and production values are - paired with the art direction, making things look spectacular and stylistic is 60 per cent of the game.

Notice how he mentions sound which is not even remotely visual in that list?

Edit: With respect to X-Blades. Nero isn't exactly likeable either but I would think you would be hard pressed to find someone who would seriously put X-Blades and DMC in the same conversation in terms of being at the top of their genre. X-Blades combat is basically the exact same animation over and over again. It works sure but it is entirely lacking in interest even if it has the same core mechanics that the DMC games have. DMC would almost certainly never have become what it was if the visual feedback was swapped with X-Blades, because X-Blades' visual feed back does nothing to make the player feel awesome.

Oh god, more than anything else I'm sick to death of people whining that games are too short (especially when they try to claim that this game or that is "only five hours long" when in most cases it's at least a few hours longer than that). More specifically, I'm sick of people assigning hard dollar values to each hour a game lasts in order to determine "value".

Joccaren:

Or they feel that having to hold down a button to select a weapon from a large list interrupts the flow too much, and they'd rather just have quick transition between a couple of weapons rather than a slower transition between a large number.

*shrugs* Fair enough. Although for me, it doesn't wreck the flow too much. :/

Plus with games like Bioshock 1 you could tap the button to switch weapons on the fly. But I'd imagine it wouldn't be as effective as hotkeys on a PC.

Joccaren:

Really?
I had more plasmids in Bioshock 1 than in Infinite. I think. Electro Bolt, Incinerate, Winter Blast, Sonic Boom, Target Dummy, Telekinesis, Enrage, Hypnotise Big Daddy, Cyclone Trap, Insect Swarm and Security Bullseye. 11 Plasmids.
Bioshock Infinite: Possession, Devils Kiss, Murder of Crows, Shock Jockey, Bucking Bronko, Charge, Undertow, Return to Sender. 8 Vigors.
They were fixed and you always had all of them [Provided you found/bought them].
Then there were the Gene Tonics and Gear, which you did swap around dependent on what you wanted, but Bioshock let you have 4 of a certain type of Gene Tonic, with 3-4 types, from memory, whilst Infinite only let you have 4 pieces of gear.

Infinite focuses more on use of Vigors than Bioshock's use of Plasmids, largely 'cause they combo well and are more fun to use, but there was more Plasmids/Gene Tonics in Bioshock than Vigors/Gear in Infinite that you could hold at one time.

I do agree Infinite had less vigors and gear than Bioshock's plasmids and tonics. I was saying that with the first game, you can only have up to six plasmids (less so early on) at a time and had to switch if you wanted to use a different one. Infinite does sort of the same thing with weapons, but allows you to use all the vigors you find at once.

"There is a problem with X in the gaming industry/community".

Replace "gaming industry/community" with almost any other group and you'd be told to stop generalising and making sweeping statements. But for some reason though it's okay to do so, despite each "problem" having countless counter-examples that prove you can't just apply it across the board.

This is especially irritating when the people who do this are hypocrites, and the first to point out you can't generalise if you say anything about a group they happen to belong to.

the 'sexism' thing, I actually rather like T&A in my games...

shadow skill:
Snip

I think you might be confusing "graphics" with "aesthetics." The former are solely about the shiny, the latter are the all-encompassing visual look of the game. God of War (I guess, I had more fun with the hacky-slashy part of the game than the actual look of it, but whatevs) and hyper-realistic hunting games depend on those high-grade graphics, but that doesn't make those games inherently better than a game like Minecraft or any Valve game that don't need the best graphics to be good.

OT: I agree with everyone above who mentioned the dumbing down of games. You can go be hardcore in your little corner and whine about how Dark Souls might get an easy mode, so people who might otherwise not have played it would, and we'll be over here, playing it on normal (or easy) because it's not that big of a fucking deal.

jackdeesface:

And CoD hate. It really smacks to me of trying to dislike something popular just to try and make yourself sound underground. You don't, you sound like a prat.

I don't think anyone dislikes CoD in order to seem underground or original. In fact it's more like joining the masses.

I dislike....

.... people saying that something true in one case is not true in another. Case in point: the gameplay vs graphics debate going on in this very thread. Certain genres (WRPG's, roguelikes, sandboxes, "classic style" FPS's) rely far more on gameplay to get them along, whereas other genres (JRPG's, Spectacle fighters, fighters, "modern military shooters", or many many different very linnear games) rely more on graphics. Different strokes for different folks, okay? Similarly, some people cannot tell the difference between 5fps and 120fps (I'm almost this bad), and others can individually see the frames at over 240fps. Different people see things differently. Just because something is right for you doesn't mean that it's right for everyone.

.... claims that dlc and f2p are ruining the market. It's too late to go into too many specifics, just know that they aren't, case closed.

.... complaints about shoehorned multiplayer. Most games that have had shoehorned multiplayer (Ass Creed, Mass Effect, etc) bring something interesting to the table in that regard, and even revitalize the multiplayer market in some way. Sure, some like Tomb Raider and Spec Ops is a bit overkill, but if I have to put up with another 10 Tomb Raiders level of cash-in to get another 1 Assassin's Creed level of innovation, I'm all for it.

and finally, to be a bit meta here....

.... complaints about complaints about Mass Effect's ending. About 90% of the time I see the ME3 ending brought up, it's by people saying that they're tired of hearing about it. If you're tired of hearing about it, for the love of God, don't bring it up, and don't respond if provoked. I was as pissed as the next guy, but it's something that I dropped about 2 or so months after the game came out. It seems the only people talking about it are the people who complain about hearing about it. So shut up about it, you're the ones keeping us from moving on.

LifeCharacter:

shadow skill:
Snip

I think you might be confusing "graphics" with "aesthetics." The former are solely about the shiny, the latter are the all-encompassing visual look of the game. God of War (I guess, I had more fun with the hacky-slashy part of the game than the actual look of it, but whatevs) and hyper-realistic hunting games depend on those high-grade graphics, but that doesn't make those games inherently better than a game like Minecraft or any Valve game that don't need the best graphics to be good.

OT: I agree with everyone above who mentioned the dumbing down of games. You can go be hardcore in your little corner and whine about how Dark Souls might get an easy mode, so people who might otherwise not have played it would, and we'll be over here, playing it on normal (or easy) because it's not that big of a fucking deal.

No I'm not confusing anything graphics posses aesthetic qualities they are not separate from them. There is no meaningful distinction possible here unless you pervert the meaning of graphic.

Minecraft and the games that Valve puts out all have the necessary graphics to accomplish what they need to. Catherine does not work at all if you replace her with a stick figure, it is just not going to come across properly when the subject matter has to do with sex. And you want to show even the slightest bit of it.

Take Hawken as another example right now they are working on an update to add some destructible environments. They could have made the game simply start damaging players after a wall gets hit a few times without bothering to even attempt environment destruction. However that would be visually disturbing and it might mean they would need some other explicit way of telling players that whatever they are hiding behind is fubared. The visual effect of destroying the object is a much better and potentially more subtle design choice.

The new DmC is a more negative example in so far as Dante's aesthetic and indeed the aesthetic for the entire game is filth yet he fights in a very flashy way. The combat animations do not fit the rest of the character's own visual presentation. Nor do they reflect his personality. Bayonetta is the exact opposite she is supposed to be this kind of Vegas show girl/stripper and her animations all reflect this theme nicely (If only they fixed her proportions so she didn't look weird. Ah well probably too late now.) and fit her personality as well.

MeChaNiZ3D:

jackdeesface:

And CoD hate. It really smacks to me of trying to dislike something popular just to try and make yourself sound underground. You don't, you sound like a prat.

I don't think anyone dislikes CoD in order to seem underground or original. In fact it's more like joining the masses.

Fair point, different sides of the same coin though. I'd argue that as CoD is one of the best selling, if not THE best selling, franchises of all time people who dislike it intentionally are trying to seem original. It just happens that they're doing this by following the crowd, abet a slightly smaller crowd than the majority.

Wow, that was hard to articulate.

CoD is a huge game and the general consensus among consumers is to like it, thats why its as big as it is.

As self identified 'gamers' we tend to be somewhat insular, as you rightly point out CoD hate seems like the opinion of the more vocal of self identified 'gamers'.

Among this group CoD hate is the popular opinion, so yes you;re right, a lot of people are probably in it to follow what everyone else is doing. I would argue that this dislike stems from a desire to seem more hardcore than the millions of 'casual'CoD players (or 'normal people' as i like to call them)out in the world.

Basically, we're both right. Lets hug.

everythingbeeps:
Oh god, more than anything else I'm sick to death of people whining that games are too short (especially when they try to claim that this game or that is "only five hours long" when in most cases it's at least a few hours longer than that). More specifically, I'm sick of people assigning hard dollar values to each hour a game lasts in order to determine "value".

While I agree that having an arbitrary formula to denote dollar to hour seems silly, I don't think this is without merit. Its becoming a lot worse as far as I've noticed with developers increased focus on multiplayer over single player. As someone who doesn't play multiplayer this essentially means my content in the game is being vastly reduced. Then again, I don't replay games, I never have re-read books or re-watched movies either.

If I buy a DVD for 15 and I moan that the film isn't over 3 hours long without mentioning anything else to do with the film am i being a prat? Yes. If I buy a DVD for 15 and the film is 10 minutes long, I don;t care how good the cinematography and acting were for those ten minuites. BECAUSE IT WAS ONLY TEN FREAKIN MINUTES!

I'm kind of sick of hearing how everyone who is annoyed on whatever scale is instantly "Entitled" or somewhat. I know people love the word of the month/year especially on the internet but the word was thrown at so many people who so much as display the slightest annoyance at something. Granted it's not so bad now but some people still haven't gotten past the phase.

'Voting with your wallet'

It's such a load of bullshit. Say EA releases a new game and it's awful, so we get the entire forum not to buy it. It won't change a thing because there are still droves of people who haven't got a clue going to buy it.

You know what does make a difference? Complaining.

People would not shut the fuck up about Mass Effect 3's ending. On every damn gaming site there'd be people complaining about it. And you know what that did?

That got the ending changed! (I know it was still shit) Which is more than 'voting with your wallet' ever did.

If you just don't buy the game, the publisher only thinks of you as an untapped market ready to be exploited. By all means, don't buy it if you don't agree with the publisher's business practices, but don't keep quiet about it!

Sexism. Every form of media is sexist. Maybe if you actually did something useful instead of bitching all the time it wouldn't be a thing. And the insane amount of white knights here really irk me.

Fanboys that attack anyone that doesn't like Dark Souls. Your game isn't perfect. #DealWithIt

Jim/Yahtzee parrots. This happens a lot on Dtoid too. Formulate your own opinions. And stop with the Polygon=emotions David Cage bullshit. It's over a month old.

This hatred with quick time events, and the constant lumping them in with regular button prompts. The knife fight in RE4 a quick time event. Pressing one button continuously to open a door a button prompt. Kratos finished off the titan Chronos in a quick time event. Pressing A to do Chris' neck breaker is a button prompt. Games do not currently allow us the freedom of movement to do the things exactly as stylishly as done in quick time events (Yahtzee), at least you have the pleasure of failing them and watching your character die a gruesome death, other wise you would be watching a cut scene entirely.

Main game that people keep hating on because of "constant quick time events" was RE6 which had even less than the 2 games that came before it. Sure it had button promps for melee moves but thats no different than having a dedicated melee button besides it being context sensitive. It doesnt hurt the game in any way to alternate LT and RT to climb as opposed to holding up on the analogue stick except alternating buttons might make you feel some of the actual exertion the character is doing.

I've had it up to here with people saying that Nintendo should quit the console race and become a 3rd party developer. Anyone who says that is extremely mis-informed and clearly doesn't know the future line-up for Wii U and 3DS, if Nintendo quit now, they would leave millions of 3DS and Wii U owners stranded on their own with no games for systems that aren't even that far into their lifecycles yet. Nintendo simply cannot quit now, they just need to improve.

alfinchkid:

and finally, to be a bit meta here....

.... complaints about complaints about Mass Effect's ending. About 90% of the time I see the ME3 ending brought up, it's by people saying that they're tired of hearing about it. If you're tired of hearing about it, for the love of God, don't bring it up, and don't respond if provoked. I was as pissed as the next guy, but it's something that I dropped about 2 or so months after the game came out. It seems the only people talking about it are the people who complain about hearing about it. So shut up about it, you're the ones keeping us from moving on.

Can you say "glass houses"?

OT Well I think that all issues in gaming trivial or not are worth discussing so I can't really think of anything I'm really sick of hearing.

jackdeesface:
snip

To be fair, I dislike CoD because I just don't find it fun. It's technologically functional and I can see the appeal. I just find it....unfun.

OT: The sexism debates as they bring in more acid and poison into the forums than a night's camp in Barney Gumble's stomach. The 'PC is teh best' thing always grinds my gears too. Yes, I have a decent gaming PC, I can see the appeal in shinier graphics and the mouse can be great to use. But I haven't had one game that I haven't had issues with, even when the system specs are great for it. I still can't play Alan Wake because of the in game screen suddenly going black and fading back in in game. No, it's not a part of the gameplay either. No, my Graphics card isn't overclocked. Not to mention texture stretching and such.

...Sorry, my PC has been bugging me something horrible lately

"Sonic Adventure 2 doesn't hold up all that well, either. At least Sonic Adventure had the good graces to let you go through all of one character's stages in a straight pattern, rather than mixing them all together into one massive horribly-paced clusterfuck..."

"But... but... My nostalgia tells me I loved that game and thought the Hubworld was cool... Honestly, its weird to play it again later and see Sanic -a blue anthropomorphic hedgehog- run up to people and talk like it ain't no thing"

My main gripe with the whole 'Sonic is broken' crying is the call to make it more like Sonic Adventure again. There is absolutely nothing in Shadow the Hedgehog that wasn't already broken in Sonic Adventure. Sloppy controls? check! Poor Camera? Check! Awful characters? Check! Nonsensical storyline? Check! Failed attempt at being hip and cool? check check check!

Sonic Adventure 2 has indeed dated badly as well, but at least it had the courtesy to remove the most confusing hubworld ever (seriously, you are only allowed to enter the next area, but to find the next area you have to wander pointlessly around until you work out 'oh you had to board a train to go to the jungle, then wander around said jungle until you stumble onto this, then you can actually begin the stage. Massive waste of time!) and death to designer who decided that a series about speed, graphics and control needed a mandatory fishing stage!!

I also hope that Shenmue never, ever gets a re release. I don't need one of my favorite games being ripped apart for its awful controls, broken character models and appalling pacing.

One thing I'm already sick of are the "the new Yoshi's Island looks like ass!!!!11!1!" threads popping up all over.

I wholeheartedly agree that the original's art style is iconic and awesome, and that the new version looks a little inferior. Even so, I wish people would just settle down and accept it already.

The new style is not that bad. It looks like Braid a little, with a bright watercolorish style instead of the crayon style.

Not that different. I actually own a set of crayons that become watercolor paint when you use a wet brush on the drawings, they rock ijs.

From all the hate on the internets this week you'd think Nintendo was trying to pass off a badly rendered DKC mod circa 1996. Some say it looks like New SMB, which I agree would be a bad thing if it were true.

I'm a 2D sprite fan for life, and personally I'm more worried that its going to be a mediocre sequel like YI DS and Yoshi's Story than I am the new art style.

I mean there are only so many games with Baby Mario saving the day that will be plausible. The kid has to grow up eventually.

There are few things, but if I must pick one it would be "Death of PC gaming"
It isn't dead or dying, it simply never was that huge to begin with (MMOs aside)
And I can't blame anyone since PC gaming isn't the most hospitable place
Yes, the hardware possibilities are superior to consoles, but you must know a thing or two about tech to get the best of PC gaming
Otherwise you will stuck with overpriced pre-built machine that will become obsolete in a few years
And developers who throw shitty console ports aren't making things easier (control, GUI and optimization wise)

Hopefully PS4 and NexBox will be so full of shit that plenty of console gamers will migrate to PC domain (and God help them)
Maybe then PC will get attention it deserves
If not, then there is always Minecraft with its mods :D

I'm sick of people complaining about how shitty their experience was with their latest Day One/pre-release purchase. What were you expecting? Use your fucking heads and stop buying games on release day.

Yeah, definitely the EA hate train. No one is saying they're a company that makes great consumer oriented decisions.. but we know this already. Don't play their games if you dislike the company to that degree. That's the only way they are going to get the message (no, buying used or pirating won't work).

My other one is complaints about game difficulty, particularly in the case of something like, yes, Dark Souls. The game is difficult, but probably not as difficult as you may have heard if you just listened to what others say and don't actually try yourself. It also includes various already existing organic ways to make the game easier (or harder) if that's what you want. Put simply, though, it's a game for a specific audience with design decisions made for that audience according to the developers desires. If you don't like the game being as difficult as it is, that's cool, don't play it. Not every game has to be made for everyone.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked