What are your unpopular gaming opinions?

[LunarWingCloud]

I dunno if it's that unpopular but I insist that Tactics has the best plot out of any FF game, period.

 

[finalark]

I dunno if it's that unpopular but I insist that Tactics has the best plot out of any FF game, period.

Maybe War of the Lions, because the original translation is too much of a train wreck for me to get into.

On that note, an unpopular opinion: I never really found any of FF Tactics games to be all that great. At least, the original and Tactics Advanced. IDK about the WoL or A2.

 

[Iceweasel]

Final Fantasy VII is generally seen as the game that made RPGs popular and viable outside of Japan,

Can anyone explain why this is? I know that's how it's seen, but why? American SNES had RPGs out the ass, so clearly they were selling. How is FF7 remembered as the game that made RPGs popular when they were selling very well before its release?

 

[Kurri ★]

Can anyone explain why this is? I know that's how it's seen, but why? American SNES had RPGs out the ***, so clearly they were selling. How is FF7 remembered as the game that made RPGs popular when they were selling very well before its release?

Because FF7 sold doubly well? I dunno, that's usually how these sort of situations work.

 

[finalark]

Can anyone explain why this is? I know that's how it's seen, but why? American SNES had RPGs out the ***, so clearly they were selling. How is FF7 remembered as the game that made RPGs popular when they were selling very well before its release?

No no no no no. JRPGs were cult as **** in the west before FFVII. A JRPG in the 90s breaking a 500k copies outside of Japan was unheard of. Case and point: Chrono Trigger. One of the most beloved and highly praised RPGs of the SNES era only sold about 28k copies in NA, clocking in at a little over 2 million worldwide.

FFVII sold ten ****ing million.

EDIT: I'd also like to put the SNES' RPGs into perspective. While in hindsight it might seem like the console had a ton of them on it, but that's not really true. Most of those RPGs were Japan exclusives.

For example, let's talk about the industry's two heavy hitters:

Enix basically gave up on RPGs in the west after the first four Dragon Quest games failed to catch on in NA. DQV and VI were never localized during the SNES era, neither was the first Star Ocean. According to my research, the only true-blue turn based RPG we got from Enix in the SNES era was an obscure little game called Paladin's Quest. We never got the sequel.

Squaresoft was extremely choosy in what we got. We got FFIV and VI, but skipped V. There were talks about making it PC exclusive in NA, since RPGs were doing much better on PC over here but it never came to fruition. Instead we got the infamously dumbed-down Mystic Quest, which attempted to break JRPGs out of their cult status but obviously that didn't happen. Most of their RPGs stayed Japan exclusive. We never got the likes of Romancing SaGa, Live a Live or Bahamut Lagoon. And being real here, the only reason why we got Mario RPG and Secret of Mana was because the former has Mario on the cover and the latter was hoping to use its similarities to Zelda as a selling point.

 

[FunAtParties]

No no no no no. JRPGs were cult as **** in the west before FFVII. A JRPG in the 90s breaking a 500k copies outside of Japan was unheard of. Case and point: Chrono Trigger. One of the most beloved and highly praised RPGs of the SNES era only sold about 28k copies in NA, clocking in at a little over 2 million worldwide.

FFVII sold ten ****ing million.

You think that might've had something to do with the graphics or what? I'm really curious as to why FFVII sold so well.

 

[Kurri ★]

No no no no no. JRPGs were cult as **** in the west before FFVII. A JRPG in the 90s breaking a 500k copies outside of Japan was unheard of. Case and point: Chrono Trigger. One of the most beloved and highly praised RPGs of the SNES era only sold about 28k copies in NA, clocking in at a little over 2 million worldwide.

FFVII sold ten ****ing million.

To add to that, it's also Square's best-selling game. Since VII, none of their games have every surpassed it's 10 million. I get that people may have preferred other Final Fantasy characters (or characters in general), but you have to admit Cloud has the star power to back himself up.

You think that might've had something to do with the graphics or what? I'm really curious as to why FFVII sold so well.

If I had to guess, it's partly due to the popularity of Final Fantasy, 3D graphics, and just how much cheaper discs were to cartridges which lead to such huge sales numbers. But again, that's just a guess, VII came out the January after my birth so what I say is probably wrong.

 

[finalark]

You think that might've had something to do with the graphics or what? I'm really curious as to why FFVII sold so well.

There's lots of factors. It had a good advertising campaign that pushed it as a game with mature themes in a time when games were trying to break free of the "kiddie" image that had dragged them down for so long. It was on a console with a huge install base with a much higher age range than Nintendo, allowing them to actually go for a more adult story, it's very accessible to newbies while still having a ton of depth for RPG veterans and a lot of people found the story and characters genuinely compelling.

There's also the OMG GRAPHIX thing, but that's just part of it.

The fact that it's honestly a really fun and enjoyable game helps too.

 

[FamilyTeam]

I hope I don't get murdered for this:

- I'm not gonna say the original Paper Mario is the only good one... but it was the only one I liked;
- My 3DS was a big waste of money seeing how it's pretty much only good for Pokemon and Smash. Speaking of Pokemon...
- Pokemon is stale. This is coming from someone who has played the series for all his life and used to have 1500 points in Pokemon Showdown. Also, people love to praise Generation 5's story (more specifically BW and not BW2) but I don't see where they are coming from;
- Sonic Adventure 1 and 2 are actually good and this is not my nostalgia speaking. Every day that passes since ProJared uploaded that SA2 review, I see more and more people boarding on the bandwagon saying it was horrible without having ever played it or having any context with it at the time of release. Just as a reminder: I'm not saying either of these games aged well or that, if you dislike those games, you are boarding on a bandwagon, I'm just saying that I think they still are fun;
- Call of Duty actually had a lot of change between its games if you bothered looking at them, though of course, some had less change than others. Still, I think it's universally agreed even within the community that Ghosts was pushing it;
- No, I'm really not fine with the Ice Climbers being left out of Smash.
- Hyperdimension Neptunia is not as bad as the critics say it is, nor is it anywhere near as good as the fans want you to believe;
- Touhou is very fun, with lots of fun characters and amazing music, but even though I'm a huge fan of the series, I still think it doesn't deserve all the popularity it has. Seeing how much amazing stuff has come out of this rather unwarranted popularity, though, I'm not complaining;
- Pretty much every single horror game for me ends up being silly with how hard they try to be scary. Do you know what's scary? Seeing an angry mob lynching somebody to death in front of your house;
- GTA2 has aged better than GTA3, though I will admit this might be a load of bias. Not that GTA3 is bad. It's just... unplayable after you play even Vice City. And after you get used to how iffy everything is in GTA3, it's hard getting used to all the options you have in the later games that use its engine. In GTA3 (and to some extent Vice City, and in very few of these cases, San Andreas) you can sponge bullets, explosions and fall damage like you have balls of steel, but strangely, there's a lot of stuff in this game that instantly kills you, like the M16 (since that gun magically kills you in half a second even with full health and armour), getting run over by a car that's not going very fast, or being set on fire if your health isn't pretty much at max. The cars can take next to no abuse at all, both from shock and gunfire, which sort of forces you to either take on police chases on foot or switch cars often (we just estabilished you can't get run over!) which makes some missions artificially hard to complete. Speaking of impossible, a few things about the game are very poorly thought out, like the behaviour of hostile gangs. You have to make sure you complete every mission that might involve at any point you going to the Red Light District before the Mafia becomes hostile towards you, or else you're either gonna have to give up on any of those missions or try to endure some of the hardest challenges you'll face in a TPS. Also, graphics-wise, the game never looked exactly pretty and nowadays the game is rather painful to look at, and the art-style doesn't help it. People love to criticize GTA4 for having way too much grey and brown, but they probably didn't remember GTA3 was also like that;
- Also, speaking of GTA, GTA4 was better than 5. 4 had an actual storyline that you could care about, 5's storyline, while far more fun to play through, is extremely forgettable, and also, I think that the C ending is a copout. Gameplay-wise, I liked GTA4's shooting system better than 5's, and also, you have way too little health, with even more stuff instantly killing you than in previous games, and your character just can't take that much flack period. Funny how our problem went from having too much health to too little;
- Battlefield 3 is better than Bad Company 2.

Please don't hurt me.

 

[Kurri ★]

- Call of Duty actually had a lot of change between its games if you bothered looking at them, though of course, some had less change than others. Still, I think it's universally agreed even within the community that Ghosts was pushing it;

As someone who only just got back into CoD with Blops 3, how was Ghosts pushing it? The only thing I remember was that the maps were insanely large or something along those lines

- Battlefield 3 is better than Bad Company 2.

I was about to fling **** at you, but thinking about it, you might have a point. I dunno, I find Battlefield 4 better than both of them anyways, although I do love BFBC2's more lighthearted tone.

 

[Ghostly ~]

I hope I don't get murdered for this:

- I'm not gonna say the original Paper Mario is the only good one... but it was the only one I liked;
- Pokemon is stale. This is coming from someone who has played the series for all his life and used to have 1500 points in Pokemon Showdown. Also, people love to praise Generation 5's story (more specifically BW and not BW2) but I don't see where they are coming from;
- Sonic Adventure 1 and 2 are actually good and this is not my nostalgia speaking. Every day that passes since ProJared uploaded that SA2 review, I see more and more people boarding on the bandwagon saying it was horrible without having ever played it or having any context with it at the time of release. Just as a reminder: I'm not saying either of these games aged well or that, if you dislike those games, you are boarding on a bandwagon, I'm just saying that I think they still are fun;
- No, I'm really not fine with the Ice Climbers being left out of Smash.
- Touhou is very fun, with lots of fun characters and amazing music, but even though I'm a huge fan of the series, I still think it doesn't deserve all the popularity it has. Seeing how much amazing stuff has come out of this rather unwarranted popularity, though, I'm not complaining;
- Pretty much every single horror game for me ends up being silly with how hard they try to be scary. Do you know what's scary? Seeing an angry mob lynching somebody to death in front of your house.

Please don't hurt me.

On those that I questioned it.

Out of all the Paper Mario series, I say that Paper Mario 64 is great for both story and gameplay, TTYD has the best gameplay but good story, Super Paper Mario has the best story and good gameplay (probably the opposite eh?). Sticker Star is maybe the worst out all of them.

The reason why people praise Black and White storyline is because it was much different than the typical main Pokemon games (get badges, stop the villains, and beating the Pokemon champion). The characters are memorable to listen and that the ending of the game is not like the other main Pokemon games. Plus the music is wonderful. XY do have the similar ending like B&W but the game was poorly executed. Sorry if my reasoning was very weak

I do like SA1 and SA2 too. Also you should like Sonic Heroes and Generations though.

I'm one of these people who really like the Ice Climber (in fact why don't they get their game remake?) and wish they should get back at least at Smash 5 (if there is).

You might not notice but I'm a Touhou fan since 2008. I really like the series that includes the characters, music, spellcards, and Gensokyo! But for some reason, I felt like the games are going downhill after 13, After all, I don't find the characters (except Kokoro) memorable in my eyes and that the music (except some of the music from Touhou 14) are quite bland and dull to listen. Still, the series is popular enough with more fanarts, fan fictions, and videos. Maybe that why casual Touhou fans don't look at other Bullet Hell games like Dodonpachi and Gradius.

The only things I found horror games scary is the atmosphere, imagery of the locations, nasty looking characters and enemies/bosses, and *ahem* silent jump scare.

 

[finalark]

Also, people love to praise Generation 5's story (more specifically BW and not BW2) but I don't see where they are coming from;

Probably has something to do with the fact that they actually tried for once.

- Sonic Adventure 1 and 2 are actually good and this is not my nostalgia speaking. Every day that passes since ProJared uploaded that SA2 review, I see more and more people boarding on the bandwagon saying it was horrible without having ever played it or having any context with it at the time of release. Just as a reminder: I'm not saying either of these games aged well or that, if you dislike those games, you are boarding on a bandwagon, I'm just saying that I think they still are fun;

I'll agree that both games are fun, but if I didn't grow up with them I don't think I'd have many positives to say about SA1.

I think SA2's aged a lot better than people credit it for. It's not perfect by any means and it's certainly a game I'd have a hard time recommending to people, but I've honestly played games that get higher praise that have aged worse. Probably because those game's don't have the internet's favorite whipping boy on the cover.

- Pretty much every single horror game for me ends up being silly with how hard they try to be scary. Do you know what's scary? Seeing an angry mob lynching somebody to death in front of your house;
Please don't hurt me.

You know what else is scary? Drowning, isolation, mankind's absolute irrelevance to the universe at large.

The thing is, when you play a horror game you're effectively signing a contract with the game. Horror games will promise to unnerve you, spook you, gives you scares. But only if you're willing to suspend your disbelief and allow the game to suck you in.

That being said, the older you get and the more horror games you play the harder and harder it is to sign that contract.

 

[FamilyTeam]

As someone who only just got back into CoD with Blops 3, how was Ghosts pushing it? The only thing I remember was that the maps were insanely large or something along those lines

The campaign reused a lot more assets from the previous games than usual (and the story itself was like, laughable), and in MP, to give the game a lot of perks, they simply got every single Standard and Pro Perk from the previous game and broke them up into multiple perks and sometimes attachments. The stats for a lot of the weapons were also similar to weapons from the previous games. When I think about it, that's mostly it for reused stuff, but people like me dislike Ghosts for other reasons, and the fact that the MP maps were somewhat comparable to small Battlefield maps is one of them. The huge maps really killed the pace Call Of Duty was so well known for, made close range-only weapons like innacurate fast-firing SMGs and shotguns useless and the gun balance kind of didn't compliment the maps, since the guns still felt like they were balanced for more closed, short maps (again, this might have to do with the fact that some of the guns were heavily based off of guns from the other games)

Edit:

You might not notice but I'm a Touhou fan since 2008. I really like the series that includes the characters, music, spellcards, and Gensokyo! But for some reason, I felt like the games are going downhill after 13, After all, I don't find the characters (except Kokoro) memorable in my eyes and that the music (except some of the music from Touhou 14) are quite bland and dull to listen. Still, the series is popular enough with more fanarts, fan fictions, and videos. Maybe that why casual Touhou fans don't look at other Bullet Hell games like Dodonpachi and Gradius.

I will admit I'm also not that fond of the Touhou games after 13, but the reason I rarely say this is because I haven't even given 14 and 15 a very fair chance yet. The music might be going downhill, yes, I will say that. Just listen to the final boss theme from 14 and 15, and then go listen to the older ones, like 6, 7, 10 or 11, maybe even 13. It almost feels like something was lost, IMO. The older ones felt overwhelming, really intimidating and epic, and I don't feel that with the newer ones, though I won't say they are bad. (Just rather unfitting. Hell, Junko's theme starts off really cool)

 

[Kurri ★]

I think SA2's aged a lot better than people credit it for. It's not perfect by any means and it's certainly a game I'd have a hard time recommending to people, but I've honestly played games that get higher praise that have aged worse. Probably because those game's don't have the internet's favorite whipping boy on the cover.

It aged okay, but SA1 definitely aged a lot better. Aside from Knuckle's songs and maybe Chao Garden, I feel SA1 or at least SADX did everything SA2 did better.

 

[SimonBarSinister]

I hope I don't get murdered for this:

- I'm not gonna say the original Paper Mario is the only good one... but it was the only one I liked;
- My 3DS was a big waste of money seeing how it's pretty much only good for Pokemon and Smash.
- No, I'm really not fine with the Ice Climbers being left out of Smash. Please don't hurt me.

1. All Paper Mario games are good in their own way(though Sticker Star is definitely the weakest of them all), but I see TTYD as the shining example of how Paper Mario games are supposed to be designed. Sticker Star was supposedly going to be more like TTYD, but it's said that Miyamoto had intervened, and well, Sticker Star is the result. If there's a day when IS starts working on a true Paper Mario, hopefully Miyamoto won't use so much of his influence to alter development. I doubt many of us want another Sticker Star situation.

2. What? No Kid Icarus? No MK7? No LoZ? No MH4U? And if anything, the 3DS hampered the development of Smash. For one thing....

3. .....This is one of the results of Smash 3DS existing. Granted, I don't really care much about the Climbers, but I don't like losing content for reasons like this. Even though I have both versions of the game, I generally don't like the idea of console-to-handheld games. Personally, if Smash 4 was strictly developed for Wii U, we might not have lost anything.

 

[FamilyTeam]

What? No Kid Icarus? No MK7? No LoZ? No MH4U? And if anything, the 3DS hampered the development of Smash. For one thing....

Honestly, Kid Icarus doesn't look like it's my thing, MK7 doesn't look anything special, and I never liked the last two. It kinda feels like if you're not into Nintendo IPs, the 3DS is sort of a waste.

 

[radio silent]

Yeah, the 3DS doesn't have as stellar a library as some people would have you think.

Honestly, Kid Icarus doesn't look like it's my thing, MK7 doesn't look anything special, and I never liked the last two. It kinda feels like if you're not into Nintendo IPs, the 3DS is sort of a waste.

Same can be said about like, any Nintendo console from the N64 on.

 

[FamilyTeam]

Same can be said about like, any Nintendo console from the N64 on.

It's what happens when you don't have good 3rd party support, I guess. I actually intend on buying Fire Emblem: Awakening next month. I tried Shadow Dragon on the DS out and it was... OK, but it didn't have Lucina in it, and my caveman brain is convinced Lucina makes everything better <3

 

[SimonBarSinister]

Honestly, Kid Icarus doesn't look like it's my thing, MK7 doesn't look anything special, and I never liked the last two. It kinda feels like if you're not into Nintendo IPs, the 3DS is sort of a waste.

Shame. You really don't know what you're missing.

 

[radio silent]

Shame. You really don't know what you're missing.

Or he does, and he doesn't care? Not everyone is super into every Nintendo IP.

Shocking, I know.

 

[FamilyTeam]

I mean, I will admit: Despite Kid Icarus not looking like it is my thing, I would try it out if I had more acquisitive power. Fire Emblem doesn't look like it's my thing either, but since Lucina has been controlling my brain recently, I think I'm gonna give it a chance when I get some money next month, which is why I'll risk dumping in 30 dollars into that game. I heard pretty good things about it, so I'm confident.

 

[Substitution]

I don't know. I mean, I liked KI:U, but I don't know if I'd call it my favorite game on the system. It's a bit too clunky for my tastes (particularly in the weapons, and items department).

Also, and this may be only me, but I can't stand the control configuration. It's the stupidest thing I've seen in a while. Can't I just choose what I want to use rather than having to sort around mapping just so I can get what I want.

 

[SimonBarSinister]

I don't know. I mean, I liked KI:U, but I don't know if I'd call it my favorite game on the system. It's a bit too clunky for my tastes (particularly in the weapons, and items department).

Also, and this may be only me, but I can't stand the control configuration. It's the stupidest thing I've seen in a while. Can't I just choose what I want to use rather than having to sort around mapping just so I can get what I want.

I've played Uprising a lot, and even from the first time I played it, it felt like it had the perfect control scheme for the type of game that it was. It's easy to learn and quite efficient. But that's just me.

Weapons and items "clunky"? I'm not sure I know what you mean.

 

[Iceweasel]

2. What? No Kid Icarus? No MK7? No LoZ? No MH4U? And if anything, the 3DS hampered the development of Smash. For one thing....

I've heard that Kid Icarus needs some weird stand thing the game came with to control without killing your hand and arm. It's next to impossible to find a used copy with that stand, and I'm not interested enough to try and track one down.

Mario Kart is a watered-down F-Zero. I have the first one on SNES and I played the one on Gamecube. I don't much care for either.

ALBW is easily one of the best Zelda games in years, but it's one game. OoT3D is good, but it's the same game we've been playing for 20 years with a new coat of paint. MM3D is alright if you don't have any other options, but it changed some of my favorite things about the original that made me decide against it.

MH4U is the only Monster Hunter game I've ever played, and it's definitely my last. It's basically a really boring, really grindy single player MMORPG. I gave up trying to enjoy it about 10hrs in.


Yeah, I'm feeling the buyer's remorse too. The best thing about my 3DS is that it has (still kinda buggy) emulators on it to play better games with.

 

[radio silent]

MH4U is the only Monster Hunter game I've ever played, and it's definitely my last. It's basically a really boring, really grindy single player MMORPG. I gave up trying to enjoy it about 10hrs in.

MH is like, the most love-it-or-hate-it series I've ever played. If the combat clicks with you, it's fantastic. If it doesn't, it's terrible.

But yeah, Mario Kart can suck it.

 

[Substitution]

To be honest, I can't quite say Smash 3DS hampered development. At least, most of it. I don't know if I've said this here before, but this is the biggest Smash game we've gotten in a long time. Were there a few things that had to be changed to removed? Sadly yes. But that doesn't mean all hope is lost.

Do I think a portable addition was pointless? Yes. Could we have lived on without it? Definately. But hell for what it's worth it was at least a damn good attempt at trying one. I mean, even with the limitations they were able to stuff in quite a bit of content.
Sure, it sucks some things had to be sacrificed, but it's just how game development works. You'll be surprised at how many ideas have to be cut or altered just so they can make the game work. Even entire games will be scrapped or changed because one or two things go wrong. It's just how development work. Now that's not the fault of anyone, nor or the developers bad for not being able to make things work like they should, it's just happens. And in the grand scheme of things something you gotta move on.

That's just me though. And don't get anything of what I'm saying wrong, I'm not chastising nor calling out anyone who didn't like the cuts. I was disappointed myself when ICs were cut. But I also believe that there was some good in trying a portable Smash.

And while I'm not sure if they'll ever try it again, with technology getting better and better (like the New 3DS being able to handle Xenoblade), there could be some good in giving it another go. Once again, it's merely how I see the whole Smash 3DS situation.

Weapons and items "clunky"? I'm not sure I know what you mean.

Maybe it's just me, but I can't stand the randomness of them. Everything from the power to the attributes are defined merely by RNG. Sure fusing can help, but it's still all down to luck.

And I'd be lying if I said the items were handled brilliantly. Apart from the completely broken "shoot through walls" everyone loves abusing, it all comes down to whether or not you can play Tetris with the powers. Wouldn't a number system work better?

 

[Rashyboy05]

- My 3DS was a big waste of money seeing how it's pretty much only good for Pokemon and Smash.

You should probably sell the thing if you don't want to play it anymore. That is what I did to my PSP seeing as I can't find any fun games on it.

- Pokemon is stale. This is coming from someone who has played the series for all his life and used to have 1500 points in Pokemon Showdown. Also, people love to praise Generation 5's story (more specifically BW and not BW2) but I don't see where they are coming from;

Pokemon has always been stale. And this is coming someone who still praises and enjoys the series even now. Why bother changing up the formula when a lot of people enjoy it? As for Generation 5, look at every other main series Pokemon games' story and then look at Generation 5. The key difference is that there is actually a story in Gen 5 while the story is rather non-existent in the other gens.

- No, I'm really not fine with the Ice Climbers being left out of Smash.

I'm very sure that this is not an unpopular opinion. A lot of people are still bitter about ICs being left out in Smash 4. I guess the main reason as to why the ICs are left out is due to hardware limitations of the 3DS.

- Hyperdimension Neptunia is not as bad as the critics say it is, nor is it anywhere near as good as the fans want you to believe;

I have friends from an online chat that I frequently go to who are fans of Hyperdimension Neptunia. They don't claim that it is the best games ever but they just think its stupidly fun and addicting. Can't say for the rest of the HN fanbase as I never encountered them yet.

- Touhou is very fun, with lots of fun characters and amazing music, but even though I'm a huge fan of the series, I still think it doesn't deserve all the popularity it has. Seeing how much amazing stuff has come out of this rather unwarranted popularity, though, I'm not complaining;

Really? I personally think its popularity is warranted. The creator certainly did not expected it to be so popular. and, like you said, the games are fun, majority of the characters are fun and memorable and nearly every song from the series is amazing. Mind you, I am someone who enjoys the music post Th13. Hell, I personally think LoLK's soundtrack is better than IN's and EoSD's.

Please don't hurt me.

Unless someone has invented the technology to strangle someone through the computer screen. No one is going to hurt you

 

[SimonBarSinister]

I've heard that Kid Icarus needs some weird stand thing the game came with to control without killing your hand and arm. It's next to impossible to find a used copy with that stand, and I'm not interested enough to try and track one down.

As long as I've played the game I've never had arm troubles, even after extended sessions(and I've never used the stand once). Some people may need to use it if they have comfort issues, but I never did.

Mario Kart is a watered-down F-Zero. I have the first one on SNES and I played the one on Gamecube. I don't much care for either.

Not sure why you'd compare the two series directly like that. Sure, they're in the same genre and owned by Nintendo, but as far as gameplay goes, they're two completely different animals.

ALBW is easily one of the best Zelda games in years, but it's one game. OoT3D is good, but it's the same game we've been playing for 20 years with a new coat of paint. MM3D is alright if you don't have any other options, but it changed some of my favorite things about the original that made me decide against it.

I opted out of the two remakes solely because I have the originals already. If there were any real significant changes to the games(like at least on the level of HG/SS as opposed to the original GSC games), I might've considered buying them.

MH4U is the only Monster Hunter game I've ever played, and it's definitely my last. It's basically a really boring, really grindy single player MMORPG. I gave up trying to enjoy it about 10hrs in.

As fun as MH is to me there are some moments when I wish there was a bit less grinding to do for certain gear I want. But other than that, it's a lot of fun to go online and team up with other players to take down the tougher monsters. Going it alone can just be a chore a times. To really enjoy it, you need other players around. It really makes things go by more smoothly. .....Unless you have sucky partners, that is.

But yeah, Mario Kart can suck it.

What's the matter? Too many salty moments?

Maybe it's just me, but I can't stand the randomness of them. Everything from the power to the attributes are defined merely by RNG. Sure fusing can help, but it's still all down to luck.

Because of fusing, I tend to worry less about the RNG, and focus more on experimenting to see how I can further improve my favorite weapons in terms of stats and effects. I mean, not only does it let you see what weapons are made from the ones you used, but also which effects carry over to the new weapon. As far as I'm concerned that's ridiculously awesome.

And I'd be lying if I said the items were handled brilliantly. Apart from the completely broken "shoot through walls" everyone loves abusing, it all comes down to whether or not you can play Tetris with the powers. Wouldn't a number system work better?

Slip Shot, Invisible Shot and Homing Boost. The only three powers you need.

But seriously, I may use combinations of these particular powers at times to aid my weapons' shortcomings, but for the most part I tend to just rely on my own skill and defensive powers to back me up in a pinch(like Aries Armor). The problem is that people tend to create weapons with already powerful natural homing effects that are boosted with Shot Homing+ stats, then combine that with Slip Shot and Homing Boost, and what do you get? Unavoidable death. They win all the matches, and you're left in the dust. Whenever that happens to me, I try to compensate by switching to a rushdown build, complete with Taurus Arm, Aries Armor and Lightweight and attempt to overpower them by getting in their faces before they can get a bead on me. Doesn't always work, but I try to make them work for it. It's annoying, I know, but there are always going to be players that let their items do the job for them instead of actually playing the game and earning their victories. But all nitpicks aside, Uprising has a ridiculously fun online, just gotta be wary of the abusive jerkwads.

 

[finalark]

It aged okay, but SA1 definitely aged a lot better. Aside from Knuckle's songs and maybe Chao Garden, I feel SA1 or at least SADX did everything SA2 did better.

I don't know about DX, since I haven't played it since 2004 but the DC version aged like crap. Say what you will about SA2, but at least in that game I know I'm not going to have to worry about falling through the world that Sonic and friends are going to go where I want them to 90% of the time.

SA1's engine is a joke. The spin dash makes a mockery of your game's physics (and camera).

EDIT: Just to clarify, I'm talking about both the DC versions of SA1 and 2.

I tried Shadow Dragon on the DS out and it was... OK, but it didn't have Lucina in it, and my caveman brain is convinced Lucina makes everything better <3

The fact that Shadow Dragon's mechanics were completely untouched from the original Famicom version is a major factor in it's underwhelming adequacy.

MH4U is the only Monster Hunter game I've ever played, and it's definitely my last. It's basically a really boring, really grindy single player MMORPG. I gave up trying to enjoy it about 10hrs in.

Monster Hunter is a multiplayer game with the option to play it solo if you have no internet or friends.

But yeah, as radio silent said, it's a love it or hate it series. If you're ten hours in and you still think it's boring then it's probably not for you.

Although I'm not sure where people are getting the "grindy" thing from. I've played way, way more games that are grindy than MH. As far as MMORPGs and pseudo-MMORPGs go I honestly consider MH at the lower end of the scale. I think people are using it interchangeably with "slow."

Yeah, I'm feeling the buyer's remorse too. The best thing about my 3DS is that it has (still kinda buggy) emulators on it to play better games with.

I don't know what kind of games you're into, but I don't think I could list a single GB/C game that's held up well.

But hey, I think you're into RPGs. You try SMT4 yet?

Yeah, the 3DS doesn't have as stellar a library as some people would have you think.

I feel like this goes for all of Nintendo's handhelds. As mentioned above, I don't think I've ever played a single GB/C game that actually holds up (this includes the handheld LoZ games), most of the GBA's best games are all cribbed from the SNES and a lot of DS games are starting really age, especially the older ones that rely heavily on gimmicky touch screen controls.

 

[radio silent]

Although I'm not sure where people are getting the "grindy" thing from. I've played way, way more games that are grindy than MH. As far as MMORPGs and pseudo-MMORPGs go I honestly consider MH at the lower end of the scale. I think people are using it interchangeably with "slow."

The grind in MH is different than the grind in a lot of games. Usually, grinding is this annoying roadblock between you and the content you actually want to partake in. In MH, the "grind" is just killing monsters, which is what you want to be doing anyway. It is called Monster Hunter, after all.

 

[finalark]

The grind in MH is different than the grind in a lot of games. Usually, grinding is this annoying roadblock between you and the content you actually want to partake in. In MH, the "grind" is just killing monsters, which is what you want to be doing anyway. It is called Monster Hunter, after all.

Well, every MMO's end game basically boils down to "kill monsters to get stuff that lets you get better gear so you can kill bigger monsters to get stuff that lets you get better gear so you can kill even bigger monsters" ect.

The thing is with MH is that it cuts the middle man and gets you straight to that "acquire gear to fight bigger things" step. No level cap you have to reach first, no factions you have to get reputation with, just straight to the gear grind.

So, yeah, it looks like I agree with you.

 

[Rashyboy05]

The fact that Shadow Dragon's mechanics were completely untouched from the original Famicom version is a major factor in it's underwhelming adequacy.

...?
The only thing that makes Shadow Dragon not so stellar from the other games were the fact that the entire game itself is slow, the underwhelming graphics, the BS gaiden chapters requirements and the fact that there were no support conversation or supports in general. The weapon triangle never existed in the original games. Reclassing wasn't even a thing until Shadow Dragon.

The maps and growths of characters are untouched? Sure. It makes sense, the games are a remake anyway. Best not to mess with the maps and characters to alienate the ones who played the first games. The gameplay mechanics are completely unchanged? That's where you are wrong.

...Unless I somehow missed the point of that statement completely.

 

[finalark]

...?
The only thing that makes Shadow Dragon not so stellar from the other games were the fact that the entire game itself is slow, the underwhelming graphics, the BS gaiden chapters requirements and the fact that there were no support conversation or supports in general. The weapon triangle never existed in the original games. Reclassing wasn't even a thing until Shadow Dragon.

The maps and growths of characters are untouched? Sure. It makes sense, the games are a remake anyway. Best not to mess with the maps and characters to alienate the ones who played the first games. The gameplay mechanics are completely unchanged? That's where you are wrong.

...Unless I somehow missed the point of that statement completely.

Okay, I was exaggerating when I said the game was complete unchanged. While Reclassing was new, it doesn't change the fact that it's lack of features and relative simplicity made it's age apparent and made the game feel very basic. And in a world where turn based strategy games have evolved well beyond the capacity of the early FE games, that's just boring.

Yes, it was a remake of the original but that doesn't mean that they couldn't have spiced it up a bit the way that Game Freak radically overhauls the more dated parts of the older Pokemon games when they do their remakes.

That ended up doing that with New Mystery of the Emblem anyway.

 

[Iceweasel]

MH is like, the most love-it-or-hate-it series I've ever played. If the combat clicks with you, it's fantastic. If it doesn't, it's terrible.

Wow, I didn't even mention combat and you just pointed out my least favorite aspect of the game. It's just... So slow and imprecise. The only weapons with useful damage output require absolute commitment to any attack, which doesn't mesh well with the monsters' dodginess or the PC's slow speed.

Not sure why you'd compare the two series directly like that. Sure, they're in the same genre and owned by Nintendo, but as far as gameplay goes, they're two completely different animals.

Play SNES F-Zero, then play SNES Mario Kart. The only major difference is that Mario Kart is slower and easier.

It's what happens when you don't have good 3rd party support, I guess. I actually intend on buying Fire Emblem: Awakening next month. I tried Shadow Dragon on the DS out and it was... OK, but it didn't have Lucina in it, and my caveman brain is convinced Lucina makes everything better <3

Shadow Dragon's mechanics were pretty primitive. See if you can't track down Blazing Sword, I remember that one being very good.

I don't know what kind of games you're into, but I don't think I could list a single GB/C game that's held up well.

But hey, I think you're into RPGs. You try SMT4 yet?

Link's Awakening, Pokemon G/S/C. I downloaded a (supposedly) complete pack of GB/C ROMS and try something new when I'm out and about. Unsurprisingly, the ones I've played are almost entirely terrible, but I did find something called "The Adventures of Star Saver" or something like that, it's pretty nice. There's also a weird Japan-only platformer called Banishing Racer that's a lot of fun.

I've never played any SMT games. Do they have continuity? I've heard that Persona doesn't, I'm thinking about getting P5 when it comes out.

 

[radio silent]

Wow, I didn't even mention combat and you just pointed out my least favorite aspect of the game. It's just... So slow and imprecise. The only weapons with useful damage output require absolute commitment to any attack, which doesn't mesh well with the monsters' dodginess or the PC's slow speed.

That's the point, really. A lot of the fun comes from observing monster behaviors, and learning your way around your weapon(s) of choice. The very deliberate attack animations require you to know when and where to strike, with mistakes being potentially fatal.

Not for everyone, obviously, but there's a reason it is the way it is.

 

[Iceweasel]

That's the point, really. A lot of the fun comes from observing monster behaviors, and learning your way around your weapon(s) of choice. The very deliberate attack animations require you to know when and where to strike, with mistakes being potentially fatal.

Not for everyone, obviously, but there's a reason it is the way it is.

True, but it doesn't have to be so slow to boot. Bayonetta's stronger angels required pattern learning, but the game was fast on top of it. Really, most action games emphasize pattern learning. It's why a miniboss in the starter area can be a generic mook in the middle. The player has new tools, higher attack, and more health, but more than that they know the patterns. I'm replaying WW right now and almost nothing is a challenge because I know the AI so well. When I first started Deus Ex, a straight gunfight with anyone would get me killed. Now that I've played it a few times, I can make good guesses as to how an enemy is going to move and I can take on 2-3 soldiers.

 

[radio silent]

True, but it doesn't have to be so slow to boot. Bayonetta's stronger angels required pattern learning, but the game was fast on top of it. Really, most action games emphasize pattern learning. It's why a miniboss in the starter area can be a generic mook in the middle. The player has new tools, higher attack, and more health, but more than that they know the patterns. I'm replaying WW right now and almost nothing is a challenge because I know the AI so well. When I first started Deus Ex, a straight gunfight with anyone would get me killed. Now that I've played it a few times, I can make good guesses as to how an enemy is going to move and I can take on 2-3 soldiers.

I like Bayonetta as much as the next guy, but I don't need every action game to be Bayonetta. The slowness of Monster Hunter lets you gain an appreciation for what you're fighting, since it's almost always a strictly one-on-one scenario. Like, coming to grips with the finer points of fighting a monster feels a lot more satisfying than "I figured out how to cheese this bad AI". You fight it, struggle with it for a while, and eventually conquer it, only to have a more powerful one waiting around the corner. It feels cool to look back on monsters that gave me trouble in the past, whereas now they're basically the equivalent of a pesky fly.

 

[SimonBarSinister]

Play SNES F-Zero, then play SNES Mario Kart. The only major difference is that Mario Kart is slower and easier.

Are you basing your argument on these two alone? They aren't exactly good examples. With the arrival of the N64, the difference between the two series became severely apparent. You can't really put those two in the same boat, especially not after playing the later games in both series. One is a high-speed racer that has a very high skill ceiling and requires good reactions, precise maneuvers and perfect track memorization to navigate the sometimes difficult courses. No items, no course nonsense, no luck, just all speed and all skill. Plus there are 30 other racers to contend with at the same time. It's definitely not a novice's type of game. The other is just a more easy-going(ironic since MK games do have rage-inducing moments at times), chaotic luck-fest which doesn't have nearly the skill requirements of a racer like F-Zero. It has easy controls for players of any skill level.

I can't say I know how the first game of either series played out(though I have seen them in action), but I do know how they played later on and like I said, the differences between them are night and day.

 

[finalark]

True, but it doesn't have to be so slow to boot. Bayonetta's stronger angels required pattern learning, but the game was fast on top of it. Really, most action games emphasize pattern learning.

Here's the problem with that, Bayonetta and Monster Hunter are two complete different beasts. Bayonetta, despite it's trademark style, is a pretty straight forward beat 'em up with fairly straight forward beat 'em up rules.

Monster Hunter, on the other hand, is something more in line with the pre-SOTN Castlevanias or the Demons/Dark Souls games. Slow games with initially tough controls that force you to make precise, calculated moves.

Honestly, it's an apples to oranges sort of things.

I've never played any SMT games. Do they have continuity? I've heard that Persona doesn't, I'm thinking about getting P5 when it comes out.

Technically yes, but each game is extremely stand alone. That being said, that SMT recommendation comes with a huge asterisk. It's a series that's really not for everyone. It's a very old-school RPG designed for hardcore RPG players. And I mean hardcore in an very old sense. Yes, there a narrative, hell, even an interesting one. But it takes a back seat to the dungeon crawling, party building and battle strategy aspect of the game. Oh yeah, and these games do not go easy on you.

The closest thing I can compare to is Pokemon (which is appropriate since SMT did Pokemon first). You build your team out of demons, all of which can have any variety of elemental weakness and resistances, learn moves as they level and can also evolve, but you can also fuse demons together that have outlived their usefulness to make new more powerful demons. And just like Pokemon, this is the primary draw of the series. If you like Pokemon but you're looking for a higher challenge and more adult themes SMT has you covered.

Persona, the little bro of the SMT series, is more or less a straightforward RPG series from P3 onward. While it retains a lot of similar mechanics to SMT, most of them are comparatively watered down and streamlined to keep the series accessible. Not to mention the difficulty is toned way, way down. Not only that, but unlike it's big brother SMT the story is a huge component and has a ton of focus. The games aren't nearly as grim and hopeless as SMT, the characters get a ton of development, hell, there's even FE style support conversations.

Honestly, between the two series I'd recommend Persona first. SMT has very niche appeal and if you're into that sort of game I personally give it two thumbs way up. But Persona is much, much more accessible, and is honestly the kind of game I could recommend to anyone. If you're going to give Persona a while my personal vote goes to the fourth game. It has a fantastic narrative, probably the best I've ever seen in a video game, and is a blast to play. It's a bit on the long side, clocking in at around 80 hours, but it's so damn enjoyable that by the time you reach the end you probably won't realize how long it's been.

But if you're more interested in SMT I'd recommend SMT Nocturne as a good game to start on. It does a good just at easing you into the game and getting you used to the mechanics before it throws a bag over your head and starts beating you with a baseball bat. SMTIV is also good, but gets straight to the bagging and baseball batting from the word go.

 

[Iceweasel]

I like Bayonetta as much as the next guy, but I don't need every action game to be Bayonetta. The slowness of Monster Hunter lets you gain an appreciation for what you're fighting, since it's almost always a strictly one-on-one scenario. Like, coming to grips with the finer points of fighting a monster feels a lot more satisfying than "I figured out how to cheese this bad AI". You fight it, struggle with it for a while, and eventually conquer it, only to have a more powerful one waiting around the corner. It feels cool to look back on monsters that gave me trouble in the past, whereas now they're basically the equivalent of a pesky fly.

My biggest gripe with the AI is that even if I correctly guess what the monster is going to do, I can't really capitalize on it due to the aforementioned slow speed.

I don't need every game to be Bayo, but it's such a well-made game that I use it as a go-to example of good design.

Monster Hunter, on the other hand, is something more in line with the pre-SOTN Castlevanias or the Demons/Dark Souls games. Slow games with initially tough controls that force you to make precise, calculated moves.

I think this is my main problem: If a game is balanced around the idea that the controls are crippled, it's badly designed. I still haven't played Dark Souls yet (it's sitting on my shelf), but I have played the first Castlevania and despised it. The only time that balancing around controls worked well was the first few enemies in Shadow of the Colossus. Even then, they're not really bad controls, they're just so specialized that no other game uses them and first-time players need to be eased in to how they work. Just a few Colossi in and the game stops doing that, and later in the game it's easy to be very fluid in using them to make Wander do exactly as you want him to.

Technically yes, but each game is extremely stand alone. That being said, that SMT recommendation comes with a huge asterisk. It's a series that's really not for everyone. It's a very old-school RPG designed for hardcore RPG players. And I mean hardcore in an very old sense. Yes, there a narrative, hell, even an interesting one. But it takes a back seat to the dungeon crawling, party building and battle strategy aspect of the game. Oh yeah, and these games do not go easy on you.

The closest thing I can compare to is Pokemon (which is appropriate since SMT did Pokemon first). You build your team out of demons, all of which can have any variety of elemental weakness and resistances, learn moves as they level and can also evolve, but you can also fuse demons together that have outlived their usefulness to make new more powerful demons. And just like Pokemon, this is the primary draw of the series. If you like Pokemon but you're looking for a higher challenge and more adult themes SMT has you covered.

Persona, the little bro of the SMT series, is more or less a straightforward RPG series from P3 onward. While it retains a lot of similar mechanics to SMT, most of them are comparatively watered down and streamlined to keep the series accessible. Not to mention the difficulty is toned way, way down. Not only that, but unlike it's big brother SMT the story is a huge component and has a ton of focus. The games aren't nearly as grim and hopeless as SMT, the characters get a ton of development, hell, there's even FE style support conversations.

Honestly, between the two series I'd recommend Persona first. SMT has very niche appeal and if you're into that sort of game I personally give it two thumbs way up. But Persona is much, much more accessible, and is honestly the kind of game I could recommend to anyone. If you're going to give Persona a while my personal vote goes to the fourth game. It has a fantastic narrative, probably the best I've ever seen in a video game, and is a blast to play. It's a bit on the long side, clocking in at around 80 hours, but it's so damn enjoyable that by the time you reach the end you probably won't realize how long it's been.

But if you're more interested in SMT I'd recommend SMT Nocturne as a good game to start on. It does a good just at easing you into the game and getting you used to the mechanics before it throws a bag over your head and starts beating you with a baseball bat. SMTIV is also good, but gets straight to the bagging and baseball batting from the word go.

If it has enough save points, I can take (and prefer) really hard games. I keep putting off finishing Xenosaga because I'm sick of getting one bad random encounter and losing a 2-3 hours' play time due to bad enemy combination or simple bad RNG rolls.

Are you basing your argument on these two alone? They aren't exactly good examples. With the arrival of the N64, the difference between the two series became severely apparent. You can't really put those two in the same boat, especially not after playing the later games in both series. One is a high-speed racer that has a very high skill ceiling and requires good reactions, precise maneuvers and perfect track memorization to navigate the sometimes difficult courses. No items, no course nonsense, no luck, just all speed and all skill. Plus there are 30 other racers to contend with at the same time. It's definitely not a novice's type of game. The other is just a more easy-going(ironic since MK games do have rage-inducing moments at times), chaotic luck-fest which doesn't have nearly the skill requirements of a racer like F-Zero. It has easy controls for players of any skill level.

I can't say I know how the first game of either series played out(though I have seen them in action), but I do know how they played later on and like I said, the differences between them are night and day.

The only F-Zero I have is the first one. I thought about trying F-Zero 64, but N64 games are a huge PITA to play today, even if you still have the system. I've been thinking about getting F-Zero GX, but Dolphin hates my computer with a burning passion and it seems like a hard game to find*.

*If it's a disc game without the original case and art it's a no-buy for me. I've had a few bad experiences recently buying disk games online and it's usually a massive headache to get a return/refund. There are no indie game stores anywhere near me.