What are your unpopular gaming opinions?

[Iceweasel]

@ finalark @ Spak This is exactly why I don't read comics. I've read a few manga and webcomics and generally like the art form, but American comic books require too much investment in time and money. Especially when half the continuity is ignored because it's too much for even the writers to understand. I'd be mostly okay with the investment if the continuity mattered, because I like really involved stories. My time spent watching Atop the Fourth Wall seems to indicate that ignoring continuity is pretty much the norm, though.


Back on topic, I kind of like Brawl. As long as Meta Knight (and arguably the Icies too) are banned, it's still a perfectly serviceable competitive game. Even though it's outshined by Smash 4 in almost every way, it still has its own charms. Enough to, say, justify maybe having a few more entrants than 64. If for no other reason than because seriously, Nintendo, **** that controller.

 

[Nixon Corral]

Back on topic, I kind of like Brawl. As long as Meta Knight (and arguably the Icies too) are banned, it's still a perfectly serviceable competitive game. Even though it's outshined by Smash 4 in almost every way, it still has its own charms. Enough to, say, justify maybe having a few more entrants than 64. If for no other reason than because seriously, Nintendo, **** that controller.

Most 64 tournaments allow you to use custom controllers as far as I know, as long as they don't have any cheating mechanisms, like turbo or what have you.

Plus, I'd say 64 has a feel that isn't replicated through the rest of the series, whereas many feel that Smash 4 was sort of a follow up to Brawl as well as an improvement in many ways.

 

[DEDEDEDEDEDE]

**** like this has got to stop. Why wouldn't you take a console someone paid you to take? It plays games. Occasionally even a good exclusive or two! This is pretty much flagrant fanboyism. There isn't a console on the planet you couldn't pay me to take. 3DO, Virtual Boy, whatever. They all are at least worth having for the decent game they get here or there.

But then I guess this is an unpopular opinions thread, so bravo for getting me going.

Also it was made by Microsoft which I did not explain and that is the reason I wouldn't take it.

Oh gee sorry bout the flood. I thought it was not posting because it did not show up on my computer. THIS WAS NOT A DELIBERATE SPAM

 

[Nixon Corral]

Also it was made by Microsoft which I did not explain and that is the reason I wouldn't take it.

So?

 

[radio silent]

So?

Microsoft is run by large, scary beasts tryin' to eat all my video games.

 

[Dr.SMASHING]

I think Mario Kart 8 is overhyped.

 

[Iceweasel]

I think Mario Kart 8 is overhyped.

I see your MK8 and raise you a Splatoon and the entire Mario Kart series.

 

[finalark]

Hold onto your butts, because I'm about to get controversial.

I entirely agree that games are art. But I feel like people are going about it the wrong way.

For example, I feel like people tend to point to things like aesthetics or narrative to support their arguments. This is not a good thing to focus. Yes, it is entirely possible to make a beautiful looking game, but you can't try to apply the same logic as you would to a painting. In-game graphics and a painting are very different beasts, and you can't really apply the same rules to them. With a painting composition is prime since no matter where you are the painting is unchanging. A game? Depending on what the player is doing with the camera and where they're located and what they're doing the way the images are perceived is going to change.

Then we get to narrative. I might burst a lot of bubbles here, but most video game stories suck. Even the best stories that video games have to offer, Metal Gear Solid, Bioshock, Persona 4, if any of these were books (hell, some of them are) they wouldn't even make a dent in the literary world. Not that these stories are bad or not enjoyable, it's just that video games aren't really an optimal story telling tool. At least not in the traditional sense.

The thing that makes games special is their ability to interact with a player. For example, Pokemon. Early in the game you find Pokeballs on the ground that contain items. This teaches you that by interacting with Pokeballs you get some extra items. Then, it happens. You touch a Pokeball expecting to get an item only to be attacked by a Voltorb. Classic mimic trap. Now you're not entirely trusting of those once-helpful Pokeballs. With one simple mechanic the game was able to create expectations and generation emotions in a player. And this is where games succeed and should be praised, for how they can convey damn near anything through player interaction.

This applies to storytelling too. Going back to the previously mentioned Bioshock, the thing that sets that game's story apart is how it reaches out of the TV and plays the player. Spoilers for an eight year old game: Throughout the game your friendly mission control friend name Atlas has a little verbal tic where he tends to say "Would you kindly." Chances are, you went through the entire game without even thinking once about it. Then, during the confrontation with the game's big bad guy, Andrew Ryan, you discover that the words "Would you kindly" were a trigger that was programmed into you to force you to obey. That's right, the entire game you, the player, were Atlas' puppet. That's just something you can't do in a movie or a book.

Granted, this also ties into my theory that a good sixty percent of the gaming community doesn't know the first thing about game design and doesn't care to learn. Probably why people have to default onto things like graphics, music and story to define a game as good, or in higher cases, art.

And don't even get me started on "ungames" that seem to think that being esoteric is all there is to being art. I feel like these miss what makes games special above all else.

 

[Dr.SMASHING]

I see your MK8 and raise you a Splatoon and the entire Mario Kart series.

That's funny. I actually love Splatoon.

Hold onto your butts, because I'm about to get controversial.

I entirely agree that games are art. But I feel like people are going about it the wrong way.

For example, I feel like people tend to point to things like aesthetics or narrative to support their arguments. This is not a good thing to focus. Yes, it is entirely possible to make a beautiful looking game, but you can't try to apply the same logic as you would to a painting. In-game graphics and a painting are very different beasts, and you can't really apply the same rules to them. With a painting composition is prime since no matter where you are the painting is unchanging. A game? Depending on what the player is doing with the camera and where they're located and what they're doing the way the images are perceived is going to change.

Then we get to narrative. I might burst a lot of bubbles here, but most video game stories suck. Even the best stories that video games have to offer, Metal Gear Solid, Bioshock, Persona 4, if any of these were books (hell, some of them are) they wouldn't even make a dent in the literary world. Not that these stories are bad or not enjoyable, it's just that video games aren't really an optimal story telling tool. At least not in the traditional sense.

The thing that makes games special is their ability to interact with a player. For example, Pokemon. Early in the game you find Pokeballs on the ground that contain items. This teaches you that by interacting with Pokeballs you get some extra items. Then, it happens. You touch a Pokeball expecting to get an item only to be attacked by a Voltorb. Classic mimic trap. Now you're not entirely trusting of those once-helpful Pokeballs. With one simple mechanic the game was able to create expectations and generation emotions in a player. And this is where games succeed and should be praised, for how they can convey damn near anything through player interaction.

This applies to storytelling too. Going back to the previously mentioned Bioshock, the thing that sets that game's story apart is how it reaches out of the TV and plays the player. Spoilers for an eight year old game: Throughout the game your friendly mission control friend name Atlas has a little verbal tic where he tends to say "Would you kindly." Chances are, you went through the entire game without even thinking once about it. Then, during the confrontation with the game's big bad guy, Andrew Ryan, you discover that the words "Would you kindly" were a trigger that was programmed into you to force you to obey. That's right, the entire game you, the player, were Atlas' puppet. That's just something you can't do in a movie or a book.

Granted, this also ties into my theory that a good sixty percent of the gaming community doesn't know the first thing about game design and doesn't care to learn. Probably why people have to default onto things like graphics, music and story to define a game as good, or in higher cases, art.

And don't even get me started on "ungames" that seem to think that being esoteric is all there is to being art. I feel like these miss what makes games special above all else.

I completely agree. All your points made sense.

 

[Iceweasel]

Hold onto your butts, because I'm about to get controversial.

I entirely agree that games are art. But I feel like people are going about it the wrong way.

For example, I feel like people tend to point to things like aesthetics or narrative to support their arguments. This is not a good thing to focus. Yes, it is entirely possible to make a beautiful looking game, but you can't try to apply the same logic as you would to a painting. In-game graphics and a painting are very different beasts, and you can't really apply the same rules to them. With a painting composition is prime since no matter where you are the painting is unchanging. A game? Depending on what the player is doing with the camera and where they're located and what they're doing the way the images are perceived is going to change.

Then we get to narrative. I might burst a lot of bubbles here, but most video game stories suck. Even the best stories that video games have to offer, Metal Gear Solid, Bioshock, Persona 4, if any of these were books (hell, some of them are) they wouldn't even make a dent in the literary world. Not that these stories are bad or not enjoyable, it's just that video games aren't really an optimal story telling tool. At least not in the traditional sense.

The thing that makes games special is their ability to interact with a player. For example, Pokemon. Early in the game you find Pokeballs on the ground that contain items. This teaches you that by interacting with Pokeballs you get some extra items. Then, it happens. You touch a Pokeball expecting to get an item only to be attacked by a Voltorb. Classic mimic trap. Now you're not entirely trusting of those once-helpful Pokeballs. With one simple mechanic the game was able to create expectations and generation emotions in a player. And this is where games succeed and should be praised, for how they can convey damn near anything through player interaction.

This applies to storytelling too. Going back to the previously mentioned Bioshock, the thing that sets that game's story apart is how it reaches out of the TV and plays the player. Spoilers for an eight year old game: Throughout the game your friendly mission control friend name Atlas has a little verbal tic where he tends to say "Would you kindly." Chances are, you went through the entire game without even thinking once about it. Then, during the confrontation with the game's big bad guy, Andrew Ryan, you discover that the words "Would you kindly" were a trigger that was programmed into you to force you to obey. That's right, the entire game you, the player, were Atlas' puppet. That's just something you can't do in a movie or a book.

Granted, this also ties into my theory that a good sixty percent of the gaming community doesn't know the first thing about game design and doesn't care to learn. Probably why people have to default onto things like graphics, music and story to define a game as good, or in higher cases, art.

And don't even get me started on "ungames" that seem to think that being esoteric is all there is to being art. I feel like these miss what makes games special above all else.

Is that really controversial, though? It's such an obvious conclusion to draw. One of the reasons Golden Sun, despite its simplistic narrative and characters, stuck with me so well is that it used player frustration to connect the player with the characters. When you got to Mercury Lighthouse, you were kind of annoyed at being given the runaround, right? Every town saying, Oh, they just passed. By the time you were finally able to face Saturos, you were ready to lay an epic smackdown. And you sort of do, but he hits like a truck and can take a fair amount of punishment. Your healer is just barely sufficient to keep the party up, and this is just ONE of the two villains. When Saturos is defeated and you learn that he was fighting with a terrain disadvantage, the player's reaction is the same as the characters'.

Every creative medium has its own advantages and disadvantages. Books let you get inside a character's head. You don't need to see the daily routine of the hero, because it's not how you learn about them. Film lets you better show the characters' struggles. You don't need to have the hero monologue to the audience, because that's not how they connect with the hero. Video games let the audience (players) experience what the hero does. We learn about them not only through their interactions with the other characters, but how the player experiences how the hero lives. The slightly awkward controls of Shadow of the Colossus reinforce that Wander is somewhat out of his league when fighting these monstrosities, but as the game goes on, the player naturally acclimates to them as Wander becomes more experienced when fighting the Colossi. When you're out too late in Pandora's Tower, Elena becomes more and more monstrous. To see her transform farther and farther, while still remaining so sweet, breaks the player's heart, just as it break's Aeron's. You want to come back earlier, right? You can't let her transformation progress this far again. Just as Aeron wants to help and protect Elena, so does the player. You can make a good game with likeable characters and a good narrative, but a GREAT game needs to connect the player to the protagonist, in a way that only vidya can. It needs to not only work within the medium, but to own it.

 

[DEDEDEDEDEDE]

So?

Evil corp Evil console.

 

[Spak]

Evil corp Evil console.

Not really... The original Xbox was the most technologically advanced console of its generation and it cost a decent amount more to make than they sold it for. That's why Microsoft was so eager to end its life and move onto the jank, often malfunctioning, money-printing 360.

EDIT: Plus, what do you have against Microsoft? They revolutionized the computer industry and shaped the way modern computers function.

 

[Nixon Corral]

Evil corp Evil console.

Care to substantiate that claim?

 

[oZzIIgk]

Care to substantiate that claim?

Microsoft Headquarters. Proof enough that they're evil.

 

[DEDEDEDEDEDE]

Not really... The original Xbox was the most technologically advanced console of its generation and it cost a decent amount more to make than they sold it for. That's why Microsoft was so eager to end its life and move onto the jank, often malfunctioning, money-printing 360.

EDIT: Plus, what do you have against Microsoft? They revolutionized the computer industry and shaped the way modern computers function.

Care to substantiate that claim?

They completely abused their place on the market.
1. They forced hardware vendors to not offer competing operating systems with the following deal: you can pay $20 per machine for every machine you ship (whether it has windows on it or not), otherwise it's full retail price per machine with windows. Sounds innocent enough, but the net effect is that no large hardware vendor could afford to ship non-windows PCs.
2. The Embrace-Extend-Extinguish tactic
3. They used their monopoly position to intimidate Spyglass Inc to license their browser code (which became Internet Explorer), and when Microsoft decided to start giving it away, argued that since it was free the amount they owed Spyglass from "sales" was $0.
These are only a few reasons and there are more.

 

[Champ Gold]

Dudebros did nothing wrong and they do less damage to the industry than most other things.

I don't find anything special about Splatoon

Nintendo has more scumbag tactics than Microsoft and Sony.

Video games needs to focus less on stories and narrative ruin some games because they want that 'movie' feel.

Handhelds are better than consoles and PCs. And especially superior than mobile

 

[Nixon Corral]

They completely abused their place on the market.
1. They forced hardware vendors to not offer competing operating systems with the following deal: you can pay $20 per machine for every machine you ship (whether it has windows on it or not), otherwise it's full retail price per machine with windows. Sounds innocent enough, but the net effect is that no large hardware vendor could afford to ship non-windows PCs.
2. The Embrace-Extend-Extinguish tactic
3. They used their monopoly position to intimidate Spyglass Inc to license their browser code (which became Internet Explorer), and when Microsoft decided to start giving it away, argued that since it was free the amount they owed Spyglass from "sales" was $0.
These are only a few reasons and there are more.

These are pretty decent justifications, but all this means is you know more of the bad things Microsoft has done than Nintendo or Sony, neither of whom are spotless. What about Nintendo's anti-competition strategies back in the NES days? The various implicit wrongs of Sony by being as entrenched in movies, music, and IP law as it is? Pretty much every company is the worst, you're just choosing not to turn a blind eye to Microsoft.

And that's fine. I'm just saying it's somewhat inconsistent.

 

[Iceweasel]

These are pretty decent justifications, but all this means is you know more of the bad things Microsoft has done than Nintendo or Sony, neither of whom are spotless. What about Nintendo's anti-competition strategies back in the NES days? The various implicit wrongs of Sony by being as entrenched in movies, music, and IP law as it is? Pretty much every company is the worst, you're just choosing not to turn a blind eye to Microsoft.

And that's fine. I'm just saying it's somewhat inconsistent.

Or like how Sony sued a company producing an emulator (Bleem) for unfair competition and trademark infringement... Directly AFTER losing a lawsuit against another company with a PS1 emulator that they sued for the exact same reasons, with all of the relevant facts being the same. Of course, neither company could afford the legal costs, so Sony bought the trademarks and copyrights and sat on them.

Don't you love the American legal system? You can win a frivolous lawsuit and still go bankrupt.

 

[DEDEDEDEDEDE]

These are pretty decent justifications, but all this means is you know more of the bad things Microsoft has done than Nintendo or Sony, neither of whom are spotless. What about Nintendo's anti-competition strategies back in the NES days? The various implicit wrongs of Sony by being as entrenched in movies, music, and IP law as it is? Pretty much every company is the worst, you're just choosing not to turn a blind eye to Microsoft.

And that's fine. I'm just saying it's somewhat inconsistent.

Can you point out to me what Nintendo have done? I'm not doubting you but I can't really think of anything they have done. I know Sony aren't spotless but I'm curious about Nintendo.

 

[Iceweasel]

Can you point out to me what Nintendo have done? I'm not doubting you but I can't really think of anything they have done. I know Sony aren't spotless but I'm curious about Nintendo.

For one thing, they paid off the APEX crew to influence their Smash 4 ruleset. That's why Skyloft is banned, and why we're suffering with a 2-stock metagame. I'm almost 100% certain that's why PM wasn't at this year's APEX either.

 

[Nixon Corral]

Can you point out to me what Nintendo have done? I'm not doubting you but I can't really think of anything they have done. I know Sony aren't spotless but I'm curious about Nintendo.

Back in the NES days, they more or less made third parties agree to make their games exclusively for NES, or else they wouldn't license them. This is part of the reason the Master System sold so horribly stateside.

Additionally, their current DRM policies are mind-bogglingly bad. Although I don't know if that's because of stupidity, malice, or both, but they certainly haven't exactly been working overtime to fix it.

 

[Iceweasel]

Speaking of back in the NES days, their censorship policies were completely absurd. There's a wonderful post called "The Expurgation of Maniac Mansion" that shows what exactly third parties had to do to get their games on Nintendo hardware, which was the only way to get it to sell at the time. Nintendo of America's policies in the 80s are a major reason that vidya was seen as "for children" until the early 2000s, and gamers still haven't completely moved away from that prejudice.

EDIT: http://www.crockford.com/wrrrld/maniac.html The Expurgation of Maniac Mansion.

 

[Twewy]

Can you point out to me what Nintendo have done? I'm not doubting you but I can't really think of anything they have done. I know Sony aren't spotless but I'm curious about Nintendo.

• Region locking.
• Always releasing a new edition of a handheld not too long after releasing the original/another edition.
• Amiibos, while in concept are a cool little collectable that unlocks things in games, are overpriced and understocked.
  
• Locking content on disc behind said Amiibos.
• Nintendo of America locking certain Amiibo to be store exclusive, and not being able to order them from the online store ala NoE.
• North American Club Nintendo was almost worth nothing. The prizes were worthless compared to European and Japanese CNs. I really loved getting posters and calenders when my neighbors across the rivers were getting Captain Toad lamps and Luigi's Mansion statues. A-at least I got downloadable ROMs!
  
• Needless censoring in overseas releases, especially in the 80s/90s.
• Nintendo of America loves stupid decisions, such as not talking about Devil's Third at all, refusing to release Xenoblade/Last Story/Pandora's Tower for a long while (it shouldn't take two years for an already translated game to reach one of the biggest gaming markets who are demanding it and forming petitions), in fact most of these "unpopular opinions" come from Nintendo of America (Which is still Nintendo)
  
• Staying real quiet about their very niche titles, almost securing the fact they won't sell. Remember the Fatal Frame showing in the Nintendo Direct? Of course you don't, buy Mario Maker.
• Accounts aren't shared throughout consoles/handhelds, and are instead tied to the specific Wii U and/or 3DS you assign it to. This is stupid, since I can sign in on Xbox Live/PSN/Steam on other systems.
• Underpowered consoles compared to their competition in a market that has focused to graphics and what multiplats consumers want with their first party.
• Nintendo ignoring a lot of their franchises anniversaries. Remember those Metroid celebrations? F-Zero? Isn't Pokemon's anniversary this year? What do we have to show for that? F2P games with cash shops? I'm addicted to Rumble World myself, but come on.
• Overpriced DLC and questionable choices. Yeah, Mario Kart 8 really needed another Mario and Peach. Can't wait for Dr. Mario and Fire Peach.
• Reggie, at this point, is just walking positive PR and makes dumb choices all the time. See above points regarding Nintendo of America for examples.
• That Animal Crossing game can only be played with a specific set of Amiibos, and even then you're spending at least $52 to play it with friends.

For one thing, they paid off the APEX crew to influence their Smash 4 ruleset. That's why Skyloft is banned, and why we're suffering with a 2-stock metagame. I'm almost 100% certain that's why PM wasn't at this year's APEX either.

Also this. Nintendo allowing a fan game with ****ing Goku, Naruto, and Bleach dude to be at APEX (Idk if it had a tournament) and not the actual competitively designed mod that doesn't actually infringe copyright is a big fat crock.

I love the Big N myself, but you have to be a big fanboy to say they are doing nothing wrong. Nintendo, believe it or not, has flaws. Just like your despised HEXBOX and DAMN DIRTY MICROSOFT.

 

[Nixon Corral]

Ah, yes, I needed another reminder that F-Zero's 25th anniversary is set up to be as eventful as Metroid's.

 

[Twewy]

Ah, yes, I needed another reminder that F-Zero's 25th anniversary is set up to be as eventful as Metroid's.

At least you have a super duper cool Captain Falcon Amiibo, and Mario Kart 8 DLC! Isn't that what you wanted, loyal customer?

 

[Nixon Corral]

At least you have a super duper cool Captain Falcon Amiibo, and Mario Kart 8 DLC! Isn't that what you wanted, loyal customer?

YES. Nothing gets me more pumped than tapping that ****** to my GamePad so I can dress my stupid chubby Mii in a Captain Falcon costume and race down Big Blue in a Blue Falcon with wheels in the all-new glacial by F-Zero standards LIGHTNING FAST 200cc mode.

 

[DragonBlade64]

I'll probably get a lot of hate for this, but here it goes...

I think The Last of Us is overrated. The gameplay had nothing that hasn't been seen already and was basically a combination of Uncharted and ZombiU. I'm pretty sure people praised it so highly purely because of its story.

I really don't care about Kingdom Hearts. At all. It never sold itself on me the way similar games have and the combat is a bit cumbersome and unintuitive.

Resident Evil and Final Fantasy have seriously lost their touch. While there may be a few recent titles that some would consider good, Resident Evil can't seem to find solid ground with itself anymore and Final Fantasy just doesn't have that charm that made it so good back in the day.

I actually like Brawl more than Melee. (GASP!) Now hear me out. I still have a lot of fun playing Melee, but Brawl just had so much more content and its controls feel more fluid and natural compared to Melee's, which I now find really clunky and not as responsive as I remember. Again, I still love to play Melee, sometimes even more than Brawl (which happens a lot), but it's something that I really have to get a feel for again, especially after playing newer installments and, as a result, I feel that Brawl is just a better game overall, despite being less balanced.

Mario Kart Wii is the worst in the series and is not a good game.

 

[MrFilibrawler]

As much as I understand the negativity, I never found Slippy Toad as an annoying character. Besides, he has made some pretty cool weapons. If Slippy wasn't there, Fox probably wouldn't have the Landmaster now, right?

 

[DEDEDEDEDEDE]

• Region locking.
• Always releasing a new edition of a handheld not too long after releasing the original/another edition.
• Amiibos, while in concept are a cool little collectable that unlocks things in games, are overpriced and understocked.
  
• Locking content on disc behind said Amiibos.
• Nintendo of America locking certain Amiibo to be store exclusive, and not being able to order them from the online store ala NoE.
• North American Club Nintendo was almost worth nothing. The prizes were worthless compared to European and Japanese CNs. I really loved getting posters and calenders when my neighbors across the rivers were getting Captain Toad lamps and Luigi's Mansion statues. A-at least I got downloadable ROMs!
  
• Needless censoring in overseas releases, especially in the 80s/90s.
• Nintendo of America loves stupid decisions, such as not talking about Devil's Third at all, refusing to release Xenoblade/Last Story/Pandora's Tower for a long while (it shouldn't take two years for an already translated game to reach one of the biggest gaming markets who are demanding it and forming petitions), in fact most of these "unpopular opinions" come from Nintendo of America (Which is still Nintendo)
  
• Staying real quiet about their very niche titles, almost securing the fact they won't sell. Remember the Fatal Frame showing in the Nintendo Direct? Of course you don't, buy Mario Maker.
• Accounts aren't shared throughout consoles/handhelds, and are instead tied to the specific Wii U and/or 3DS you assign it to. This is stupid, since I can sign in on Xbox Live/PSN/Steam on other systems.
• Underpowered consoles compared to their competition in a market that has focused to graphics and what multiplats consumers want with their first party.
• Nintendo ignoring a lot of their franchises anniversaries. Remember those Metroid celebrations? F-Zero? Isn't Pokemon's anniversary this year? What do we have to show for that? F2P games with cash shops? I'm addicted to Rumble World myself, but come on.
• Overpriced DLC and questionable choices. Yeah, Mario Kart 8 really needed another Mario and Peach. Can't wait for Dr. Mario and Fire Peach.
• Reggie, at this point, is just walking positive PR and makes dumb choices all the time. See above points regarding Nintendo of America for examples.
• That Animal Crossing game can only be played with a specific set of Amiibos, and even then you're spending at least $52 to play it with friends.

Also this. Nintendo allowing a fan game with ****ing Goku, Naruto, and Bleach dude to be at APEX (Idk if it had a tournament) and not the actual competitively designed mod that doesn't actually infringe copyright is a big fat crock.

I love the Big N myself, but you have to be a big fanboy to say they are doing nothing wrong. Nintendo, believe it or not, has flaws. Just like your despised HEXBOX and DAMN DIRTY MICROSOFT.

They use Miiverse to run a dictatorship where if you say anything bad about Nintendo you are kicked out. The characters in MK8 are an absolute JOKE! Why the heck has Rosalina got a baby character. What has she even done in games to do that? Also Pink Gold Peach, Metal Mario, Tanooki Mario, Cat Peach and Dry Bowser should not have even been considered when there are characters like Dry Bones, Birdo, Bowser Jnr, Diddy Kong and King Boo. Anyway not really unpopular so moving on.

The Amiibo war is just ridiculous. I don't get Amiibos myself and I don't buy them. But the way Nintendo understocked them had to be intentional and the price for a little figurine is just insane really.

I don't think region locking is that much of a crime to be honest. It's understandable. Specific focus on their main franchises is bad. Mario Maker looks terrible IMO. Other than that I can't really comment on the North American Nintendo ones.

 

[John Onefifteen]

I don't think any of the legend of zelda games where really that good.
Street fighter, Mortal Kombat, and tekken are all terrible.
Mario Kart 8 was not worth the hype.
Mario Party 10 was absolute garbage.

Deal with it

 

[radio silent]

Mario Party 10 was absolute garbage.

Well, yeah.

It's Mario Party.

 

[Nixon Corral]

Mario Party 10 was absolute garbage.

I don't think that's an unpopular opinion by any stretch. Also, you can't really do the mic drop/deal with it thing in a thread where you're supposed to be controversial, lol.

 

[John Onefifteen]

you can't really do the mic drop/deal with it thing in a thread where you're supposed to be controversial, lol.

you're right, my b lol

 

[Nixon Corral]

you're right, my b lol

I will say calling Street Fighter and Zelda bad definitely qualifies as unpopular, though, so you're good.

Although I agree I've definitely never been as captivated by Zelda as most people.

 

[Iceweasel]

As much as I understand the negativity, I never found Slippy Toad as an annoying character. Besides, he has made some pretty cool weapons. If Slippy wasn't there, Fox probably wouldn't have the Landmaster now, right?

On the topic of unjustly hated characters, Navi. She never got on my nerves but once at all during all my years of playing Ocarina of Time. It was in the Kokiri Forest, when she kept telling you to find a sword and shield, but without any hints on where to find the sword. Once I knew where the Kokiri Sword was, Navi was the definition of helpful in almost every instance I hit C-Up.

Now, I'll grant the Navi haters this, she did get on my nerves quite a bit in OoT3D, but they changed how often she gives you hints and made her break the fourth wall to tell me to stop playing.

You want me to stop playing, Nintendo? How about I stop playing all your games! You don't break my immersion because some whiny idiot parent won't tell their damn kid to shut off the game and go the **** to bed!

 

[finalark]

They completely abused their place on the market.
1. They forced hardware vendors to not offer competing operating systems with the following deal: you can pay $20 per machine for every machine you ship (whether it has windows on it or not), otherwise it's full retail price per machine with windows. Sounds innocent enough, but the net effect is that no large hardware vendor could afford to ship non-windows PCs.

In the late 90s/early 2000s Sony threatened certain vendors by stated that they wouldn't be shipping the highly anticipated PS2 to them if they pushed the Dreamcast too much.

As everyone else has said, every company has played dirty.

They use Miiverse to run a dictatorship where if you say anything bad about Nintendo you are kicked out. The characters in MK8 are an absolute JOKE! Why the heck has Rosalina got a baby character. What has she even done in games to do that?

90% of the Nintendo fanbase (and somebody with power at Nintendo) has claimed her as their space waifu. Usually the reasons cited are because she's a "more complex" character than all of the women in the Mario universe. But when your basis for comparison is Peach and Daisy then giving any character a tragic backstory is going to make them appear "complex."

I don't think I could ever express in words how sick I am of Rosalina.

EDIT: I'm going to try.

I'll be honest, I liked Rosalina when she made her first appearance in Mario Galaxy. But people seemed to really, really cling to her. It wasn't long before articles about the "hidden depth" of Mario Galaxy began cropping up everywhere. And I didn't get it. Yes, the storybook was charming and a nice touch to the game. But for how sad her backstory is, it certain doesn't seem to affect Rosalina. No line of dialog or interaction could possible be interpreted differently with the knowledge of her history. That's because for all intents and purposes, Rosalina is basically just another NPC. An eight foot tall inhuman abomination that kind of makes me uncomfortable, but still just another NPC who sprouts basic dialog and gives you pointers. For how much her backstory affects her character, it might as well have been about Wario. I know it really clicked for some people, but a sad backstory and a G-rated take on The End of Evangelion wasn't enough to really endear her to me.

So she starting showing up in spin-offs. That's cool, she's a popular character and Nintendo wants to use that to their advantage. But by this point it's almost a punchline. Who's the secret character in Mario 3D World? Rosalina. Who's an unlockable character (twice) in Mario Kart 8? Rosalina in a oddly sexy outfit (and infant Rosalina). Who's the last DLC character in Mario Golf World Tour? Rosalina.

I wouldn't really mind her being as prevalent as the Mario mainstays if her fans weren't so insistent on her being the best thing since jam on toast. Plus I have my personal conspiracy theory that the Ice Climbers were actually removed in order to make Rosalina's mechanics more unique. I know the official reason is that the 3DS couldn't handle it, but if you're telling me a handheld that can run something like Resident Evil Revelations or Shin Megami Tensei IV can't do something that hardware from 2001 could deal with no problem then I'm calling BS on that.

Or I might be wrong and crazy.

 

[DEDEDEDEDEDE]

90% of the Nintendo fanbase (and somebody with power at Nintendo) has claimed her as their space waifu. Usually the reasons cited are because she's a "more complex" character than all of the women in the Mario universe. But when your basis for comparison is Peach and Daisy then giving any character a tragic backstory is going to make them appear "complex."

I don't think I could ever express in words how sick I am of Rosalina.

EDIT: I'm going to try.

I'll be honest, I liked Rosalina when she made her first appearance in Mario Galaxy. But people seemed to really, really cling to her. It wasn't long before articles about the "hidden depth" of Mario Galaxy began cropping up everywhere. And I didn't get it. Yes, the storybook was charming and a nice touch to the game. But for how sad her backstory is, it certain doesn't seem to affect Rosalina. No line of dialog or interaction could possible be interpreted differently with the knowledge of her history. That's because for all intents and purposes, Rosalina is basically just another NPC. An eight foot tall inhuman abomination that kind of makes me uncomfortable, but still just another NPC who sprouts basic dialog and gives you pointers. For how much her backstory affects her character, it might as well have been about Wario. I know it really clicked for some people, but a sad backstory and a G-rated take on The End of Evangelion wasn't enough to really endear her to me.

So she starting showing up in spin-offs. That's cool, she's a popular character and Nintendo wants to use that to their advantage. But by this point it's almost a punchline. Who's the secret character in Mario 3D World? Rosalina. Who's an unlockable character (twice) in Mario Kart 8? Rosalina in a oddly sexy outfit (and infant Rosalina). Who's the last DLC character in Mario Golf World Tour? Rosalina.

I wouldn't really mind her being as prevalent as the Mario mainstays if her fans weren't so insistent on her being the best thing since jam on toast. Plus I have my personal conspiracy theory that the Ice Climbers were actually removed in order to make Rosalina's mechanics more unique. I know the official reason is that the 3DS couldn't handle it, but if you're telling me a handheld that can run something like Resident Evil Revelations or Shin Megami Tensei IV can't do something that hardware from 2001 could deal with no problem then I'm calling BS on that.

Or I might be wrong and crazy.

Can't agree more. The only reason she is popular is that she has a big sob story. IMO should not have even be considered to be in SSB4. I can think of a lot of much much much much better characters that should be in. Waluigi is just one. She is humongously overrated. Really hope she is dropped in the next SSB but think of the backlash Nintendo would get.

Made it myself BTW.

 

[radio silent]

IMO should not have even be considered to be in SSB4. I can think of a lot of much much much much better characters that should be in. Waluigi is just one.

Waluigi is an abomination that was only conceived so that Wario could have a tennis partner. He is lame, and should consider himself lucky that he's even an assist trophy.

Is that an unpopular opinion? It shouldn't be. Because Waluigi is laaaaaaame.

 

[DEDEDEDEDEDE]

Waluigi is an abomination that was only conceived so that Wario could have a tennis partner. He is lame, and should consider himself lucky that he's even an assist trophy.

Is that an unpopular opinion? It shouldn't be. Because Waluigi is laaaaaaame.

As is Rosalina.

 

[Champ Gold]

As is Rosalina.

Atleast Rosalina was somewhat relevant in the games she was first in and had importance in the plot she as in and is playable in a Mario platformer.

Waluigi is f****** filler as in he was made to be filler and that's what he'll always be and what he should be