Unpopular Opinions On Gaming

[Rynnec]

- I prefer 2D fighters to 3D ones, and feel that they are a lot more easier to get into (At least the faster paced ones like Capcom vs. or any Arc System Works fighter). Not to say that 3D fighters aren't fun, most of them just seem so bland compared to the more over-the-top 2D ones.

-Bomberman 64: The Second Attack! and its single player mode if far superior to any multiplayer oriented Bomberman game.

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

- I prefer 2D fighters to 3D ones, and feel that they are a lot more easier to get into (At least the faster paced ones like Capcom vs. or any Arc System Works fighter). Not to say that 3D fighters aren't fun, most of them just seem so bland compared to the more over-the-top 2D ones.

For some reason I always thought that 2D fighters were held in much higher regard than 3D fighters as a sort of default opinion of most people. I do agree, though, that I prefer the faster pace of 2D fighters.

[Spark Of Spirit]

I agree with EK on Splatterhouse. It was a mindless beat em up, and quite good at what it does. It's not perfect, but it's pretty much everything a game like Splatterhouse could be in 3D.

-Bomberman 64: The Second Attack! and its single player mode if far superior to any multiplayer oriented Bomberman game.

I believe I've heard you say this before, and as a fan of Bomberman in general can you let me know what makes it different to other single player Bomberman? There's few Bomberman games I dislike.

[Rynnec]

-Bomberman 64: The Second Attack! and its single player mode if far superior to any multiplayer oriented Bomberman game.

I believe I've heard you say this before, and as a fan of Bomberman in general can you let me know what makes it different to other single player Bomberman? There's few Bomberman games I dislike.

It's been awhile since I've played TSA! but the first 64 game has a similar enough single player.

What makes it different is that you actually have freedom and more stuff to do in the level's. And each level was uniquely designed and was fun to go through. The addition of changing the element of your bombs via the Elemental Stones you get from boss battles led to several different bomb mechanics, where different types of bombs were more effective against certain enemies, and it was  also used for puzzle solving. There was also a sort of co-op element where the second player would play as Bomberman's animal sidekick for that game, even though the first player still had to fight bosses and finish levels alone, it was still an enjoyable experience. Me and my cousing had a lot of fun with it back in the day.

The story and characters were surprisingly good too, for a Bomberman game. Even if it was a generic "Destroy the 7 generators so you can escape the black hole" plot, it was still nice that they fleshed out a little. There was also this cool little feature, that after you finish a level, the game would show a cutscene of the games villains talking amongst themselves. Even if dialogue in said cutscenes was little more than "Bomberman defeated one of us!" "No matter. I, the next boss will surely defeat him!" "Ha, you're to weak to beat him. I, a future boss, will be the one to defeat him!" and so on, it was still a pretty cool thing to see. The story did go for the "Darker and Edgier" approach, but it actually didn't feel forced or overbearing. The music wasn't that bad either (The game's score was composed by Yasunori Mitsuda, so expect to hear a lot of awesome tracks).

Even though Generation and Jetters had a similar single-player mode, they just lacked the charm the ones the 64 games had. Admittedly, this is mostly nostalgia talking, and for all I know the game probably hasn't aged well (I haven't played the game in almost ten years). I could see some finding the bosses in the game a bit on the easy side for one thing(there's no truly giant boss in the game except the final bosses). But overall, I thought it was an enjoyable game in its own right.

That's the best I can describe it.

[Spark Of Spirit]

No no, sounds good. I really enjoyed Hero despite never playing it on the N64 when it came out, and I liked the SNES, Game Boy, and TG16 Bomberman games, so I'll be sure to pick them up if I see them out in the wild.

[Rosalinas Spare Wand]

- I prefer 2D fighters to 3D ones, and feel that they are a lot more easier to get into (At least the faster paced ones like Capcom vs. or any Arc System Works fighter). Not to say that 3D fighters aren't fun, most of them just seem so bland compared to the more over-the-top 2D ones.

For some reason I always thought that 2D fighters were held in much higher regard than 3D fighters as a sort of default opinion of most people. I do agree, though, that I prefer the faster pace of 2D fighters.

Depends where you look really. Internationally, Tekken is the most popular fighting game series, but North America is more interested in the Street Fighter/VS series, while Central and South America prefers SNK games.

Pretty sure Soulcalibur and Mortal Kombat are right behind Tekken in terms of popularity as well.

[gunswordfist]

I don't think it's cool to hate Killzone and you'd have to be a fucking moron to think it's ripping off FEAR.

wat

The only similarities it has to F.E.A.R. are how the weapons and some of the stages look. One enemy type also appears to be ripped directly from Project Origin, but yeah, they're not really much alike...

That said, the first Killzone (the one on the PS2) is terrible while the others are fairly fun if unremarkable.

That reminds me, I found it funny that Sony fanboys tried so hard to make Killzone 1 sound so good since the console had no FPS exclusives that could put Halo to shame.

[gunswordfist]

I have no problem with really hard games. As long as it's not too much of a grind (Serious), impossible (Battletoads, Earthworm Jim), I don't have to read a guide to figure a part or it's just plain broken, I'll keep on trying.

Cheap bosses are fun such as Shao Kahn and the wrestler and that sailor boxer from Streets Of Rage 2. Those are some of my favorite, even if I have never beaten Shao Kahn.

If someone, the creator or whatever, is responsible for most of a game's vision or what not, he should decide if a sequel gets made or not, not the fans. I'm pretty sure I'm thinking of only 2D games here or at least games from years ago, not current big budget titles. That would be stupid to apply that to.

That's pretty much it. I don't have a hate for any game series and I can't think of too many underrated/overhated games atm.

[gunswordfist]

Oh yeah, regenerative health is the perfect health system for many 3D games. Only the blurred vision effect is a drawback but it's still infinitely better than hunting around for limited health packs in the middle of a fight. This doesn't apply to Doom-like shooters, games with upgradable health bars, fighting games, beat em ups/hack n slashes and survival games though.

Most games are better without quick saving.

[talonmalon333]

Noticed some DKC3 talk. I don't think it's boring. But it's certainly a lackluster experience in comparison to it's predecessors. Level design is overly gimmicky, gameplay is sluggish thanks to swapping Diddy with Kiddy, heck, even the graphics and music are lower quality. I honestly believe that they rushed this game due to the N64's release.

Oh yeah, regenerative health is the perfect health system for many 3D games. Only the blurred vision effect is a drawback but it's still infinitely better than hunting around for limited health packs in the middle of a fight. This doesn't apply to Doom-like shooters, games with upgradable health bars, fighting games, beat em ups/hack n slashes and survival games though.

Most games are better without quick saving.

Thanks for that triple post, gunswordfist. You're really a helpful part of society.

[gunswordfist]

Get used to it.

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

-I prefer save points to manual saving (as in, anywhere you want). The main reason is because if the game leaves saving up to me, I get OCD about that shit and don't know when is the right time to save (maybe a hard boss is coming up or something like that), or if I should just go on for a while and ignore saving, but then if I neglect it for too long and forget about it and then die, I can be set back well over an hour's worth of gameplay, which can be really annoying. I actually like when you're only option to save comes in the form of save points. At least that way I can just save every time one comes up since the developers would have already strategically placed the save points at places that would be most appropriate to save at, and then you can just focus on the game and don't need to worry about saving every other minute. That, and having the opportunity to save whenever and wherever you want makes the game too easy.

While I do still prefer some manual control in saving (which is why I think that save points are perfect), I also don't mind too much if a game just forces auto-saves or checkpoints on you as long as they are well-placed. In games like Halo and its sequels, this can be a nuisance because of how random and awkwardly placed they are, but in games like F.E.A.R. (the XBOX360 port, anyways), the auto-save checkpoints are perfectly placed and it allows me to completely ignore having to save every other second, and instead I can just have fun playing the game the way it was meant to be played without any such distractions.

[Spark Of Spirit]

Wario Land is kind of an underrated series. Each game is pretty unique and in its own style, they're all pretty great. But it seems of all Nintendo's platforming franchises, it is the only one that doesn't seem to do all that well. Which is a shame because it's a great little series.*

(*Note* I'm not referring to junk like Wario World or Master Of Disguise. Those are Wario games, not Wario Land games.

[Spark Of Spirit]

Rayman is overrated by platformer fans. The first game is generic and dull with a cheap usage of difficulty and the third game is a minigame fest. Keep in mind that I have yet to play Origins (I'm waiting for the 3DS version), but from my experience the only good Rayman game is 2, and it's not really that great. But when I see someone list the series among platforming greats, I just have to shrug and disagree. It's a merely decent series with few original ideas and only one (possibly two including Origins) decent games.

That said, Origins does look great. Even if it will bomb like no one's business.

[Commode]

Wario Land is kind of an underrated series. Each game is pretty unique and in its own style, they're all pretty great. But it seems of all Nintendo's platforming franchises, it is the only one that doesn't seem to do all that well. Which is a shame because it's a great little series.*

(*Note* I'm not referring to junk like Wario World or Master Of Disguise. Those are Wario games, not Wario Land games.

I don't really like the first Wario Land(Super Mario Land 3) and I don't know if I've ever played the second one, but I really like 3 for GBC and 4 for GBA.