Hot takes on well-liked games

[hippy dave]

allmost every game that has DLC, can we just not have the full game please like we did in the 90's/00's

Yeah DLC used to be extra content that was added to an already complete game, rather than filling in the missing parts later for an extra charge.

 

[Glyptofane]

Kind of hated what I played of Undertale, but it's possible I just wasn't in the right frame of mind for what it ended up being or rather not being, although I have played games like Moon and Chulip before.

 

[lokomelo]

Yeah DLC used to be extra content that was added to an already complete game, rather than filling in the missing parts later for an extra charge.

Exactly! The Witcher 3 is an example of good implementation of DLC.

 

[PacBunny]

Ocarina of Time is a boring, easy Zelda game with mechanics that are too simple. Also, how can someone called this game a masterpiece when it has terrible text scrolling? CHECKMATE!!!

 

[Wolfy]

Yeah DLC used to be extra content that was added to an already complete game, rather than filling in the missing parts later for an extra charge.

Agreed, imagine past games like Halo 3 where you could download new multiplayer maps that actually add to the games, or more recently Monster Hunter World and Rise where they add a whole new campaign to the game for less than the price of a new game.

 

[ChiefReginod]

Red Dead Redemption hasn't aged well at all. On a recent play through, these things stood out to the point that I might even call it a bad game:

- Glitches, glitches, glitches forever.
- 95% of play time is riding from one location to another, 4% is tedious collect-a-thons and the remaining 1% is the actual missions.
- All of the horses control and feel the same. There's no variation and no other modes of transport, so 95% of the game is the same thing over and over.
- Your own horse literally runs from you.

Once upon a time, I would have listed RDR as one of the best games I've ever played, but now I see that I was blinded by the at-the-time great graphics and hype. It was a unique game and I enjoyed it when it came out, but this last play through has just highlighted how little there actually is to do. It's a sandbox game where you can't do anything fun, just shoot and hogtie people. That's it. No unique modes of transportation. No jumps. No explosions. No real chaos even at the highest wanted levels. What's even the point?

 

[Amadeus007]

Persona 5 Royal. Boy do I have opinions on that game.
I'm a big fan of both Persona and SMT, and let me tell you, I was very disappointed with Royal.
Persona 5 was already a 90+ hour game. I really enjoyed playing through the game the first time. Fell in love with the story, characters, palace design. When they announced Royal, I was so excited, only for that excitement to be thrown into the garbage disposal when I found out that it was the exact same game until like, the last few hours of the game where all of the new content was.
Before that, there were 2 new social links, the thieves den and the new area where you could play darts with your team. That's it. It was exactly the same otherwise until those last few hours.
So we had to play the same game twice basically for the addition of 2 extra characters, playing a dumb card game in the thieves den, and only two hours of extra story content, which wasn't that great anyways.
It was really infuriating.

 

[mrgone]

Red Dead Redemption hasn't aged well at all. On a recent play through, these things stood out to the point that I might even call it a bad game:

- Glitches, glitches, glitches forever.
- 95% of play time is riding from one location to another, 4% is tedious collect-a-thons and the remaining 1% is the actual missions.
- All of the horses control and feel the same. There's no variation and no other modes of transport, so 95% of the game is the same thing over and over.
- Your own horse literally runs from you.

Once upon a time, I would have listed RDR as one of the best games I've ever played, but now I see that I was blinded by the at-the-time great graphics and hype. It was a unique game and I enjoyed it when it came out, but this last play through has just highlighted how little there actually is to do. It's a sandbox game where you can't do anything fun, just shoot and hogtie people. That's it. No unique modes of transportation. No jumps. No explosions. No real chaos even at the highest wanted levels. What's even the point?

bought it a few years ago for the ps3,
so it's gta with horses
bored the hell out of me


i also hate that everything needs to be open world now
i call BOTW -> GTA Hyrule
sometimes is like constricted spaces

 

[AkikoKumagara]

I bought Red Dead Online (standalone) when it came to Steam.
It was so painfully unfun I ended up refunding it.

 

[Taleweaver]

Not in the same vein as AAA titles, but what's with the popularity of aperture science labs?

The 'game' is a freaking walking simulator that doesn't even let you walk. It's just pushing buttons when prompted and characters talking to you(a silent protagonist). Yet the popularity of that monstrosity is off the charts!
Christ... Yes, it's valve. Yes, it's free. But i feel like it's just the reverse of review bombing: people just thumb it up because they've just received an awesome handheld.

 

[Veho]

Not in the same vein as AAA titles, but what's with the popularity of aperture science labs?

The 'game' is a freaking walking simulator that doesn't even let you walk. It's just pushing buttons when prompted and characters talking to you(a silent protagonist). Yet the popularity of that monstrosity is off the charts!
Christ... Yes, it's valve. Yes, it's free. But i feel like it's just the reverse of review bombing: people just thumb it up because they've just received an awesome handheld.

It's short, doesn't overstay its welcome, it is full of the humor specific to the franchise, it expands on the lore of Aperture Science Laboratories, and pretty much does what it set out to do, which is make you familiar with the wacko layout of the Deck's gamepad while being more amusing than staring at a wall. If the rating system were more granular the score would probably be lower, but when the choice is between "OK" and "shit" I can see how most people would find it inoffensive enough to give positive feedback.

Now Warioware Touched on the other hand....

96% approval rating for a glorified Nintendo kiosk tech demo that for some reason cost as much as a full game

 

[Taleweaver]

It's short, doesn't overstay its welcome, it is full of the humor specific to the franchise, it expands on the lore of Aperture Science Laboratories, and pretty much does what it set out to do, which is make you familiar with the wacko layout of the Deck's gamepad while being more amusing than staring at a wall. If the rating system were more granular the score would probably be lower, but when the choice is between "OK" and "shit" I can see how most people would find it inoffensive enough to give positive feedback.

A game without proper storyline, goal or mechanics overstays its welcome pretty fast in my opinion. I get yours(I'm not trying to convince you or anything), but it doesn't change my hot take in the slightest.

 

[Nothereed]

More like a genre, Farming games. I honestly don't get the appeal. Oh and dating games.
Shooters? FPS? I don't even know the category really.
I also don't have a particular fondness (or liking)
So for example half life (1 and 2)? I mean... they're probably good, but it just doesn't keep my interest, and I find it kinda boring to play. And I've played a lot of the story.
The only exception is like, titanfall since the movement mechanics are just so good.

 

[Maximumbeans]

Games thats whole 'shtick' is being painfully difficult bring out the tryhard in a lot of gamers and it's obnoxious. Stuff like Dark Souls/Elden Ring come to mind in particular.

This would probably have to be my answer too, in general. I like a challenge but stuff that's just designed to be painful because ha-ha-ha suck it baby gamer just doesn't gel with me.

Slightly more niche answer is that Pokemon Conquest is a really popular 'underrated gem' amongst Pokemon fans but I just don't see what makes it so great. It's not bad but it's pretty basic and the combat feels very shallow. Maybe I need to give it another go.

 

[sableye126]

Persona 5 Royal. Boy do I have opinions on that game.
I'm a big fan of both Persona and SMT, and let me tell you, I was very disappointed with Royal.
Persona 5 was already a 90+ hour game. I really enjoyed playing through the game the first time. Fell in love with the story, characters, palace design. When they announced Royal, I was so excited, only for that excitement to be thrown into the garbage disposal when I found out that it was the exact same game until like, the last few hours of the game where all of the new content was.
Before that, there were 2 new social links, the thieves den and the new area where you could play darts with your team. That's it. It was exactly the same otherwise until those last few hours.
So we had to play the same game twice basically for the addition of 2 extra characters, playing a dumb card game in the thieves den, and only two hours of extra story content, which wasn't that great anyways.
It was really infuriating.

Late but, huh??????? Royal added a LOT more new stuff. It’s not hard to look it up but off the top of my head, Kichijoji has a lot more to do than the darts game (even the place where you play darts also has billiards but there’s a lot more than that), there’s a second new shopping district, there’s the addition of Jose in Mementos and the features related to him including the will seeds, QOL features, and there are 3 new confidants not 2. But most of all, the new story content is a LOTTTT more than 2 hours, the cutscenes in the new palace alone are twice that length and obviously the new content takes up more time than that, it’s easily 20+ hours longer. It’s far from being the exact same game until the last few hours and I’m pretty sure you haven’t played it.