State your unpopular video game opinion...

and more platforming.

That makes me think about an unpopular opinion and that is that shooters suck and that platforming games are great and way better. I love games like donkey kong and rayman leagends ect and would play them over games like COD any day of the week.
 
I disagree. After the first one is down, we can't have her mourning every death in her path, struggling to do it or feeling sick with it. After the initial experience is out of the way, it is understood that this is the path to take for survival. What would you have her do? Say sorry after every couple of deaths?
In a movie there would be more time for that due to its different pace. Here we're always having enemies at our throats. It's a desperate situation. It doesn't mean she's having fun doing it. I felt the exact opposite when it was just her in the scene. She was exhausted. She was still doing a horrible thing, but she understood that it was either that or be killed. The time to struggle was over.

It's the fact that she immediately becomes an expert at killing. The game, especially at the beginning, was trying to humanize Lara, to show a slow evolution between an average college student to the female Indiana Jones. The problem is that there wasn't a transition; she goes from a regular, scared person with presumably no weapons training to dispatching legions in an instant. It was a harsh wall of narrative dissonance that didn't work for me. I understand that to alleviate this they would have had to rework the whole combat aspect of the game, drastically reducing the amount of encounters and gun play and probably heightening the puzzle solving and dungeon crawling, but I probably wouldn't have minded that. There was a considerable lack of actual tomb raiding in the game.
 
It's the fact that she immediately becomes an expert at killing. The game, especially at the beginning, was trying to humanize Lara, to show a slow evolution between an average college student to the female Indiana Jones. The problem is that there wasn't a transition; she goes from a regular, scared person with presumably no weapons training to dispatching legions in an instant. It was a harsh wall of narrative dissonance that didn't work for me. I understand that to alleviate this they would have had to rework the whole combat aspect of the game, drastically reducing the amount of encounters and gun play and probably heightening the puzzle solving and dungeon crawling, but I probably wouldn't have minded that. There was a considerable lack of actual tomb raiding in the game.
And that wouldn't be a problem as it would be a throwback to the original game. I much preferred enemies there as Lara rarely encountered humans. Most of her guns were aimed at animals that attacked her
 
Animals? Call in the RSPCA! How could she, beast of a woman!
 
It's the fact that she immediately becomes an expert at killing. The game, especially at the beginning, was trying to humanize Lara, to show a slow evolution between an average college student to the female Indiana Jones. The problem is that there wasn't a transition; she goes from a regular, scared person with presumably no weapons training to dispatching legions in an instant. It was a harsh wall of narrative dissonance that didn't work for me. I understand that to alleviate this they would have had to rework the whole combat aspect of the game, drastically reducing the amount of encounters and gun play and probably heightening the puzzle solving and dungeon crawling, but I probably wouldn't have minded that. There was a considerable lack of actual tomb raiding in the game.
I see what you mean. Maybe the alternate route would be to have her aiming to be really inconsistent at first and it gets better as we upgrade, like in The Last of Us. It's indeed like you said, though. They'd have to rework most of how the action worked. I'm fine with how it turned out.
 
And that wouldn't be a problem as it would be a throwback to the original game. I much preferred enemies there as Lara rarely encountered humans. Most of her guns were aimed at animals that attacked her

havok, this is the unpopular thread. if someone doesn't like something about a game I don't think it's always practical to convince them they're wrong about what they're saying if they make valid points and a sound argument.
 
Just as people are free to post their opinions, others are free to post their opinions of those opinions. It's not a one way street, remember that.
 
Just as people are free to post their opinions, others are free to post their opinions of those opinions. It's not a one way street, remember that.

yeah you right. I'm just saying it only seems like havok is not willing to accept anything that someone says that's not part of the mainstream opinion of these games.

havok, you cool, I think I may just be buggin out
 
It's the fact that she immediately becomes an expert at killing. The game, especially at the beginning, was trying to humanize Lara, to show a slow evolution between an average college student to the female Indiana Jones. The problem is that there wasn't a transition; she goes from a regular, scared person with presumably no weapons training to dispatching legions in an instant. It was a harsh wall of narrative dissonance that didn't work for me. I understand that to alleviate this they would have had to rework the whole combat aspect of the game, drastically reducing the amount of encounters and gun play and probably heightening the puzzle solving and dungeon crawling, but I probably wouldn't have minded that. There was a considerable lack of actual tomb raiding in the game.

[YT]CEN5obhFRj4[/YT]
 
He's just discussing stuff, and he doesn't agree with some stuff. I mean, don't worry, Havok has some...less mainstream opinions. I promise. I've seen things, my friend.
 
i heard you can play the entirety of metal gear solid 4 without killing a soul.

better be an awesome ass trophy for that if it's true lol

You can do it for all the MGS games, I've done it for MGS 1-3. It's not hard and I did it for fun, even before trophies/ach. You can even (sort of) do it for Prototype by not eating civilians. You get an ach. for eating less than 10 of them through the entire game.

You can do a really hard run through of the MGS games by doing a Ghost run by never being seen and killing nobody, only tranqing the least amount of soldiers you can. In MGS3 there's one level where you're dead for a bit and you have to face everyone you killed in the game, they're ghosts and if they touch you then you lose health, you lose enough and it's game over. If you killed a bunch then they just swarm you, if you killed no one then you just see the bosses who killed themselves even if you tranq them and it's just a long walk down the river. You get nice bonuses for doing no kills and/or stealth runs, either infinite ammo or invisibility at will. Makes the game a cakewalk.
 
You can do it for all the MGS games, I've done it for MGS 1-3. It's not hard and I did it for fun, even before trophies/ach. You can even (sort of) do it for Prototype by not eating civilians. You get an ach. for eating less than 10 of them through the entire game.

You can do a really hard run through of the MGS games by doing a Ghost run by never being seen and killing nobody, only tranqing the least amount of soldiers you can. In MGS3 there's one level where you're dead for a bit and you have to face everyone you killed in the game, they're ghosts and if they touch you then you lose health, you lose enough and it's game over. If you killed a bunch then they just swarm you, if you killed no one then you just see the bosses who killed themselves even if you tranq them and it's just a long walk down the river. You get nice bonuses for doing no kills and/or stealth runs, either infinite ammo or invisibility at will. Makes the game a cakewalk.
I own MGS4 but never really played it. Couldn't figure it out.

I suppose now it won't come out on xbone since the metal gear collection we're been hearing about is a clothing line
 
Yeah, that's been a standard feature of the MGS series since the second game (you had to kill the bosses, at the very least, in the first game).
 
He's just discussing stuff, and he doesn't agree with some stuff. I mean, don't worry, Havok has some...less mainstream opinions. I promise. I've seen things, my friend.

I'm not knocking his opinions, or him at all; he had my back in the xbox forum at one point when projectpat was talking about how having 1 console per gen was nonsense.

havok was one of the few people who agreed with me & backed me up :word:
 
Having one console per gen isn't nonsense? Why?
 
Having one console per gen isn't nonsense? Why?

because some people (like me, for example) don't want to spend close to $1,000 on just the hardware, and then be divided on what version of a multiplatform game to buy, and have my time consumed even more by video games by just having more of them.

that's why.

i don't think it's justice but if you want to have them all, more power to you, but don't call others out for not following in line with you. that's being irrational.
 
I can't see why you'd need more than one current gen system at a time with the XB1 and PS costing so much but then again I'm cheap. :p

I own MGS4 but never really played it. Couldn't figure it out.

I suppose now it won't come out on xbone since the metal gear collection we're been hearing about is a clothing line

MGS is complicated because it has a massive backstory. Try the MGS collection the released one 360/PS3, it has MGS 2 and 3 and that explains almost all the story.

MGS 4 is one of the reasons I plan to get a PS3. Just so I can finish the ****ing story.
 
I can't see why you'd need more than one current gen system at a time with the XB1 and PS costing so much but then again I'm cheap. :p
I can see why some people who I guess we can call hardcore gamers would want both so that they don't miss out on any exclusives, but video games are NOT cheap. a brand new game is $60, and I don't care who you are (I guess unless you're a millionaire lol), that is expensive. It is a lot of money to spend, and it is ONE brand new game. Add another to your purchase and you're already spending over $100, AGAIN.


MGS is complicated because it has a massive backstory. Try the MGS collection the released one 360/PS3, it has MGS 2 and 3 and that explains almost all the story.

MGS 4 is one of the reasons I plan to get a PS3. Just so I can finish the ****ing story.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Sony-PlaySt...1634070560?pt=Video_Games&hash=item3a968f3420
 
because some people (like me, for example) don't want to spend close to $1,000 on just the hardware, and then be divided on what version of a multiplatform game to buy, and have my time consumed even more by video games by just having more of them.
that's why.
i don't think it's justice but if you want to have them all, more power to you, but don't call others out for not following in line with you. that's being irrational.
Oh, you meant purchasing more than one console per generation. That sentence was vague enough that I could interpret it differently and understand having just one console available for purchase in each gen, like, for example, just having the PS4 as an option in the market and no XBone or Wii U.

Having multiple consoles at my disposal never crossed my mind and I still don't miss it. Everything I want comes for the Playstation, anyway.
 
I can see why some people who I guess we can call hardcore gamers would want both so that they don't miss out on any exclusives, but video games are NOT cheap. a brand new game is $60, and I don't care who you are (I guess unless you're a millionaire lol), that is expensive. It is a lot of money to spend, and it is ONE brand new game. Add another to your purchase and you're already spending over $100, AGAIN.



http://www.ebay.com/itm/Sony-PlaySt...1634070560?pt=Video_Games&hash=item3a968f3420

I need money before buying that.

Also, a working TV.

TV first, then games. Besides I have a bunch of Amazon money in my account I'd rather use first and I could probably buy a PS3 from a pawnshop I trust for $130-150 and MGS4 at the same time.
 
I'm not knocking his opinions, or him at all; he had my back in the xbox forum at one point when projectpat was talking about how having 1 console per gen was nonsense.

havok was one of the few people who agreed with me & backed me up :word:
This isn't Band of Brothers dude. :woot: Everyone has different opinions on different things and sometimes the same person's opinion will coincide with yours and sometimes they'll be the opposite. When they're in opposition it doesn't mean they killed your dog and when they back you up... they might actually have just killed your dog. :ninja:;)
 
Honestly if given the option in games I'd prefer to either go through a game with no body count or very limited or a total stealth route even if it takes twice as long. I love challenging myself like that in games. Even games where you're expected to murder everything like Prototype I always did the camouflage on the bases and took everyone down one by one with no fuss until there was just one guy. I'd leave him just wondering when the heck everyone went. :p

I can't stand those non-stop shooters where you can't go three minutes without shooting people.
Totally agreed. That's why I love Splinter Cell Blacklist so much, gives you the option to do both.
 
I was pretty content with my 360. I didn't get a PS3 until 2013. But I found 600 dollars to be just exorbitant. Though I did buy a Wii. But only really because it launched with Zelda.

This generation though I actually make good money, and I now know how to really shop, so I do expect to get all the consoles in about a year.

Though honestly, I would probably be content with just one console. Provided it's not the Wii U obviously. I love Mario, and I'm looking forward to Star Fox and Zelda... but I like variety.
 
I need money before buying that.

Also, a working TV.

TV first, then games. Besides I have a bunch of Amazon money in my account I'd rather use first and I could probably buy a PS3 from a pawnshop I trust for $130-150 and MGS4 at the same time.
lol well good for you for havin a local pawn shop like that. you can also get a cheap (in every sense of the word) 4k tv on amazon too.
This isn't Band of Brothers dude. :woot: Everyone has different opinions on different things and sometimes the same person's opinion will coincide with yours and sometimes they'll be the opposite. When they're in opposition it doesn't mean they killed your dog and when they back you up... they might actually have just killed your dog. :ninja:;)
band of brothers, what the hell is that lol

and yeah dude, i don't think any 2 people on this planet even friggin identical twin will ever agree on anything. it's when you start declaring your opinion as fact or treat others harshly for their opposing opinions, that things start to get problematic. you know what i'm sayin
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,290
Messages
22,081,114
Members
45,881
Latest member
lucindaschatz
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"