Unpopular Gaming Opinions

M!Ck^

M!Ck^ wrote: »

Didn't even know there was one!? Loved Escape from Butcher Bay.

The original development team are working on it though Diesel did say it may be an MMO. in recent interviews Diesel has dropped all reference to MMOso hopefully it'll just be a good old fashioned Riddick title.

C14N

Deleted User wrote: »

The original development team are working on it though Diesel did say it may be an MMO. in recent interviews Diesel has dropped all reference to MMOso hopefully it'll just be a good old fashioned Riddick title.

You never know though, we all know Diesel loves him some MMOs.

Stone Deaf 4evr

C14N wrote: »

You never know though, we all know Diesel loves him some MMOs.

I live in hope of a fast and furious mmo :pac:

x43r0

*Search Thread for "Fallout"*

Very little mention - Glad people can agree something :pac:

Stone Deaf 4evr

x43r0 wrote: »

*Search Thread for "Fallout"*

Very little mention - Glad people can agree something :pac:

I'm holding out hope for an announcent of fallout 4 at this years E3, next gen console only, amazing games.

Thargor

Got all excited about Singularity there then clicked the links and realised Id already played and completed it aswell, definitely not a cult classic, average is about right, 75 on Metacritic is generous. Controlling the sniper bullet in the air was fun but doing that with anything such as TOW missiles in a flight sim or Hellfires from a drone in Call of Duty always gives me a buzz. The rest of it was just brown and grey FPS mush.

Thargor

Stone Deaf 4evr wrote: »

I'm holding out hope for an announcent of fallout 4 at this years E3, next gen console only, amazing games.

Only thing that would tempt me to next gen that I can see at the minute or on the horizon, and if its on pc aswell Ill just upgrade my desktop instead.

C14N

Stone Deaf 4evr wrote: »

I live in hope of a fast and furious mmo :pac:

I'd like to see a combination of Vin Diesel's two favourite things: The Fast and The Furious and World of Warcraft. It's just the ultimate team up of meatheads and nerds.

x43r0 wrote: »

*Search Thread for "Fallout"*

Very little mention - Glad people can agree something :pac:

I think very few people actively dislike Fallout, probably because it doesn't get the insane levels of hype and sales that the more popular bashing targets like COD, GTA, Zelda or Halo get. It's loved in a much more reasonable way. It's also a case of nobody is really going to disagree about the problems like the rubbishy character models, it's just that people who like it get over that.

C14N

C14N wrote: »

I'd like to see a combination of Vin Diesel's two favourite things: The Fast and The Furious and World of Warcraft. It's just the ultimate team up of meatheads and nerds.

A Riddick MMO would be closer to what Diesel loves, after all he only came back to the Fast and Furious series so that himself and David Twohy could regain the rights to Riddick. And he went so far as to use his house as collateral on loans they needed to finish the last Riddick film.

shruikan2553

I actually think call of duty advanced warfare looks interesting. Normally I dont care about CoD but I'll keep my eye on this one.

r3nu4l

shruikan2553 wrote: »

I actually think call of duty advanced warfare looks interesting. Normally I dont care about CoD but I'll keep my eye on this one.

Oh, I see, well that's ni.....wait, what?

:eek:

That is controversial :pac:

Grimebox

I ranted about alpha games on steam a few pages back. Check this out. I stand by what I said, "Early Access" means "Avoid At All Costs" :pac:

Grimebox

Grimebox wrote: »

I ranted about alpha games on steam a few pages back. Check this out. I stand by what I said, "Early Access" means "Avoid At All Costs" :pac:

It's two failures out of how many successes? There is always the risk that the game may not work out as planned and anyone paying for access is aware of that. I've a few early access games, mostly gotten through bundles or review code and honestly it's rather interesting to watch a game develop over time. A number of early access titles have been overhauled as a result of feedback and while it may not be for everyone, there's no reason to try and turn people off the idea. It's not like anyone is forcing people to buy a title.

C14N

Deleted User wrote: »

It's two failures out of how many successes? There is always the risk that the game may not work out as planned and anyone paying for access is aware of that. I've a few early access games, mostly gotten through bundles or review code and honestly it's rather interesting to watch a game develop over time. A number of early access titles have been overhauled as a result of feedback and while it may not be for everyone, there's no reason to try and turn people off the idea. It's not like anyone is forcing people to buy a title.

It's not like anyone is forcing you to buy on-disc or day one DLC either but those still get a lot of backlash

CiDeRmAn

C14N wrote: »

It's not like anyone is forcing you to buy on-disc or day one DLC either but those still get a lot of backlash

But it stinks to essentially have content on the game you buy that is then locked off by the developers and publishers so they can have a payday down the road.

C14N

C14N wrote: »

It's not like anyone is forcing you to buy on-disc or day one DLC either but those still get a lot of backlash

That's because most day one DLC is content which should have been on the disc. Fighting genes charging for access to characters is a cheap money making tool and to call it DLC is a little insulting.

gizmo

CiDeRmAn wrote: »

But it stinks to essentially have content on the game you buy that is then locked off by the developers and publishers so they can have a payday down the road.

As has been mentioned before, it doesn't really stink when you allow for the fact that said content was created for the specific purpose of being locked off in the first place. There are exceptions of course, mostly when later iterations of a series (albeit in the same generation) have less content than their predecessors and then make up for it with paid DLC. But as a thing? Nah, I've never understood this fundamental objection to such a practice.

As an aside, the margins on DLC are fairly massive so it's unsurprising they're being used to offset the spiralling costs of development with the relatively stagnant prices of games at retail.

Stone Deaf 4evr

gizmo wrote: »

As has been mentioned before, it doesn't really stink when you allow for the fact that said content was created for the specific purpose of being locked off in the first place. There are exceptions of course, mostly when later iterations of a series (albeit in the same generation) have less content than their predecessors and then make up for it with paid DLC. But as a thing? Nah, I've never understood this fundamental objection to such a practice.

As an aside, the margins on DLC are fairly massive so it's unsurprising they're being used to offset the spiralling costs of development with the relatively stagnant prices of games at retail.

A lot of these Day one DLCs are to make new games more attractive than preowned ones. I dont have a problem with it in theory, but its the cases where they lock off things like multiplayer that I find abhorrent.

gizmo

Stone Deaf 4evr wrote: »

A lot of these Day one DLCs are to make new games more attractive than preowned ones. I dont have a problem with it in theory, but its the cases where they lock off things like multiplayer that I find abhorrent.

I wouldn't necessarily say that Day One DLC is designed for that purpose to be fair, at least not the paid kind. The likes of pre-order bonuses and content exclusive to early runs of the game are developed to make that early, new purchase more appealing whereas Day One DLC, at least the reasonable kind, is there for those people who buy early, finish early, want more content and are happy to pay for it.

gaynorvader

I remember Dragon Age came out with day 1 DLC, but when you bought the game new it came with unlock codes for the DLC. That was a neat way to do it I thought.

johnny_ultimate

My only problem with day one DLC is that 95% of it is pointless filler content that can actively detract from the flow and pace of the game and would have been better left excised altogether.

gizmo

gaynorvader wrote: »

I remember Dragon Age came out with day 1 DLC, but when you bought the game new it came with unlock codes for the DLC. That was a neat way to do it I thought.

See, that was grand.

Having an NPC prompt you to buy additional content in-game is the biggest pile of **** I've seen this generation.

Stone Deaf 4evr

gizmo wrote: »

See, that was grand.

Having an NPC prompt you to buy additional content in-game is the biggest pile of **** I've seen this generation.

Dead space 3's options to buy better weapons is a joke too.

kunst nugget

gizmo wrote: »

See, that was grand.

Having an NPC prompt you to buy additional content in-game is the biggest pile of **** I've seen this generation.

Just out of curiosity, what games have you seen that in?

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

kunst nugget wrote: »

Just out of curiosity, what games have you seen that in?

dragon age origins

gaynorvader

kunst nugget wrote: »

Just out of curiosity, what games have you seen that in?

Crackdown sticks out in my mind. The giant pillars of light that you kept finding that demanded you get some dlc

C14N

CiDeRmAn wrote: »

But it stinks to essentially have content on the game you buy that is then locked off by the developers and publishers so they can have a payday down the road.

But it's like the alphas, you don't have to buy the game or the DLC. I'm not arguing in favour of the DLC, I dislike it too and I would have it banned if I were Supreme Ruler of the Universe, I just think that they're pretty similar because they're basically selling you something at full price without all the content.

Deleted User wrote: »

That's because most day one DLC is content which should have been on the disc. Fighting genes charging for access to characters is a cheap money making tool and to call it DLC is a little insulting.

I disagree. I know there was a huge ruckus about Mass Effect having day one DLC but I never bought it and the game still seemed complete and functional. In comparison you can pay €30 for an alpha that's buggy as hell and missing plenty of features from the full version. Sure you know what you're getting into with the alpha, it'll say "this is not finished yet" and that there are still bugs but you know what you're getting into with games that have day 1 DLC too. Just the same, if you don't like getting an incomplete version you can wait a few months for the Game of the Year copy or just for the price to drop so that it evens out.

I don't play many fighting games but I did notice that on Playstation All Stars when I played it with my brother. It does leave a bad taste and gives off a horrible feeling of money-grubbing and taking advantage of the fans but I still feel the exact way about the alpha games.

sarumite

kunst nugget wrote: »

Just out of curiosity, what games have you seen that in?

There is something similar in NFS most wanted. You pull up to a car as normal, only half the cars are DLC. Its annoying for those cars that are in hard to reach areas and you make the effort to get there only to be promted to go to the store!

johnny_ultimate

I have to be honest here. I get the motivation behind early access for smaller developers, financially and artistically. I get their appeal, as it almost allows the player feel like they're engaging in a meaningful development dialogue and seeing a game grow, warts and all. And yes, it is entirely optional. Personally I don't have any time whatsoever for early access, though.

To me, a game should be a complete thing when I play it. Like I don't want to see a rough cut of a film before the final one, I'd rather play a game that has evolved and developed behind the scenes and emerged as a finished work. Perhaps this boils down to the fact that the games I tend to prefer aren't ones that tend to benefit from public refinements, a few minor fixes aside. My gaming time is limited enough that I want the best I can get, and patiently revisiting alphas and betas holds little appeal - I'd even worry that it would damage my enjoyment of the finished game, much of the surprises and enjoyment having been minimised by playing through a rough draft.

Again, I can see the benefits, but just something I don't have the time or patience for. I'd actually rather alpha and betas be included as an 'extra feature' of some sort, so I can revisit them out of curiousity after I've played the final game (I'm sure that's technically frustrating to implement - a video or two will do if so :pac:)

ShadowHearth

I think the worse example of launch dlc is elders scrolls online. You need to buy collectors edition to get imperial race. You get a mount too. To get mount in game is extremely expensive.