|
Duke Nukem was cool, it just wasn't as good of a game. The level design just didn't do it for me.
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2019 21:16
|
|
bruvs be4 luvs
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 11:40 |
|
|
bradzilla posted:System Shock 2 is really really good and Portal 2 aped a lot of the story. Even though it's clunky, I still play that game for nostalgia. It has a lot of little jumpscares that were made worse by infinitely respawning enemies and dwindling ammo & cash. When I played Portal (always at a friend's house) it just seemed like a game based around that one mechanic. Like, cool, I can make portals. That's pretty goddamn lazy compared to some of the teleporter levels that id Soft made.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2019 21:16
|
|
|
Going from playing poo poo like blake stone and wolfenstein to DOOM on the same hardware as a child was pretty much the most amazing thing ever, and I wish everyone got to experience a jump like that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2019 21:18
|
|
|
Blake Stone was the poo poo. Low on health? Don't take a chance on that informant.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2019 21:22
|
|
|
I just tried playing this apex bullshit and my nvidia drivers somehow got deleted what the gently caress is this poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2019 21:25
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:I remember buying a CD with like 1500 duke nukem levels on it. I'm sure some of them were good (not the ones I tried though!) I remember when I had my very first computer (pentium 100 mhz) a cousin brought 26 floppy discs and installed Duke Nukem on my pc, 26 of the fuckers, he had a big shoebox, they don't make them like that anymore
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2019 21:28
|
|
|
The Battle Royale 'genre' is trash.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2019 23:50
|
|
|
BeanpolePeckerwood posted:The Battle Royale 'genre' is trash. Just deleted Apex that poo poo is trash...
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2019 23:51
|
|
|
BeanpolePeckerwood posted:The Battle Royale 'genre' is trash. The entire multiplayer FPS genre is trash
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2019 23:54
|
|
|
Away all Goats posted:The entire multiplayer FPS genre is trash Nah, just BR.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2019 00:04
|
|
|
Multiplayer online is only good for non-Starcraft RTS games.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2019 00:27
|
|
|
phasmid posted:Even though it's clunky, I still play that game for nostalgia. It has a lot of little jumpscares that were made worse by infinitely respawning enemies and dwindling ammo & cash. If you're specifically referring to Portal 1, wasn't it like a tech demo that they turned into a game? I recently played Portal 1 and yeah it's really basic. Portal 2 is far more cinematic but also way easier puzzles.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2019 00:44
|
|
|
Portal 1 was great and simple, 2 was had too much cutscene trash and characters that ruined the lonely mood
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2019 00:48
|
|
|
bradzilla posted:If you're specifically referring to Portal 1, wasn't it like a tech demo that they turned into a game? I recently played Portal 1 and yeah it's really basic. Portal 2 is far more cinematic but also way easier puzzles. If memory serves it was something a couple interns whipped up in their free time before getting hired fake edit: Looks like it was actually a senior project at digipen. Which surprises me because growing up I was under the impression that place was a scam.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2019 00:53
|
|
|
BeanpolePeckerwood posted:The Battle Royale 'genre' is trash. Sure, but counterpoint...  12 year olds love them and 12 year olds are awful so keeping them sequestered into the shittiest games is good.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2019 01:05
|
|
|
Shibawanko posted:Doom I can appreciate but somehow never got into, I was probably the wrong age when it came out. Duke Nukem 3D was my game and Doom always just seemed like a more primitive version of that. phasmid posted:Even though it's clunky, I still play [System Shock 2] for nostalgia. It has a lot of little jumpscares that were made worse by infinitely respawning enemies and dwindling ammo & cash. I feel that a lot of these titles are context-sensitive on when where and how they where released. Duke3d whouldn't have existed without Doom, which was scary and immersive and difficult at it's time. Also Doom somehow still has an active community about it, which is comical and great. Portal wasn't a AAA title, it was released literally as a freebie extra for the Orange Box (back when people still payed money for TF2). It's still beautifully made, given its context as a tech demo polished up into a full game. And SS2 was way ahead of its time. If you can stomach the early-3D uglyness, the gameplay is still good/better than modern titles, the only real flaw in the game is the too-sharp transition from boring pregame tutorial to dumping you strait in the deep end.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2019 01:08
|
|
|
Best multiplayer fps ever is action quake 2 and 2nd best is tribes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2019 01:23
|
|
|
bradzilla posted:If you're specifically referring to Portal 1, wasn't it like a tech demo that they turned into a game? I recently played Portal 1 and yeah it's really basic. Portal 2 is far more cinematic but also way easier puzzles. That would make sense. I don't remember which one I played (could've been both) but I remember it sometimes had narration and someone told me it was the guy from Oz/Spider-man. The mechanic was interesting but it just seemed a ridiculous that was all it took to get a fanbase for a year or two. Now, combine that system with a game that's already full and fleshed out and I'd have no complaint. Serephina posted:Portal wasn't a AAA title, it was released literally as a freebie extra for the Orange Box (back when people still payed money for TF2). It's still beautifully made, given its context as a tech demo polished up into a full game. Okay. Now Portal makes a lot more sense. Also lol did people actually subscribe to play TF2? Good god. And yeah, SS2 could be really brutal esp on the harder difficulties. Sometimes I'll put a game down for a little while and when I start back up, I'm completely at a loss for what was happening. That's usually about when mechs and those weird psychic balloon sacs find me. naeka posted:Best multiplayer fps ever is action quake 2 My man.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2019 01:37
|
|
|
Portal 2 took the things I didnt like about Portal 1 and expanded the hell out of them. I also had a way harder time with portal 2 because the mid 3rd environments were so ugly.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2019 01:39
|
|
|
Prey was a really excellent spiritual successor to System Shock 2 btw, if y'all haven't played it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2019 01:40
|
|
|
When TF2 came out, it was definitely great and a breath of fresh air after several years of boring dark and gritty WW2 shooters and CS junk. Kinda went to poo poo soon after but first year or two were great.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2019 01:40
|
|
|
phasmid posted:Okay. Now Portal makes a lot more sense. Also lol did people actually subscribe to play TF2? Good god. Wasn't a subscription. You paid full-game price and got Portal, TF2, and Half Life 2: Episode 2 (RIP.)
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2019 01:42
|
|
|
phasmid posted:That would make sense. I don't remember which one I played (could've been both) but I remember it sometimes had narration and someone told me it was the guy from Oz/Spider-man. The mechanic was interesting but it just seemed a ridiculous that was all it took to get a fanbase for a year or two. Now, combine that system with a game that's already full and fleshed out and I'd have no complaint. Tf2 wasn't a subscription it was a normal game you bought off the shelf or got as a freebie in the orange box. Nowadays it's free to play, hence the distinction.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2019 01:42
|
|
|
Yeah orange box was well worth it back in 2007 or 2008. 40 or 50 bux for Half Life 2, Episodes 1 and 2 and Team Fortress, all solid games.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2019 01:47
|
|
|
Colonel Cancer posted:Yeah orange box was well worth it back in 2007 or 2008. 40 or 50 bux for Half Life 2, Episodes 1 and 2 and Team Fortress, all solid games. If you include Portal the whole thing even came with one good game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2019 01:51
|
|
|
Barudak posted:If you include Portal the whole thing even came with one good game. Idk I enjoyed Half Life 2 and episodes back in late 2000s, and just about everyone with a PC did. Why be such an edgy contrarian?
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2019 01:55
|
|
|
Colonel Cancer posted:Why be such an edgy contrarian? Do you need to be reminded what thread you're in
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2019 02:12
|
|
|
Colonel Cancer posted:Idk I enjoyed Half Life 2 and episodes back in late 2000s, and just about everyone with a PC did. Why be such an edgy contrarian? Im not trying to be, I genuinely dont like Half-Life 2 and think its expansions are dreadful. TF2 actually was perfectly fine around the time orange box came out iirc as the full on gently caress balance patches were still years away, unless of course you bought a non PC copy of Orange Box in which case get bent.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2019 02:13
|
|
|
Dubplate Fire posted:Just deleted Apex that poo poo is trash... It seems polished and compitently made, and I hope it's successful enough for Respawn to continue doing their thing with Titanfall. Other than that, the entire gameplay loop of Battle Royale games sucks donkey dick. edit; I gotta give Apex a little credit though, because since it released player counts in Titanfall 2 have bumped up again.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2019 02:19
|
|
|
Barudak posted:Im not trying to be, I genuinely dont like Half-Life 2 and think its expansions are dreadful. TF2 actually was perfectly fine around the time orange box came out iirc as the full on gently caress balance patches were still years away, unless of course you bought a non PC copy of Orange Box in which case get bent. But why tho? It had cool atmosphere and most of the most egregious flaws like forced vehicle levels and endless ladders and vents were simply the norm in that whole generation of fps games. Away all Goats posted:Do you need to be reminded what thread you're in Fair nuff.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2019 02:28
|
|
|
BeanpolePeckerwood posted:It seems polished and compitently made, and I hope it's successful enough for Respawn to continue doing their thing with Titanfall. Other than that, the entire gameplay loop of Battle Royale games sucks donkey dick. That’s the problem. The game is good looking, runs well, feels good, I just hate the game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2019 02:47
|
|
|
Battle royale can actually be a lot of fun but Apex Legends sucks. Blackout rules. AL completely misses the point of about 60% of what I enjoy about the genre.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2019 02:50
|
|
|
They all suck because the concept sucks. edit; though I understand that this opinion might not be so popular 
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2019 02:52
|
|
|
BeanpolePeckerwood posted:They all suck because the concept sucks. No offense but I know for a fact you don't know what you are talking about. Generally even if we differ in opinions it's actually based on something other than your own confirmation bias. You briefly played one bad BR game, presumably solo with pubbies, and used it to confirm your preexisting hatred of a genre you'd never even tried. By all means I don't expect everyone to like the genre, and oversaturation/overexposure is annoying, but it can be a really fun type of game when you are rolling with a crew that has good teamwork and knows what they are doing. If you find it fundamentally unappealing so be it, but I think it's silly that you actually have an opinion this strong on something you have such limited knowledge about.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2019 03:09
|
|
|
butthole royale
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2019 03:10
|
|
|
veni veni veni posted:No offense but I know for a fact you don't know what you are talking about. Generally even if we differ in opinions it's actually based on something other than your own confirmation bias. You briefly played one bad BR game, presumably solo with pubbies, and used it to confirm your preexisting hatred of a genre you'd never even tried. Nah it just sucks
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2019 03:19
|
|
|
PUBG and Blackout are essentially just really large scale tactical shooters aside from the whole looty aspect. Tactical shooters are fun.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2019 03:24
|
|
|
veni veni veni posted:PUBG and Blackout are essentially just really large scale tactical shooters aside from the whole looty aspect. Tactical shooters are fun. The loot aspect is what makes it suck. Edit: you’re defending the most popular type of game at the moment in the unpopular opinion thread
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2019 03:30
|
|
|
Actually as far as this thread and goons in general are concerned I think my stance on it probably qualifies as an unpopular opinion. I have mixed feeling on the looting myself though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2019 03:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 11:40 |
|
|
veni veni veni posted:By all means I don't expect everyone to like the genre, and oversaturation/overexposure is annoying, but it can be a really fun type of game when you are rolling with a crew that has good teamwork and knows what they are doing. If you find it fundamentally unappealing so be it, but I think it's silly that you actually have an opinion this strong on something you have such limited knowledge about. I take issue with the fundamental principles behind team pvp. I think it brings out the worst in all participants. The psychological stakes inherent to a competitive match get paired with the anonymity of the internet, but even with an assembled group with strong teamwork skills you'll still be at each others' throats. If one player's performance slips for whatever reason, it can have a snowballing impact on the team that only serves to stoke resentment for the player who made a mistake. It's difficult or even impossible to recover from unless your opponents take a similar misstep, because one team must win at the expense of the compounded errors of the other by design. When you lose, everyone starts to blame each other before evaluating their own failings because ultimately, you're playing a video game; what matters is in front of your eyes on your own screen and it's impossible to consider the perspective of others the way you can in person. And because you're playing against real opponents, your defeats are magnified, and it makes it all the easier to whip an entire group of teammates into a rage spiral focused on each other. It's destructive. This doesn't apply to 1v1 pvp, where everything is on your own shoulders. You lose, you learn from the mistakes you made and the smart plays your enemy ran. There's nobody to blame for it but yourself, and you can introspect and improve yourself. That's the good poo poo. I'm a strong proponent of cooperative pve. You communicate, you work together, and if things go pear-shaped, no worries; we're just fighting a computer. We can get up and try again, it's not gonna talk poo poo and there's no stake against another human being. Any competitiveness is limited to personal successes that will always benefit the group as a whole, so it cultivates healthy friendly rivalries. You make a mistake, whatever; well-designed pve games allow players to recover from it, because there's no reason not to give the player advantages against a computer that doesn't care whether it wins or loses, or if it's playing a fundamentally fair game. This builds you up, this is what crews are made of. You always have fun. It might be a little easy, but everyone always feels great not only about themselves but about each other. MMOs are the exception to the rule of pve co-op, because they live and die on subs. They're designed with margins and perfectionism in mind to keep players engaged in their skinner boxes. So they have the same problem as team pvp where every tiny mistake someone else makes is another needling reason to hate them while continuing to preen over yourself. Resentment is the name of the game. tfw serious posting in unpopular video game opinions thread Fur20 fucked around with this message at 03:53 on Feb 13, 2019 |
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2019 03:49
|
|
