I’m talking about games that you still like but you had no idea were criticized so much.
The perfect example for me is Sonic Unleashed.
I admit that the game has its bad things, but I would have never imagined that it was so hated at the time… Although, that could be extended to the entire Sonic franchise, since for many years I was not aware at all of that “Sonic was never good”, “Sonic had a rough transition to 3D” nonsense.
The Sniper Elite series, and to a lesser extent the Sniper Ghost Warrior series. Also, the True Crime series. I think all of those games are a ton of fun, I enjoyed playing them all and still do sometimes but they had very mixed reviews.
None. I couldn’t care less about people hating the games I enjoy.
Sonic Adventure 2
Digimon World 4.
Granted, I was a child when I played it, and I remember having a grand whole time.
Years later I found a few YouTubers shitting on it due to bugs, recycled assets, lack of digivolutions, shitty camera angles, spammy gameplay, etc etc.
I agree with all of these criticisms and in hindsight yea that game was really lazy. However, I still had a good time.
Interestingly, the two example you shared (Sonic Unleashed and the whole Sonic franchise being bad) are likely a good example of “hanging with the bad crowd”. Unleashed is… not great, in my opinion, but the whole franchise? Please. We’re not talking Sonic06 level of horrible decisions.
Another view on this is, if you enjoy something, and people have to tell you it’s bad just so you know, it can’t be that bad. People enjoy different things, and seriously, the toxicity of large communities is the worst thing ever. At this point, even with what seems to be “unanimously loved”, you’ll be able to find a large enough group of people happy to tell you it’s shit.
With that said, some games are really, really bad. But these games usually don’t need to be pointed out for people to know.
edit: dang, that was full of typo.
“hanging with the bad crow"
That’s my favorite Sonic mission.
I remember some people in Reddit not being too happy with It Takes Two.
We loved it and look forward to playing Split Fiction when we find the time.
I remember some people in Reddit not being too happy with It Takes Two.
They’re just mad they don’t have any friends or a partner to play it with.
I don’t want to dissuade you, because Split Fiction is just as fun, game-play-wise, as It Takes Two.
But the story is not as good. And the characters are even more teeth-grindingly frustrating sometimes.
But still play it, it’s a lot of fun.
Cheers mate, appreciate the advice!
People don’t like it takes two? Was the book too over the top or what?
IIRC it was a minority, but the critique was gender stereotypes and misogyny.
They are entitled to their opinions, and I’m glad I read it after playing the game so it did not affect my experience.
My kids played this co-op and loved it
Seemed like a pretty solid coop game to me!
The original iteration of no mans sky. Absolutely lied a shit ton about what was in the game but I really enjoyed my initial time with it.
There was something about the infinite emptiness that struck an emotional chord with me. That’s gone now, for the better overall, but I’m glad I experienced it.
COD Ghost. I loved the singleplayer storyline. Everyone hated the game for the storyline.
Is that the Call Of Doggy one? To be honest I’ve only actually finished COD4.
Yes
That game looked fine to me tbh. I think it might have been the point that their yearly release schedule had begun to saturate the brand as opposed to the games getting worse.
I’ll upvote for the honest answer, but that game is what made me quit CoD lol
The next few games were bad, so you didn’t miss out on anything
I am one of the 10 people on earth who really enjoyed playing Starfield. The space combat seemed like a love letter to the old Wing Commander series, the art design was beautiful, there was a lot of fun content. I think i made it to NG7 before they took it off the free to play. When it’s on sale i can’t wait to grab it.
by comparison i hated The Outer Worlds which was the first ‘it’s like fallout in space!’ that was promised so i was tickled when Starfield actually was like fallout in space.
I really like it until I started having problems with what I think must have been save bloating, making it more and more difficult to save. Which in turn made me quite until a possible fix as I didn’t want to risk the save becoming unplayable.
Then I played other things and sort of forgot to check if it was fixed, but I still really liked the game.
I tried The Outer Worlds but couldn’t stand it.
I felt that Starfield was good with the potential to be great (with enough added content, which they haven’t done yet, but here’s hoping).
The Outer Worlds, on the other hand, feels like it pretty much reached its limit. It’s a better game vanilla, since it has more content and far less empty space, but I don’t think that there’s any more they could really have done with it. Not quite great, but definitely worth playing.
And the “Fallout in space” line references the overall vibe of TOW, with '50s-'60s style culture and advertising. Starfield has Fallout’s mechanics, but it’s more of a Star Trek or Firefly aesthetic, depending on where you are.
Overall, I enjoyed my experience with Starfield. I just wish I didn’t spend half of my time trying to build the optimal bases for trading hubs. Apart from that, everything was good
I can understand someone complaining that it wasn’t Fallout 5, but I definitely think it deserved a higher Steam rating.
To be honest, I think it had a decent chance to be Fallout 5, but in space. Maybe if they doubled the number of companions (read: not followers) and put all the new ones in different factions. I honestly expected the lady who pulls you into the gang in the ocean city would be a follower with how fleshed out she was
The bases were interesting! Getting an interplanetary production system going took some figuring and i never got an inter-system network up. If the mod scene keeps going for it they sure have a lot to work with!
I enjoyed it for a while, but the whole ng+, while pretty cool, really killed it for me. My first playthrough I made bases, upgraded weapons, etc. Then I learned about all the cool perks you got from ng+ and did that. The problem is you lose all your bases and material farms. So you’re in this weird spot of having to bum rush all 10 universes to get the maximum benefit before actually setting up any significant settlements. I burned out quick. Also a bunch of the powers are underwhelming, and space travel is DOGSHIT. NMS, elite dangerous, hell even star citizen are space games. Starfield is NOT.
Fallout 4. game was pretty decent but the pacing was weird. by pacing I mean the game seemed like it was set out in a way that you wouldn’t complete the game until you were many levels up from what I was, so many upgrades that took a lot of caps left unlockable, and by the time I felt I was really starting to get somewhere, the game ended with the Institute ending
There’s a lower budget game by Spiders called Technomancer that came out in 2016. It came up in my XBox game pass, so I played it before I read any reviews on it, and I honestly enjoyed the hell out of it.
I didn’t find the combat stilted. It felt quite fun to work between three different fighting styles. The storyline was interesting and (to me anyway) original. And the Universe was pretty fun to play around in.
Watch Dogs 1. It was quite fun for me, but quite a lot of people expected it to create a spark like GTA 5 back in the day, so when it didn’t; they all criticized it to hell.
Same and for me watch dogs 2 wasn’t as fun anymore.
Same. I think “No Man’s Sky” syndrome turned people off, but I thought it was really innovative, and I liked the PC being broody and driven, but not dramatic.
Mass Effect: Andromeda - I knew 1 & 2 were held in high regard, but I hadn’t played them. Actually, I’d played about 10 minutes of one of them a couple years before and it just wasn’t what I was in the mood for at that time. So, I went into Andromeda without any expectations really and thought it was a perfectly fine game.
Just finishing about a new playthrough of Andromeda and I think it’s larger problem is that the good content doesn’t open up until a third of the way through the game. For the first third, you have very little to do except follow the Kett and the Angara storyline, and those are the absolute worst parts of the game.
It doesn’t actually get good until it opens up and you’re dealing with Outlaws, Collective, internal politics of the Nexus, the Krogan rebellion, etc… and your (admittedly pretty lame) companion quests. But at least it’s something more than just two new species that aren’t nearly as fleshed out or complete as what already existed.
By the time the game opens up and you can do more than just the main quest, you’re already friggin bored.
Breath of the Wild. It is such a good game and I really love it and I only have ever heard possitive things about… but than I met a bunch of old school Zelda fans and they don’t like the game that much. They say it’s a great game but not a Zelda game. Maybe they just wanted to be contrarian but I can also understand where they are comming from.
As a long time Zelda fan I never understood any of the hate for BOTW from other long time fans. That being said I haven’t been able to play it since TOTK came out because TOTK is what BOTW was missing for me.
From seeing discussions among those Zelda fans (which to be clear I am not one), the issue is that the mainline games are now a completely different genre, but treated as though it’s the natural progression of the series.
The classic zelda games are primarily puzzle games, with a little bit of combat and intricate hand-crafted exploration to spice it up a bit. The modern zelda games (BOTW & TOTK) are exploration games with puzzles to spice it up. If you were a classic zelda fan, the niche genre you loved used to have regular releases by a major developer and now doesn’t.
Plus, there’s a “all my homies hate skrillex” effect here; the series is massively more popular now, but the newcomers have a different idea of what makes a zelda game a zelda game. By sheer numbers they dominate a community that is now reshaped by their presence. In other words the zelda fan community is itself a different genre.
For what it’s worth, I haven’t played that much of the series. Link to the Past I didn’t care much for, Links Awakening (new one) I honestly hated, and BOTW I liked but had a couple issues with. All I’ve written above is based on passively seeing a bunch of discussion.
Plus, there’s a “all my homies hate skrillex” effect here; the series is massively more popular now, but the newcomers have a different idea of what makes a zelda game a zelda game.
This is wht I don’t play Warframe anymore. I started back when crowd control was crucial, and played Nyx almost constantly. But after Mesa was added, the game slowly shifted to being more focussed on killing enemies as fast as possible. I finally quit the game from a combination of the mods going crazy and newer players berating me in chat for playing as Nyx despite me dealing most of the damage in the mission we were playing.
Tears is better than Breath in every way, it’s true. It’s also more Zelda-like, in that you gradually expand your ability to explore the world.
Funnily enough, I heard a lot of people saying that they specifically liked it because it was a “return to classic, retro Zelda.” The difference being that their idea of retro Zelda was the original rather than Link to the Past or Ocarina of Time.
call of duty world war 2. my favorite one (mostly cause its the only one im actually good at haha) but a lot of people hated it
