|
Post by Allie on Nov 12, 2015 23:47:32 GMT -5
Alright, I'm laying down a ground rule here.
No bringing up "Dudebro" games like Call of Dudebro or Madden.
Everybody knows why you don't "get" those games. They're popular with all of the testosterone-overloaded dudebros that you hate.
You didn't like those games to begin with, and you ESPECIALLY hate the people who play them.
We all know it, so there's no need to bring those up.
Instead, bring up games popular with "traditional" gamers where you just don't get it.
________________________
For me, it's Burgertime. I hear people bring it up a lot, but for the life of me, I just can't figure out what anybody sees in it.
|
|
|
Post by X-pert74 on Nov 13, 2015 0:01:13 GMT -5
Burgertime is a fun game! I like running around and successfully dodging food items while dropping burget toppings down! It's almost like a super-early survival horror game ^_^
I could probably name several games whose popularity I don't get, but just to start things off... Castlevania. This is mainly about the original NES game. I find it so painfully clunky and frustrating to control, and the difficulty gets aggravatingly cheap once you get to like level 3 or 4, pretty much. I know it was an important game for its time, but I just don't find it fun. I think as far as action platformers go, Ninja Gaiden is way more exciting and has much better controls, while still being super hard to beat.
|
|
|
Post by Allie on Nov 13, 2015 0:05:05 GMT -5
Burgertime is a fun game! I like running around and successfully dodging food items while dropping burget toppings down! It's almost like a super-early survival horror game ^_^
I could probably name several games whose popularity I don't get, but just to start things off... Castlevania. This is mainly about the original NES game. I find it so painfully clunky and frustrating to control, and the difficulty gets aggravatingly cheap once you get to like level 3 or 4, pretty much. I know it was an important game for its time, but I just don't find it fun. I think as far as action platformers go, Ninja Gaiden is way more exciting and has much better controls, while still being super hard to beat. I get the original, but I don't get Simon's Quest. I sometimes wonder if that's because I lack the context of the FDS and its ability to save. And then I realize, that no, IT'S BECAUSE OF THE STUPID FAKE FLOORS.
|
|
|
Post by X-pert74 on Nov 13, 2015 0:11:13 GMT -5
Burgertime is a fun game! I like running around and successfully dodging food items while dropping burget toppings down! It's almost like a super-early survival horror game ^_^
I could probably name several games whose popularity I don't get, but just to start things off... Castlevania. This is mainly about the original NES game. I find it so painfully clunky and frustrating to control, and the difficulty gets aggravatingly cheap once you get to like level 3 or 4, pretty much. I know it was an important game for its time, but I just don't find it fun. I think as far as action platformers go, Ninja Gaiden is way more exciting and has much better controls, while still being super hard to beat. I get the original, but I don't get Simon's Quest. I sometimes wonder if that's because I lack the context of the FDS and its ability to save. And then I realize, that no, IT'S BECAUSE OF THE STUPID FAKE FLOORS. Heh, I've had Simon's Quest since I was a kid and never got into it. I later on got Castlevania on the Virtual Console because I heard people say it was better... and it was, but it is still not something I particularly like. As far as the FDS is concerned, you might not be so badly off playing the NES version. - legendsoflocalization.com/avgn/castlevania-ii/
|
|
|
Post by Exhuminator on Nov 13, 2015 0:30:16 GMT -5
Pokémon.
I just don't get it.
|
|
|
Post by Arale on Nov 13, 2015 0:52:22 GMT -5
Mass Effect/Dragon Age. I will admit that, no, I've never played them, but they just look like insanely boring and generic whatever-whatever modern games to me. There's just nothing interesting there.
|
|
|
Post by Allie on Nov 13, 2015 1:06:52 GMT -5
Pokémon. I just don't get it. I briefly got it during the Black 2/White 2 era. And then promptly fell out of it again. White 2 got me to understand its merits as a single-player game, but I still couldn't quite get into the whole obsessive min-max value-breeding competitive aspect.
|
|
|
Post by X-pert74 on Nov 13, 2015 1:23:37 GMT -5
Mass Effect/Dragon Age. I will admit that, no, I've never played them, but they just look like insanely boring and generic whatever-whatever modern games to me. There's just nothing interesting there. Depending on what kinds of games you enjoy... maybe you should give them a try? I actually also thought Mass Effect looked super boring and generic when I first learned of it, and couldn't understand why anyone would be interested in it. A couple years after it came out though, I decided to give it a try, and I ended up loving it by the time I beat it. I remember being blown away by the high production values and the quality of writing for each character in the game.
|
|
|
Post by spekkio on Nov 13, 2015 1:32:55 GMT -5
Phantasy Star 2. At least, I've seen it praised as a great RPG on not a few occasions around the web. Due to its reputation I've made multiple attempts to get into the game, but just wound up quitting early on every time due to the dreadfully slow pace and high random encounter rate. Granted, the battle animations must have been awesome for their time, but watching each individual character and enemy perform a sluggish animation every turn gets quite tedious. I'd sooner go back to some of the other dated retro RPGs such as Lufia.
Phantasy Star 4 on the other hand? That's an awesome game.
|
|
|
Post by Maciej Miszczyk on Nov 13, 2015 3:20:49 GMT -5
-competitive Pokemon - I like single player but getting a properly EV-trained high level competitive team seems like an exercise in tedium -Bethesda games - I never got into the older ones too much but I recognize their merits; the newer (Oblivion and further) ones are just too dumbed down for my tastes -most of the old ZX Spectrum sidescrolling action-adventure games - I have a lot of respect for the 1980s computer scene but inventory management in all the Dizzies and Pyjamaramas is annoying -any game series that gets annualized (aka Call of Duty but for different reasons than in the OP) - it quickly becomes obvious that you're playing the same game over and over again; they change eventually over the years but you'll get bored before you notice -Diablo and Diablo clones - fun for a while but my experience with roguelikes that inspired the genre makes it seem very shallow and repetitive -cover-based third-person shooters - it's one of those mechanics that looks pretty cool the first time you see it but is pretty boring from gameplay perspective; wouldn't mind if it was used sparingly but after Gears of War became a success everyone decided that every game must be Gears of War and the shortcomings of this kind of gameplay became obvious; funnily enough, a lot of the problems could be fixed by removing the third-person aspect: leaving cover would be far riskier if you didn't know where the enemies are while sticking to it
|
|
|
Post by elektrolurch on Nov 13, 2015 4:58:38 GMT -5
Oh yeah, I also never ever got Pokemon......It's a bland kid friendly RPG and not worth it for me. Otherwhise, let's see.
Goldeneye. Everyone acts like it is one of the best FPSes and historically very significant. I just don't see it, to me it just feels clunky, borderline unplayable. And yes, I played FPS games at the time- it's not a phenomenon of "You are just too young to get it and too used to modern games"- heck, I played Doom when it was new..
Deus Ex. Yeah. Everyone loves it. I just never got into it, was overwhelmed by it. Maybe i just should put more effort into it, it sounds like a game I should really love. But as of now, I just don't.
Halo. I really am not too fond of Halo. Maybe because I only played the single player on pc of Halo 1. Well, I had some fun with the split screen of Halo 1+2 on XBOX, but Halo singleplayer-na.
And one last really schocking one-BRAID! It's a game that in theory. I should love. Cool premise, unique art style, and yet somehow I found it annoying to play. Esp. with those weird floaty slow controls. And I LOVE Indie platformers in general, this was one of the first to make this kind of game popular aigan and yet, I still can't bring myself to enjoy it, no matter how hard I try.
|
|
|
Post by moran on Nov 13, 2015 5:23:17 GMT -5
Pokémon. I just don't get it. I'm with you on this one. I just don't get it. Sonic is another one. The originals at least. The levels are needlessly huge and I find myself just holding right until I hit the end.
|
|
|
Post by Aoi on Nov 13, 2015 6:39:27 GMT -5
Omg this kind of thread just makes me want to defend stuff... or at least give a different view.
Castlevania: Yes, it's old and clunky, but this is more of a product of its time and not modern value. This was 1986, months after Super Mario Bros, it is one of the first major platformers. It's one of the first major third party titles to get side-scrolling platforming right. Also... the polish is obscene compared to any game before it. It has a full composition of music and beautiful sprite work. Compare that to even Nintendo product of the day, and it's no competition.
Goldeneye: Again, a first milestone. The key here being a first good console FPS. Yeah, PCs had Wolfenstein and Doom, but consoles just never got the ball rolling until Goldeneye. It kind of set the standard for console shooters until the consoles were able to meld this with PC standards set by Half-Life and what have you. I didn't own a PC, I owned consoles, and we played the crap out of this (though Perfect Dark is better imo).
Pokemon: I don't get it nowadays, but first generation was bananas. Yeah, it's Dragon Quest Lite, yeah it's a mild JRPG... but who was playing RPGs back then? Again, pre-FF7 in the west. Yes, RPGs were huge on SNES, but Pokemon made them mainstream. It was a nice mix of casual and core, and honestly just a fun game. I'd still recommend any gamer to play through Red/Blue.
Mass Effect: Don't let the EA stink get to you, it's a fine trilogy. While ME3 was pretty ehhh, 1 and 2 are a hoot. This is even moreso if you were coming off of Kotor, like me at the time =3
Sonic: Hell yes you hold right! Blast processing! So colorful and fast! Mario don't do that. Had to be there =\
= = = = =
Anyways, I'm gonna second Burgertime. I hate that game. Same with Tapper. Ugh, maybe it's just those old one screen arcade games.
Sitting here trying to seriously think (cause most I just don't like but understand why they're popular), but the Yoshi games? I don't get the interest. Just the Nintendo collectathons in general rub me the wrong way. Re-running a level just to get 1 more melon and a smiley face just sounds absolutely degrading. Maybe I'm just old, but SMB3 was fun just running through levels, there was no 100% collect crap. Even SMW barely had anything beyond the dragon coins, which really didn't matter. After that, though, hold on to ya butts, we collecting the world. Sorry if you like them and now gotta defend them back, hehe, I just don't get it = p
|
|
|
Post by moran on Nov 13, 2015 7:16:46 GMT -5
Sonic: Hell yes you hold right! Blast processing! So colorful and fast! Mario don't do that. Had to be there =\ Oh, I was there. Genesis does what Nintendon't. And what Genesis did was make some really boring games that I didn't like.
|
|
|
Post by 🧀Son of Suzy Creamcheese🧀 on Nov 13, 2015 7:44:24 GMT -5
Pokémon isn't the deepest RPG, but it's fun, and has a lot of replayability. One thing that I dislike about it is how it's usually 1-on-1. That removes a lot of strategy. I agree that competitive seems like a tedious waste of time. And it also really annoys me there's Pokémon that are too OP to use in the single-player or that you can only access after you beat the game. What's the point of that? How can I use that Pokémon now? But yeah, I like the games, I certainly get why it's popular. Even if you're not a fan of the games themselves, it shouldn't be hard to see why it's gotten so popular. Sonic is another one. The originals at least. The levels are needlessly huge and I find myself just holding right until I hit the end. Isn't that more of a recent Sonic thing? The classic Sonic titles have so much better level design than recent ones. Certainly no hold-right-to-win affair. I honestly don't really see the appeal for MMORPGs and such. Or anything that requires you to progress through the game with people online. I also don't get how FPS's have become so big this century, since they're much worse these days than classic 90's ones. Also, how come nearly every big name shmup these days is a bullet hell shooter? Surely I'd think games like Gradius and R-Type would be more popular than those.
|
|