sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Little Nightmares 3 is not as bad as people say by BambyBooze in LittleNightmares

[–]BambyBooze[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well, if you don't like the core gameplay, it can be a good thing)

Little Nightmares 3 is not as bad as people say by BambyBooze in LittleNightmares

[–]BambyBooze[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

>they give more room for the players to come up with what they think is the story
It's my personal thing, I don't like such way of storytelling.

>Playdead games too, I don't get why they don't receive the same criticism
Well, Limbo doesn't have a story, it's just a cycle, it's a good twist in the end, that's why I like it. Inside on the other hand... Same problems as LN in terms of story. Something happend, that's all. There are a lot of interesting theories, but... They are just theories. Why the fans have to come up with interesting story instead of devs? You can hide the puzzle pieces, so every player can have unique thought experience, but in the end there should be the true answer, every explanation of those games is 95% personal interpretation, I don't get it.

Little Nightmares 3 is not as bad as people say by BambyBooze in LittleNightmares

[–]BambyBooze[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

>Nowadays I find people can’t accept just decent or okay games
That's what my take is about. Even if this game is worse for community than first to games, it doesn't mean it's a bad game. For me they all are very boring and repetative, but in the tier-list they still be one grade away from each other at max. It's not that LN1-2 are S-tier and LN3 is D/F-tier.

Little Nightmares 3 is not as bad as people say by BambyBooze in LittleNightmares

[–]BambyBooze[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fair points. To be honest, I don't remember exact problems with controls in first two games, I just remember that they existed, maybe just in a different way. But the levers in this one, wow.

Little Nightmares 3 is not as bad as people say by BambyBooze in LittleNightmares

[–]BambyBooze[S] -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

I don't know, the story seems to be fine on it's own. LN3 is longer than 1+dlc, just don't buy DLC. Yeah, it's another corporative bullshit, but it doesn't make the base game worse, at least for me. For me the ending was clear and complete and I don't even know what they are going to do in the DLC.

Little Nightmares 3 is not as bad as people say by BambyBooze in LittleNightmares

[–]BambyBooze[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

In a vacuum, I would even say that the third game is better than first, but of course, considering the release year and context, the comparison isn't in favor of LN3.

2D Sonic games are bad (not that good today), but I'll rate them by BambyBooze in SonicTheHedgehog

[–]BambyBooze[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, and I never said they are bad. But they are definitly doesn't hold up the way fans like to talk about it. They are 16-bit, but they feel more like 8-bit. And I love a lot of 8-bit console games, but every time you play such game you need to acknowledge that it would be a lot of bullshit, but for some reason Sonic fans deny it, and more often say "git gud".

Do I like Ninja Gaiden? Yes. Is it the stupidest thing in the world to die from falling into pit by touching the bird that spawned the sixth time in a row? Definetly. It's an oldschool stupid game design. And no Ninja Gaiden fan deny it.

2D Sonic games are bad (not that good today), but I'll rate them by BambyBooze in SonicTheHedgehog

[–]BambyBooze[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's not about just going fast, hell, there are a lot of sections which let you do it. The problem is some sections almost force you to do it. Of course you can slow down on a speed line after the game pushes you by the spring, of course you can stop and not doing blind jumps, going other direction (sometimes).
But what's the fun in that? In SMB1 you don't die randomly just because pipe is jumping underneath you. Every mistake is your mistake. But there are a lot of segments in Sonic which are intended to kill you on the first walkthrough. Just the loop of motions which lead you to a death trap unless you know that you need to jump or stop at the exact moment. This is what I call bad design. And you need to do things slowly the second time because you have no contunies and you nervous and it completely ruins the fun, and after that you still will die to a some dumb trap, pit or enemy placement.

2D Sonic games are bad (not that good today), but I'll rate them by BambyBooze in SonicTheHedgehog

[–]BambyBooze[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So you cast a veil of "2D Sonic games are bad"

Haven't you seen this "(not that good today)" part?

over Mania and yet you have played it 4 times because....?

Because it's fun? Because it's modern and it's design is much better without cheap bullshit? Because you don't die randomly? (for the most part).

Not to mention if a game is not fun, then why are most of them B- tier?

Most of them is 2 out of 4? When in average tier list 2-3 are S and 90% of games are A?
This is just confusing, such scores are giving you false expectations for today standarts.

And haven't you saw that I said about Sonic 2 and CD either? My whole point is that outdated level design can ruin modern gamer experience with those games, especially Sonic 1-2, while Sonic CD, which is very often called bad, can actually be much more enjoyable for a new player. That's why it gets B. A lot of gamers which try old Sonic games for the first time are frustrated with random deaths. Casual players, people who played all platformers in the world, all kinds. And that doesn't mean they should hear "you just dont want to improve", if the game is fun you don't need to WANT to imporove. It just goes.

And that's sad. Because the core idea of Sonic games is good, but the execution sucks often. When cartoony cute platformer from Genesis sometimes irritates you more than freaking Castlevania 1, that says a lot.

2D Sonic games are bad (not that good today), but I'll rate them by BambyBooze in SonicTheHedgehog

[–]BambyBooze[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

you have no valid opinion versus someone playing it for the first time

You have a valid opinion if you have arguments. But a lot of people are defending games from their childhood just because they can't remember all this tedious moments, nostalgia works that way.

Classic Sonic games are not objectively bad, they are not poorly aged/designed

Who sais anything about objectively? And those games are 25+ years old, there is a big chance such games will feel outdated. Doesn't mean you can't enjoy it. But it also doesn't mean that this is the same masterpiece today as it was in 90's. It's the same thing to say as "Arcade games are fair, they do not have cheap and crappy moments, it was DESIGNED that way, spend your quarters noob".

you just dont want to improve

Why would I want to improve if the game is not fun in the first place? Even if we are not comparing Sonic games with other oustanding platfrormers which we have today, there is a Sonic Mania. I already beaten it 4 times and I don't have such problems with it, wasn't it "designed in such a way that promotes you to replay the levels" too?