By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - Things about gaming that make people mad but you actually don't care

-Tackling political and cultural issues in video games. These have been a part of video games for decades now, but there is a certain crowd that gets very angry when someone even hints at the idea of "politics" in video games. Of course, they only care when its the kind of politics they don't agree with. As far as I'm concerned, being opposed to video games discussing difficult topics, whether they are political, sexual, religious, or any other kind, means you're actively rallying against the growth of video games as a medium and art form.



Around the Network

100% of the things you said are things im not bothered much about as well. I actually preffer when story-driven games do touch social and political issues, because it adds depth. Don't really have much to add to your list, other stuff people have mentioned in this thread dont seem so trivial at times. I guess ...FPS??? Never understoon how people go with the "60 fps minimun or its unnaceptable" mentality. Im perfectly fine playing with 30fps, provided its steady.

Edit: Also the overuse of ports/remakes/remaster in recent times. I absolutely love it. 



Doctor_MG said:

1) accessible difficulties and optional easy modes: I don't get why people have an issue with this. There is nothing to be gained by locking people out of games arbitrarily. Using things like Nabbit or Toadette in New Super Mario Bros is a complete choice. If you don't want easy mode don't select it or use the things that make the game easier. It's simple.

I know people mention this from time to time, but I find it hard to believe that more than a tiny handful of (basically) trolls in gaming forums oppose difficulty options.  What fucking sense would that even make?  Play the game however you want, and I'll play it the way I want.  

I've been gaming since 1983.  I can say definitively that gaming is more enjoyable now, since almost any game, even in a genre I'm not very good at, is now accessible to me.  This is especially true for kids and handicapped gamers.  And, having an easy mode that takes even 100% of the challenge out of a game doesn't impact my ability to spend 100 hours struggling through a campaign on "epic crazy certain death mode" if I want to.  

On a more personal level, I enjoy shooter campaigns a lot, but they're often quite short.  So, I typically play them on the next to hardest difficulty setting so that they last a little longer.  But, in RPGs, I don't like having to study skill trees, do lots of crafting or mods, or other things like that.  So, I typically play those games on "normal" difficulty so that I can just worry about the parts that I enjoy.  These are options that allow me to enjoy my games more, while impacting other gamers exactly zero. 



Metallox said:
IcaroRibeiro said:

5) Crossgen games. I'm actually shocked people dislike them, like... why? 

Because the newer consoles supposedly don't get pushed harder from the start. I mean, that's like the most generic criticism that people love to throw around. 

Which is indeed a very generic criticism. There is not way to make a game to take full advantages of new hardware when the hardware in question is brand new. Take years until devs learn how to properly use the technology and build games from the ground to new hardware 

It means no "true" new game for next Gen consoles for at least 3 years



mZuzek said:
GoOnKid said:

3) The fact that not each and every Pokemon is in Sword/Shield. I'm actually glad about it, only the ones that fit into the location are in and that makes perfect sense. I hope Gamefreak sticks with this idea in future games.

You do realize that was never the issue? There has never been a single Pokémon game where you could catch 'em all without trading from a different game. Every game since the GBA has always used a hand-picked regional Pokédex that does not include the "ones that don't fit into the location".

The difference is that those games still allowed you to transfer other Pokémon over from other games. The only acceptable reason for why they'd remove this feature is because of how much work would go into programming all of them into the game, but Sword/Shield still reuses all the same Pokémon models and animations the games have had since the 3DS days, so there's just no excuse.

They also removed some moves. This generation was a big let down, I never even tried to play VGC because I was really disappointed with all the stuff removed. Thr gingatamax gimmick turn the game really unbalanced

Mega evolution was a great addition in gen 6, but it opened a bad precedent to create generational gimmicks that are dropped in the next generation. Last gen were the weird (and unbalanced) Z moves. Now are the gigantamaxes. 

Worse is the Gimmicks are becoming more lazy and dumb each generation, Game Freak should try release only one generation for each Nintendo console and release sequels of the same generation (like a trilogy in the same region). This would improve substantially the quality of each region and give them time to refresh the battle system instead of dropping mechanics so fast 

But I guess they want to make generations short, so they can sell new toys and refresh the anime before kids get too old and find something else to watch and play 



Around the Network

Short games. The vast majority of my favorite games are like 10-15 hours max and thats fine with me, even if they're full price, if they give me a memorable experience I'll gladly take it over tons of hours I won't enjoy



What console a game is exclusive to.



Nintendo Switch Friend Code: SW-5643-2927-1984

Animal Crossing NH Dream Address: DA-1078-9916-3261

When people complain about Nintendo's online services. I'm not an online gamer so I don't care. I have never set foot on Nintendo's online service, and have no idea what it's like. It could be total garbage for all I know, but I don't game online, so it doesn't affect me.

I buy games on the eshop and that's all.  But as far as online gaming goes, I have no idea and don't care.

Last edited by Paperboy_J - on 01 August 2021

mZuzek said:
GoOnKid said:

3) The fact that not each and every Pokemon is in Sword/Shield. I'm actually glad about it, only the ones that fit into the location are in and that makes perfect sense. I hope Gamefreak sticks with this idea in future games.

You do realize that was never the issue? There has never been a single Pokémon game where you could catch 'em all without trading from a different game. Every game since the GBA has always used a hand-picked regional Pokédex that does not include the "ones that don't fit into the location".

The difference is that those games still allowed you to transfer other Pokémon over from other games. The only acceptable reason for why they'd remove this feature is because of how much work would go into programming all of them into the game, but Sword/Shield still reuses all the same Pokémon models and animations the games have had since the 3DS days, so there's just no excuse.

Oh wow, I guess I misunderstood that.



Most things people bitch about Nintendo over. Nothing they do compares to EA, Actiblizzard, or Tencent.