Amen. I also have a ton of issues with contemporary game design—padding playtime with procedural generation, prioritizing graphics, world size, or narrative over gameplay… etc.
Nowadays, I feel as if every game tries to compete for "most game" while lacking cohesion and polished ideas.
And to top it off: non-optimized game size. I'm sorry—I don't care if your game is $2.99, I'm not downloading 80GBs just to try a game I may refund an hour later.
FR. I hate this app so much, and how necessary it has become for multiplayer gaming. I'm glad it'll get worse and hopefully give people a strong reason to move.
Odd take in this context. The last game in this trilogy was released almost 20 years ago—if they're not gonna remaster this, what are remasters for exactly?
Hmm… sure, but I feel like "reviews are subjective" gets used as an excuse to give low-effort reviews a pass too often.
Like, I understand if a Steam reviewer writes whatever because they're just a user, but I cannot justify using the same scale to judge a professional reviewer.
I understand a game may not be a reviewer's cup of tea, but if this stops them from engaging with the game's systems and attempting to provide insight through their review then I think it's fair to judge they haven't done their job well.
Like, if someone hires me to do a job, and I accept, I cannot go "Oh, I'm gonna do half of it because the rest isn't my cup of tea. Sorry." No, I'll do the job and maybe complain about it afterwards, which IMO, is exactly what reviewers should do—example: "I beat the boss, but the fight sucked because X, Y, and Z."
I think there should be standards, otherwise you get reviewers unfairly judging games they barely played like in the infamous God Hand review.
Any action/fighting/shmup franchise because the stories are typically nonexistent/shit anyway:
Bayonetta: I recommend the original as a starting point for an authentic action experience, but Bayonetta 2 is more beginner-friendly.
Devil May Cry: either 3, or 5 will work—3 if you're after a challenging experience, and 5 if you're looking for an insane combo simulator. 1 could work as an entry point, but it's too old and will not appeal to everyone.
Ninja Gaiden: I recommend the original Ninja Gaiden 2 on XBOX (not Sigma) if you're after nonstop action, and Ninja Gaiden Black if you're more of a souls-like fan.
Crimzon Clover: World EXplosion is the superior game.
Under Night In-Birth: I recommend Sys:Celes because it's the only one with functional netcode.
Persona 4 Arena Ultimax because it's the only Persona Arena game, they just started at Persona 4, and the story has tie-ins for Persona 3 and 4.
Guilty Gear: start with XX Accent Core Plus R if you need the "the most Guilty Gear" because every character has the most moves they've ever had throughout the series. -STRIVE- for beginners, and Xrd if you find XX inaccessible. OG Guilty Gear is a broken artifact, maybe to be admired, but not taken seriously.
DoDonPachi: DaiOuJou: widely regarded as a shmup goat and the best DoDonPachi game. I recommend the Black Label release.
In case anyone forgot: this game was nominated for Best Fighting Game twice at the TGAs and still failed 😂 Both times ahead of far more deserving candidates—further evidence a good chunk of these awards is promotional crap.
You may wanna re-read my comment—I did not bring up cut scenes, or claim Naughty Dog games don't have enough gameplay sections.
My point was Naughty Dog's gameplay sections are uninspired, non innovative, and passable at best because they're more interested in telling a story than innovative gameplay.
Whether I like narrative-driven games or not is of no relevance.
Maybe not the length of the main campaign, but good luck 100%ing Cartherine, holy shit. Nevermind Full Body. There's like 8 endings combined + insane challenges and 64-stage game within the game. +100 hours easy, if not more.
It's all relative. Mediocre is still better than garbage, but not necessarily interesting or innovative. It's just "fine" because the whole point of the gameplay in these games is to progress the narrative forward. Mastery is rarely, if ever, required and gameplay depth is of no interest to players or developers.
You ignore all of that and start comparing their catalog to Ubisoft pumping out generic trash for years (NGL that Prince of Persia game is sick though) and you get a much brighter picture that doesn't necessarily take all factors into account.
Personally, I play games for the hyper engagement they offer, which I expect from hobbies and cannot get from film or literature. Stories, on the other hand, I can find elsewhere, so I don't necessarily care for them that much in games.