Annoyingly bad games

[Goemar]

This sounds more acceleration and deceleration more than anything. Which, yes - many Mario games do have. As I mentioned elsewhere when I played SMW 2 on the SNES it threw me off a bit (it was altered on the GBA release) but you soon get used to it. I guess a lot of platform games now don't have this and you just start and stop completely (obviously except for games about momentum).

But well calling that slippery is like calling the jump mechanic in Ghost n Goblins 'broke' (you can't 'move' once you jump) even though it's a purposeful design. I mean if it's something you don't like - that's fine. And it's a valid opinion for not liking Mario games. I just wouldn't call it bad control. More, disagreeable design choice I guess.





Anyway, adding to my list of annoyingly bad games. Every '32-bit' era Mega Man game (including MM & Bass). Like, what the hell happened there?

[miyabi95_]

most megaman games are annoying to me but not necessarily in a bad way. i just certainly can't consider myself a megaman speedrunner cuz...well, you have to devote your life to speedrunning a single megaman game.

(also might i mention that dr. light's english voice actor is just amazing)

[Benny The Miraj]

Kind of going out on a limb here, but I think, ultimately, what I dislike most about Mario... is its fanbase.

Take a game I already don't like all that much, add fans of the game who will bully anyone who expresses any form of disdain for the game, telling them "No! You're wrong! It's FACTUALLY good! The gameplay is FACTUALLY tight and perfect!" I've seen people on this forum have similar feelings to Sonic and Final Fantasy 7: franchises people feel the need to bully others into liking, well honestly Mario is my Sonic/Final Fantasy 7. They're not bad games, I/you just didn't have a good experience with them, and when you bring it up, people make that experience feel even worse. For once, I'd just like to state an unpopular opinion without it being belittled by others.

[Kriven]

The thing is: the way you backed up that opinion was misguided and inaccurate. "Mario is clunky and slippery" is like saying "I don't like Mickey Mouse because he swears too much"

[Gors]

well fanbases can be problematic, that I can agree, but what you heard here is not because we're Mario fanboys lmao, "clunky and slippery" is not what Mario is, that's just conservation of momentum and it's part of Mario's core gameplay.

It's ok that you don't like it but each game has different set of rules. Replicating inertia is not "slippery physics" and dealing with it is part of why mastering Mario is fun

For me it's a perfectly acceptable take on platforming and much like anything else - more emphasis is given to how a character is able to traverse an obstacle course.

Sonic is also okay but it's unintuitive at times, and the emphasis on speed is kinda crippling when coming to other gameplay elements but that also doesn't make it a terrible game, it's just different styles for different people, so no need to be defensive

[Goemar]

I'm going to throw Mario Kart into this. Yes, the gameplay is great BUT it's so old in what it offers. Cup, 4 courses - race. Other games (like Sega All-Stars) have so much more in the single player department. Boost challenges, ring challenges, beat a timed lap etc etc.

I'm not saying it should have a hub or anything like Diddy Kong Racing but man, they need to add some flesh to those bones.

[Kriven]

At the very least they should bring back that Mission Mode from Mario Kart DS. That was pretty darn fun.

[Benny The Miraj]

But at the same time, guys, even if it's SUPPOSED to be that way, that doesn't give it a free pass. The physics work around inertia and whatnot, but at the same time, that still makes it slippery even if they're trying to be realistic. It's like telling someone that a scoop of banana ice cream that someone thinks is too sweet that "It's SUPPOSED to be."

And at the same time, I kind of have to be a little defensive since you're not respecting my opinion since you keep saying "it's wrong." And no offense, but that is just about every Mario fan I've met. Someone says anything bad, and then it's Mario fans to the rescue to tell that person they're wrong for their opinion when all it is is an opinion. You keep telling me this elaborate theory, but no matter how you sugar coat it, I still find the games slippery and clunky, and the more you try to defend it and sugar coat it, honestly, the more I'll probably think so. Why is that so hard to accept?

I want to end this soon because I have a nasty feeling this is going to turn into a fight if it keeps on.

[Shade]

You know you're posting on a message board where people reply and discuss and/or debate things with each other, right?

The minute you make your position on a topic known is the minute others should be allowed an attempt to refute it. No one is being unreasonable by doing that and you're free to do the same thing. If it's actually so important to you then, instead of being so defensive just because your opinion is being criticized, try harder to prove your position right, otherwise don't knowingly post something controversial in the first place, or at least be less astonished when it's challenged.

>I am not a mod nor an authority this is my opinion and does not reflect the opinion of The VGR Staff 2017

[Gors]

You think this is going to be an internet fight? Looks like you haven't been into an actual internet flamewar then my little friendu

I don't care about changing your mind nor I want you to enjoy Mario. I don't even play a lot of Mario to begin with, but once you press "Post Reply" you abide to being refuted if needed, and simply put, being refuted is not being attacked by "Mario" "Fans" "Who" "Hate" "Sonic" "And" "Final" "Fantasy" "Seven"

If you think that a simple exchange of points of view is an imminent fight then I think you should like go outside and chill a little. Not even being ironic right now, in case I'm sounding condescending

Communicating by text is kinda shit when coming to nuances but believe me, no one's trying to one-up you in this discussion, we just want to tell you that just because you don't enjoy Game A, it doesn't mean it's Game A's flaw.

[White-Jet]

I'm going to throw Mario Kart into this. Yes, the gameplay is great BUT it's so old in what it offers. Cup, 4 courses - race. Other games (like Sega All-Stars) have so much more in the single player department. Boost challenges, ring challenges, beat a timed lap etc etc.

I'm not saying it should have a hub or anything like Diddy Kong Racing but man, they need to add some flesh to those bones.

I'm much less of a fan of Super Mario Kart, mainly because certain CPU-run characters will throw items you're never going to get and have massive jumps that can leap over said hazards, including ones you can use, while the only jumps you can make (without a Cape Feather, btw) are pathetic hops that couldn't even get you over an inch-deep oil slick.

And just to even out the hate for games that actually deserve it in series that is beloved by all, Sonic Shuffle as an annoying slog whose idea of "fun party games" is not being able to finish a board until ALL OF THE GEMS ARE COLLECTED, and allowing the CPU see your cards when you can't see theirs, usually resulting in you being stuck with the worst hand by the time you actually reach one of the bosses guarding the gems.

I could lump in Final Fantasy IV: the After Years as another game that is mostly hated for "almost" retelling the same story 17 YEARS LATER (not to mention abilities being altered by the different phases of the moon and, at the time, being episodic and forcing fans to pay for a continuation, especially in the Wii port).  But, sadly, I'm going to have to toss most of my annoyance to the PSP exclusive Interlude.  It may have brought back the original gameplay without the moon alterations, and trying to clear up certain confusions that the sequel either didn't bother to explain, or didn't realize the complications it might bring (such as introducing Ceodore at 17 rather than the now canonical 16), but its short length, already maxed out characters and mostly linear gameplay just makes me think it should have gotten the "Day of Sigma" treatment rather than a pointless nostalgia romp that the remastered original already gave us.

[Benny The Miraj]

You think this is going to be an internet fight? Looks like you haven't been into an actual internet flamewar then my little friendu

I don't care about changing your mind nor I want you to enjoy Mario. I don't even play a lot of Mario to begin with, but once you press "Post Reply" you abide to being refuted if needed, and simply put, being refuted is not being attacked by "Mario" "Fans" "Who" "Hate" "Sonic" "And" "Final" "Fantasy" "Seven"

If you think that a simple exchange of points of view is an imminent fight then I think you should like go outside and chill a little. Not even being ironic right now, in case I'm sounding condescending

Communicating by text is kinda shit when coming to nuances but believe me, no one's trying to one-up you in this discussion, we just want to tell you that just because you don't enjoy Game A, it doesn't mean it's Game A's flaw.

Personally, I'm trying to be reasonable. I'm mostly just expecting a fight because of myself. ...To be honest, I'm usually not this patient when my opinions are challenged. Maybe I'm improving as a person, I guess.

But when a person doesn't enjoy "Game A," it's because "Game A" has a flaw. And IMO, Mario's flaw is its core gameplay, which you guys like, and that's fine. However, you are also going as far as to treating an opinion as a fact. If you think Mario has super-tight controls, good for you. I personally don't think it does, and defending it and creating elaborate sentences as to how the flaws I find aren't real flaws won't make me think differently. This discussion is just going to go nowhere as long as you continue to treat an opinion as a fact.

Also, as for what you said about Sonic games? I didn't find them that counter-intuitive. While the games have slippery controls just as badly, even worse than Mario, I do like the fact its gameplay is faster paced while having more freedom and action than Mario, but that is just my opinion. You like Mario, I like Sonic. No one's wrong, no one's right, we just have opinions.

[Kosheh]

* Kosheh sticks finger in eye, removes eye booger

sorry if I'm derailing here, but I hope you don't mind me interjecting. Also me being the one who technically "started this fight", let me be the one to end it, I guess.

You think this is going to be an internet fight? Looks like you haven't been into an actual internet flamewar then my little friendu

I don't care about changing your mind nor I want you to enjoy Mario. I don't even play a lot of Mario to begin with, but once you press "Post Reply" you abide to being refuted if needed, and simply put, being refuted is not being attacked by "Mario" "Fans" "Who" "Hate" "Sonic" "And" "Final" "Fantasy" "Seven"

If you think that a simple exchange of points of view is an imminent fight then I think you should like go outside and chill a little. Not even being ironic right now, in case I'm sounding condescending

Communicating by text is kinda shit when coming to nuances but believe me, no one's trying to one-up you in this discussion, we just want to tell you that just because you don't enjoy Game A, it doesn't mean it's Game A's flaw.

Personally, I'm trying to be reasonable. I'm mostly just expecting a fight because of myself. ...To be honest, I'm usually not this patient when my opinions are challenged. Maybe I'm improving as a person, I guess.

But when a person doesn't enjoy "Game A," it's because "Game A" has a flaw. And IMO, Mario's flaw is its core gameplay, which you guys like, and that's fine. However, you are also going as far as to treating an opinion as a fact. If you think Mario has super-tight controls, good for you. I personally don't think it does, and defending it and creating elaborate sentences as to how the flaws I find aren't real flaws won't make me think differently. This discussion is just going to go nowhere as long as you continue to treat an opinion as a fact.

When you post a "controversial" opinion and someone doesn't get it, saying "Wow that sucks I don't like your opinion" is kind of a terrible way to retort, isn't it. You posted a relatively unpopular opinion, and I, being one who thinks Mario games have pretty tight controls all-considering, thought it was unusual to hear someone say "These controls are clunky". I figured I'd ask "WHY are they clunky," as in my experience, they're not clunky, and the other posters in the thread also agree. I've found Sonic games to be harder to control but that makes sense (given the physics) but hearing that a Mario game - a game that's slower-paced than Sonic, sure, and a series I've grown up with and didn't ever have an issue with the controls, whereas other platformers like Sonic, Crash or Spyro took a little getting used to - is somewhat jarring, as most of us probably use Mario for a yardstick for judging platformers as opposed to Sonic or Spyro.
I was curious about your (admittedly atypical) opinion so I figured I'd ask. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

This type of conversation has a fancy name on the Internet - it's called "discourse". It's a fancy word for "conversation" yea but don't worry it's fancy

Like this is exactly why the topic exists, and it's serving its purpose.

---

Oh, actually this reminds me, I gotta actually contribute with my own unpopular opinion.

I don't like Klonoa games. They've always been extremely jarring for me and playing through the original for the first time I wasn't really sure who the intended audience is. I get he's kinda an alternative to Sonic (and to an extent, kind of the original "Needlemouse" idea Naka had where the protag is a rabbit who picks things up with his ears, though I think Klonoa just uses his arms)
I'll admit that the gameplay is actually pretty solid (the GBA ones are OK, and I think I've attempted to make decent progress in them) but the wordbuilding within them are just completely, utterly childish and terrible. I'm sure the story behind Klonoa is probably dark and brooding but it's hard to get past that when the music in the first two stages is so obnoxiously carnival-ish that it sets a really lousy tone that just doesn't jive with me. Also Huepo's voice (when it is voiced) makes me just want to McFucking Kill Myself) Compared to Mario, THESE games, while they handle incredibly solidly, move WAY too slow for me.

and i swear to fuck if i hear that rabbit shout "ANYA" when he falls down a pit One More God Damn Time

[miyabi95_]

as the person who made this thread, just a reminder that you are 100% free to talk about "bad" games based on YOUR preferences. what's "bad" is different for each person.

just thought i'd make that clear. （╹◡╹）

also for the record, klonoa's chipmunk voice is far better than the creepy teenager voice in the english dub of the DTP remake. :p

[Gors]

Klonoa was... an ok game I guess

I didn't get any of the "this is a Good Game" vibe, just "this is a Game That Exists" and I was like well okay,

this exists.

The game is indeed a tad slow and the momentum is essentially inexistant so platforming isn't too difficult - that is, until trick jumps with the bubble thing starts to appear, and that's nice.

One thing that I don't like is how everything else seems to dwarf in character design compared to Klonoa himself. It feels like 80% of the character designer budget went to Klonoa and they had to do whatever they could with the remaining 20%

My ex-girlfriend wanted me to play this game so bad and even wanted to watch me beat it but I honestly got bored on the 80% mark and gave up, which upset her a lot. But to be honest, none of her fave games were games I liked so there's that

---

Also it was incredibly verbose and tryhard in storytelling, which I don't really enjoy. Not that it's bad, just not my cup of tea. An action game should try and do the most of storytelling with the actions and gameplay elements, not cutscenes and speech bubbles everywhere