It's me, I'm the guy who really liked Outriders. The story has this air of mystery, the plot twist at the end was neat, and accidentally making a ridiculous build with a skill to spawn a minigun and keep it active forever when it shouldn't be, kept me hooked. The DLC campaign did blow, though the end game activity was fun.
Oh I want more of this! It is indeed very easy to go with the opinions of other people! I've fallen for it too, as sometimes the people I follow (or have followed) hold such "sane" opinions it makes me compelled to follow them, even if their other bad opinions get to me. Or in simpler terms, peer pressure! Heck, even within these 14 comments (as of writing) I can see people share similar opinions! On the topic of "games with agendas", one game I'm interested in is Dustborn, despite its reception due to certain perceived agenda it being tied to. Simply because I've come aware that it does seem to go against that agenda, such as by stereotypical giving a character an ability based on their weight. Which should be something that goes against that agenda, that people assume it has! So I'm intrigued about what it really has to offer, to see what people haven't said, and if it really goes against both... _groups_ (which as an European in a country with more than 2 popular _groups,_ I'm all for it >:D ). In the end it would either be an actually bad game, a game that is so comedically bad its good, or a legitimately good game!
I understand where youre coming from but sometimes there are games that you know you wont like without even trying it. Let me use Veilguard as example. I love both Dragon Age Origins and Mass Effect trilogy, and the things that makes me like them are the writing and companions. Veilguard's writing is like Marvel movie, its so safe and borderline cringeworthy. The companions are too friendly with no conflict or clash in personalities to the point that they make a fuss over trivial problems just to create one. I dont need to buy the game to notice those things. Even from gameplay perspective, Veilguard plays like God of War which consist of cutscene > combat > puzzle > repeat and I hate those, especially the puzzle which isnt even a real puzzle because its so mind numbingly easy and boring.
Sometimes just looking at some gameplay or a review is more than enough. You don't necessarily need to try everything to know for certain. The idea of where I was going with this, was about self-monitoring your own thoughts and feelings while looking at a game of interest. If there are elements in said game that a reviewer brings up that you agree with, then it should be a case of commonality rather than just trusting what the other person says without thinking about how you feel. Having your own voice is important, especially in today's landscape.
I've hated that trend in video game puzzles, it's either impossible to complete with *insert upgrade here" that you get once your conveniently too far away to go back too, or b can be completed but has the most brain numbing "wait for elevator to move" puzzle design that you know can be skipped with an ability you have that they assumed you wouldn't. Star wars jedi fallen orders puzzles could all be completed with double jump freeze and force push if i remember right the first abilites you really get as cal
Im not the biggest fan of your message as I will never believe that you need to try something to know whether you like it or donta as to do that you gonna have to spend money or just your time trying something which might just look mid, and we live in a time where the new AAA game that are coming out are just bad compare to the older AAA games and the older games are cheaper and the i a dig change that you have acces yo them. so I think that if a new game doesn't wow you through most of it story that is just worthless. Also I feel like the title is misleading and that you should do a deep dive into a actually bad game and what you can learn from it (this is what I was expecting from the vid btw. ) But I wish you the best and you definitely have potential to make YT work for you.
Well here's the thing, a bad game will vary from person to person. The games I like the most and show, someone else may feel the opposite towards them and consider it a bad game, so it doesn't really matter that much what game I show on the screen. As I explained to someone else, you don't necessarily need to try the game to know for certain, it's just a more thorough avenue to see what it has to offer. Just watching gameplay is enough to gauge information to make an informed decision on your own terms, rather than just blindly going off by what other people say. You know what you like and if you decide to dismiss the game, it should be on your own account at the end of the day.
@@SackoYT The opinions of other people who are informed and have played the game are perfectly valid reasons to skip something. Trusting the research and opinions of others is foundational to like... human progress? You cannot reasonably try everything and it's vitally important to know how to gauge others' opinions and what to incorporate into your own thoughts and choices. And who says we're 'going blindly off what other people say'? You can take someone's opinion into account and be critical of that opinion while still agreeing with it.
@craterlake7368 Sure, those opinions can be valid. But it's not written in stone either. You may or may not change your mind at some point in life. That's part of the beauty of being human. Blind trust is definitely a thing, I've been there. I'm glad you're finding holes or pointing out certain things I may have missed or misunderstood. Generating conversations on topics like this was what I wanted.
If you're a developer, bad games can teach you what not to do, what direction not to go in. If you're a gamer, it can help guide how you use the reviews. The more you disagree with the reviewers, the more you'll apply a negative bias to the ratings.
@anon_y_mousse You can learn even if you're not a developer. Plenty of people take an interest in knowing the more in-depth aspects of gaming without the desire to develop. Reviews vary, I'd say that looking at both positive and negative reviews leads to a more balanced perspective because you'll have a mix of agreements and disagreements of your own.
@@SackoYT Indeed. This is why I read the middle reviews and the lowest rating reviews as well. It gives you a more complete picture of what you're in for.
@@roadkill_52 Exactly, and once you determine how a review relates to you, you can more accurately judge which games will be worth your time. The faster and more accurately you can read the better your results too, especially for those games that are already very short playthroughs.
While I agree with the sentiment of this video, after all I have games I adore which people generally consider to be "bad" (just look at the mediocre metacritic score for Goldeneye: Rogue Agent for example even though I think it's one of the best console-only FPS ever made), not everyone has the disposable income or time to just go try everything ourselves. This is the reason we do research before purchases to begin with. It's less that I parrot other people's opinions and more that there is certain red flags in which games show they're not for me so I lose interest in them not because of some vapid alarmist and generalizing notion of "[Specific game] is bad so therefore GAMING IS DEAAAAD" but because there is a sea of games out there being made nowadays which are _really good_ and _cater heavily to my tastes_ so I would rather play those than take a chance on something I might not like due to one reason or another. There are patterns that I can pick up on that essentially are predictors that I will not like a thing, and 90% of the time I am right, the other 10% is acceptable shrink because I'm constantly playing other things I enjoy. Funny you should mention outriders, I really enjoyed the demo of that game, but I ended up not purchasing it because it reminded me of Remnant of the Ashes, which all of my friends played for a week and then never talked about it again. Not that I need my friends to play something to give it value, it's more an indication of how much staying power it actually has.
Sure, you play enough games and you'll eventually notice patterns you don't jive with. There's genres I have no interest in but I respect them because they have their own place and have things going for them. To be clear, I don't want people to not research stuff before purchasing, being informed is a good thing. It's more about reading between the lines, finding out what "You" don't like, and not necessarily what the other person doesn't like.
@@SackoYT I understand what you mean completely (I hope), you're saying it's okay to not like something, but be sure that you came to that conclusion on your own, instead of piggybacking off of hating something because it is a trend to hate it. I was speaking more to the notion of "How can you say you hate it if you haven't played it" which is something I've heard more than once from people (mostly used as a gaslighting tool to defend really stupid things) and like, if that were the case, there'd be no point to trailers that tell you about something before you play it. Additionally, I've always hated the notion of this "Goldilocks Zone" of playtime for your opinion to be valid, like how some of the same people who say "How can you know you hate it if you haven't played it enough" will make fun of people who thumb down a game after having hundreds of hours in it as if there's no difference between addiction and enjoyment. Plus, entertainment is a cultural touchstone, people talk, and I'm not saying _every opinion_ is worth listening to but you can get a broad strokes picture of what you're looking at by how people describe it and what the documented events in the game are.
Mechanically bad games, are not the same as games that are actively trying to scam you with microtransactions, nor games that are made to brainwash and spit on an existing franchise, or groups of people. And, while people still play slop trash like that, it does destroy any value it had as a serious game. Just because the masses eat the slop. Does not mean the slop is healthy, nutritious, or even edible. Badly made games, or buggy games, or games that are just janky are not necessarily subject to this. There was far more wrong, for example, with the Gollum game, than just mechanics. The entire story and elements spit in the face of Tolkien's work. And it is filled with subversive trash. If you include the fact that taxpayer money was demanded from the people for this. And the insane price tags on it, after. It is effectively, a scam. Making it worse than a bad game. It is actively damaging on multiple levels. Principles matter. Game mechanics are not the only factor. There are many many more.
Different perspectives are always appreciated. And yes, messages and agendas behind a game are definitely important to diagnose and weigh-in. Values are also placed by other entities in the industry, even if it's at the expense of the consumer. But it's what you value most that matters. Never played Gollum, don't have any interest in the game, life goes on.
It's me, I'm the guy who really liked Outriders. The story has this air of mystery, the plot twist at the end was neat, and accidentally making a ridiculous build with a skill to spawn a minigun and keep it active forever when it shouldn't be, kept me hooked. The DLC campaign did blow, though the end game activity was fun.
Oh I want more of this! It is indeed very easy to go with the opinions of other people! I've fallen for it too, as sometimes the people I follow (or have followed) hold such "sane" opinions it makes me compelled to follow them, even if their other bad opinions get to me.
Or in simpler terms, peer pressure! Heck, even within these 14 comments (as of writing) I can see people share similar opinions!
On the topic of "games with agendas", one game I'm interested in is Dustborn, despite its reception due to certain perceived agenda it being tied to. Simply because I've come aware that it does seem to go against that agenda, such as by stereotypical giving a character an ability based on their weight. Which should be something that goes against that agenda, that people assume it has!
So I'm intrigued about what it really has to offer, to see what people haven't said, and if it really goes against both... _groups_ (which as an European in a country with more than 2 popular _groups,_ I'm all for it >:D ). In the end it would either be an actually bad game, a game that is so comedically bad its good, or a legitimately good game!
I understand where youre coming from but sometimes there are games that you know you wont like without even trying it. Let me use Veilguard as example. I love both Dragon Age Origins and Mass Effect trilogy, and the things that makes me like them are the writing and companions. Veilguard's writing is like Marvel movie, its so safe and borderline cringeworthy. The companions are too friendly with no conflict or clash in personalities to the point that they make a fuss over trivial problems just to create one. I dont need to buy the game to notice those things. Even from gameplay perspective, Veilguard plays like God of War which consist of cutscene > combat > puzzle > repeat and I hate those, especially the puzzle which isnt even a real puzzle because its so mind numbingly easy and boring.
Sometimes just looking at some gameplay or a review is more than enough. You don't necessarily need to try everything to know for certain. The idea of where I was going with this, was about self-monitoring your own thoughts and feelings while looking at a game of interest. If there are elements in said game that a reviewer brings up that you agree with, then it should be a case of commonality rather than just trusting what the other person says without thinking about how you feel.
Having your own voice is important, especially in today's landscape.
I've hated that trend in video game puzzles, it's either impossible to complete with *insert upgrade here" that you get once your conveniently too far away to go back too, or b can be completed but has the most brain numbing "wait for elevator to move" puzzle design that you know can be skipped with an ability you have that they assumed you wouldn't.
Star wars jedi fallen orders puzzles could all be completed with double jump freeze and force push if i remember right the first abilites you really get as cal
Oh wow, the god of war comparision, you said the quiet thing loud, right? I totally agree
Always be amazing.
Amazingly good or Amazingly bad is secondary. Dont be like EA, Activison or Ubisoft. Only villains do that.
If a game is bad, maybe and that's a big maybe, i'll try it out for free. No way would i pay even 5$ let alone 50.
Im not the biggest fan of your message as I will never believe that you need to try something to know whether you like it or donta as to do that you gonna have to spend money or just your time trying something which might just look mid, and we live in a time where the new AAA game that are coming out are just bad compare to the older AAA games and the older games are cheaper and the i a dig change that you have acces yo them. so I think that if a new game doesn't wow you through most of it story that is just worthless.
Also I feel like the title is misleading and that you should do a deep dive into a actually bad game and what you can learn from it (this is what I was expecting from the vid btw. )
But I wish you the best and you definitely have potential to make YT work for you.
Well here's the thing, a bad game will vary from person to person. The games I like the most and show, someone else may feel the opposite towards them and consider it a bad game, so it doesn't really matter that much what game I show on the screen.
As I explained to someone else, you don't necessarily need to try the game to know for certain, it's just a more thorough avenue to see what it has to offer. Just watching gameplay is enough to gauge information to make an informed decision on your own terms, rather than just blindly going off by what other people say. You know what you like and if you decide to dismiss the game, it should be on your own account at the end of the day.
@@SackoYT The opinions of other people who are informed and have played the game are perfectly valid reasons to skip something. Trusting the research and opinions of others is foundational to like... human progress? You cannot reasonably try everything and it's vitally important to know how to gauge others' opinions and what to incorporate into your own thoughts and choices.
And who says we're 'going blindly off what other people say'? You can take someone's opinion into account and be critical of that opinion while still agreeing with it.
@craterlake7368 Sure, those opinions can be valid. But it's not written in stone either. You may or may not change your mind at some point in life. That's part of the beauty of being human.
Blind trust is definitely a thing, I've been there.
I'm glad you're finding holes or pointing out certain things I may have missed or misunderstood. Generating conversations on topics like this was what I wanted.
If you're a developer, bad games can teach you what not to do, what direction not to go in. If you're a gamer, it can help guide how you use the reviews. The more you disagree with the reviewers, the more you'll apply a negative bias to the ratings.
@anon_y_mousse You can learn even if you're not a developer. Plenty of people take an interest in knowing the more in-depth aspects of gaming without the desire to develop. Reviews vary, I'd say that looking at both positive and negative reviews leads to a more balanced perspective because you'll have a mix of agreements and disagreements of your own.
@@SackoYT Indeed. This is why I read the middle reviews and the lowest rating reviews as well. It gives you a more complete picture of what you're in for.
"Bad" is relative
@@roadkill_52 Exactly, and once you determine how a review relates to you, you can more accurately judge which games will be worth your time. The faster and more accurately you can read the better your results too, especially for those games that are already very short playthroughs.
While I agree with the sentiment of this video, after all I have games I adore which people generally consider to be "bad" (just look at the mediocre metacritic score for Goldeneye: Rogue Agent for example even though I think it's one of the best console-only FPS ever made), not everyone has the disposable income or time to just go try everything ourselves. This is the reason we do research before purchases to begin with.
It's less that I parrot other people's opinions and more that there is certain red flags in which games show they're not for me so I lose interest in them not because of some vapid alarmist and generalizing notion of "[Specific game] is bad so therefore GAMING IS DEAAAAD" but because there is a sea of games out there being made nowadays which are _really good_ and _cater heavily to my tastes_ so I would rather play those than take a chance on something I might not like due to one reason or another. There are patterns that I can pick up on that essentially are predictors that I will not like a thing, and 90% of the time I am right, the other 10% is acceptable shrink because I'm constantly playing other things I enjoy.
Funny you should mention outriders, I really enjoyed the demo of that game, but I ended up not purchasing it because it reminded me of Remnant of the Ashes, which all of my friends played for a week and then never talked about it again. Not that I need my friends to play something to give it value, it's more an indication of how much staying power it actually has.
Sure, you play enough games and you'll eventually notice patterns you don't jive with. There's genres I have no interest in but I respect them because they have their own place and have things going for them. To be clear, I don't want people to not research stuff before purchasing, being informed is a good thing.
It's more about reading between the lines, finding out what "You" don't like, and not necessarily what the other person doesn't like.
@@SackoYT I understand what you mean completely (I hope), you're saying it's okay to not like something, but be sure that you came to that conclusion on your own, instead of piggybacking off of hating something because it is a trend to hate it.
I was speaking more to the notion of "How can you say you hate it if you haven't played it" which is something I've heard more than once from people (mostly used as a gaslighting tool to defend really stupid things) and like, if that were the case, there'd be no point to trailers that tell you about something before you play it.
Additionally, I've always hated the notion of this "Goldilocks Zone" of playtime for your opinion to be valid, like how some of the same people who say "How can you know you hate it if you haven't played it enough" will make fun of people who thumb down a game after having hundreds of hours in it as if there's no difference between addiction and enjoyment. Plus, entertainment is a cultural touchstone, people talk, and I'm not saying _every opinion_ is worth listening to but you can get a broad strokes picture of what you're looking at by how people describe it and what the documented events in the game are.
Mechanically bad games, are not the same as games that are actively trying to scam you with microtransactions, nor games that are made to brainwash and spit on an existing franchise, or groups of people.
And, while people still play slop trash like that, it does destroy any value it had as a serious game.
Just because the masses eat the slop. Does not mean the slop is healthy, nutritious, or even edible.
Badly made games, or buggy games, or games that are just janky are not necessarily subject to this. There was far more wrong, for example, with the Gollum game, than just mechanics. The entire story and elements spit in the face of Tolkien's work. And it is filled with subversive trash.
If you include the fact that taxpayer money was demanded from the people for this. And the insane price tags on it, after. It is effectively, a scam.
Making it worse than a bad game. It is actively damaging on multiple levels.
Principles matter. Game mechanics are not the only factor. There are many many more.
Different perspectives are always appreciated. And yes, messages and agendas behind a game are definitely important to diagnose and weigh-in. Values are also placed by other entities in the industry, even if it's at the expense of the consumer. But it's what you value most that matters.
Never played Gollum, don't have any interest in the game, life goes on.
Do I need to eat dung to know it tastes like shit?
@WeWillAlwaysHaveVALIS You look at it, and you move on.
No. But ideological subversive shite is actively damaging.
Making it worse than worthless.