Are there any “perfect” video games?

not objetively, maybe oot is.
some vidya are perfect for some people. Age of empires 2 the conquerors is perfect for me, for example

>Why yes, I did "befriend" your mom last night, how could you tell?

Attached: 1562003522056.png (974x1200, 563K)

Perfection is subjective. Sonic 06 is the perfect bad game. Its flaws are amazing.

Metroid Prime.

every fucking time retards like you and your muh Tetris, despite the fact that there have been improvements ever since the original game and it continues to change
at least have the balls to pick a fucking version

I’d say Undertale achieved “perfection” in what Toby Fox had in mind, and I think how he wanted the player to feel was done perfectly, not to mention the perfect OST as well.
I could be biased though, considering I only just replayed it a week ago.

nothing is perfect user

No, not even Undertale, as much as I like it.

the original is trash compared to the newer ones

These, otherwise literally ever "Best game" list in existence wouldn't have them listed at the top

Attached: mosaice7a40295cd60be6160c06ce371a709c75d5c45bd.jpg (920x920, 382K)

ROLLER COASTER TYCOON 2

Though even that isn't completely perfect

>oot
>good

What do you think could have been improved? I think the Asriel fight was the weakest fight for me in the game, but even still it’s pretty damn good. It’s just the saving SOULs part of it that dampened it for me, made it feel too cheesey. But after playing genocide, I understand why he went for the cheesey “super anime ultimate fight” tone.

its not perfect, as replayability is not that high. All the sections with lesbian dinosaur make it annoying to replay. And some would say its a bit much.

Also..
>letting a dev basically define their goalposts and then hereby claim their game is perfect

Games dont need to be perfect, as that would mean a minimalistic approach basically always. The less surface for "failure", the more easier it's to deliver something "perfect". Tha wont translate into appeal however

These are highly rated for overcoming the technical limitations of their respective eras, but they’re far from perfect by today’s standards. I mean what game is perfect and will not age with time.

It's always premature to claim perfection.
At the time of its release, Dragon Quest 3 was considered a perfect RPG by its devs, and admittedly it was a spectacular game for its day. That was in 1988 or something. Since then, there have been remakes of DQ3 that people recommend over the original version, for legitimate reasons. Rebalancing the game for less grinding, more content, streamlining the UI, etc. What happened to that perfect game?
Additionally, if we consider game making a kind of art, the perfect game was always the non-existent game the designer imagined in their head. By bringing that perfect game into existence, flaws must inevitably be introduced.

Attached: 1337648482479.gif (500x284, 496K)

C R I N G E

One could make a Smash Bros fanfic that is technically perfect, but it is still a Smash Bros fanfic. The same goes for Undertale, its core is just garbage even if each isolated element is perfect (not saying that they are).

PLOK!, for the SNES is the perfect game.

is it true that skeletons have a ghost penis?

Personally, I don’t find replayability to be a key point, but that’s venturing into subjectivity. I’m trying to find what game is perfect in the sense of no other game will out-do it as time passes, because if a game is out-done by another a few years down the line, then it was never really “perfect” to begin with.
The dinodyke was a bit grating for me as well to be fair, although the True Lab segment of the game, again, justified the annoying archetype that that character was. It sounds like I’m giving Toby Fox a load of free passes and passing of criticism as “but that’s just part of the game, bro!” but I genuinely think the flaws in the story are understandable and make the game better when examined under the lens of hindsight.

mario 64

what makes you say that lmao?

Have you played Undertale? It’s frustrating seeing it being painted as a tumblr-core experience, whereas when you actually play it you find it far more enjoyable than you’d like to admit. Give it a go if you haven’t already, user.
Yeah.

I think the game is far too obfuscating for its own good. Yes, there's definitely a good element of mystery to it, but it eventually reaches the point where fundamental things are missing or ill-explained, resulting in a game that has various interpretations, ranging from thought-provoking to nihilistic. I get that symbolism relies in giving the player/watcher/reader leeway into interpreting events and stuff as they like, but there should be semi-solid grounds for that, otherwise it's just a mess. I actually think the Asriel fight was really damn good in terms of invoking just how much it matters to make connections. The whole game is built around forming connections and how that can bridge things, rather than rely solely on the power of determination and the SOULs portion really hammered it home in an excellent way. The anime influence didn't bother me, because at its core you're basically still fighting something with the mentality of a child.

That and Genocide. I know it was supposed to be somewhat unsatisfying, but it's hard not to feel like it was rushed out the door, after the Undying fight.

I've never played Smash Bros so I can't tell you anything on that, but maybe it's just not for you then.

By Toby's admission, the game is not perfect. There were definitely things he wished he could've improved on, notably the visuals.
The game is admittedly very good despite the limitations of the developer, but if read through stuff like the art book, you can see a lot of compromise.
Here's hoping that DR is a bit better in every way.

Attached: marsh.png (1978x867, 1.96M)

>I’m trying to find what game is perfect in the sense of no other game will out-do it as time passes, because if a game is out-done by another a few years down the line, then it was never really “perfect” to begin with.
I feel like at best this is a recipe for madness. More so than writing or art, games can still be heavily limited by the tech. You can have an excellent game from 10 years ago be outdone today, but since the tech didn't exist at the time, it would have been impossible to do so at that time.

PONG is perfect. Make the mental excercise.

Tetris
youtube.com/watch?v=Tnztj1UlkQs

The thing that does elevate Undertale though is that you can pretty easily tell how much of a passion project it was. Much of its failures are rooted in Toby simply not being able to do better at the time. The fact that he still pulled too adds a lot of charm to it. I hope DR manages to go beyond, but for what it currently is, I'm happy enough UT managed to get made at all, rather than languishing with an ideas guy forever.

>I’d say Undertale achieved “perfection” in what Toby Fox had in mind
By his own admission, it did not.

the more stuff you add to a game the more imperfect it is?

No, there are no hard criteria for what makes a videogame "good" what one person will love, another will despise.
While some flaws can be virtually universally hated, there are no aspects that are universally loved.
This does not mean "hurr there's no way to distinguish bad from good" and that no statement can be made in the declarative as to quality, or that retards can fall back on subjectivity when they can't present a cohesive fucking statement on why they think a game is good in the face of a well structured argument to the contrary.

>if you don't know what ghosts are you wont know to avoid them
>not learning through 5 seconds of trail and error

You were close OP

Attached: deltarune-pic.png (1000x563, 10K)

I have played it once and seen the other two routes. It is a very childish game (not in a good way like Alice's Adventures in Wonderland). The internet just overrates games with fourth-wall breaking elements like crazy, even though it is nothing new or fundamentally interesting.
The premise of the game is very juvenile, it is basically a game about games with nothing to say to people that are not into them already. There are a lot of "books about books", but they do it with a purpose, like talking about history, human cognition or whatever. Undertale seems to be asking very inane questions, like "dude, what if game characters were actually living on a world of their own even if we are not playing the game and we're like invaders or something and grinding was bad?". It very obviously comes from a culture of fanfic and escapist relation with fictional characters without being too critical of it. It has this relationship with itself the is more like wanking than it is like introspection. You could argue that the games try to touch in themes like morality and freedom of choice, but if so, it is very incompetent, so I think it is even preferable to think of it in more self-contained scope.
This may sound a bit abstract or not important, but I'm talking about the core of the game. If we go into its elements, it is still far from perfect. The "internet humor" style of writing is very limited, most characters are just walking jokes, the world has puzzles that are tossed out without going anywhere, pacing problems in the narrative...

Cope, the more contrarian Yea Forums is towards it the better the game is

I feel like you're simultaneously over- and undershooting the core of it, either by assuming it's trying to say more than it does, or reducing elements to >muh X, but at the end of the day it wasn't really your thing and that's fine as well.