What's the best "everyone else says it's bad" game out there?

>It's incredible how a minimap can improve a game so much.
>It's incredible how an objective marker can improve a game so much.
>It's incredible how pressing enter on the menu and letting the entire game play itself can improve a game so much.

You know the original japanese release came with a map in the manual, right?

FF15

Then print yourself one instead of cheating.

Simon's FUCKING Quest

Attached: horriblecurse.gif (290x290, 13K)

It's literally the same thing except it wastes more time.

>a minimap is the same as having the game play itself

Attached: 1506696653779.jpg (600x484, 24K)

FF8

Attached: 1441988579535.jpg (400x462, 26K)

Yeah, I like this game yet keep seeing people shit on it for some reason. It's just Mario Party but with Sonic.

Monster Dance fuckin SLAPS

youtu.be/Drfs6dUF1nk

Attached: 1511910416685.gif (491x704, 3.22M)

It literally isn't you dumb zoomer.

I actually finished the first Dead Island 6 times. The melee combat, exploration and item management/upgrades are super comfy to me. It also had the best gore system of its time for a zombie game. Everyone kept saying it was trash, thou, I never understood how...

Attached: s3-0bfe7f3fe6f5b96c79dc3f7177440df8.jpg (1280x720, 369K)

Gameplay in that as amazing.
Zombies, hot girls with fat asses and cute faces, and sick ass gameplay. Good OST too.

What more could a man want.

Final Fantasy 2

Attached: A8667585-DC7C-452C-B92F-D6E79DD87AE2.png (500x549, 111K)

TWEWY Solo Mix

Good setpiece/level design.

Speaking of this game, i don't get the people who claim that 5 is the worst game in the series and that 4 was the best. Mechanically they are very similar games. re5 only has mildly more action than 4, makes sense though because a coop partner gives you twice the firepower. Its a fun action game. heck i even thought re6 was alot of fun action game to play with a friend.

streamlining a clunky gaming experience by making information intended to be available to the player more accessible isn't the same as having the game play itself. You're a fucking moron.

A lot of people who praise 4 but shit on 5 get hung up on the co-op aspect of the game. Either they don't want co-op in their Resident Evil or just don't like co-op games.

t. doesn't like co-op games, but I also don't think 4 is the best RE so whatever.

it looks like link is jerking his big cock haha

Sonic 06

Dragon Quest II
People say often say it's too hard, but I feel that's part of what makes it good.
The difficulty of the random encounters (which can pop up ANYWHERE at a moment's notice) make it feel really oppressive, like a dark lord really did win and now presides over the world.
I'm not sure if it's intentional or not, but I feel it's one of the few JRPGs that manages to connect the plot and the gameplay really well, by making the world (in terms of gameplay) actually accurate to the world (in terms of plot).

true, but both re5 and 6 are still completely functional playing solo. Just having another person to play with brings something new to the table,

I played through 5 completely solo and i guess i played after the patches or whatever because sheva never got in my way, and consistently kept herself save. I had to be careful not to give too much ammunition because she is too trigger happy.

Functional, yes. Fun, not really.

Zelda 2 was shit tho

Nah, its only mistakes were a needlessly punishing game over state and a few obtuse roadblocks. Combat and dungeons were generally pretty good and a pleasant challenge.

Link had such short range on his sword and the dungeons had no puzzles. it was shit

I only disliked DQ2 near the very end when it really got confusing on where you needed to go. Plus, that trap at the inn is a really dick move to pull. I do agree that it's not an awful game and it was actually a really cool experience going from DQ to DQ2.

Short range sorta sucked but it was still workable, plus you still had magic (which has never been done better in Zelda since). As for puzzles, that wasn't in any way, shape or form the point of Zelda II. They were literal labyrinths, the challenge was simply finding your way to the end.

You are capable of moving in Simon's Quest therefore traversal and navigation are core gameplay elements. Having them be automatically carried out by a minimap thus makes it a movie game. At least minimaps can usually be excised without problems due to the game being designed around them; however, they lead developers down the path of temptation into further degeneracy very quickly.

But magic wasn't as plentiful as it is in other zeldas. It was hard to come by and you needed it alot and iirc, no enemy dropped a health pickup.

>the dungeons had no puzzles
neither did zelda 1

yes it did. pushing the blocks around was a puzzle

its awful

But your options were much better. Enemies did drop magic (even if it was a bitch to get a hold of) and you still had shield/heal spells among other options.

Armored Core V
There was a ton of complaints from people whose first AC game was 4, but I found the pace to be more alike the games that came before 4 and thus enjoyed it. Being able to walljump off vertical surfaces was also a fun addition to the series.

It's arguably the best game in the series.

You don't really push the blocks "around" in Zelda 1, you rub your face against them until one of them moves at all and ta-da, problem solved. It's more like hitting a hidden switch than solving a puzzle.

I always liked it.

Attached: shot00229.png (1024x768, 1.12M)

>a minimap is the same as having the game play itself

Attached: 1510376774523.png (703x911, 19K)

but when you have to use multiple spells, it drains your bar a lot.

that title goes to Majora's Mask

imagine thinking a game is better just because you occasionally push a fucking block.

Manage your meter wisely then.

Rule of Rose. Most people's rating of it would go up a full 3 points if the hitboxes were just a hair less jank. Prime example of a game that does a hundred things right but one core thing very, VERY badly.

>the game playing itself isn't the game playing itself
So, normalfag or brain-scrambled tranny?

Attached: 1559499564287.png (995x1080, 647K)

>a minimap is the same as having the game play itself

Attached: 1493109600052.png (400x400, 149K)

How often do you criticize games for not being Etrian Odyssey? I mean, charting your own map is cool but very, very few games actually do this.

Horseshit. Dungeons were generally awful, boring hallways with one branch-off for the item and one for uselessness. Which I have to assume was by design, because without the aid of the map (something you'll remember the first game HAD) it would've been easy to get lost in a game of that size with rooms that look so samey.

Etrian Odyssey is also casual trash.

>awful, boring hallways

You fought your way through the hallways. Zelda II is by far the most combat-intensive Zelda.

Yeah, see, that's the other problem. When the combat works, it's fun. Many of the bosses are about precision hits or positioning, and I think that's where it shines. Problem is the dungeons themselves are not about that at all, so that's a full 10% of the game where the combat is good.

Knights are RNG spam until they decide to stop auto-blocking your hits enough to die. Infinitely respawning enemies in rooms without even enough room to maneuver around them can only be described as the worst kind of nuisance. The axe lizard guys are almost impossible to fight without getting hit (good thing you can just jump over them most of the time - if you had enough mana to do so). Basically no other enemy than the ones I mentioned even register on the difficulty scale at all.

The game rotates between the dull monotony of walking through another dagger-fox-thing infested hallway and stabbing a shield for a week until you get to the fun part. Then it's over and you go to the next dungeon.

Do you not have a brain? Use that instead of a minimap. You don't need to literally draw a map or electronically like Etrian Odyssey.
Game telling you your position and terrain/road/room layout from UI instead of letting you use your eyes is the same thing as asking for an action game, like DMC, to autocombat for you whenever you are not entering a movement or attack input of your own.

Paper Mario: Color Splash

This is the correct answer

How is a minimap the same as the game playing itself? Can you even answer that question or are you just going to dump your image folder?

You're wrong, and stupid.

Okay yeah, you're retarded.

A good chunk of that comes down to technical limitations and design sensibilities of the time, and in that light I think Zelda II worked pretty well with what it had. Heaven knows it's not the only game of its time to throw out endless waves of enemies, and doing something like breaking past an iron knuckles' defenses was surprisingly involved for a NES game. To that end, Zelda II obviously wears its age on its sleeve but I think it did fine with what it had. There are certainly Zelda games I like less.

>You don't need to literally draw a map or electronically like Etrian Odyssey.

But why wouldn't you?

the game is asking you to perform an action (navigation and observation) while simultaneously doing it for you via a blatant and constant ui element. As I mention earlier, it can be turned off a lot of the time; but, it leads developers into further bad design and designing the game around non-interactivity by trivializing movement, observation, and navigation which are the most basic and foundational elements of most game types
do people not understand that gameplay includes more things than combat systems
>or are you just going to dump your image folder?
I posted one image? Are you a braindead faggot?

AI is a fucking cheat

Good game design also entails streamlining elements that may annoy or dilute the meat of the experience so as to keep things focused on what you want the player to stay focused on. If you don't want the player to get lost by design, if it's not the point of the game, then there's nothing wrong with an autofilling minimap function. It depends on the game. There are some games out there that get one when it arguably doesn't benefit from one by design such as, I don't know, Metroid Zero Mission. But a lot of the time, minimaps don't actually hurt much of anything.

The Simons Quest hack isnt a minimap, retard. The guy used the wrong word. Its a straight up map screen and it doesnt automatically direct you anywhere and you cant fast travel. Fuck off

Finally, somebody with the bravery to stand up to movie games like La-Mulana. Preach.

Fuck you all I liked Skyward Sword.

Attached: 1550897106977.gif (200x226, 113K)

Skyward Sword is a mid tier Zelda. Some really shitty parts for sure but also some very inspired parts. It's a mixed bag.

every single enemy is a damage sponge, item durability feels way too fucking low, every character in the game is shallow and forgettable, the story ranges from meh to who fucking cares this sucks

i will say the game looked good, the island setting was really nice and i wish it was done similarly more often, and combat sometimes actually felt satisfying when your best weapon wasnt exploding into shrapnel, and you had a friend with you to dick around during the way too often lulls in a glorified zombie hoard game. but it was such a slog. probably the worst offender of an almost good bad game i've ever played

full disclaimer i played it on ps3 and co-oped start to finish in about a week

Team Fortress 2. I still like it.

Shadow the Hedgehog is better than Sonic Heroes

Attached: 1534565999217.png (2336x3016, 3.26M)

Well, yeah. I'm pretty sure it's just refined Heroes at its core.

If SS is mid-tier to you, then what's the low tier consist of?

Most Toon Link Zeldas in all honesty. Minish Cap is alright but the others, eh. And yeah, that does include Wind Waker, I think that one really gets away with a lot of mediocrity due to its aesthetics. But yeah, SS is about on par with Zelda II and BotW for me, other Zeldas that clearly have high highs but also fall short of their full potential.

no just. no. the game is still so shit in so many ways

>one of the most popular and profitable games of all time is "everyone else says its bad"
what

Also the most banging overworld theme.

I'm convinced that anyone who says Zelda 2 is bad is just a casual that thinks it's too hard.

Same.

This. Too many take "it's the worst soulsborne" to mean it's bad. It's massively flawed but it's still an excellent game.
Also, people forget that SotFS was designed as a challenge mode for the original, for people who played through the original and wanted a freshened up experience. It's just a shame they also included performance patches on it and not the original.