racketboy.com

The thing with achivement is that, in theory, they can be a lot of fun but in practice are always terribly designed grinds with no thought put into them whatsoever.

The only time achievements have added anything to a game for me is in stuff like FTL where I'm going to play the game multiple times anyway and the achievements give me different goals to shoot for.

Or in the case of MMOs where they can actually serve a purpose in the end game.

Otherwise I just ignore them.

Sega's biggest rival was Namco, not Nintendo.

For most of Sega's history, the arcade bussiness was significantly more important than that of making consoles. It was significantly higher by volume, it represented a majority of the profits and it was where Sega was delivering its best products. And in that market, the biggest threat was Namco.

Here's something that is unlikely to be an unpopular opinion:

Everyone seems to like Monster Hunter 4. I have seen a lot of praise for the "verticality" of the level design.

I like the game but the "verticality" just means there are a lot of ledges to fall off of unexpectedly and/or run into while in combat.

It doesn't make the battles more interesting. It makes them more frustrating.

Edit: Here's unpopular opinion part 2 related to this. I had WAY more fun with Toukiden on Vita (the supposedly inferior MH clone) than I have had with MH4. Too bad that was the only game I really liked on my Vita.

Erik_Twice wrote:Sega's biggest rival was Namco, not Nintendo.

For most of Sega's history, the arcade bussiness was significantly more important than that of making consoles. It was significantly higher by volume, it represented a majority of the profits and it was where Sega was delivering its best products. And in that market, the biggest threat was Namco.

Definitely.

The history between Sega and Namco is pretty interesting. They've been enemies and allies. If you look at their arcade output side by side they were really going at each other's throats.

But on the other hand Namco was one of the first big home market third parties to support the Mega Drive with exclusive titles.

Unpopular - but true! - opinion:

The GBA's library is full of lazy ports and shovelware. In that respect, its library is even worse than the Nintendo Wii's library.

I did not enjoy Ori and the Blind Forest all that much. Beautiful looking game obviously but the same old platforming I've played 9999 other times.

prfsnl_gmr wrote:Unpopular - but true! - opinion:

The GBA's library is full of lazy ports and shovelware. In that respect, its library is even worse than the Nintendo Wii's library.

Funny you say that. I went to my local record store yesterday and pawed through the stacks of GBA carts. 95% looked like junk. And they want like $40 for the loose Mario carts. Sigh.

prfsnl_gmr wrote:Unpopular - but true! - opinion:

The GBA's library is full of lazy ports and shovelware. In that respect, its library is even worse than the Nintendo Wii's library.

Hey those Mary Kate and Ashley games are classics!!!!!!

I agree there's a lot of trash littering the GBA library (though you can say that about nearly any popular platform's library). But there are some exclusive classics on the GBA as well. I mean, the last truly outstanding Metroid and F-Zero games released on it for example. Also it doesn't have any Imagine games on it does it?