I don't understand how people still argue over games to the point of personal insults and death threats as grown ass adults.
Look, we all know I can become a little heated on here(though I'd say much less over the years), but what I don’t like is being disrespected and having my points misrepresented.
Look it's well documented here that I'm no Nintendo fan. I don't like them and I can be a jerk about that. But even then I have relaxed on that. But I still think this Pokemon game looks bad and the open world very unpealling and bland looking. I communicated that, but also tried to communicate that it's not because it's OMG PS5 levels of graphics.
But then you had Potato come in here and seem to not get that. While also making the pretty dumb post to me, complaining that people judge games on graphics and referencing people calling Nintendo kiddy.
No one called Nintendo kiddy and since I believe games are a sum of their parts and look at them that way, graphics are an element to think about.
But here's what I got from that:
When people constantly complain about a game they state they have no intention of playing and their criticism amounts to "it looks bland".
. Go and play whatever boring bland third person shitfest that you Sony fanboys think is great these days
I'm sick and tired of people whose first question about any game is, "How are the graphics?" I thought we were all intelligent enough to leave that kind of stupidity behind in the 16-bit era. Looks like they are still around and still trot out the same tired old one-liners about Nintendo that have been used since the 1990s
.
See it's crap like this that annoyed me. If you're not going to engage with someone’s post why argue? If you're going to start off being a jerk to me I'm gonna be a jerk to you.
We are on a game forum and we talk about games beyond what normal people do. I also do have an interest in Pokemon.
I did not bring up Sony stuff. I didn't even compare anything to Sony stuff. Everything I compared this game to was either Nintendo’s own games or games that are not AAA top stuff, but instead more creative in their approach. That good graphics can be utilized and mean more then whatever the top of the line is. That as someone who likes games, you can appreciate different things about games.
That was my big point. Games mean lots of things to people and there isn't one thing that makes or breaks a game.
Of course these points were meet with:
Who cares? These other things Sell well!
But even that's a bad point because again games are the sum of their parts and there is no one way to judge a game. Not one way that can make a game sell.
But then you got this gem:
“Some people prioritise pretty graphics and don't care how shit a game plays and some people prefer a game to play nicely and don't care about the graphics. Don't let me tell you which one is right.”
Which is a pretty asshole way of thinking in my opinion. And I'm the Sony fanboy even though I never brought up Sony. I'm the idiot for caring about presentation and the way the world feels and looks in an open world game. I only care about graphics even though I was trying to communicate that it's not just about top of the line graphics.
So no, fuck that guy.
