ITT: We post the best games of 2016 so far

Dude, Fuck the Chaos Pegasus Knight mini boss

I thought I was overleveled, everybody is level 34 and stage rank 10 except for the new girl. I have open audition on everyone and a ton of sessions moves but the fucking chaos Pegasus Knight is excessive

lol

TMS was good but pic related is a legit 10/10

This

story 2/10
characters 5/10
music 6/10
level design 6/10
combat/skill building 8/10

5.5/10

>TMS in GOTY when an actual SMT game and not "Nintendo funds Persona 4 kidz so they can have an atlus rpg on wii u" has come out this year

Yeah i agree, Persona 5 is great.

Go jack off to your waifus, SMT4F shitter

But Final is several times over a better game than TMS

Way too many cutscenes. Too much disgusting sex fanservice, not enough videogamey parts.

I've got your GOTY pickings right here, friend.

lol

oops wrong image

>goes right from Amazing to Above Average
Your line of thought is what's killing reviews.

>music 6/10
>level design 6/10
Tbh I'd put those as 8/10 and 7.5/10 but that's just me.

>Ranking games before they're even out
>FNAF World Average
>"Nuclear Throne but worse" Above Average
>Focusing too much on online multiplayer is a bad thing

Wow.

What's wrong with these points?

pic unrelated

So far, it's a three-way between Zero Time Dilemma, Guilty Gear Revelator and SMT IV Apocalypse for me.
It's ACFag, don't listen to him.

Is best some subhuman language for most censored?
>make idolshit to alienate me
>cover it up to alienate idolfags, while I'm still not going near it
Genius.

Censorship does not make a good game bad, though

...

ACFag? Care to explain?

>idol shit
>only really 1 idol in the game
People who parrot shit are the worse

>It's a grindfest snoozefest with shit gameplay episode.

He always makes these lists that review unreleased games, generally has awful opinions, and is unable to defend them so when he gets called out he just says
>f-f-fucking COD cinematic fag
and posts the picture in another thread.

Furi
Overwatch
Dark Souls 3

>He always makes these lists that review unreleased games,
Sean Murray, is that you?

the fact that you can't skip the obnoxiously long sessions combos drops the gameplay down a solid 3 points
by the last dungeon i was basically getting up and walking off every time i inputted commands because it was a fucking 50 second cutscene for each attack

If you have trouble with that the final boss it's gonna rip you a new asshole.

You better start grinding user.

>all the best games are Japanese

what does this tell us?

Honestly, this. I loved the game but this is a genuine complaint.

Go away, Kotaku. Nobody will buy a butchered game no matter how much you praise it.

The west has been shit since like 2007.
AA jap games are top tier

Western games aren't being released?

Yup. I loved how much better this game was than I expected at first, but the battle system got old FAST.

Your next line will be "It's not censorship, it's localization."

>generally has awful opinions

Which ones would those be?

It just shows how your opinions are worthless and not founded on first hand knowledge.

...

what's a halfway decent western game that even came out this year? I guess Witcher 3 had an expansion.

Half of this shit is muh censorship or muh crossover.

>your opinions aren't founded on first hand knowledge

Meanwhile, this was your post:

>all unreleased games are good and you can never tell if they'll be bad unless you buy them ten times over and play the for several hundred hours
>nope, nothing has ever disproven this

Doom was pretty good.

Calls games like Federation Force garbage because of the sin of having cutscenes. Generally shits up every thread by shitposting like . Here is his amazing best of 2015, and you can bet he put the games there before release date.

So yeah, just ignore him next time.

>Defending heavy censorship that ruins a game to appeal to SJWs
Cuz it's the current year!

>50 second cutscene for each attack
Actually, the "max" sessions could get up to 1m20s, I clocked that shit on my phone.
It's so ridiculous that you can't skip those, because you can skip literally every other animation in fights.

>fnaf world better than anything
yeah thats bait

I got your real GOTY right here.
youtube.com/watch?v=j6NMpIiY0vw

>xenoblade
>mech only 20 hours in
I see someone sped through that game

Instead of bitching like a faggot that you are, why not you don't learn moon and play the game uncensored?

So lazily done.
Just like Fatal Frame 5 where they do the gravure shoot in her normal clothes.

>Calls games like Federation Force garbage because of the sin of having cutscenes

Well, the game is really bad. Are you some kind of contrarian?

Warhammer total war
XCOM 2

That's about it for me, Zero escape and king of fighters were mediocre.

not him, but you can just patch it
the wii u has been pirate city for like a year

No no no, you don't get it. Federation Force *is* pretty bad, but his reasons are retarded because he doesn't play games, he bitches about them. Nobody would seriously call that game cinematic.

>FNAF World, a functioning game released for free, is better than shovelware made solely to sate some corporate's greed for more money

IS there a problem here?

Compare it to the original Super Metroid and you'll find that it is pretty damn cinematic. Imagine if Super's unskippable intro played every 5 minutes, that's what Federation Force is. Metroid isn't supposed to have a story. Remember the last game that tried it?

>games that aren't even out are listed

seeThanks to Hello Games, all unreleased games should be considered bad until proven otherwise. Why should anyone have to pay 60 bucks for something that '""might""" be good?

kys yourself, baitman

firewatch

Game of the year, bar none.

That's a real case of bad taste there

I wouldn't call it the best, but Kirby: Planet Robobot is probably my favorite of the year.

>tfw waited to pirate the game and play the uncensored version
it was still mediocre in terms of gameplay and the characters were so fucking bland. the most appealing thing about it was it's vibrant colourful presentation.

The only correct post in the thread.

The game is fun as fuck.

SMT4A and #FE are probably my two favorites so far

Deus Ex was fucking great. Flawed, but still my favorite game this year so far.

Tokyo Mirage Sessions will be in the running for WiiU GOTY.
Not that there's a huge amount of competition this year.

fuck you, I liked it

This is a God awful list.

I'm glad you aren't the final say on anything.

Can you explain why? I'd love to hear.

paragon will be hot shit mark my words

>Stardew Valley that high
>Dark Souls that high
>Anything FNAF Related that high
>Kirby that slow
>SFV somehow lower than Pokken
>Rating games on shit as petty and as subjective as difficulty and graphics

Oh and
>Rating games that aren't even fucking released yet

>hates FNAF but likes Kirby

I can understand alot of your complaints, but this one baffles me. I at least acknowledge both as meh average products.

I agree. More people need to agree so that a cult following happens like earthbound. Then I can scalp my sealed collector's edition to idiot collectors.

In all fairness, it's the game's fault for being made by bad developers. When a dev like Hello Games or Gearbox stabs you in the back, yur game is no longer entitled to pre-release hype. Sorry.

No Man's Sky.

FNAF is furfag bait and a pretty awful horror series.

I can give Scott props for taking what didn't work in his first game and applying that to something else but FNAF is a really barebones series.

Kirby games are pretty god damn entertaining and are in essence what a video game should be; not ground breaking or deep, just fun.
Saying a game will be bad because of a previous fuck up is pretty fucking retarded.

Was Mario Galaxy bad because Sunshine was bad? Hell no.

You can't just cherry pick a stupid company and then apply it to every company.

This game made me hate both Fire Emblem and SMT so I'm never gonna try either series out because it would be a waste of time.

...

>Kirby: Planet Robobot
>Below Average

>FNAF is furfag bait and a pretty awful horror series.
So how does that apply to FNAF World? You do realize it's not even a horror game, right? It's a lighthearted spinoff RPG. Barebones yes, but for the price of free you can't go wrong.

>Kirby games are pretty god damn entertaining and are in essence what a video game should be; not ground breaking or deep, just fun.
Fun is a meaningless buzzword that doesn't convey an argument for quality. For 40-60 bucks you should be getting something higher quality than a game that doesn't even want to offer a proper hard mode, or true arena until late into the game.

>Saying a game will be bad because of a previous fuck up is pretty fucking retarded.
When a company is known for these "fuck ups" then they're no longer trustworthy. You want me to give you money blindly and mindlessly shill your product lal the way to its release? That's not sensible.

>Was Mario Galaxy bad because Sunshine was bad? Hell no.
That's not even remotely similar to this argument. Sunshine wasn't a bad game, it was just a subjective taste that not everyone would like. A bad game would be Call of Duty, Battlefield, No Man's Sky, Firewatch, Virginia, etc. Games that promise the earth and the sky, but can't even muster up a mound of dirt. And when the devs aren't even apologetic for lying to their customers and attacking them for criticizing their games (not to mention SUING THEM FOR CRITICIZING THEIR GAMES, you can't forget that) we're supposed to let that slide and instantly buy their next product? What do I, as the paying consumer, get out of that deal?

Just in the off chance you're serious, they're both worth checking out. Especially SMT considering it still gets good games unlike Fire Emblem.

I'd say Idolm@ster Platinum Stars.
Although I've honestly been playing more Starlight Stage and I consider it the better game of the two, but technically it came out last year and has just received a lot of new content and support this year.

Tales of Berseria hands down.
Even went for EX New Game and I never do that with this series.

>Disliking Kirby

holy shit my man

I still don't know what kind of game this is except it has idols and fire emblem?

Protecting the princess has brought me more fun than any other game this year.

They really shouldn't have advertised it as a tower defense game though. It's more of a musou with beating up tons of enemies and you can move the princess around anyway. The game is fairly easy on normal for the most part, but the unlockable harder difficulties ramp up the challenge and spawn different enemies in the stages to change things up.
youtube.com/watch?v=5K2zrMSXleg

...

Is WiiU emulation a thing already? How fucking cool would it be to emulate with like a tablet hooked up on USB or something like that

>So how does that apply to FNAF World?
It's still furry pandering.
You do realize it's not even a horror game, right? It's a lighthearted spinoff RPG. Barebones yes, but for the price of free you can't go wrong.
>
>Fun is a meaningless buzzword that doesn't conveyan argument for quality. For 40-60 bucks you should be getting something higher quality than a game that doesn't even want to offer a proper hard mode, or true arena until late into the game.
You buy games to have FUN, that's why it's called ENTERTAINment.
If a game is enjoyable you should be able to excuse some of its faults.

Also Kirby is a game DESIGNED around being easy, so saying it's easy is fucking obvious and was what they were going for.
If you are expecting a challenging campain from Kirby you bought the wrong game.

>When a company is known for these "fuck ups" then they're no longer trustworthy. You want me to give you money blindly and mindlessly shill your product lal the way to its release? That's not sensible.
True, I guess I have to agree with you there.

>That's not even remotely similar to this argument. Sunshine wasn't a bad game, it was just a subjective taste that not everyone would like.
It's by far the worst game in the franchise. And thanks for proving my point about complaining shit where it isn't applicable.

> A bad game would be Call of Duty, Battlefield, No Man's Sky, Firewatch, Virginia, etc. Games that promise the earth and the sky, but can't even muster up a mound of dirt. And when the devs aren't even apologetic for lying to their customers and attacking them for criticizing their games (not to mention SUING THEM FOR CRITICIZING THEIR GAMES, you can't forget that) we're supposed to let that slide and instantly buy their next product? What do I, as the paying consumer, get out of that deal?
Not a huge fan of CoD but from what I have played it's OK. It's mildly entertaining, which is what a game is meant to be.
I haven't played the rest so I wouldn't know.

You'll be getting Wii U's for 100 bucks before emulation becomes viable. And while at it you could aswell buy one since it will probably become an expensive as fuck system after a few years.

>XCX 3/10
Serious question, what does Cred Forums think of this game? Is it worth?

Not even out of early access and its still better than 99% of trash released this year

>it's still furry pandering
Because there are animal animatronics in it? why does Kirby get a pass then, when it has talking animals as well?

>If a game is enjoyable you should be able to excuse some of its faults.
What if someone had fun with FNAF World? Its faults aren't allowed to be excused? Similarly, what if I don't like Kirby? Why should I give it a pass?

>Also Kirby is a game DESIGNED around being easy,
So it's a walking simulator, akin to Firewatch or Gone Home. Right?

>It's by far the worst game in the franchise. And thanks for proving my point about complaining shit where it isn't applicable.
It's still a serviceable game. It's not a 60 dollar DRM ridden garbage heap filled with DLC and bugs everywhere. Unlike your average Call of Duty installment.

>Not a huge fan of CoD but from what I have played it's OK.
In a vacuum the gameplay isn't bad. But it's everything shackled to it that makes it a terrible series, from the restrictive online, to the mounds of DLC and season passes, to the lackluster non-challenging, handholding singleplayer, it's a mess all around.

>Kirby
>Walking Simulator

You can stop posting now.

>20 Merkeldollars for League of Legends

why

It's pretty great if you really like exploring and don't care too much about a good overall story. The sidequest stories are more interesting than the main story. The battle system eventually devolves into doing the same thing every battle once you've leveled up your class enough though.

What point is there to a game if there's no challenge in it?

If you're expecting a good main story with good characters and deep story and a great soundtrack you will hate it.

If you want one of the best singleplayer open worlds with flying mechs, a bunch of sidequests and great exploration in beautiful huge landscapes and nice atmosphere you will love it.

its not LoL, its WoW arena with better balance and a top-down view

also belly buttons

Can we count this? All the versions besides the 3DS one released this year.

>implying you just walk through the game

Entertainment. Not every game has to be 'muh dark souls hard.'

>Because there are animal animatronics in it? why does Kirby get a pass then, when it has talking animals as well?
Kirby doesn't have talking animals, all the creatures are mystical and not from earth.

>What if someone had fun with FNAF World? Its faults aren't allowed to be excused?
I mean, I guess not, but FNAF World is a pretty meh RPG.
>Similarly, what if I don't like Kirby? Why should I give it a pass?
I'm not saying you should, but calling the series bad because of personal taste is retarded.

>So it's a walking simulator, akin to Firewatch or Gone Home. Right?
No, those are designed to be "cinematic experiences" that's a whole other thing.

>It's still a serviceable game. It's not a 60 dollar DRM ridden garbage heap filled with DLC and bugs everywhere. Unlike your average Call of Duty installment.
Ya got me there.

>In a vacuum the gameplay isn't bad. But it's everything shackled to it that makes it a terrible series, from the restrictive online, to the mounds of DLC and season passes, to the lackluster non-challenging, handholding singleplayer, it's a mess all around.
Yeah, guess you're right.

There are games on that list not even released.

as a 5 season wow glad, i agree. ive been playing and i like it... can't find a decent partner for 2s yet. friend system in-game instead of steam API = shit tho

If everybody whined about censorship like you underaged faggots do today, nobody would have played anything back in the day. Or watched any movies for that matter.

>Not every game has to be 'muh dark souls hard.'
Without challenge you can just watch a game on youtube. What do you miss? Interaction that you barely needed to put in anyway?

>Kirby doesn't have talking animals, all the creatures are mystical and not from earth.
The same excuse can be made for Sonic. Does that make it any less furry? What does "being from earth" have to do with it?

>I mean, I guess not, but FNAF World is a pretty meh RPG.
You dind't even know it was an RPG before I mentioned it. You just discarded it as if it was another installment in the jumpscare garbage that preceded it. That's why I Was skeptical of your criticism.

>I'm not saying you should, but calling the series bad because of personal taste is retarded.
That's why I didn't call it bad. I said it was "below average". 'm trying to give it credit, but when people literally say "challenge is problematic and hurts video games" as an excuse as to why Kirby is lacking it, then I find that dubious.

>No, those are designed to be "cinematic experiences" that's a whole other thing.
How do they differ, I wonder? The point is to be "comfy" and "artistic" as opposed to being actually challenging, or requiring the player to utilize a little thought. Is there truly a divide between them?

>music 6/10
>level design 6/10
more like 8/10 and 9/10

And characters are at least a 6/10.

overall, 8/10 game

Give me was best song.

youtube.com/watch?v=V_qIMueF8LA

>Without challenge you can just watch a game on youtube. What do you miss? Interaction that you barely needed to put in anyway?

Challenge isn't everything in a game. You can have fun from playing an easy game just as much as a hard game.
Also, 'just watch the game,' is a bullshit argument. You get nothing from it.
For example, take a boss like Haltmann.
His fight isn't the hardest, but the music is great and it's an extremely fun fight.

nigger, get out of here, you clearly don't even play video games.

>You can have fun from playing an easy game just as much as a hard game.
Where does the "fun" come from though? I'm not being asked to exert any tactical skill, or utilize anything I've found or learned. I'm just going through the motions, like I was watching a movie. When you're just "going through the motions" then a game just stops being fun.

>The same excuse can be made for Sonic. Does that make it any less furry? What does "being from earth" have to do with it?
Sonic characters are based off of real live animals.
The term furry comes from taking an animal and humanizing it.
Aliens aren't animals.

>You didn't even know it was an RPG before I mentioned it. You just discarded it as if it was another installment in the jumpscare garbage that preceded it. That's why I Was skeptical of your criticism.
Except I did, when I was talking about FNAF, I was talking about the series as a whole.

>That's why I didn't call it bad. I said it was "below average". 'm trying to give it credit, but when people literally say "challenge is problematic and hurts video games" as an excuse as to why Kirby is lacking it, then I find that dubious.
Challenge is not a problem, but it can certainly be done badly and certainly isn't the point of video games.

>How do they differ, I wonder? The point is to be "comfy" and "artistic" as opposed to being actually challenging, or requiring the player to utilize a little thought. Is there truly a divide between them?
Yes there is.
Kirby might not have challenge, but it's a hell of a lot more of a game than something like Gone Home.

Cinematic experiences are bad because of a lack of gameplay, not challenge.
By this logic Mario can be compared to a Cinematic Experience when Mario is what video games are at their core.

Not even fucking close.
youtube.com/watch?v=DmpLgEXDL3k

>Calls games like Federation Force garbage
Are you really going to pretend that Fed Force is good just to spite ACFag? Come on now.

Never ever, PCuck

read my reply to him in this very thread

You don't need to have a, 'collection of skills,' by the end of a game. Kirby is especially good at pulling something like this. It's final bosses are grand and epic, but at the same time the main campaign remains plain and simple.

Do you just have a vehement hate against Kirby?

>quality=sales

>No Reincarnation
At least we can agree that the ballad one was the worst, right?

Tales of Berseria or Ys 8, can't decide so I'm taking both
I love both games so much holy shit.

Can't believe Berseria was so good when every Tales since Graces (that is only good for the gameplay anyways) has been mediocre to shit.

And Ys 8, I was all ready to give up on Falcom after Sen2 and especially Tokyo fucking Xanadu but they hit it out of the park there, it rivals best Ys with Felghana for me and is definitely much better than say Celceta.

I would also put Utawarerumono 3 but it's probably count more as a Visual Novel as a game, still loved it

>Aliens aren't animals

Yes they are? Being from another planet doesn't bar you from being an animal. The dictionary definition definitely agrees.

>"Animals are multicellular, eukaryotic organisms of the kingdom Animalia (also called Metazoa). All animals are motile, meaning they can move spontaneously and independently at some point in their lives. "

Nothing about this says they have to be from earth.

>Except I did, when I was talking about FNAF, I was talking about the series as a whole.
It isn't very fair to hate on FNAF world just because the previous games sucked, right? Infact, that was one of your arguments against my list, in that I was "judging unreleased games" because of the sins of the previous titles. Granted, with any game on that list that's unreleased, if it comes out and it's actually good, I'll completely change my tone about it and give it a fair prop. But until then, it's just another soulless rehash. And if FNAF world wasn't released yet, I would completely understand you hating it because of the track record of the previous games. You get what I'm saying?

>Challenge is not a problem, but it can certainly be done badly and certainly isn't the point of video games.
Then what is? The "experience"? The story? The graphics? I'd cite that the gameplay is all that matters in a game, and a game that doesn't require much thinking on your part doesn't feel like a game that's trying, like it's ashamed to be a game and wants to skip past the videogamey sections to get you to the next cutscene, or pretty set piece. Look at FFXV for example, and all that we've seen. The game looks like a slog through pretty set pieces, with the occasional button mashing scene that takes almost no effort. Can the story or graphics really redeem gameplay that doesn't ask you to jump out of your comfort zone?

You will probably love P5 even more, it's basically SMT at this point

>Kirby might not have challenge, but it's a hell of a lot more of a game than something like Gone Home.
Since Gone Home can be beaten in 20 seconds, I can technically agree, but at the end of the day these games pride themselves on not being "videogamey". Robobot may not be directly guilty, but Kirby as a whole can be accused of not wanting to be a video game, but more of a "comfy simulator". Look at Epic Yarn for example. You literally cannot die in the game, and the only challenge is collecting things. Considering that 99% of Nintendo games already qualify as collectathons, is this really a selling point?

>Cinematic experiences are bad because of a lack of gameplay, not challenge.
i'd argue otherwise. There are tons of cinematic experiences that have gameplay, but they don't want to be games. They dislike challenge because it "reinforces white privilege and rape culture" and whatever silly nonsense tumblr talks about. Look at Uncharted. 15 hours of gameplay mixed in with 5 hours of dialogue and cutscenes and exposition. I'd still consider it cinematic. Look at The Order 1886 as another example. Or even Dragon Age Inquisition, which totes 200 hours of gameplay, but at the end of the day every single waking moment in the game is just looking at a text screen, or a pop up dialog, or walking along a hallway to get to the next cinematic. Granted, Kirby isn't that bad, but it still holds the same philosophy, that an "Experience" shouldn't ask the player to challenge themselves.

>ITT: We post the best games of 2016 so far.

except SMTxFE was not a good game. Hell, pic related is better than that failed crossover

>Kirby
>Furry

I'm convinced that this is bait.

I mean, holy shit.

>Nothing about this says they have to be from earth.

It's literally there: "eukaryotic organisms of the kingdom Animalia". There can't be two kingdoms of the same. Alien life would form their own kingdom(s).

>Kirby is especially good at pulling something like this. It's final bosses are grand and epic
How though? Being grand and epic can fall flat on its face if the game didn't properly build you up to that moment. And if the boss itself is weak and predictable, then it falls even further down the line and treads into "interactive cutscene" territory.

>Do you just have a vehement hate against Kirby?
If I did, it would be in the lowest tier next to Federation Force and Call of Duty. I just dislike the philosophy that it encapsulates, that a game shouldn't be challenging.

>Yes they are? Being from another planet doesn't bar you from being an animal. The dictionary definition definitely agrees.
And by technicality Humans are also animals, but that doesn't make us furry.
Furry is specifically about animals like wolves, cats, and maybe the occasional lizard and bird.

Aliens are in a whole other section.

>>"Animals are multicellular, eukaryotic organisms of the kingdom Animalia (also called Metazoa). All animals are motile, meaning they can move spontaneously and independently at some point in their lives."
You know that class is specifically from Earth right?

If we found Aliens on another planet we would've classify them in that if not a whole other tree altogether.

>It isn't very fair to hate on FNAF world just because the previous games sucked, right?
FNAF was never really interesting in the first place, the first game was ok and the rest was awful.
>Infact, that was one of your arguments against my list, in that I was "judging unreleased games" because of the sins of the previous titles.
All admit that was a pretty shoddy argument on my part.

Then what is? The "experience"? The story? The graphics?
The gameplay.
>I'd cite that the gameplay is all that matters in a game, and a game that doesn't require much thinking on your part doesn't feel like a game that's trying, like it's ashamed to be a game and wants to skip past the videogamey sections to get you to the next cutscene, or pretty set piece.
Gameplay is still gameplay even if it's simple. You do more shit in Kirby than any cinematic experience.
>Look at FFXV for example, and all that we've seen. The game looks like a slog through pretty set pieces, with the occasional button mashing scene that takes almost no effort. Can the story or graphics really redeem gameplay that doesn't ask you to jump out of your comfort zone?
It really depends. Kirby has simple gameplay that makes you feel strong. The games are simple because Kirby is simple.

Apparently someone forgot about Dedede's "drooling while eating" habit.

But all games SHOULDN'T be challenging.

Games are meant for all varieties or people. Games like Kirby are meant to be simple and fun experiences, with a slight extra challenge for those who want it.

Kirby also loves to give bones to older fans, which is really nice.

>Alien life would form their own kingdom(s).
How do we know that? And who says it wouldn't be furry?

I mean shoot, the entire argument here is that FNAF is furry pandering, but there isnt' a single furry character in the games. They're all robots.

I stopped listening to the retard when he called Kirby a walking sim

there's no excuse to not play a very good JRPG if you are interested in those. You can literally pirate it and patch it to solve your problem.

>Hashtag FE
>very good JRPG

>stardew
>slime ranch
>fnaf world
>>>>>>that high
ill give you a (you) for taking time into making this image

>And by technicality Humans are also animals, but that doesn't make us furry.
Technically it does, but we fall into multiple areas. A fat furry guy, for example? He's considered bara. A small kid hooking up with an older girl? Straight shota. and etc.

>If we found Aliens on another planet we would've classify them in that if not a whole other tree altogether.
That remains to be seen, and feels speculative at best. For example, the fossilized microbes found on Mars were put into our animal kingdom structure despite not being from earth. Their actual classification remains to be cemented, but their animalia and specification are pretty much set in stone.

>FNAF was never really interesting in the first place, the first game was ok and the rest was awful.
And I'm not denying that for the four cash cow installments. They're all below average quality. But I'd argue that FNAF World deserves a little accolades for essentially taking the piss out of the series. Someone once called it "shitposting in video game form."

>It really depends. Kirby has simple gameplay that makes you feel strong. The games are simple because Kirby is simple.
Again this could be said with any game like Uncharted or TLOU. There's technically hours of gameplay amidst the cutscenes, but it doesn't ask you to do anything but go through the motions. After a while it just feels like the game is playign itself.

>Games are meant for all varieties or people.
Then where's the challenge? Shouldn't there at least be something like the true arena that I don't need to play the whole game just to get to?

But all those games suck

So far, I loved TMS#FE, Deus Ex, AM2R, and Bravely Second. Playing Doom now and im loving every second of it.

Pokken and Kirby Planet Robobot are fun, but not GOTY contenders

So far, AM2R and TMS#FE are my 2 favorites

>you can die in a game like Uncharted
>you literally can not die in Kirby's Epic Yarn

>one is a walking simulator, the other isn't

Take a guess.

>Technically it does, but we fall into multiple areas. A fat furry guy, for example? He's considered bara. A small kid hooking up with an older girl? Straight shota. and etc.
If told some furries that they'd call you stupid as fuck.
>That remains to be seen, and feels speculative at best. For example, the fossilized microbes found on Mars were put into our animal kingdom structure despite not being from earth. Their actual classification remains to be cemented, but their animalia and specification are pretty much set in stone.
[citation needed]

>And I'm not denying that for the four cash cow installments. They're all below average quality. But I'd argue that FNAF World deserves a little accolades for essentially taking the piss out of the series. Someone once called it "shitposting in video game form."
Making fun of your past fuck ups doesn't remove them.

>Again this could be said with any game like Uncharted or TLOU. There's technically hours of gameplay amidst the cutscenes, but it doesn't ask you to do anything but go through the motions. After a while it just feels like the game is playign itself.
No it really can't. Again, you're comparing entirely different genres on very loose and subjective terms.
I could argue that Stardew is cinematic because of it's lack of serious gameplay and difficulty, but I'd also be called a retard.

>ctrl+f
>no Project X Zone 2
fuck all y'all

>No Death = Walking Simulator

Well Gee Rick I guess that means Rayman is a walking simulator then!

>If told some furries that they'd call you stupid as fuck.
And I'd say it sounds stupid if you make furry porn about a fox, but then say he's an alien fox totally unrelated to earth foxes, and that suddenly makes it not furry.

>[citation needed]
smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/life-on-mars-78138144/?no-ist

Nowhere is it mentioned that we need new animalia kingdom classifications.

>Making fun of your past fuck ups doesn't remove them.
Actively removing them from the game and going in a different direction with the spinoff does a good job of removing them.

>I could argue that Stardew is cinematic because of it's lack of serious gameplay and difficulty, but I'd also be called a retard.
Stardew is a little on the weak end in terms of gameplay challenge, so that argument could be made.

>This game doesn't appeal to me and have my standard of challenge so it's bad

Ah. I see where you're coming from, user.

>a game made by Ubisoft is a walking simulator

Wouldn't surprise me in the slightest.

>And I'd say it sounds stupid if you make furry porn about a fox, but then say he's an alien fox totally unrelated to earth foxes, and that suddenly makes it not furry.
That doesn't make sense.
You can't have an "alien fox".

>Stardew is a little on the weak end in terms of gameplay challenge, so that argument could be made.
No it really couldn't.
If you called Stardew a cinematic game people would call you a faggot, a retard, or a baiter, or all three. That simply doesn't make sense.
Nice bait.

What's it like having the absolute best taste in the thread user?

this isn't funny
the fact you'd even start a thread with that game calling it anything other than average is cringey as fuck and you are simultaneously proving that nintendo fans have no taste and overhype their shit games

.
>If you called Stardew a cinematic game people would call you a faggot, a retard, or a baiter, or all three
What if I feel that theres a little too much dialogue and exposition, and not enough gameplay? Why is that such a crime? Especially considering how much the industry circlejerks hollywood """experiences""" and wants to get rid of videogamey things that offer a challenge.

Finally got around to finishing the new Doom. Actually payed full price for it and didn't feel complete buyers remorse for once.

The strong emphasis on offensive combat just feels too damn good.

>Implying either FEfags, SMTfags, or Nintendofags like this pile of trash
He's just baiting.

Because games like Stardew have existed long before the Cinematic Game craze and have never been called as such and importantly; ARE NOT EVEN IN THE SAME FUCKING GENRE.

I'm sorry but lack of difficulty and complex gameplay will NEVER be mutually exclusive to Cinematic Games no matter what your opinions of them are.

I've pretty much had enough of this stupid argument, it's like talking to a brick wall with ego issues.

>Because games like Stardew have existed long before the Cinematic Game craze
Gonna stop you right there. Cinematic games have always existed, and have been a blight on every console they step on. Whether they were tie ins for movies like Total Recall, or garbage with the story emphasized over the gameplay (Final Fantasy comes to mind) or games where you just point and click through an empty world without any puzzles (ripping off Riven and Myst was a big thing back in the day) these kinds of "games" have always been a burden. Being a different genre doesn't excuse it if the gameplay is constantly sacrificed to be "comfy" or "heartwarming" or some other buzzword.

>I'm sorry but lack of difficulty and complex gameplay will NEVER be mutually exclusive to Cinematic Games no matter what your opinions of them are.
I never said they were. But cinematic games are usually the prime culprits of such. And again, like i said before, if the purpose of a game is to tell a "story" or be comfy, then why even bother playing it? After all, the gameplay doesn't matter, and your interaction isn't important. That's what I feel every time a game tells me not to try, because it isn't going to try itself.

I'm sorry user, but I cannot look at a game as good if it throws up its arms and says "please don't expect a challenge. Someone might not be able to beat the game, and that would hurt their feelings. so everyone gets participation awards!"

>I've pretty much had enough of this stupid argument

was it really an argument when the other guy is just spouting stupid shit all the time?

Stupid? How so?

have you seen the stupid walls of text the moron posted?

too much reading. Got some bullet points?

his posts

I didn't see anything out of the ordinary.

>if its hard its quality!
so if its unplayable its a masterpiece?

There's obviously a fine line between challenge and artificial difficulty, but a good game would be able to skirt that line without going to either extreme.

Surely you'd rather play Devil May Cry than play Uncharted, right?

I dont like hack n slash gameplay but i also dont like cinematic experiences. but yeah id rather play the first if i really have to choose.

What i dont really understand is how you can undermine the value of interaction of a world with a player just by judging its challenge on to the player itself.
or hell even compare it to walking simulators who dont offer more than a straight walk.

In a nutshell, challenge is not what defines a game as good or not its just an aspect of gameplay nothing more. Some games are based around it some games do without them.

It's fun
Also doom 4

>What i dont really understand is how you can undermine the value of interaction of a world with a player just by judging its challenge on to the player itself.
It's all about risk/reward. If i don't feel like I've earned something, then I don't enjoy it. If I'm fighting a big epic final boss, but he's not hard, then I don't feel like I'm earning my victory over him.

Other games this year, like Metroid Federation force were very guilty of this as well. If you want to play solo, you get to use a chip called "Lone Wolf" which lets you do double damage. The problem is that it ALSO reduces damage you take, so there's absolutely no risk involved in using it. It's a 100% benefit that doesn't make the game more fun, and it's also a lazy copout for good gameplay scaling, since it's obviously just multiplayer trash that you can play by yourself, without the game compensating for that.

>In a nutshell, challenge is not what defines a game as good or not its just an aspect of gameplay nothing more
There is no point to a video game if some degree of challenge isn't there. That's why I initially compared Kirby to walking simulators. If you're a person who doesn't care about a game being "cute" or "comfy" then this series holds absolutely nothing of worth to you, akin to getting someone to like Call of Duty if they don't like gritty realistic war shooters. I cannot even remember the last game I enjoyed that didn't have at least a hard mode in it.

persona 5

H-Hello...

Before i go any further with my argument i need to know. Do you consider that platformers can be good games? If so what would be an example?

But all those people have actually come to an agreement that it's pretty good

A platformer can be good, but obviously it needs a deal of quality. One of my favorites this year was Am2R. Technically a Metroidvania, but it also has platforming. Right off the bat, it has a functioning hard mode, so it's nice for someone who likes a little challenge.

In term of SMT this year

P5 > Final/Apocalypse > #FE

Having played them all
And before people go "PERSONA ISN'T SMT", go play it, it's as SMT as they come

Actual demons and not the shadows shit, negotiations, guns, actually really well designed and fun dungeons.

Add to that really smooth gameplay with attack that don't take forever like #FE and the ability to be fully free 2 times by day instead of one like the previous games

Dark Souls 3

Plants vs Zombies Garden Warfare 2

Mario and Luigi Paper Jam

Street Fighter V

Forza Horizon 3

Kirby Planet Robobot

Lets start by defining what makes a platformer good. It would be its gameplay right?

But what exactly is gameplay?
Id argue its the interaction between a player and the world its presented with.

So how do we define if a platformer did this interaction in a compelling way that warrants game time or a purchase.

Well, we see if the elements it has are different than others for a start. Kirby robobot promises new features that arent in other games, that is the usual kirby formula of absorbing enemy powers is changed to add a new robot element that makes it different. Here we are already offered a new experience.

Im trying not to use words like fun or enjoyable because that is subjective. Instead i use words like new or different. If the experience is new then its worth paying for, if its different then it is too. Kirby offers interactions that are different, it offers ways to reach the ending that can vary since you are given a multitude of way to interact with enemies until you reach the end. that makes every level different, every obstacle it presents you with has a myriad of ways of being overcome. You dont just jump and run over enemies like mario presents. The game is it easy and that is worthy of not making it the best game since the interactions dont require much skill when compared to other platformers.

All of the above without even bringing into account the story, characters, soundtrack, graphics all things that can contribute to a good game.

Notice that at no point do i mention difficulty because kirby never bases itself around it like other games do nor does it need to prove itself as a good platformer (Do note that nonetheless it still gives the player this, just later on).

What makes a game good is what gameplay that is new and different from its competition. I havent played Am2R but what does it do thats different from others? what sets it apart? what will i experience that i havent experienced before.

I really enjoyed Ace Attorney Spirit of Justice, it's not GOTY material by a long shot but I really fucking enjoyed it especially as an Apollo fag, and the variety of different gameplay mechanics was fucking nice

Mario and Luigi Paper Jam was surprisingly good, they did a nice job building an entire RPG based on the Standard Mario World, and it had a lot of variety. Toad Missions vary but I personally really likes them because your mostly on the overworld doing shit. The only ones I absolutely hated was where they are floating around and you have to catch them before touching the ground. Otherwise best fucking gameplay mechanics as well as special moves, and by far the most entertaining bosses in the series. Since this game's designs was made on purpose, I'm really looking forward to the improvements made into a new game with new places and characters