-Final Fantasy is not an rpg. It's a linear story telling game that just happens to have gameplay mechanics (turn based battles, leveling, etc.) that are common among rpgs. There is no actual role playing in the series beyond the first game (and MAYBE the third, if I'm being generous), so I don't think they should be called rpg's.
There's a MASSIVE difference between a JRPG and an RPG. JRPG's are very much their own thing, and were always meant as a linear story telling genre. They're more based on the VN genre than anything else, whereas western RPG's are developed off of D&D.
(Note that the split between western RPG's and JRPG's doesn't have a thing to do with the geographical location of the author anymore.)
-Turn based battles are not obsolete. They can have the same sense of excitement as any action game battle, they just go about it differently. Action vs Turn Based both have their advantages so it's more of a trade off picking one over the other. Turn Based leads itself more to the "imagination" aspect of rpg's though.
When did this become an unpopular opinion? I know a lot of people who dislike the traditional turn based stuff, but not much more than a vocal minority that would call them "obsolete."
anything indie in its name is a joke.
If the game actually put indie in the title, yeah, it's probably a sarcastic joke.
In fact, I think I want to make a game called "Indie Simulator 2014" now.
the problem is that the market for indies sort of whores out the word "indie" alone. it worked for fez, and people bought it. it works for braid and people buy it. I hate how the TERM itself is just so whored out in its entirety. a game should stand on its own merits, not because of how its made.
Fez and Braid weren't considered good games because they're indie, though. That's kind of a baseless claim. You might say they got popular by being indie games, or used the term to advertise, but that's a different story.
My problem with "indie" is that it doesn't mean shit anymore, because at this point most of the games that call themselves indie have a publisher. To most people it means that it's not AAA, and stuff like Bastion or nearly any Double Fine game or even Day Z get called "indie." It's really just a buzz word at this point.
Qauntic Dream and David Cage are overrated and terrible. For example, Heavy Rain? The game everyone lauded as "the greatest"? I hated it; it's barely a game at all, and even then only because it has QTE. That's all.
For one, QTE's are really really unfairly condemned. A lot of games use them terribly, but that doesn't mean you should EVER say that a game is bad simply because it uses QTE's. Explain why it uses them poorly. This annoyed the crap out of me with The Walking Dead critiques, when in all reality it used QTE's very well; they produced good immersion, by having you perform frantic motions in frantic moments like mashing a button to push a zombie off of you and some calmer mouse/analogue stick motions when the actions performed are calm. The problem that QTE's have when they're haphazardly added to games is that they aren't consistent; you see that you're in a cutscene, you calm down, and then all of a sudden it has you press A for some reason, and you miss it, and you're forced to start the cutscene over... they use it as a lazy way to pretend like you aren't watching a cutscene, basically, and to not have you lose control of the character, when in all reality that's such a horrible way to do it that it's 500x as bad as excessive cutscenes.
And as for the "barely even a game" thing... well, you don't really understand what a game is. The definition of a game is extremely dependent on circumstance. It's a waste of time to attempt to make a unified definition of "game" because, much like "art", you're never really going to find one that fits every game. As such, it's silly to accuse one game of being more gamey than another game, since if we can't exactly define "game" then we sure as hell don't know what makes a game "gamey." This all kind of sounds like a run-on sentence because I've had to make this argument like a million times, I'm really tired of it, if you want me to go more in-depth I guess I can but I honestly really don't want to, look up a youtube video or something. Actually, here, hand selected youtube video that explains more:
Knock yourself out.
...
Ya could've foooooooooooled me. .-.
There's pretty much no one that's really involved with gaming that would tell you that games cause shootings.
Although, really really unpopular gaming opinion:
When studies are funded to test games as a cause of violent behavior, why the fuck does everyone freak out? There are 3 realistic outcomes to the scenario, and you benefit from all of them:
1.) Games really do make people psychopaths and it's probably a good thing for you to know about, considering you play them.
2.) Games are conclusively proven to not cause long term violent behavior, and you get to rub it in to your local pretentious housewife.
3.) The study doesn't prove shit, you laugh at them for wasting money, life goes on.
Nobody has any reason to be angry. Seriously.
Majora's Mask is better than Ocarina of Time. In fact, Majora's Mask is the best Zelda game ever (This opinion has seen some popularity recently as well!).
Majora's mask is the best game Nintendo has ever made.
