Game is boring, bland, and nothing new

[World's Strongest Man 1984]

Even Hades 1 was the same. They're just boring rogue-like dungeon crawlers on easy mode, with barely any ingenuity. I'm convinced they sell well because people like the pat on the back rewards they get for playing easy games and winning. People who praise games like this have either never played video games before and don't realize this is literally nothing new, or are just easily impressed by anything because their lives are otherwise dull and boring.

Can someone make a convincing argument for why this game, or it's prequel, deserve any kind of merit? What is it that makes this game so impressive and supposedly so genius, that other rogue-likes have never done before? Because it's very samey. And not just that, but why did this warrant a sequel? The first game is almost identical.

[soul like that be capable of]

guess 97% positive reviews are made by unhappy people

[World's Strongest Man 1984]

Originally posted by Mika:

guess 97% positive reviews are made by unhappy people

100% of meth users are happy about using meth, it doesn't mean meth is good.

[ﾚﾌﾄ]

The argument to end all arguments.

POV: You're the next evolutionary stage of the humble water flea. After millions of years, you're the first of your kind to grow legs and walk on land.
One small step for crustaceans, one giant step for water flea kind.

It's a lot of work, but you climb the smallest hill you can find. This is it, the moment of truth, everything has been building up for this moment.

Originally posted by Chris Mintz-Pie:

I'm convinced they sell well because people like the pat on the back rewards they get for playing easy games and winning. People who praise games like this have either never played video games before and don't realize this is literally nothing new, or are just easily impressed by anything because their lives are otherwise dull and boring.

And then you die. Someone stepped on you without even noticing.

[FibS]

Charlie was right, children have too easy access to the Internet

['Strict]

Originally posted by Chris Mintz-Pie:

Originally posted by 'Strict:

Are you comparing games to.....food?

Do you.....need games to survive?


I myself would have compared games to other entertainment but then again....I don't need movies or games to survive like you do.

Good logic man



And no....I wouldn't get all achievements for a game I didn't like. If I don't like a game I tend to stop playing it or even refund it if possible

Tell me you've never made it out of highschool knowing what an analogy is without telling me.

Did you know that you can compare the redness of a red Ferraria to a red apple, even though one's a car, and the other is a fruit? Did you know that you can compare the texture of a tree to the texture of leather, even though one's a plant and one's an animal product. That's kind of the whole point of comparisons, to compare two *different* things.

Also, probably not wise to try slam dunk someone with the whole "I don't need movies or games to survive like you do." thing, when you have 4x more games than me, and more hours in your most played game than my entire library combined. But good try, man.

Can't tell if huge purposeful hypocrite, or accidental unintelligent ignorance.

Tell me you didn't read my post without saying you didn't read the post.

I literally said "I'd have used entertainment instead of food" but yeah...guess you saw red as soon as someone made fun of you and you started spewing insults around and saying I don't understand analogies.
But let me guess, if I had spelled something wrong cause I'm a fast typer you'd have been rolling on the floor laughing cause "he cant spell so he's a ****** moron !!"

And yes.....the amount of games and hours....I tend to play the games I buy (well actually 80% of my games I have 0 hours in since they are from bundles I bought cause getting the bundle of 10 games that had 9 games I didn't want....was still cheaper than buying that game alone on Steam). But I guess you just buy the games...then complain about them on the forums instead of playing them. And I think 3 of my top 5 are just idle games as well that I had running while playing other games or even while at work

[lensemerc]

I looked through your answers, and assuming that you are genuine in your bewilderment over the critical praise of the game -- yeah, it all amounts to the gorgeous style. Supergiant games has interesting narrative to them and characters that you want to follow and know more about. They put a lot of elbow grease in fleshing out the game world
Difficulty of the game can be adjusted after you sink 10 or more hours in to be more challenging, if you're into that stuff

[ButtahNips]

This is some REAL weak bait lmao

[DaylightDemon]

Originally posted by Chris Mintz-Pie:

What do you mean? This seems almost like an oxymoron. What's interesting about 3 basic types of attack? I personally found that very bland. It's like playing Call of Duty with only 3 gun choices. Or Stardew Valley with 3 plant choices. Or Elite Dangerous with 3 ship choices.

the 3 "basic types of attack" all serve different purposes and depending on what boons you find in your run, alter their behaviour and synergy. this ofc is nothing new for roguelikes but i think having 5 different weapons in early access each with 2 attack types and their channel variants (making it 4 per weapon in total) is plenty of options. and then you also got your snare circle that also has many different boons that alters the way it works. on top you also can unlock an "ultimate" with selenes boon that also can interact with your build or change your playstyle.

i genuinely dont know what it is youre missing here. sure there might be games that are "more complex" or "harder" but what has that to do with quality or fun per se?

a game doesnt need to be ultra hard or infinitely complex to be enjoyable. in fact, many of the greatest videogames of all time are streamlined and simple at first glance but offer great fun, flow, challenge or variety for many people across decades and generations.

and if you really think that way then you basically lose out on many great games because of weird, selfimposed standards.

what i ask myself is what games do you find enjoyable and why? it sounds to me as though you want your games to be as hard and as complex as possible and that would be worthwhile for you. hey, you do you.

[Kitten Shady]

Sorry to break it to you, but I've been playing games since the mid-nineties. So the argument is not good.
Absolutely any game can be called boring if you personally don’t like it; I would call a lot of games boring that been called masterpieces, and at the sight of which other people literally squeal with delight.
Usually I don’t like roguelike genre and everything in it, but in Hades and Hades 2 I like the plot, humor and visuals. Also the first game had delightfully responsive controls; in many games with a similar, say, running-teleportation, the controls are simply disgusting, but there it was literally DIVINE.

[Naijiro]

Originally posted by buttnut:

Originally posted by Dawnbomb:

Its the voice acting, and branching narrative.

The amount of text in these games, voiced text, that all never overstays its welcome, is immense. Its very rich voice acting, combined with very high end audio effects applied to the recordings. Its also very stylish.

However, the gameplay of hades 1 is a hot mess. Other then people straight up bad at games, its terrible. Everything is extremely tanky, by the arena fight it becomes absurd how tanky everything is. This problem gets so significant, people theorized it wasn't mathematically possible to actually beat the max difficulty.

This is a great video on it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S-VUzcJHWF0

Altho someone did manage to beat it, it still stands it took years of endless grinding to do so, to get the perfect RNG.

the gameplay is extremely basic, but the game is gorgeous.

In that sense, it has some of the appeal of pokemon. Graphically gorgeous, adventurously rich, and intellectually vapid.

Another thing that making hades popoff, is a lack of quality roguelikes.
While it's easy to go, go play something better, whats the better?
other genres have fire emblem or the tales series to go super high end, but roguelikes? We had isaac, and then gungeon, but then what? The only mega big one has been slay the spire, and its a deckbuilder! Infact, every other "big" one (also bad) is stuff like balatro or slice and dice. Also bad, but interesting enough that for people beyond burnt out of the good ones, their down to explore something new even if they know its not nearly as good.

Hades hits that "good enough to experience" but not actually being a intellectually stimulating game area. One to help tide people over until we get our next mega roguelike. We did get Chrono arc, but its so easy, and the runs so absurdly consistent, you can get the same build every single time.

Saying the text never overstays its welcome is a wild take. There's some much pointless boring exposition it almost makes the game unplayable. Maybe if they spent time adding actual gameplay mechanics and interesting interactions then it would really be a great game.

Lack of quality roguelikes is also insane. There's a dozen right now that are clearly drastically better than this game. Having polished art doesn't make your game the best in this genre, the gameplay does, and this game is so obscenely shallow and dull in that department. Balatro is bad? What a ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ terrible opinion. The fact that you think Gungeon, Isaac, and StS are still the best in the genre shows how massively out of touch and stupid you are. Balatro is only a 'really good' roguelike and it completely blows this dull boring piece of ♥♥♥♥ out of the water.

I keep seeing people comment on this but no

Originally posted by Chris Mintz-Pie:

Originally posted by dino thunder peenie esploder:

god forbid a man enjoy playing an easy game and winning

You're totally allowed to do that. I'm happy for you if you enjoy the game, that just doesn't mean it's genius design, or a good narrative as people seem to claim.

My point with the whole "easy mode" thing is that if you're playing a game that's easy, and winning a lot, you're likely to say that game is good, because it feels rewarding to play, even if it's not. I mean, people are actually saying it has a good narrative. That's just the worst take, it's not even close to a narrative in any sense. But if you enjoy the game, I don't have a problem with that, I'm just saying it's been made to be cheaply enjoyable rather than richly enjoyable.

My thing about your argument is, who are you to tell people what's rewarding or what isn't? It seems like based on what you're saying your personal sense of reward comes from playing difficult games, and if that's your thing then cool, but it doesn't mean you get to tell other people they can't enjoy things just because they prefer to not struggle though games with what limited time they likely have to game.

If you have a lot of time, or perhaps a lot of patience to keep hitting your head against a wall until it breaks then say you're a king for that cool, but a lot of people would rather just use the door right next to the wall that provides just as much entertainment for them.

I think the issue comes in when people like you associate your ego with gaming, to the point where you have so much ego you can tell other people how to feel about games.

You can sit here and call this game "cheaply" enjoyable but you've provided no examples of what you find richly enjoyable narrative or gameplay wise, it's like you're just crapping on people for enjoying things but not providing any better alternatives. I mean what is GOOD narrative to you? I think it's neat that the game focuses a lot on world building, different plot threads, fleshing out characters, and more.

Considering your comment history it looks like one of your most played games is a 13 yr old pixel based dungeon crawler, so your taste in games is thrown into question, although i'd never say you can't enjoy that either.

[Naijiro]

Originally posted by Chris Mintz-Pie:

Originally posted by Mika:

guess 97% positive reviews are made by unhappy people

100% of meth users are happy about using meth, it doesn't mean meth is good.

What a stupid comparison to make, also a childish take considering how many people are likely in rehab for the drug.

['Strict]

Originally posted by DaylightDemon:

Originally posted by Chris Mintz-Pie:

What do you mean? This seems almost like an oxymoron. What's interesting about 3 basic types of attack? I personally found that very bland. It's like playing Call of Duty with only 3 gun choices. Or Stardew Valley with 3 plant choices. Or Elite Dangerous with 3 ship choices.

the 3 "basic types of attack" all serve different purposes and depending on what boons you find in your run, alter their behaviour and synergy. this ofc is nothing new for roguelikes but i think having 5 different weapons in early access each with 2 attack types and their channel variants (making it 4 per weapon in total) is plenty of options. and then you also got your snare circle that also has many different boons that alters the way it works. on top you also can unlock an "ultimate" with selenes boon that also can interact with your build or change your playstyle.

i genuinely dont know what it is youre missing here. sure there might be games that are "more complex" or "harder" but what has that to do with quality or fun per se?

a game doesnt need to be ultra hard or infinitely complex to be enjoyable. in fact, many of the greatest videogames of all time are streamlined and simple at first glance but offer great fun, flow, challenge or variety for many people across decades and generations.

and if you really think that way then you basically lose out on many great games because of weird, selfimposed standards.

what i ask myself is what games do you find enjoyable and why? it sounds to me as though you want your games to be as hard and as complex as possible and that would be worthwhile for you. hey, you do you.

It sounds to me like this guy would have hated the console games I grew up with like SEGA and Nintendo, the controllers for the SEGA only had 3 buttons and one of those were usually for jumping, and if a game has to have more than 3 attacks to be fun....then none of those games would be fun, but yet they sold.

Also....he used Call of Duty as an example....how many different attacks do those games have !? Yeah there's diferent weapons but they almost all do the exact same thing just in different ways. Automatic, semi-automatic, spread or 1-tap. So that makes no sense as a comparison.
And the "what if Stardew Valley only had 3 crops?" well it also has animals, mining, fighting, dating, friendships and so on. I don't think anyone is playing Stardew Valley cause "It has more crops than this other game". It's about the quality of the game, not the amount of damn crops.
But someone should make a game for this guy with 400 crops and nothing else to do and he'd love it.


And speaking of games being hard to be fun....I personally hate games where it's all about dodging like Elden Ring and whatnot.....does that mean I say it's a ♥♥♥♥ game? Nope, it's just not a game for me, if you enjoy it, great for you. For me though...I'd get bored after 5 minutes.

I also hate permadeath in games like Xcom, doesn't mean I hate xcom, I actually love those games.....I just savescum if my higher ranked troops die =p

So why say that a game is ♥♥♥♥ and that everyone else must hate it just cause you don't like it?
I don't like all foods, movies or games...but no need to throw hate over them or over people that like them/it.



If the guy had just said "I don't like this game cause of X and Y" instead of insulting every person that enjoys it...nothing would have happened. But instead he decided to troll and throw insults.

[Antorius]

Originally posted by Chris Mintz-Pie:

I don't claim to know of a better rogue-like, but I do claim to know of others of the same quality that had nowhere near the same amount of success that Hades did.

I would be interested to hear which other games you are thinking of.

[Ender Yılmaz]

"Game is boring, bland, and nothing new"
Game can be boring or bland for you but saying nothing new is objectively false statement game is filled with new stuff. But you are the guy who say "respect my pronouns" so no gamer respect people like you and people like you deserve no respect in gaming. Go cry about it on film industry they care about your pronouns we give no ♥♥♥♥ about your pronouns. Also saying "don't assume my gender" is objectively fascistic statement. You have no power over what other people can or cant assume. You crossing your line

[rick432656]

This is one of my favorite games and its in early access so happy they decided to let us play it and give feedback