Top 5 Stupidest Things To Praise Video Games For

[ElectroYoshi]

Now you guys may remember my thread about the Top 5 Stupidest Things to Criticize Video Games For. Well, unfortunately there's also some pretty stupid things to praise a video game for. Wanna know why? See below (And be sure to take plenty of notes, because this will be on the final).

5. Nostalgia
What it means: Saying a game is good because it harkens back to the series' earlier days
Why it's not valid: I'll be fair here and say that nostalgia in general isn't a bad thing. In fact, I thought that the return of the Tanooki Suit in Super Mario 3D Land was a pleasant surprise. Here's the thing though: Nostalgia is an OK thing to like about a game when it is used sporadically. If it's what the whole game is based around then...does it really feel like a new game? I'd say no. Nostalgia in place of innovation is bound to send a game into a redundancy curse (See New Super Mario Bros. for further reading).
4. "Everybody's game is different"
What it means: No two people will have the same experience with the game.
Why it's not valid: Aaaaahaha! Betcha didn't see that one coming, didja!? Well, whatever. What was I saying? Oh yeah, why it isn't valid.

Here's how it works: Open-ended games like Skyrim are often praised because no two people will have the same exact experience when they play through it. While this is a good way to up replay value (and also got me hooked on various Atmosphir levels for weeks, MONTHS even, on end), it does not do a lot to improve the experiences you do have with the game. Will it make the combat more interesting? No. Will it make the temples any different? No. So yeah, it's a cool idea to base a game around, and for that reason, I don't find it to be a "laugh-out-loud bad" reason to like a game, but it isn't a great reason to give a game a perfect 10 like some critics do.
3. It changes the core mechanics of the franchise
What it means: Yeahhh, I don't think this one really needs explaining...
Why it's not valid: Ummm...well...people tend to like the core mechanics of their favorite franchises. That's why they call them, y'know, their favorites. The core mechanics changing doesn't really make for a better game. In fact, it can make for a worse game. Zelda games have always had swordplay as a core mechanic. And most, if not all, Zelda fans would completely flip out if that mechanic was replaced with the water gun mechanic Super Mario Sunshine is built around. If you like something about a series, why would you want that thing to change?

2. Because it's [Insert franchise here]
What it means: Excessive Fanboyism. What more do I need to say?
Why it's not valid: Holy Mary Mother of God, don't even get me started on this. Oh whoops, too late. If you like a game because it's Mario or because it's Sonic, that is chronic fanboyism! If you have never bought anything but one franchise all your life, that is fanboyism.

But that's not the main problem. If the reason you like something has nothing to do with the thing itself, is it possible that you don't actually, y'know... like it??? Every time I hear the phrase "true fan", I want to go up to the person who said it and punch them in the face as hard as I possibly can. People tell me I'm not a true Zelda fan because I don't like Majora's Mask, or that I'm not a true Mario fan because I don't like the Mario Golf games. You became a fan of the franchise because it did something right. You became a fan of it because you played one of the games and enjoyed yourself. If a game in the franchise ever comes out that you don't enjoy, your loyalty to the franchise may or may not survive. The only people that are not true fans are those who only like [Insert franchise here] "because it's [Insert same franchise here]". If you do not fall into this group, you are a fan. If you do, you are not. And now, for the moment you have allll been waiting for

1. Three words: Dynamic camera angles
What it means: Cameras that shift around a lot in game and capture a lot of different perspectives
Why it's not valid: *Sigh...* There is just no defending this one. I do think that all the other things are stupid, but those are all completely valid reasons to like a game compared to this. This has no effect on the experience. The new Donkey Kong Country game for the Wii U that Retro Studios announced at E3 has dynamic camera angles at certain points. That's neat, but it's not a good selling point in any way. If Retro hadn't done that, the game would probably be exactly the same. Anyway, seeing a game get praised just for this is a major pet peeve of mine, and that's why I have it at number 1.

[Phantomboy]

Great list I can understand praise given being a bit unwarranted and perhaps that upsets some people, sure. However, it is worth noting that nearly all of these rules can be broken and a player can have entirely justifiable praise for a game. Since a lot of narrative-driven games play off invoking an emotion onto the player - if the intended emotion is nostalgia then by any account the game has succeeded its goal. For instance, a game like Limbo is a heavily emotion driven game. Fear being one of the main emotions, however it is arguable that nostalgia is another, not only holding a 2D art theme to convey this but you are also playing as a young child. A figure that is uncertain of the future and what lies ahead but regardless pushes on for the reward. For many this may be a big key of nostalgia for their own childhood.

4. Creating a game experience that attempts to mix up each players diverse expedition is an at least well-intentioned idea. However many games can pull this off well and generally get properly earned praise. Such as a game like Spelunky or Minecraft, both examples of games that can be generally well rounded with this sort of thing. Grand Theft Auto is another game that pulls this off well in some of its missions, because of the open layout of the world and the fact that the game developers couldn't predict how the player might attack something in a mission has to be designed with that in mind.

3. Changing the core mechanic of the franchise can also be done well, if done correctly. It is easy to call back to Super Mario 64 for a shining example.

2. Often liking a game because of a franchise is very obviously biased and short-sighted. There is no ignoring that. However, many major fans of the Super Smash bros series originally picked it up because they wanted to be Link, Kirby or etc. Simply seeing their favourite character in this new lighting and created enthusiasm for a style of combat gaming that perhaps the player would have overlooked otherwise. I am not saying it is a flawless outlook, but it is something the game does pull off well. I suppose the same case can be made for the Marvel Capcom franchise as well.

1. Heavy Rain is, for all intents and purposes, a game about dynamic camera angles. For what it aims to do they game polishes it well. I see this type of game being disliked a lot and I can understand that, it is a very hard mechanic to pull off. Whilst the game isn't my cup of tea, I wouldn't say that a gamer liking it for the camera angles is unjustified or stupid as the game has a reason to do it.

I suppose that is what I have concluded with this. If the game has a reason to do it, these reasons aren't so stupid after all Of course, keep in mind that this, as with most lists, is written on opinion... I can understand there is likely a million and one opposing opinions that can be made here but I hope I have at least justified mine to some and I completely respect everyone's separate thoughts on this

[ElectroYoshi]

4. Creating a game experience that attempts to mix up each players diverse expedition is an at least well-intentioned idea.

Oh yes, I won't try to deny that.

The main reason I put that on the list is because It's hard for me to imagine that it really does anything to improve or impede on the overall experience. The new Legend of Zelda game for the Wii U is supposed to be a lot more open ended (think Skyrim) and while I do think that will provide an interesting experience, I also can't imagine that it will do a lot to impact how much I like the game, since it will still be a Zelda game at its core.

And yes, there is definitely more wiggle room here than on the Things to Criticize Games For thread. If one of these things is part of the game's central idea, I'm willing to make an exception to it, but games that are built around nostalgia or camera angles aren't terribly common, which is why I put those on the list.

[Phantomboy]

Oh yes, I won't try to deny that.

The main reason I put that on the list is because It's hard for me to imagine that it really does anything to improve or impede on the overall experience. The new Legend of Zelda game for the Wii U is supposed to be a lot more open ended (think Skyrim) and while I do think that will provide an interesting experience, I also can't imagine that it will do a lot to impact how much I like the game, since it will still be a Zelda game at its core.

And yes, there is definitely more wiggle room here than on the Things to Criticize Games For thread. If one of these things is part of the game's central idea, I'm willing to make an exception to it, but games that are built around nostalgia or camera angles aren't terribly common, which is why I put those on the list.

Yeah, I feared towards the end of writing my post it was veering towards a complaint rather than an actual opinion. With that said, I fully accept and agree that these rules are broken for the worse more times than the better. In the end, I think we can both agree - a game is good if it is built well. No matter the mechanics, if time and care was put into making it a meaningful experience then it deserves praise Also, I am still looking for a justifiable reason for the Wii U's massive controller will a screen in - I have yet to find a game that looks as if it will utilize it well and I invite you to let me know if you find any game that catches your eye regarding the controller

[ElectroYoshi]

Also, I am still looking for a justifiable reason for the Wii U's massive controller will a screen in - I have yet to find a game that looks as if it will utilize it well and I invite you to let me know if you find any game that catches your eye regarding the controller

You could make a pretty good case for Nintendo Land and Pikmin 3, methinks. :3

Super Mario 3D World is supposed to have some touch controls too, but not to a substantial degree, at least I don't think so.

[Phantomboy]

You could make a pretty good case for Nintendo Land and Pikmin 3, methinks. :3

Super Mario 3D World is supposed to have some touch controls too, but not to a substantial degree, at least I don't think so.

Ah, I haven't actually played a Pikmin game before. However, from what I have seen it seems that a seen giving touch-screen controls could benefit the game well as controlling a game which consists heavily of large crowds of characters seems more fit for a touch-screen than an analog stick.

[AtmoMario]

Nostalgia may not be one of the best reasons to praise a game, but it isn't a flaw like some of these other ones. Just because it blinds you to possible flaws does not make it inherently bad for a game.

[ElectroYoshi]

Nostalgia may not be one of the best reasons to praise a game, but it isn't a flaw like some of these other ones. Just because it blinds you to possible flaws does not make it inherently bad for a game.

I'm not saying it makes for a bad game. I don't mean that about any of these things, really...

I'm just saying that, to me, it seems kind of ignorant to like a game because it's nostalgic. I did like the nostalgic aspects of Super Mario 3D Land, but that's not the sole aspect of it I enjoyed. I enjoyed it because it provided a fun challenge and I thought it was well made. Nostalgia alone just doesn't really cut it for me.

[Miniike]

I think it's OKAY to praise a game for things like nostalgia and dynamic camera angles, but putting so much focus on them is stupid. They don't make/break the experience. Regardless, pointing them out isn't a big deal, at least in my opinion.

[ElectroYoshi]

Regardless, pointing them out isn't a big deal, at least in my opinion.

I know, I'm just saying it's stupid to like a game solely because of things like that.

[Miniike]

I know, I'm just saying it's stupid to like a game solely because of things like that.

OOOOooooohh....okay.

[AtmoMario]

I know, I'm just saying it's stupid to like a game solely because of things like that.

To like a game solely because of any one individual aspect of it is stupid. A good game should have more to it to like than just one or two things.

[SirWrek]

You mean I can't praise it for being CoD or having Guillermo del Toro angles?! >:/

To like a game solely because of any one individual aspect of it is stupid. A good game should have more to it to like than just one or two things.

This.

[ElectroYoshi]

To like a game solely because of any one individual aspect of it is stupid. A good game should have more to it to like than just one or two things.

This.

True, but I'm actually pretty forgiving on that front if it's something more relevant like the plot or the mechanics

[thelegendary]

Whenever someone says Sonic Unleashed is a good game because of the daytime stages yet openly admit that the night time stages suck. If over half the game sucks it isn't a good game!

[tta]

Whenever someone says Sonic Unleashed is a good game because of the daytime stages yet openly admit that the night time stages suck. If over half the game sucks it isn't a good game!

Is it weird that I don't mind the nighttime stages too much?

[ElectroYoshi]

Whenever someone says Sonic Unleashed is a good game because of the daytime stages yet openly admit that the night time stages suck. If over half the game sucks it isn't a good game!

Sonic Unleashed probably would've been a much better game if it weren't for that stupid Werehog thingy.