It is irritating, but at least it isn't an open butchery of grammar.

And now they did it again: CONV/RGENCE. What the heck does that even... (raging randomly)

Whatever you do, don't look up Resident Evil titles.

Could be worse. Could be Thi4f. (luckily they abandoned that one, although it didn't make the game any better...)

Crafting is annoying and irritating, and a big waste of time in the vast majority of games. Sure, I get the point of it in actual survival games like the Long Dark where it's kind of half the point with the game., .... but in rpgs and action games? no, I don't like it.

Looting is annoying, for the same reasons as above. Just reward me with the good stuff after I complete a mission/quest.

I often miss a well-crafted linear single-player game. Too many games feel like a sandbox experience these days.

4th-wall "meta" stuff is never good.

Kane & Lynch 2 was awesome, I have replayed it many times. It's like being in a classic Hong Kong action film.

I think it's really stupid when games have the genre in the title: "Action Man RPG", "Rogue Lords", "Orc Warchief: Strategy City Builder".

This is something I agree with. That and achievements.

One of the nicer things about GOG galaxy is that playtime and achievements can be disabled. I don't like to be pressured into playing fir the sake of ticking achievement boxes so my "gamer profile" looks better.

crafting can be good if devs go all way but they keep droping epics and legendary's makes crafting a underdog and worthless time sink

if they go all in, or all out it makes a lot more sense.

I don't mind crafting in general, but this was definitely an issue I had with Divinity: Original Sin. It has a really nice, deep crafting system that lets you make just about anything. But then, the devs go and stuff the game so full of loot that it renders the crafting absolutely pointless. The last thing you need in that game is to have yet another legendary sword of almighty smiting, alongside the other 5 that are already filling up your inventory.

So, I totally agree. If you're going to put crafting in, there has to be a point to it. Good gear should be made less frequent, so there is actually a benefit to the crafting. Otherwise, don't bother.

Interesting, that's the exact opposite of my opinion. If you're going to put crafting in, make it entirely optional, or fuck off. If you want to punish people for not doing chores, run an orphanage or something. Don't make games.

I'm not saying crafting should be essential to beat the game. At least not in an RPG (although in a survival crafting game, yes, as that is the whole point).

Yes, it should be optional, but there has to be a point to it. There has to be some in-game benefit of crafting. Because otherwise, if it's totally pointless, then there is no point having it at all. I think it's fine to have different ways to achieve the same goals in a game, and crafting, if done well, can provide more options to the player to achieve those goals. I don't agree it should be as black and white as crafting is either essential or pointless. It should be possible to achieve some middle ground between those two, and imo that is what developers should be aiming for.

Really, it's very similar to RPG side-quests. They shouldn't be essential for completing the game, but there should be some sort of reward for doing them. Crafting should be used as just another form of optional side-content, to give options and variety to the player, for how they build their character and beat the game.

Imo, D:OS would have been greatly improved if the frequency of loot was significantly reduced. Not to the point where you can't beat the game without crafting, but to the point where the crafting would be worth doing. Sure, have there be some (reduced) chance of finding decent gear lying around in a dungeon. Or have some good gear available from merchants (at a fairly high price). But, it would have been nice if the crafting had been a viable way to get hold of some good gear that you otherwise couldn't, or that was better customized to your characters.

But the way the game just constantly throws top notch gear at you all the time, it's hugely over the top.

That Duke Nukem Forever is a much better game than people give it credit for.

RPG side quests that do need to be completed to feasibly beat the game (particularly if it's your first playthrough) can be done well, particularly if the game's point is being less linear.

For example, looking at Super Famicom RPGs made by Square:
* In Final Fantasy 6, once you get the second airship, the game becomes non-linear. While you can go into the final dungeon right away, it's intended that you do sidequests to pick up companions; doing so gets you extra treasure, and you also get the XP you need to make the final dungeon not too difficult. There's also story content in these sidequests (though it fortunately isn't as cutscene heavy as the game is prior to getting the second airship), and the game guides you to specific sidequests (like the ones that give you Cyan, followed by the Gau one) so you don't need to wander aimlessly.
* Final Fantasy 5 and Chrono Trigger do something similar, albeit on a smaller scale. (In FF5 you're told you need to collect the 12 legendary weapons, but technically you don't need to do that, and only the first tablet (which unlocks 3 of them) is actually mandatory.)
* Romancing SaGa's mandatory tasks consist of a short intro, followed by having to fight a large number of battles to advance time, and then one of the endgame quests will open up. Before then, the game gives you sidequests that you can do so you aren't just wandering around fighting battles to advance time.
* Romancing SaGa 2 and 3, I believe, are still non-linear, but have a bit more structure. RS2, for example, has 7 major bosses that you do have to eventually kill, though not in any particular order.

This pattern also shows up in other games, like Dragon Wars; most of the game is sidequests, but you're expected to do them or there's no way you'll be strong enough to beat the game. (I note that there's one mandatory item and two mandatory spells in Dragon Wars.)

TES IV Oblivion is the best game in series for me

One opinion that doesn't seem strange to me, but does to many others, it seems:
* Dragon Quest 5 is one of the weaker entries in the series; Dragon Quest 6 (particularly the original version, as the remake took out monster recruitment and made game balance a bit worse) is much better.
* Similarly, I consider Dragon Quest 8 to be one of the weaker entries in the series, and may be my least liked entry in the series.

(With that said, note that Dragon Quest's quality is more consistent than Final Fantasy's; there are many FF games that are worse than DQ8. On the other hand, I prefer Romancing SaGa: Minstrel Song (which was released in the US around the same time) to DQ8, despite RS:MS using electric guitar in the normal battle theme, meaning I can't play the game for extended periods.)

RTS games shouldn't have overpowered siege units that can dominate with just 2-3 of them shelling you from who-knows-where(several screens away) while you struggle to find and eliminate them. Total annihilation and TA: Kingdoms, as well as Supreme Commander and Starcraft all suffer from this design choice and that's why I can't play them for longer than about an hour before I need a cognitive reset(different game) to deal with the stress of this type of gameplay.