Then what is?

Nintendo 64! No I mean Pong! Or Quake, or....
Whatever, arguing retro or aesthetics is ridiculous.

I'm not here to argue, just state my unpopular opinions. :)

Flatshaded polygons, early 90s P&C games, mid 90s RTS, various late 80s-early 90s arcade games and some others all look way better.

16-bit seems objectively better than 8-bit. And also subjectively easier on the eyes than the horrendous polygons of the next generation.

Gamers are nice and chill people.

Isn't it just a function of your age and when you grew up?
My golden childhood years were spent playing the VGA/SVGA games like the early 90s P&Cs you mentioned, SNES RPGs/ARPGs and for me, that is it, and I on the whole I find earlier EGA graphic games to be generally garish, and later 3D games to be too simplistic. But I can respect the skill and quality of some of the EGA games that came before (Loom and Monkey Island's VGA conversion was beautiful, but the originals were even more incredible considering the constraints).
3D before 2002/3 (aside from a few rare exceptions) look horrid, however :D.

I thought of another one, that specifically refers to games with RPG-like growth systems:
* Leveling up via experience points is a stale mechanic, and developers should experiment with other growth systems.
* Skill points gained via leveling up is one of the worst mechanics for learning and improving skills; it can be made more tolerable with patches (like easy respec, or having low (possibly scaling) caps on skills to force players not to overspecialize, but that still doesn't change the underlying system and really feels like a workaround to the problem. (Also, the system is overused these days, just like the experience level system has been since the earliest RPGs.)

To an extent, absolutely. I did start off with 8-bit graphics though (SMS, NES, EGA) and yes I can also appreciate the work put into those. I guess I'm just sick of seeing the style in indie/budget gaming nowadays, which also tends to not stick to the old limitations 100%.

Flat-shaded looks awesome but benefits from higher resolution and smoother framerate. See the new Virtua Racing release for example.

Duke Nukem Forever and Blood 2: The Chosen are good games.

Far Cry 2 is not only the worst Far Cry game in the series but also the worst open world game I've ever played. A vast disappointment compared to Far Cry 1 and Far Cry Instincts, the best Far Cry games.

Bioshock Infinite is the worst game in general.

Blood 2:The CHosen is not as bad a legend has it, butoverall It's not a good game.
Duke Nukem Forever was crap, though. GOod example of a game that was ruined by "Consolization".

My own controversry opinion:The whole Final Fantasy Sereis is incredibly overrated.

And people who won't play a really good game because the graphics are dated are morons whose opikions o gaming should not be taken seriously. People who thinks pretty graphics are more important then gameplay are iditos.

I also think there is a fair amont of "Look at me! I am praising a generally disliked game and ripping a really well regarded game ! What a daring, rebellious, edgelord I am" going on in this thread.

Is this including Final Fantasy 2, which frequently ranks last on people's rankings of the FF series? (Note that I am *not* talking about the Super NES game with this title, which is really a version of Final Fantasy 4.)

(By claiming a game is overrated, you are asserting that the game is worse than most people think it is, and I think people generally consider this game so poor that it would be unlikely for it to be true. I personally feel that game is underrated, and that more games should adopt its approach to character growth (but do some work on the balance, please).)

Of course, I am reminded of another unpopular opinion I hold (that might have been stated a long time ago in this topic): invisible random encounters are better than the most common alternatives. (Specifically, having visible enemies move in real time causes the game to turn into an action game, which is undesirable in what is supposed to be a turn-based RPG. The SaGa series, from Romancing SaGa onward, is guilty of this; in particular, I note that the encounter rate is more frustrating in the DS reamke of SaGa 3 than in the original version of said game.)

This dosen't really concern games, but I happen to greatly prefer Clippy to Cortana.

See my username.

I don't especially like Baldur's Gate character creation, at least point assignment. For one thing, if 10 is a baseline normal person, your character is already basically superhuman at the start of the game with how many points you get (also hated that in Fallout New Vegas). Second, rolling for stat points at the start of the game is stupid and pointless, you should just get a set amount. Third, there's not much depth to it, your class has a primary stat that you'd be stupid not to dump as many points into as possible, and then the rest go into the next most important stat. Great game, but kinda feels like the tabletop stuff works against it, especially with the unintuitive 2nd Edition rules.