>>1820521 >it was called scorpion not just cause Source? >And do cool spy shit Literally countless games where you do that, Just Cause 1 was popular in LATAM due to it's LATAM setting along with cool spy shit.

>>1825819 You mean Battlefield V? The only propaganda I remember was that playing as a White Army scout made you play as a chick. Unless you're upset over the whole Harlem Hellfighters thing, which would be very silly for muktiple reasons. V was the one that added all the woke progressive garbage.

>>1826043 Battlefield 1 had niggers, women and was a flanderized parody of WW1. You have to be blind and stupid not to see it.

>>1826669 Ah, so you are one of those extra special people, carry on then. THERE'S A NIGGER BEHIND YOU LOOK OUT!!!!!!!

>>1818838 The sequels actually have better gameplay though, even if pre-patched DA2 had issues with archer stunlock

>>1826752 Is Xitter down or something? Battlefield 1 and V creative director was a literal communist with a degree in revisionist hostory.

>>1826836 >pic Topjej

>>1826808 >sequels had better but still weak/shallow gameplay FTFY.

>>1826043 >Harlem Hellfighters Literally all the multiplayer models for most western front armies were like 60% negro. Granted French you could say it's Senegalese, but the Brits? The Americans who didn't desegregate the army until the 50's? The fucking Germans?

>>1826836 >Battlefield 1 and V creative director was a literal communist with a degree in revisionist hostory. That's why I never even touched V. 1 never felt like forced diversity to me until they added muh stronk wymin snipers. >>1827493 >Literally all the multiplayer models for most western front armies were like 60% negro. Mental illness posting I see, bold move.

>>1806372 >there goes me ever wanting to play it You shouldn't want to play JC4 regardless of who voices Rico, it's a rushed mess with the shortest dev cycle in series history. It actually has less stuff in it than JC3 and somehow it also looks worse. Off the top of my head >No pistols >No explosives >No liberations >Bizarre technical issues rivaling the first game >Worse controls for vehicles >Every second mission is an escort mission >Grappling made awkward with a loadout system >Worst story in the series If I sat here I could come up with more, but ignore JC4. Its VA is the least of its problems.

>>1828670 >1 never felt like forced diversity to me You have yet to break mainstream media conditioning

>>1828670 He's not even wrong, every Western faction had 2 nigger classes. Amerisharts and commies know 0 shit about European history.

>>1825829 >>it was called scorpion not just cause >Source? I was 8 and all my older cousins said the game is the coolest ever

>>1817717 >>1817812 Unironically shit taste

>>1843677 Diablo 2 without tiered loot lazy bullshit would be top tier

>>1843677 Why would I give a shit about your opinion on my taste?

>>1818560 Axiom Verge 2 is not a bad game, though... >the difference is night and day. That was kind of the point... >t. loved AV2 after giving it a chance.

>>1849740 that elf needs some good raping

<<1832713 >He's not even wrong Any time I hear this shit I immediately assume samefagging, that (and its variants) is a phrase I'd always see as a vol when checking post histories of (1)s that conveniently only ever posted to defend a specific Anon/IP

>>1849740 I gave it a chance. I beat the final boss.

A serious contender, surprised to not see it mentioned. >>1765262 Sonic 1 is odd, the levels are so start-stop and at odds with the game's own mechanics. I'd argue the early Mario games have a better sense of speeding through levels. >>1765236 Do you mean NES/Famicom Metal Gear or do you mean MSX Metal Gear? They're very different, Kojima himself doesn't like the console ports. I'm actually surprised Metal Gear 1 and 2 never got remakes. >>1765380 It's highly amusing how much of Gen 1 just doesn't work. Actually I have a question. /v/, what was the best Pokémon gen? >>1768758 Were any of the Halo games all that good? I only played up till 2 because Microsoft made them Xbox exclusive for a decade, but I don't recall them being all that great to begin with. Fine games but standard sci-fi point-n-shoot. Doesn't stand up at all to the likes of a Half-Life, Deus Ex, Duke Nukem, etc. I have to wonder if a lot of the love for Halo isn't similar to the love for Goldeneye in that it's the first/only FPS a lot of kids played. >>1777477 I've seen this one brought up a lot as a response to the bizarre "games can't age poorly" argument. >spoiler based >>1815213 Human Revolution was alright, though I have noticed it getting a serious critical revaluation in recent years. >>1817279 >Quake Before CoD etc captured the audience, dudebros of the 90s and early 2000s acted like Quake III was the best fucking game ever. It was pure PvP garbage, thankfully the Q3 praise has died out and Quake 1 is rightfully considered the best, as Romero intended. >Fallout People act like Fallout is one of the greatest CRPG series ever when it has exactly 2 (two) genuinely good games. The rest vary between decent (2 and 3) to terrible (BoS)

>>1875375 >>1817279 What's wrong about Quake 2? >>1828670 Drop your rose tinted glasses. It was just battlefield 4 but in ww1 also singleplayer felt like a parody of ww1 and an insult to ww1 veterans. The onpy reason you care about V is because people care about ww2 and give zero fucks about ww1. >>1849700 Literally a nothing burger. >>1849713 Yet you've replied. Curious

>>1875393 Quake 2 has had a second wind recently with the excellent re-release that features a huge amount of additional content, much of it better than the base game, but on launch Quake 2 felt like a worse retread of the original game with weaker design. Similar to Doom 2, actually. It's meh, very unessential in the canon of retro FPS.

>>1875375 >/v/, what was the best Pokémon gen? The first. Because none of those glitches Hoennbabbys complain about actually hurt the game at all. They all just added to the mystery. Missingno and its variations were mythical Pokemon on a level akin to Mew. I've heard them complain that the relationship between ghost and poison was the opposite of what it was "supposed" to be. But as far as we knew, that was how it was supposed to be, so it was fine. I've heard that some of the ways particular moves work weren't "as intended," but again, how would we know? We saw how a move worked and decided if we wanted to use it or not. Plus there were cool glitches like Glitch City, a cool place you can visit if you explore well enough, and this is a game about exploring, after all. No, the game isn't about battles, since the battles are heavily dependent on RNG anyway, and the secondary mechanic behind the RNG is just grinding. But the exploration was fun, and Gen I did it very well. But actually no, Gen II is better because it kept all the key ideas from Gen I, including the actual location and all the Pokemon, and just expands upon them. You can still get all the old Pokemon, you can even trade and battle with old games, only now there is even more. The story is a real sequel that builds upon the story of the first game, which is pretty appealing in an RPG, where the story is more significant than most other genres. For some reason almost no other Pokemon games bothered to do this. Gen III broke the canon and is effectively a reboot, both in story and mechanics, removing mechanics from Gen II, and even removing Pokemon. Later these same people who love Gen III would complain about "Dexit" even though Gen III did it first. They had the audacity to re-sell you Gen I to get some of the old Pokemon, since you couldn't just trade with it (even though you can link GBA to GB/C, and just play Gen I in a GBA, and software-wise it's obviously doable since they did it on 3DS). Then even if you bought Gen I again twice (because Pokemon always tried to jew you with one game for the price of two), you still couldn't get all the Pokemon you had before, so you had to get a Gamecube, a special link cable for that that was basically only good for this and Four Swords, and special editions of spinoff games. God I hate Gen III. Gen IV is good but only because it re-added the stuff Gen III removed. Really I can't say it's better than Gen II. At least since you can trade online, you could then get all the old Pokemon, but it's still much more annoying than in Gen II, since you can't just trade with old versions, like Gen II could do. That whole transfer system was bullshit and still a step backwards from how Gen II did it. Gen V had the best Pokedex since II, since at least it was brand new instead of a mix of new and old. I could forget about the old ones instead of being constantly reminded of the ones I couldn't get thanks to seeing other old ones from the same game. But it was too short and linear, so I can't say I liked it as much. And Black & White 2 were too similar to the previous games to keep my attention through the whole thing, while too different to be able to play them first and enjoy them fully. Then I never played any of the later ones. Some of the newer ones seem intriguing now that they're actually 3D and it looks like battles are more interactive than before, but I can't be bothered.

>1875393 >reading comprehension this poor You people can't get deported fast enough.

>>1875393 Quake 2s weapons and movement are ass and the enemies are super spongey. The levels are also much linear despite looping on themselves. It also lacks atmosphere

>>1875794 >enemies are super spongey What Quake 2 are you playing? bar the Tank and Gladiators everything else is near insta-gibbed by the super shotty in one to two hits alone.

>>1875726 >missingno and its variations were mythical pokemon on a level akin to Mew Is this the pokemon equivalent of "bugs are features" bethesdafags? >Gen V had the best pokedex since II Fitting since both of them were shit.

>>1875883 >Is this the pokemon equivalent of "bugs are features" bethesdafags? I don't like Bethesda games so I don't know precisely how they use that argument, I just think their games are boring. I don't like bugs in the way speedrunfags do, but when they simply give you more stuff to experience, then yes, they're effectively features. Doing that door glitch to finish Super Metroid faster isn't a "feature," but Minus World and Missingno are. Doing that glitch where you go left in certain Sonic levels and then warp to the right to automatically finish the level? Not a feature. The glitches that let you get Tails and Knuckles into Death Egg and Doomsday in Sonic & Knuckles? Those are features. >Gen II's dex is shit It's literally every Pokemon that existed up to that point. Gen III them removed a bunch and made you spend hundreds of dollars, including buying games you already owned (since they were not very old yet and were literally the best selling games of all time) just to get Pokemon you already caught before. And it didn't even have the decency to at least give you a whole new dex so that you weren't reminded of the old ones. Running into Rattata and Tentacool every five seconds makes you wonder why the fuck you can't get Pidgey. And Gen IV had that same problem, but at least trading online mitigated it a bit (and it brought back most other features from II that III removed, like the day/night cycle). If they're not going to let me get all pokemon reasonably, then I respect them more if they just give me a whole new collection, like V did. If you're going to give me yet another "Not-Pidgey" replacement Pokemon, then you might as well just do the entire collection over.

>>1765127 Legend of Zelda comes to mind since even back then, there was no reason to not have diagonal movements especially when Crystalis did it. Also, Super Mario Bros 1 and Super Mario Bros 3 were night and day especially when the first game was basically an arcade game in which each continue was another coin you put into the machine. Super Mario World is still my favorite in the whole franchise.

>>1875393 >What's wrong about Quake 2? The movement is gimped. You move slower and don't jump as high. The movement was the best part of Quake 1.

>>1875820 >Super Shotty Can't hit the side of a barn and feels pathetically weak

>>1826752 Yes, it's you niggerfaggot.

>>1876548 Crystalis came out way after Zelda. And saying Mario 3 is better than 1 doesn't mean Mario 1 is "iffy." If the thread was "games with sequels/imitators that improved upon them," there would be many more examples. Practically every first entry in a series or genre is improved upon by later games. Also, Mario World is too easy. Mario 3 is better. Though it would be nice to have proper saving and backtracking.

>>1878123 >Mario World is too easy. Mario 3 is better. The harder levels in Mario World are tougher than anything in 3, in part because they're so much longer.