Share your unfiltered, unpopular gaming opinions and let’s dive into some real discussions. If you come across a view you disagree with, feel free to (respectfully) defend your perspective. I don’t want to see anyone say stuff like “we’re all entitled to our own opinions.” Let’s pretend like gaming is a science and we are all award winning scientists.

My Unpopular Opinion:

I believe the criticism against battle royales is often unwarranted. Most complaints revolve around constant content updates, microtransactions, and toxic player communities

Many criticize the frequent content updates, often cosmetic, as overwhelming. However, it’s optional, and no other industry receives flak for releasing more. I’ve never seen anyone complain about too many Lays or coke flavors.

Pay-to-win concerns are mostly outdated; microtransactions are often for cosmetics. If you don’t have the self control to not buy a purple glittery gun, then I’m glad you don’t play the games anymore, but I don’t think it makes the game bad.

The annoying player bases is the one I understand the most. I don’t really have a point against this except that it’s better to play with friends.

Overall I think battle royale games are pretty fun and rewarding. Some of my favorite gaming memories were playing stuff like apex legends late at night with friends or even playing minecraft hunger games with my cousins like 10 years ago. A long time ago I heard in a news segment that toy companies found out that people are willing to invest a lot of time and energy into winning ,if they know there will be a big reward at the end, and battle royales tap into that side of my brain.

This is just my opinion

  • ayaya@lemdro.id
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    What do you mean too expensive? While the higher-end GPUs are still ridiculous, you can find something like the 6650XT for ~$200 and that is more than enough for 1080p gaming. Meanwhile SSDs and RAM are at an all-time low price because of how cheap NAND flash is. Throw in a previous gen Ryzen 5 or i5 for ~$100 and you could easily build a competent gaming PC for $500. Plus you don’t have to pay the $60/year tax for online and get access to Steam sales and mods. And torrents if you’re into that.

    • Styxie@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      17
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m talking about something which can achieve parity with the 4k graphics that console gamers expect nowadays. That’s not remotely affordable on PC, but it is for consoles.

      • ayaya@lemdro.id
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The Series X and the PS5 are both roughly around the performance of a 6700XT, possibly lower depending on where you look. Any “4K” that is happening is upscaling. Most games run on the equivalent of low or medium settings, use dynamic resolution, checkerboard rendering, or for big games like Starfield or Elden Ring will run at 30fps.

        • Styxie@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          14
          ·
          1 year ago

          Look, you’re welcome to nitpick graphical fidelity, but I think current gen console games running on a 4k tv look excellent. They’re also a fraction of the price compared to PC hardware. That’s a better proposition compared to PC gaming these days for anyone looking to get into gaming. I get that that’s not a popular viewpoint among the PC crowd, but that’s why I posted it.

          • ayaya@lemdro.id
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            17
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            The point isn’t how good they look, the point is that it’s not actually 4K. You can run your PC games at 1080p on a 4K screen and get the same experience. That’s what DLSS and FSR are already doing. And if both are $500 it’s not a fraction of the price it’s the same price. Actually over time PC is cheaper because you’re not paying $60/year for online.

            After 5 years your $500 console actually cost $800. That’s $300 you could have spent on more games or on a stronger GPU that can maybe actually run higher resolutions or higher framerates. At the end of the day consoles are the illusion of a good value. It is smoke and mirrors.

            • Styxie@feddit.nl
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              1 year ago

              I looked it up, and a 6700XT costs the same price as a PS5/Xbox in my country. Add onto that all of the extra components you’ll need to build a PC and it’s way in excess of what a console costs. Sorry, but the cost of entry for PC just doesn’t compare to consoles.

              • ayaya@lemdro.id
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                11
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                I’m going to assume you’re in the Netherlands because of feddit.nl. The 6650XT that I mentioned earlier is €247 on amazon.nl while the Series X is €539. And the 6700XT is €349. That’s €200 less for the 6700XT and €300 less for the 6650XT. And that’s just Amazon-- I’m sure there are used options on sites I’m not going to know about. And again assuming you are using the console for 5 years the real cost is €539 + €300 = €839. You can definitely build a better PC for that much.

                EDIT: Here you go. A decent gaming PC with performance that should roughly be on-par with consoles for €593 which is less than the price of the Series X + 1 year of Xbox Live (€599). And this is with all new parts. I usually recommend going used for everything but storage, but I wouldn’t know if ebay is good or what the alternative is for you.

              • Chobbes@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                7
                ·
                1 year ago

                I mean it’s not really an apples to apples comparison. The hardware is generally more expensive for an equivalent gaming computer for sure… but I’m not convinced it’s more expensive overall. A computer can be used for more things, and games are often available cheaper (though consoles have a better used market and stuff), plus there’s a huge back catalog of older games that you can keep throughout the generations. If you want a console that’s totally fair, and there’s definitely advantages… But I need a desktop anyway, so buying a graphics card is a better investment for me, and I like not being in quite as much of a walled garden.

              • hiddengoat@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                11
                ·
                1 year ago

                “In my country.” Look dude, if you live in a shit country that gets like nine GPUs per year and they’re all stupidly expensive then say that in your post so you don’t waste people’s fucking time.

      • DrQuint@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        “”“upscaled”“” 4K, righto.

        I dunno why people expect extreme levels of graphics anyways. Alan Wake 2 will not be a better game just because the pores in the wood are rendered at all times.

        A $600 PC runs everything if you learn to ignore this one, meaningless attribute.

        • calzone_gigante@lemmy.eco.br
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          This, i loved the original Alan Wake for it’s story, i wouldn’t care at all if the second game had the exact same graphics. The industry wants to push for graphics because it is very simple for them to improve that, just put more time/money on the assets, hire actors to do mocap and not think about anything else, that’s as souless as the movie industry.

      • sugar_in_your_tea
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Eh, I don’t want 4k on my PC, 1440p is already overkill. The only reason I care about 4k on my TV is because it’s so big. But even then, my Switch looks fine, and it definitely doesn’t render in 4k.

        For me, PC gaming is way less expensive than consoles. I spend about $500 every 3-5 years for upgrades, and I spend way less for games because of sales.

      • PM_ME_FAT_ENBIES@lib.lgbt
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        So your complaint with the PC’s affordability is that it’s expensive to produce ultra high end graphics?

        Yeah, people who have to care about money don’t care about 4k.

        • Styxie@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Well from my perspective, 4k monitors came out about ten years ago, so it’s not ultra-high end. It’s actually quite old. I’ve been holding off on getting into 4k for so long, but the prices keep going up. The expectation was that prices are supposed to go down over time. Hence, I no longer feel like PC has the edge it used to.