It's a good game, it's just not a good [X] game"

>it's a good game, it's just not a good [X] game"

>Overwatch is a good game, it's just not a good competitive game

Why does this statement trigger autists so much?

Say there was a new Dark Souls game. But it played nothing like, looked nothing like, had no item descriptions or story like Dark Souls, but it was still a good/great/etc game. People would say "It's a good game, but it's not a good Dark Souls game."

Why are you such retards?

AC black flag.

Metroid fusion

It's what shills and retards with buyer's remorse say when their game actually sucks shit but need to save face.

>Actually bumping a shitposting thread
Shig

That's where the stipulation of it still being a good game comes in. If it was a dark souls game through and through but was just a shitty game overall and people said "but not a good dark souls game" they would be wrong.

But if a game comes out under a franchise name, and is a good game, but nothing like the others, the statement holds true.

Give me examples of games that would be just as enjoyable in other settings.

It's not just about the setting, it's about the entire game.

If Dark Souls 4 came out and it was was the best twinstick shooter ever created with a mahou shoujo theme, then it's still a good game. But it's nothing like Dark Souls aside from the name, so it's not a good Dark Souls game.

Resident Evil 4

>mordern germ*ns
>hating jews

It can be true but more often than not when I see someone say this they're wrong on both accounts.

The game we are developing is a spiritual successor of (some obscure old rubbish)

It's unironically the best game in the series though.

>germans hate the jews
not anymore, they are the most cucked country in the world after sweden

That's a funny way to say the US.

Breath of Fire: Dragon Quarter

Damn that game is great, best in the series too bad it triggers casuals.

it's like in music:
>BASIC THINGS ARE NOT DONE ANYMORE
like for example the new Doom, it was awesome, it was simple, it was meat headed, THESE KIND OF SHOOTERS DONT GET MADE ANYMORE, it's a miracle if one gets published

It's not a good Banjo game, because those games were shit and this is better.

DmC. A pretty good hack and slash which was shat on by salty nostalgiafags.

mgs 5

well same goes for movies, only cookie cutter shit gets done, not genre pieces or other great simple things that just work

modern devs want in some shitty gimmicks and other garbage that make the game not so fun, my life is garbage, i dont need a game to simulate some other miserable fuck's life, i want to escape and have fun

Halo 4

literally no one says that its a good game

>All games in a series should only play in one way and never try anything new or different

Which Front Mission games should I play?

>it's not a good game, it's just a good pokemon game

...

All of them.

That is quite the time investment and I'm half way through Tactics Ogre so I don't think I'll survive that much srpg.

Why would it not be a good Dark Souls game? Who says every game in a series has to play the same?

Would you say, for example, Warcraft 3:TFT is a bad Warcraft game, given it plays nothing like Warcraft: O&H? Or that the narrative is presented in a completely different way? Or that it doesn't look like it at all? Would you say it's a bad RTS game, given it doesn't play like Dune II?

It's all in your head, and while it's all good you make those classifications for yourself, in a conversation they have no place, because what you happen to be the defining characteristics of a work or genre are completely subjective.

Aliens is a good movie. It isn't bad Alien (series) movie, even though it's completely different from the first one in tone and pacing. because you don't get to define what Alien (series) is. Both can be as defining of what Alien means.

if you went into maccy Ds and all they had was sushi it could still be good but you would go to arbys if you just wanted a burger

The problem is that the statement is generally used to excuse a bad game being a piece of shit. Similar to other statements that trigger autism like "it's good if you don't think about it" or "It's good if you have friends." These can all be said to give one free pass to crap games.

You don't usually hear it to defend good spinoffs/differing titles in a series, you hear people that like dogshit like Fallout 4 say it.

Bloodborne is not a Dark Souls or even Souls game, yet people say it is.

well every god damn multiplayer game is better with friends and pretty awful without

Don't know what either of those are.

I'm not saying those statements are always false but that they're usually misused to defend things that shouldn't be defended in that way. Think of the worst game you ever played and I guarantee you some asshole has said "Yeah but when I'm with friends and were passing the controller around, it's pretty great dood."

...

I've got a question for you. If a series is known for being a certain way and doing things in a particular fashion, why should a sequel that wants to do things differently actually be a sequel instead of a new game?