DevastaTheSeeker

DevastaTheSeeker OP t1_iui5dux wrote

There are definite answers. I literally just used an example of something that someone in the world considers to be "good" that is not good.

I like the game Dark Cloud but the weapon durability system is a flaw because it destroys your weapon that you have been using for the entire game.

This is a fact. It is not an opinion.

Someone may like that it adds more value to your weapons in the game but the vast majority will say that it was a bad design choice to make the weapon you spend the whole game upgrading disappear. Which is why they changed it in the sequel along with cutting the amount of playable characters down to 2 to make it more sreamlined.

You see how I can point out objective flaws in the game that I consider to be my favourite despite it being my favourite game?

0

DevastaTheSeeker OP t1_iuhew08 wrote

You do know most people don't play free for all in call of duty right? Plus not to mention that modern call of duty is made to be multiplayer. Re:Verse reuses the engine of a single player game. It has room to grow sure but it'd be better if they just remade the game entirely so it didn't play like ass.

1

DevastaTheSeeker OP t1_iuhe2lf wrote

Re:Verse has no real structure and is only ever a free for all. You can't pick a loadout to choose which character you want to play with what creatures they turn into when they die.

Resistance isn't good either but it's better than Re:Verse. Each player has clear goals that they need to do. Re:Verse is just a mess that drops everyone into an arena and says "hey just shoot anything that moves"

0