Thread: Controversial Video Games

By controversial, I mean the ones that created an internet backlash whether they're major or minor and will threaten to leave the series for good. I've experienced it all time no matter where I go on the internet. This usually comes from hardcore gamers who have been consumers since the 80s and 90s, gamers who only care about story rather than gameplay, and fanbases to a long-running franchise. Here are the list of the controversial games to my knowledge (I may be missing some):

New Super Mario Bros. Wii
Super Mario Galaxy 2
Super Paper Mario
Legend of Zelda: Wind Waker
Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess
Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword
Pokemon Ruby/Sapphire/Emerald
Pokemon Diamond/Pearl/Platinum
Pokemon HeartGold/SoulSilver
Pokemon Black/White
Pokemon Black 2/White 2
Metroid Fusion
Metroid Prime
Metroid Other M
Star Fox Adventures
Star Fox Assault
Star Fox Command
Kirby's Epic Yarn
Super Smash Bros. Brawl
Wii Music
Nintendoland
Sonic Unleashed
Sonic 4
Marvel Vs. Capcom 3
Ultimate Marvel Vs. Capcom 3
Street Fighter X Tekken
Resident Evil 5
Mass Effect 3
Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2
Call of Duty Black Ops
Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3
Call of Duty Black Ops 2
Halo 4
Epic Mickey
Heavy Rain
Final Fantasy XIII
Angry Birds

It really pains to see this much hate even when they haven't been released yet. I fear for the worst to come.

These are all epic games.

Haters gonna hate.

lol, these are controversial? Ever heard of Custer's revenge? or the GTA series? Fans whining about some features of a game don't make games controversial. Yes there are instances like c&c tiberium twilight but that is only an exception to the rule.

Following this all games are controversial. Seriously what you said happens to almost every game everywhere.


...I'm very surprised you didn't put Sonic 2006 there considering that is considered the worst sonic game ever, it was very very rushed so what was released was an obvious beta with many of the promised features cut off and this game may have caused the sonic fanbase to be torn apart very heavily. I'm not sure if that count as controversial but still..

Rapelay was controversial.

Originally Posted by Tailisu10

...I'm very surprised you didn't put Sonic 2006 there considering that is considered the worst sonic game ever, it was very very rushed so what was released was an obvious beta with many of the promised features cut off and this game may have caused the sonic fanbase to be torn apart very heavily. I'm not sure if that count as controversial but still..

Well I wanted to include games that were good but are still considered bad by the fans.

Medal of Honor, definitely. The fact that they initially planned to make the Taliban playable speaks for itself.

Pissy hardcore gamers refusing to acknowledge the legitimacy of casual games really isn't a controversy.

What made Marvel vs Capcom 3 controversial. Some people were upset with the small roster compared to MvC2, and some were upset over Ultimate MvC3 being released nine months later, but there really wasn't a controversy surrounding the game. Invested players still buy the games en masse.

Originally Posted by Shinobu

Pissy hardcore gamers refusing to acknowledge the legitimacy of casual games really isn't a controversy.

It is to them because of their so-called "self entitlement."

What made Marvel vs Capcom 3 controversial. Some people were upset with the small roster compared to MvC2, and some were upset over Ultimate MvC3 being released nine months later, but there really wasn't a controversy surrounding the game. Invested players still buy the games en masse.

There's more to that. They are upset about the lack of Capcom's mascot, Mega Man, when they have only Zero and Tron Bonne. Let's not forget the absence of Venom, which can't be done because Eddie Brock is now Anti-Venom, so it's either him or Carnage.

Just don't pay mind to all the haters. In the Internet, the anonymous stance always gives people a +50% Jerkiness buff. I agree with @Tailisu10 in that, going with your standard, ALL the games are controversial, and there's not much to discuss about that; as @Ferbgor stated, and well, "haters gonna hate". Unless you want to switch it to discuss truly controversial games (Postal comes to mind), I don't see much of a point for this thread.

Diablo III is missing. A crappy launch with a stupid online-only DRM for single-player caused quite a stir. Then there were the idiots who rushed through the game and beat it in less than ten hours, complaining that it's too short and the story is utter crap.

But truly controversial games would be Doom, Duke Nukem 3D, and, as said above, Postal.

Originally Posted by Dread Advocate

But truly controversial games would be Doom, Duke Nukem 3D, and, as said above, Postal.

Don't forget Night Trap. Though anyone who's ever played the game will find it hard to see why...

As others have stated, by this criteria, all games are controversial. The Sonic franchise may have come under fire for its recent installments, but there is still a significant part of the fanbase who quit after Sonic 3. So it's nothing new to see people abandon franchises for seemingly silly reasons.

But it's true that every franchise has its utter failures that failed to live up to expectations... or were just plain terrible games overall, but I think the main factor is just that: Expectations. The longer you wait to release a new installment, the more attached people become to the existing games and thus expectations sore to impossible points that even the original games fail to meet.

I guess you could say it's like comparing an indie guitarist to Jimi Hendrix. Sure, it's true the former isn't as good as the latter, but if you compare everything to an older, legendary counterpart, of course it's not going to be as good. That sandwich may not be as good as the one I had at my favorite restaurant, but that doesn't mean it's not good. I may not be as close to my friends' pets as my own pets, but that doesn't mean they're not good pets. The list goes on.

All of those games you mentioned would have been much more embraced by people if they had been released when they were younger. That's not to say their arguments against it don't hold any water, I'm just saying that normally what they didn't like about the game might have been what made the games before it so exceptional. Going back to the Sonic example, Sonic 4 was initially well-received and then someone pointed out the physics weren't... well, very good, and that Sonic had always been about physics-based platforming, not about pure speed, and then everyone seemed to have adopted that opinion either to sound smarter (because it's cool to be cynical on the internet!) or because their outlook was changed by the negative review, even though a lot of them loved the game prior to reading or hearing about it. The truth is, the classics didn't have amazing physics either, and from Sonic 2 onward, the player's ability to outrun the screen served as the greatest of all obstacles in the 2-D games.

So as someone before me put so nicely, haters gonna hate. What's important is that -you- still love a franchise and the way the games on that list are selling, there's probably a good reason why they're so popular, and not because everyone except for a select few people are close-minded slaves to viral marketing and those few are the minority with brains that aren't easily-impressionable who still appreciate -real- gaming!

This is a controversial game. This is not. Even on a less erm...criminal level, there's also this kind of controversy.

I fail to see what is controversial at all about the vast majority of the games you mentioned in your opening post. The thing is, what you describe as controversy, is actually a difference in opinions, which is bound to happen on the internet where over several million people have the anonymity to make them feel like they can say whatever is on their mind.

Originally Posted by Otika

All of those games you mentioned would have been much more embraced by people if they had been released when they were younger. That's not to say their arguments against it don't hold any water, I'm just saying that normally what they didn't like about the game might have been what made the games before it so exceptional. Going back to the Sonic example, Sonic 4 was initially well-received and then someone pointed out the physics weren't... well, very good, and that Sonic had always been about physics-based platforming, not about pure speed, and then everyone seemed to have adopted that opinion either to sound smarter (because it's cool to be cynical on the internet!) or because their outlook was changed by the negative review, even though a lot of them loved the game prior to reading or hearing about it. The truth is, the classics didn't have amazing physics either, and from Sonic 2 onward, the player's ability to outrun the screen served as the greatest of all obstacles in the 2-D games.

The same thing happened with Super Smash Bros. Brawl back in 2008. Everyone loved it until a popular youtube ranter by the name of RandomDCE posted a negative review because of how the game didn't meet his high expectations such as the character roster, and everyone started to hate on the game. He also criticized Super Mario Galaxy 2, back when it was first announced, for being the same as the first Galaxy game despite the original SMB2 being the same as the first SMB game (though he said that both versions of SMB2 were completely different experiences from the first game). Goes to show that an opinion of a popular internet celebrity will change the mindsets of every gamer who listens to them. And don't get me started on the hate BW2 is suddenly getting, though I'm going to name the users here who I know hate them and believe Nintendo is doomed. That is how controversial video games can get within the fan community.