It feels like I've seen people complain about varying games not allowing jumping or crouching countless times, seemingly never asking themselves why they think the game needs jumping or crouching. It's almost like the omission was on purpose. Imagine that.

the one i had for the playstation 2 ''The Super Dimension Fortress Macross'' even had some movement options like rolls, like a rail shooter. And really interesnting fact about The Super Dimension Fortress Macross is that it was made by sega am2, the guys behind outrun and virtua fighter

Also I think this community is far too into the whole arcade-style of video games, this is fine on it's own, to each their own of course, but I've seen people lambasting certain games due to "filler". A few I've noticed are a disdain for unlocks and a disdain for filler, I can agree on filler (kinda, more on that later) but personally I like unlock systems in video games, I like making my way through a world or game, unlocking things and slowly becoming stronger, It feels nice. There is the question of "Should this stuff even be locked behind skill trees or upgrade systems in the first place, would it be better to just give the player all of these tools at the start" I feel like in some games yes, but in some games absolutely not, The hitman games reward you for going back and trying different execution methods and special challenges with not only more ways to start off one particular map, but also more tools in general like Lethal syringes and explosives, giving that all to the player instantly I feel would make going back and doing the challenges much less rewarding. For another example, unlocking everything at the start of the binding of Isaac would make the game alot less enjoyable for me, Isaac is ABOUT repeat runs and unlocking new stuff with every won run, not only that, but gradually unlocking more and more of the game as you play is fine in a game like Isaac where even at the base level, there's tons upon tons of content, and the game doesn't get old in any of those runs because of that AND the fact that there's literally thousands upon thousands of rooms, meaning that each run is going to be different and is going to have a different reward at the end of it. Imagine if you just unlocked Forgotten or Keeper or Lost right out the gate, it would just remove the special feeling from these characters, as they themselves are rewards for performing certain tasks, and their unique qualities reflect that. It's much more satisfying to finally unlock the forgotten after going through the endurance test that is unlocking him, especially considering how fun of a character he is. it really feels like you accomplished something. Basically, given that no run is the same and Isaac has tons upon tons of content even to start with, I don't think there's anything wrong with Isaacs unlock system because the game at it's very base is still tons of fun and repeat runs are quite enjoyable due to the sheer variety the game has to offer, and seeing those unlocks flash up at the end of a run, especially considering alot of the unlocks are very unique and fun to use, just gives you that feeling of "I did it." there's a reason why so many people have got 3 whole 100% save files of this game, it's because it's simply that enjoyable to play even on repeat runs when you go back to zero, and just giving you everything at the start would remove alot of what makes Isaac so special. I feel this also applies to others in the genre like Deadcells and Gungeon. Deadcells rewards your skill by giving you more cells and goodies depending on time or amount of enemies killed without taking a hit, which help you unlock more things, plus the fact that the game is constantly getting harder with each time you beat it, it forces you to get familiar with the mechanics and is quite punishing especially later on, plus the fact that they sell you a tool that can extract blueprints from enemies, it doesn't feel grindy, it feels like you're getting better with each run. Another example, Crosscode. having access to all 4 elements in Crosscode right off the bat would not be a good idea, as the game's story and pacing is centered around these elements for a good chunk of the game, and the game gives you plenty of stuff to play around with while unlocking these things so the combat never feels redundant. Another example, Shovel Knight, buying weapons is a big incentive to grab the money which the game so generously scatters throughout the levels, the game often balances risk/reward by putting more valuable gems in harder areas. Plus the fact that in the base campaign alot of the items are unlocked within the levels themselves, which also incentivises you to grab as much gold as possible just in case you find the chest dude within the level. With Ori and the blind forest you could argue some of the kit should be given at the start, but given it's a metroidvania, unlocking skills later so you can find extra content in previous areas is the name of the game. With Hyperlight drifter, yeah honestly I feel like they could have given you the charge attack and the dashstab right off the bat, but it's not a deal breaker for me especially considering how the upgrade system in Hyperlight rewards exploration. and I feel skill trees grant players with a sense of progression and empowerment, especially when they branch, like CrossCode. Speaking of metroidvania's. Here's the filler thing. Alot of people here see the backtracking or simply exploring in games like HyperLight drifter or Hollow Knight or any metroidvania to be "filler". I disagree, I like taking in the world around me, finding secrets and special dialogue or goodies. I don't see it as filler at all. going back to previous area's with new abilities not only to show how far you've come but also to access new secrets and area's is a part of the game, and I like it. Truth be told I think this community in general is a bit too overstimulated, no offense. Don't get me wrong filler and padding is an actual issue that many games suffer from, like GoW Ragnarok with it's insane amount of stuff not happening and all of the cutscenes, (By the way cutscenes should always be skippable regardless and I totally agree that it's bullshit some games don't let you on a first playthrough) or Omori with some parts of headspace, (even if that is kind of the point of headspace). Point is, Exploring new worlds and backtracking through previous ground can be fun and interesting, of course if back tracking is done constantly then yeah it's an issue, and if the world you are exploring is uninteresting or lacking in cool content then yeah I get it, but otherwise I don't think it's as big of an issue as some people say it is. (CrossCode does this extremely well because every part of the world is like one big puzzle) I just feel like certain people are far too snobby with that kind of stuff, and treat any game with exploration or unlocks/skill trees as below them simply because they like a different type of game, maybe I'm wrong but that's just my assertion. Not saying you can't critique these games, critique is very important, but alot of the stuff said feels less like critique and more like "This game isn't for me thus it is bad" or "Any game that doesn't have things I like in it is slop", I think it's alot more taste-focused than some people would like to make it out to be. Like Boghog is without a doubt a talented and game design savvy individual but I feel like he frames his tastes in games as what games SHOULD be instead of simply his tastes and it comes across as really snobby sometimes, no Bog, unlocks and exploration are not going to kill games, neither is Vampire Survivors, it's a taste thing, it's not that deep. and a game doesn't always have to be skill based, it just has to be fun. and Vampire survivors is very fun. If Hyperlight drifters exploration was bad, then the maps would be very bloated and the rewards you get from exploring would be few and far between, making you have to walk around identical forest and temples just for one upgrade chip. instead, every screen and every area in Hyperlight feels distinct enough and usually has atleast 1 reward in it even if it's not clear to you instantly. and every set piece of Hyperlight is oozing with detail and props. I mean I like turn based RPGs and story focused stuff like CrossCode and Undertale so I probably shouldn't be throwing my hat into the ring when it comes to a dude who likes fast paced stuff like Schmups and true action games like Ninja Gaiden, but I figured I would anyways as this was kinda fun to write. I don't think hard games should be stigmatized and I don't think games that don't appeal to beginers or appeal to more hardcore gamers should be stigmatized either, they have a right to exist just as games that tone it down for more casual or beginner players have a right to exist, and all of those types of games are fine, aslong as they are designed well and are fun. From Nioh to Kirby, it doesn't matter to me aslong as it's fun. As I'm sure you've noticed I'm into a very different kind of game than the ones discussed here, as I'm more focused on indies, so perhaps my opinion here doesn't matter too much, but this was still interesting to write. TL:DR, To me it all depends on what a game is going for and if the game is designed well around that. If an easy game is designed well and fun then it's fun and well designed. If a hard game is well designed and fun then it's well designed and fun. Basically, just don't suck at your job please. Thinking about it, you would probably like Super Meat Boy.