Comments that don't warrant a thread

[DrVenkman PhD 0]

KOTOR was the first thing that came to mind as meeting many of those requirements but I seem to recall you saying you hated that game and engine, which is why you didn't like FF XII (another good example).

[luke-o 0]

I'd have said Blue Dragon but I have only seen it being played. I do want to have a go but my 360 is broken (shock horror)

[Broward83 0]

as far as Blue Dragon? What's the general consensus on the game? I'm looking to pick up an RPG but don't know which one to pick up....

[AndrewTS 0]

KOTOR was the first thing that came to mind as meeting many of those requirements but I seem to recall you saying you hated that game and engine, which is why you didn't like FF XII (another good example).

 

Yeah, KotoR and FFXII don't really gel with me, because I don't quite get or like the free-movement + turn-based deal they got going on there. Not that it's bad, it just seems kind of annoying and slower than it should be. Ho-hum waiting for my character to trudge around and strike a baddie...I have the *illusion* of real control, but it's still menu-driven and cumbersome to boot! Plus FFXII's arcane skill building / job system made absolutely no sense to me. I liked the art design and the voice acting was superb, I just couldn't muster any care up for it. I guess that happens when you completely fall out of the series.

 

However, I think Mass Effect looks fantastic. A real-time action-rpg-3rd-person-shooter where you actually have real choices in what you say and do in conversations? Yes, please.

 

I'll admit that I should probably given KOTOR at least another shot, because I hadn't played much of it, and RPGs tend to suck in the first few hours anyway; they're not big on immediate gratification or granting you a wide breadth of skills, tactics, and interesting story early on.

 

I'm in the process of downloading the Blue Dragon demo now. Although I never heard of team attacks in it, I heard gripes about the pacing and grinding, and I'd heard that while enemies appear in the field and are avoidable, they're too small and quick to effectively avoid.

 

Eternal Sonata's been the most recent traditional RPG I've played to grab my interest. It's almost too streamlined and simplistic though if it's still the same as the demo. Why can't I choose who to heal?!

[Obi Chris Kenobi 0]

as far as Blue Dragon? What's the general consensus on the game? I'm looking to pick up an RPG but don't know which one to pick up....

 

I'm onto disk2 and its ok, but the achievement points on it are stupid - I'm by no way an achievement whore, but I do like to get a few hundred a game at least. The ones in BD are just absurd and annoying. A lot of grinding ones, and alot of 'oh shit, I missed that one now I have to start a new game to get it'. Which on an RPG where you have to play for hours to get to that point is shit.

 

Infact, I'd go as far as to say right now I feel like Blue Dragon feels like a chore to play. While above I said that BD is probably the closest thing to what AndrewTS was looking for in a game, it certainly doesn't mean its the best game out ever, just the shit that's floated to the top in a weak string of games over the years.

I feel like I've played this game before, there's nothing original about it. Even the Characters feel like they're from a PS2 game, or some Anime movie I might have seen - at first I thought 'Dragon Quest' on the PS2, but I checked at work and it wasn't that, but I'm pretty sure these characters have appeared in another game. Shu's Grandfather looks all too familiar.

 

I good feature is searching the scenery around you to gain items, though that becomes tiresome after a while.

 

POO MONSTERS? No thanks.

 

I'll probably be trading this game in without even sniffing disk3, as Halo3 is out soon and I'll be more then happy to play the generic shoot 'em up with all the hype and online gameplay, then this rehashed and clichéd semi hyped no online RPG.

[AndrewTS 0]

Infact, I'd go as far as to say right now I feel like Blue Dragon feels like a chore to play. While above I said that BD is probably the closest thing to what AndrewTS was looking for in a game, it certainly doesn't mean its the best game out ever, just the shit that's floated to the top in a weak string of games over the years.

 

Could you expand on that a little? Is the grinding indeed a problem? Is enemy avoidance as bad as I'd heard?

Is the pacing poor and riddled with drawn-out grind-fests, fetching, or just general RPG-filler like that? Does the game try to be long for the sake of being long, rather than wrapping up before it's overstayed it's welcome?

 

If that's the case, naw, it isn't really what I'm looking for.

 

I feel like I've played this game before, there's nothing original about it. Even the Characters feel like they're from a PS2 game, or some Anime movie I might have seen - at first I thought 'Dragon Quest' on the PS2, but I checked at work and it wasn't that, but I'm pretty sure these characters have appeared in another game. Shu's Grandfather looks all too familiar.

 

That's Toriyama character designs for ya. Dragon Ball/DBZ, Dragon Quest, Tobal and even Chrono Trigger characters all look basically exactly the same.

 

Dragon Quest VIII looks almost exactly like the DBZ characters are all in disguise in an RPG. "Oh hey, there's Mr. Satan as a gypsy fortune teller! Oh look, Android 18 is a barmaid in a bunny costume! Those green folks are totally not nameks without antennae!"

 

EDIT: Come to think of it, though...

 

http://www.cvgames.com/wp-content/uploads/...ragon_large.jpg

 

...they remind me of the cg renders Square whipped up representing the Final Fantasy VI characters:

 

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/t...sy_SGI_demo.png

 

And that cat-thing reminds me of Cait Sith:

http://www.ffextreme.com/site/ff7dc/images/characters/7.jpg

[Obi Chris Kenobi 0]

I feel like I've played this game before, there's nothing original about it. Even the Characters feel like they're from a PS2 game, or some Anime movie I might have seen - at first I thought 'Dragon Quest' on the PS2, but I checked at work and it wasn't that, but I'm pretty sure these characters have appeared in another game. Shu's Grandfather looks all too familiar.

 

That's Toriyama character designs for ya. Dragon Ball/DBZ, Dragon Quest, Tobal and even Chrono Trigger all look basically exactly the same.

 

Dragon Quest VIII looks almost exactly like the DBZ characters are all in disguise in an RPG. "Oh hey, there's Mr. Satan as a gypsy fortune teller! Oh look, Android 18 is a barmaid in a bunny costume!"

 

It might have been a Dragon Quest game after all then, I can picture it in my mind, Shu standing on a rock with a bottle on his Belt, and his Grandfather behind him.

 

Infact, I'd go as far as to say right now I feel like Blue Dragon feels like a chore to play. While above I said that BD is probably the closest thing to what AndrewTS was looking for in a game, it certainly doesn't mean its the best game out ever, just the shit that's floated to the top in a weak string of games over the years.

 

Could you expand on that a little? Is the grinding indeed a problem? Is enemy avoidance as bad as I'd heard?

Is the pacing poor and riddled with drawn-out grind-fests, fetching, or just general RPG-filler like that? Does the game try to be long for the sake of being long, rather than wrapping up before it's overstayed it's welcome?

 

As for how it feels like a chore - I don't know, I just don't feel like playing on it, when I load it up, I feel like the game hasn't gripped me enough into actually going to the next village like I've been asked. Then I realize 'oh shit there's a whole other disk after this'.

 

There's alot of walk around and talk to people type of things, as in any RPG, which I don't mind, and a few 'WALK THROUGH THIS VALLEY SINCE ITS QUICKER!' moments, even though it never is and the valley always has 1000 monsters waiting to bite your balls.

 

The storyline itself is ok, crazy old guy has machines and magic he wants to destroy everything, he destroyed you little village you go and stop and gain friends on the way.

 

I personally don't feel the enemy avoidance is that bad, you can learn a skill 'stealth' that makes it hard for them to spot you, as well as 'field spells' like 'barrier' and 'stun bomb' that either automatically defeats enemies you've defeated before at the cost of some MP, or stuns then for a few seconds to run around them. There's even a nice little touch where certain types of monsters will fight each other for you - Hamster eating the Nut monster, Dog eating the Skeletons, etc.

 

Actually, this is another reason I don't feel too engaged into the game, the monster types, I'm just not 'feeling it'. That might sound like a real cop out reason for not like a game, but I'm just not feeling the Monster Types. I know they're tried and testing, but its just too generic and too clichéd and apart from the 'Monster Battle' (where they fight each other) there's nothing new to them. Same old, Same old - this game is basically like every other RPG you've played before.

 

The shadow system is pretty cool, I'm enjoying that, though I can see why some people might be annoyed with the time and grinding you'd have to put in to get a decent selection of abilities to make a good Shadow. There's basically a 8 or so different type of dragon, each type has its own unique skills, however, you can use any of the skills unlocked to form a custom dragon. Example - Shu starts off as a Sword Master dragon, so he has all the sword master abilities, however, I switched him to guardian and unlocked some of the guardian skills, and now he's got a mixture of Sword Master and Guardian skills. Though to do that you have to level up alot to unlock new Shadow types, and then you'll have to level up General type Shadow so you can have more then 4 skills. It won't make that much sense until you play it. I like it, but again it'll require alot of time (not much effort) to do it.

 

There's also a nice bit where you get to design and make a ring (at the start of the 2nd disk), though I'm not sure how many more moments there are like that in the game, I'm hoping its not a one off thing as it was pretty unique and felt fun - at least for me.

 

Like I said, I think the main problem for me is I feel like I've played this game before, nothing seems fresh or new. I also could have really done without Poo Monsters, I mean I like my shit and fart jokes as much as the next person, but there was just something about having alot of monsters made out of Poo that annoyed me. I have no idea why. I suddenly felt this game was aimed at kids.

A mixture of having played games for over 10 years now, and a lack of originality in general. This game IS just Final Fantasy without the Franchise Title, it would be silly to suggest otherwise.

 

The demo will give you an idea of the game, though it kind of just throws you into the middle of the game so you won't have a real idea of what the hell is going on. I still haven't got up to the part where Kluke gets the thing around her neck.

[muzz 0]

I honestly cant see the love for Goldeneye64, sure it's a good game, but Quake was out at the same time and was a far superior game. And whereas Goldeneye64 has not aged very well at all, Quake still manages to hold up.

 

Saying that, my favourite FPS of all time is Unreal Tournament.

 

 

I couldn't compare the two. I usually dislike console FPS'ers, but GoldenEye was just so much fun and so involving. For that fact I'll always love it, but Quake multiplayer really startedf me on PC shooters.

[haws bah gawd 0]

I honestly cant see the love for Goldeneye64, sure it's a good game, but Quake was out at the same time and was a far superior game. And whereas Goldeneye64 has not aged very well at all, Quake still manages to hold up.

 

Saying that, my favourite FPS of all time is Unreal Tournament.

 

 

I couldn't compare the two. I usually dislike console FPS'ers, but GoldenEye was just so much fun and so involving. For that fact I'll always love it, but Quake multiplayer really startedf me on PC shooters.

 

I played Golden Eye at Play and Trade a couple weeks ago. It still PLAYS well, but Jesus Christ is that game ugly. I guess I'm jaded by Half Life 2 and Gears of War, but the visuals of GoldenEye have not aged well.

 

While I never enjoyed the game much due to the control and horrid camera, I remember Mario 64 being the greatest-looking game EVER for it's time. Unfortunately, its another game who's visuals haven't aged very well. The draw-distance holds-up pretty well, but the graphics are very dated.

[World's Worst Man 0]

Goldeneye was successful due to its multi-player, which was the first time a console FPS had multi-player of that depth. Obviously it was nothing new for PC gamers - Doom had already done 4 person multi-player, while Quake was doing 32 player online multi-player and revolutionizing PC FPS gaming around the time of Goldeneye's lifespan - but Goldeneye was reaching a different and probably larger group of gamers, so it didn't matter what the PC games were bringing to the table. It was more or less the same situation as Halo, and the same thing that's happening with BioShock, but that's just the nature of PC gaming I guess. It's not as widespread or popular as console gaming, even more so today, so a lot of those PC games fly under the radar - and when carbon copies of those games are released, many people consider them original and they receive a ton of praise.

[DrVenkman PhD 0]

Which is eaxctly the point I was trying to make. My original statement was in conjunction with how a good a console game was for it's time, not versus modern day or PC games. Sure enough, one of the first responses was about how it doesn't hold up today or against PC games.

 

That said, I think a thread devoted to disecting what made games great in their time period followed by modern day playability and thoughts on how it holds up might arouse some good discussion in this corner of the forum. Or a bunch of petty arguing. One or the other.

[The Man in Blak 0]

Goldeneye was successful due to its multi-player, which was the first time a console FPS had multi-player of that depth. Obviously it was nothing new for PC gamers - Doom had already done 4 person multi-player, while Quake was doing 32 player online multi-player and revolutionizing PC FPS gaming around the time of Goldeneye's lifespan - but Goldeneye was reaching a different and probably larger group of gamers, so it didn't matter what the PC games were bringing to the table.

 

I don't think Goldeneye's success can be solely attributed to the fact that it was the first decent console FPS. It was one of the first FPS games on any platform to offer context-sensitive hit locations, which made for a decidedly different multiplayer experience from many its FPS peers at the time. Goldeneye also emphasized stealth when many of its competitors (save for maybe Team Fortress) primarily focused on the typical run-and-gun deathmatch style, and it provided a robust single-player mode with varied objectives that actually leveraged the James Bond license in an effective manner.

 

I'd wager that it hasn't aged well because of the first-generation 3D graphics rather than the gameplay, the latter of which is still in circulation today through the TimeSplitters series. (Try enjoying some of those early Saturn/Playstation games, if you don't believe me.) Even considering that, there's still a lot of quirky value to be had in a playthrough today (paintball, Oddjob, "Slappers Only!").

[World's Worst Man 0]

Which is eaxctly the point I was trying to make. My original statement was in conjunction with how a good a console game was for it's time, not versus modern day or PC games. Sure enough, one of the first responses was about how it doesn't hold up today or against PC games.

 

That said, I think a thread devoted to disecting what made games great in their time period followed by modern day playability and thoughts on how it holds up might arouse some good discussion in this corner of the forum. Or a bunch of petty arguing. One or the other.

 

Start the thread then. We can just use it to post witty banter and insider jokes, even though it's much more offensive than gross smarminess and an inability to deal with differing opinions.

[The Man in Blak 0]

Start the thread then. We can just use it to post witty banter and insider jokes, even though it's much more offensive than gross smarminess and an inability to deal with differing opinions.

 

Uh, what?

[World's Worst Man 0]

That was in response to DrVenkman.

 

The single player was decent, but I think the draw of the game was multi-player. At least, that's what I got from hearing people talk about it. The reason I don't think it's aged well is that it's pretty much been one upped by many games since its release. Locational damage was done better by Counter-Strike - and others - with it's "true" locational damage (one headshot kills, 3 body shots, etc). Stealth was more in-depth in games like Thief, MGS, Splinter Cell, Deus Ex. Not to mention the games like the Half Life series, which aren't really the same type of gameplay, but probably hit aspects of the genre better than Goldeneye. I don't doubt that there's still playability in it, but in a critical sense I don't think it's held up very well.

[Black Lushus 0]

Nostalgia's a helluva drug!

[Ripper 0]

Eh, I don't know.

 

I would still play golden eye if the screen didn't look like mud. Hell, I still play doom and the graphics are bad but they aren't muddy which is fine. Golden eye looks smeared.

 

But gameplay wise, while others have done it better, the overall simplicity of golden eyes control scheme was very very awsome, and like someone said, it remains pretty much unchanged in the Timesplitter games (which I still play). Yes others have done it better (and did it better at the time) but goldeneye was all kinds of kick ass and when i play it now, I don't find myself saying "this game sucks" I find myself saying, "This would be fun if I could see a goddamned thing"

[World's Worst Man 0]

I actually really loved the music in Goldeneye. There really needs to be a new, good, James Bond FPS, if for nothing else than the single player would be awesome.

[AndrewTS 0]

I played Half-Life and Deus Ex recently for the first times (I played HL2 before, though), and I'm still very impressed with a lot about those games. Deus Ex, especially.

 

DE makes me think of what the new Shadowrun *could* have been. Half-Life's graphics and the gameplay is no great shakes compared to today, but the way the storytelling and presentation is done is still very good.

[Ripper 0]

I still play Unreal all that time, just because it is fucking fun to play multiplayer against the bots, who actually have some common sense and are sneaky bastards to boot(one hiding in the dark with a rocket launcher waiting for people to drop down through the entrance and just shoot the shit out of you.)

[haws bah gawd 0]

I'm one of the few that really enjoyed the PS2-launch version of Unreal Tournament. I liked the "bundle" trick that you could do with the Rocket Launcher.

[Guest]

Is there a good N64 emulator out there? I want to play No Mercy.

[Mike wanna be 0]

I haven't had any problems with any of the No Mercy mods available with the Project64; I'd imagine the base game would work just as well, but I haven't played that nearly as much.

[Scroby 0]

I actually really liked Goldeneye's single player as well as it's multi-player. Overall I just found Goldeneye to be a really great game over all. It was diffently one of the N64's funniest games to play.

[Mike wanna be 0]

Since the NCAA thread is apparently missing, I'll just post it here.

In 2009, the consensus #1 team in the nation is UNLV for the sole reason of "They're the only undefeated team". All first-place votes in both the coaches and media polls go to UNLV.

 

For the record, UNLV did not play a single team that spent a single week on the top 25 list of any poll.

 

EDIT: They were crushed by 22 in the national title game, and dropped out of the top 25 for the following season. They're down to a C+ overall, so methinks Cinderella is long gone.

 

HOWEVER, a badass thing I noticed is that NCAA 08 on the 360 (can't say if it does on any other console) now keeps track of every team's team records, so when you change teams they have the updated records (Mike Hart has the UM season rushing record, for example).

This almost makes up for having a 30-season limit when at least half the all-time coaching records are impossible to achieve in 30 years. Almost.

[DrVenkman PhD 0]

AVGN's look at Nintendo Power

 

As a subscriber from like, 1989 to the mid 90s plus buying the occasional magazine without a subscription, this was a pretty entertaining look back at the evolution of the magazine.

[AndrewTS 0]

I actually really liked Goldeneye's single player as well as it's multi-player. Overall I just found Goldeneye to be a really great game over all. It was diffently one of the N64's funniest games to play.

 

Odd typo. Unless there were some cutscenes I missed.

 

If Nintendo would be able to sort out the legal issues, Goldeneye would be worth buying even at a "premium" price (i.e. an extra 100-200 Wii Points). Anyone who has downloaded an N64 game on VC knows that the games no longer have such ridiculous blurring. Textures are far clearer and crisper. Couple that with classic controller support (dual analogs) and you have a game that will look and play better than it did on its native hardware. Although, rumble would probably be out...did GE have rumble? I didn't really make much use of it on N64 aside from Starfox since I had to shove that big clunky rumble pack into the pad.

[Ripper 0]

Golden Eye was hilarious. Especially with the cheats. Like the one where you slow it down. The ass shot animation was funny, or the neck shot where it would take the guy 10 minutes to die. By the time he hit the floor his entire suit was red.

 

And of course using mines when slowed down so you can watch guys slowly come flying by you after you blow them up.

 

And if you moved up enemy health and drop their accuracy, you could just tourture a guy for a while with hand and foot shots.

 

Its the same kinda of funny fun I have with the Stranglehold demo now.

[Exslade ZX 0]

Maybe a stupid question, but do Xbox Live updates ever causes a game to fuck up more?

 

Been playing Skate all day, no problem. Then, decided to connect to Live, and I had to update it to play, and since, it's crashed like three times now (The game just freezes up) and I'm curious as to whether or not the update had anything to do with it

[Obi Chris Kenobi 0]

Crackdown fucked up a bit with the update and DLC, not sure about Skate. Check gamefaqs, that place is used for people to bitch and moan and cry about everything a game has to offer.