logo
 drop

Main

Community

Submissions

Help

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - KaioShin

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 ... 58
181
Gaming Discussion / Re: Suggestions for PS2 RPGs
« on: September 28, 2015, 05:09:48 pm »
Persona 1+2 are unplayable for me. Terrible terrible level design. It's just bland and empty corridors. No landmarks of any kind, no soul. Boring battles and a stupid recruitment system. Perhaps they have a good story, but I couldn't get past an hour of either to find out before I had to quit or puke.

P3 & P4 also have terrible dungeon presentation, but the floors are very short and the battles are great (as long as you don't use AI control, in P3's case that means playing Portable afaik). I really like Persona 4 because it has a fantastic cast and a strong story. It's a really engaging mystery plot. Quite atypical from what you usually get. P3 on the other hand, I absolutely despised when it came out. I'm actually playing P3P right now and while I don't hate it anymore, it's still far far inferiour to P4. The cast is much weaker on every level and the story is a joke. No it doesn't get better after 20 hours, whoever told someone that lied to him. The plot of P3 just sucks, it's as simple as that. Zero plot for 60% of the game. Than a "shocking" twist that doesn't affect anyone because it wasn't setup at all and the character it applies to was so bland that no one would give a shit. Not to mention the direction the bad guy turns to is "I want to destroy the world just because ".

182
Gaming Discussion / Re: Suggestions for PS2 RPGs
« on: September 26, 2015, 02:53:55 am »
Alundra is amazing (IMO better than any 2D Zelda game, yes I said it). But for the love of god, stay away from Alundra 2. Coming from Alundra it's like being ambushed in a dark street corner after midnight and getting gangraped by demons with thorn-covered cocks.

183
Gaming Discussion / Re: Suggestions for PS2 RPGs
« on: September 25, 2015, 03:02:24 am »
I won't dispute that a lot of those PSX games are good or even great (well, tbh only Suikodens and Star Ocean :P) but it's pretty much all standard fantasy world fare that I thought the OP wasn't looking for? Hell, if I had to put a name to the concept of "most generic and featureless JRPG ever created" that 'honor' would go to Lunar.

184
Site Talk / Re: Rating system for the rom hacks on this site?
« on: September 24, 2015, 09:21:03 am »
I think the version info IS more or less mandatory now. The reason it's missing from a lot of reviews is that this feature was only added a year ago: http://www.romhacking.net/forum/index.php/topic,18594.20.html

As for replying, yeah as Spooniest said, it's probably not a good idea. Check out that topic I linked to in general, it also touched upon this whole topic. Adding the version info was the most accepted solution we came up with.

185
Site Talk / Re: Rating system for the rom hacks on this site?
« on: September 24, 2015, 08:40:34 am »
"We aren't promoting anything, we are just providing a platform."

Providing a platform is promotion though.

That particular post was directed at a user who claimed that the RHDN staff was favoring specific projects over others, which was and still is not the case. Of course we want to promote romhacking as a hobby in general.

There really isn't a specific post I intended point to, just pointed to those discussions (there are more referenced in the thread) for reference. My personal opinion is that there isn't big enough of a (actively reviewing) userbase to get meaningful rankings. There is also the issue that rankings often lead to a "the rich get richer" development, as people only try the most downloaded and most reviewed hacks and don't touch new and lesser known ones.

186
Site Talk / Re: Rating system for the rom hacks on this site?
« on: September 24, 2015, 02:50:42 am »

187
Gaming Discussion / Re: Why I hate OoT
« on: September 15, 2015, 02:31:08 am »
Yes it's very friendly now.

Quote
If you honestly think modern games are done better then you have no clue what you are talking about.

By stating the games you like, you show your (terrible) tastes in gaming. If you'd said 'Last of Us' instead of Tomb Raider 2013 then I could've taken you more seriously.  If a string of orgasm-sounds from a woman being in pain/tortured and a subsequent series of QTEs and FarCry-knockoff gameplay is what appeals to you then have at it.

It's good we have at least our expert here to tell us all what's what, I couldn't keep living in ignorance anymore.

188
Gaming Discussion / Re: Why I hate OoT
« on: September 15, 2015, 02:09:52 am »
Oh great, now this devolved into pointless "My argument will win because I can list more games than you that fulfill my random and subjective criteria for what I consider right".  :thumbsup:

189
A well written review will succinctly break down and discuss the mechanics of the whole game in two or three paragraphs. In a video I have to watch half an hour to get an impression on one level of the game, a tiny snapshot. If it's a complex game it won't tell me anything about how good things are balanced overall, how mechanics interact later, etc.

There is nothing I hate more about the current internet trends than that everything needs to be a video. I was playing Arkham Knight and looking for some last collectible objects and I wanted to check a guide so I'm not wasting time stumbling around randomly. It would have been super efficient to have a table, sorted by locations, with a screenshot of the map and of the game screen for each collectible. But no, they released a video walkthrough for it. So I had to randomly skip through a 20 minute video, trying to hit 5 seconds of information that was relevant to me. It's bullshit, it's a massive waste of my time.

Watching a speedrun of a game as a "review" I have to invest a ton of time for information that could be summed up into a few paragraphs, while I'm getting spoiled all over, and getting expectations about how a game has to look when it's played well that I won't be able to fulfill just playing casually. I literally see zero upside to this "review" method whatsoever.

190
Gaming Discussion / Re: Suggestions for PS2 RPGs
« on: September 13, 2015, 04:07:11 am »
I can already tell this thread might become hard to keep up with.

From my experience this kind of thread quickly devolves into people listing every PS2 RPG they ever heard the name of since they don't read :P I honestly hope you'll get some good recommendations instead. Though I can't think of much more and I did play through most of the PS2 JRPG library, at least the officially localized ones. Back then my standards were much lower and it was kinda the golden age of JRPG in terms of quantity and quality. Maybe that's the point I became sick of them since there was just too much :P Thinking back I played a ton of them but not too many were memorable enough to immediately pop into my head now 10 years later.

191
Gaming Discussion / Re: Suggestions for PS2 RPGs
« on: September 13, 2015, 03:19:54 am »
I'm looking for something interesting and original.

Yeah don't play JRPGs then. I'm sorry but that's how it is. If you already played SMT3 there is not much left. I guess I can concur with Lakmir's Rogue Galaxy recommendation. Gameplay wise it's much more fun thanks to being real time action and the setting isn't overused. Also Shadow Hearts 1+2 has an amazing cast and unique story and is all around pretty great. Gameplay wise it's nothing super special though.

192
Gaming Discussion / Re: Do video games still need mascots?
« on: September 12, 2015, 03:18:21 pm »
Yeah maybe it's a good thing. Maybe it's a sign that gaming evolved past being marketed in the ad blocks between children's cartoons.

193
Gaming Discussion / Do video games still need mascots?
« on: September 12, 2015, 03:09:11 pm »
Quote
I agree with this.  Nintendo has been riding the exact same handful of franchises for 30+ years.  It's almost embarrassing.  There's only so many times you can repackage Mario or Zelda before it gets tired... and I think most people have hit that point.

This quote inspired me to this thread. It would have been pretty off-topic in the other thread so I'm creating a new one.

Do videogames still need to be carried by a singular character? When was the last time we got a new character that reaches recognizability and lasting power like Mario, Link, Sonic, Lara Croft, Crash Bandicoot, Solid Snake etc...?
If we look at modern games, what is popular seems to be multiplayer games with no or unimportant characters. Indie games focused on game mechanics and not characters or story. Even the storydriven stuff is very self-contained. I think a character like Elizabeth from Bioshock Infinity has more personality and depth than all the 90s game heroes combined, but we'll never see her in another game and I don't mind that. When a game is more character driven we get to experience their story and then they are gone. There is no longer this type of broad stroke mascot that'll stick with us through a whole franchise.

Or am I off-base here? This thread is the first thing that came to mind after reading the above quote, I'm sure I'm forgetting stuff. More importantly, is this a bad thing? I just noticed this, but I can't say I ever missed them. And the publishers still don't seem to be tired to keep throwing games with those old characters at us. Maybe that's why no one is noticing. They have the market covered amongst themselves.

194
And let's not kid ourselves by saying that game reviews are trustworthy.
Reviews are perfectly fine if one is an intelligent human being that can read and understand that different people have different point of views. The only reviews that are untrustworthy are exclusive reviews that come out while everyone else is still embargoed.

195
Another interesting point to that discussion, "what's the "worth" of let's plays as free advertising?": People tend to vastly overestimate this as well. There have been games that were successful, perhaps, solely because of YT and streamers, but they are rare. A lot of the times there is no effect on sales. Here is a recent blog post by an indie dev that raised some controversial discussions: http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/DanielWest/20150908/253040/Good_isnt_good_enough__releasing_an_indie_game_in_2015.php

His game was streamed by very popular streamer, that video has over 500k views on YT, and that video sold maybe 20 copies of the game.

The streamers and the stream viewers certainly seem to get much more mileage out of them than the devs. Maybe they are right to consider options of restricting or stopping let's plays.

196
Gaming Discussion / Re: What is the most disappointing game you played.
« on: September 10, 2015, 06:23:49 am »
It trimmed most of the excess gunk (stuff like Combat mode and Survival) in exchange for time spent making it the only title in the series with multiplayer worth playing, rock solid core mechanics and the absolute best incarnation of the map edit mode for the series.

It's a multiplayer title first and foremost, to be honest.

And no, the series is dead because Nintendo couldn't sell Advance Wars in Japan no matter how much the US and Europe liked it (DoR even sold the best of the localised releases, despite never being released in Japan apart from being a throwaway Club Nintendo Title there) because it's not an RPG with some semblance of "strategy" gameplay thrown on top *cough*3DSFireEmblem*cough*.

I completely agree with you. Unfortunately I'm interested in AW only for singleplayer so that incarnation was super disappointing to me. The removal of a hard mode campaign alone killed it for me. I could also rant about how bad Fire Emblem is all day, but it wouldn't fit the thread since it's not disappointing if it was always bad ;)

197
Site Talk / Re: New Entry Fields Request
« on: September 10, 2015, 03:13:57 am »
Also what about a mandate for all submitted rom hacks/translations to be able to work on headerless (and deinterleaved if applicable) roms?

Can't go back and retroactively change hundreds of existing patches without the author's knowledge and permission. And having different rules for each different platform is convoluted and over complicated. Some people have problems following the upload rules as they are already, without having to figure out which of them apply to their upload and which don't.

198
Gaming Discussion / Re: Why I hate OoT
« on: September 09, 2015, 11:15:45 am »
I think the success of the 3DS Remake proves that it's not just a child of its time but still manages to entertain a ton of people. I watch my 8 year old nephew play it for the first time now that he can read and he certainly seems to enjoy it as much as any other game or as much as I enjoyed any game in 1998. From those you listed, the only one that can be remotely compared is MGS, the rest are completely different genres and/or 2D, that's apples and oranges.

So ok, you don't like it. \thread.


199
Gaming Discussion / Re: Why I hate OoT
« on: September 09, 2015, 02:53:33 am »
Could you please elaborate, KaioShin?

He said Dark Souls is better in every way and he is correct. But how is that surprising? OoT is the prototype that made 3rd Person Action Adventures a thing in the first place. Before that no one knew how to actually make them work. Thanks to OoT it became the genre of the 3D generation. And Dark Souls is the pinnacle of 15 years of evolution in that genre now. Using DS to shit on OoT is like shitting on a Model T Ford because your new car is sexier, more secure and faster.

200
Gaming Discussion / Re: What is the most disappointing game you played.
« on: September 09, 2015, 02:50:27 am »
Breath of Fire 5 - The most nonsensical BS game mechanics I have ever seen in an JRPG, and the whole JRPG genre is  pretty much what happens when good gameplay and novel ideas go on vacation in the first place. Though kudos for trying something new I suppose, but it doesn't change the fact that it sucks ass.

Advance Wars Days of Ruin - It's not bad per se, but compared to the rest of the series it's a huge disappointment. It's like 25% as much content as the games that came before and there is not much left after that aside from an easy mode campaign. Coincidence that the series seems to be dead since?

I'll throw in an entire console, the Nintendo DS. Compared to how much it sold and how much it was hyped and how many games were released for it, the overall quality of the games was lackluster. There were some great games of course but I could list half the system's library as disappointments. It should have been the turning point were handheld games were finally up to par with console games, but at the end of the day most released are barely passable and that only because they were for a handheld. Also the dual screen feature is pretty useless. At first we had some gimmicky experiments like holding the DS like a book or even a clever puzzle involving it here and there, but then devs quickly realized how useless it actually was and they all went back to showing minimaps and inventories on the second screen. How amazing...

Duke Nukem Forever - They should've just canceled it and did a different Duke game entirely.

Yes, this was so bad they would have been better off not releasing it. I mean from a game standpoint, I'm sure it made financial sense since the name alone had enough attraction power to move some units.

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 ... 58