Which "great" games can't you stand?
Jason E.K. Brown
>
>Howdy folks. As a frequent reader here for the past 18 months or so,
>I've observed that opinions vary wildly on each game. When a game is
>generally regarded as a "big" game and is supposed to be great, most
>people who say "This game sucks" are trolls just looking for attention.
>However, there *are* times when a game comes along that everyone else
>seems to love that I just plain despise.
>
>So my question is this: which of the most popular games (that everyone
>else on the planet seems to love) leave a bad taste in your mouth? Why,
>specifically?
Wow! Cool thread! Lemme see...
VF1-n. I dunno what it is, but ALL of the VF games just annoy me. The look
great, the control is tight yada yada but it doesn't save it. I just can't
seem to have ANY fun at all playing it. Funfactor on a scale of 1-10 is like a
-3. The characters don't realling interest me, floaty jumps look lame. The
control system has a lot of depth, but feels counter-intuitive to me.
Nights... YUCK. Never liked it at all. Not sure if its the fairy looking
character, the excessive use of pastels or what, but Nights is a total turn
off for me. I'd rather play a Saturn sports game!
Zelda, ever since the SNES version. Zeldas move to 16-bit was bad, and it
never recovered IMO, moving it over the the Blurry-grafx 64 didn't help.
There are others...guess I'll stand by to delete the flame emails... ;)
J
--
Join these today! Make money, JUST for surfing the www!
http://www.gotoworld.com/getpaid/default.asp?rid=1017072207
http://www.epipo.com/signup_form.asp?jekbrown
Want up to 25% CASH rebates on purchases you make online?
http://www.ebates.com/index.jhtml?referrer=jekbrown
John Isles, iv
but I though Super Smash Bros. was lame. It might be because I rented
Zelda with it; It might be because I played it after staying up all night,
cleaning up after a storm that took out the roof in our "laundry room"; It
might be beacuse I was tired...
--
From the computer of John Isles, iv-...@as.net
Made with Macintosh, the ORIGINAL Windows.
"Read my lips: No new taxes. You know, it's funny, but if you JUST read
my lips, you'd think I'm saying, `No nude actresses'."
--Ben Stein, game show host/actor
Me and my mother during a trip to Arizona in June, while stopping in
Laughlin, NV, one night:
-Me: "I've never been to a real Nevada buffet before."
-Mom: "That's because you've never been to a real Nevada before."
______________________________________________________________
Posted via Uncensored-News.Com, http://www.uncensored-news.com
Only $8.95 A Month, - The Worlds Uncensored News Source
Paladin
I've observed that opinions vary wildly on each game. When a game is
generally regarded as a "big" game and is supposed to be great, most
people who say "This game sucks" are trolls just looking for attention.
However, there *are* times when a game comes along that everyone else
seems to love that I just plain despise.
So my question is this: which of the most popular games (that everyone
else on the planet seems to love) leave a bad taste in your mouth? Why,
specifically?
(Disclaimer: no flames, please. I'm not expecting any responses except
your least favorite "favorites.")
Here's a few from my list:
Xenogears (PSX): I hated the rotating graphics (which were pretty ugly
to begin with), the slowness of the sweat droplets, and the totally
uncontrollable battle system (my favorite part of RPGing.)
Zelda 64 (N64): It was just plain boring. Had the same old "young man
rescues princess from evil lord" theme. Dull, unengaging plot coupled
with Mario-with-a-sword gameplay. Yech.
Virtua Fighter 3 (DC): While having nifty uneven playing fields and cool
backdrops, this game played like absolute crap and the cpu was horribly
cheap (especially throw-wise.) A huge disappointment after the excellent
VF2 on Saturn.
Feel free to add your own.
Scott Wozniak
bores me to tears.
-Scott Wozniak
KuRuPt697
>I've observed that opinions vary wildly on each game. When a game is
>generally regarded as a "big" game and is supposed to be great, most
>people who say "This game sucks" are trolls just looking for attention.
>However, there *are* times when a game comes along that everyone else
>seems to love that I just plain despise.
>
>So my question is this: which of the most popular games (that everyone
>else on the planet seems to love) leave a bad taste in your mouth? Why,
>specifically?
Well... topping it off, NiGHTS on the Saturn, just doesn't do it for me, at
all. I bought it, used $15, when it was still 'hot.' I played it for about an
hour, and as I leave my Saturn for the day, I keep asking myself, "what's all
the fuss about?" I fly around "pretty" environments, twirling in my gayish
glee, circling loops and beating the clock! Feh. I kept on playing it,
forcing myself to like it, so that I won't admit that I wasted my money... but
I'm still asking the same question. What's all the fuss about?
Next game, yup, you guessed it, Burning Rangers. It was a marked down price
($50 down to $9, I'd get almost any game if it was such a deal) so I bought it.
First of all, for being one of the last Saturn games in the US, I would've
expected it to excel at least in graphics. I was wrong. What's all the fuss
about?! The graphics are _and were_ poor! Okay, that's not much of a
complaint. The gameplay... it was pretty fun, really it was... but after the
second mission, it felt repetitive more than anything. I love Sega and all, I
just don't understand why people seem to worship Sonic Team. They're
innovative, so what?
Tomb Raider series. A 3rd person shooter, except you shoot animals and such.
BORING. So she's a polygonal babe, it's not going to make me buy all three
(wait, there's gonna be four, soon).
That's just my .02...
--
AFKAK3:16--The Artist Formerly Known as KuRuPt 3:16
The Innovator of Fire Pro VIOLENCE
Remove "nospam" from email.
President of the IWL
http://www.angelfire.com/sd/iwl/
Chris Johnston
: Howdy folks. As a frequent reader here for the past 18 months or so,
: I've observed that opinions vary wildly on each game. When a game is
: generally regarded as a "big" game and is supposed to be great, most
: people who say "This game sucks" are trolls just looking for attention.
: However, there *are* times when a game comes along that everyone else
: seems to love that I just plain despise.
: So my question is this: which of the most popular games (that everyone
: else on the planet seems to love) leave a bad taste in your mouth? Why,
: specifically?
Here's some of mine:
Twisted Metal (any): I played the first game, and just have never enjoyed
it. Especially III and 4... The first wasn't bad and II was "eh," but I
there must be something I'm not getting.
Jet Moto: Always have hated this game. It's just not at all fun to play...
slow, choppy, not even a real racing game or jet skiing game.
Chris J.
--
_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_
Chris Johnston wake...@xnet.com
Nickname: SuperPac on IRC ICQ#: 6084051
Homepage: http://www.xnet.com/~wakemich
Scott X
| to begin with), the slowness of the sweat droplets, and the totally
| uncontrollable battle system (my favorite part of RPGing.)
Haven't played this one.
|
| Zelda 64 (N64): It was just plain boring. Had the same old "young man
| rescues princess from evil lord" theme. Dull, unengaging plot coupled
| with Mario-with-a-sword gameplay. Yech.
I agree, if it wasn't hyped so much I would probably like it more. It was
well done, but had hardly anything to offer that wasn't done already. It
was way too slow too.
|
| Virtua Fighter 3 (DC): While having nifty uneven playing fields and cool
| backdrops, this game played like absolute crap and the cpu was horribly
| cheap (especially throw-wise.) A huge disappointment after the excellent
| VF2 on Saturn.
I've got to disagree here. If you were comparing the AI and gameplay to DOA
or (maybe) Tekken 3 I would have less of a beef with this statement. But I
can find no way that VF3tb is not an advancement on VF2, either arcade or
Saturn versions. More moves, faster gameplay and smarter CPU opponents.
Add better graphics and more realism and I see a better game than VF2. Now,
on the other hand, VF2 on the Saturn was a better use of hardware than VF3tb
is on the DC, but I can't see anyway that it is a better game than VF3tb.
About the AI, it is very beatable, you just have to be good to do it. I've
known guys that can do all of the combos for every character without fail,
and the CPU for them is a joke, but it kicks my cheese. It actually adapts
to my fighting style too, if I lose once to it, I can't beat it again for a
long time. But it isn't cheating, it's just better than me. SF2's little
tricks were cheating. When you can see the computer walk straight up to you
and wait for you to press a button to attack, you know it's cheating. Rant
mode off.
| Feel free to add your own.
|
Soul Caliber:
In fighting games, I require at least some realism. Sparks and flashes of
lights don't impress me and neither does running my opponent through with a
pointy stick only to see them get up again. It is a well done game though
and has much play mechanics to build on that adds replay value. If I'm
fighting with swords in a game, I don't want to see stinkin life bars
though.
Hydro Thunder (DC):
The load times were way too long and frequent and the water physics just
weren't as convincing as they were in the arcade, probably due to the lack
of a dedicated simulation machine. I'll pick this up on discount sometime
maybe.
Final Fantasy 7 (PS):
I played all the way through this game and I found it the sorriest attempt
at a story I have ever seen. The whole time they just kept beating the
character development with way too much dialogue. Add that to the fact that
it used crappy flatshaded polys on a 2D prerendered background and I was
very underwhelmed by the whole experience. Then they really pissed me off
after 50hrs of play and didn't complete the story. Did Holy judge Humans as
evil? Did Aeris come back? Who does Cloud end up with if so? What was the
relationship between Cloud, Sephiroth and Jenova? None of these questions
could be answered by anyone other than a scholar who knows what mythologies
that the story was derived from, because it was not presented well enough to
speak for itself. I haven't played FF8 as a result, from the reviews and
discussions it sounds like more of the same. Why can't Square make the
games connect with each other like the Phantasy Star series? They just keep
retelling the same story.
Goldeneye (N64):
The game that is supposed to make the N64 a worth while purchase. I played
this game for a day straight in multiplayer and single player and I found
nothing spectacular about the game. It is a good game, and well made, but I
think the only reason that it was this popular is because people haven't
played Doom or Quake multiplayer. My biggest problem is the gun being off
center of the screen so you can't aim with the crosshairs on the gun. Who
the heck holds a gun off to his right to fire?
Armored Core(PS)
While this was a good game by most standards, the fact that people compared
it to Virtual On as if it was even in the same genre, much less on the same
level made me hold it to a higher standard. The controls were too sluggish
and so was the mech, the graphics were also too low res and lacked detail,
and the music was bland. I would compare this game to Gungriffon and say
that it was a better game, but it ain't VO.
I actually do like a lot of games on all platforms, but this is a post about
what I don't like.
|
|
|
Jeff Williams
> So my question is this: which of the most popular games (that everyone
> else on the planet seems to love) leave a bad taste in your mouth? Why,
> specifically?
God, there are too many to even fit in my memory, so I'll just list the ones I can think
of off the top of my head:
Mario 64 - why? Because it's crap. It basically epitomizes everything I hate about the
N64 (there are a few good games on that system, but most N64 games are typified by Mario
64). Chunky, blurry graphics, a childish theme, 3D for 3D's sake. Pilotwings was the
better of the 2 launch titles.
Final Fantasy VIII - unbalanced, easy gameplay, laughably bad story. An immense
disappointment after FF7, which is by far my favorite game ever.
NBA 2K - feels sluggish, looks disjointed, just doesn't feel like basketball to me.
NHL 96-2000 - All of EA's 3D hockey games are sheeps in wolves' clothing. They look
realistic but play like arcade games. A travesty to the game of hockey.
Resident Evil - this is "horror"? I laughed at it. Plus I'm just not very good at it.
But the "atmosphere" just felt like a b-movie to me, and that was the most damning thing
(a good game that I'm not good at I will just keep practicing until I am).
Tomb Raider - to me, the Lara cult is worse than Pokemania. What is so freakin' special
about this game? Nothing, except it's got this alleged babe as the main character. For
one thing, I don't even think she's at all attractive (I would take any of the Sakura
Taisen girls over Lara), and for another, she's a goddamn CGI model for God's sake.
Any wrestling game - you really have to ask why?
Power Stone - bunch of running around mashing buttons. This is fun? Plus it just feels
stiff - I don't know what it is, maybe the characters don't run fast enough or something,
but I always find myself practically tearing at the controller in futility.
The grandaddy of all:
Half Life. This is "the best game ever" (according to PC Gamer)? Please. It's decent,
but it's no better than any other FPS game, all of which are basically the same. I'll
take Unreal over Half Life any day - at least Unreal's got some sense of style, and
imaginative level design; a far cry from Half Life's endless white, flourescent lit,
straight corridors.
While we're at it, Quake II. Same deal as Half Life - it's decent, but I really do not
understand why so many people are still playing this game. You run around and shoot
people. Whoop dee doo.
That's about all I can think of off the top of my head, though there are dozens of others
I'm not recalling I'm sure...
--
// Jeff Williams
// ge...@nervhq.org
// ICQ#: 7177789 AIM: Basscadet75
// "Just don't expect to get your bloody black backpack back." - Stroke 9
Muskie
> Half Life. This is "the best game ever" (according to PC Gamer)?
Please. It's decent,
> but it's no better than any other FPS game, all of which are
basically the same. I'll
> take Unreal over Half Life any day - at least Unreal's got some sense
of style, and
> imaginative level design; a far cry from Half Life's endless white,
flourescent lit,
> straight corridors.
Huh? Obviously you didn't play the game. "Endless white,
flourescent lit straightcorridors"? Nice try.
You didn't play the game plain and simple. It's survival
horror/platformer/FPS. Next time you are going to lie about playing
some game,make sure you know what you are talking about. The Xen levels
in Half Life are some of the most amazing levels.
Tell me, what did the XEN levels look like?
>
> While we're at it, Quake II. Same deal as Half Life - it's decent,
but I really do not
> understand why so many people are still playing this game. You run
around and shoot
> people. Whoop dee doo.
Its called replay value, modes, control, the feel of the game and the
fluid, proper flow of graphics, sounds, and actions.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
LynnMinmay
-min
Jeff Williams
news:80ljq1$2si$1...@nntp1.atl.mindspring.net...
> Soul Caliber:
> In fighting games, I require at least some realism. Sparks and flashes of
> lights don't impress me and neither does running my opponent through with a
> pointy stick only to see them get up again.
I can see this thread's going to turn it into a flame war pretty quick... I do hope people
keep posting their own choices though, even though I know others are going to argue with
those choices, as I'm about to do...
Anyway I don't see how you can complain about this in Soul Calibur but not in VF3. Just
because VF3 is hand to hand? Come on - kick somebody in the face in real life and see
what happens. 9 times out of 10 they are not getting up. Probably 5 times out of 10 they
are in the hospital, not instantly ready to say "come on, best 2 out of 3!" IMO you
suspend disbelief for *any* fighting game, whether it's VF3, Soul Calibur, Power Stone, or
whatever. None of them are anywhere remotely realistic - the one fighting game I can
think of that *tried* to be realistic is Bushido Blade, and people complained about *that*
game *because* you could knock a guy out in one shot. (I personally loved that game, but
most of the time I like Soul Calibur better, because it's more fun - as games should be.)
> Final Fantasy 7 (PS):
> I played all the way through this game and I found it the sorriest attempt
> at a story I have ever seen. The whole time they just kept beating the
> character development with way too much dialogue. Add that to the fact that
> it used crappy flatshaded polys on a 2D prerendered background and I was
> very underwhelmed by the whole experience. Then they really pissed me off
> after 50hrs of play and didn't complete the story. Did Holy judge Humans as
> evil?
Yes. Which they were - at least those in control of Midgar.
> Did Aeris come back?
Yes and no. You apparently missed the whole explanation of the lifestream. In the world
of FF7, life is constantly being refreshed and recycled. All life eventually returns to
the lifestream - nobody really dies, they just lose their individual consciousness.
Aeris, as a Cetra, had control over the lifestream when she rejoined it, and she was able
to retain her consciousness. That was the whole issue with the "Promised Land" - it was
supposed to be an area of the lifestream where humans could go while retaining their
consciousness, thereby gaining control over it - but in the end the Promised Land didn't
really exist as a physical place.
> Who does Cloud end up with if so?
Tifa! Didn't you get the difference between the relationship between Cloud and Aeris and
Cloud and Tifa? Aeris becomes Cloud's sister/mother figure - Tifa is his love.
> What was the
> relationship between Cloud, Sephiroth and Jenova?
Cloud was a Sephiroth clone. Both were injected with Jenova's cells. Sephiroth was a
success that ultimately mutated into failure - Cloud was a failure that ultimately mutated
into success.
> None of these questions
> could be answered by anyone other than a scholar who knows what mythologies
> that the story was derived from, because it was not presented well enough to
> speak for itself.
Sure it was! I don't know anything about any mythology, I just know what I saw in the
game. And I'm answering your questions entirely from the memory of a game I played more
than 2 years ago. It wasn't all that complicated if you were paying attention. About the
only helpful mythology is to know your Star Wars - a lot of the plot (including Aeris'
intentional death and subsequent return, and the relationships between Aeris/Tifa/Cloud)
is ripped right out of Star Wars - only taken to another level IMO. The FF crew are all
huge Star Wars fans, and that's about the one constant thing they inject into all the FF
games.
> I haven't played FF8 as a result, from the reviews and
> discussions it sounds like more of the same.
If only it was...
> Why can't Square make the
> games connect with each other like the Phantasy Star series? They just keep
> retelling the same story.
Uhhh... they don't connect the games so they *don't* keep retelling the same story. Tell
me how FF8 is like FF6 is like FF4. They're not in the slightest. FF8's graphics bear a
passing resemblence to FF7's, but gameplay and story-wise they're night and day.
Alexander Mendes
>Howdy folks. As a frequent reader here for the past 18 months or so,
>I've observed that opinions vary wildly on each game. When a game is
>generally regarded as a "big" game and is supposed to be great, most
>people who say "This game sucks" are trolls just looking for attention.
>However, there *are* times when a game comes along that everyone else
>seems to love that I just plain despise.
>
>So my question is this: which of the most popular games (that everyone
>else on the planet seems to love) leave a bad taste in your mouth? Why,
>specifically?
<snip>
I could cough up a genre or two:
First-person Shooters (or, as I said in another thread, first-person
anything): "but they're so realistic!" How exactly is a 15-20 degree
field of vision realistic? And how come everyone slides around like
they're running around on a waxed floor in their socks?
Resident Evil, and any game that uses the same control scheme: Gee, why
don't I just play with my feet? Of course, an uncontrollable game is
worthless, and this one is uncontrollable.
Breath of Fire 3: The music was terrible, the camera idea was awful, the
combat was boring, and the story is, as far as I got, stalled so that the
characters can spend hours continuously escaping from and getting captured
by Balio and Sunder. And is there any reason why trying to run will get
you attacked instantly?
Jet Moto: Some times the graphics are so bad they just make your eyes
hurt. Like this game...
The Sonic the Hedghodge series: Wow, it's a blue thing that runs around a
lot. Well...that's...so...fun...zzzzz...
--
--
Alexander Mendes
Steve Cutting
it damn boring, with horrible controls. I bet if it was a 1st person
game it wouldn't have sold half the copies, because then you couldn't
see Lara's behind.
Wipeout - I hate race games with weapons. To me, when they have to add
weapons to a race game it usually means the racing itself is no fun.
That was the case with Wipeout for me. No decent engine sounds, no
real physics or track interaction due to the "floating" nature of it.
Boring, frustrating and unrewarding. Feels like driving a hairdryer.
Actually the utterly crap RedlineRacer on DC reminds me of this game,
but RR got slammed by everyone.
Resident Evil - Rented this and found it plain stupid. Horrid, slow
unintuitive controls. Walk along a corridor, a dog jumps out and
starts circling you. Press the controller to turn, then sit there
waiting 1/2 hour as your character slooowly turns around. blech
and this was supposed to be an action game. More like a (boring)
uninteractive movie IMO
Steve
John Kitchar
leave it at that.
Any popular RPG---walking up to town people only to have them say things
like "my son loves dogs" or "you're not from around here, are you?" makes my
skin crawl.
RE2---the very 1st video game I ever played---on my own new PSX. I hated
that game almost enough to throw in the towel on videogames in general. Then
I purchased GT...
Medieval---lack of save points killed that game for me.
JMK
Vincent
suurounding Metal Gear Solid. Would rather be playing Tenchu, GoldenEye, or
Medal Of Honor.
Paladin wrote in message <382E4528...@Blazenet.net>...
Howdy folks. As a frequent reader here for the past 18 months or so,
I've observed that opinions vary wildly on each game. When a game is
generally regarded as a "big" game and is supposed to be great, most
people who say "This game sucks" are trolls just looking for attention.
However, there *are* times when a game comes along that everyone else
seems to love that I just plain despise.
So my question is this: which of the most popular games (that everyone
else on the planet seems to love) leave a bad taste in your mouth? Why,
specifically?
(Disclaimer: no flames, please. I'm not expecting any responses except
your least favorite "favorites.")
Here's a few from my list:
Xenogears (PSX): I hated the rotating graphics (which were pretty ugly
to begin with), the slowness of the sweat droplets, and the totally
uncontrollable battle system (my favorite part of RPGing.)
Zelda 64 (N64): It was just plain boring. Had the same old "young man
rescues princess from evil lord" theme. Dull, unengaging plot coupled
with Mario-with-a-sword gameplay. Yech.
Virtua Fighter 3 (DC): While having nifty uneven playing fields and cool
backdrops, this game played like absolute crap and the cpu was horribly
cheap (especially throw-wise.) A huge disappointment after the excellent
VF2 on Saturn.
Feel free to add your own.
Andrew Ryan Chang
>> What was the
>> relationship between Cloud, Sephiroth and Jenova?
>
>Sephiroth was a
>success that ultimately mutated into failure - Cloud was a failure that
>ultimately mutated
>into success.
Um, Cloud _wasn't_ a Sephiroth clone... you have to go back into
the basement in Nibelheim near the end of the game to get one of the last
flashbacks.
If I recall correctly, Cloud did return to Nibelheim... but as one
of the low-level guard units. _Zack_ was the Soldier. Nibelheim was
where Sephiroth lost it; he proceeded to knock out Zack and Tifa. Cloud
took Zack's sword and ran Sephiroth through. Then, somehow, both he and
Zack are captured and (more?) experiments are run on them. They escape
and head to Midgar, where Zack is killed, and Cloud (dunno why) assumes
Zack's clothing and weaponry, and begins to blur their identities.
In other words, Cloud was a real person who had been subjected to
Jenova experiments.
As long as we're on this thread: I've never really liked Tekken.
Or Street Fighter-ish games. Or Tetris, at least when compared with Puyo
Puyo. Or Tomb Raider. Or Starcraft/Warcraft.
--
"_Babe Flathead:_ At MPU, Babe was a 43-letter man, leading his team to cham-
pionships in every existing sport[...] (Many observers feel that Babe's teams
would have won those championships even if every competing school had NOT had
their QCAA memberships revoked.)" -Encyclopedia Frobozzica.
Sean X. Chang
Paladin wrote
>So my question is this: which of the most popular games (that everyone
>else on the planet seems to love) leave a bad taste in your mouth? Why,
>specifically?
>
Hmm... kind of an interesting thread.
So... IMNSHO -
FF8 - yep. Played through this game, took advantage
of the system to the max, tried to get into the storyline and
characters, and ended up being quite forgettable. Just a tedious and
boring game. Doesn't deserve to sell about 3 times more
than its nearest PSX competitor in Japan.
Grand Theft Auto - ugh. I can see how it can be fun... that is, if
you have a twisted sense of fun.
Pokemon - great idea, but overdone. Really. We don't need
blue, red, yellow, gold, silver, etc. version of the same damn
game selling millions of copies each.
Scott X
|
| I can see this thread's going to turn it into a flame war pretty quick...
I do hope people
| keep posting their own choices though, even though I know others are going
to argue with
| those choices, as I'm about to do...
There's no reason to start flaming. That's what discussion is all about. I
like to be proved wrong if I'm wrong, because if I'm wrong then what I am
saying is stupid.
|
| game *because* you could knock a guy out in one shot. (I personally loved
that game, but
| most of the time I like Soul Calibur better, because it's more fun - as
games should be.)
This is a very good point. On the other hand though, can it not be said
that games like SC depart from reality further than the VF series does, as
far as life threatening blows go? It is *possible* to get kicked in the
head and not get knocked down even, personal experience, but likely not if
your fighting a professional fighter. However, for whatever reason, I can't
enjoy Tekken and SC, and I can enjoy VF3tb, I don't know why other than it
appears to simulate real fighting better, or at least real sparing.
| > Final Fantasy 7 (PS):
| > I played all the way through this game and I found it the sorriest
attempt
| > at a story I have ever seen. The whole time they just kept beating the
| > character development with way too much dialogue. Add that to the fact
that
| > it used crappy flatshaded polys on a 2D prerendered background and I was
| > very underwhelmed by the whole experience. Then they really pissed me
off
| > after 50hrs of play and didn't complete the story. Did Holy judge
Humans as
| > evil?
|
| Yes. Which they were - at least those in control of Midgar.
It shows a run down Midgar in the future, this could mean that the people
just left Midgar, or it could mean that the people were gone entirely. It
isn't clear about it, and leaving that much up to speculation is not what I
like in a story, I know that some people do though. I am also not saying
that this is not a good game, I just did not think it was *as* good as
everyone always says it is.
| > Did Aeris come back?
|
| Yes and no. You apparently missed the whole explanation of the
lifestream. In the world
| of FF7, life is constantly being refreshed and recycled. All life
eventually returns to
| the lifestream - nobody really dies, they just lose their individual
consciousness.
| Aeris, as a Cetra, had control over the lifestream when she rejoined it,
and she was able
| to retain her consciousness. That was the whole issue with the "Promised
Land" - it was
| supposed to be an area of the lifestream where humans could go while
retaining their
| consciousness, thereby gaining control over it - but in the end the
Promised Land didn't
| really exist as a physical place.
I did catch that, and I understood that Aeris said to Cloud in his dream
that she would be coming back, but the ending only shows her opening her
eyes, in a very dreamlike scene that can be interpreted as simply a
remembrance of her, or that she was coming back to life. All of that would
be moot though if all of humanity was destroyed by holy, which it is not
clear on, but it certainly implies.
|
| > Who does Cloud end up with if so?
| Tifa! Didn't you get the difference between the relationship between
Cloud and Aeris and
| Cloud and Tifa? Aeris becomes Cloud's sister/mother figure - Tifa is his
love.
Tifa was also the one that helped Cloud sort out himself, so she could also
have been a mother figure, and he never showed any particular interest in
any of them in the game. Though in the flashbacks Cloud mentioned wanting
her to like him. This too, is up for interpretation. But it does imply
that Tifa would be his love interest. Again though, this point would be
moot if Aeris does not reincarnate, or if Holy destroyed humanity.
|
| > What was the
| > relationship between Cloud, Sephiroth and Jenova?
I have read interpretations that Sepheroth was always a pawn of Jenova's, as
was Cloud. But Cloud was the one with the true power outside of Jenova's
grip, demonstrated by his casting Sephiroth off of the catwalk in the mako
reactor, and by Clouds easy victory against Sephiroth in the very last boss
fight, after Jenova was gone. The game said that Cloud was a clone of
Sephiroth, but also made Sephiroth look like the impostor. Much doubt was
left in this part too. Again, it might be considered a great approach if
one wants to spend hours mulling over all of the random lines in the game,
but I think that it could have been better if the story was presented more
concisely.
| intentional death and subsequent return, and the relationships between
Aeris/Tifa/Cloud)
| is ripped right out of Star Wars - only taken to another level IMO. The
FF crew are all
| huge Star Wars fans, and that's about the one constant thing they inject
into all the FF
| games.
It really ties in more with Jewish and European mythologies. I had an in
depth report linked, I'll have to find it again. But my point was that
there was too much conflicting information in the storyline for any one
conclusion to be absolutely right, and I don't like that. I like for a game
to end, and it is over and I know what happened. I don't want many of the
key points in the story open for interpretation. It is a very good game by
all standards, but I really would have liked it more, *personally*, if the
story were more clearly presented like Lunar: Eternal Blue or the Phantasy
Star series always is. A good story doesn't have to be complex.
| > I haven't played FF8 as a result, from the reviews and
| > discussions it sounds like more of the same.
|
This is no judgment on the game, I know nothing of it and I may buy it for
the computer and play it.
| If only it was...
|
| > Why can't Square make the
| > games connect with each other like the Phantasy Star series? They just
keep
| > retelling the same story.
|
| Uhhh... they don't connect the games so they *don't* keep retelling the
same story. Tell
| me how FF8 is like FF6 is like FF4. They're not in the slightest. FF8's
graphics bear a
| passing resemblence to FF7's, but gameplay and story-wise they're night
and day.
Well, mine was a weak point on this part. If I were to loosely describe the
story of all FFs they would all be the same story, but so would most games.
What I mean though is that the Phantasy Star story is a continuing saga,
each new addition has ties with the past games. It would not be as good if
they just offered a more complex story with every new installment without
offering any ties with the other games. I don't see any reason to make a
sequel to a game that has nothing to do what so ever with its past
installments. Just my opinion, and I am aware of the counter arguments for
FF7, I just haven't seen any reason that my point would be wrong either.
Steve Cutting
wrote:
>The grandaddy of all:
>
>Half Life. This is "the best game ever" (according to PC Gamer)? Please. It's decent,
>but it's no better than any other FPS game, all of which are basically the same. I'll
>take Unreal over Half Life any day - at least Unreal's got some sense of style, and
>imaginative level design; a far cry from Half Life's endless white, flourescent lit,
>straight corridors.
Agreed. I bought this the day it came out expecting to be blown away.
Found it very boring though. Played it 1/2 way through, then sold it a
week or so later while I could still get a good price for it. I prefer
Unreal as well. Much more imaginative, in terms of monsters, level
design and overall feel.
Steve
jor...@europa.com
Persona (PSX) - They reduced the number of random encounters for the US
version, but there were so many different things you could do at each
encounter point it became impossible to be well rounded in each of the
objectives. I.E. you could get persona cards at the expense of experience
points and cash, but not all three evenly. I went for cash to buy items to
stay alive at the expense of experience and persona cards, advanced fairly
far into the game only to be told that I couldn't get any persona cards
because I wasn't experienced enough. Unfortunately I had already passed
several event points and was unable to return to earlier levels to power
up. Ended up giving up on the game and trading it for something else.
: Zelda 64 (N64): It was just plain boring. Had the same old "young man
: rescues princess from evil lord" theme. Dull, unengaging plot coupled
: with Mario-with-a-sword gameplay. Yech.
I found the subversive drug messages amusing ("YOU NEED SOME OF
OUR... SPECIAL... CROP!"), but by the third temple the game-play was
getting too repetitive and I gave up on it.
- Jordan
jor...@europa.com
********************************************************************
* "Heroes are not giant statues framed against a red sky, they *
* are people who say: 'This is my community, and it's my *
* responsibility to make it better.'" *
* - Tom McCall, Oregon Governor 1967 - 1974 *
********************************************************************
Joshua Kaufman
>
> Howdy folks. As a frequent reader here for the past 18 months or so,
> I've observed that opinions vary wildly on each game. When a game is
> generally regarded as a "big" game and is supposed to be great, most
> people who say "This game sucks" are trolls just looking for attention.
> However, there *are* times when a game comes along that everyone else
> seems to love that I just plain despise.
>
> else on the planet seems to love) leave a bad taste in your mouth? Why,
> specifically?
>
> your least favorite "favorites.")
>
> Here's a few from my list:
>
> Xenogears (PSX): I hated the rotating graphics (which were pretty ugly
> to begin with), the slowness of the sweat droplets, and the totally
> uncontrollable battle system (my favorite part of RPGing.)
>
> rescues princess from evil lord" theme. Dull, unengaging plot coupled
> with Mario-with-a-sword gameplay. Yech.
>
Since when are Zelda games about plot? And you obviously didn;t play the
game if you think it's "Mario with a sword".
-Joshua
--
AOL-IM: TerraEpon ICQ: 5404138
Akira
( I WAS gonna say FF8, but ive played a bit further on and its off my hate
list )
Twisted Metal 3(PSX):
Pathetic tracks, cars and was just plain boring.
Destruction Derby One(PSX):
Play it for about 30 mins and you'll know.
VF3(DC):
It seemed like the hits didnt even hit them, the AI was very cheap (and
easy), and besides from the graphics, the game was boring as hell. Soul
Calibur was a million times better.
Silent Hill(PSX):
Crap Graphics, No good Weapons, Crap Enemies, Motovation to keep
playing:NIL
Dino Crisis (PSX):
Worst Control System in any game I've played, Not Scary in the slightest.
Yoshi's Story, Bomberman 64, Mario Party and numerous others(n64):
Cutesy, Annoying, Zero Gameplay, Boring.
Akira
>As long as we're on this thread: I've never really liked Tekken.
>Or Street Fighter-ish games. Or Tetris, at least when compared with Puyo
>Puyo. Or Tomb Raider. Or Starcraft/Warcraft.
>
I've always disliked Tekken as well. Same with TR. I LOVE Starcraft and
Warcraft! Both two of teh most involvin RTS's Ever. Starcraft had an
amazing storyline and gameplay content.
Muskie
Yet you never played Half Life deathmatch or TFC, did you? Thats what
I thought.
---Muskie
Akira
>
>| Feel free to add your own.
>|
>
>Soul Caliber:
>In fighting games, I require at least some realism. Sparks and flashes of
>lights don't impress me and neither does running my opponent through with
a
>pointy stick only to see them get up again. It is a well done game though
>and has much play mechanics to build on that adds replay value. If I'm
>fighting with swords in a game, I don't want to see stinkin life bars
>though.
SC wasn't just flashing lights. The warrior's weapons were equal to a
warrior's type of fighting in Tekken. Same with Combos. Life bars were for
lastability in a fight. People seem to be forgetting its been done before
with Soul Blade, so it isnt that new a concept.
>Hydro Thunder (DC):
>The load times were way too long and frequent and the water physics just
>weren't as convincing as they were in the arcade, probably due to the lack
>of a dedicated simulation machine. I'll pick this up on discount sometime
>maybe.
Never Played.
>Final Fantasy 7 (PS):
>I played all the way through this game and I found it the sorriest attempt
>at a story I have ever seen. The whole time they just kept beating the
>character development with way too much dialogue.
Play Xenogears, then come back.
Add that to the fact that
>it used crappy flatshaded polys on a 2D prerendered background and I was
>very underwhelmed by the whole experience. Then they really pissed me off
>after 50hrs of play and didn't complete the story.
Did Holy judge Humans as evil?
Yes, but only the ones who drained the planet of Energy. (Harmed the
Planet).
>Did Aeris come back?
Yes and No. She wasnt alive in solid form, but her conciousness was alive
in the planet. She controlled the lifestream. (Remember when Marlene says
"Flower Girl" in the last FMV).
>Who does Cloud end up with if so?
Tifa. Aeris was more of a guardian, a sister if you will. Tifa was the one
he loved.
>What was the relationship between Cloud, Sephiroth and Jenova?
Sephiroth and Cloud were both expirements of the professor. They had Jenova
cells in them, which was suppost to make them fighting machines. CLoud was
the "failure" while Sephiroth was a success gone crazy. Its kinda like
Ghost In The Shell, testing humanity. HE was trying to find his past.
>None of these questions could be answered by anyone other than a scholar
>who knows what mythologies
>what the story was derived from, because it was not presented well enough
>to speak for itself.
If you actually listened carefully to the story, you'd understand it well.
I haven't played FF8 as a result, from the reviews and
>discussions it sounds like more of the same. Why can't Square make the
>games connect with each other like the Phantasy Star series? They just
keep
>retelling the same story.
True.
>Goldeneye (N64):
>The game that is supposed to make the N64 a worth while purchase. I
played
>this game for a day straight in multiplayer and single player and I found
>nothing spectacular about the game. It is a good game, and well made, but
I
>think the only reason that it was this popular is because people haven't
>played Doom or Quake multiplayer. My biggest problem is the gun being off
>center of the screen so you can't aim with the crosshairs on the gun. Who
>the heck holds a gun off to his right to fire?
This game has given me and my friends days of multi-player entertainment.
>Armored Core(PS)
>While this was a good game by most standards, the fact that people
compared
>it to Virtual On as if it was even in the same genre, much less on the
same
>level made me hold it to a higher standard. The controls were too
sluggish
>and so was the mech, the graphics were also too low res and lacked detail,
>and the music was bland. I would compare this game to Gungriffon and say
>that it was a better game, but it ain't VO.
>
>
>
>I actually do like a lot of games on all platforms, but this is a post
about
>what I don't like.
Whateva.
- Akira
Paladin
Joshua Kaufman wrote:
> Since when are Zelda games about plot? And you obviously didn;t play the
> game if you think it's "Mario with a sword".
Sure I did. I prepurchased the gold version, played it for 10 hours or so,
and then I just couldn't stand it any more, so I stopped playing and took it
back. I just don't share your perspective on the game. Grow up and accept it.
Or even better, post your own list instead of attacking mine.
Muskie
1. Tenchu
Cheesy graphics, bad sound, poor AI, poor controls. Just an overall
bad game IMHO.
2. Silent Hill
Poor controls, bad AI. I bought this game believing it would have
this mature, "thriller" non-in-your-face premise, but 5 minutes
into it and I have giant demon-bats trying to rip out my head.
Not exactly "low key" or suttle as all its favorable critics said.
The story was especially bad, and seemd the writers knew the
story was awful ,and made it so it was a jumbled mess on purpose with
no ending. The voice acting and graphics were poor also.
3. Syphon Filter
The poor mans 007. Really outdated, poor graphics, funky
controls, poor sound, poor gameplay. I liked the way the game flowed ,
but that was the only thing. lol the control was really laughable.
The bosses looked no better than those characters on SOuth Park who
fart and laugh.
4. TR3 --enough said.
5. Madden 2000
Running game? Controls?
The whole point in having a football game is to have fun
PLAYING it. The emhpasis of the game should be ON the field, not off.
If you want to make a Football game that is EA MAdden 2000 General
Managers Edition, go ahead. People can draft and trade and all those
goodies, and then watch the scores pop up on a screen and adjust
accordingly.
Muskie
> unintuitive controls. Walk along a corridor, a dog jumps out and
> starts circling you. Press the controller to turn, then sit there
> waiting 1/2 hour as your character slooowly turns around. blech
> and this was supposed to be an action game. More like a (boring)
> uninteractive movie IMO
>
> Steve
>
>
Lol. I like the RE series, but thats a funny way to put it. It's not
really an action game at all.
Kevin Sullivan
>Howdy folks. As a frequent reader here for the past 18 months or so,
>I've observed that opinions vary wildly on each game. When a game is
>generally regarded as a "big" game and is supposed to be great, most
>people who say "This game sucks" are trolls just looking for attention.
>However, there *are* times when a game comes along that everyone else
>seems to love that I just plain despise.
>
>So my question is this: which of the most popular games (that everyone
>else on the planet seems to love) leave a bad taste in your mouth? Why,
>specifically?
>
>(Disclaimer: no flames, please. I'm not expecting any responses except
>your least favorite "favorites.")
>
>Here's a few from my list:
>
>Xenogears (PSX): I hated the rotating graphics (which were pretty ugly
>to begin with), the slowness of the sweat droplets, and the totally
>uncontrollable battle system (my favorite part of RPGing.)
I agree here, great story, pretty bad battle system, it seems like it
was thrown in as an afterthought...
>Zelda 64 (N64): It was just plain boring. Had the same old "young man
>rescues princess from evil lord" theme. Dull, unengaging plot coupled
>with Mario-with-a-sword gameplay. Yech.
Zelda64 does have a lame story (and an ending that makes no sense:
What possible effect would beating Ganon in the FUTURE have on the
past (or present, depending on how you look at it...) Everyone at the
end is celebrating but since nothing bad ever really happens to the
present and has no idea what Link did in the future it's kind of
pointless...) But aside from that I thought the game was awesome. It
has some of the best level design of any game I've ever played. And
since when are Zelda games about the plot? Every single one of them
has a lame story:)
Kevin Sullivan
>Well, I hate to be honest, and I may not be giving this game a fair shake,
>but I though Super Smash Bros. was lame. It might be because I rented
>Zelda with it; It might be because I played it after staying up all night,
>cleaning up after a storm that took out the roof in our "laundry room"; It
>might be beacuse I was tired...
I played Smash Bros. for the first time last night and I thought it
was pretty bad. The control is horrendous and the way the camera pans
out so far that you can't even see your character and you die as a
result is kind of lame too. I have no idea what everyone sees in this
game...
>--
>From the computer of John Isles, iv-...@as.net
>
>Made with Macintosh, the ORIGINAL Windows.
>
>"Read my lips: No new taxes. You know, it's funny, but if you JUST read
>my lips, you'd think I'm saying, `No nude actresses'."
> --Ben Stein, game show host/actor
>
>Me and my mother during a trip to Arizona in June, while stopping in
>Laughlin, NV, one night:
>-Me: "I've never been to a real Nevada buffet before."
>-Mom: "That's because you've never been to a real Nevada before."
>
>______________________________________________________________
>Posted via Uncensored-News.Com, http://www.uncensored-news.com
> Only $8.95 A Month, - The Worlds Uncensored News Source
Akira
<80lmlk$1f...@enews4.newsguy.com>:
>
>Any popular RPG---walking up to town people only to have them say things
>like "my son loves dogs" or "you're not from around here, are you?" makes
my
>skin crawl
ALong with the fact that you can go into anyone's house, steal their
belongings and sleep in their beds. Hmm, Thats realistic.
Kevin Sullivan
>
>Paladin wrote
>>So my question is this: which of the most popular games (that everyone
>>else on the planet seems to love) leave a bad taste in your mouth? Why,
>>specifically?
>>
>
>
>Hmm... kind of an interesting thread.
>
>So... IMNSHO -
>
>FF8 - yep. Played through this game, took advantage
>of the system to the max, tried to get into the storyline and
>characters, and ended up being quite forgettable. Just a tedious and
>boring game. Doesn't deserve to sell about 3 times more
>than its nearest PSX competitor in Japan.
>
>Grand Theft Auto - ugh. I can see how it can be fun... that is, if
>you have a twisted sense of fun.
>
>Pokemon - great idea, but overdone. Really. We don't need
>blue, red, yellow, gold, silver, etc. version of the same damn
>game selling millions of copies each.
>
To be fair Silver and Gold are different games from the originals but
it is unbelievable to me that Yellow sold a million copies in 2 weeks.
No wonder Nintendo is taking their time releasing Silver and
Gold...why bother releasing sequels when the kids are completely happy
buying rehashes, and hell , Red and Blue are still selling like
mad...Just think, In Japan they had Red, Blue, Yellow AND Green
versions of the same game...
Akira
<80lqb0$cmc$1...@news.cis.ohio-state.edu>:
>Pokemon - great idea, but overdone. Really. We don't need
>blue, red, yellow, gold, silver, etc. version of the same damn
>game selling millions of copies each.
ARRRGGG!!! I cant believe I forgot that meaningless trend! GAmes, Cards,
Stuffed Animals, PIKACHU! About Seven versions of the same game, oh boohoo
that Nintendo cant manufacture 4 million, instead of 2 million of the
silver and gold. Maybe there is a whole 1 new pokemon to find.
John Ford
<Weap...@Yermeatix.netcom.com> wrote:
>Again, it might be considered a great approach if
>one wants to spend hours mulling over all of the random lines in the game,
>but I think that it could have been better if the story was presented more
>concisely.
Yes. Agreed. Whole-heartedly. You should not have to 'guess' at the
meaning. (Referring to Japanese transcriptions and stuff, etc.) There
should not be self-contradictory elements. There can be gaps,
inferences, and so on -- but they should always subtly lead toward ONE
thing. (At least in a game.) Xenogears does this well -- no, actually,
it explains it all right out. FF8 does this too, but the love story
aspect has a pretty huge corn factor you have to get over first.
AZsun
Banjo Kazooie &
Zelda 64 (both quite boring, IMO)
Akira
>
> The poor mans 007. Really outdated, poor graphics, funky
>controls, poor sound, poor gameplay. I liked the way the game flowed ,
>but that was the only thing. lol the control was really laughable.
> The bosses looked no better than those characters on SOuth Park who
>fart and laugh.
HAHHAHAHAHAH...I love how you said funky controls :)
Akira
> Resident Evil - Rented this and found it plain stupid. Horrid, slow
>> unintuitive controls. Walk along a corridor, a dog jumps out and
>> starts circling you. Press the controller to turn, then sit there
>> waiting 1/2 hour as your character slooowly turns around. blech
>> and this was supposed to be an action game. More like a (boring)
>> uninteractive movie IMO
>
Umm RE2 is about a hundred times better, read any review to confirm that.
Steve Cutting
Yes I played HL DM at a LAN. It ran like crap, and was virtually
unplayable on some maps (in particular that bounce one). We all agreed
that Q2 played/ran better and went back to playing that. Maybe they've
patched HL to make MP better now. dunno
Steve
pigcop
pretty much any game that fanatics talk about.
In article <80m5fq$tel$2...@news.ccit.arizona.edu>,
The_Vipah
you gonna dispute my "opinion" on that as well?
Paladin wrote in message <382E8E34...@Blazenet.net>...
The_Vipah
to the "arcade" racers.
Scott Wozniak wrote in message
<19991114002240...@ng-fp1.aol.com>...
>I hate Gran Turismo. I don't see what everybody loves about the game.
It
>bores me to tears.
>
>-Scott Wozniak
>
Professer Revolution
>else on the planet seems to love) leave a bad taste in your mouth? Why,
>specifically?
1. Gran Turismo(PSX)--This game just felt like one big Driver's Test. I guess I
could see how people into cars and whatnot would enjoy this game, but I just
don't get a kick out of earning enough money so I can add new shocks to my car,
thus lowering my lap time by 0.007 seconds or something. And the actual racing
itself was pretty dull IMO
2. Marvel vs Capcom(DC)--I used to enjoy this game, really. I still play it on
occasion, but I've pretty much lost my taste for it. No real strategy is
involved, just go for your characters' money moves over and over, bleh. I'll
take SFA3 over this game anyday. But I'll take VF3 over any fighter for tha
matter^_^
3.Banjo Kazooie(N64)--bad characters, bad gameplay, and tons of blur. Ugh. I
played through to the Christmas area or whatever(with the giant snowman) and
took it back. Lame game, dude.
4.Zelda 64(N64)--I still think the SNES version was the best. I agree with
Paladin that it's pretty much "Mario with a sword." I was pretty much amazed
when I first played it, then it turned to slight disappointment, now I'm amazed
at how boring, repetitve, and short it is/was. The Water Temple was the only
really "hard" part of the game. Everything else just takes forever to get to,
even with the horse, and about 10 mins to complete. Big letdown IMO.
Crash Team Racing/Diddy Kong Racing(PSX/N64)--Pretty much the same game IMO.
Mario Kart 64 is still the best "cute" racer of them all...
I'm sure there's more^_^
===============+++++++==============
Professer Revolution's Joint--
Hit the<A HREF="http://members.aol.com/profrev777/index.html"> Joint</A>!!
Giant Gram Move List
Power Stone and Sega Rally 2 Guides
Soul Calibur Mission Battle Guide
NJPW 4 FAQ
haggis
How come one little guy hiding behind a tree shows up on radar half a
bloody mile away while a swarm of enemy helicopters attacking my
harvesters doesn't show up on radar at all?
I waited YEARS for tiberian sun and it's exactly the same! They seem to
have spent all their time building sets for the FMV clips. Sure there's
a few new units, but there are absolutely no gameplay enhancements
whatsoever.
I really wish they'd make all the units available at the start of the
game, that would give the player a bit more scope for strategic
creativity. As things stand, it's just a case of churning out the
current most powerful unit and throwing into the mincer until one side
runs out of money.
What a pile of shite.
pad...@abts.net
Dynamite Cop(DC) - Great game for the first thirty minutes, then I was
done - WTF?
Metal Gear Solid (PSX) - Syphon Filter turned out to be what this game
should have been.
Philip
agi...@my-deja.com
Without a doubt...Final Fantasy 7. I hate all of the Cool Boarders as
well! I also couldn't stand any of the Donkey Kong games on SNES.
In article <382E4528...@Blazenet.net>,
pal...@Blazenet.net wrote:
> Howdy folks. As a frequent reader here for the past 18 months or so,
> I've observed that opinions vary wildly on each game. When a game is
> generally regarded as a "big" game and is supposed to be great, most
> people who say "This game sucks" are trolls just looking for
attention.
> However, there *are* times when a game comes along that everyone else
> seems to love that I just plain despise.
>
> So my question is this: which of the most popular games (that everyone
> else on the planet seems to love) leave a bad taste in your mouth?
Why,
> specifically?
>
> (Disclaimer: no flames, please. I'm not expecting any responses except
> your least favorite "favorites.")
>
> Here's a few from my list:
>
> Xenogears (PSX): I hated the rotating graphics (which were pretty ugly
> to begin with), the slowness of the sweat droplets, and the totally
> uncontrollable battle system (my favorite part of RPGing.)
>
> Zelda 64 (N64): It was just plain boring. Had the same old "young man
> rescues princess from evil lord" theme. Dull, unengaging plot coupled
> with Mario-with-a-sword gameplay. Yech.
>
> Virtua Fighter 3 (DC): While having nifty uneven playing fields and
cool
> backdrops, this game played like absolute crap and the cpu was
horribly
> cheap (especially throw-wise.) A huge disappointment after the
excellent
> VF2 on Saturn.
>
> Feel free to add your own.
>
>
--
AOL IM: Gilatif
ICQ: 15116217
Want to get paid to surf the interet? Make even
money for getting referrals! Email me for info!
agi...@my-deja.com
Chris Johnston <wake...@xnet.com> wrote:
I've got a feeling someone's not going to be getting any more
promotional items from 989... :)
> Here's some of mine:
>
> Twisted Metal (any): I played the first game, and just have never
enjoyed
> it. Especially III and 4... The first wasn't bad and II was "eh," but
I
> there must be something I'm not getting.
>
> Jet Moto: Always have hated this game. It's just not at all fun to
play...
> slow, choppy, not even a real racing game or jet skiing game.
>
> Chris J.
>
> --
> _-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_-=-_-
=-_
> Chris Johnston
wake...@xnet.com
> Nickname: SuperPac on IRC ICQ#:
6084051
> Homepage: http://www.xnet.com/~wakemich
Jon Foster
>Xenogears (PSX): I hated the rotating graphics (which were pretty ugly
>to begin with), the slowness of the sweat droplets, and the totally
>uncontrollable battle system (my favorite part of RPGing.)
Did you play it to the end? I thought the graphics got better, and the story
was obviously amazing.
>Zelda 64 (N64): It was just plain boring. Had the same old "young man
>rescues princess from evil lord" theme. Dull, unengaging plot coupled
>with Mario-with-a-sword gameplay. Yech.
I agree. I only played it a little bit and I didn't like it at all.
----------
-JF-
Joshua Kaufman
>
> Joshua Kaufman wrote:
>
> > Since when are Zelda games about plot? And you obviously didn;t play the
> > game if you think it's "Mario with a sword".
>
> Sure I did. I prepurchased the gold version, played it for 10 hours or so,
> and then I just couldn't stand it any more, so I stopped playing and took it
> back. I just don't share your perspective on the game. Grow up and accept it.
> Or even better, post your own list instead of attacking mine.
But Zelda's gameplay isn't even close to Mario's. The only similarity is
that they are both in 3d. Saying "Zelda is Mario with a sword" is like
saying "Bust a Move (Puzzle Bobble) is Tetris with balls"
-Joshua
--
AOL-IM: TerraEpon ICQ: 5404138
Joshua Kaufman
>
> Radiant Silvergun is slow, boring, has a STUPID theme and final boss, the music
> sucks for a shooter and is better suited for a bald headed steroid wrestler
> entering the arena. You can hardly even hear your guns, no arcade style
> powerups. If I want to play a puzzle game I'll play a puzzle game, shooters
> should be FAST. Supposed to be the best shooter ever according to people here.
> Battle Garegga
> makes this game look like slow motion.
*yawn* AOL...
Alan Kwan
wrote:
>So my question is this: which of the most popular games (that everyone
>else on the planet seems to love) leave a bad taste in your mouth? Why,
>specifically?
>
>(Disclaimer: no flames, please. I'm not expecting any responses except
>your least favorite "favorites.")
>
>Here's a few from my list:
>
>Zelda 64 (N64): It was just plain boring. Had the same old "young man
>rescues princess from evil lord" theme. Dull, unengaging plot coupled
>with Mario-with-a-sword gameplay. Yech.
This one is on mine too. The game may be great for a kid, but the
puzzles are too simple to keep me entertained. The most "complex"
dungeon, the Water Temple, cannot compare to the best ones in SFC
Zelda (the Swamp one and the Ice one).
Others on my list:
FF7 [PS]: Battles are too easy and they are too frequent. The materia
system may have been a good concept, but it was poorly implemented.
FFT [PS]: Far too much complexity than depth. Some unrealistic,
unreasonable and problematic rules (such as that you have to wait for
a crystal to decay before ending the battle, or you will lose the
loot; in reality, people loot /after/ battle, not during). Not as
good as FF5j; not even as fun on the first playing as re-playing FF5j
for the N-th time.
Thousand Arms [PS]: Battles are too easy and they are too frequent.
The dating sequences and jokes are too childish.
Wild Arms [PS]: Again, battles are too frequent. This game is clearly
inferior to Estpolis 2 (Lufia 2) IMO.
Grandia [SS, PS]: The lad is too childish and naive. The battles are
still not intersting enough to warrant that many of them. I would
prefer more interesting battles (which everyone has to play through,
lots of them) than "interesting" towns with lots of 'useless' dialogue
(most of which most players don't read).
Bio Hazard (Resident Evil) [PS]: A mostly pointless game.
Azure Dreams [PS]: Incorrect primary focus for a rogue-like game.
Controls are too clumsy. Not as good as Shiren [SFC].
Duel Monsters (Yu-gi-oh) [GB]: Worst CCG design (or rather,
non-design) *ever*.
Pocket Monsters [GB]: Though the many cute monsters are attractive for
kids, to me it's just another boring, repetitive RPG.
Bomberman [everywhere]: Too much chaos and too little strategy.
There are a dozen or so action puzzle or vs. falling-block puzzle
games better than it. Even "Pigs and Bombs" mini-game in Doki Doki
Nightmare is better than it IMO.
rythm games [everywhere]: A waste of time and money IMO. The "aural
test" mini-game in Sakura Wars 2 is more interesting.
Wipeout [PS, SS]: Couldn't steer straight. Wasn't fun at all. F-Zero
was better.
Monster Farm [PS]: Initially a very promising game, but after playing
for a while, some severe balance problems become apparent.
"Live life with Heart." - Alan Kwan / ta...@notmenetvigator.com
http://home.netvigator.com/~tarot (hard-core game reviews)
(please remove anti-spam section "notme" from mailing address)
Dimension S editor: http://209.213.100.47/
Brian Osserman
>Howdy folks. As a frequent reader here for the past 18 months or so,
>I've observed that opinions vary wildly on each game. When a game is
>generally regarded as a "big" game and is supposed to be great, most
>people who say "This game sucks" are trolls just looking for attention.
>However, there *are* times when a game comes along that everyone else
>seems to love that I just plain despise.
Well, I dunno if it's just me, but I generally find that if I play
a game that got rave reviews, even if I have complaints about it, I still
end up enjoying it pretty well. The one exception that comes to mind
immediately is:
Legend of Oasis
I never saw a single negative review of this, but when I got it (for free,
luckily), I just couldn't get into it at all. The action was the typical
half-assed "technically it's an RPG so we don't have to worry about making
the action fun" system, and the puzzles were mostly obvious, but occasionally
didn't make any sense at all (ie, I'd just try everything I could think of
until something worked, and then still not understand why it worked when
it eventually did). To top it off, the plot didn't seem particularly
interesting (and I'm not normally a big plot advocate). I played about halfway
through it and decided I couldn't care less how it turned out.
Brian [holding himself back from trying to defend NiGHTs]
Brian
> that they are both in 3d. Saying "Zelda is Mario with a sword" is like
> saying "Bust a Move (Puzzle Bobble) is Tetris with balls"
Once again, he's simply expressing his opinion, so quit attacking his list.
Personally, I loved Zelda and hated Mario 64, but that surely does not mean
everyone out there feels the same.
Brian
> else on the planet seems to love) leave a bad taste in your mouth? Why,
> specifically?
Mario 64: I found this game very disengaging. Nothing ever 'pulled' me in. It
was just another platformer with the only thing different being the 3D
environment, and thought that was a big accomplishment, I wouold have rather
they made it 2D and put more into the gameplay, etc.
Turok/Turok 2: These 2 just suck. Is it an adventure or a shooter? If it's a
shooter, way too much space between things too shoot (those levels are huge...
actually too big). If it's an adventure, way too little 'adventure' in it. It
would have been better as a Zelda/RPG-type adventure with cool weapons, or a
closed up third person like Quake.
Grand Turismo: Way too boring. Just no feeling of speed, and the cars always
seemed loose to me. I unfortunately don't play video games for absolute
realism. I'll take an 'arcade' style racer any day.
Brian
loose. I'll take an 'arcade' racer like Sega Rally any day.
Jeff
<kauf...@email.uc.edu> wrote:
This is directed to "Spyderham" (heh, I remember that comic), not Joshua...
Everything that you don't like about the game is _exactly_ why I think
it's a great game, and one of the best shooters ever. Treasure could have
made yet another shooter; change the graphics and name and make a new
soundtrack. Instead they break all of the rules of what a shooter should
be. And breaking the rules is almost always a good thing, IMO.
You're right about Battle Garegga, though. :)
--
jeff
Linda and George
Joshua Kaufman <kauf...@email.uc.edu> wrote in message
news:382EC512...@email.uc.edu...
> Spyderham wrote:
> >
> > Radiant Silvergun is slow, boring, has a STUPID theme and final boss,
the music
> > sucks for a shooter and is better suited for a bald headed steroid
wrestler
> > entering the arena. You can hardly even hear your guns, no arcade style
> > powerups. If I want to play a puzzle game I'll play a puzzle game,
shooters
> > should be FAST. Supposed to be the best shooter ever according to
people here.
> > Battle Garegga
> > makes this game look like slow motion.
>
> *yawn* AOL...
>
> -Joshua
That hardly seems fair. The post he made was perfectly reasonable in
the context of the thread, even if I also happen to disagree with it. Just
because you disagree with his taste in shooters is no excuse to insult his
intelligence when he is expressing his OPINION of a game; it's not as if he
just posted "Radiant Silvergun sux," he gave plenty of good examples of why
he didn't like it.
George K.
DaRQueSToRM
never have enjoyed it.
Paladin <pal...@Blazenet.net> wrote in message
news:382E4528...@Blazenet.net...
> Howdy folks. As a frequent reader here for the past 18 months or so,
> I've observed that opinions vary wildly on each game. When a game is
> generally regarded as a "big" game and is supposed to be great, most
> people who say "This game sucks" are trolls just looking for attention.
> However, there *are* times when a game comes along that everyone else
> seems to love that I just plain despise.
>
> So my question is this: which of the most popular games (that everyone
> else on the planet seems to love) leave a bad taste in your mouth? Why,
> specifically?
>
> (Disclaimer: no flames, please. I'm not expecting any responses except
> your least favorite "favorites.")
>
> Here's a few from my list:
>
> Xenogears (PSX): I hated the rotating graphics (which were pretty ugly
> to begin with), the slowness of the sweat droplets, and the totally
> uncontrollable battle system (my favorite part of RPGing.)
>
> Zelda 64 (N64): It was just plain boring. Had the same old "young man
> rescues princess from evil lord" theme. Dull, unengaging plot coupled
> with Mario-with-a-sword gameplay. Yech.
>
> Virtua Fighter 3 (DC): While having nifty uneven playing fields and cool
> backdrops, this game played like absolute crap and the cpu was horribly
Ken Small
No flames, please, these are obvisouly just opinions.
Zelda: Link's Awakening. I really hate the adventure games of the "get
the thing and give it to the guy so you could get the thing to give to
the other guy to open the door to get the thing to give to the third
guy to get the thing to give to the guy from the beginning" type.
People complain about Doom and switches, this is the same thing on an
annoyingly huge scale.
Legacy of Kain: Blood Omen (the first one-- haven't played the
second). Sorta like Link, above. Both suffer from numbingly boring
combat, too.
Puzzle Fighter: I like puzzle games, but I think my least favorite
aspect is two-player spazziness. That's about all this game offers. I
know, I KNOW, the drop patterns introduce "strategy" but mostly it's
just speed, speed, speed. Not thrilling.
Castlevania (3 and 4? the SNES ones): Man, were these games tedious,
what little I played them. I nearly didn't play Symphony of the Night
based on that fact (and while I liked SOTN, it was incredibly
overrated, IMHO).
Rockman/Megaman whatever: Like Castlevania, never saw the appeal. The
absolute epitome of the aspects of platform games I *don't* like-- boss
pattern memorization, learn all where all the enemies are going to be,
trudge through the level.
I'm going to get killed for this one: Gunstar Heroes. I like the
Contra concept OK (not my favorite, but enjoyable) but this game just
seemed bland to me, except great-for-the-genesis graphics. I rented it,
played it a lot for a day, and never felt the need to go back. Never
understood what I missed.
Tekken: I'm not a fan of fighting games in general, but most of them I
at least saw the appeal of. I even really enjoy Soul Calibur. But
Tekken always bored me.
And some classics:
Asteroids: Borrrrrrrr-ing, even back in the day. Give me Space Duel
(the 2nd sequal) any day.
Space Invaders: OK, I hate this one becuase I alwasy sucked at it. It
also spawned a hellofva lot of lame clones (as well as some brilliant
ones)
Dig Dug: Well, I actually do like it, but hate that you can't really
get that far without memorizing patterns, a practive I thought ruined
a lot of games.
Xevious: Blah
Zork: good god this game is dull.
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"How wrong can I be, before I am right?" --EC
Paul Summerhill
> Zelda 64 (N64): It was just plain boring. Had the same old "young man
> rescues princess from evil lord" theme. Dull, unengaging plot coupled
> with Mario-with-a-sword gameplay. Yech.
This one I totally agree with. I preorderd the gold copy even, got all the
goodies that came with it at EB... was really excited about it. Finally got
it, brought it home... popped it in for 5 minutes... walked around for like
10 minutes and grew bored... never went back to it... eventually sold it. My
brother ended up beating it though.
Ken Small
Jeff Williams <ge...@nervhq.org> wrote:
>Tomb Raider - to me, the Lara cult is worse than Pokemania. What is so
>freakin' special about this game? Nothing, except it's got this
>alleged babe as the main character. For one thing, I don't even think
>she's at all attractive (I would take any of the Sakura Taisen girls
>over Lara), and for another, she's a goddamn CGI model for God's sake.
Well, not that this should change your mind, but I really liked TR I
and II *despite* Lara. I like the 3D climbing puzzle aspect. Lara has
nothing to do with that. I don't mind the character, but the cult, is,
agreed, extremely annoying. Home come you can't read a review or
preview or a TR game without them mentioning a computer models
breasts? Grow up, guys.
Paul Summerhill
Jeff Williams wrote:
> Half Life. This is "the best game ever" (according to PC Gamer)? Please. It's decent,
> but it's no better than any other FPS game, all of which are basically the same. I'll
> take Unreal over Half Life any day - at least Unreal's got some sense of style, and
> imaginative level design; a far cry from Half Life's endless white, flourescent lit,
> straight corridors.
I have to tell you that you're totally wrong on this one. I've been playing HL still to this
day (about a year) and I have to say it totally TOTALLY blows away Unreal. There is no
convincing me otherwise, that this is the best PC game I've ever played. Otherwise, I
wouldn't be playing it still. Plus with free add-ons like Team Fortress & Counter Strike...
I've gotten more out of this game than anything else I've played in my entire life. I don't
think you played it or a decent machine or tried multiplayer on something higher than a 56k
modem. Actually, you must have not played the entire game if you think it's straight
corridors...
ttammi
>Anyway I don't see how you can complain about this in Soul Calibur but not in VF3. Just
>because VF3 is hand to hand? Come on - kick somebody in the face in real life and see
>what happens. 9 times out of 10 they are not getting up. Probably 5 times out of 10 they
>are in the hospital, not instantly ready to say "come on, best 2 out of 3!" IMO you
Not true. Not even near all kicks to the head in kickboxing matches,
or hits to the head in boxing matches, knock you out or put you in a
hospital.
For what's it worth, if you want to knock someone out in e.g. a boxing
match, you try to hit him to the jaw/chin. That is what makes boxers
pass out, not hits to the _head_. Or if a hit to your head (e.g.
temple area) really puts you out, it might kill you in the process.
I used to compete a bit in kickboxing myself, so I guess I have a bit
of personal experience too. I remember one instance when I got what
seemed like a perfect powerful roundhouse kick straight to my
adversary's head: it didn't seem to slow him down one bit, only made
him more angry. On the other hand, if the kick would have hit him in
the jaw, I guess that would probably have put him out.
Paul Summerhill
Ken Small
short, and silly fantasy physics even for an arcade racer, and had no
real challenge other than to master the few "hard" corners each track.
Got tired of it after a week, and for me, for a racer, that's pretty
quick.
Robert Hernandez
the graphics, but the more I played the game, the more I realized how poorly
designed the game was with all those cheap deathtraps and leaps of faith
WWF Warzone/Attitude (N64/PSX) - these are not "wrestling" games, they're
just Mortal Kombat style fighting games with wrestlers as the characters
Paladin wrote:
> Howdy folks. As a frequent reader here for the past 18 months or so,
> I've observed that opinions vary wildly on each game. When a game is
> generally regarded as a "big" game and is supposed to be great, most
> people who say "This game sucks" are trolls just looking for attention.
> However, there *are* times when a game comes along that everyone else
> seems to love that I just plain despise.
>
> So my question is this: which of the most popular games (that everyone
> else on the planet seems to love) leave a bad taste in your mouth? Why,
> specifically?
>
> (Disclaimer: no flames, please. I'm not expecting any responses except
> your least favorite "favorites.")
>
> Here's a few from my list:
>
> Xenogears (PSX): I hated the rotating graphics (which were pretty ugly
> to begin with), the slowness of the sweat droplets, and the totally
> uncontrollable battle system (my favorite part of RPGing.)
>
> Zelda 64 (N64): It was just plain boring. Had the same old "young man
> rescues princess from evil lord" theme. Dull, unengaging plot coupled
> with Mario-with-a-sword gameplay. Yech.
>
Chris
>Howdy folks. As a frequent reader here for the past 18 months or so,
>I've observed that opinions vary wildly on each game. When a game >is
>generally regarded as a "big" game and is supposed to be great, >most
>people who say "This game sucks" are trolls just looking for >attention.
>However, there *are* times when a game comes along that >everyone else
>seems to love that I just plain despise.
>So my question is this: which of the most popular games (that >everyone
>else on the planet seems to love) leave a bad taste in your mouth? >Why,
>specifically?
FF3(US)- I couldn't get into the story and the characters did not appeal to
me. I also thought the encounter rate was too high. I did like the music
though.
Tomb Raider 2- I hated the controls, levels, gameplay, graphics etc....
Sonic the Hedgehog- I'll never understand why my friends picked this game
over Mario World.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Alternate email: chri...@hotmail.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Miasfis32
>
> It seemed like the hits didnt even hit them, the AI was very cheap (and
>easy), and besides from the graphics, the game was boring as hell. Soul
>Calibur was a million times better.
>
You got to be kidding me how in the hell is the al cheating if you want
cheating go play dead or alive and maybe you should go to virtuafighter.com/
and dl their movies to see jeffreys throws to see if they look like they're
hitting.
Scott X
unfun and never even considered buying one version of them.
| As long as we're on this thread: I've never really liked Tekken.
| Or Street Fighter-ish games. Or Tetris, at least when compared with Puyo
| Puyo. Or Tomb Raider. Or Starcraft/Warcraft.
van...@my-deja.com
mind at the current time
In article <382E4528...@Blazenet.net>,
pal...@Blazenet.net wrote:
> Howdy folks. As a frequent reader here for the past 18 months or so,
> I've observed that opinions vary wildly on each game. When a game is
> generally regarded as a "big" game and is supposed to be great, most
> people who say "This game sucks" are trolls just looking for
attention.
> However, there *are* times when a game comes along that everyone else
> seems to love that I just plain despise.
>
> So my question is this: which of the most popular games (that everyone
> else on the planet seems to love) leave a bad taste in your mouth?
Why,
> specifically?
>
> (Disclaimer: no flames, please. I'm not expecting any responses except
> your least favorite "favorites.")
>
> Here's a few from my list:
>
> Xenogears (PSX): I hated the rotating graphics (which were pretty ugly
> to begin with), the slowness of the sweat droplets, and the totally
> uncontrollable battle system (my favorite part of RPGing.)
>
> Zelda 64 (N64): It was just plain boring. Had the same old "young man
> rescues princess from evil lord" theme. Dull, unengaging plot coupled
> with Mario-with-a-sword gameplay. Yech.
>
> Virtua Fighter 3 (DC): While having nifty uneven playing fields and
cool
> backdrops, this game played like absolute crap and the cpu was
horribly
> cheap (especially throw-wise.) A huge disappointment after the
excellent
> VF2 on Saturn.
>
> Feel free to add your own.
>
>
Muskie
playing HL still to this
> day (about a year) and I have to say it totally TOTALLY blows away
Unreal. There is no
> convincing me otherwise, that this is the best PC game I've ever
played. Otherwise, I
> wouldn't be playing it still.
lol. I got this game last March, and I'm still playing it almost every
day.
>Plus with free add-ons like Team Fortress & Counter Strike...
> I've gotten more out of this game than anything else I've played in
my entire life.
Agreed. I would have payed 250$ for this game. To me, it has more
replay value and action than all of certain consoles entire libraries.
As for the Add-ons....let me give you some pointers.
A new single player add-on called USS darkstar has 9 new Half Life
single player levels. Available for download now. Also, a new Co=op
mod, called Sven Co-op, is avaibale, and can use 8 players.
There are also other new multiplayer add-ons and entire new single
player games.
Heres a good link to get you started. There are HUNDREDS of Half Life
mod pages and such, buit heres a good centralized location:(im sure you
already know all this, but its just in case)
Also, an easy way to get new maps and models is at wonswap.com
It automatically installs files into your Half life game without
having to zip them and such.
I don't
> think you played it or a decent machine or tried multiplayer on
something higher than a 56k
> modem. Actually, you must have not played the entire game if you
think it's straight
> corridors...
Straight corridors...lol. I can only remember one straight white,
brightly lit corridor in the entire game. The game is just so insane.
The troops, the alien life forms..oh man what a great game! "FIRE!!!"
How about the atmosphere of Zen? Oh man that place gave me a case of
the freak-outs. You wonder why PC gamer gives it best PC game ever,
and many other mags including NExt Gen and IGN consider it (possibly
the greatest game ever made).
By the way..are you a TFC'er, HL DM 'er, or CS'er?
Jason E.K. Brown
>But Zelda's gameplay isn't even close to Mario's. The only similarity is
>that they are both in 3d. Saying "Zelda is Mario with a sword" is like
>saying "Bust a Move (Puzzle Bobble) is Tetris with balls"
Zelda and Mario don't interest me...but Puzzle Bobble -IS- Tetris with
balls!!! =P ok...upside-down tetris with balls, but thats a
technicality...
J
--
Join these today! Make money, JUST for surfing the www!
http://www.gotoworld.com/getpaid/default.asp?rid=1017072207
http://www.epipo.com/signup_form.asp?jekbrown
Want up to 25% CASH rebates on purchases you make online?
http://www.ebates.com/index.jhtml?referrer=jekbrown
Jason E.K. Brown
>>
>> Radiant Silvergun is slow, boring, has a STUPID theme and final boss, the
musi
>c
>> sucks for a shooter and is better suited for a bald headed steroid wrestler
>> entering the arena.
Ok, I understand the whole purpose of this thread and all, but thou shalt not
talk trash about RS!!!!!
>>You can hardly even hear your guns
They are energy weapons...why would you hear them? Lasers etc don't make
noises when they "fire" (generally). Besides, the weaps are obiously
futuristic, whos to say they make noise at all, and if so, that you can hear
it inside the cockpit of your fighter?
>> no arcade style powerups.
So what? Do you think an F-14 pilot in combat sees "super homing missiles"
floating in the air for him to grab? I don't think so. In air combat, what you
take off with is what you fight with. Besides, some games go WAY to far with
power-ups. Instead of playing the game, you spend all day running around
desperately trying to grab those power ups. Pretty distracting to the over all
shooter experience in some cases.
>> shooters should be FAST.
If RS was "fast" like you wanted it, it'd be nearly impossible. I'm pretty
good at dodging bullets in shooters, and RS has so many, that increased speed
would just make it too hard. Besides, the visuals look great in RS, why does
it -really- matter if they whizz by at 10000000 mph or if they just slowly
scroll? If the backround did blur by, so what? The only difference would be
that you couldn't see/enjoy it. I guess if the backround suck you'd want hyper
speed, otherwise it is insignificant.
>Supposed to be the best shooter ever according to people here
Uhhh, no. It -IS- "the best shooter ever according to people here." Whether
its the best to you or not hasn't changed that... (yes that is a
generalization, not everyone here has even played RS...but it does rock, and
LOTS of people agree)
>>Battle Garegga makes this game look like slow motion.
If speed is ALL that matters, get aeroblasters for the Turbo. (think thats
what its called). So fast that its stupid.
PaPaShOt
>Zelda is not for everyone..I personally think that the first 2 KILL Zelda64.
>you gonna dispute my "opinion" on that as well?
>
Well I will, how can you forget about THE best Zelda, Zelda III: a
Link to the Past....
PAPASHOT
PaPaShOt
>Castlevania (3 and 4? the SNES ones): Man, were these games tedious,
>what little I played them. I nearly didn't play Symphony of the Night
>based on that fact (and while I liked SOTN, it was incredibly
>overrated, IMHO).
On the Snes it was 4... Castlevania 3 for the NES is still my personal
favorite Castlevania...
PAPASHOT
PaPaShOt
Sullivan) wrote:
>Zelda64 does have a lame story (and an ending that makes no sense:
>What possible effect would beating Ganon in the FUTURE have on the
>past (or present, depending on how you look at it...) Everyone at the
>end is celebrating but since nothing bad ever really happens to the
>present and has no idea what Link did in the future it's kind of
>pointless...)
Hmmm.... Welll what I thought the ending meant was:
The party was for the defeat of the evil Gannondorf by Link, which
just happened. But since so much other 'bad stuff' happened, Zelda
(after the party) sent Link back in time to the moment she first met
Link (in this game...), and this time she would NOT tell Link to go
after Gannon and open the the Temple of Time (this is what u see at
the very end of the ending...). At least not now, that would be done
in the future once Link got stronger and wiser....
Still, not great, but at least makes a LITTLE more sense...
PAPASHOT
WC
>Howdy folks. As a frequent reader here for the past 18 months or so,
>I've observed that opinions vary wildly on each game. When a game is
>generally regarded as a "big" game and is supposed to be great, most
>people who say "This game sucks" are trolls just looking for attention.
>However, there *are* times when a game comes along that everyone else
>seems to love that I just plain despise.
>
>So my question is this: which of the most popular games (that everyone
>else on the planet seems to love) leave a bad taste in your mouth? Why,
>specifically?
>
>(Disclaimer: no flames, please. I'm not expecting any responses except
>your least favorite "favorites.")
>
>Here's a few from my list:
>
>Xenogears (PSX): I hated the rotating graphics (which were pretty ugly
>to begin with), the slowness of the sweat droplets, and the totally
>uncontrollable battle system (my favorite part of RPGing.)
>
>Zelda 64 (N64): It was just plain boring. Had the same old "young man
>rescues princess from evil lord" theme. Dull, unengaging plot coupled
>with Mario-with-a-sword gameplay. Yech.
>
>Virtua Fighter 3 (DC): While having nifty uneven playing fields and cool
>backdrops, this game played like absolute crap and the cpu was horribly
>cheap (especially throw-wise.) A huge disappointment after the excellent
>VF2 on Saturn.
>
>Feel free to add your own.
>
should be like.
Nick Zitzmann
article <382E4528...@Blazenet.net>:
> So my question is this: which of the most popular games (that everyone
> else on the planet seems to love) leave a bad taste in your mouth? Why,
> specifically?
Final Fantasy VIII. IMHO the game gets the highest marks I can think of for
presentation. But I still don't get why Famitsu gave this game a 38/40. I
still don't like the gameplay, somewhat cliched storyline (but the original
plot is okay), final boss thrown into it for the heck of it, etc. OK, flame
me; I know someone here (ZFP & the other Square absolute brand loyal people)
isn't going to let me get away with this...
Also, Resident Evil II. No, it's not because of the length - I think the
length of gameplay is decent; if you combine all the quests together you get
some 60+ hours of gameplay. I just didn't like the terrible imbalance of the
gameplay - first the game starts sort of difficult (took me several tries to
get to the police station), then gets easy (the police station has no
zombies at first), then gets difficult (took me a while to realize there was
no way to kill that licker you run into early on), then easy (no threats for
a while), then difficult, etc. And I still couldn't get anywhere in the game
without that ammo bonus by starting in easy difficulty (I'm the kind of
person who has to clean out every area before proceeding).
Nick Zitzmann ICQ: 22305512
To see my real signature, finger my E-Mail address.
David A. Copeland
Powerstone - I found this game to be absolutely no fun. Fighting games should
involve fighting, not running around grabbing items.
Bust A Move (any) - One of the few puzzle games I hate.
F-Zero
--
"There is nothing so absurd but some philosopher has said it" - Cicero
"This is genius, this is genuine, this is bullshit" - Bob Mould
"People are idiots who deserve to be mocked" - Dogbert
And remember - Semper ubi sub ubi.
Nick Zitzmann
article <NAwX3.19493$we.3...@newsfeeds.bigpond.com>:
> ALong with the fact that you can go into anyone's house, steal their
> belongings and sleep in their beds. Hmm, Thats realistic.
Hey; different cultures have different attitudes toward that stuff. <;*)
Raymond McKeithen II
Paladin <pal...@Blazenet.net> wrote in message
news:382E4528...@Blazenet.net...
> I've observed that opinions vary wildly on each game. When a game is
> generally regarded as a "big" game and is supposed to be great, most
> people who say "This game sucks" are trolls just looking for attention.
> However, there *are* times when a game comes along that everyone else
> seems to love that I just plain despise.
>
> else on the planet seems to love) leave a bad taste in your mouth? Why,
> specifically?
>
> your least favorite "favorites.")
Well, it's (well?) known I don't share tastes with a majority of people, so
here goes; I've included some things by category as well as specific titles
series. In no particular order:
1) Any "team" sports game; i.e. football, basketball, hockey, etc. I said
"team" because I can actually enjoy certain things like an occasional tennis
or even golf game.
2) Any "first person shooter" (i.e. "Doom clones").
3) "Vehicle battle" games like Twisted Metal series. Typically, if I'm
driving, I want to race, not wander around and shoot up other guys. I did
like the mix of racing and shooting in Wipeout though.
4) So-called "survival horror" games (why is this even a category, since
everything else is categorized by *gameplay*?). It's not the gameplay that
annoys me, I don't like horror, blood, guts, or being scared.
5) Metal Slug 1/2/(and probably X)
6) Guardian Heroes
7) Mario 64
8) Zelda 64
9) Grandia - the immaturity of Justin is intolerable to me.
10) Any (2D or 3D) Street Fighter game
11) Any Tekken game
12) Most gun shooters, Virtua Cop 1/2, Time Crisis 1/2, and the old T2 game
excepted.
13) Do Don Pachi (take that Terrry :P )
14) NiGHTs
15) Donkey Kong Country Series
16) Any "boarding" game (snowboarding, skateboarding, jetskiing, etc.).
17) Any Road Rash game
18) "Real-time strategy" games like Warcraft, C&C, etc.
19) Yoshi's Island (SNES)
Well I'll stop there, I'm sure there's others though...
--
Raymond
remove "suchiepai" for email
Matt C.
<pal...@Blazenet.net> wrote:
> Howdy folks. As a frequent reader here for the past 18 months or so,
> I've observed that opinions vary wildly on each game. When a game is
> generally regarded as a "big" game and is supposed to be great, most
> people who say "This game sucks" are trolls just looking for attention.
> However, there *are* times when a game comes along that everyone else
> seems to love that I just plain despise.
>
> So my question is this: which of the most popular games (that everyone
> else on the planet seems to love) leave a bad taste in your mouth? Why,
> specifically?
>
> (Disclaimer: no flames, please. I'm not expecting any responses except
> your least favorite "favorites.")
>
> Here's a few from my list:
>
> Xenogears (PSX): I hated the rotating graphics (which were pretty ugly
> to begin with), the slowness of the sweat droplets, and the totally
> uncontrollable battle system (my favorite part of RPGing.)
>
> Zelda 64 (N64): It was just plain boring. Had the same old "young man
> rescues princess from evil lord" theme. Dull, unengaging plot coupled
> with Mario-with-a-sword gameplay. Yech.
>
> Virtua Fighter 3 (DC): While having nifty uneven playing fields and cool
> backdrops, this game played like absolute crap and the cpu was horribly
> cheap (especially throw-wise.) A huge disappointment after the excellent
> VF2 on Saturn.
>
> Feel free to add your own.
Metal Gear Solid- I don't know why, but I never found this game any
fun. I played it on easy and it was too easy, I played it on normal it
was too easy. Then I played it on hard and it was too hard. I thought I
would really like a spy/action game, but I really didn't like it all.
Great Graphics though. The strange thing is that I LOVED Tenchu, one of
my favorite games.
Zelda 64- Its BORING. I also suck at all of the Zelda games.
Tomb Raider 2 & 3- Got #2 for my birthday and #3 in a bargain bin. I
hate both of them. I know that I shouldn't have bought #3 since I hated
#2, but I heard that #3 was like #1, and I loved the first one. #2
Simply was too hard. They enemies seemed to have more life and better
guns than you. #3 was just too big and boring. Maybe I didn't give #3
much of a chance, but since I found #2 so boring, I didn't think it was
worth my time.
-Matt
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Email address is purposely wrong so cyberthrill recieves the spam instead of me
(the ripped me off $70!) My real address is:
Webm...@segadreamcast.8m.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Raymond McKeithen II
David A. Copeland <ds...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote in message
news:80n7u6$p...@freenet-news.carleton.ca...
>
> Powerstone - I found this game to be absolutely no fun. Fighting games
should
> involve fighting, not running around grabbing items.
>
Powerstone isn't a fighting game.
Not arguing with your opinion of the game. :)
cybin
says...
>
> Half Life. This is "the best game ever" (according to PC Gamer)? Please. It's decent,
> but it's no better than any other FPS game, all of which are basically the same. I'll
> take Unreal over Half Life any day - at least Unreal's got some sense of style, and
> imaginative level design; a far cry from Half Life's endless white, flourescent lit,
> straight corridors.
>
Endless? The stages that you describe are only the first part of the
game. I was amazed at the level design in Half-life, and all the
different scenarios you ended up in. Dodging missiles from a helicopter
while tip-toeing around a cliff is far from usual fps fare. Take it
easy,
Michael
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
mic...@innova.net
To get the facts about drug prohibition and the harm prohibition causes,
check out http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer
"If the doors of perception were cleansed every thing would
appear to man as it is: infinite."
--William Blake
Vince Greene
FEEL like Zelda.
2. Post SNES Square games, excluding Tobal2, FF8, and FFT. I dunno why,
but I simply can't get into most of their recent stuff, FF7 included.
3. The Tekken series: More than anything in the world, I hate fighting
games that take very little skill and strategy. Tekken is the god of
these games.
4. Soul Calibur: See Tekken.
5. NFL2K: Too slow, too many bugs, too many ankle tackles... bleh!
"The Exception"
Vince "Blazin" Greene
-------
Maktos Translations
http://www.maktos.com
YOUR source for anime and videogame related journalism
--------
-These are quotes of actual Usenet personalities. They all regard Vince
Greene.-
---------
"There's not much to say after that brilliant post by The Exception." -
Chris Claiborne
"I envy you" - -=Zipp=-
----------
Braves + Griffey= DYNASTY
KvNMack
ttammi
>The grandaddy of all:
>
>Half Life. This is "the best game ever" (according to PC Gamer)? Please. It's decent,
>but it's no better than any other FPS game, all of which are basically the same. I'll
>take Unreal over Half Life any day - at least Unreal's got some sense of style, and
>imaginative level design; a far cry from Half Life's endless white, flourescent lit,
>straight corridors.
Ummm, how long did you play it exactly? 15 minutes? Do you remember
for example the part early in the game when you ascended to the
surface to fight with the soldiers? Or the alien levels?
What makes Half-life better FPS than Unreal was the much better enemy
AI, you had guards fighting on your side etc. It was still "just" a
FPS, but the best one ever anyway.
>While we're at it, Quake II. Same deal as Half Life - it's decent, but I really do not
>understand why so many people are still playing this game. You run around and shoot
>people. Whoop dee doo.
They are playing it for multiplayer. As single player game it was very
bland (unlike Half-life). There are some very good multiplayer mods
for Quake 2, although I still think TeamFortress for original Quake is
still probably the best multiplayer FPS mod. At least you can't claim
you are just running around shooting everyone in Team Fortress.
>That's about all I can think of off the top of my head, though there are dozens of others
>I'm not recalling I'm sure...
Well, from your list it appears you just happen to dislike FPS games
in general... Don't worry though, that's quite alright. I on the other
hand hate all fighting games and sports games I've ever seen.
ttammi
>I could cough up a genre or two:
>
>First-person Shooters (or, as I said in another thread, first-person
>anything): "but they're so realistic!" How exactly is a 15-20 degree
>field of vision realistic?
Racing games have the same problem. Do people mind that? I wouldn't
say so.
By the way, many FPS games let you change the field of vision. For
example launch the original Quake and try out the 'FOV' command in the
console.
>And how come everyone slides around like
>they're running around on a waxed floor in their socks?
That depends completely on the animation system, and this is a
potential problem in any 2D or 3D game, not just first person
shooters. So I don't understand how this can make you hate FPS games.
Look how the characters move in Castlevania: SOTN. Not very realistic
looking, is it? Or Medievil?
>Resident Evil, and any game that uses the same control scheme: Gee, why
>don't I just play with my feet? Of course, an uncontrollable game is
>worthless, and this one is uncontrollable.
Guess what? I would have liked Resident Evil more if it was in first
person view. That would have made at least the gun aiming much easier.
In fact there is one PC game which in my opinion is much like
"Resident Evil in first person view": Realms of Haunting. I loved that
game years ago, very spooky.
ttammi
>So my question is this: which of the most popular games (that everyone
>else on the planet seems to love) leave a bad taste in your mouth? Why,
>specifically?
1. Most fighting games I've ever tried.
- Same old, same old, just with prettier graphics and a few more
moves. But then I just happen to dislike this genre in general.
2. C&C: Red Alert
- This game simply was never worthy of existing. Starcraft did the
same so much better later. So it isn't whether I hate RTS games,
because I loved Starcraft, but hated Red Alert.
3. Twisted Metal 2
- Way overrated game IMHO. There's very little interesting or fresh
in this game.
4. Tomb Raider 2-n
- Tomb Raider 1 was pretty original action-adventure game, although I
was fed up with it after playing 1/3 of it. But after that the series
didn't simply improve almost at all from the first game. Why should I
buy the same game every Christmas, just because Eidos re-releases it
every year?
Orlando
>
> <snip>
>
Let's see..
- Star Ocean 2 -- ugh. it hurts just to think about it.
- Resident Evil (series) -- those godawful controls could drive anyone
crazy.
- Mario 64 -- Brought mario from a fun, fast paced, platformer to a
boring, slow paced, adventure game.
- Any 3d "platformer"-adventure game without Spyro.
- Zelda 64 -- Awesome for 3 hours. Boring for the other 22. Don't get me
started on the story.
- 2d fighters
- Final Fantasy iv -- Granted, i played this when it came out for the
snes, and i wasn't into rpgs then, but all i remember about it, i
dislike.
Orlando
-----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeeds.com The Largest Usenet Servers in the World!
------== Over 73,000 Newsgroups - Including Dedicated Binaries Servers ==-----
Alexander Mendes
>alexm...@nospam.earthlink.net (Alexander Mendes) wrote:
>
>>I could cough up a genre or two:
>>
>>First-person Shooters (or, as I said in another thread, first-person
>>anything): "but they're so realistic!" How exactly is a 15-20 degree
>>field of vision realistic?
>
>Racing games have the same problem. Do people mind that? I wouldn't
>say so.
What do I care whether or not they mind? I'm the one playing, not them,
and when I play racing games, I use one of the third-person perspectives.
Like I said, I don't really like first-person anything, meaning that I'm
not fond of any game that doesn't have a decent third-person perspective
to play from (I can make an exception for the slow-moving sims with
complex instrument panels, but since this is a console newsgroup, and
ther's no such thing for consoles...).
>By the way, many FPS games let you change the field of vision. For
>example launch the original Quake and try out the 'FOV' command in the
>console.
Yes, I know that. Too bad they tend to be poorly done afterthoughts,
rather than a well-designed way of playing...
>>And how come everyone slides around like
>>they're running around on a waxed floor in their socks?
>
>That depends completely on the animation system, and this is a
>potential problem in any 2D or 3D game, not just first person
>shooters. So I don't understand how this can make you hate FPS games.
>Look how the characters move in Castlevania: SOTN. Not very realistic
>looking, is it? Or Medievil?
The question isn't whether or not it's realistic, it's whether or not the
controls get in the way of the game. In SoTN, the controls are right for
the game, whereas in most FPS games, they aren't. (and why would anyone
expect realism in a Castlevania title anyway?) As for Medievil, I only
played the demo, but from what I recall, the control wasn't so hot there
either.
>>Resident Evil, and any game that uses the same control scheme: Gee, why
>>don't I just play with my feet? Of course, an uncontrollable game is
>>worthless, and this one is uncontrollable.
>
>Guess what? I would have liked Resident Evil more if it was in first
>person view. That would have made at least the gun aiming much easier.
As far as I'm concerned, a complete redesign was in order. The controls
in that title were the worst I've seen in years, and was enough to make me
careful about any game that even seemed to vaguely resemble it.
--
--
Alexander Mendes
Paul B
> So my question is this: which of the most popular games (that everyone
> else on the planet seems to love) leave a bad taste in your mouth? Why,
> specifically?
Metal Gear Solid - Felt like I was playing an HBO Movie; not my kind of
theme; hate Mission Impossible themes and don't have a weapons fetish. I
could care less about their realism or variety...*yawn*. Graphics were
proportionate to the budget: very nice and cinematic -- but in the end this
didn't make the game worth keeping.
Clock Tower - every review I've read is positive, but this thing turned out
to be a big piece of poo; graphics were terrible and the scissor-man killed
you in the same boring manner *every* single time you died. It was
adrenaline-fun for about an hour, but then just became too repetitive to
hold my attention. The writing was atrocious as well, right up to par with
Silent Hill, but I managed to finish and enjoy the latter despite the lame
dialog...not so with Clock Tower. And why on earth is there a sequel now?
Thousand Arms - everyone seems to have raved about this one; I actually
enjoyed myself through 2/3 of it. I finished it and felt like spitting on
it for putting me through that final dungeon. Definite "bad taste in my
mouth" from completing that one.
Bandwagon vote: Final Fantasy VII; irritating, poorly translated story with
no point and no ending. Barrett. Cait Sith. Soundtrack. Can't say I "can't
stand" the game, but I definitely felt hollow and annoyed after finishing
it...Maybe RPGs just aren't my thing anymore, dunno.
-Paul B.
John Ford
>> But Zelda's gameplay isn't even close to Mario's. The only similarity is
>> that they are both in 3d. Saying "Zelda is Mario with a sword" is like
>> saying "Bust a Move (Puzzle Bobble) is Tetris with balls"
>
>Once again, he's simply expressing his opinion, so quit attacking his list.
>Personally, I loved Zelda and hated Mario 64, but that surely does not mean
>everyone out there feels the same.
There is nothing wrong with asking someone to clarify their reasoning.
Otherwise there is no point in making such a list. Zelda is not Mario
with a sword. There is a difference between saying that, and saying
they are too similar for you.
Jay
execution it lacks. Sure it's got tons of cars, but most will only appeal to
a niche market. NFSHS had only a fraction of the cars but all were ones I'd
want to race with. More importantly, and the killer of this game FOR ME
very, very, very dry track design and irrelevant AI. The tracks, while nice
looking were boring in design. As for AI play World Driver on the N64 and
then play GT. I don't understand why AI is so low in priorities for racing
games. It seems to go #of cars, #of tracks, track design, AND FINALLY
AI--WHY?
My OPINION
JASON
Jason E.K. Brown
spyd...@aol.comWebstrDS says...
>why not? Nobody made you moderator of this group.
Have you EVER heard of a joke? When someone says something like "thou shalt
not..." doesn't it sort of give you the impression that the writer MIGHT not
be competely serious? Wow, talk about up tight...someone needs a vacation or a
strong drink.
>There's going to be different opinions on every game.
Wow?! Really? Thanks for the info...
>Who are you, "hardcore" Raymond who won't
>accept a negative opinion on this game?
Apparently someone can't read very well. Does my email say "raymond"? Nope. I
think most people do respect Raymonds opinions however...he does have
-extensive- knowledge of Sega games. Though I'm not sure if he has as many SS
shooters as I have... =P Then again...no one really knows what Raymond has
for sure...
>It's an offensive game
Don't you think thats a LITTLE strong? Offensive? You are actually offended at
the existance of a video game? I dunno, a game would have to be REALLY bad to
cause that reaction in me. Maybe Club Drive for the Jaguar...but RS? Like the
"feel" or not, I don't think anyone would find it truly offensive. Sort of
like my "relationship" with the VF series. I can't stand 'em! But I -CAN-
admit that they are good games, just not my flavor, thats all.
>Because this is a videogame we're talking about, not a futuristic simulator.
For a game to have some meaning, it must be based (atleast somewhat) in
reality or sci-fi in some way. (could be abstract, but there has to be some
connection).
>And last time I played, RS does not put you in the cockpit of a plane.
Perhaps in the future, fighters are remote controlled, and you really will see
your plane from above! =P
>If you
>use that sound argument then why is there a sound effect when Super Mario
>jumps
The amound of force required to lift the porky plumber is incredible...no
doubt him jumping would make a noise.
>or why does a fighting game character yell out a certain phrase when doing a
>move?
Ali and Bruce Lee made noises when they fought...
>Why have any sound effects in videogames then?
I didn't say all games should be mute, simply that the sounds of weapons in RS
would hardly make it "more of a game".
>Most of the sounds in
>videogames don't sound like what they would in real life anyway.
Uhhh, yeah. so?
>No I don't, but this is a videogame and videogames are fantasy not reality.
Good fantasy has a basis in reality...
>Adds to the fun in my opinion.
Sometimes. Its also, at this juncture, INCREDIBLY unoriginal. When I see them,
I'm like, "wow, power ups....whoopeeee"
>The game I compared it to, Battle Garegga does
>not distract with its powerups since you really don't even need them.
BG is a good game. I like it. Having no power ups at all would not make it
less of a game IMO.
>If you want to survive,
>then you should skip the powerups. Thats how the experts play the game
Who cares how "experts" play? Who are these people? Is there a profession
shooter video game player guild I dont know about? IMO the gamer should worry
less about what some "expert" might do, and more about blowing up the enemy
and dodging bullets. Especially the later....gotta love those miraculous
dodges... 8D
>LOTS of people who haven't played many of the other better shooters that are
>hard to find. Battle Garegga being one of them.
Nothing hard to find about BG. Gekirindan and Sonic Wings Special were much
harder for me to find...there are others. If there are Saturn shooters out
there that I haven't played...I haven't seen/heard of them. I think my
opinions are based on a good knowledge of what the Saturn has to offer in the
shooter realm. The fact that our opinions differ is hardly based in ignorance.
Perhaps some of the people in this NG have only played a few...but there are
still lots of others that HAVE played a bunch of SS shooters and think RS is
the best. When I rank them, I usually put BG 3rd or 4th...behind RS, Soukyu,
Hyper Duel, and maybe Strikers...(I love those quasi WW2 shooters!)
>Even Cotton Boomerang is a
>better game and features as much innovation if not more than RS but it never
>gets credit for it.
CB? Innovative? You are aware that Cotton came out on the PCE -YEARS- ago
right? (early 90s sometime...PCE fans feel free to help us out) CB isn't
exactly innovative compared to RS. Not that CB isn't good of course...everyone
loves Silk.
J
Jason E.K. Brown
spyd...@aol.comWebstrDS says...
>Clueless idiot? Hmmm, that really shows maturity for someone who claims to be
>twice my age. You also flamed Terrry for his opinion.
Such a comment would only be inmature if it was false. Not saying that it
is...but the truth is rarely inmature...
>This coming from a person who says something along the lines if you buy only
>one shooter buy Radiant Silvergun. Check dejanews, Raymond.
Any such comment is obviously an opinion. How could it not be? With 50+
shooters available for SS, picking just one IS an opinion. If I could have
just one, it would be RS. Some like DDP, some Soukyu etc etc etc. Nothing
wrong with stating an opinion, especially if its based on a good deal of
knowledge.
>Ummm, yeah. You said something along the lines buy Radiant Silvergun,
>no words necessary. I remember you saying that, it led me to buy the game.
Hit your self in the face with a hammer. <pauses> What? You're not going to do
it? Why not? Gimme a break. If you don't believe what others think about a
game, any game, how about doing a little research on your own? Wow, theres a
thought...
>If
>you dont think so check dejanews, its somewhere in there but you post about a
>million messages a year since you don't have a "sorry life" so you'll have a
>hard time finding it
Posting tons of messages hardly precludes the possibility of a "non-sorry
life". One would hope you could see that...
>This is a man who claims to be what, 40?
>Crying over my negative opinion of a VIDEOGAME?
And you crying over the very same thing...
>I sold it last July for like $44 so what are you complaining for?
lol...yikes. Someone got hooked up.
>Oh no, he's
>played more shooters than me! My life is "sorry" now because I haven't
>played as many videogames as he has!
Thats not what he said at all. Did you read his response at all? He said hes
played more saturn shooters than you have...in your sorry assed life. That
doesn't mean that your life is sorry BECAUSE you haven't played as many...just
that (in his op.) you have a sorry life. I'm not sure if his opinion is
accurate...but your reading comprehension is pretty sorry.
>Raymond is more hardcore than me! Do I care?
>There's other things to do other than videogames.
What other things have to do with expetise in videogames, I have no idea.
Whats are you gonna say next? "my dad can beat up your dad"? This is a VG
newsgroup...stick to games or risk looking dumber than you already do.
>He claims that I make stupid comments yet he comes up with comments that
>insult anyone who enjoys a game made in America. What a hypocrite.
If someone elses makes stupid comments...that makes your stupid ones somehow
better? Interesting "thought" you have there...
D
<snip>
> ALong with the fact that you can go into anyone's house, steal their
> belongings and sleep in their beds. Hmm, Thats realistic.
But on the other side of the coin - how many of us play games for the
realism? Some folks *want* to escape from reality . . . do you see
what I mean?
Sure, there has to be some basis in reality for a gamer to connect
with, but if the gaming community decided to put out games that
completely reflected reality, Joe Average Gamer would turn up their
nose at it.
Just playing devil's advocate.
Jon Foster
>
>AOL-IM: TerraEpon
...You were saying?
----------
-JF-
tbr...@trinity.edu
pal...@Blazenet.net wrote:
> Howdy folks. As a frequent reader here for the past 18 months or so,
> I've observed that opinions vary wildly on each game. When a game is
> generally regarded as a "big" game and is supposed to be great, most
> people who say "This game sucks" are trolls just looking for
attention.
> However, there *are* times when a game comes along that everyone else
> seems to love that I just plain despise.
>
> else on the planet seems to love) leave a bad taste in your mouth?
Why,
> specifically?
>
> your least favorite "favorites.")
> Here's a few from my list:
>
> Xenogears (PSX): I hated the rotating graphics (which were pretty ugly
> to begin with),<
You mean the fully realized 3-D polygonal travelling areas?
Controlling the camera angles were the only way to get through many
areas. But it can be disorienting if you aren't expecting that sort of
control.
The "rotation" also rears its head for cheap effect during the battle
scenes. After a while, you get used to them.
> the slowness of the sweat droplets, <
Huh?
> and the totally uncontrollable battle system (my favorite part of
RPGing.) <
Not sure what you mean here. Instead of a menu cursor, the game uses
buttons. One should be able to naviagte through the battle menu
without using the cursor.
> Zelda 64 (N64): It was just plain boring. Had the same old "young man
> rescues princess from evil lord" theme. Dull, unengaging plot coupled
> with Mario-with-a-sword gameplay. Yech.
>
> Virtua Fighter 3 (DC): While having nifty uneven playing fields and
cool backdrops, this game played like absolute crap and the cpu was
horribly cheap (especially throw-wise.) A huge disappointment after the
excellent VF2 on Saturn. <
I thought the major complaint against VF3 was that it played TOO much
like VF2. Kinda like how every immediate successor in the SF2 series
plays TOO much like its predecessor.
To be honest, I think VF3 gets a bad rap, with all of the Tekken.Soul
Calibur fans around these parts and in the press. Seeing as how VF2
can be had for 2 bucks at Funcoland (42 bucks, if you don't have a
Saturn), investing $250 to get a DC and VF3 is a bit much :)
But I'm looking for more detail on why YOU don't like it. Other than
the throwing issue, which might simply be a matter of your fighting
style.
> Feel free to add your own.
I'll stick to the out-and-out bombs, instead of just the disappointing
games. Too many of the latter to name...
Battletoads (NES)
What the heck was this, anyway. A sloppy fighting system with
horrible hit detection, mildly diverting action puzzles, and
atrociously difficult vehicle stages. A game should NOT require
Nintendo Power to beat.
Mickey Mania (SNES)
I unofficially gave up on this one in about five minutes, but kept
playing through to see if it would improve. The hop-and-bop, marble-
throwing action is infantile; barely NES-worthy.
Resident Evil (PSX)
Just a shame. Pretty graphics, blood, cheap thrills. Lethargic
action and puzzles of varying degress of inventiveness (mostly simple-
minded, though). Playing this one was more of a chore than an
experience.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Alan Kwan
wrote:
>>Spyderham wrote:
>>>You can hardly even hear your guns
>
>They are energy weapons...why would you hear them? Lasers etc don't make
>noises when they "fire" (generally). Besides, the weaps are obiously
>futuristic, whos to say they make noise at all, and if so, that you can hear
>it inside the cockpit of your fighter?
Even if they make noise, the pilot would be wearing headphones which
play music to protect his ears. ^_^
>>> shooters should be FAST.
>
>If RS was "fast" like you wanted it, it'd be nearly impossible. I'm pretty
>good at dodging bullets in shooters, and RS has so many, that increased speed
>would just make it too hard.
In Spyderham's ideal "fast" shooter, the bullets are fast but come in
mostly uninteresting patterns. You don't really dodge "fast" bullets:
you just wriggle your ship around habitually and they will all miss
you. Silvergun gives you slow bullets in spray patterns which you
have to actually watch and dodge consciously.
In short, slow bullets in Silvergun are a design feature.
"Live life with Heart." - Alan Kwan / ta...@notmenetvigator.com
http://home.netvigator.com/~tarot (hard-core game reviews)
(please remove anti-spam section "notme" from mailing address)
Dimension S editor: http://209.213.100.47/