Anjon's forum posts

#1 Edited by Anjon (110 posts) -
@Taku128 said:

@Anjon said:

@Taku128 said:

@Anjon said:

Events shift in 999 when they really shouldn't. For example, there's a character who can die if you choose a certain course of action, but that action has nothing to do with them nor how they die. It's just an arbitrary change much like Heavy Rain's arbitrary changes.

I got every ending in 999 and have no idea what you're talking about. Your path opens up situations for certain things to happen that wouldn't in other storylines, but there's never an instance where something happens in one playthrough that should've happened in the others but didn't, at least not that I can remember.

I distinctly remember a situation where a certain character that originally died had escaped death for seemingly no reason when I got different endings. It's been a while since I've played it, but that stuck out to me as being a real "What are you trying to pull, game!?" moment. Though I haven't played VLR, so maybe they explain it in some crazy pseudo-science-y way later on in the timeline. Maybe Mantorok had something to do with it. Apologies for incredibly obscure references.

Could you spoiler tag what you're talking about? The only situation I could think of would be

*MAJOR 999 SPOILERS INSIDE TAG*

Wow, that's actually what I was talking about, but I was remembering it very differently, probably since I basically ran through all of the endings in that game in about a day, all while screaming "WTF" every few minutes. The game doesn't really take care in explaining its crazy twists, so there's so much stuff that got bogged down that I still don't understand. A lot of it is probably weird "anime" stuff like (not really a spoiler since it starts right at the beginning), why does Junpei actually care about Akane to the point of doing the things he does in the different ending paths when he literally forgot she existed until she literally tackled him to the ground and rubbed her face all over him? Is that just an anime thing or did they explain that in a twist? I remember a twist involving them that kiiiiiind of seemed like it was implying something about that but the game is just full of twists literally every 5 minutes or so and it all starts to feel very silly... but that's just my opinion. In any case, that dead character thing isn't as despicable as I thought it was. I thought it was some straight up David Cage-ian mess.
 
Edit: In retrospect, I guess having twists on top of twists on top of twists is also an "anime thing"...
#2 Posted by Anjon (110 posts) -
@Taku128 said:

@Anjon said:

Events shift in 999 when they really shouldn't. For example, there's a character who can die if you choose a certain course of action, but that action has nothing to do with them nor how they die. It's just an arbitrary change much like Heavy Rain's arbitrary changes.

I got every ending in 999 and have no idea what you're talking about. Your path opens up situations for certain things to happen that wouldn't in other storylines, but there's never an instance where something happens in one playthrough that should've happened in the others but didn't, at least not that I can remember.

I distinctly remember a situation where a certain character that originally died had escaped death for seemingly no reason when I got different endings. It's been a while since I've played it, but that stuck out to me as being a real "What are you trying to pull, game!?" moment. Though I haven't played VLR, so maybe they explain it in some crazy pseudo-science-y way later on in the timeline. Maybe Mantorok had something to do with it.
 
 
 

Apologies for incredibly obscure references.
#3 Posted by Anjon (110 posts) -

Glad to see someone repping VNs! It's just disappointing that this is the game that really introduces Western audiences to the genre, because all of those problems Patrick mentioned about the redundant text, obtuse puzzles, and juvenile humor are all pretty infuriating when trying to get through 999. Also, the deeper you get into the mechanics, the more annoyed you become. Events shift in 999 when they really shouldn't. For example, there's a character who can die if you choose a certain course of action, but  that action has nothing to do with them nor how they die. It's just an arbitrary change much like Heavy Rain's arbitrary changes. I've heard some people assuming that VNs are just like that, but that's not true at all! There're a lot of great VNs with amazing stories that don't get bogged down by this stuff.
 
While I'm ultimately unhappy with how 999 represents visual novels, it is the most successful attempt so far at bringing the genre to mainstream Western audiences (though I heard the Lost in Blue series for DS was pretty good). It's also the closest a VN has come to being a "game", despite how those parts might have turned out.

#4 Posted by Anjon (110 posts) -

If I had a nickel for every time someone said "Kotaku" in this thread, I could buy you all a thesaurus.

#5 Posted by Anjon (110 posts) -
@Jack268: May I ask why you disagree that Bayonetta is a superior game? Because I consider it to be almost objective. Almost. Sure, they aren't the exact same game and thus they have their "differences", but those differences don't really matter when compared to the whole. Bayonetta is crazier than Devil May Cry, perhaps too crazy. People might prefer DMC in that regard, but how much does that matter in the long run? I personally thought all of the "diversion" levels in the first Bayonetta -- like the Afterburner and Road Rash levels -- were awful, but none of that matters in regards to the full package either. 
 
Ninja Theory's history with framerate issues also doesn't really matter, as the majority believe their games to be good, and in the game industry, the majority's opinion becomes fact. For what it's worth, there isn't a single Ninja Theory game I like, though I've played them all and I understand their appeal. It's all mass-market appeal for one. They aren't looking to make super technical action games, just games that people will think are cool and/or pretty and/or have Andy Serkis in them. They know how to make character action games for people who might not like character action games is what I'm trying to say.
 
And I'm not saying that one franchise should suffer because another franchise is (in my opinion), better. I'm saying that one franchise WILL suffer because another franchise has taken its soul and went on to do bigger and better things with it on a (near) objective level. There is no one left at Capcom to produce Devil May Cry to an extent that Capcom feels would be satisfactory. That's evident by the fact that this game exists at all. Why take the risk of destroying a beloved franchise unless they believed their was no other choice? And when Bayonetta came out, the common consensus was "Oh, this is like Devil May Cry but way better." You might not believe so, but those reviews pretty much spoke for themselves. So what happens to Devil May Cry then? They can't just make a traditional Devil May Cry and expect it to still shine while Bayonetta is sitting right beside it, decked out in jewels and platinum.
 
Like I mentioned with Uncharted vs Tomb Raider, the presence of a superior game of the same genre is going to affect the direction other games take even if you don't personally believe in that superiority, especially if they're particularly derivative. Splinter Cell came out declaring itself a better stealth game than Metal Gear, even going as far as attacking it in marketing, but look how many reboots if went through while Metal Gear just kept going and turned into a crazy phenomenon. It's barely even the same franchise anymore. Hitman is the same way, though I personally because that series was unique enough that they didn't have to make the huge 180s they did in Absolution to stay relevant. Back in that Tomb Raider example, Crystal D could have just released another Tomb Raider continuing from TL:U, but in a post-Uncharted 2 and 3 industry, how well would that really have gone? Would it really sell well outside of the hardcore Tomb Raider/Lara Croft community?
#6 Posted by Anjon (110 posts) -

To me, the announcement, development cycle, and release of DmC followed a common path to its logical conclusion: a decent action game that markets itself to a new audience. That's all it could have ever been, and that was the single "good" path the franchise could have taken. The Devil May Cry franchise effectively died in 2008. Everyone involved with making that series good left to do other things, and Hideaki Kamiya, the father of the franchise, put all of his expertise towards creating Bayonetta, which he himself considers the ultimate evolution of Devil May Cry. Also, Bayonetta is preeetty good. Simply put, Devil May Cry as it was before Ninja Theory touched it simply can't coexist in the same world as Bayonetta because Bayonetta is just...better. It also has the minds behind Devil May Cry working to make it great. It's similar to Tomb Raider's existence after the Uncharted series happened. It just kind of floundered and then sparked an inevitable and much needed reboot. This is the only way the beloved Devil May Cry franchise can see be relevant -- by being utterly tasteless, easier, and less insane. This is what the franchise needed to stay alive.
 
So isn't this a good thing? I mean, for one the DMC franchise gets to stay alive. Also, we have Bayonetta! Bayonetta, dude! That game is super crazy! We don't even need DMC anymore! I thought we were on the same page here, but then the internet rage just wouldn't stop. What did people think was going to happen to the new game exactly? It's unreasonable to think a Ninja Theory game is just going to bomb flat out. At the very least, they know how to make games about dudes beating up stuff with weapons.

#7 Posted by Anjon (110 posts) -

Sure, I know a few pirates. Actually, pretty much every friend I have who plays video games also pirates a lot of them. They also buy a lot of games legit. Well, most of them do. I have one friend (or former friend rather) who's of the mindset of "Pirate all the things!", but he's a terrible person overall. Personally, I believe there's definitely a place for piracy. I just got into serious PC gaming about a year ago and was shocked  by how many full priced (like $50-60) games came out completely without demos. That's ridiculous to me. In fact, I recently had trouble deciding whether I was going to buy Hitman Absolution or not, because there were so many claims of it running poorly on nVidia hardware and there was no demo I could download and try. I ended up using Amazon to get it for about $30 and figured I'd take a leap of faith, which actually paid off. I shouldn't have to make a leap of faith when purchasing a game though. That was a really crappy situation and I couldn't help but think how much easier it would have been to just pirate a copy, try it out, then make a purchasing decision later.
 
On a similar note, how do you guys feel about pirating games that are pretty much impossible to acquire by normal means? For example, American McGee's Alice was out of print for years, with copies randomly showing up on ebay worth approximately all of the money. It recently got a rerelease as a pre-order bonus with the sequel, but before then the only way to get it without going helluv crazy in the process was to just pirate it. There're still a lot of games that are super hard to find without resorting to piracy.

#8 Posted by Anjon (110 posts) -

An obscure one, but I almost bought a Saturn in Japan so that I could play "Princess Crown", the precursor to Odin Sphere. I also want to play the last two Shadow Hearts games.

#9 Edited by Anjon (110 posts) -
@FlarePhoenix
I did not tell people to exploit the glitch. Where did I ever say that? The glitch can't be exploited, because it's extremely random and impractical. It requires having your save corrupted during crucial gameplay milestones like beating Arcade Mode or unlocking items in Ghost Battle. To exploit it would mean somehow forcing your 360 to crash while the game is auto-saving these moments, which isn't even guaranteed to work and will most likely just give you corrupted data. Not special "oh look, DLC" corrupted data. Just plain ole "my game is jacked up" data. I repeat, I did not advise people to attempt to recreate this glitch. I merely tried to help people whom had  already encountered it.
 
@big_jon
What am I leaving out? I explained how I thought the glitch worked. I explained how I don't think it can actually be exploited. There's literally no more information to share. I don't have any mods or hacks. I don't know what else you want me to say. What specifically do you want to know?
 
Edit:
@FlarePhoenix said:
Regardless, this isn't a case of an innocent customer getting screwed over by a big bad corporation. Even if he didn't purposely get the DLC himself, he was more than willing to exploit the glitch and keep the content. He was willing to take in the benefits, so I think he would also be willing to accept the consequences. Whether the consequences should be a permanent ban I'm not sure (I'm still not entirely convinced this is something that just happened by accident) but the original poster isn't completely innocent in this matter.
You're inferring a bunch of evil hackery where there is none. How was I willing to exploit the glitch? And how did I "take in the benefits"? If you're saying I didn't immediately erase my save and pretend it didn't happen, then you're right. Sorry, but I have a  whole lot of hours put into that game, and I'm not going to get rid of it just because of a glitch. Also, I already said that I wasn't banned permanently. It's only for two weeks. In the time it would take to finally get this thing resolved, if even possible, the ban would already be lifted normally, and I'd feel really silly about the whole thing.
 
I should also mention that the DLC in question is actually free. I'm not saying that to justify anything, just to put it into perspective. A few people mentioned the idea of "stealing DLC", but Namco isn't actually selling this content for money. They're just....not releasing it immediately for some reason. It starts rolling out October 9th, which is why I thought it was strange that my ban was only for two weeks, because it ends the same week that the DLC starts releasing. I'm not going to infer any meaning from that, but it is pretty weird. To me, anyway.
#10 Posted by Anjon (110 posts) -
@Grillbar: I don't think you understand. I've explained my situation to everyone I could. The customer service reps I called believe me, but they have no access to the tools used to enforce and lift suspensions and bans. The actually people who do have access to those tools ( the enforcement staff ) won't even confirm that what I originally suspected was the reason for my suspension is actually the reason. In fact, those people won't address me at all. That's become the main problem. There's no one to even talk to to get anything done.
 
I'm really interested in finding people who actually have been unbanned. I've searched through that forum and I haven't found anyone who've succeeded, and most of the people there are in far worse situations than I. There're countless posts from parents who've put literally hundreds if not  thousands of dollars into their children's accounts which are permabanned. All of them believe their kids are innocent, and all of them feel that Microsoft essentially robbed them of huge sums of money, which feels pretty damn scary when you think about it. I would love to find one of the few success stories from people who fought Xbox Live bans and hear how they got them resolved.
 
Also, I don't mean to be cynical, but I don't think the enforcement staff cares a whole lot about innocence. For example, there's a stickied thread in the banned accounts forum that documents the general flow of fraud cases where accounts have been hacked  and banned due to activity from the hacker and not the rightful gamertag owner. According to the sticky, it's unrealistic to expect them to unban your account just because you were a victim of hacking, for some reasons they don't fully explain. Sorry, but after all that's happened and all I've read, I'm not going to assume that these guys have the best intentions at heart. But hey, if they're willing to talk to me, they're welcome to prove me wrong.