believer258's forum posts

#1 Posted by believer258 (11797 posts) -

@hailinel Is Grayson Hunt (of Bulletstorm) or Captain Price (of you-already-know) on any of these?

#2 Posted by believer258 (11797 posts) -

I doubt that Fire Emblem Awakening and Ni No Kuni will even enter the GOTY conversation.

@pabba said:

I'm pretty sure you're safe with Ni no Kuni not getting spoiled, as Brad only played a little bit during the Quick Look and never seemed to bring it up again.

I remember Brad talking about it in a Bombcast somewhere, but I think he said that he eventually got tired of the combat or got tired of the grinding and just gave up on it.

Bioshock Infinite, Metro Last Light, The Last of Us, Grand Theft Auto V, Brothers, and Saints Row IV are probably the ones that people concerned about spoilers need to pay the most attention to.

#3 Posted by believer258 (11797 posts) -

@dalai said:

@dudelongcouch said:

You've been spoiled by modern video games holding your hand and guiding you through candy-ass glorified movies with a modicum of interactivity. LBW is harkening back to the old days, when games gave you the freedom to explore and figure things out for yourself instead of having a super companion pop up and explain every little detail for you, and I LOVE it for it.

This, this, and this. The way to play is to explore and find the secrets on your own. No fairy to point you in the right direction, no hour long session of tutorials and exposition to ease you into the game, no bullshit.

This isn't entirely untrue, but when you apply this complaint you almost always apply it to the Blockbuster-style AAA games like Uncharted, Call of Duty, Gears of War, etc. If you get deeper into gaming you find that there are a lot of games that don't hold your hand and do let you explore. Fire Emblem Awakening, Shin Megami Tensei IV, Dark Souls, X-Com, Deus Ex Human Revolution, Minecraft, Terraria, Super Meat Boy, Dishonored, Dragon Age Origins, and more do not hold your hand at all.

In the meantime, Zelda games - and any game that really asks the player to explore the world around him - almost always includes a few moments where the player just doesn't know what to do next. The best thing to do when you just can't figure out what the game wants you to do is to shut it off and go do something else for a while and come back to it with a fresh mind and, hopefully, some fresh ideas on how to get past an obstacle. It's almost always a pretty obvious solution that just didn't cross your mind when you were getting mad at the game.

#4 Posted by believer258 (11797 posts) -

I'm about to do the same as soon as I go pick up my Vita!

I'm definitely playing on Hard, I've heard that this one's easier.

#5 Edited by believer258 (11797 posts) -

@dark said:

Mark Wahlberg, he ruins everything else ... why not this?

Huh? @markwahlberg seems like an OK guy to me.

#6 Edited by believer258 (11797 posts) -

@wuddel: Just so you know, if you buy games off of the eShop, they're tied to that 3DS. If that 3DS is lost or stolen, you are boned. All your games go with it. You can transfer all data to a new 3DS if you still have your old one and it functions, though.

Aside from that, I've enjoyed the Etrian Odyssey games, Fire Emblem of course, Mario 3D Land, Shin Megami Tensei IV and Soul Hackers, Ocarina of Time, and Donkey Kong Country Returns. Also, if you never played Chrono Trigger then get the DS remake of it. It's fantastic.

#7 Posted by believer258 (11797 posts) -

@l1ghtn1n: Wasn't it just January where the music changed?

Anyway, I like Persona 3 a little better. Persona 4 is a really good game but it constantly repeats itself to the player. If you want to make sure the player remembers everything, have a summary or a record of conversations or something in a pause menu. You do not restate things you've already stated several times in the past few minutes. Persona 3 did this occasionally but it wasn't anywhere near as pervasive as it was in Persona 4.

The rest of the story in Persona 3 was more interesting to me. Persona 4 really overstates the danger at hand there toward the end. Persona 3, though, sets up a pretty good end-of-the-world scenario and foreshadows it pretty well. The whole plot builds a lot better than Persona 4's and the payoff is way more interesting. I'll give it to Persona 4's characters, though, they definitely feel more diverse and interesting.

I found the mechanics in Persona 4 way better, though. I eventually got used to only setting vague combat roles for my team in Persona 3 but it's just not the same as pulling off a series of moves that really does some damage to whatever you're fighting. I also don't buy the "it gives them more personality" angle that some people take. You're still giving them orders and they've still elected you as the leader.

I do hope that Persona 5 takes advantage of the PS3's extra power to do something more than just better graphics. It would be cool if there were a bigger section of the city open, if there were a lot more voiced dialogue, and if cutscenes didn't consist almost completely of text boxes. Also, there needs to be more weather. This sounds like a really weird thing to say but better storms, better sunny days, some snow over the winter months, etc.

#8 Posted by believer258 (11797 posts) -

@believer258 said:

@grantheaslip said:

@believer258 said:

@hailinel said:

@adam1808 said:

@hailinel said:
(I could try to argue for Final Fantasy XIII's inclusion, but I know that's a battle I would never win despite how much I enjoy the game because so many people are determined to hate it for existing).

I'm pretty sure we're determined to hate it because it takes 20 hours to begin.

It really doesn't.

It doesn't, but it sure as hell doesn't bother explaining itself for quite some time beyond basic plot threads. Who are these people? What are these words you're throwing around? What's the context here? Why should I care?

If you've finished the game, these things might be more obvious. But I just bought it this summer and played about ten hours of it. Is it a good game? Why, yes, as a game it doesn't deserve anywhere near the hate that it gets. Does it belong anywhere near a Game of the Generation list? Absolutely not. There's little to no exploration, the story isn't terribly clear, the pacing is not all that great, the battle system is fun but far too rigid and controlled in terms of leveling and what you get, etc. The latter half of the game would have to include some really brilliant storytelling, great mechanics, and spectacular locales to make up for the first bit and I just don't see that happening. [...]

I always find the complaints about FF XIII's story confusing, because they almost seem like complaints about a different game than the one I played. I had next to no trouble following what was happening, and I think I stopped reading the Datalog at a certain point. There are definitely issues of pacing, some minor problems with questionable character motivations, and a pretty lame main villain. It's not a perfect game by any stretch.

With respect to context, I look at FFXIII as a game that's more about its characters than its world. I don't think you're really supposed to understand everything about the world -- just the stuff important to the narrative. The biggest moments in the game are interactions between the characters, not interactions with the world.

I think the rigidity of the character progression was one of the game's bigger strengths, because it allowed for genuinely challenging boss encounters and obviated grinding. It's a game that seems skill-based in a way a lot of JRPGs aren't (or at least don't have to be). FFXIII-2 removed the Crystarium caps and gave the player more control, and I think it was for the worse.

I've been getting into JRPGs over the past year or so, and FF XIII is one of my favourites so far. I liked it more than Xenoblade, and (having just finished it) I liked it more than Kingdom Hearts. They're tough to compare, but I liked it more than Persona 4 Golden in some ways,. I have no history with the FF series, and I can see where people are coming from about FF XIII's issues, but I don't think it's anywhere near as flawed as it's made out to be.

You also finished it. I only got ten hours in and I could give a rough estimate of what was happening, but I couldn't give you any more details than "Some people are chasing Lightning and Co. because they've become some kind of pawns of some kind of god."

Gameplay wise, though, I had a lot of fun with what I've played.

I do plan on eventually playing more of it but right now I'm thoroughly enjoying its predecessor, Final Fantasy XII, which is pretty much the antithesis of FFXIII in terms of gameplay and its story is way more political.

The thing is that you've sort of got the higher level scenario nailed down, but that part of it's not really the part that matters. It was the stories between the characters that ended up being way more important, or at least resonating with me more. If that's not your jam -- which it sounds like could be the case if you're into something more political -- that's a different issue entirely. I'm not going to claim FF XIII was particularly profound writing, because it wasn't, but I enjoyed it for what it was.

To put it another way, you could boil down The Waking Dead's story to "Zombies are chasing around Lee and Co. because there was some sort of outbreak", but The Walking Dead wasn't about the zombies or the outbreak, and describing it in those terms isn't very useful. You played a few hours, so I'm not saying you misunderstood it -- just trying to explain what the appeal is.

This sequence (warning: spoilers galore -- don't watch if you're going to play it!) is a good example what FF XIII's story really was, or at least what I remember the most about it.

I also haven't found myself really connected to the characters so far. Sazh was all right. Lightning was all right. I generally like great characters better than I do politics but I'd like to have better context about what's going on.

But yes, I do plan on playing more of it. And I'm only ten hours in, so I might pull a 180 and call the story "great" by the end.

#9 Edited by believer258 (11797 posts) -

@believer258 said:

@hailinel said:

@adam1808 said:

@hailinel said:
(I could try to argue for Final Fantasy XIII's inclusion, but I know that's a battle I would never win despite how much I enjoy the game because so many people are determined to hate it for existing).

I'm pretty sure we're determined to hate it because it takes 20 hours to begin.

It really doesn't.

It doesn't, but it sure as hell doesn't bother explaining itself for quite some time beyond basic plot threads. Who are these people? What are these words you're throwing around? What's the context here? Why should I care?

If you've finished the game, these things might be more obvious. But I just bought it this summer and played about ten hours of it. Is it a good game? Why, yes, as a game it doesn't deserve anywhere near the hate that it gets. Does it belong anywhere near a Game of the Generation list? Absolutely not. There's little to no exploration, the story isn't terribly clear, the pacing is not all that great, the battle system is fun but far too rigid and controlled in terms of leveling and what you get, etc. The latter half of the game would have to include some really brilliant storytelling, great mechanics, and spectacular locales to make up for the first bit and I just don't see that happening. [...]

I always find the complaints about FF XIII's story confusing, because they almost seem like complaints about a different game than the one I played. I had next to no trouble following what was happening, and I think I stopped reading the Datalog at a certain point. There are definitely issues of pacing, some minor problems with questionable character motivations, and a pretty lame main villain. It's not a perfect game by any stretch.

With respect to context, I look at FFXIII as a game that's more about its characters than its world. I don't think you're really supposed to understand everything about the world -- just the stuff important to the narrative. The biggest moments in the game are interactions between the characters, not interactions with the world.

I think the rigidity of the character progression was one of the game's bigger strengths, because it allowed for genuinely challenging boss encounters and obviated grinding. It's a game that seems skill-based in a way a lot of JRPGs aren't (or at least don't have to be). FFXIII-2 removed the Crystarium caps and gave the player more control, and I think it was for the worse.

I've been getting into JRPGs over the past year or so, and FF XIII is one of my favourites so far. I liked it more than Xenoblade, and (having just finished it) I liked it more than Kingdom Hearts. They're tough to compare, but I liked it more than Persona 4 Golden in some ways,. I have no history with the FF series, and I can see where people are coming from about FF XIII's issues, but I don't think it's anywhere near as flawed as it's made out to be.

You also finished it. I only got ten hours in and I could give a rough estimate of what was happening, but I couldn't give you any more details than "Some people are chasing Lightning and Co. because they've become some kind of pawns of some kind of god."

Gameplay wise, though, I had a lot of fun with what I've played.

I do plan on eventually playing more of it but right now I'm thoroughly enjoying its predecessor, Final Fantasy XII, which is pretty much the antithesis of FFXIII in terms of gameplay and its story is way more political.

#10 Posted by believer258 (11797 posts) -

RDR has that entire Mexico section, which is extremely dull and kinda frustrating, plot-wise. I couldn't make myself finish it.