believer258's forum posts

#1 Posted by believer258 (12017 posts) -

I play mostly on my PC, 3DS, and Vita. I play my PS3 and PS2 often enough to keep them plugged up. I also have a 360 which gets used once every other month. My Wii stays in the drawer, my Xbox, DS, and PSP are in my brother's room, my PS1 is in the closet, the Gamecube and GBA are my brother's, and I no longer have a SNES.

I don't think I own too many consoles since only the Vita and 3DS are relatively new. I've accumulated everything else over the years. As I said a year and six months ago, I used to dream of owning every console and just tons of games, but now that I've got that I'm like "eh". I can't even think of a good reason to own a PS4 and/or an Xbox One yet. Maybe later next year. I'm not sure about the Wii U. On one hand, it's got a few Nintendo first party games on it that are worth playing. On the other hand, the only things on it worth playing are Nintendo first party games.

#2 Posted by believer258 (12017 posts) -

@ch3burashka: Thought about it, but decided I'd just give it away. GB duders are the best anyways

Well, you gave it to a GB duder whose only post is thanking you for giving away a Wasteland 2 Steam key.

#3 Edited by believer258 (12017 posts) -

It would be beyond stupid to release a game that really and truly requires a graphics card with 4GB of VRAM at this point in time. I don't know how they got those recommended specs, but I doubt that's the reality. They might be recommending something like that if you want to turn all the settings up, but for the average guy who is just going to put it on Medium or High? No way they're going to ignore those guys, unless they just don't want this PC port to sell at all. And as has been mentioned, they have to be able to scale this back to 360 and PS3 levels.

Of course crazy things do happen. The Saints Row 2 port exists, after all, as mentioned above, so maybe I'm wrong. Best to wait and see, but it's probably not a good idea to get all riled up about it yet.

#4 Posted by believer258 (12017 posts) -

You need a first person shooter with progression that you can play offline.


I've never played Brink because I've never heard anything that makes it sound remotely worth playing.

#5 Edited by believer258 (12017 posts) -

Man, I'm glad my internet speed just got a bump up or those GIF's would be an unexpected throwback to the '90's.

#6 Posted by believer258 (12017 posts) -

I still need to play more of the original, but if I got this one it would be the 360 version.

#7 Posted by believer258 (12017 posts) -

Man. I want to be bilingual.

#8 Posted by believer258 (12017 posts) -

Maybe it's because I've been trying to get into CRPG's for a while now, but I found Wasteland 2 pretty easy to get into and start playing once I had filled out the character sheet. The character sheet is the most intimidating thing about it and you don't even have to mess with it much if you just want to use pre-made characters. After that, talking to people is talking to people and combat reminds me a lot of X-Com.

Just from the Quick Look that Brad played, I'm going to make a wild guess that Divinity Original Sin's gameplay is a little more complex and difficult. Wasteland 2's story seems more involving and interesting, though.

#9 Edited by believer258 (12017 posts) -

@hailinel said:

This conversation came up in another thread. People are blowing his comment severely out of context.

"Casual" does not mean "dumbed down" or "Will be Angry Birds". And most Final Fantasy games feature one-button combat, when you come down to it.

Most Final Fantasy games feature hitting the A button to confirm a strategic choice in a menu. A single button action game is an entirely different affair.

I'd agree with you if he said something along the lines of "I want to make it easier to understand the complexities of the game". Instead, we have this piece of wonderful clarification on what he means by "more casual":

With the hardware specifications of the newer consoles, it's possible to set it up so you have different enemies and different choices of attacks you can enter in, but I want to simplify that. It'll basically be a one-button action, and the AI intuitively outputs an action that kind of satisfies, gives you that instant gratification, and it connects with the simple touch of a button. I myself am not getting any younger. I don't want to be frantically pushing buttons. I also want to utilise the intelligence of the hardware spec, and not have to go through too much hassle or trouble in order to execute moves.

What does this say to you other than "I would like to simplify the game down to a single button press?" Right there at the end, he says "...not have to go through too much hassle or trouble in order to execute moves".

You're right that it could still turn out to be a game with plenty of depth and we could be completely misunderstanding him. But reacting to a quote like this with worry about the game's depth and complexity is not an overreaction.

Hailinel, sometimes you're way too over-defensive of this franchise.

#10 Edited by believer258 (12017 posts) -

@believer258 said:

I've seen a few people who are still kinda men on what they've seen of Wolfenstein, which is a little disappointing. That game is one of the best shooters in some time.

I remember listening to Justin Mcelroy talk about his brief experience with it a while back, and based on the first area alone he vehemently disliked it and stopped playing. From the outset I can understand how someone might be put off into thinking it's yet another run of the mill generic shooter, but oh man does it start going places, and good ones at that, pretty fast.

Now that's just pathetic, especially for someone who works in any sort of games press and especially because the first two levels are kinda short.