Clbull's forum posts

#1 Posted by Clbull (127 posts) -

Would anybody else like to see Nintendo release an MMORPG based on the Pokémon universe? Personally, I think its something that could potentially dethrone WoW.

#2 Posted by Clbull (127 posts) -

I pretty much had a poker face the whole time I was watching the trailer. I am seriously wondering what the hell this game actually is genre wise. To me, it just seems like some physics sandbox which is fair enough for a few minutes of fun but will get very dull after a while
 
From the way it looks, I'd say its like a cross between LittleBigPlanet, Armadillo Run and Scribblenauts. Unfortunately, to me, it seems like EA are just developing a user-content driven game for the hell of it.
 
Yet, you know what would be great, a console user-content driven game of a specific genre that hasn't been done already, like an RTS, MMORPG (FreeRealms and Lego Universe are close but they don't feel very RPG-like, I'm talking more like World of Warcraft but with huge amounts of user made content) or even a console based first person shooter where EVERYTHING is customiseable (and much simpler to customise compared to things like using the Source SDK or the UDK)

#3 Edited by Clbull (127 posts) -

Once again to me, Lionhead have lost it. They drove a perfectly good RPG franchise into the ground and then some. Fable was a brilliant game that had a great combat system that actually felt fun, and boss battles which could be handled with strategic attacking/blocking/dodging/casting/flourishing patterns.
 
What happened with Fable 2? They balls'd it all up by making each attack type assignable to only one button, greatly limiting the amount of moves you could actually pull off. Then they made each enemy do the same thing. Mindlessly attack (and block) every now and then and swarm you. Plus the bosses were basically stronger versions of regular enemies that took a few more hits to kill.
 
In-game currency and the fact that you could get it in a piss easy way if you play another Xbox 360 game for a few hours just made the value of it meaningless. You could go from having a few houses and shops to owning the whole of freaking Albion from playing a few hours of say.... GOW2 or Halo 3 or any other game that is much better than Fable 2.
 
And yet rather than fix the problems Fable 2 had with its gameplay in its sequel, they instead choose to "innovate" by making entire towns change in real time based on how you treat them and allowing you to become a king and choose whether to be a tyrant or a saint in terms of leadership. Not many people care about this kind of realism and its just turned the game from a fun RPG with a good combat system to some sort of leadership sim.

#4 Edited by Clbull (127 posts) -

To me, Age of Empires 2 and even Age of Mythology were the last good RTS games. They were (somewhat) simple, they didn't have a great single player campaign but bloody hell, the map editor and multiplayer were brilliant additions. Theres nothing more satisfying than building a massive city and army and taking down your enemy. Starcraft and even the Warcraft series however are not for me. Their gameplay focuses too much on quick expansions, uber micro, levelling up heroes (well WC3 is like that) and rushing.
 
In fact, I've yet to see a game replicate that feeling of building a really nice city.

#5 Posted by Clbull (127 posts) -

If theres one thing we can all agree on here, its that Elite Beat Agents deserves a sequel.... BADLY!

#6 Posted by Clbull (127 posts) -

How about LAN support.

#7 Posted by Clbull (127 posts) -

Fight Night Round 2
 
Phantasy Star Universe

#8 Posted by Clbull (127 posts) -

I felt the same way about Starcraft. I don't have SC2 myself but I did play the SC2 Beta as I got an invite.
 
The second one currently blows its prequel away, especially since the prequel no longer has ranked leagues, but rather has a douchy elitist community that insults you constantly and has jerk game hosts who ban you from their games (literally) for having a 0 - 5 loss record online in unranked games. At least this is what I experienced playing it on the EU region server.

#9 Posted by Clbull (127 posts) -

Reminds me of the Evony ads. Next thing you know, they'll be using semi-nude women in bikinis feeling each other and saying "PLAY DISCREETLY MI'LORD" as an ad banner.

#10 Posted by Clbull (127 posts) -

> Don't you have to pay both SE and MS to play FFXI?
 
I only played the Xbox 360 Open Beta version (which was when they were packaging the game with OXM and it had a small beta period.) If I recall, you could play FFXI and even Phantasy Star Universe online with just an Xbox Live Silver account. I don't think you have to pay both developers to play the game.
 
Nonetheless, I think that Microsoft are stupid to let Xbox Live continue like this, the way it currently is. And do you want to know the several massive reasons why this is?
 
Well here goes:

  • Every other console has free online gameplay. You just have to look at Nintendo WFC and PlayStation Network and realise you should have gotten a PS3 or a Wii
  • Their platform is too restrictive. e.g. with The Orange Box when they would have to charge for DLC and therefore little of it was released. Its also why Gabe Newell announced that Portal 2 was coming to the PS3 with Steamworks support. Because while he did completely slate the PS3 at one point, he ate his words and said that PSN was the most open platform for online gaming.
  • The community on XBL is terrible. Just look at the idiots you'd meet on an average Xbox Live game.
  • £50 a year. Just to do online gaming. When every other current gen console does it for free.
 
Nonetheless, I am pissed off that FFXIV will not come to the 360. I just might go for a PS3 instead.