LobsterCrunk's forum posts

  • 33 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
Avatar image for lobstercrunk
Avatar image for lobstercrunk
#2 Edited by LobsterCrunk (92 posts) -

I just found the wiki for it, turns out there's an anime :|

Avatar image for lobstercrunk
#3 Edited by LobsterCrunk (92 posts) -

@Icemael said:

Gregory Horror Show.

You are amazing, sir

Was searching on google for "henry mansion" and "stanley scary ps2 castle"

knew it had a posh-sounding name in the title

Avatar image for lobstercrunk
#4 Edited by LobsterCrunk (92 posts) -

Need help finding this one, the name completely escapes me so I can't find any screenshots or anything to help out

If found, I'm going to play the hell out of this sonuvabitch, and I'd advise anyone to do the same

You ever play a game that was on either Ps2 or Gamecube (can't be sure)

It was in a scary mansion, and upon entry the main dude (a rat) took your soul, I believe?

All the characters were animals, and they were all cube-shaped, sorta like Minecraft

The goal was to use the rooms to scare the souls out of other guests and then harvest them, if they saw you they would flip out and chase you around the mansion

There was a pink lizard nurse - one of the earlier guests - who stabbed you in the head with a giant syringe when she caught you

The guests don't move out once you harvest the souls, and they will gang up on you and fuck your shit up if you're not extremely careful

They got added on a time basis - so there was a limited time for collecting souls, before the rat killed you and it was game over, which would mean starting again from the beginning because you've completely fucked it

I can't remember much more, but there was also some kind of meta-card game in there, and at the end there was a large board game against the rat, whose name's in the title

never seen this game since I played it, all those years ago
no random images online
never mentioned in any discussions
but it was fucking quality
Avatar image for lobstercrunk
#5 Posted by LobsterCrunk (92 posts) -

@Karkarov said:

Actually I would argue that off all the games Dragon's Dogma has been compared to Monster Hunter is the least valid comparison save maybe Shadow of the Collossus. It isn't just a more complex character creator your character is literally in a totally different dimension of functionality, customization, and depth than a Monster Hunter character. In Monster Hunter you are in an instanced closed world, Dragon's Dogma is open world with very little instancing. MH has no story, DD has a 30-40 hour long main story. MH it is all about the gear in every respect down to how you play and what moves you have, in DD gear is important but only because it helps determine stats and your move set options which are so expansive it is literally impossible to even have half the available moves for a one hand sword usable at the same time. Forget about the fact that you actually have a class, character level, job level, very deep build system, more gear slots, etc etc in DD. MH is heavily reliant on multi player for it's fun factor and was built for multi player from the ground up, DD is the exact opposite.

Both games have big monsters with multiple body parts, action based combat, and were made by Capcom. Beyond that they have very little if not nothing else in common.

Remember that you can at least hire a buddies pawns, trade items with friends, participate in the Ur Dragon fight, and share pics on facebook or other social media. So it has some multi player based things.

Apologies for the wall. of. text:

I'm gonna have to state, once more, that Dragon's Dogma most definitely has been designed with mutliplayer in mind because every encounter is faced with at least two characters - you and your pawn - and every action that every pawn is capable of making is also an action that any player-controlled character can do. There is also a distinct singleplayer aspect to Monster Hunter, with quests that cannot be done online, which means that if it wasn't designed from the ground-up as singleplayer, it should have been.

Monster Hunter also had different classes - depending on the weapons that you chose to wield (hammers, greatswords, daggers, crossbows, that kind of thing) and the success of your team, online, depended on your collective ability to balance those classes. The game did not give you AI buddies, but some of the enemies were so difficult that you required multiple players to get through it, so if you didn't have internet access (or no-one you knew had a PSP), the game was very hard and difficult to get deep into. Would it have been so difficult to put in AI characters that you could give weapons to? Or even choose from a list of characters, like you do in the character select screen at the start of the game? Do you see how, immediately, this makes the game almost identical to Dragon's Dogma?

I understand, by the way, that DD is a far deeper game than MH, in many respects, but that doesn't mean they are not incredibly similar to each other. The gameplay itself is remarkably similar, and seems more like that of a sequel than anything else. An incredibly polished sequel, mind you, and one that's dealing with hardware that can take a lot more punishment - like Metal Gear Solid to Metal Gear 2. The two games have distinct story lines, distinct characters, distinct themes and are totally distinct from each other, but they are both progressions of an idea of gameplay - one more primitive than the other.

So they make Dragon's Dogma and they want to put big enemies in it, but they realise that you can't deal with all of these enemies by yourself, so they give you AI buddies to help you out.

Why not go Monster Hunter with it, then? Why the sudden change of heart? If the answer is, indeed, that they wanted to craft a story-driven experience that might have been marred by the presence of human companions, why not go Resi 5 with it and present the option to play the game with others if you so choose? What about after you've completed the game the first time, when you know how the story goes and you decide to skip a few cutscenes because the reason you're playing the game again is to play it, not because you are moved by the story. When all there is left is gameplay, adding more people simply makes all the variables explode and this creates parameters of chaos that every game benefits from - in a way that is completely distinct from the singleplayer experience.

Also, you really can't count any of that stuff as multiplayer, it's all based on social media and exists outside of Dragon's Dogma - the game. The only slightly multiplayer part of it is the Ur Dragon, which is pretty cool and all, but that's all it is, it's still not actually multiple players taking part in the same encounter. Can you really tell me that any of that is comparable to taking on a dragon with 3 of your friends?

All of this - and then you consider Capcom's most recent announcement, that on-disc DLC will no longer be a sticking point for consumers. Except we have to wait until after Dragon's Dogma for DLC to be entirely off-disk? It sounds even more like they're going to be selling me the multiplayer code a few weeks down the line - and if this happens, by the way, all of your arguments are null and void, because then they will have thought of and implemented multiplayer long before the game's release.

Honestly, I kind of hope that multiplayer never comes out for it, if that was the case.

Avatar image for lobstercrunk
#6 Edited by LobsterCrunk (92 posts) -

@VDay said:

@LobsterCrunk: The game was always, from the start, a single-player open world RPG. It's one thing if you think it'd be cool if it had co-op, but demanding it and saying how clearly it should have multiplayer or presuming that it was "designed with multiplayer in mind" when every single thing Capcom's ever said points to the opposite being true just comes off as gamer entitlement. Even implementing something as simple as letting your friend control a pawn would take a lot of time and resources, and adds a ton of technical challenges both from a coding and game balance standpoint.

People make it sound like every modern open world RPG has co-op/multiplayer in it and that Dragon's Dogma is some weird outdated game that inexplicably doesn't. If they wanted to make a multiplayer game they would've made Monster Hunter West, but they didn't so they made Dragon's Dogma instead. It's fine if you want the latter to be more like the former, but it just seems silly to me to be upset that Dragon's Dogma is a different type of game than what you, for whatever reason, decided you wanted it to be.

Dude, in gameplay terms you can literally do everything that the AI characters can do - that takes care of all the character balancing issues because, once again, you always play the game with at least one other character (who potentially shares all of your player-controlled abilities) to help you out. Not only that, but every enemy encounter in the game is balanced to be taken on in a group.

Actually, I guess it really is too early to say that. For all we know there could be whole sections of the game that are especially challenging because they want you fighting solo.

I guess that's just my impression based on absolutely every piece of information regarding this game before release. Especially given the focus on your pawns, it seems like solo-multiplayer is a really high focus for this game - and I guess, also, that this is exactly the kind of experience they want to make.

I have been looking forward to this kind of game for some time. It's Capcom, and they made Monster Hunter - which I only ever got to play once in multiplayer, because nobody I know owns a PSP. I had such fun with that game, with how it played and how the monsters behaved. They continually deny Monster Hunter a release on either PS3 or 360 - even though it would be crazy easy to do so - but they do release a game that looks almost exactly like it, only with deeper combat and a far more complex character creator. And they focus it on a closed-off co-op experience. It's a bitter pill to swallow, for sure.

Avatar image for lobstercrunk
#7 Posted by LobsterCrunk (92 posts) -


What I meant was that since all the pawns in the game use spells, abilities and items that you are able to use as a player, the seperate team-roles are all able to be fulfilled by another human - the gameplay has been designed with multiplayer in mind.

I would rather that than nothing at all - if it was just that you could join a friend's game and take the role of his, customised pawn - I would prefer taking on giant monsters and surviving the perilous night with a buddy.

You could easily go the other route though, Borderlands was able to have constant character progression: you just select what character you want to continue progressing and everything is constantly saved.

Avatar image for lobstercrunk
#8 Posted by LobsterCrunk (92 posts) -

This game was built with a 4-character team comprised of different builds that you, the player, can totally play as and they didn't add multiplayer...

If this is Resi 5 all over again I am going to be pissed, because multiplayer seems like something that really should be in this game from the get-go

Avatar image for lobstercrunk
#9 Edited by LobsterCrunk (92 posts) -

Unable to find it anywhere, anyone in Blighty got the same problem?

Should also mention I'm on 360

Avatar image for lobstercrunk
#10 Posted by LobsterCrunk (92 posts) -
@Farley_Lives said:
I feel like it almost has to be Shinnok.
I highly doubt Shinnok would be added until the next MK game, along with all the other Netherrealm dudes that appeared later on in MK like Moloch and Drahmin. 
@PrioritySeven said:

I know it's not going to happen, but I'd love to see the cyborg version of Smoke added.

Boon tweeted a lot about Robo-Smoke before MK came out, has he said anything since then to change things?
  • 33 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4