Vasta_Narada's forum posts

#1 Posted by Vasta_Narada (458 posts) -


#2 Edited by Vasta_Narada (458 posts) -

@bocam said:

@hollitz: Q is canon

Also if one of the big moments you're talking about is Shinjiro's death that kinda gets off handedly spoiled. The Persona 3 main character dying gets spoiled as well.

Wait, really? How?

#3 Edited by Vasta_Narada (458 posts) -

@bbalpert said:
@mosespippy said:

I think the Polygon review said that both the P3 and P4 parties are midway through the events of their respective games when this time travel stuff happens in PQ. That would explain certain character choices, like why P4A characters and Marie aren't in it.

As long as the game takes place before whatever "HUGE thing" that @wemibelec90 mentioned happens, then I should be fine.

Out of curiosity, roughly how far into the game does that huge thing in P3 happen? I don't want to know anything about what it is that happens, just a ballpark estimate of whether it's in the middle of the game, mid-late, or right at the very end. I ask because if it's somewhere in the middle, I might not be too far from just seeing it myself.

All of the important plot points in P3 that people would feel shitty about having spoiled occur after the events of Persona Q, i.e. not referenced in Persona Q. The first one that I can think of happens after the September full moon incident, the period of time afterwards I leave unspecified.

#4 Edited by Vasta_Narada (458 posts) -

Day One patches are usually justified by the following:

A game going gold basically means that it meets the criteria outlined by Sony/MS/Nintendo to be published on their platform, so companies begin ramping up production of physical media in preparation for release day. However, developers don't stop working just because the game is gold, and the game goes gold when it does because deadlines have to be met. Thus, Day One patches are the work that the developers completed in the time between the game being version-locked for pressing discs and actual release day. Unfortunately, sometimes developers take shortcuts like with The Evil Within, wherein a lot of the optimization work was in that Day One patch.

Contrast this with games during the SNES era and N64 era; there were two options:

1. The game gets delayed. Pretty self-explanatory.

2. The game releases as normal, but the work that would be in a Day One patch nowadays is just quietly released on a V1.1 cart whenever the work is ready, with no indication to the consumer.

You also have to understand that with programming, even with something relatively simple, fixing one bug can cause another, or two, or one that just sucks way more. That's why, during QA, developers catalogue bugs under different ratings of problem (i.e. this bug only causes a graphical glitch for a second, a second bug crashes the game consistently, while this third bug crashes the game only a fraction of the time and it's hard to replicate). You probably heard Drew say the words "Known Shippable" before, which is this exact process. Some bugs just aren't worth the time it would take to fix when there are more pressing bugs to work on, and when there's the risk that you cause more damage than good.

As far as 10GB patches, I can't think of any that big off the top of my head other than Master Chief Collection, and that patch is literally all of the multiplayer components because there was no room on the disc. Also, it depends what stuff is in the patch: if the patch includes a bunch of 3D model changes, you might have to download the entire model, which can get big.

#5 Edited by Vasta_Narada (458 posts) -

I've been doing kung-fu for about 10 years. I don't know what style because I never bothered to ask my instructor, but he blends a lot of traditional techniques with some more real-world applications. We don't have a lot of kata/forms, 1 unarmed, 1 stick, 2 swords, and a couple borrowed from Tai Chi, (and stick and sword are our only weapons) but it's based primarily around counters rather than aggressive fighting, using kicks and joint dislocations/"breaks". Along with that, we learn to defend against basic grappling (sleeper hold, grabs at wrists/neck, etc.).

As some previous replies said, it's not about the style so much as the school, nowadays. So many styles have such variance in them that the type of kung-fu I describe would be so much different from a northern style school, which is different from a bunch of other kung-fu styles, and the same goes for other kinds of martial arts. What you should look for are schools with good work ethic (ex: if you're doing kicks, they should be making you practice with both legs) and a focus on technique and practicality rather than style (i.e. schools that don't make you break boards or some shit), and a school that will work you really hard (at my school, the instructors have to do workouts under the master's teaching/tyranny if their students aren't sweating buckets at the end of a lesson). Oh, and don't go to a school that teaches you to fight in tournaments; all the schools I've seen that do so usually teach poor real-world fighting skills because of the tournament rules fighters have to adhere to (eg: kick people in the balls when you're fighting, I don't give a fuck what people tell you. You're in a self-defence situation to win, not for some honorable fight BS)

This is my personal bias, based on the schools around my area (Surrey, BC), but don't go to a Taekwondo school. The ones around here are super shit and I rarely hear people online painting schools of that style in a good light. Of course I recommend kung-fu, and I hear good things about aikido and karate. Krav Maga is a popular pick and has a good rep.

EDIT: I should also mention that when you're looking for schools, try to find ones that make you do (good) sparring. At my school, when we spar, we fight at full-speed with no gear on save for some gloves and shin pads, and the only rule is to not give your opponent any injuries worse than a bruise (i.e. don't punch/kick straight into a guy's face without pulling it, don't separate a guy's ribs with a kick, etc). If someone lands a decisive string of attacks, something that would obviously win you the fight, we reset and continue, so it's not point-based like tournaments are. Having that sort of sparring experience is critical, because you can't fight well if you don't know what it's like.

#6 Posted by Vasta_Narada (458 posts) -

I'm currently riding the Final Fantasy XV hype train--have been since '06, and the stuff they've put out hasn't let me down yet. Hyper Light Drifter's beta justified my hype, as did Sm4sh. It's been a while since I played a game that gripped me until it was over, something I obsessed on from release to completion and occupied my thoughts most of my free thinking time. Last one was probably Ghost Trick.

#7 Edited by Vasta_Narada (458 posts) -

Digital Devil Saga and Shin Megami Tensei: Devil Summoner are both PS2 classics on the store, I believe. Devil Summoner's combat is a bit clunky as far as action-RPGs go--also pretty high encounter rate. Digital Devil Saga will probably require a little grinding here and there, but it also has a high encounter rate so it's never a big deal if you fight all the battles you come across. It is, however, a completely turn-based game with no action commands/timed hits. The stories of both are interesting and don't have a big focus on cutscenes (fair amount of dialogue boxes though).

I agree with the Resonance of Fate recommendation: mechanics-heavy, character-focused story. I found it pretty solid, and had a lot of fun playing it.

Eternal Sonata has good, interesting combat and a cool story.

As far as FF goes, I would go for FF9 on the store (PS Classic) over FFX/X-2. It captures the essence of what Final Fantasy was pre-7, so you understand why people liked the series, has a solid story that generally doesn't take control away from you for too long at a time (but it can and will at times), and a great cast, but the battle system doesn't have anything in the way of timed hits. It's supposedly Sakaguchi's (the father of FF) favorite FF game, and it's definitely mine. FFX, on the other hand, is pretty cutscene heavy (unskippable, btw) and was also the first to feature voice acting and it shows. FFX has little in the way of combat mechanics that you're interested in (I think it's just in the Overdrives that can be used when a "rage" meter fills over the course of a handful of battles), since FFX is a turn-based game like 9 (although 9 is ATB-driven, so your characters can take their turn as soon as a meter fills, and every character/enemy has a meter that fills at different rates (and as long as two characters have their turns ready, you can choose who goes first).

Edit: Of course, I can't forget Tales of Vesperia. That game's a pretty awesome action-RPG. The plots in Tales games aren't the most clever ever, but people come to those games for the characters who are generally likable and well-developed.

#8 Posted by Vasta_Narada (458 posts) -

I didn't realize this was only on PS3 when I got my 360 copy. Debating whether to get the PS3 copy as well, seeing as I have friends to play with there as well. PSN on PS3 has never worked well for me for fighting games, though.

#9 Posted by Vasta_Narada (458 posts) -

What the hell is wrong with you?

#10 Posted by Vasta_Narada (458 posts) -

Depending on why I couldn't play videogames anymore. If I was in your position where my eyesight had been considerably worsened, I might turn full-on into Let's Plays (but I'm already big into that so it's not a big deal). If I still had cognitive functions and a way to type, I would likely start working on all the novels I've wanted to write over the years. As it stands, my progress on those is really slow because of all the time I spend playing games XD

I also do a lot of kung-fu, so who knows, maybe I'd devote myself fully into that. Again, videogames cut into it at the moment.