BrunoTheThird's forum posts
Never played this game, but I just finished it in about 4 and a half hours. I leveled up everything in the game and found all the armour and collectibles in about 3 hours (without looking stuff up), and finished all the puzzles. It's definitely an intuitive game compared to others in this RE style; I never got stuck once, as there's no obscure solutions or multi-layered item combining required. It's all very sensible and never hinders your flow.
The passive abilities you get make a lot of sense, too, serving to reduce how much time you spend combing rooms or farming for upgrade orbs. The systems are only there to be fun, interesting or helpful, and it feels like the devs wanted to have the elements that made RE good without the headaches or time-wasting. It's also a breezy experience in terms of combat, especially with the modern controls they've added in, which is what I was hoping for. Laying into dudes with lightning/fire/wind attacks never got old, and, despite being a short game, the enemy variety constantly evolves in a natural way that keeps your hands and eyes interested in what's happening. The weapons feel significantly different from one another, too, so I found myself switching constantly between them.
Story-wise, it's clear they wanted to set you up with a very simple but effective narrative via a good old-fashioned princess kidnapping with some demonry and classic samurai shit thrown in. A neat sub-narrative is found in the scrolls you come across, some hidden well, which describes a survivor who is trapped within the castle with many oni, and is painting their horrifying behaviour and rituals on these scrolls to be discovered posthumously. His ordeals are written in a simplified way that reminded me most of Lovecraft, in a good way. They're interesting, and dig into some fundamentals of oni legend. Much like the mechanics and gameplay, it's efficient -- never too short or too long -- and gives you some fantastically ugly monsters to detest. The designs all 'round are quite something, actually, not that it's a surprise 2000s Capcom were at the top of their game. One scene made me gasp and gawp like a dumbass it was so gross, yet fucking awesome. I've re-watched it on YouTube about eight times. The traditional Japanese architecture mixed with the Arkham colour palette and meaty, bony, ribbed quality of some of the content makes for a genuinely great look.
The characters are strong, too, especially with the Japanese VA. I enjoyed the two controllable characters very much, and how their differences change the gameplay in terms of speed, flow, abilities, etc. No pathos or deep interactions or anything, but it works for what it is as well as it needs to in the time it has.
I would've liked it so R2/L2 switched weapons in real-time instead of having to go into the menu.
I don't dislike backtracking when it involves interesting shortcuts that loop back, which this game totally has, but I would've liked an easier way to go back to earlier puzzles once I had the right clues, even though it's an optional side thing. Perhaps a warp system via the save mirrors?
You have to hold L1+ R1 together to block, which I was never told how to do, and didn't figure out until I was almost finished.
The princess and her young adopted brother are unfortunately nothing more than captives with some very basic backstory tacked on. Again, it's an extremely short game, so I totally get why.
Overall, not gonna lie, I absolutely loved this game. Dope monsters, some crazy and creative cutscenes, novel item upgrades, Game of Death-style combat trials, fun swordplay, surprisingly crisp graphics that totally hold up better than DMC 1-3, likeable characters. Just a real good Capcom-as-fuck videogame. I wanted more, so here's hoping the rest of the series gets this treatment over the next couple of years.
8/10 any day of the week for me!
If there's a PS4 Pro mode for 1440p at 60 fps, I'd think about pre-ordering there -- it's not exactly a beautiful or modern looking game IMO -- but it is cheaper on PC on some sites, 32.99 vs 44.99. I'm torn, but there are other ways to play older AC games. Think I'll go PC, 'cos I can really lose myself with the Xbox One controller's triggers in shooting games.
Resident Evil Zero's companion stuff was nothing but an inconvenient grind. That game separates you in such silly ways sometimes, and the iffy A.I. doesn't help. It's still a decent game, somehow, despite that trash.
It takes a lot of time to edit content like the sketches, and back when the gang was all in the same building it seemed easier for them to work on that stuff in advance of GOTY. Now we have two halves of GB with their own unique challenges with regards to filming and being able to just fart around in a big space, I'm not sure if it's viable to expect that stuff anymore. Most of the content we get is recorded by pretty fixed camera setups now, it seems, so I just don't know if they have the time or resources to grab cameras like they did with Drew and Vinny way back and blue sky some ridiculous shit in the buildings they're in.
I could be way off on literally all of this, but I feel I've passively come to understand it's not so fast and loose as it was in previous years. I'd even utter the forbidden phrase and say it's: more . . . professional *jumps out the window.*
@frostyryan: Very true. At least Bethesda told us there'd be no NPCs or VATS beforehand. They basically admitted to single-player Fallout fans this was absolutely not for them. Hello did nothing but push that Sisyphean rock higher and higher with misguided marketing, unfortunately.
No Man's Sky, specifically on release day, before the updates, the drama, and nasty social media abuse Hello got. After 15 hours of naming barely-different flora and fauna, discovering and finishing banal 'quests' and mining shit, I had this sudden blast of realization. "This . . . this is it, isn't it? This is the game..." and I couldn't quite believe it.
It's a better game lately, but still a husk of the open-world, C. Clarke-esque space playground I hoped for. Subnautica gave me everything I wanted but switched space for ocean, so I'm totally okay with it being just what it is, but at the time I felt sick to my stomach from sheer flabbergastedness.
I think we all have an innate love or at least respect for classic old games (or less respect for less important old games if that is a qualifier in your case), so I never take it as some kind of ageism, just a matter of taste like everything else. I am currently way into PC Engine and the 5200 myself, but it's fascinating to hear from a perspective of deep retro fatigue. I am always intrigued by the thought processes and reasoning behind certain responses, but also how they would interpret the same responses from the other end. Switching the I/O, so to speak.
Very interesting answers so far, to me anyway. I had similar thoughts about how people interpreted things like this when some comments kind of despaired that another old game was the focus of This Is the Run (Contra Hard Corps).
I posted this on Reddit already, but thought I'd post it here too if that's cool.
I read plenty of comments from people who seem to have fairly strong knee-jerk responses whenever old games make an extended appearance on UPF or other GB shows, and I thought of some questions that would genuinely interest me if you could answer. Not in a, "So tell me this, haters!" way, I actually don't have a stance on it either way, this is purely fueled by curiosity.
Q1. Let's say you were the host of a laid-back gaming show, and one of your favourite things to do on the show was dig into some older games and see what happens. You see after the stream's over, or even live in the chat window, that x amount of people really don't enjoy it. What would you do about it? Would you change your output? Would you engage with them in regards to it? Would it bug you?
Q2.a I often comment when I don't like the direction an episode from a TV show went, which is an identical process, but I feel that I'm inclined to do this to start a discourse, perhaps to gain other input, pro or con, to digest and integrate into my own thinking. My question is, when you express how much you dislike when old games crop up, are the intentions of that similar to my TV show analogy, or is there a part of you that hopes the staff may see your comments and try to curtail the content to make for -- in your opinion -- a superior viewing experience?
Q2.b. If the latter was true for you in Q2.a, have you ever thought of an alternate way older games could be shown without making you want to stop watching? Say, streaming an old game at the same time as a newer one, and having multiple feeds to choose which you'd like to focus on?
Looking forward to your responses!
After twelve hours of playing RDR2 and coming to the conclusion it just wasn't working for me, story-wise and controls-wise, I was in the process of selling the game when I tuned into the podcast. I heard the little details and special moments Brad mentioned on the GOTY discussion and ended up really taking his experience to heart. I said to myself I'd give it another fair chance, ignoring the controls issues I had and accepting them as intentional. I also stopped using pistols and rifles and stuck with shotguns, as I felt they countered a lot of my frustrations with enemies constantly ducking and moving and leaning while aiming with the more floaty weapons, increasing my murder efficiency. This allowed me to just focus on the game and get in that zone where you lose yourself.
50 hours later over the course of a week, I finished it...
It's a masterpiece. I'm now ten hours into RDR1 -- I booted it up again as soon as I finished the epilogue -- and it has made me appreciate it so much more. The issues I had with Marston just don't exist for me anymore with how well they handled his backstory with the gang. The writing isn't as good, it's quite one-note, but I like it a lot more than I did when it came out.