Tevor_the_Third's forum posts

  • 14 results
  • 1
  • 2
Avatar image for tevor_the_third
Tevor_the_Third

315

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Here's my pitch. I think at best Shadow Complex was a bit of a wake up call for indie devs in the sense that it showed them that they were "allowed" to make a game like Metroid.

I know that might seem silly but the human experience is silly

Obviously people have been making games like this forever but sometimes you need a flash point for it to hit home with people. Think of every big thing in games and you'll generally find the starting point, the thing that spawned copycats, didn't invent it. They just sold the most copies.

Shadow Complex did an incredibly 1:1 adaptation of the Metroidvania formula, where as classically games in that loose genre (Faxanadu, Monster World, Blaster Master, etc) tended to be a little more bespoke, that got tons of attemtion, made lots of money and received no push back from Nintendo or Konami.

I can see the case being made that overnight a hundred indie devs who had been saying for years, "Why don't they make another 2D Metroid/Castlevania on console" just going, ok, I'll do it myself too then.

Avatar image for tevor_the_third
Tevor_the_Third

315

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@bowl-of-lentils: Here's hoping. It certainly *looks* like a real ST game otherwise.

Mostly I'm worried after being reminded of that Valkyrie Chronicles game that came out between 3 and 4 that was... not good. Similar situation an d even staff I think? My fingers are crossed though.

Avatar image for tevor_the_third
Tevor_the_Third

315

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Everything looks super spot on but I gave to say the one big "but" is definitely the combat.

I'd be ok with going action based, it honestly looks pretty rad visually. Zipping around in a Kamui would be a blast. But what they've shown outside of trailers, actually in play, looks... not good.

It has all the worst hallmarks of a Musou game. Large swarms of enemies that die near instantly and, most damningly, *don't move or attack the player*.

Hopefully it works out. But I gotta say I'm nervous.

Avatar image for tevor_the_third
Tevor_the_Third

315

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4  Edited By Tevor_the_Third

I did my best to make Inigo Montoya. Not pictured; his battle quotes are all "Hello" or revenge based. It's the little things...

No Caption Provided

My other favorite is a very simply and easy to make Death from Castlevania. Even more so then dear Inigo this is a case where Zasalamel's move set actually works really well in the dummy version.

Gallery image 1Gallery image 2

I do still miss SC3's handful of original loveseat though. Defining them to "your" character is always more fun then just making an elaborate, for instance, Mitsurugi skin and pretending it's not Mitsurugi. Oh well. Still a great CaC mode.

Edit: Moveset. Not loveseat. But dumb auto-corrects crack me up so...

Avatar image for tevor_the_third
Tevor_the_Third

315

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Hurray! Thanks guys. Much appreciated fix.

Avatar image for tevor_the_third
Tevor_the_Third

315

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

You get used to PS4 text entry honestly :P

Just don't go nuts writing an essay length piece.

Avatar image for tevor_the_third
Tevor_the_Third

315

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Avatar image for tevor_the_third
Tevor_the_Third

315

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Ditto. I don't know if a bunch of people chiming in with "Me too" is helpful but... maybe it is? Anyways thanks, just let us know if it's a permanent incompatibility issue with Sony's browser is all I need. PS4 is my only avenue of accessing GB Premium content so, yup. If it's just broken no biggie.

Avatar image for tevor_the_third
Tevor_the_Third

315

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9  Edited By Tevor_the_Third

@corpsemachine: So what I don't get is why would using the third person camera to look around and scout be considered unfair or cheating and not just as part of the meta.

It's been there since the servers went live, a fundamental component of the game being third person.

Reading through the above replies my only real takeaway was that certain people just, on a fundamental level, will just always consider FPS style games to be superior. It doesn't matter the specifics, if you are shooting a gun it's FPS or bad.

For example there's really no reason why tactically using the camera to view the environment from behind cover in a videogame would be a bad thing. You're using the tools available to you to succeed. Unless of course you're talking about a competitive FPS. It'd break Counterstrike for instance. Thing is, Battlegrounds was never that game. The very fact that it is third person is evidence enough that it's not a competitive FPS. The same way that being a dog is proof enough your not a cat. But because it can be played as a FPS a certain subset will always hold it to a different set of standards then most people.

Which is fine. That's why they made FPS only servers.

So I would say the answer to your question in simply that. It's not more "hardcore". It's not objectively better. It's just different. And there's an audience for whom that specific difference makes a huge difference. They only want their shooters to be one specific way and anything outside that isn't "different" it's "worse". Human nature rearing it's ugly head yet again.

Another way to look at it is to think of Smash Brothers tournaments! :P

Those people straight up ban 90% of the games designed content then afix their own house rules as to how it's played. This has become the standard and is also looked upon as the "real" and "hardcore" way of playing these games. Instead of adapting to the games meta they believe their way is better and enforced their own fan-built meta. Instead of learning to utilize the third person camera as a powerful tool they just call it out as bad.

Player Unknowns Battle Grounds: No Items, FPS only, Final Destination. Ban Diddy Kong.

Avatar image for tevor_the_third
Tevor_the_Third

315

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

1

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10  Edited By Tevor_the_Third

People need to stop insisting on having absolutes in life. Or especially on the internet :p

This is not a Yes or No question. Like most things in life the answer is; it depends on situation, context and other aspects of the matter at hand.

Do you need to beat a game to review it? Depends on the game.

Certainly there are games you should probably beat first, we've all read those reviews where they clearly stopped playing two hours in as shown by the fact all their complaints are addressed and solved in the game itself.

But it's also easy to cherry pick instances where it doesn't matter. Look at the original Super Mario Bros. If someone reviewing that game only plays six stages... Who cares?

They've a full grasp of the look, the feel, the mechanics, all the power ups, how secrets work, the different stage and enemy types, everything they need to fairly and effectively critique that game. There's nothing in 7-2, for example, that would have any effect on a review.

But old games don't count you say? Ok. Look at the Binding of Isaac. You don't need to get to the chest or Platinum God that game to fully know exactly what it is. It'd take a lot more playing and research then Mario of course, but you could fairly stop way before "the end" and give a fair review.

You just need all the relevant information and experience to accurately say what a game is.

The tricky part is knowing when it's ok to stop.

Play 40 hours of Final Fantasy 12 and not knowing how the story ends isn't going to change that review. I don't think you really miss anything else, just more of what you've already seen and done and you already know how you feel about that. Play 40 hours of Neverwinter Nights 2 however and you'll miss the whole Stronghold building part of the game. That reviewer should have played more.

The fear here is that they're offering some sort of authorative, if still subjective, oppinion without seeing the whole picture. I agree that sort of problem can indeed invalidate an oppinion. If you don't know about the subject you're speaking on then who cares what your saying?

But not all games are holding out with that sort of hidden depth. Plenty of games are pretty upfront with what they have to offer. Also it's 2017. If someone reviewing Nier wants to know if "they need to keep playing" before they write the review it's pretty easy to find out that they do.

  • 14 results
  • 1
  • 2