Messages

1501

Gaming / Re: Emotional Gaming (SPOILER WARNING?)

« on: May 16, 2010, 06:28:50 AM »

Hmm... Mother 3 and MGS3 come to mind. If anyone's played either of those you know which scenes I mean, even if you don't feel that way yourself.

Another one that's sort of borderline is the end of Secret of Mana.

Smash Bros Melee with competitive players is even worse.

NO ITEMS
FOX ONLY
FINAL DESTINATION
NO FUN ALLOWED

There used to be a game store in my neighbourhood, that had a Gamecube and Smash Bros always on. These 4 guys were sitting on the store couch ALL DAY, from when it opened until it closed, just playing that same battle over and over and over and over again. ALWAYS. They did it for about the five years the shop was open.

I never understood how people could do that... it kind of defeats the purpose of the game.

1502

Gaming / Re: The Double Edged Nintendo Fallacy

« on: May 16, 2010, 06:03:13 AM »

- I'm blasting Nintendo because they've created an environment where developers don't believe they can make money on the Wii. They recognize this problem themselves. Why can't you?

I'm saying that it's more because of past actions moreso than what they're doing now. You made it sound like it's only things they're doing now (again, whether this was your intent or not isn't clear). That's all I'm trying to say.

- We're talking consoles here. Don't mess the subjects up. PC is PC, and having an up-to-date PC is a costly development which makes more people invest in consoles and have a certified 5-year window of games to play through.
It was irrelevant.

I was responding to him, didn't intend to bring PCs into the equation.

1503

Gaming / Re: The Double Edged Nintendo Fallacy

« on: May 16, 2010, 04:36:25 AM »

Again, Nintendo did try something new with the Wii as well, and judging by the $20 Million sellers they have with Wii Play & Wii Fit, and the close to $20 Million sellers they have coming, its succeeded.  The problem with this success is that other companies wanna try and get dat pimp money, as it were.  The reason the PS2 had all those titles you mentioned was because that was the market that bought the PS2 so that's were the money was to be made.  You're right in that the PS2 was THE system for RPG's, so clearly they are going to try to cater to the RPG crowd.  Meanwhile, clearly the Wii caters to the more family oriented fun type of games, because that's where the money is coming from, and "cash money ain't ever gonna play out." (Ice-T, New Jack Hustler).  Like with everything in the gaming industry, it's all about money.  Despite the technological advances since arcades, all of our console systems and our handheld systems are just quarter munching whore machines.  Like I mentioned before, it's like when I talked to Seth Killian about if we'd ever see a Power Stone 3 and he told me from a business standpoint, it makes no sense when they can just release a new Street Fighter game and without question make much more money developing something like that rather than developing a new Power Stone game.

Pretty much why I brought up the PS2, really. It was successful for a different crowd, however, which is the issue Flash has with it. Fine and dandy. Can you really blame people for trying to make a quick buck? It also helps that both consoles in question here were the cheapest to develop games for.

Also, as Jericho said, a lot of the reason there might not be as many third party devs on the Wii as they possibly could have stems from the past... hence my pointing out that this stuff has been going on for a long time and is certainly not limited to the Wii era for Nintendo. My problem with some of the things you said is because you're pretty much just blasting Nintendo for their actions now, when it's been a long time this sort of thing has been an issue for them.

My final note which is a bit far removed from the discussion thus fat is that if you're interested, there's a pretty recent article with an excerpt from Iwata stating that they have acknowledged the troubles Wii has been having with getting dev support and how Nintendo is now taking the initiative to bring them on board. Let me go fetch the link from GAF first though.

Really? That would be pretty good if they manage to get the ones they scared off.

Oh, and Flash? Just so you know, I'm not a fan of NSMBWii myself. A lot of the old school fans love it though.

Since I have no interest in debating, I will make a quick "hit and post" to just throw my opinion out there. So... *ahem*

Neither the PS3, nor the 360 has produced anything worthy of my attention. Take this with a grain of salt as my interest in video games as a whole has waned to the point where I play Pokemon on a regular basis.

The problem for me with the popular games on these consoles is that for a lot of them I'd much rather play them on a computer... and a good portion of them I can

1504

Gaming / Re: The Double Edged Nintendo Fallacy

« on: May 15, 2010, 03:48:06 PM »

Oh yes, because we all know Activision is re-releasing Wing Commando completely untouched, with a new coat of graphics, just like Nintendo's doing with Punch-Out!! and New Mario Bros. Oh, and they're releasing a new Pitfall too, completely like the first ones. One thing is sequel-itis, another thing is rehashes. Learn the difference, because I'm getting tired of pointing the obvious things here. I don't see other companies being so eager to put out stuff from the past as Nintendo is, specially in terms of creating a full service just so they could resell old titles for big bucks. XBLA and PSN at least add better graphics, leaderboards and online play. I don't even see a damn button imput option in the Wii's half-assed emulator.

...Capcom? Konami? Konami's "rebirth" series comes instantly to mind in particular. As do Capcom's Megaman 9&10, and Bionic Commando Rearmed (with a 2 coming).

YES, it's Nintendo's fault. Because they seem to be fine with this situation. They seem to be fine with the fact that few companies are giving a damn to release good stuff on their system, and instead, just put out half-assed attempts of halfway decent games. And that's not enough. Microsoft and Sony actually seem to care about other companies' games on their system. When was the last time you've seen Nintendo publically making an effort to push forward any game that wasn't theirs? Or getting some company exclusively to make a fantastic game for their system? Buying an exclusive, or something? They don't seem to care. Dev kits are flying out the door to any schmoe who can put out a shitty minigame collection, while the overall quality of the titles goes downhill. And the genres in the console keep dwindling. I don't see any simulators. I see few RPGs. Is this any kind of console you'd want to make a game for? I sure wouldn't.

And Sony apparently cared during the PS2 era to you? There was a lot of [parasitic bomb] on that system too. A lot of the releases for it was crap, because it was the cheapest to develop for. Sound familiar?

Because the N64 had Rare support and a ton of other companies making great games for it. It had legendary games made by other companies. And so did the CG, with stuff like Resi 4 and Eternal Darkness. It had outside companies willing to bet on it with incredible and revolutionary games instead of going for other consoles. That's what made them stand out. And Nintendo was willing to have new experiences and sagas in the consoles. Not anymore. And, as always, I had explained this several times before in my previous replies and have to explain it again because you refuse to read them.

You act as if these games were released on a regular basis. Honestly, they weren't. There were long periods of nothing new being on those consoles back in the day, with those few standing out whenever they finally got released. These things didn't come out often. As for what Nintendo released, aside from Pikmin and Chibi Robo, what else was there (other than the usual franchises)? I keep asking these questions because your responses to this just don't work. You complain that Nintendo had more back then than it does now, but in reality those games you mention were stretched out over quite the long time between releases.

1505

Gaming / Re: The Double Edged Nintendo Fallacy

« on: May 15, 2010, 08:29:06 AM »

If you don't like the labels, don't use them. Why whine about them if you're going to use them anyway?

Err... because it's the most universal terms that people use, so that people will know what I mean off the bat. All the terms do really is create a divide between people, especially now that lots of companies are dumbing down their games so that more people have access to them. That's another debate for another topic, though.

And they haven't released much that isn't a rehash of something.

Again, this is new... how now? Companies have been rehashing their stuff for a while now.

Yes, it's their own damn fault to make the Wii appear like a console in which only Nintendo can make any money on, like I said in at least ten replies before.

... Again, how is this Nintendo's fault? I'm pretty sure other companies have made money from the Wii, it's just that a lot of them are rushing stuff out the door to make a quick buck. It's always been like that, especially for the more popular consoles. There's lots of crap out there, but there's some hidden gems in there too. Sure, the Wii hasn't been used to it's full potential yet, but most consoles don't until the end of their life cycle. Someone's bound to figure out a good way to make use of the creative possibilities on there.

and if you try to show me that damn list with Castlevania Judgement on it trying to make it look like a "Good games on Wii list", you'll lose even more credibility.

Hey, I didn't write that list. That said, while maybe not everything on there could be top notch, if you can't really find anything on there that you like... you're just not trying.

A lot of your complaints are valid, but the fact that your just applying them to the Wii and nothing else is a bit... eyebrow raising. Dude, it's always been like this, especially in the N64/GC generations.

Oh God, Judgement...
Oh God...

?

He's showing his dislike for it. I have no opinion on it, never played it.

1506

Gaming / Re: The Double Edged Nintendo Fallacy

« on: May 15, 2010, 02:18:58 AM »

I don't see why you're surprised by lack of peripheral support, it's always been like that. It's lame, yes, but it's nothing new. I agree they should be used more, though.

it brought new elements never used in a game before

There's my issue with it, they were used before. In a different manner, but they are there. I still think they're creative uses of these elements, and it plays wonderfully.

that they're simply being ungrateful towards alot of the audience.

This is a viewpoint I never understood. They've released games of both the (god I hate these labels) "casual" and "hardcore" variety. This is ungrateful... how? Is it their fault that other companies don't make more "hardcore" games? No, it isn't. Some do try, but they're usually ignored or tossed aside as not good. They do exist, though.

1507

Gaming / Re: The Double Edged Nintendo Fallacy

« on: May 15, 2010, 01:15:12 AM »

They brought the mechanics into the third dimension in a creative way, yes. I just don't find that qualifies as innovation, considering the elements were lying around for a long time. From my point of view from the way I see the word "innovation" to be, that is (emphasis added because this has been routinely ignored thusfar in favour of more confrontational approaches). Also, I did say there's probably a better example, didn't I? To be honest, this whole thing is nitpicking. I find the thing about Nintendo not being innovative to be nitpicking. More new IPs directed toward the more (ugh) "hardcore" demographic would be nice, but in the meantime the way they're handling most of their main franchises as is works fine for me.

If I may- Prime 1 also "feels" different than 2 and 3.

It does, actually. Prime 2&3 leaned more towards the shooter elements than the first one did, especially Corruption. It's my favourite of the three by far.

1508

Gaming / Re: The Double Edged Nintendo Fallacy

« on: May 15, 2010, 12:32:52 AM »

What, like Morrowind and so on? You seriously think they were like Metroid Prime?

In the context of exploration being one of the more important aspects from a first-person perspective... somewhat. They were more RPGs, as I said, but you wanted an example of a game that you wander around and get lost in first person, so there you go. Metroid Prime was certainly more polished in the combat department and didn't have stats and such, but combat isn't the main focus in either of them. This is just off the top of my head, mind you, so there's probably a better choice than this. Point is, there's been ideas floating around for a long long time. Just because they used them well doesn't make it innovative.

besides,

I think we've strayed off the original topic a bit... and some of our posts are either being misinterpreted or taken out of context.

whole lot of this.

1509

Gaming / Re: The Double Edged Nintendo Fallacy

« on: May 15, 2010, 12:06:06 AM »

So what you're saying is that you can't actually think of any games that were like it, then.

*sigh* There's games that were technically RPGs that controlled from a first person perspective, in which you could get lost. Mostly on the PC. Let's see... The Elder Scrolls series comes to mind. Not much in the way of platforming, but exploration was certainly key, and you played the game from the first person perspective. You attacked enemies with weapons and spells and the like. Not to say that Metroid Prime is exactly like that, but no games are exactly alike (for the most part, few exceptions in the past). Again, saying all this in the interest of the word "innovation", blah blah blah.

I think we've strayed off the original topic a bit... and some of our posts are either being misinterpreted or taken out of context.

Very much this. People's views on "innovation" clearly differ as well.

1510

Gaming / Re: The Double Edged Nintendo Fallacy

« on: May 14, 2010, 11:27:29 PM »

I shouldn't have used the word "gameplay" earlier, admittedly. Hence why I used the word "mechanics" thereafter, if you care to notice. Mistake on my part there.

I was talking about the environment in 3D games, if you didn't notice.

Didn't quite seem like it, truthfully. It kind of seemed like you were saying that no game ever did it before. Perhaps not your intent, persay, but it certainly gave off that vibe. I mean, look at it:

The simple matter of characters having personalities, mattering to you in an unseen way, giving you a certain destiny in what became of the world, and giving you an epic feeling NO GAME, I repeat NO GAME had ever been able to before, is what truly mattered.

Doesn't really seem like you're talking about environment in 3D games to me.

Anyways, I think we've stayed on the whole OoT thing too long anyways. You find it was super innovative, I don't. It's our view of the word "innovation" here (or words that amount to the same thing) that's the issue here, clearly, so there's no point in continuing this segment of the debate. Again, Eye of the Beholder and such.

Posted on: May 14, 2010, 04:25:29 PM

But making an FPS like Metroid Prime was innovative. What other games were there that were like Metroid Prime? That whole FPS wander around everywhere getting lost type of gameplay, what other games were like that?

But it was expected of a Metroid game to be like that. It's all a matter of perspective.

1511

Gaming / Re: The Double Edged Nintendo Fallacy

« on: May 14, 2010, 11:07:04 PM »

So do you guys think that Metroid Prime has the same gameplay as Super Metroid? Serious question.

Notice earlier I said similar, not same. Very different here. Of course it's not going to be exactly the same, but the base idea behind the mechanics can be. Again, in the context of innovation, which was the issue before, it's similar. Once more, Metroid Prime did what it did very well, but it's not necessarily innovative.

But again, that's from my point of view. Repeating once more, I don't think I ever said they were the same. If I did, that was a mistake on my part. Same =/= similar.

Not to mention, lots of people exclaimed at the time (reviewers included) that "it's like they took apart Super Metroid, and remade it in 3D!". Their words, not mine.

1512

Gaming / Re: The Double Edged Nintendo Fallacy

« on: May 14, 2010, 10:35:21 PM »

Everyone has their own opinions on everything, and none of them are automatically right, yours included, Flash. My brother likes games, but he didn't like OoT at all. He prefers A Link to the Past far more. Which, might I add, did have characters with personality, did give Link a destiny he had to fulfill, did all that. And it was 2D, and not OoT. Let's look at it this way, shall we? A comparison of LttP and OoT.

3 Dungeons in the first half, 7 in the second, big bad final dungeon, final boss, and then TRUE FINAL BOSS. Applies to both games.
Hookshot to pull you across ledges, arrows to shoot eyes that will open doors, etc. Applies to both games.
Save Zelda from Ganon. Well, that one applies to almost all Zelda games, but still.
Jumping off of ledges into pits. Applies to LttP and all games after.

The core gameplay remains the same between the two; the only difference is that OoT added the Z axis and myriad other things (not the Ocarina or the trading sequence; those originated in Link's Awakening) such as Epona and... well, that's about it. The only reason it may seem better is because it was OMG POLYGONAL MODELS!

Sorry if the discussion had moved past this...

Sort of... that's pretty much what I was saying, along with the fact that the items didn't really change much between the two. Probably best not to go back there, though.

1513

Gaming / Re: The Double Edged Nintendo Fallacy

« on: May 14, 2010, 10:06:58 PM »

The simple matter of characters having personalities, mattering to you in an unseen way, giving you a certain destiny in what became of the world, and giving you an epic feeling NO GAME, I repeat NO GAME had ever been able to before, is what truly mattered.

Well, you see... I managed to have that feeling before. From which game, I couldn't tell you, but I can guarantee you that I had that feeling far before. Not necessarily from a 3D game, either. Therein lies the problem here, I do believe. For you it was something that was never done before, and for me... well, it was something that was done well. I wasn't as impressed at the time as you were, obviously, and therein lies the problem here. Also, it hasn't held up as well as time went on. I can't go back and play it over and over again, unlike many other games where I have no issues doing so. I'm not talking about newer games only either, I mean stuff from way back as well.

Beauty in the the Eye of the Beholder, yes?

1514

Gaming / Re: The Double Edged Nintendo Fallacy

« on: May 14, 2010, 04:24:50 AM »

And by the way, I AM a graphics whore. And by that, I mean I like pretty games. And both Link to the Past and Ocarina of Time are pretty games. I used that metaphor to compare the gameplay styles and looks of the previous games to the current ones. Don't be so damn quick to put labels on people. I've explained time and time again what my points are.

Sorry, just wanted to address this quickly. If you read up in the quote, I'm pretty sure I didn't label you as such, but was merely stating that that one comment made it seem so. Don't get your panties in such a knot. I'm not throwing any insults around here.

For the whole OoT thing... my problem with that whole argument (again) is the word innovative. They were doing what was the norm by that point. They did it well, but still the norm... what was expected. Innovative =/= what was expected. Again, bringing up MM and WW, they got creative with the items and their uses. They got creative with the landscapes that we would traverse, and the method to do so. OoT didn't really do so (aside from Epona, but she was woefully underused). I am looking at it from a technical standpoint... yes, they did a good job, but I wouldn't call it innovative (from my point of view). I'm just saying this because Nintendo being innovative (or lack thereof) seems to be a strong point with you.

I'm not just saying they should try new things with their own franchises. They certainly have, by the way. Mario Galaxy. Luigi's Mansion. Metroid Prime. All stellar games. If "fans" didn't like it, screw them. Everyone else did.

Oh, I'm aware they've tried new things with the franchises, but as I said, the majority of it wasn't well met beyond Mario. Even there, Luigi's Mansion wasn't all that well received (although I liked it for what it was). Metroid Prime was indeed an exception to this. While I agree that those "fans" shouldn't matter, they do to Nintendo... gotta please the masses to survive.

1515

Entertainment / Re: At The Movies With RPM

« on: May 14, 2010, 12:55:39 AM »

Watched "How to Train Your Dragon" yesterday. When I first saw the trailer some months ago I was completely uninterested, now it's my favorite movie of the year so far with only Toy Story 3 and Iron Man 2 looking to be candidates to take that spot.

I was pleasantly surprised by it. I went in expecting nothing, mind you, but it was far more interesting than I figured it would be.

1516

News and Announcements / Re: Zero Fanart Contest Begins at Capcom Unity

« on: May 14, 2010, 12:48:04 AM »

Heh, I remember the shitstorm the fans had over the style change. I wasn't too sure if I'd like it back then, but I grew to like it in it's own way.

1517

Gaming / Re: The Double Edged Nintendo Fallacy

« on: May 14, 2010, 12:37:48 AM »

Have you even played the game?

Why yes I have, quite a bit. Enough to notice the similarities to LttP all over the place, I'd reckon.

Look, this is my issue. You're complaining that you don't want a game with the same mechanics anymore, that you want creative innovations. OoT's innovation was to play a game akin to LttP... in 3D! Look, if you had chosen something like Majora's Mask or Wind Waker, which actually tried to do things differently (and got lambasted for it on a large scale, I add) I would have no issue with you. But if you just stop and think about OoT for a moment, the core mechanics are largely unchanged. Sure, the presentation is changed to suit the shift in dimensions. They used the vertical nature of 3D to great effect. But the core mechanics and ideas... they didn't really change that much if you stop and think about it. They had to adapt it to 3D, which they did quite well. Thing is, again... 3D was the norm by then, so that shift was to be expected. The items behave much like you would expect them to... in 3D!

Look, I'm not try to call OoT a bad game, unlike what your reaction suggests. I'm just trying to point out that the games are more similar than you're willing to accept. I'm doing that because you're expecting Nintendo to try something new with their franchises. Fair enough... but bringing up OoT as an example of this just doesn't sit well with me. Shall I also bring up the fact that each time they've tried to deviate with some of their franchises, the fans didn't like it? The majority of the (Nintendo-made) games that managed to get away with trying to be different and actually survived to tell the tale unscathed was Mario. Zelda? "We want more OoT!" Star Fox? "We want more Star Fox 64!" See the pattern here yet? Not to say they're necessarily right (except for Star Fox... yeesh for some of those), but that's what people want. Guess what? They went back to the base formula for Twilight Princess, and... the fans complained it was too much like OoT.

...

[tornado fang], the fans don't know what they want.

You also bring up that Nintendo should do new IPs. Hey, I agree with you there. More stuff out of the blue like Pikmin from the GC era would be great. Then again, all that "out of the blue" stuff is heavily regulated to the Wii itself and all those "Wii ____" games/tech demos.

And this:

And YES, it was as impactful as Mario 64, because it turned a game about tiny chibi characters seen from afat poking each other until they died, into something out of Lord of the Rings.

Makes you sound like quite the graphics whore, sir. Probably not your intent, but saying it as such certainly conjures up that image. Just saying.

And tell me a SINGLE third-party game for the Wii that provided such an incredible experience and was showered with as much acclaim as Goldeneye. Perfect Dark. Resi 4. Eternal Darkness. There are decent third-party games for the Wii, and some of them are pretty darn good, like Sin & Punishment 2. But most simply provide either more of the same, or like Red Steel 2, try to innovate but turn out to be a boredom repetitive festival of the same over-and-over battles.

There was a list given to you earlier, and you just dismissed it offhand. Why should I bother? It's not like you're actually going to accept anything at this point, because it's quite apparent you just don't want to.

1518

Gaming / Re: The Double Edged Nintendo Fallacy

« on: May 13, 2010, 01:40:27 PM »

Unless that Kid Icarus game provides us with a fascinating experience the likes of which we've never seen before, Nintendo can stick it up their collective bums. Seriously, if it's a 2D/3D remake of the original, with the exact same things, I'm done with this crap.

... Yet you say OoT isn't the same as LttP? Gameplay-wise, they're quite similar. Hell, The plot of OoT is expanded from the stuff in LttP. Yes, the presentation is far improved, but the base gameplay isn't as different as it may seem. Yes, the swordplay is more fancy, but... what else? The targeting system, that was admittedly an innovation. Otherwise, the items act largely the same as their earlier counterparts. The base layout of the game is about the same. The overworld actually managed to regress into a large empty field with nothing to do. Said overworld connects to dungeons that the player must venture forth into. So on and so forth... do I really have to spell it out? Then you say you're sick of that and then elaborate that you don't want a 2D/3D game with the same elements, right after praising OoT? Seriously? Stay consistent, please.

You bring up the shift into 3D again... but really, by that point basically everything on the console was in 3D. Yeah, OoT had set the bar higher for sure, but it sure wasn't as impactful as SM64 was.

Of course they weren't made by Nintendo, that's the damn point. Do we get those kind of experiences by third parties on a Nintendo console anymore? No. That's what I'm saying. And Nintendo seems to be fine with it. Letting third-parties rot while they are the only ones who turn a pretty profit on their own console. Microsoft and Sony value third-parties enough to BUY stuff like exclusive DLC for their own console for piles of cash. Nintendo just seems to be frolicking while the other companies keep leaving the Wii and saying that developing games for it is bad business.

Again, it was like this since the N64. Third-Party support for Nintendo consoles in general was rather low for both the N64 and GC, so I really fail to see how suddenly this is new. There are good third party games on the Wii, you just won't bother with them.

1519

Gaming / Re: The Double Edged Nintendo Fallacy

« on: May 13, 2010, 07:54:21 AM »

I see your point Flash, I really do. Things is, aiming for a different audience was an enormous gamble. I seem to recall them being in a pretty tight spot before the Wii. Also, I have to point out that some of the "innovations" you speak of aren't really as big as you make them out to be. Let's take LttP and OoT for example... aside from the fact that it's in a different dimension, what's so different about them really? Sure, OoT's in 3D, but what else? It's not like a game being in 3D was a big thing by that point in time. So what's the innovation?

Now the GC games... yes, those games were all quite good. Thing is, most of them weren't made by Nintendo, nor did most of them stay exclusive to the GC. Since you have issues finding other games on the Wii that attract your attention in the same manner, I would have to say that the third-party devs are to blame here as well. Not that the GC really had much more to choose from compared to the other consoles, either.

You claim to not be a Nintendo fanboy, but... are you sure about that? Nostalgia is one heck of a thing. I'm talking from a purely objective point of view here.

1520

Gaming / Re: The Double Edged Nintendo Fallacy

« on: May 13, 2010, 01:03:37 AM »

Activision, UbiSoft and EA certainly can. And they're the constant targets of a ton of rage. Why not Nintendo?

Well, those three get a lot of rage for things indirectly linked to the games they make (ie DRM) moreso than the games themselves. On the same coin though, Nintendo does get a lot of slack for their online, so they're in no way exempt.

Also again, I must point out that those companies don't have to worry about R&D. Also, ugh... UbiSoft Montreal. Don't get me started on the policies there, or else I'll never stop

1521

Gaming / Re: Dem Bosses

« on: May 12, 2010, 10:13:26 PM »

Hmm... Favorite boss... Hands down, Orochi from Okami.

You fight him 3 times over the course of the game, each time either he gets weaker, or he's actually getting stronger but you're getting even stronger faster. Hard to tell. I love how part of the fight involves making him drink sake and getting his heads really sauced.

Speaking of Okami, that reminds me of one. The buildup to Ninetails was perfect, and they really managed to make that fight feel important. The atmosphere of the entirety of the castle was heavy, and the atmosphere of the battle arena itself made the fight feel that much more epic. The music as well lent itself well to the battle. It didn't hurt that Ninetails as a boss itself wasn't the easiest of enemies the first time through, using brush techniques against you if you take too much time to draw your own.

Video of Ninetails.

The fight proper is at 3:00, if you want to skip the buildup to the fight. (Yeah, new video... this one shows the fight better).

1522

Gaming / Re: Dem Bosses

« on: May 11, 2010, 01:51:52 AM »

People only like it for the background music that plays...

Other than that, it's not all that great.

Agreed. I was rather disappointed by it. In concept it sounded great, but yeah... the execution left a lot to be desired.

Hmmm epic boss?

Oh it's definitely Luca Blight.

I forgot the the details, but he's basically the most [chameleon sting]ing evil badass of them all. You've to divide your party into 3 full teams to ambush him, that is like 18 vs 1, and he can still win it easily if you're underleveled, heck your other teams besides your main purpose are to damage him not to defeat.

and after you manage to defeat him, you still have to duel with him. When he did lose, he gives a badass last word. He is actually mocking you for defeating him.

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3FXN0in0lkM&amp;feature=related" target="_blank" class="aeva_link bbc_link new_win">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3FXN0in0lkM&amp;feature=related</a>

skip to 2:37. Man, that was one though yet epic boss battle.

Ah yes, Luca Blight... fully agreed on that one.

1523

Gaming / Re: Dem Bosses

« on: May 11, 2010, 01:34:27 AM »

The End was among one of the most satisfying boss battles I've done. It feels more like a battle of wits more than a straight up fight. Some people have complained that the fight takes way too long, but all I can say to them is that they completely missed the point.

One of my favourites is Ganon from ALttP. Sure, it's not the hardest boss fight, but I still enjoy it every time nevertheless. The first few times that bastard always knocked me into the side pits, making me start the whole fight again. The feeling of triumph I had when I finally beat him that first time was great, and the ending made it that much more satisfying. Nowadays he's quite simple to beat for me, but I'll never forget being knocked into the pit as I tried to light those torches.

Nothing else really comes to mind at the moment, unfortunately. There is one that I was looking forward to for a while when I was younger, but in the end it kind of fizzled out. The X vs Zero fight in X5 could have turned out so damn well, but the execution wasn't quite as grand as it could have been.

1524

News and Announcements / Re: Mega Man Online...?

« on: May 11, 2010, 12:55:47 AM »

Personally, I hope not.

All this sounds like to me is just another quirky, made-for-PC, Korean-made, East Asian-centric MMO that will likely come in, enjoy a time in the sun for like about a year or so, and then go right the hell back out. Life goes on otherwise, as real Megaman games are released fairly normally.

Capcom would have to be seriously tripping if they think MM has it in him to do anything otherwise. Rock can't be expected to really combat Blizzard, much less the likes of bigger products like Bioware's "The Old Republic" and whatever Marvel has in store for their MMO. Plus, shouldn't they be focused on actually trying to build the Monster Hunter brand in the West?

I said that it would make sense, not that it would be a good idea

1525

News and Announcements / Re: Mega Man Online...?

« on: May 10, 2010, 11:13:14 PM »

It would definitely make sense if it turned out to be Megaman Universe.

Free with cash shops?  Wonder if the cash shop points will be called "Bolts" o.o

I can see this being the case, too. It would pretty much guarantee that more people would be willing to try it.