Messages

2801

Gaming / Re: Classic Games for 3DS

« on: June 29, 2010, 03:53:16 PM »

I'll throw Goku at his face then.

You'll have to defeat the ten ranked gaming presidents before you can fight him.

2802

Gaming / Re: Official Unofficial StarFox discussion thread

« on: June 29, 2010, 03:50:59 PM »

*gets thread back up*

So, now that Nintendo's announced a remake of Star Fox 64 for the 3DS, what are your thoughts on it? I was actually hoping that they would develop an all-new Star Fox for the Wii that was more back to the roots, but I guess right now I couldn't ask for much more, now could I? Afterall, 64 IS the best game in the series.

Anything specific you'd like to see in 64 3D? New missions perhaps? New planets? Free play ability to play any level whenever you feel like it?

...good controls would be nice. The last DS title just didn't impress in that department.

2803

Gaming / Re: Legend of Zelda - The official Zelda thread

« on: June 29, 2010, 03:50:14 PM »

Argh, matey. Everything's an ass-pull to you.

Zelda2 Japanese manual:
Long ago, when Hyrule was still one country, a great King was said to have used the Triforce to maintain order in Hyrule.

Triforce of the Gods Japanese box:
This time, the stage is set very long before the time when Link accomplished a feat, the epoch when Hyrule was still one kingdom.

Which actually states the opposite as Miyamoto, unless you interpret the quote from the box as actually in reference to that game's backstory; the events of Ocarina, the imprisoning of Ganon. In which case Miyamoto's order works out.

The devs just make up [parasitic bomb] as they go along, not really caring about the order of the games or anything. I'm betting that if we asked Miyamoto about the order again, he'd give us a completely different answer.

2804

Off The Wall / Re: Zero:Shisei no Koe Original Soundtrack Download

« on: June 29, 2010, 03:00:44 PM »

http://forum.rockmanpm.com/index.php?topic=3129.0

There's a thread for this. Please move this request there.

2805

Gaming / Re: Legend of Zelda - The official Zelda thread

« on: June 29, 2010, 02:59:06 PM »

Miyamoto is the "all gameplay" type, whereas Aonuma is the one aware of continuity. Evident in their interviews with Miyamoto confused about the time travel endings of Ocarina, and Aonuma having to explain it. Miyamoto just isn't the only person on team, and where he doesn't care, there are others who do.

This is actually one of the more disputed statements. During FSA's development, Aonuma spoke as of "thinking" of Four Sword as the oldest tale, and in another interview there's noted original intend of this being a  "new Hyrule". However, several months later Aonuma admitted FSA's story changed all the way till the end. Which leaves it entirely unclear, other than FSA's ties as some sort of prequel to a Link to the Past.

---------------

Aonuma: The GBA Four Swords Zelda is what we’re thinking as the oldest tale in the Zelda timeline. With this one on the GameCube [(FSA)] being a sequel to that, and taking place sometime after that.

Aonuma: In an example with Four Swords Adventures, I was the producer.. I didn’t actually put the story for that game together... Mr. Miyamoto then came in and upended the tea table... we changed the story around quite a bit... storyline shouldn’t be something complicated that confuses the player... and the storyline changed all the way up until the very end

---------

    Nintendo Power: "This title is the third game in the Four Sword series. Did you plan it as a trilogy from the beginning?"

    HF (Capcom): "We did not think to develop a trilogy from the beginning. When we developed the first Four Swords game for GBA, we created a new Hyrule legend that said that a long time ago, evil Vaati brought crisis to Hyrule and people sealed that evil. We had some thought that we wanted to carry over that story into future titles some way."


Correct me if I'm wrong, but all Nintendo said was "the Skyward Sword becomes the Master Sword." Which actually implicates two possible settings. Not just SS->OoT, but also ST->SS. The post Wind Waker setting requires a return of the Master Sword, after all.

The weird thing with Miyamoto's timeline statement is that the game manuals and boxes implicate the exact reverse. However, it works considerably better once you add in the sound and drama somewhere in the equation.

http://zeldapower.com/index.php/features/articles/sound_and_drama_-_the_script.php

Argh, conspiracy theorizing about ass-pulls. =P Again, if there was a timeline, they'd make it alot more visible.

2806

Off The Wall / Re: FIFA world cup 2010, where surprise happened.

« on: June 29, 2010, 02:56:38 PM »

Epic battle is today.

Going to be stuff of legends.

2807

Off The Wall / Re: What's your job? What do you do?

« on: June 29, 2010, 02:56:18 PM »

I view myself as living proof of that! 

You got a cushy job! =P Nice proof.

2808

Gaming / Re: Classic Games for 3DS

« on: June 29, 2010, 02:53:49 PM »

If it is, I'll just beat up Satoru Iwata for the code to open the vault.

You cannot. His power level is too strong.

2809

Gaming / Re: Legend of Zelda - The official Zelda thread

« on: June 29, 2010, 05:13:31 AM »

And I don't think anyone is even trying to argue with that last paragraph.

But people loooove arguing amongst themselves about the tiny details that makes the games OBVIOUSLY stand in this or that timeline. I say screw it. =P Nintendo never cared about anything timelines (okay, Metroid has a pretty established one) and they're not about to start. So let's just enjoy individual Zeldas for what they are.

2810

Gaming / Re: Legend of Zelda - The official Zelda thread

« on: June 29, 2010, 05:05:37 AM »

Since even he's not sure where it fits, and from what they say, they keep the timeline reserved in their secret Nintendo clubhouse, I'm gonna call an ass-pull on these. =P Maybe Miyamoto had the vision of a Zelda game before all the others in OOT (although he said this new Skyward Sword game was before OOT), but he certainly didn't campaign it. We were never told about the timeline directly, never told how we should look at them, except one thing that fits in EVERY. SINGLE. INTERVIEW. That they always develop every single Zelda game as a whole new world and experience, worrying more about gameplay, and just keeping the main elements of the game alive.

Miyamoto isn't Grant Morrison. He doesn't set up huge stories through years so we can follow small details of them through convulted timelines that may or may not relate to each other. The dude makes games. For gaming. And in each game, he makes a whole new experience. I've yet to see a game from him which was actually a "sequel" to anything story-wise, instead of a whole new thing.

2811

Off The Wall / Re: Do you have an internet doppelganger?

« on: June 29, 2010, 05:04:02 AM »

HOLY [parasitic bomb]. Time for me to change my name!

You better. Even when I don't sport it, I got premium dibs.

2812

Gaming / Re: ITS MAHVEL 3 BAYBEE (The MvC3 topic)

« on: June 29, 2010, 03:23:15 AM »

MANY people would beg to differ with that statement. To say the least, especially our Asian brethren, who can't even play the game through normal means (No Japanese/Asian release of HD Remix exists). Still others have problems with how David Sirlin chose to "balance" the game (giving buffs to his favorite character, Honda, for example).

You're asking them to spend the money, but...for what reason? Where is the guarantee of a "bigger" audience if they really sought out to change things any more than what they are currently? For example, "Vanilla" SF4 has gone on to sell upwards of over 3 million units world wide. Mortal Kombat vs. DC went on to sell 1.8 million units. Both of these games have done just fine, doing things as per the current "status quo". Conversely, Tekken 6 has done more to be a commercial failure, even in spite of an attempt to make for a decent worldwide push beyond its normal scope (for what it was worth).

If any thing, T6 is probably the very thing that showcases why trying to vie for what you speak of can do more harm than good for a fighting game. Development of the home version was held back by an additional year, and it was largely due to Namco wanting to craft a 360 port to make for better "worldwide appeal" (much to the chagrin of PS3 owners who were originally expecting to be able to play the game back in 08). The end result was that BOTH ports suffered as a result performance-wise, and that wasn't even necessary when bad netcode and other issues would eventually crop up, and would do more to seal the fate of T6's home version. In the end, what can be concluded is that trying to go for the "worldwide appeal" with the Tekken property was just too much for even Namco, one of the biggest publishers in the business. As of right now, Namco's Tekken brand is in a pretty bad slump worldwide, which is probably why they've already done more to announce Tekken 7 in an effort to try and save face after last year's fiasco.

So, we got a number of examples of some doing just fine with things the way they are, and one resounding example of how trying to go too far was disastrous. Which do you think most of the competition is going to go with, especially in this economic climate?  

Unfortunately, I don't see it the same way. For one, how do you go about "making it work"? "Expanding the genre", even? Is the answer more in the way of "casual appeal"? I would say "no"; if there's anything that games ranging from KOF, Melty Blood, BlazBlue and TvC have showcased, it's that reducing the number of buttons doesn't do THAT much to level the playing field. Those who still bother to learn the games are going to be the ones who win out, even if you do end up humoring the fantasy of "one button Hadoukens", one day. On the contrary, such a thing does more to take away from the meta-game that experienced players like myself love, which doesn't do us any favors, either.

No, the long and short of it seems to be that Fighting Games would probably need to significantly overhaul the basic formula at a fundamental level, in order to make it expand. Because the basic thing is, Fighting Games require you to do a whole lot in the way of "learning" just to be able to be competent. And that's not something that everybody can do, especially since there's no immediate reward for this learning process that this current "Achievement" and "Trophy" generation can relate to.

Namely, a game like StarCraft will teach you how to play the game through its story mode, and if nothing else, a gamer can play through the campaign, and feel a sense of "achievement" for beating the game. He may or may not ever go on battle.net, but at least he's got that sense of achievement that can't be taken away from him. Such a thing doesn't really exist in the fighting games of today. A gamer can plow through the story mode, muster whatever is necessary to see a character's ending and barely scrape the surface of what the game may potentially have.

Now, I show you this:

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4WhEc_pjOE" target="_blank" class="aeva_link bbc_link new_win">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4WhEc_pjOE</a>

(Technical Breakdown for Ash Crimson in KOFXIII)

I could break down a video like this for a more casual minded gamer. Tell 'em how one does the stuff in it, when it should be applied in a match and etc. If they're still around, and not scared away by the amount of learning that would be required to perform some of this stuff, the main thing I could imagine them saying is "....why? Why should I learn this stuff? What's my motivation, if I'm just going to play the game the way I want to play it? I just count myself lucky that I'm able to do a Shoryuken at least 1/4 of the time~! ". 

That, in a nutshell, explains why FG still have such a great "disconnect" when it comes to casual gamers, which furthermore is the main proponent of why expansion of any sort is unlikely. The basic formula would likely have to be overhauled in order to even hold their interest for more than the "shits and giggles" state of mind. And even there, where's the guarantee of expansion? Hell, you might do more to [acid burst] off your ride-or-die fanbase and lose everything in the process.

So, in the end, that's perhaps one reason why I'm still going to watch out for MvC3, even as I'm still cautiously pessimistic (for now, at least). A much more casual interface, "more emphasis on story" and familiar brand names and characters may have the potential to showcase a new way of doing fighting games. Or it could just be more of the same. We'll see~.

[/rant]  

Jesus Christ, it's 2AM. Not gonna reply to all that. Still, while I do agree with the fact that it may be hard to introduce complex fighting games into the overall gaming population, I do believe a way to do it should be explored. I offered some ideas, but I don't develop games, and neither do I have any kind of idea about what the current game companies face economically. But I will say this. It's possible to pretty much popularize every single gaming genre without taking away its substance, and still making it appeal to an enormous audience. I refuse to believe that fighting games are better off in a tiny niche, with japanese players flocking to their own little arcades while the rest of the world can't share such an experience. This isn't just a "I want to play the game" rant. Heck, being a huge Street Fighter fan, I still haven't bought a version of 4, mooching off from friends' disks when I can. My point is that fighting games have shown that they can appeal to everyone. And there must be a way to introduce them to a wider audience without taking away the essence that makes them what they are. Smash Bros had the right idea, for example, but it went at it from a completely different angle. Imagine doing that for 1-on-1 fighting games. It's possible. People may think about impossibilities in terms of controls and a wider audience, but there's always some kind of incredible solution one can find, eventually. Meanwhile, even for a regular masher such as myself, fighting games are still quite alot of fun, and I continue to play them and enjoy them quite alot. I know the same is possible for the average gamer.

2813

Off The Wall / Re: What's your job? What do you do?

« on: June 29, 2010, 02:25:36 AM »

Man is something to be surpassed. What have you done to surpass mankind?

Humanity can surpass itself just fine. I am content to play with it and make some chaos along the way.

2814

Forum Games / Re: "What Are You Thinking Now?"

« on: June 29, 2010, 01:58:36 AM »

She's tried that a few times. She says it doesn't work for her. She doesn't like sympathy she doesn't think she deserves. She says she's thinking of going back and seeing if it helps any more this time around. It's not something a professional can work out for her, though. She needs to resolve the issues herself. She said herself she won't be able to feel properly good about herself unless she sorts it out, which she is having problems with.

That's actually an admirable quality. She'll make it. People who think like that always do.

2815

Off The Wall / Re: What's your job? What do you do?

« on: June 29, 2010, 01:57:31 AM »

I stand at the side of the street and get paid to scream "God is dead" at passers-by.

Seriously though. Currently nothing, still studying. I do have a career plan marked out, though.

If anyone said that to me, I'd look at them and go "BEHOLD. I TEACH YOU THE SUPERMAN!"

2816

Gaming / Re: Legend of Zelda - The official Zelda thread

« on: June 29, 2010, 01:43:39 AM »

That kind of talk is nothing but turning a blind eye to what is actually established. As I said in my previous posts, a great deal of games are connected in order as undeniable fact and they continue to be produced with continuity in mind. Spirit Tracks is proof positive that Nintendo DOES care.

Yes, you listed some games that have a clear continuity, but that's only a fraction of it; there's more than that. Really, when it comes to Zelda's continuity, it's simply a manner of sticking to the facts (as in ANY canon). Just don't try to connect titles of ambiguous nature with rampant theorizing in the gaps. But apparently the Zelda community is so fond of this that Zelda has gotten this bad name of having no continuity at all. Which is as much a false claim as the supposed infinite plotholes that exist in the MegaMan story; the fanbase is apparently incapable of keeping their facts straight.

Game design is really the biggest factor to this. And it's not just Zelda. Metroid and Rockman have the exact same issues with revisited environments being completely different in unbelievable timespans. Let alone Castlevania which actually tries to make a plot excuse for this phenomenon.

Nintendo may have priorities, but that doesn't mean they complete and utterly do not care about continuity. All it does is provide a reason for the occasional unclear ingame references of their intended premise, as in your Twilight examples.

In some games, like Spirit Tracks, they define some continuity. In others, like Twilight Princess, they don't.

But it's just a few elements that go on. The rest, is all completely new, without any bother to any kind of continuity, and with a whole new world and characters.

Nintendo doesn't give a [parasitic bomb] about PROPER continuity. They linked some games in order to offer some nostalgia factor and so players can remember those experiences. But they're really not interested in offering any sort of sequel. Everything is always new.

2817

Forum Games / Re: "What Are You Thinking Now?"

« on: June 29, 2010, 01:39:55 AM »

My friend is feeling suicidal again...I hate it when this happens...it really terrifies me.

Therapy. Pretty much only solution if they're in too deep.

2818

Off The Wall / Re: Do you have an internet doppelganger?

« on: June 29, 2010, 01:39:10 AM »

I don't know of anyone else named "Dexter" or "Gamma" on the net. If I did, they wouldn't exist anymore... or something like that.

Gamma's my nickname in most websites. It's also one of my real surnames.

2819

Off The Wall / Re: Post Pictures Of Yourself

« on: June 29, 2010, 12:31:42 AM »

Well, he does look hungry. =P

2820

Gaming / Re: Legend of Zelda - The official Zelda thread

« on: June 29, 2010, 12:30:53 AM »

More than a century has passed since Ocarina of Time, factor in the fact that game design demands you make it different, of course the entire world map has its differences from Ocarina. Even Four Sword Adventures changes the world map completely, and that's the same Link in the same place as Four Swords.

Not just the differences. Aside from some positions, it's a completely different world. Few centuries don't change the landscape so much.

2821

Off The Wall / Re: Do you have an internet doppelganger?

« on: June 29, 2010, 12:20:51 AM »

I do.

We had sex.

It was AMAZING.

2822

Off The Wall / Re: Post Pictures Of Yourself

« on: June 29, 2010, 12:18:47 AM »

Quick, someone edit in a shark about to jump out of the water and eat him.

2823

Gaming / Re: Legend of Zelda - The official Zelda thread

« on: June 29, 2010, 12:14:52 AM »

Well not directly after, naturally. And not with times. And if you do that, then where does it go? It's explicitly stated that the legends of the old Hyrule were lost. If it came after MM, it would have to be the last entry. After all, the towns in AoL were named after the Sages... It gets pretty confusing when you think about how one game's placement could affect the others, and how the others prevent it from going there...

As I said, people making the game don't care much about making continuity. They just want to provide a good experience, independent from all the other games.

I thought Ganon's entire backstory in Twilight more than enough established continuity toward Ocarina and favored the intended time travel shenanigans. Particularly the details behind the Triforce and the existence of the Temple of Time.

And then stuff like world map inconsistensies, the new location of the Master Sword, the fact that other than a few tiny similarities, the whole world is very, very different, and that it's basically a new Ocarina of Time, like fans requested. They didn't give a damn about continuity here. They might have put this or that reference, but if they gave a single damn about any proper continuity, they would have shown it in a more obvious way.

2824

Gaming / Re: The Official Pokémon Black & White Discussion Thread

« on: June 29, 2010, 12:00:00 AM »

To me, emphasizing on the team aspect more would be along the lines of the kind of evolution the series needs. If they're not going to do anything to rock the boat about the "Eugenics Experiment" that is EV training, or even the basic "Rock-Paper-Scissors" dynamic, then at least focus on other aspects of the game engine that would force a change-up in the meta game all the same.

Besides, if they're not going to do anything truly compelling with it, then it's just a throw-away gimmick that they shouldn't have even bothered with. Battling is the focus of this series, and it's all that's there after you tear through the storyline especially.

But the evolution towards constant team battles doesn't do anything but add more elements to a single battle instead of changing them. Evolution shouldn't be just about adding things, it should be about changing them so the overall system can work better. 2v2 or 3v3 battles should work really well in a larger, more epic context, of bigger battles. So you can actually feel the difference of complexity between battles instead of just fighting stronger opponents. Something like making Gym Leader battles like that would work well. What wouldn't work, would be to simply add more elements, more stuff, more weaknesses that you have to watch for at the same time. Because making that part of the constant gameplay you have to endure would ruin the simplicity Pokémon was based in its original concept. They should keep the simple battles most of the time, but perhaps think of a different gameplay system. Mix in other turn-based elements, maybe.

2825

Gaming / Re: Legend of Zelda - The official Zelda thread

« on: June 28, 2010, 11:54:24 PM »

Personally, when I went through the story of that game, I felt its premise worked entirely with what Aonuma stated. When you add Majora's Mask to that, it works out even better.

Aonuma: The Wind Waker is parallel. In Ocarina of Time, Link flew seven years in time, he beat Ganon and went back to being a kid, remember? Twilight Princess takes place in the world of Ocarina of Time, a hundred and something years after the peace returned to kid Link’s time. In the last scene of Ocarina of Time, kids Link and Zelda have a little talk, and as a consequence of that talk, their relationship with Ganon takes a whole new direction. In the middle of this game [Twilight Princess], there's a scene showing Ganon's execution. It was decided that Ganon be executed because he'd do something outrageous if they left him be. That scene takes place several years after Ocarina of Time. Ganon was sent to another world and now he wants to obtain the power...

If continuity was truly a concern, they'd make more references. When playing the game, there's absolutely no continuity between them, except for "oh, this MIGHT fit here, IF this happened this way". It's an ass-pull. Continuity in Zelda is a non-issue, because in most cases, there isn't the direct concern of one.

Because of the possibility of branching, WW cannot come after MM.

Why not? In WW, it's told that the Hero of Time dissapeared and didn't show up again when evil returned to Hyrule. In Majora's Mask, Link goes on a journey, far from Hyrule. We never know if he returned or not. So it pretty much works out.