Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Oh boy here we gowheoever made that list is a huge sprint fanboy
http://consumerist.com/2013/03/18/here-are-your-contestants-for-the-2013-worst-company-in-america-tournament/
@pokepal148ok then you're excused
My opinions on Kid Icarus: Uprising are well documented. It was incredibly polished but I thought mechanically it was ill-conceived. I didn't much care for it.
As for Fire Emblem? Oh, you mean that game that I've been pining for ever since I heard it was being localised? That one game that I'm excited about above all others? That one game that isn't yet released in Europe? You mean that game?...it hurts.
1 sec, I'm busy lifting 458 lbs over my head like its nothing.and he's typing on the keyboard with only the concentrated power of the shockwave generated from each lift.
i'm referring to the way things would be without this and how if you want the portability of the 3DS Version and to play online you would need to have the Wii U version of the game as well and the cross save data voodoo that comes with it...
you would have needed a Wii U to play online even if they didn't do this so you just don't need the Wii U version of the game now,
it's better then having to double dip if you want portability and online in your Monster Hunter
What the hell are you talking about? lol.
Also, In 2013 why shouldn't we expect handhelds games to offer online multiplayer without the need to tether the device to a home console? I don't care how the game was released in Japan. I don't care that Capcom have always done it this way. It's a silly oversight brought on by complacence. If Capcom want to make this series (a series that I myself am a fan of) as big as it is in Japan then this MacGyver stuff really needs to stop.
kid icarus and especially fire emblem say hello.@ Pixelated Pixies
Until third parties actually start supporting the Wii U then Nintendo is going to have to funnel all their resources into supporting the Wii U
Didn't you already say that, and didn't I already agree with you? *looks up at post*
As for
and not the 3DS because it has too much support at this point.
I don't think I agree with you that the 3DS has 'too much support'. At least, not as far as retail goes. I guess it depends on your tastes though.
There hasn't been a 3DS retail release since Mario 3D Kart back in December of 2011 that I've really enjoyed. You could argue that regardless of whether or not I appreciate the games, the system is still being supported with releases. I'd argue though that if those retail releases aren't engaging me as a consumer then the system isn't being supported to the extent that it could or should be. Support should be measured in terms of both quantity and quality. I would argue that retail releases on the 3DS have been missing the mark on both.
eShop on the other hand continues to be a great source for games. Fallblox, Fluidity, Nano Assault EX, Harmoknight etc. are the sorts of games I want on a handheld. If it weren't for the eShop I think I would have got rid of my 3DS a long time ago. Still, I would love to see more support being thrown behind the 3DS in terms of retail releases, particularly from western developers.
It has nothing to do with being grateful or ungrateful. At least not for me. Capcom are putting out a Monster Hunter game on the 3DS which you can only play online if you own a Wii U. I don't own a Wii U and won't therefore be buying the game. I can't imagine playing a Monster Hunter game without other people.you would have needed a Wii U to play online even if they didn't do this so you just don't need the Wii U version of the game now,
the ewoks are fine in my opinion. i don't see why so many people don't like them.Jar Jar Binks is worse than all the Ewoks put togther, he's actually probably one of the worst characters in anything ever.1. Jar Jar is pretty cool in The Clone Wars (makes sense as its a cartoon)
2.The Ewoks were awesome like Gizmo from Gremlins. The rebels would have loss the battle without those furry little dudes.
but at the same time you don't necessarily have to share with the publisher.Not everyone wants to be rich. I guess...
Nobody's getting rich making games, regardless of where they work. You can make more with a big company, maybe, but you lose creative freedom, and there's an appeal to the whole indie ideal for a lot of those guys.
But they're of low quality almost if they were made in Kore......i did a bit of research and found that the iphone isn't the holy grail of design, heres a quote from a reply thread from one of the hyperlinks i used
many indies want to avoid exactly what sony would offer. a large budget studio and deadlines...Video of a Presentation by AJ Grand-Scrutton CEO of Dlala Studios who is working inside of Microsoft's Soho building (holds Lift London and Soho Productions) in an incubation process. Video is about ow the studio got started and how Microsoft is trying to help its image in the eyes of indie developers. So they're working in a situation similar to thatgamecompany had with Sony. They have a contact with Microsoft to work on a game for them (how many games wasn't disclosed) and Microsoft gets to keep the IP. In return Dlala is using space inside of the Soho building alongside Microsoft's two internal development studios. Dlala is paid as if they were normal Microsoft employees as well receive help from other studios and MS employees. By the time the game is complete Microsoft will have enough capital for Dlala to work as a completely independent studio and then go forward and go their separate ways. I wouldn't be surprised if Microsoft buys Dlala after the contract is up as a way to show independent devs that working on Microsoft platforms could have great benefits.
On that note i'm pretty surprised that Microsoft hasn't acquired signal studios yet as thye have worked on nothing but Microsoft platforms thus far.
So Microsoft being friendly with "indie" devs is them having an indie guy work in their office, be payed exactly like an MS employee and MS gets to keep all IP rights to what is created.
That sounds identical to working directly for MS, what is independent about any of that?
Because they have a contract with Microsoft an once that contract is complete they're free to do what they they want, That and they're a fourman studio.
Sony does the same thing letting indies (thatgamecompany and Giant Sparrow) use space within the Sony Santa Monica building. Sony also retained all IP in this case and Sony Apparently offered to buy them but they said no. (bad idea imo)
http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/02/tech/gaming-gadgets/indie-video-games-sony/
You want Simcity 2013 GIFs? You got it!.FLYING CARS!!!!
Bonus:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQs4WIxXQog
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yySa34R0D_4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zHdyzx_ecbQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_ufAd79bOA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sFKKIH2WasM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcEaHT9mt-Y
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IECDGp_lHTU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLC22aB7JPs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g418BSF6XBQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-d0b41H-Lnk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EcRI9_oXSCs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgvhKPXzYcs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fDeSRdHvefw
Voted Sim City 2013 if you haven't guessed. I don't see SC getting "Ironed out" as they will have to reconsider the very underlying design foundations and assumptions on which the game is built on. Using Glass box was a very poor decision and the box is smashed.
Sure if you want a Facebook game, yeah this mess might be acceptable, but Simcity is better than that, it's more than that. If this is acceptable, I will be happy to never ever see another Simcity game ever made again. Take out to the back of the barn and shoot it.Kind of mean spirited to hope people lose their jobs. I mean ignoring the online debacle and the fact that you can only make cites that existed in the 1950s Sim City got pretty good review. That's more of a EA wanting control of everything rather than being a Maxis problem.Also the "Good" Reviews were based on a "Closed" review session at EA where they only got several hours of play. not long enough for the illusion that is glass box to shatter. Also stop white knighting for companies, you are helping to maintain the status quo. 10 Year old games have better AI than this with a fraction of the CPU power and in much larger cities with functioning economic relationships.
It's no more mean spirited than it is unfortunate. There was this restaurant I went to once to get some lunch. The owner/cook was having trouble after a year in business. I felt sorry for him and in some way I wanted to help, so I sat down to talk to him. But after taking the food home and eating it, I knew why he was in trouble. His food wasn't any good. I wanted to tell him, but I knew it wouldn't help and the situation was terminal. Sometimes to move people on to better thing, they have lose their jobs and businesses.
In the case of EA, you can rightly tell them to get the **** out.
You are connecting two dots that don't exist. The Madden mention was in regards to saying it's OK for a reviewer to go back and change their score. If you think it's OK for for a studio to go back and change their score based on online, what would be wrong with a reviewer going back and changing their score for something like Madden 07, now that you can't play it online or even get all of the achievements?
With Subspace Emissary, there is nothing preventing you from going back in 20 years and playing it. And if you ever played the Smash Bros. games, you would know how fun and interesting it is to unlock trophies. And I could say that nobody who has a life cares about something like leveling up in Call of Duty's online (especially as when online gets shut down for that, it all goes away. But with Smash, you will never lose that stuff).
Um, Subspace Emissary is part of the main game. In fact, it's how you unlock a lot of things. So that comparison is faulty.it's a matter of relevance. nobody gives a crud about madden 07
Unless online is the main purpose of the game (or is required), then it shouldnt factor in. Should they mention it in the review? Sure, but it shouldnt effect the score. And what is the time frame for these reviewers playing revisionism history with their review score? Can a reviewer go back and dock their score for Madden NFL 07 because EA shut down the servers and there is no way to play it online now (and I think 07 had an achievement that required it)?
Yes. Unless online is the main focus of the game, then a weak online system should not hurt the overall score of the game. Online is not standard with every game, nor should it be for most.but it is, alot of people buy a game for it's online mode. Shouldn't reviewers make sure that the main reason people buy the game is held accountable.
For your specific example, I would scoff at that review. They are reviewing the game, which is the campaign mode. Yes, online is very popular in the Halo games, but they are not vital to the actual game and shouldn't be a factor in the score.
For games that dont require online, the score doesnt need to be changed. If online is required, review the game ahead of time, and only change the score if online severely changes it (not just a little slow down because of server overload, dropping the score because of that destroys credibility of the reviewer).So if a new halo game comes out with a broken online system it shouldn't change the score because you still have a campaign mode that you can get through in an hour?
Under that logic, ANY game that focuses on online (like MMOs, and many FPSs) should not be reviewed until after they launch since online will be vastly different in the wild vs. just playing other reviewers.then what should they do... they are expected to have reviews at launch. should they just say 'were not reviewing this game because of the online function'
As for Polygon (who are a joke of a site, and why people consider them respectable is a mystery), they have changed their score twice, so they are not reliable. Like they dropped the score from a 8 to a 4 after EA temporarily (and EA made sure to say it was temporary) removed features while they stabilized the game? I wonder if Polygon will apologize and put the score back once those features are all returned? Some of them already have been restored.
