Messages

1

TalkBack / RE:REVIEWS: Mario Hoops 3-on-3

« on: August 30, 2006, 05:03:06 PM »

I had no wrist problems with the stylus in MP:H. Ever. Maybe certain DS games need seperate reviews for non-pussies?

And why does a negative review end with 6.5? Score it below 5 if it's bad for crying out loud.

2

Nintendo Gaming / RE:Metroid...at launch!

« on: May 16, 2006, 04:37:29 PM »

A new Retro Studios interview at ign has been posted:

A standout quote for me:

Quote
IGN Wii: In Prime 3, do you lose your abilities and have to retrieve them throughout the game?

Mark Pacini No.

Bryan Walker: We did that for two games in a row. We didn't want to do it again. [Laughs]

[DeadlyD]

3

TalkBack / RE:REVIEWS: Metroid Prime: Hunters

« on: April 15, 2006, 08:38:56 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: DeadlyD
well if they kept to the formula for mario, then we wouldnt have mario 64
heck donkey kong 64 was more about platform jumping then mario 64, and that didnt make it fun

Exactly.

Quote
Originally posted by: Jonnyboy117
Multiplayer for Prime 3 is not obligatory.  Last I heard (which was a long time ago), they would only consider it if they could find a much better and more interesting way to do it than was in Prime 2.  I'm sure they are impressed by the multiplayer in Hunters, but it wouldn't be a good fit in the real Prime games (just as its precessor was not a good fit in Prime 2).

After the success of Hunters, and with the removal of lock-on, I honestly cannot see the logic of releasing the game without multiplayer. It just makes no sense to me.

[Jonnyboy117]

4

TalkBack / RE:REVIEWS: Metroid Prime: Hunters

« on: April 15, 2006, 04:40:45 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Jonnyboy117
AC, I'm sorry (happy) to tell you that I know someone very high up in Retro and have talked to him a great deal about the Metroid games, and he seems to agree with me.  Hardly surprising since Retro's games actually feel like Metroid, no matter how much they change the perspective, add things like scanning, change iconic abilities like Screw Attack, etc.  They know what makes a Metroid game, and they make sure that's in there, then go in and screw around with the formula as much as possible without messing up the core.  I'm sure Prime 3 will take that idea even further.

I'm looking forward to Prime 3 because of the new hardware and massively improved control system alone (as well as the gameplay). I just hope the game also feels fresh. Also, as the Metroid universe expands certain things worry me, for example how many times can Samus just lose her abilities at the start?

Anyway, here's a thought I just had. Seeing as Hunter's multiplayer is apparently top-notch and multiplayer in Prime 3 is obligatory, how about NST does Prime 3's multplayer while Retro focus on the single-player? Ah never-mind.

5

TalkBack / RE: REVIEWS: Metroid Prime: Hunters

« on: April 10, 2006, 09:47:51 AM »

Well that isn't what I take issue with, I thought we all knew that this was multiplayer-centric from day one (hence memory restrictions that mean the areas get shoehorned into the single-player game rather than the other way around).

It was the idea that constant upgrades (and I guess the constant contrived in-story reasons for them) MUST be part of every title that calls itself Metroid, at all costs. The very notion that a developer may try something slightly different is criminal. How is that justified?

6

TalkBack / RE:REVIEWS: Metroid Prime: Hunters

« on: April 10, 2006, 07:49:38 AM »

Prime 2 didn't feel fresh to me, dark worlds or not. It felt closer to an expansion pack of Prime than an entirely new product. Although this was a while ago I played it.

Is Hunters really less of a Metroid game than say - Fusion? Why does this not have the same "core gameplay"? Because there are no upgrades? The review makes out that this is a cardinal sin, and the game must be dismissed immediately. I'm not so sure. I'm sure I've read comments on fansites such as Metroid2002.com happily considering it a Metroid game. I think dismissing the game as not belonging to the series, not even dabating the point and printing it as fact in a review is ridiculous.

Also, I meant to say "NST tried to freshen up the series", although I'm not sure what you mean by "normal FPS" - I don't think there is one.

[platformer]

7

TalkBack / RE:REVIEWS: Metroid Prime: Hunters

« on: April 10, 2006, 05:12:54 AM »

Quote
...there is no upgrading beyond the six sub-weapons, which are interchangeable for the most part.  And you can't have a Metroid game without upgrades; that would be like having a Mario game without jumping... The original Metroid on NES establishes the importance of upgrading within the first thirty seconds of the game.

WHAT? Completely worthless statements in what sounds like a pretty worthless review. Review the game for what it IS not for what it ISN'T. The comparison with Mario is ludricrious, that's a platformer. A fairer comparison would be with mushrooms and fireflowers in Mario games, but is that worth marking Super Mario 64 down as some kind of 'fake'? I doubt it.

I haven't actually played the full game yet and fair play if it the Adventure Mode isn't up to scratch. But for god's sake, throwing a hissy fit because NST actually decided to (god forbid) freshen up the series, makes me worried that you actually get to talk to Retro. Metroid Prime 2 was filled with undeniably great Metroid gameplay, but was so uninteresting to me. Why? Perhaps because it was the same damn thing yet again.