Warmaker Posted January 3, 2008 Posted January 3, 2008 That's just how it is: Now that you really want something, it just won't be there. All the other times when you didn't want it, it was there!
Lynx7725 Posted January 3, 2008 Posted January 3, 2008 Just my two cents about MMOGs.. I got into MMOGs a few years back, went with Lineage II (and that's a ballbuster for you), and CoH, and EVE. Then I got into the "free" MMOGs, which are browser-based and often ran as a side projects by non-corporate owners. In general, I think the commercial concept taken by most software house is not quite to my liking. Aside from the usual "people are asshats online" problem -- which is none of the developers' problem -- my gut feel is that the MMO genre is still waiting for a killer app. My current view of the traditional approach to MMOG design is as follows: Make it look pretty to attract players. Give the online economy some ridiculous name and claim people can deal with other real-life people (as if it's a good thing!) Give some nebulous and often inconsequential rewards to attract and retain players. Pander consistently to high level players in the game update releases. Features in new releases are often mostly for more developed game characters rather than newly joined characters. I don't think this approach works very well, because it simply encourages players to stay online to grind their characters up. Since most companies charge on a monthly basis, it actually doesn't make any sense to get players to do this (since you cannot charge them for it) and the whole online presence of gamers are probably over-stated. And the grind is probably the most stupid design decision ever made. Yes, it does cause players to stick around to develop their in-game characters, but it also tends to alienate players over time. This just creates a churning of players, with new players replacing dissatisfied players. As long as you can sustain a positive churn you are ok, but the market is notoriously fickle, so it's not IMO a good long-term strategy. At the end of the day, people want to play games to have fun. Grinding is not fun. Having people interact online may not be fun because people are more likely to be asshats online. Having empty achievements is not fun after a while. The whole point of the game is to make players larger than life, not having a second digital life where they have to work at being merely adequate. Which is why I think the MMOG genre is still looking for a killer app, or at least to rethink its approach and rapport with their customers. I don't play WoW, but apparently they got something right but overdid on the grind portion, or structured their game in such a way that once players hit the cap, there's little incentive to continue gaming/ paying. I played EVE, and they almost got it right -- it's innovative in many ways and the grind isn't too terrible, but it didn't get everything right because it's still a lot of work at high levels and content is somewhat lacking (for me) at low. CoH got it mostly right, but unfortunately the genre is not interesting to me. I think what the MMOG need to do is to develop their online economy AI and their non-combat AI substantially. At the end of the day, combat/ conflict in MMOG is a means to an end -- you should fight because you have to, not because you want to. The risks and cost inherent to open conflict should be crippling, but for most games now, fighting is the whole point. If open conflict isn't the way to go, then the other areas -- the so-called "soft war" option -- need to be improved so that players got another option to achieve their own goals. Content is king in MMOG, and direct combat doesn't fill that niche; there's only so much combat stuff you can engineer into the game, so it's always limiting. Too many MMOG concentrates on hyping their P2P combat that they don't realise MMOG is not the same as an online FPS. There is a critical need for the developers to rethink the design philosophy behind the game.
Alpha OTS Posted January 9, 2008 Posted January 9, 2008 I just found out there's another Twisted Metal game coming out.......for the PS2. Seems to be a port of the PSP game with a ton of extras. I heard great things about the PSP version of Twisted Metal, that it had gotten back more to its TM2 roots(the real high point of the series), and the screen shots and movie here seem to bear this out. Paris again! http://blog.us.playstation.com/2007/12/04/...wisted-edition/ How is it I have a 360 and now a PS3, and I'm playing 2d games on my ps2, *and* looking forward to a 3d ps2 game of a psp port of all things? Madness, I say. Just in a retro mood, I guess....
David Hingtgen Posted January 9, 2008 Posted January 9, 2008 Air Guitar Hero! http://video.ap.org/v/Legacy.aspx?partner=...mp;&f=wasee Seriously, and it works.
mikeszekely Posted January 9, 2008 Posted January 9, 2008 I just found out there's another Twisted Metal game coming out.......for the PS2. Seems to be a port of the PSP game with a ton of extras. I heard great things about the PSP version of Twisted Metal, that it had gotten back more to its TM2 roots(the real high point of the series), and the screen shots and movie here seem to bear this out. Paris again! http://blog.us.playstation.com/2007/12/04/...wisted-edition/ How is it I have a 360 and now a PS3, and I'm playing 2d games on my ps2, *and* looking forward to a 3d ps2 game of a psp port of all things? Madness, I say. Just in a retro mood, I guess.... Hey, like I said in another thread, having finished the holiday glut of 360 games, I found myself broke and itching for something to play, so I started digging through my PS2 collection. When I worked at Gamestop, I picked up a lot of games on whims that I either never played, or I started to play but never finished. Currently, that means I'm playing Shin Megami Tensei: Nocturne. I truly regret that I didn't play this game sooner. Combat is turn-based with heavy emphasis on hitting enemies with their elemental weaknesses to gain turns, a story that begins with the end of the world and is a far cry from your usual cookie cutter JRPGs. Oh, and you recruit demons to fill out your party, giving the game a sort of demonic Pokemon vibe. Hands down the best JRPG I've played since the PSone, and better than any Final Fantasy since IV. I mean, I thought I was losing interest in the genre, but with two Digital Devil Saga games and Persona 3 (all part of the Shin Megami Tensei family), I could be playing JRPGs (on the PS2) until Spring.
David Hingtgen Posted January 9, 2008 Posted January 9, 2008 I've tried the Shin Megami Tensei family, but lose interest after a couple hours. It all comes down to this: EVERY fight is a boss fight, difficulty-wise. It's just insane. New ones any better in that regard?
JB0 Posted January 9, 2008 Posted January 9, 2008 I've tried the Shin Megami Tensei family, but lose interest after a couple hours. It all comes down to this: EVERY fight is a boss fight, difficulty-wise. It's just insane. New ones any better in that regard? The one I own isn't like that at all.
mikeszekely Posted January 9, 2008 Posted January 9, 2008 I've tried the Shin Megami Tensei family, but lose interest after a couple hours. It all comes down to this: EVERY fight is a boss fight, difficulty-wise. It's just insane. New ones any better in that regard? Which ones have you played? Nocturne's the only one I've fired up so far, and I've been playing long enough for the Demi-Fiend to be around level 50. From my experience, you have to buy as many healing items as possible (might as well, unless you count the few Magatama that show up for sale, you don't buy any equipment). And unlike modern Final Fanasy game where you can pretty much just keep playing to advance the story regardless of level, you really should grind in any new area you come to until, at minimum, until you can recruit any demon in the area. Playing that way, I haven't had any trouble with the regular demons in an area. Boss fights, on the other hand, range from hard to insane, especially the fiend battles. You pretty much have to go into the battle, see what it does and what it's weakest against, get killed, switch Magatamas and party members around, and have a solid strategy thought out. Or at least consult a walkthrough that'll tell you what you should do. No two ways about it, the game is HARD. But I kind of feel that the payoff is worth it. Prior to Nocturne, I'd played plenty of JRPGs, but the last three I really got into were Xenogears, Chrono Cross, and Final Fantasy IV. (Sorry, I never played Chrono Trigger). Even then, to this day, I couldn't really explain to you what Xenogears was about. Most JRPGs just ape the usual anime/Final Fantasy story cliches (especially the one about not making too much sense). Nocturne is completely different.
David Hingtgen Posted January 9, 2008 Posted January 9, 2008 I could talk for a LONG time about Xenogears, then lose my train of thought and have to go play it again. When I played it through 3 times straight in the space of a few months I had it all figured out, but not so much any more. But I do believe I "get" it far more than most people. (You CANNOT get it from just playing once---way too much stuff is only explained with foreshadowing, etc)
Gaijin Posted January 9, 2008 Posted January 9, 2008 WTF?!! Namco assures an extra million copies of Soul Caliber IV will be sold
bandit29 Posted January 9, 2008 Posted January 9, 2008 (edited) Will they be able to use the Force lol? I'd never thought I'd see this.. WTF?!! Namco assures an extra million copies of Soul Caliber IV will be sold Edited January 9, 2008 by dejr8bud
mikeszekely Posted January 10, 2008 Posted January 10, 2008 I could talk for a LONG time about Xenogears, then lose my train of thought and have to go play it again. When I played it through 3 times straight in the space of a few months I had it all figured out, but not so much any more. But I do believe I "get" it far more than most people. (You CANNOT get it from just playing once---way too much stuff is only explained with foreshadowing, etc) I don't necessarily mean that games like Xenogears or Final Fantasy VII are indecipherable, but they require more effort to understand than I'm willing to give. I should also stress that, despite its overly complex story, Xenogears was my favorite JRPG on the PSX (Final Fantasy VII, on the other hand, is wildly overrated). WTF?!! On the one hand, it really seems to make no sense to have Star Wars characters in a Soul Calibur game. On the other hand, it didn't make sense to have Spawn, Link, or Heihachi in 2. And those screens of Vader do look pretty bad ass...
David Hingtgen Posted January 10, 2008 Posted January 10, 2008 Plus the fact that everybody and anybody made SW characters in SC3's customization menu. Heck, I still have my Darth Revan saved. (not exactly, I went for more of a "Sith Lord esque" look than directly doing Darth Revan---mainly I just got as many layers and robes and hoods as possible and did the dark reds and browns instead of pure black/grey)
Alpha OTS Posted January 10, 2008 Posted January 10, 2008 Something about these doesn't look like they fit in with the rest of the cast. Yoda especially. Look at the detail in his face, then look at the anime-ish person he's fighting. Doesn't gel right. Cool, but not for me. Heihachi fit, being a Tekken model which is essentially a Calibur model without a weapon. Spawn kinda fit, given the axe and how "evil" Siegfried already looked. Link was the weakest of the three, but didn't look *that* out of place. That said, what they should have done is do a Star Wars Calibur game. Problem solved and *everyone's* happy.
mikeszekely Posted January 10, 2008 Posted January 10, 2008 Plus the fact that everybody and anybody made SW characters in SC3's customization menu. Heck, I still have my Darth Revan saved. (not exactly, I went for more of a "Sith Lord esque" look than directly doing Darth Revan---mainly I just got as many layers and robes and hoods as possible and did the dark reds and browns instead of pure black/grey) I loved Soul Calibur II (I bought and played through both the GC and Xbox versions), but I couldn't get into Soul Calibur 3. It just felt like a step backward (to be fair, maybe it wasn't from the PS2 version of SC II). So I can't say I spent much time with the character creator. Apparently, Yoda is going to be 360 exclusive, and Vader will be PS3 exclusive. Usually I buy multiplatform games on the 360 because even when the PS3 version is identical, the 360 version has the Achievements I've grown to love. But as cool I I'm thinking it would be to play as Vader, I can't muster that level of interest for Yoda, so I guess I'm going with the PS3 for this one.
JB0 Posted January 10, 2008 Posted January 10, 2008 Something about these doesn't look like they fit in with the rest of the cast. Yoda especially. Look at the detail in his face, then look at the anime-ish person he's fighting. Doesn't gel right. Cool, but not for me. Heihachi fit, being a Tekken model which is essentially a Calibur model without a weapon. Spawn kinda fit, given the axe and how "evil" Siegfried already looked. Link was the weakest of the three, but didn't look *that* out of place. That said, what they should have done is do a Star Wars Calibur game. Problem solved and *everyone's* happy. Heihachi's lack of weapons was a major sticking point. He was totally out of place. I gather he also had pretty bad range issues, since he was the only barehanded fighter. I had the 'Cube version, so... I loved Soul Calibur II (I bought and played through both the GC and Xbox versions), but I couldn't get into Soul Calibur 3. It just felt like a step backward (to be fair, maybe it wasn't from the PS2 version of SC II). So I can't say I spent much time with the character creator. Apparently, Yoda is going to be 360 exclusive, and Vader will be PS3 exclusive. Usually I buy multiplatform games on the 360 because even when the PS3 version is identical, the 360 version has the Achievements I've grown to love. But as cool I I'm thinking it would be to play as Vader, I can't muster that level of interest for Yoda, so I guess I'm going with the PS3 for this one. As I understand it, that's only half-true. While each system will only get one in the box, both will be able to buy the other via online store. Microtransactions are lame.
Gaijin Posted January 10, 2008 Posted January 10, 2008 The whole Star Wars in Soul Caliber thing is lame. But I'm probably alone in the universe or at least on a board such as this thinking that one.
eugimon Posted January 10, 2008 Posted January 10, 2008 I loved Soul Calibur II (I bought and played through both the GC and Xbox versions), but I couldn't get into Soul Calibur 3. It just felt like a step backward (to be fair, maybe it wasn't from the PS2 version of SC II). So I can't say I spent much time with the character creator. Apparently, Yoda is going to be 360 exclusive, and Vader will be PS3 exclusive. Usually I buy multiplatform games on the 360 because even when the PS3 version is identical, the 360 version has the Achievements I've grown to love. But as cool I I'm thinking it would be to play as Vader, I can't muster that level of interest for Yoda, so I guess I'm going with the PS3 for this one. Yup, if it's between Vader and Yoda... i'd have to choose Vader. Besides... the 360 controller is just crap for fighting games.
Warmaker Posted January 10, 2008 Posted January 10, 2008 That said, what they should have done is do a Star Wars Calibur game. Problem solved and *everyone's* happy. You remember the PS game from the 90s called Star Wars: Masters of Teras Kasi? It was the only Star Wars fighter ever made.
yellowlightman Posted January 10, 2008 Posted January 10, 2008 The Star Wars thing is a bit lame, but not as lame as Spawn or a generic Todd McFarlane craptacular original design. But I agree an entirely Star Wars fighter would make a bit more sense and probably keep fans happier.
eugimon Posted January 10, 2008 Posted January 10, 2008 as long as the SW characters don't come up in story mode, i don't care. Having them around adds a fun twist for versus mode.
mikeszekely Posted January 10, 2008 Posted January 10, 2008 As I understand it, that's only half-true. While each system will only get one in the box, both will be able to buy the other via online store. Microtransactions are lame. The only mention I've heard of DC was Kotaku saying that the only way for a Yoda vs. Vader fight was IF Namco Bandai/Lucasarts decided to make them DC for the platforms they're not on. That's not something you can take to the bank.
JB0 Posted January 11, 2008 Posted January 11, 2008 The only mention I've heard of DC was Kotaku saying that the only way for a Yoda vs. Vader fight was IF Namco Bandai/Lucasarts decided to make them DC for the platforms they're not on. That's not something you can take to the bank. Ah. Shows what I get for taking second-hand comments at face value(I didn't read the article, someone else was telling me about it)
David Hingtgen Posted January 11, 2008 Posted January 11, 2008 Namco is quickly becoming the king of nickel and diming everyone to death via DLC. First AC6, now SC4. Stuff that SHOULD have been in the game is now DLC, and overpriced. You can bet Vader/Yoda will not be 100, or likely even 200 points.
eugimon Posted January 11, 2008 Posted January 11, 2008 Namco is quickly becoming the king of nickel and diming everyone to death via DLC. First AC6, now SC4. Stuff that SHOULD have been in the game is now DLC, and overpriced. You can bet Vader/Yoda will not be 100, or likely even 200 points. I believe the fine people who brought us Lumines still remain king of that particular hill.
David Hingtgen Posted January 11, 2008 Posted January 11, 2008 Note I said "quickly becoming", not "is". Time will tell the final rankings.
eugimon Posted January 11, 2008 Posted January 11, 2008 true, true. But namco has a LONG way to go before they approach the absurdity that is Lumins DLC.
Alpha OTS Posted January 11, 2008 Posted January 11, 2008 You remember the PS game from the 90s called Star Wars: Masters of Teras Kasi? It was the only Star Wars fighter ever made. Oh yeah, and believe me, I tried desperately to like it *because* it was a Star Wars fighter. There was not one redeeming factor about that game. It was even graphically sub par at the time of its release! I really like AC6, but I refuse to pay for any of the current dlc as is. Now if they package the lot of it up and offer it for 400 credits, then, *maybe* I'll pay for the skins and altered stats of planes that I already own.
Black Valkyrie Posted January 11, 2008 Posted January 11, 2008 Vader, Yoda in SC4 lame. They don`t fit in the first place, if I was Namco I would put instead Conan or He-Man & Skeletor.
JB0 Posted January 11, 2008 Posted January 11, 2008 Vader, Yoda in SC4 lame. They don`t fit in the first place, if I was Namco I would put instead Conan or He-Man & Skeletor. BY THE POWER OF SOUL EDGE! I HAVE THE POWER!
Gunbuster Posted January 11, 2008 Posted January 11, 2008 BY THE POWER OF SOUL EDGE! I HAVE THE POWER! LOL! They might as well add Lion-O from Thundercats :-P
mikeszekely Posted January 11, 2008 Posted January 11, 2008 Maybe I'm just not as picky as some of you, but I don't mind playing Vader in SCIV. But then again, I wouldn't mind playing He-Man or Lion-O either. Pretty much anyone with a weapon is OK by me. I'd even play Duncan McLeod. The only two sword-wielding characters that I am against turning up in Soul Calibur are Cloud and Sephiroth. They're overrated enough.
lechuck Posted January 11, 2008 Posted January 11, 2008 I find this horrible, sticking Sci-Fi characters in a fantasy universe. And what's with Lucas stooping so low. I thought he was a lot more anal in what way his Star Wars stuff is used? If it's sales they are after they could stuck Musha Gundam in there, it's BANDAI NAMCO afterall. Sales would be tenfold and they wouldn't even have to worry about how the game does in other territories. Man, the mix is so bad. That's like watching an episode of Star Trek with Picard on the bridge, the Enterprise stuck in a hopeless situation surrounded by a fleet of Romulan Bird of Preys, then suddenly the camera focuses on the rearward turbo lift and out walks McGyver with his swiss pocketknife. Builds something out of Geordie's Visor, Data's head and Riker's communicator to help Picard and spares a couple of secs to tells Worf he hates Bath'leths. Yeah that's how bad this mix is. I mean there are so many other more fitting characters and franchises they could of used... Senko no Basara, Warcraft, heck even Sol and Ky from Guilty Gear could of done the trick. But the best fitting would of been Samurai Showdown which then also serves as tribute.
Warmaker Posted January 11, 2008 Posted January 11, 2008 The bonus characters just don't sit right to be mixed in with this game. Spawn? Darth Vader? Yoda? Whatever crack the developers and marketing guys were using must have been some good s**t. I'll second Samurai Shodown would have been a far better fit, but more along the lines of SNK vs Capcom games. SS characters used weapons, so it's not a far stretch for SC.
David Hingtgen Posted January 11, 2008 Posted January 11, 2008 http://www.penny-arcade.com/images/2008/20080111.jpg
Recommended Posts