Search Amazon.com:
Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us $3,400 per month for bandwidth bills alone, and since we don't believe in shoving popup ads to our registered users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
«960 »
  • Post
  • Reply
THE AWESOME GHOST
Oct 21, 2005

THAT'S WHAT THE SONG WAS REALLY ABOUT


I played Prototype 2 at a friend's... It doesn't feel like a more polished Prototype. It feels like a Prototype 1 mod. I didn't really like it.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

revolther
May 27, 2008


Prototype 1 was simply a Hulk Ultimate Destruction mod, the company is essentially trying to pull investor money and reuse the same engine as cheaply as possible for as long as possible, but is somehow getting their games published like a serious title.

revolther fucked around with this message at May 17, 2012 around 07:12

...!
Oct 5, 2003

Let's go trophy hunting!

OK, gently caress Yakuza Dead Souls. I'm on Chapter 4 and it just plopped me down into an assload of enemies that spam knockdown attacks. I can't even reload my gun before I'm knocked down again and there's no room to move away. I honestly can't believe that some of you guys recommend this game to people. Holy poo poo.

Samurai Sanders
Nov 4, 2003



...! posted:

OK, gently caress Yakuza Dead Souls. I'm on Chapter 4 and it just plopped me down into an assload of enemies that spam knockdown attacks. I can't even reload my gun before I'm knocked down again and there's no room to move away. I honestly can't believe that some of you guys recommend this game to people. Holy poo poo.
I'm with you, I thought its core game mechanics were just awful from playing the demo and didn't even consider buying the full game, despite being a huge fan of the series.

...!
Oct 5, 2003

Let's go trophy hunting!

OK, that's the last loving straw. It just put me up against a boss who you can almost never shoot at because if you do then the loving infinitely spawning zombies kick your rear end. And then when I managed to get one of his health bars down he just loving regened it. gently caress this game forever. I told myself I would at least play through the story before sending it back but no. Hell no. This is one of the worst games I've ever played and highly recommend that people do not play it. Back it goes to Gamefly right loving now. Good riddance.

Stelas
Sep 6, 2010



A well-timed dodge roll as you stand up can usually get you out of a stunlock - it's easier to do if you've purchased the upgrade, but it's always an option, especially if you leap towards them so they kill themselves next molotov.

Not sure which boss regens, though I'm going to guess it's the flier? That's pretty much the hardest guy in the game, but as long as you keep tabs roughly on where he is and have both a decent long range weapon and a shotgun to hand, you can generally knock him down sufficiently while also dealing with the zombies.

It's definitely not a game for everyone, and probably only Yakuza fans should be playing it, but it is completable at the very least.

weird bleep
Feb 7, 2004



Ape Agitator posted:

It's an incredible fighting system and when you come to grips with it, it transforms the game. I started Batman: AA like it was Streets of Rage and mashed against one guy at a time. But then the combo idea really took hold and the rest of the game was amazing. And for me, someone who never got to "the next level" with DMC or GOW, it was very accessible and rewarded observation and planning more than memorization and super fast button mashing.

I have a large fascination with combat systems in video games, and personally I don't like the combat in the recent Batman games. I am generally not a fan of combat that has heavily context sensitive attacks. It never feels like I am directly controlling Batman, there are too many gaps the game fills the games for you. You don't have to be concerned about any form of distancing for melee hits or choosing attacks, you just say to Batman "attack the person in this direction" and the game will choose an appropriate attack based on the distance. The counter move is too powerful, and you are able to cancel animations of Batmans actions into a dive or counter too easily, making attacks have little risk.

Of course this means it's more accessible like you said, but the praise the combat gets is pretty crazy to me. The tools stop the game being a total bore, and it can be interesting to mess around with them, but I find they are either unnecessary or are treated as too much of a direct counter to certain enemy types. The game ends up feeling brainless to me, much like the God of War series. They create a variety of tools for the player to use, but there is not much reason to explore the options they give you and no real depth beyond the surface.

TaurusOxford
Feb 10, 2009

Fuck you Nintendo


bleep posted:

I have a large fascination with combat systems in video games, and personally I don't like the combat in the recent Batman games. I am generally not a fan of combat that has heavily context sensitive attacks. It never feels like I am directly controlling Batman, there are too many gaps the game fills the games for you. You don't have to be concerned about any form of distancing for melee hits or choosing attacks, you just say to Batman "attack the person in this direction" and the game will choose an appropriate attack based on the distance. The counter move is too powerful, and you are able to cancel animations of Batmans actions into a dive or counter too easily, making attacks have little risk.

The whole point of the Arkham combat is to be a Batman simulator. If the game was like DMC or Ninja Gaiden, I would undoubtedly hate it because I suck at those kinds of "make mistake you die" combat systems.

Samurai Sanders
Nov 4, 2003



Am I the only one who likes predator fights much more than fistfights in AA and AC?

edit: I didn't feel like Batman combat was any easier or harder than DMC, just different. If you're bad at either of them you can die pretty fast.

weird bleep
Feb 7, 2004



TaurusOxford posted:

The whole point of the Arkham combat is to be a Batman simulator. If the game was like DMC or Ninja Gaiden, I would undoubtedly hate it because I suck at those kinds of "make mistake you die" combat systems.

I don't think anyone is wrong for enjoying it, the game achieves what it sets out to do well. I just don't think it is as interesting as some people make it out to be, but it's personal taste. I think the game is great at making the player feel strong as soon as they pick the controller up, but I prefer it when that feeling of strength comes from spending time learning the depths of a games mechanics.

I think calling it a Batman Simulator isn't really right though. It's more like you are telling him what to do, rather than simulating his actions.

Samurai Sanders posted:

Am I the only one who likes predator fights much more than fistfights in AA and AC?

edit: I didn't feel like Batman combat was any easier or harder than DMC, just different. If you're bad at either of them you can die pretty fast.

I feel the same way. I did enjoy Arkham Asylum, I felt the predator sections worked much better as a fun sandbox to mess around with tools in than the direct melee combat does.

Ape Agitator
Feb 19, 2004

Soylent Green is Monkeys

bleep posted:

Of course this means it's more accessible like you said, but the praise the combat gets is pretty crazy to me. The tools stop the game being a total bore, and it can be interesting to mess around with them, but I find they are either unnecessary or are treated as too much of a direct counter to certain enemy types. The game ends up feeling brainless to me, much like the God of War series. They create a variety of tools for the player to use, but there is not much reason to explore the options they give you and no real depth beyond the surface.

I find that surprising I guess. In Asylum, I felt there was a nice mixture of enemy types at the further levels so you were in a position of needing to be aware of your surroundings and how is where to get the most out of it. I also played it again on hard without the prompt and felt very comfortable even without the visual prompt because I'd been paying attention to enemies for so long. And using the general purpose gadgets like reeling people in or using batarangs kept it always fresh and trying different stuff.

Contrast that to my GoW experience where I really mashed the hell out of that game. I really enjoyed it and it was visceral, but it was nowhere near as dynamic for me. I barely even weapon switched and I beat the higher difficulties on that. But, as I said, I never got "next level" so there's doubtless depth I missed like I end up missing on so many games that take cues from fighting games. My complexity meter pegged at Street Fighter 2. When you swing chain blades in a 120° arc 25 feet from you, it becomes more abstract.

I think it boiled down to me really enjoying more of the translation of what I wanted to do being discrete actions that followed along logically. Okay, guy right there punch him, punch the guy slightly to his left and, oooo counter, okay, they're pretty far let's rope them in, guy with a knife so he gets some dust to the face, they're getting clustered let's hop over a guy for some room. All of that was intensely satisfying when coupled with the feedback of your improving play which was faster and faster rhythm and solid connections that never lost the feeling of "button press->break bones" instead of combo hit inflation spam.

It's when you get in a room with tasers, weapon wielding, and a giant and take them out through liberal use of gadgets and knees to the back that I think it really differentiates itself from the GoW/DMC/Bayonetta approach. And I really don't relish going back to XXTriangleSquare combos for GoW4. I know I will, but it's hard to imagine it won't draw comparisons.

Edit:

bleep posted:

I think the game is great at making the player feel strong as soon as they pick the controller up, but I prefer it when that feeling of strength comes from spending time learning the depths of a games mechanics.

Again, this might be owing to my overall skill level but I really developed over the course of the game much greater ability. I think there's depth in the fighting system to be found and the steady introduction of more tools as you progressed also upped the ways you could tackle a mass of enemies. And the feedback of the wind going out of your sails when you broke a combo with bad timing or a poor choice was a strong way to shape your play. I really went from "Streets of Rage" to "I am Batman" and felt comfortable enough to go right into "no hints" hard mode right afterwards.

Ape Agitator fucked around with this message at May 17, 2012 around 09:14

weird bleep
Feb 7, 2004



Ape Agitator posted:

I find that surprising I guess. In Asylum, I felt there was a nice mixture of enemy types at the further levels so you were in a position of needing to be aware of your surroundings and how is where to get the most out of it. I also played it again on hard without the prompt and felt very comfortable even without the visual prompt because I'd been paying attention to enemies for so long. And using the general purpose gadgets like reeling people in or using batarangs kept it always fresh and trying different stuff.

Contrast that to my GoW experience where I really mashed the hell out of that game. I really enjoyed it and it was visceral, but it was nowhere near as dynamic for me. I barely even weapon switched and I beat the higher difficulties on that. But, as I said, I never got "next level" so there's doubtless depth I missed like I end up missing on so many games that take cues from fighting games. My complexity meter pegged at Street Fighter 2. When you swing chain blades in a 120° arc 25 feet from you, it becomes more abstract.

I think it boiled down to me really enjoying more of the translation of what I wanted to do being discrete actions that followed along logically. Okay, guy right there punch him, punch the guy slightly to his left and, oooo counter, okay, they're pretty far let's rope them in, guy with a knife so he gets some dust to the face, they're getting clustered let's hop over a guy for some room. All of that was intensely satisfying when coupled with the feedback of your improving play which was faster and faster rhythm and solid connections that never lost the feeling of "button press->break bones" instead of combo hit inflation spam.

It's when you get in a room with tasers, weapon wielding, and a giant and take them out through liberal use of gadgets and knees to the back that I think it really differentiates itself from the GoW/DMC/Bayonetta approach. And I really don't relish going back to XXTriangleSquare combos for GoW4. I know I will, but it's hard to imagine it won't draw comparisons.

There isn't really a "next level" with God of War I find. I should clarify that I like the Batman games more than the God of War series, and overall I think the Batman games are more interesting, but they both gave me similar feelings when it specifically comes to their melee combat systems.

I don't think games have to give you a mile long move list or over complicate things with various character and enemy states either. Demon's Souls and Dark Souls have really great combat and there is a lot of depth to them even though you only have a handful of attacks. You directly control which attacks you use, and there is a large importance on spacing between your character, the enemy and the world around you that decides when it is appropriate to take certain actions. What the Souls games do with a small move set ends up creating a large amount of depth that warrants people spending a lot of time learning the intricacies that are created from how the game is designed to succeed in fighting both AI enemies and even more so other players. I think smartly limiting the player goes very far when it comes to creating depth without complication. I personally think that the combat in Batman games are about empowering the player, at the cost of depth.

Ape Agitator posted:

Again, this might be owing to my overall skill level but I really developed over the course of the game much greater ability. I think there's depth in the fighting system to be found and the steady introduction of more tools as you progressed also upped the ways you could tackle a mass of enemies. And the feedback of the wind going out of your sails when you broke a combo with bad timing or a poor choice was a strong way to shape your play. I really went from "Streets of Rage" to "I am Batman" and felt comfortable enough to go right into "no hints" hard mode right afterwards.

I think it's fantastic that the game can create this feeling in players, I unfortunately just don't get that from playing it.

Aphrodite
Jun 27, 2006

MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH


MUFFlNS posted:

One thing I find interesting however is that EA is adopting the same release schedule as Activision has with their COD games, except maybe releasing games even more frequently? They seem to be making GBS threads out Battlefield/Medal of Honor games so often that they're starting to actually outdo Activision for shoveling poo poo into the market, even though EA like to mouth off about COD games releasing each year.

Annual releases were EA's thing long before they were Activision's.

There was a year and a half between Bad Company 2 and Battlefield 3, though.

THE AWESOME GHOST
Oct 21, 2005

THAT'S WHAT THE SONG WAS REALLY ABOUT


I pretty much have the exact same feelings as you on combat systems bleep, but I liked Batman AA's combat less because of the combat and more because of the awesome out of combat stuff.

To me the best part of the game was sneaking around or figuring out how to get to new areas, the combat often seemed like a punishment for getting caught like in MGS. Not that it was horrible, it just didn't seem like the point of the game.

Morpheus
Apr 18, 2008
HAMDOGS: Like staring into the Flame of God

THE AWESOME GHOST posted:

I pretty much have the exact same feelings as you on combat systems bleep, but I liked Batman AA's combat less because of the combat and more because of the awesome out of combat stuff.

To me the best part of the game was sneaking around or figuring out how to get to new areas, the combat often seemed like a punishment for getting caught like in MGS. Not that it was horrible, it just didn't seem like the point of the game.

No way, best way to play was to find the hugest group milling about you can, then do a charged dive (or whatever it was called) to immediately take down one or even more guys at once, then as the rest are reeling, throw down explosives and beat the poo poo out of everyone else before they know what the hell just happened.

Arkham Asylum and City are the only games I've played where I would actively seek out as many battles as I could, because it was just so fun. Plus, if I decided I didn't want to finish the fight, I could just bat-zip away.

ElwoodCuse
Jan 11, 2004

we're puttin' the band back together

a shameful boehner posted:

Does anyone know where the SSX thread went? I GameFly'd it and am...somewhat...enjoying it but I'd like to see if people had similar reactions to me with the lovely shoehorned WoW-esque itemization and the crevasses that go on forever. Meh.

The good tracks are lots of fun and global events are a really awesome way to do online multiplayer. The problem is that the tracks where you run the risk of falling into holes all the time suck. They are the minority, though.

If you fail a story mode event enough times (you don't always need to finish first to pass them, either), you can skip all of them except the very last one.

Cartoon Man
Jan 31, 2004



ElwoodCuse posted:

The good tracks are lots of fun and global events are a really awesome way to do online multiplayer. The problem is that the tracks where you run the risk of falling into holes all the time suck. They are the minority, though.

If you fail a story mode event enough times (you don't always need to finish first to pass them, either), you can skip all of them except the very last one.

I may have to give this another shot. I bought it and played to like the third mountain before putting it down for other games. I tried to master the right analogue stick for tricking, but it just seemed like I was waggling it around without really using it to make good combo decisions. Should I just give it up and switch the game to classic button press mode for tricks? I really wanted to learn to use the stick, but maybe I should admit defeat.

I also got bored of the same-ness to all the tracks, but maybe I didn't give the game enough of a chance.

Is the new DLC that is supposed to have classic SSX-type tracks any good?

DangerKat
Nov 5, 2009

I approach you from the front and you're kinda like "wow this dude's pretty serious."

Then I walk away and you're like "damn he likes to party. with two R's."


You should absolutely use the buttons over the right stick. And the track DLC is good because it lacks death pits. There are long drop points but you won't die at any point.

ImpAtom
May 24, 2007

Watch that tongue... sticky!


bleep posted:

Of course this means it's more accessible like you said, but the praise the combat gets is pretty crazy to me. The tools stop the game being a total bore, and it can be interesting to mess around with them, but I find they are either unnecessary or are treated as too much of a direct counter to certain enemy types. The game ends up feeling brainless to me, much like the God of War series. They create a variety of tools for the player to use, but there is not much reason to explore the options they give you and no real depth beyond the surface.

See, I feel the exact opposite. Pretty much every single thing in AC has a purpose. That is what makes it engrossing to me. There's plenty of reason to use every tool available to you and there's nothing that is worthless or useless. You can win fights just by pounding triangle but it's the equivalent of winning fights in DMC by spamming Ebony and Ivory from a distance to chip the boss down to nothing. It works but you're gaming the system to avoid having to do better.

God of War on the other hand has a large number of tools with no distinct purpose at all. You use one or two combos and one spell and you're set. There's no reason to decide which move you're going to use or why and more importantly no encouragement for getting better, whereas your score in AC is directly tied to your variety. The Challenge Rooms make this stand out when figuring out the optimal combination of moves to get the highest variety and the highest combo involves more than just pound buttan because you have somewhat limited enemies and a wrong choice can lead to a worse score.

It is a simple combat system, but it has a surprising amount of depth for one. The feeling of pulling off a long combo with maximum variety is completely different from just winning a fight. My only real complaint is that Disarm does discourage learning how to deal with certain enemies and you miss some of the intricacies of the combat system. (Such as the fact that you've got invincibility frames when Aerial Attacking an enemy with a shield but not when one without.)

ImpAtom fucked around with this message at May 17, 2012 around 15:07

ElwoodCuse
Jan 11, 2004

we're puttin' the band back together

DangerKat posted:

You should absolutely use the buttons over the right stick. And the track DLC is good because it lacks death pits. There are long drop points but you won't die at any point.

Absolutely. To elaborate on the controls, I played all the previous SSX games to death and immediately started out with the classic controls, but after kinda scraping along I switched to the new style (with buttons, not the stick) and it didn't take long at all to adjust.

DangerKat
Nov 5, 2009

I approach you from the front and you're kinda like "wow this dude's pretty serious."

Then I walk away and you're like "damn he likes to party. with two R's."


ImpAtom posted:

See, I feel the exact opposite. Pretty much every single thing in AC has a purpose. That is what makes it engrossing to me. There's plenty of reason to use every tool available to you and there's nothing that is worthless or useless. You can win fights just by pounding triangle but it's the equivalent of winning fights in DMC by spamming Ebony and Ivory from a distance to chip the boss down to nothing. It works but you're gaming the system to avoid having to do better.

God of War on the other hand has a large number of tools with no distinct purpose at all. You use one or two combos and one spell and you're set. There's no reason to decide which move you're going to use or why and more importantly no encouragement for getting better, whereas your score in AC is directly tied to your variety. The Challenge Rooms make this stand out when figuring out the optimal combination of moves to get the highest variety and the highest combo involves more than just pound buttan because you have somewhat limited enemies and a wrong choice can lead to a worse score.

It is a simple combat system, but it has a surprising amount of depth for one. The feeling of pulling off a long combo with maximum variety is completely different from just winning a fight. My only real complaint is that Disarm does discourage learning how to deal with certain enemies and you miss some of the intricacies of the combat system. (Such as the fact that you've got invincibility frames when Aerial Attacking an enemy with a shield but not when one without.)

Completely agree with this. For the most part, I feel God of War's different combat actions are fairly situation based, using this combo/magic/weapon based entirely on who you are facing. In the Arkham games, everything in your arsenal fits in any situation and they all build your combo while also taking down mobs faster. I love both series but the fluidity and variety in Arkham's combat system is second to none.

For another game comparison, Assassin's Creed features an attack/counter system that utilizes timing and gadgets/weapons in the process. The key difference is that AC's combo potential is limited by the AI's location and whose turn it decided it was to approach Ezio. In the Arkahm series, it's really limited only by you and your ability to hit all the beats and utilizing all your skills.

MUFFlNS
Mar 7, 2004



Aphrodite posted:

Annual releases were EA's thing long before they were Activision's.

There was a year and a half between Bad Company 2 and Battlefield 3, though.

They put out a Medal of Honor game between those two releases though didn't they? That's pretty crazy when you think about it, pushing out three major FPS releases in one and a half years, and then trying to trash talk Activision for releasing one COD game each year

Crowbear
Jun 17, 2009

You freak me out, man!


Jeff Gerstmann, a man who has been in the industry for a long time and is not easily impressed, tweeted this

@jeffgerstmann posted:

Got to watch a quick demo of The Last of Us yesterday that looks outstanding. Definitely one of the coolest things I've seen in awhile.

and now I'm somehow even more excited for this game than I was before

ImpAtom
May 24, 2007

Watch that tongue... sticky!


DangerKat posted:

For another game comparison, Assassin's Creed features an attack/counter system that utilizes timing and gadgets/weapons in the process. The key difference is that AC's combo potential is limited by the AI's location and whose turn it decided it was to approach Ezio. In the Arkahm series, it's really limited only by you and your ability to hit all the beats and utilizing all your skills.

Yeah, Assassin's Creed feels to me like Batman done wrong. There's a lot of moves but little reason to use them and the best and optimal way to win every fight really is counter-counter-counter or counter-killstreak in Brotherhood onwards. It's not terrible but I think playing them right after each other really highlights what Batman does right.

SpacePig
Apr 4, 2007

He's always
right there.


Crowbear posted:

Jeff Gerstmann, a man who has been in the industry for a long time and is not easily impressed, tweeted this


and now I'm somehow even more excited for this game than I was before

I dunno. The fact that it's "Watch" "Looks" and "Seen" doesn't make it particularly promising to me. I think everyone knows at this point that it looks very nice.

Crowbear
Jun 17, 2009

You freak me out, man!


SpacePig posted:

I dunno. The fact that it's "Watch" "Looks" and "Seen" doesn't make it particularly promising to me. I think everyone knows at this point that it looks very nice.

I assume he used those words because it's a gameplay demo that was played in front of them, but they weren't allowed to play themselves.

For reference there's pre-E3 conferences going on right now where some publishers show their games to the press ahead of the show.

Aphrodite
Jun 27, 2006

MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH MUNCH


MUFFlNS posted:

They put out a Medal of Honor game between those two releases though didn't they? That's pretty crazy when you think about it, pushing out three major FPS releases in one and a half years, and then trying to trash talk Activision for releasing one COD game each year

They did, but that's a different dev studio (Though DICE did the multiplayer, I think?)

AngryBooch
Sep 26, 2009


Aphrodite posted:

They did, but that's a different dev studio (Though DICE did the multiplayer, I think?)

So are Infinity Ward and Treyarch.

EA does Battlefield-Medal of Honor alternating years. Activision does CoD from IW-CoD from Treyarch alternating years.

...!
Oct 5, 2003

Let's go trophy hunting!

Stelas posted:

A well-timed dodge roll as you stand up can usually get you out of a stunlock - it's easier to do if you've purchased the upgrade, but it's always an option, especially if you leap towards them so they kill themselves next molotov.

Not sure which boss regens, though I'm going to guess it's the flier? That's pretty much the hardest guy in the game, but as long as you keep tabs roughly on where he is and have both a decent long range weapon and a shotgun to hand, you can generally knock him down sufficiently while also dealing with the zombies.

It's definitely not a game for everyone, and probably only Yakuza fans should be playing it, but it is completable at the very least.

I don't think I was clear enough. The game literally dropped me in a pile of zombies with no room to take a single step, much less dodge. I should also point out that I loved Yakuza 3 and 4 (came drat near platting 4) but this game has pretty much turned me off of the entire series. It was nothing but frustration up to that point and that last bit of bullshit was the final straw. I highly recommend that no one play Yakuza Dead Souls, especially not fans of the series.

Mechanigma
Apr 17, 2007

ur already ded


The answer to that is wakeup sweep and then roll. The kick has armour on it so it guarantees that you will at least stand up. I don't think the game emphasised the usefulness of the kick upgrades enough because they really are lifesavers.

Agreed that the flying boss is pretty bullshit though. I think I ended up cheesing it the first time by standing behind a car on the westernmost part of the map where the regular zombies were too dumb to reach me, and then sniping the boss.

I really did end up liking the game despite its faults, but I still wouldn't recommend it to anyone because it does take a lot of getting used to.

Captain Walker
Apr 7, 2009

Mother knows best
Listen to your mother
It's a scary world out there


I humbly submit that time you spend "getting used to" a Yakuza game is time better spent playing a different Yakuza game and punching everybody until their ancestors are begging for mercy and giving you free items.

Code Jockey
Jan 24, 2006
I shoot my gun and Java be dancin'


^^ I guess this is a good point too - Dead Souls is a very different game than 3 and 4 [and 1 and 2 for that matter] and if it's really that frustrating, then watch an LP I guess, because the story was still pretty cool I thought and it's fun seeing everyone's favorite spine-crushers in action

The flying boss is indeed bullshit and the first time the lag bug really got to me, but drat I still loved Dead Souls

Also I'm fairly sure you can cancel his regen if you shoot him when he does it because he was doing that, I noticed it, literally screamed gently caress THIS BULLSHIT [bad lag and getting my rear end beat the whole match was rather trying on my patience, glad I was home alone] and started unloading on him and he died despite having his health bar back to like 50%. vv

I get it though. I get every word you're saying, because to some degree or another I felt the same things playing it, but I guess we differ in that despite it all I still loved the game and I guess it just clicked right with me, I dunno. It was horrendously frustrating at times and yeah, flying boss and his infinite zombies can suck a dick though.

Policenaut
Jul 11, 2008



I love the franchise but Dead Souls really is the worst game in it. Like it's really just a tech demo for Binary Domain and it shows. It's a complete waste of the franchise too, because the game by its nature is a "greatest hits" and they proceed to do jack poo poo with it. Thanks guys.

Also re: Yakuza games, I wrote up a Yakuza general thread a couple days ago. I'll post that probably later tonight so Yakuza chat can go there.

Fuzz
Jun 2, 2003

I'm an annoying drama queen fuckass with an online videogame grudge, but I still love Starfleet Dental

Okay, my PS3 is finally fixed and I got my E3 passes.


LET'S DO THIS!

...!
Oct 5, 2003

Let's go trophy hunting!

No permanent harm done. I threw the game in the mailbox and spent the rest of my gaming time last night playing the just-purchased Clash of Heroes. And just received Max Payne 3 from Gamefly so tonight I'll probably be playing something that's actually fun.

Yechezkel
Oct 5, 2004



Lots of games coming to PSN next week.

PS3 Full Games:
Sorcery
Super Street Fighter IV Arcade Edition
Tom Clancy’s Ghost Recon: Future Soldier

PSN Games:
Dr. Who: The Eternity Clock
Dungeons & Dragons: Daggerdale
Alex Kidd in Miracle World
Monster World IV
The Revenge of Shinobi
Wonderboy in Monster Land
Wonderboy in Monster World
Super Hang-On

PS2 Classics:
Syphon Filter: The Omega Strain
Need for Speed: Most Wanted

PSone Classics:
Alone in the Dark: The New Nightmare

PS3 Demo:
Journey


update: Pure Chess might come next week as well.

Yechezkel fucked around with this message at May 18, 2012 around 05:02

...!
Oct 5, 2003

Let's go trophy hunting!

Miracle World is the only Alex Kidd game that's any good, honestly (and it's the first in the series). The only really, really, really terrible thing about it is that it's one of those games where you can gently caress yourself over by missing an item early on that's required to progress at a point much later in the game. I'd recommend using a FAQ while playing. And you may need to abuse save states on the bosses because you can be screwed over by the randomization.

Tamagod Sushi
Oct 26, 2009

One Bad Muthapaca

Yechezkel posted:

Lots of games coming to PSN next week.

PS3 Demo:
Journey


Getting more people to try it is great and all, but how do you have a demo for a game that's basically two hours max?

Shalinor
Jun 10, 2002

Can I buy you a rootbeer?


Tamagod Sushi posted:

Getting more people to try it is great and all, but how do you have a demo for a game that's basically two hours max?
No time limit, and in the same world with others, but you can't pick up any scarf items. All you can do is watch as everyone else romps through the first area and then flies away.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Samurai Sanders
Nov 4, 2003



Shalinor posted:

No time limit, and in the same world with others, but you can't pick up any scarf items. All you can do is watch as everyone else romps through the first area and then flies away.
I don't know if that is the best or worst idea for a demo ever.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply
«960 »