|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Thu Mar 11, 2010 11:05 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 11, 2010 11:13 pm
 |
|
|
|
Biohazard EXTREME The King of Misery Why is it that REmake and Zero have way better qualities,yet 2 and 3 are among the most popular? Well, the reason why I DON'T like 0 is primarily because of Marcus. I mean, you got your scale there... Marcus would be about a 1 on how "Resident Evil" that character is. And I'm talking about the Queen Marcus, the one dressed up like a white mage, singing opera on top of a hill. That was the biggest turn off for me, which puts RE0 pretty low on my scale. But still high enough that I bother playing it. Remake, in my opinion is the best RE there is... The King of Misery Now someone here-don't remember who-said they like the City atmosphere better then the mansion basis.That's just ridiculous.With the city comes non-realistic events-disregaurding the fact I am speaking of a zombie outbreak.Why not just drive a car threw the whole damn thing.If there's a Police Station or a Gun/Pawn shop whenever you run low on ammo,why not a Gas Station. And the exploration;when a zombie outbreak occurs,all of the sudden streets,and allies and s**t just form a twisted path in a labyrinthine sort of way.It makes far more sense to have people seeking refuge in a large mansion that they ome across knowing that they probably won't survive yet deciding they have no other option,rather than runing throughout a whole city.Given the fact is doesn't make too much sense that the mansions are filled with traps/puzzles and creatures,but then again that's how the storyline works. Well, you kind of answered your own question there. I mean, yes, at the beginning, people get into cars they drive off, they panic, they crash, you end up with streets that are completely blocked off by destroyed cars, which creates the tighter quarters, in addition to all the barricades that were put up when the city went into martial law. People raid gun stores, but can't shoot worth crap, so they waste a bunch of bullets trying to shoot the zombies... In the hearts, I'm guessing. They get eaten, more zombies. Plus when people panic, they can act stupid. There'd be probably many cases of, "This is MY Shelter, not yours!" Shoots the guy, tosses the body away. The smell attracts zombies, etc. etc. Plus a destroyed city with burning cars, broken windows, etc, is just plain cool. It's an awesome sight.Oh, and Leon's hair isn't gay, it's bicurious. EDIT: But honestly, the biggest reason for why RE2 and 3 are the most popular is probably the distribution. I mean, look, at first they're released on PlayStation, which already had a HUGE market. Then they port it to PC, DreamCast, and even the very same GameCube... There's just a lot more of a chance for people to play them, plus they've been out longer.
I said it. And that's why I prefer the city setting. Plus, I've been a city slicker all my life. I just love the city. |
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 11, 2010 11:21 pm
|
|
|
 |
Chase Me To The End I said it. And that's why I prefer the city setting. Plus, I've been a city slicker all my life. I just love the city.
Hey, don't get me wrong, if RE3 had been remade as faithfully as REmake, with the same kind of atmosphere, gorgeous graphics, SAME GAMEPLAY STYLE, couple of extra ereas and all that awesome stuff, it would probably be my favorite. Or RE2. But the fact of the matter is, Remake was not just a throwback to RE's origins, but it did capture all that, and it's the most photorealistic game of the previous generation. And I don't just mean the graphics, but something about the way the characters were animated... They just seemed so much more human than anything else I've seen. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 12, 2010 7:41 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 12, 2010 11:12 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Mar 13, 2010 12:14 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Mar 13, 2010 12:20 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Mar 13, 2010 10:35 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Mar 13, 2010 10:37 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Mar 13, 2010 10:38 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Mar 13, 2010 10:47 am
|
|
|
|
Seriously, dude, where do you find this s**t?
The biggest problem I see with Sony Move is the unfilfilment of potential. Like, at the tech demo, they had BOTH controllers fully motion controllers... Now they're down to 1, and I don't understand why. With two, you could have so much more. You could have two handed control, essentially. Things like... Well, like that sword and shield demo they did? You could have dual wield sword or something.
Heck, you could have the next generaiton of driving games. You drive with your left hand, and handle the standard with your right. Or if it's a trucker game, you could grope the housewife you've picked up with your right. It just seems like a lost opportunity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Mar 13, 2010 11:07 am
|
|
|
|
Nintendo is probably one of the only companies in the world than can say, "Okay, make this great innovation... If it fails... Or fails to gain attention, no big deal."
Maybe next year sony will present "Sony Fingers" that's a motion glove... Who knows.
Either way, unless there's gonna be games that have really good storylines, art direction... Basically, unless we're gonna get like, Uncharteds, Heavenly Swords, and other games LIKE that, which require the use of the motion controller, I'm not gonna bother.
If it's all gonna be, Casual games and Marios (not literally, just games with no real storylines), then I'm probably not gonna bother.
I am curious what kind of third party support it'll get. Cause it's one thing to say, "We're making a game for the Wii." and it's another to say, "We're making a game for the 360 and PS3, but with the PS3, we're gonna fully integrate the Move into it."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Mar 13, 2010 3:13 pm
|
|
|
|
Biohazard EXTREME Nintendo is probably one of the only companies in the world than can say, "Okay, make this great innovation... If it fails... Or fails to gain attention, no big deal."
Uh, what? You think it would have been no big deal for Nintendo if the Wii completely flopped? Sony could've just as easily done the same thing. I'd say that any multibillion dollar corporation that has the kind of resources to sell their hardware at a $200 or so loss per unit -- the same multibillion dollar company that lost more money selling their current gen console than they made with their previous gen console, and is still able to stay in business has just as much, if not more resources to make that kind of move than Nintendo did. Especially taking into consideration that Nintendo got their asses completey handed to them by Sony for the past two console wars. The only thing that kept them alive was the handheld market.
Anyway, from what I've seen of it, yeah, it's a Wiimote. A slightly enhanced Wiimote Plus. But nothing I saw in any of those demonstrations was really anything different from, or anything I couldn't do on a Wii. It's slightly more accurate with HD PS3 graphics, which is certainly nothing to complain about, but as far as the games go, it's pretty much everything we've already seen on the Wii. They even got a sports game. Though I guess you could say it has a more realistic, less "kiddie" art direction to it. Whateves.
I think it could definitely be a big hit for PS3 FPSs, though. Anyway, I'm definitely interested in the third party support, too. Ultimately, competition means that both sides are gonna have to step their game up with quality titles, and that means more fun for me. Plus, games like Madworld that didn't get a fair shake on the Wii may be granted a second life and turn up some profit with a Move port, and then maybe they'll make a sequel. It's win-win.
But yeah. Enjoy your Nintendo Wii controls, PS3 fanboys. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Mar 13, 2010 3:32 pm
|
|
|
|
Well, if the Wii completely flopped, sure, it would've been a big deal. But let's say, if Wii Motion Plus flopped, it wouldn't have been a big deal. I guess that statement mostly applies to add ons. I mean, let's face it, the Wii was already ridiculously popular and well sold before "Wii Fit" came along. So if Wii Fit didn't pick up, they still would've been good.
Nintendo spends millions of dollars on pure experimentation. How do you think Nintendogs were born? Nintendo has a whole research and development division, which basically means they got a bunch of guys going, "Let's experiment with this. Now let's experiment with this." and if there's anything born from it, they develop it further, and then sell it. It's how Nintendogs got started, and heck, it's probably how most of its innovations got started.
I honestly believe that the Wii just happened. I don't believe there was a single guy or group that said, "Okay, so here's our idea..." I think they were just experimenting with it and said, "hey, this is cool," they showed it to Nintendo, Nintendo said, "Can you make it functional and marketable?" They did, and there ya go.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
