[dahssun]

ZP.., on 21 March 2010 - 04:58 PM, said:

GoW 3 certainly has the graphics, but this is relatively easy when the camera is fixed. While videos from it impressed me a great deal as a visual spectacle with its detail, effects and choreography, technically it doesn't seem so remarkable to me. I concede that the character models are practically a match for any 1-on-1 fighting game though.

If the fixed camera is perfect as it was in GOW1, then who cares?

[Team Andromeda]

ZP.., on 21 March 2010 - 08:58 AM, said:

I haven't played GoW 3, but I get the impression from most reviews and gamers that Bayonetta is the deeper and more enjoyable game to play. It is the new benchmark, not Ninja Gaiden. I bought a guide book on it and it's over 400 A4 pages long in small print, weighs nearly 2kg, has accompanying online videos, and still doesn't go into quite as much detail as I thought it would do given the page count. Yet the game is still fairly easy to play through to the end on the lower difficulty levels. Bayonetta really is the closest thing to the Virtua Fighter of action games. Perhaps more so, given that I enjoyed the Jeanne fights more than any battle in a fighting game. I would have liked a 2 player vs. mode for just those bits alone.

GoW 3 certainly has the graphics, but this is relatively easy when the camera is fixed. While videos from it impressed me a great deal as a visual spectacle with its detail, effects and choreography, technically it doesn't seem so remarkable to me. I concede that the character models are practically a match for any 1-on-1 fighting game though.

I like Bayonetta and its combat is so deep and varied its increasable, but for all that, I think NG Combat Combat system is far better , I like the weapons more, and that a dedicated button is there for dodge/blocks , I liked NG II more as a game -The stages and fighters were that bit better , I also liked Ninja Blade more over Bay
GOW 3 is just jaw dropping and on a Scale I've never seen before in any video game (and I really mean that) , and every new level, just keeps on getting better and better . Its a near perfect blend of puzzles , platforming and action.

[andy]

I would like to play, but my ps3 still sits here non working (turns on and shows the menu but wont load movies or games) lasted a year and a half. Its been sitting around for about 6 months because sony wants me to pay 150 dollars to have it fixed. it can sit here and rot if thats the case. >

[GunnerX]

andy, on 22 March 2010 - 09:38 AM, said:

I would like to play, but my ps3 still sits here non working (turns on and shows the menu but wont load movies or games) lasted a year and a half. Its been sitting around for about 6 months because sony wants me to pay 150 dollars to have it fixed. it can sit here and rot if thats the case. >

You're not alone. My friend's co-worker got the Yellow Light of Death and actually had SONY replace the drive for $180 CAD. That was 4 months ago. This weekend, she got the YLOD again. Another $180!!!

[andy]

EVERY sony product (aside from ONE tv) has lasted 2 years or less.. thats 3 differnet products that crapped out! Pretty sad. not giving sony 150 more dollars. I'll do without.

[whippingboy]

Posted by request from Team Andromeda.

Since sending this PM- others have also posted my point. Oddly, TA you yourself have admitted you prefer the gameplay of other action games like Ninja Gaiden - so how are we expected to "believe the hype" when the Hype has rated this game HIGHER? I've said before I'm sure it's good for it's fans, but unlike my other comparisons- this franchise is STALE- I'd say the same thing if there was a Ninja Gaiden 3! By 3 games if you add NOTHING that changes HOW the game is played - either by adding additional modes or strategies- then you're simply milking it. Call of Duty even changed things up with Modern Warfare by adding the experience for multiplayer- and then adding co op challenge levels of MW2. The core gameplay may be rather similar to COD1- but there are plenty of other differences to the $60 purchase. GOW3...eh not so much other than graphics... which we expect in a sequel. If Call of Duty games by Infinity Ward was simply COD1 with better graphics and more weapons, it wouldn't sell the way it does today. And I'd be bashing Ninja Gaiden 3 just as bad if someone told me to believe the hype if it was the same as NG 2 with more weapons and pretty graphics.

By your examples in your earlier posts- we shouldn't expect developers to add any new modes to existing gameplay then! So by your definition Halo Reach should be just like Halo 1- NO ONLINE, NO LEADERBOARDS, NO FORGE, NO CO OP- because none of this counts as new gameplay? Or you just take all that for granted- but we somehow shouldn't give credit where it's due and admit that takes a lot of effort and adds a huge amount of replay and value to the gamer?

But yet we should "Believe the hype" that God of War 3 is the best game around when it added NOTHING that other games in the genre (or it's prequels) didn't already?

And yeah- Every Zelda and Mario game is rather different from it's direct predecessor. SMB1 to SMB2, SMB3, Mario on SNES (ok THAT one was a lot like SMB3) Mario64, Mario Sunshine, Mario Galaxy to NEW Super Mario Bros (3 games later they revisit the SMB3 formula) you think ALL THOSE games in that order play JUST AS SIMILAR as God of War 1,2,3?

Sorry, You're in denial.

I have no doubt God of War 3 is a great game- but I don't see how your comparisons are in any way similar- you ignore and discount what other series add to their games from one iteration to the other and say it's not gameplay. So because Sam Fisher still uses a gun- or Mario can always use his ass as a weapon I'm supposed to say none of the other changes in these games make a difference in the gameplay?

God of war games feel like episodes of the same game rather than sequels they're so similar.

[Team Andromeda]

That's more like it Whip .

Yes you can believe the hype , GOD Of War III was expected to show off what the PS3 could really do , and it does just that , on a scale never ever seen before in any game .
I really don't get this issues over changes to gameplay , All I see is people asking and demanding Sonic goes back to his old gameplay routes, Sonic Heroes was a dramatic change to the core gameplay , and instead of getting praised for trying something new, all the fans wanted to play just as Sonic and the old gameplay to return , HALO II and MGS II make the simplest of changes (ie new controllable character ) and there's uproar
I'm playing Mass effect II , its more of the same , no Multi Player Online modes , no Co-Op , No Force mode , and guess what, no complaints for Whip, for starers. And are the fans of Mass Effect unhappy with hardly anything new being added ?, Did That stopped people raving over the game ?, Stopped the game getting top reviews ? , and are You really expecting drastic changes, to the gameplay for the concision of the trilogy?.

Co-Op, Multi Player is nothing new to HALO and you know it , its been there as part of the series since day one , and even online if you owned the PC version . Not every game needs Multi Player , Co-Op ECT...
Half-Life II most certainly doesn't , and its all the beter for the focus being all on the Multi Player
What next , We're reduced to comparing 3D games to 2D ones now ?. Yes to Play Mario III is to play Mario IV, To Zelda 64 is to play every other 3D Zelda made since , the core gameplay remains exactly the same . Just some new stages and some new moves (exactly like GOD 3) , You 're expecting Mario Galaxy II to play different to Mario Galaxy ???, Most people I know , just want and expect more of the same

How far , have you Got in Bayonetta then whip ?, how many hours are you in to God of War III ? One can rate a game more , but find issues where other games in a similar genre do something better .
I think the AI in FEAR is 2nd to none and the best I've seen in any FPS, but I like Half-Life II more as a Game (is that Ok whip). I think the header and shooting system is brilliant in Pro Evo, but think Fifa is the best football game overall , is that Ok Whip? .
I'm not expecting anything massive changes in HALO Reach , in fact I see in a Interview BUNGiE come out and say they're going to cheery pick all the best bits from the Trilogy, and put it all in one package , and how the Team want to the game to feel more like the Original HALO (BUNGiE words not mine) And Isn't that what a lot of people want , more HALO ?

[whippingboy]

Quote

Mass effect II , its more of the same , no Multi Player Online modes , no Co-Op , No Force mode , and guess what, no complaints for Whip, for starers.

To the best of my knowledge you've seen me say little about the game because I've NOT PLAYED or witnessed the game or a demo of Mass Effect 2! Nice try to bait me though.

Actually, the reason I didn't rush out to get it is the scanning of planets for resources is a dealbreaker for me. It's a crap timewaster/filler that adds no redeeming gameplay for the player. I've seen this mentioned countless times from both friends and reviewers- and since my gaming time is limited- this is a giant turnoff. But if you must know- I could come up with a laundry list of changes they did to the game since the 1st that makes it have a lot more differences with it's prequel than God of War 3 does with GOW 2 or 1.

You can mention 1 or 2 mario or zelda games that are similar- but I mentioned all in the series- there are far more different games in those series than similar ones.

I'm not saying you can't like God of War- I've said that in every post above- that is IS A GOOD GAME- but all you keep pointing out are the GRAPHICS- the lighting/polys, textures, the size of bosses- when others have already said this game locks the camera angle and keeps you in a often small area which allows them to draw whatever "impressive" graphics they want. Even you yourself mentioned the low poly count in certain enemies. But regardless of ANY of that- I still don't doubt it's a good game, and among some of the best the PS3 has to offer ... IF YOU AREN'T ALREADY TIRED TO DEATH OF THESE SEQUELS.

To explain differently, I've never been crazy about this genre to begin with- I've been vocal from the start about that- Devil May Cry was arguably one of the 1st... although you could argue Legacy of Kain/Soul Reaver even preceeded that- however those still focused on exploration more in line with a Metroid and Darkseiders- where God of War is a more linear affair like DMC, Ninja Gaiden and the like.

Those games too are extremely cookie cutter from one to the other- and I bitch about that in other threads- but not nearly as loudly when a God of War comes along because people lose their minds on this series and I have no idea why...

OTHER than it's exclusive to Sony- and thus the Hype drums are cranked to 11. I can remember when DMC and Onimusha were exclusive and they used to get the same treatment...when they went multiplatform the Hype died...

Coincidence? Or just did those games just beat a dead horse with one too many sequels with too little new between them?

Don't look now, but GOW is headed on the same road to mediocrity.

This post has been edited by whippingboy: 23 March 2010 - 12:11 PM

[Team Andromeda]

Quote

To the best of my knowledge you've seen me say little about the game because I've NOT PLAYED or witnessed the game or a demo of Mass Effect 2! Nice try to bait me though

Its not a way to bait you , Just simply saying Mass effect 2 doesn't have such modes , don't see you coming into the Thread and bemoaning the lack of Online , You bought GOW III yet then whip ?

Quote

You can mention 1 or 2 mario or zelda games that are similar- but I mentioned all in the series- there are far more different games in those series than similar ones

And that's because they do play very similar, especially the Zelda 3D series.

Quote

I'm not saying you can't like God of War- I've said that in every post above- that is IS A GOOD GAME- but all you keep pointing out are the GRAPHICS- the lighting/polys, textures, the size of bosses- when others have already said this game locks the camera angle and keeps you in a often small area which allows them to draw whatever "impressive" graphics they wan

Ahhh , I take it we're not playing the Final game then ? You'll be in for a shock , and the camera system is far better than the likes of Bayonttea. God of War 3 isn't cheating its all there, all in game , and there's nothing
around that can touch it (Gfx wise) .

Quote

To explain differently, I've never been crazy about this genre to begin with

If one just said that at the start , it would have been the end of it . why all this rubbish that it doesn't have the depth of Bay , when you don't own both titles I do not know

Quote

OTHER than it's exclusive to Sony- and thus the Hype drums are cranked to 11. I can remember when DMC and Onimusha were exclusive and they used to get the same treatment.

Oh I think people did rave about DMC , It was a landmark title . Maybe because GOW III is a SONY exclusive is what winding people up a bit and so Lets try and find every fault with the game there .
I really doubt HALO was the 1st FPS whip , didn't stop X-Box fans raving about it , I really Doubt Gears Of war was the 1st 3rd Person action , but 360 fans went nuts about it , and its sequel (which offered little new over the 1st) Yet somehow its ok to rave about those titles ?
Now play the final game , and after about of a Hours of gameplay , watch the game up its pace , and the Graphics and effects (motion Blur HDR Lighting) go to a scale never seen before in a game of this type . Just to give you a small example , I've never seen a marble floor , look so real and that's just one detail in the game .

[whippingboy]

We keep skating around the issues:
TA what you MEANT = "I love the graphics of this game- believe the hype when you hear this is the best graphics in this genre seen anywhere!"

Whipp response ="When you put it THAT way hey cool- I'll have to check out those graphics"

I took "Believe the hype" to mean all the reviews that I saw giving the game a near 10/10- which I clearly don't understand when the gameplay hasn't changed over the course of the series.

[Team Andromeda]

whippingboy, on 24 March 2010 - 07:06 PM, said:

I took "Believe the hype" to mean all the reviews that I saw giving the game a near 10/10- which I clearly don't understand when the gameplay hasn't changed over the course of the series.

Like I say , I doubt people want or expect gameplay to be changed in a Trilogy . Halo III plays like HALO (did that stop people raving about it or loving it ?) , Mass Effect II plays like Mass Effect, and if we even get to see Too Human II and III I'll expect them be more of the same ., What next whip moaning that shining force 3 scenario 2 and 3 plays very similar to what's gone before ? .
The same sites that gave GOD III great scores , also gave HALO III, GTA IV , Gears Of war II top marks, when they play almost exactly like what's gone before, and there were quite a lot of people that raved over Gears II, GTA IV , HALO III


The real issues is you don't own either Bay or God of War III (just the GOD 1& 2 collection) yet feel able to make wide sweeping statements on which game is better , and comments on Camera angles . I wouldn't say too much, but Bay's is pretty poor at moments of intense action . And before the 360 defence force , come out in force .
No this isn't because its a SONY Exclusives, because I felt the same over Ninja Gaiden II . Lots of people were having a go at the game , based on demo code along , which is a shame as the Game really doesn't get going until Chapter 7 . I do like people to actually play games , when they're making such comments as if they've played the title in question

[tripwire]

I would say that Mass Effect 2 plays differently enough from 1 that it takes some getting used to. It's obviously not a rebuild of any sort, but the differences are noticeable (and honestly not always for the better). No rover, thermal clips (WTF?), more emphasis on the action part of the game, etc. Saying ME2 plays like ME1 just shows that you haven't played the game at all and you shouldn't make any comments cuz they are so obviously wrong.

Halo ODST was a rip at full price because not only was it more of the same, it was so frickin' short! Half or a third price and I'd be singing it's praises.

Also, a game (in your example NG 2) should not take to chapter 7 to get good. I can understand heavily story driven games (like RPGs) taking a few hours to "get going", but not 25 (even for an RPG!), or up to chapter 7.

No comment on God 3 since I haven't played it and Team A would chew me out for making ANY sort of comment on a game not played. *laughs and rolls eyes at the same time* Although I agree that games playing the same is not necessarily a bad thing, some tweaks - including non-gameplay stuff like the video recording in Halo 3 - is appreciated. Being the first God game on PS3 I'm inclined to give it a bit more leeway as the visual impact would be refreshing - oh crap!, I just commented on a game I haven't even seen let alone play!!! X_X

I think you guys just need to agree to disagree - both of you guys are trying too hard to make yer points that your defense gets weaker and weaker.

[Team Andromeda]

Quote

Also, a game (in your example NG 2) should not take to chapter 7 to get good. I can understand heavily story driven games (like RPGs) taking a few hours to "get going", but not 25 (even for an RPG!), or up to chapter 7.

Well some games take a good while to get going , I remember Castlevania IV being really slow at the start , it then transforms its self, to one of the best games ever made. I remember texting Batman about how incredible the action was in NG II Chapter 7 , which is hands down for me , the best action stage to any game of this type . NG II starts off really good , then just ups the anti after Chapters 7.

Quote

No comment on God 3 since I haven't played it and Team A would chew me out for making ANY sort of comment on a game not played.

No I wouldn't do that , I only have an issues with some points , I think it does live up the Hype , it does look incredible , but you really need to play the Final game to see that .
Remember what I was told , when I had the bare face check, to moan at the HALO III demo , wait for the Final game I was told , don't I know the meaning of Beta code ECT, ECT.
Didn't we all used to have a disagreement with EDGE, when he would knock X-Box games that he never played , much less owned .

I like have debates with Whip , Its nothing nasty or Personal . But if you're going to take issues with what some people say about this or that game , its really a good idea to make sure you've played it yourself , or at least point out , you're only going on what you've seen in a demo . Lets not act like the PS2 faithful that would knock anything to do with rival machines, while never playing their games

[whippingboy]

Quote

I think you guys just need to agree to disagree - both of you guys are trying too hard to make yer points that your defense gets weaker and weaker.

Which is why I tried to take this dialog offline w/ TA by proposing a debate in PM instead.

You ignore any of the "added value" these other sequels bring to the table and then say we all expect more of the same in a sequel- despite my best attempt to point out many games that continually attempt to "raise the bar" in some small way- whether it be in new online modes or social leaderboards/stat tracking or experience.

I've NEVER claimed to be an authority on ANY game, history or system- I think members here know me well enough as I've posted many times over that I'm more a fan of the industry than I am of the games themselves. I've also commented many times- if your core gameplay can't get someone within 15-30 minutes you've missed a potential SALE. All the gameplay AFTER that amounts to someones' opinion of the ENTIRE experience.

Metro 2033 I hear has a great environment, plot and some truely unique ideas- but the CORE GAMEPLAY as an FPS BLOWS. Unfair AI and accuracy are the brunt of the problems. So do you applaud the game as a whole due to it's uniqueness or do you say it sucks because at the end of the day you are playing it for the gameplay? Some Just Cause 2 reviews give a different review- the gameplay is insanely fun due to the variety in environment and your ability to do just about anything- but the missions they make you do are mundane and tired - so progression in the game isn't fun- but if you just want to screw around in the sandbox, it's a blast. I've yet to try even demos of either.

Your fascination of having to complete a game in order to have an opinion may be accurate for a GAME REVIEWER- I expect the media to review based on the ENTIRE experience. I DON'T expect gamers, hardcore or casual on a message board to do the same. Perhaps you'd find more satisfying discussion addressing your comments to magazine / content publishing editors?

I played Sonic the Hedgehog 1 when it released as an instore demo for 5 minutes to know I liked what it did differently so much from Super Mario Bros that I HAD to have a Genesis finally. That said, the game was extremely short and power ups and enemies / gameplay not as diverse IMHO than Mario. Didn't change the fact I liked it better. Maybe it was all the pretty colors or the hip hedgehog attitude or the overall speed of the game?

I also NEVER owned a NES because I thought the limited color palette too poor for me to invest my hard earned cash as a kid, I rather play arcades- and instead played NES and Turbo Graphix for YEARS at other kid's houses until my Genesis came along w/ Sonic. (I avoided Genesis as the launch games in the US failed to impress me) Now that's ME- you probably think despite the fact I never owned an NES or TurboGraphix or Neo Geo I can't comment on their games, yet I'm very familiar with a large library of their games and yes I have a very firm opinion on many of them.

Sorry if you don't approve- you're entitled to your opinion...

I'm just as entitled to mine- regardless of what I've seen or played- of them - if you wish to consider that uninformed- so be it. But something tells me if I BUY God of War 3 or Bayonetta, my opinion won't change of either- neither game resonates with me, but I can't articulate why other than- I get bored.
God of War= easier combos, more casual pace due to slower fighting style - attempt to create epic battles due to scope and settings. Feels more like an adventure game.

Bayonetta= old school Sega campy dialog w/ overly complicated subplots similar to dialog of House of the Dead/Resident Evil meets Devil May Cry- action is on par w/ faster fight pace than GOW (more akin to Ninja Gaiden/DMC) with combo options that add a large amount of diversity,depth and variation that provides a game experience that can be appreciated by "hardcore gamers" and novices alike. Feels more like a twitch/arcade experience.

Meanwhile games I like:

I LOVED ODST and it's newfound improved storytelling and mood added to the Halo universe- without co op, I would not have finished it as quickly - the plot is about a TEAM and with a TEAM you appreciate it further. Reason why Battlefield Bad Company 2 is a bit of a letdown.

I enjoyed Gun on X360 so much because it felt like I was interacting w/ a western film with a great cast of characters (Something I never feel when playing Grand Theft Auto). It took the sandbox idea of GTA, and the gunplay of Max Payne and combined them with mediocre graphics but GREAT voiceacting and a decent plot (predictable- but on par to any western film I've seen)

I don't expect you to like either game- and I can write paragraphs of how I thought both games could have been done a lot better- but I played both of those to completion and I can barely bring myself to complete ONE STAGE of God of War or Bayonetta. That's my opinion.

Sorry if you don't agree with either. I'm not trying to convert anyone to see my POV- they can think what they want.

This post has been edited by whippingboy: 25 March 2010 - 12:24 PM

[Team Andromeda]

Whip it's a nice quite touching Life story , and no I didn't own a NES either , but then I didn't make out that Sonic had better gameplay or a Camera system than Mario III , Simply because at that time I never played the game . If people are going to come out and say , well I think Forza is much better than GT- but by the way I've never played the game , I'm only going on some Metric ratings or a One Track demo .
I would expect GT fans to have some issues with that . Just admit you don't own GOW III ,it be so much easier

Quote

Bayonetta= old school Sega campy dialog w/ overly complicated subplots similar to dialog of House of the Dead/Resident Evil meets Devil May Cry- action is on par w/ faster fight pace than GOW (more akin to Ninja Gaiden/DMC) with combo options that add a large amount of diversity,depth and variation that provides a game experience that can be appreciated by "hardcore gamers" and novices alike. Feels more like a twitch/arcade experience

You got all that from demo's . Let me spoil the surprise, the plot and story in Bayoneta is laughable its hardly makes any sense at all , and nothing like HOTD . It's saved by some over the top action and a decent cast . Its plays very differently from GOW III ,which features platform action and puzzle action ,as well as over the top action (its bosses are also better imo) , and what this old school SEGA and hardcore ?/

For one I thought SEGA were a joke these days , Bay isn't even made by SEGA (most prob why its good) , if its SEGA tunes and Memories, then Sonic racing should be right up you'll alley . I think its Capcom that's famous for campy dialogue not SEGA . Also what makes a game hardcore ? I like to know , because I've really no idea what makes a Gamer or game more hardcore than other's

Quote

I don't expect you to like either game

I quite liked HALO OTDS , just because it was more HALO . Never really played GUN , most prob why I've hardly posted views on the game .

This post has been edited by Team Andromeda: 25 March 2010 - 01:16 PM