I-Mockery Forum

I-Mockery Forum (http://i-mockery.com/forum/index.php)
-   Gaming 'n Toys (http://i-mockery.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=18)
-   -   What are you playing right now? (http://i-mockery.com/forum/showthread.php?t=69697399)

Dimnos Sep 7th, 2010 12:49 PM

I havent played a Persona game since the first one on the PS1. :\

Fathom Zero Sep 7th, 2010 02:08 PM

They've since upped their game, y'know.

Phoenix Gamma Sep 7th, 2010 02:14 PM

It's generally agreed that the first Persona is kinda bad. Even the PSP remake was pretty crummy.

Speaking of PSP, Kingdom Hearts: Birth By Sleep was leaked a few days ago. It's aaaaaaaaalmost as good as the first, except the story and characters are probably the most retarded yet. It doesn't have any of the awful dialog from the DS game ("Maybe I'm everything...maybe I'm nothing...") but the story's just as ridiculous. At least the combat's a little better this time. And dayum, the game's pretty. Like, really really pretty. And Leonard Nimoy and Mark Hamill are voice actors?!

Esuohlim Sep 7th, 2010 04:00 PM

I am now playing SUPER MARIO SUNSHINE, which I enjoy far more than I ever enjoyed Super Mario 64

10,000 Volt Ghost Sep 7th, 2010 04:33 PM

I got to the part with the lava enemies in SM Sunshine and gave up. Spent too much time trying to get the red coins from the Palinko Machine level.

DougClayton4231 Sep 7th, 2010 05:39 PM

Sunshine made me upset with how difficult it was. Apparently that makes me some sort of pussy because Japanese five year olds can supposedly figure out how to kill giant electric stingrays. *sigh*

Esuohlim Sep 7th, 2010 05:53 PM

Super Mario 64 is way more difficult for me because you don't get the hover nozzle handicap. I can run amok and be less careful about it in Sunshine.

And the stingray level is my favorite because of its difficulty. The Plinko pinball machine does really suck though and I dread it each playthrough.

Phoenix Gamma Sep 7th, 2010 06:03 PM

I honestly don't like the 3D Marios except for the two Galaxy games (which I love). Even back at launch I thought it was kinda lame.Does that make me a monster? :(

I thought Sunshine had some great levels though, like the second world. And I used to mess around in the hub with the rocket and stuff.

DougClayton4231 Sep 7th, 2010 06:28 PM

http://www.destructoid.com/review-ka...s-181575.phtml

lulz Destructoid gave Kane and Lynch 2 one of the most biased reviews I've ever seen. The reviewer gave the game a 1/10 because it's realistic. One of my friends got upset about the game purely because he sucked at it as well. You can't rush enemies, shoot a machine gun with one arm and perfect accuracy or soak up bullets like a kevlar sponge and that is somehow a bad thing.

There were a few sections that frustrated me, but overall I really enjoyed the whole realistic street combat thing, as opposed to military shooters where you play as a one man army who can eat tank rounds, fire two uzi's simultaneously with pinpoint accuracy and take on a battalion of troops without any cover.

I guess this is why I've stopped reading and watching reviews. I know that they'll give Halo: Reach a 9 even though it's a mind numbing mess of cheap deaths and near identical scenarios. If you hate one for one reason, hate 'em all for the same reasons.

Fathom Zero Sep 7th, 2010 07:07 PM

You realize, you can read opinions then disagree with some of them, but also agree with them on other topics, yeh?

OMGBIASBIASBIAS

What the fuck does bias mean?

Phoenix Gamma Sep 7th, 2010 07:17 PM

Quote:

Review
Quote:

Jim Sterling
:lol Nothing to see here. Move along, everyone.

Besides, the only Kane and Lynch 2 review that matters is Jeff Gerstman's.

Dr. Boogie Sep 7th, 2010 07:19 PM

He actually liked the first Kane and Lynch a lot, which convinced me to buy the PC version (a decision I deeply regret), and he was really excited to see the sequel.

His biggest gripes were that the story wasn't as good as the original, the single-player campaign was too short, the multiplayer was really limited, and the intentionally crappy youtube-style graphics were terrible.

What are your thoughts on that?



In all fairness, though, Jim does bait quite often. He loves to slip little stabs at organized religion into inappropriate places, and I remember him saying a little while ago that using mouseaim is cheating.

Fathom Zero Sep 7th, 2010 07:24 PM

I played the first one after my expectations were completely destroyed by the unanimous hatred of it and I had the same opinion as Sterling. It needed a lot of tightening up, but the style, story, and characterization were all there. It was just a bit fucked up as a shooter.

I can say that I probably won't get this one. Maybe, though. When it's in the bin like the last one, when I got it. :)

Dr. Boogie Sep 7th, 2010 07:53 PM

The PC version of the first one didn't run, period. The demo for the second one ran like ass on my computer, and apparently I'm far from the only one.

For that reason, I would say the series isn't even worth pirating.

DougClayton4231 Sep 7th, 2010 08:05 PM

Both games play well on the consoles. It's very funny that he griped about the length and the multiplayer, as it is virtually as long as the first game and offers better multiplayer. The graphics are better than the first games as well and it runs at a constant 60fps. That's why I said the review is completely biased, there's nothing objective about the whole review.

Mafia 2 was reviewed very similarly. It sucks just as much ass as GTAIV or the expansions, except that the cars actually handle somewhat accurately, but it was panned for shortening the GO HERE-SHOOT 30 GUYS-DRIVE HOME formula to 10 hours instead of 30. It's pretty much the same game sans helicopters and rocket launchers but everyone hated it.

darkvare Sep 7th, 2010 09:38 PM

i want the areana achievement for castle crashers anyone wanna play on 360 or ps3?

Dr. Boogie Sep 8th, 2010 12:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DougClayton4231 (Post 697262)
Both games play well on the consoles. It's very funny that he griped about the length and the multiplayer, as it is virtually as long as the first game and offers better multiplayer. The graphics are better than the first games as well and it runs at a constant 60fps. That's why I said the review is completely biased, there's nothing objective about the whole review.

Mafia 2 was reviewed very similarly. It sucks just as much ass as GTAIV or the expansions, except that the cars actually handle somewhat accurately, but it was panned for shortening the GO HERE-SHOOT 30 GUYS-DRIVE HOME formula to 10 hours instead of 30. It's pretty much the same game sans helicopters and rocket launchers but everyone hated it.

I wouldn't say that Mafia 2 shortened the formula at all. In fact, I'd say they milked it. I can't tell you the number of missions that have you starting off at your house (west end of town), going down to the docks (south end of town), and going to Joe's place (north end of town).

GTA 4, on the other hand, shortened all this considerably by letting you take cabs wherever you wanted because they understood that while a car chase can be fun, driving a long distance without a time limit is not. I understand that some of these instances in Mafia 2 are so they can squeeze in some dialog, but when Rockstar did that in RDR, they mixed it up by having the NPC drive you on occasion. None of this "I'll pick you up, but you drive my car" nonsense.

As for Kane and Lynch, Jim had said that the main draw for the original was the story and unique characters, as the gameplay was a bit lacking. That's why he hated the second one so much; it had all the same problems, and none of the character development of the first. He also mentioned that the multiplayer experience suffered from many of the problems he mentioned for the single player campaign.


Finally, the reason I don't like people calling game reviewers "biased" is because that statement has no meaning. When you review something, you compare it with what already exists, then you layout the good and bad points with explanations for each. That's pretty much the antithesis of objectivity. The only aspect of a game that can be evaluated objectively is whether or not the game actually runs, and even that can depend on what equipment you're using.

Reporters are the ones who are supposed to be unbiased. Not game reviewers.

Fathom Zero Sep 8th, 2010 03:30 AM

I think people tend to swap around "biased" and "opinionated" as if they had the same meaning. I should hope reviewers are opinionated. If I find a reviewer that I can tune myself to, his reviews are gonna resonate with me better. Which is why I'd also give Deadly Premonition a 10/10. I really really would. That game is a labor of love on the part of the dev. You can see it in all the content. It's a throwback to the cheesy survival horror genre popularized by Resident Evil. It's campy and silly and, most importantly, knows it.

I've grown to hate the Final Fantasy games and all of it's shitty story conventions and it's art style. I'm really tired of it. Thus, when XIII came out, I was very unimpressed.

But I enjoy games like Persona 4, as well, and dislike Monday Night Combat, which a buncha reviewers seem to like. It just wasn't fun for me. So nothing's 100%.

DougClayton4231 Sep 8th, 2010 09:22 AM

Biased does have a meaning though. If someone reviews a game like it killed his or her family, it's biased. The same goes for reviews that can't keep the game's dick out of it's mouth.

Case in point, GTAIV. None of the reviewers managed to mention that the controls for literally everything were pretty god awful due to the crummy physics engine, 40% of the game consists of driving from point A to point B (even with taxis), the NPC's constantly harass you because you won't spend worthless time with them playing shitty minigames, every mission is exactly the same, and it goes on and on and on.

I hated RDR for the same reasons, even more so because they piled a bunch of racism and flawed ideology on top of it. But both were reviewed with near perfect scores, go figure.

K&L2 could have used more variety and a bit better pacing but it is no way in hell a horrible game.

MrAdventure Sep 8th, 2010 09:54 AM

i loved both gtaiv and rdr for all the reasons you hated them, p funny

MrAdventure Sep 8th, 2010 10:01 AM

i mean it's to the point where my dick gets all soaked spaghetti if i see the old rag doll physics in motion, especially if it's a free roam environment

let's just everyone pay the money to license the good shit so i can get hard 24/7

MarioRPG Sep 8th, 2010 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Esuohlim (Post 697245)
Super Mario 64 is way more difficult for me because you don't get the hover nozzle handicap. I can run amok and be less careful about it in Sunshine.

And the stingray level is my favorite because of its difficulty. The Plinko pinball machine does really suck though and I dread it each playthrough.

I hate that hotel level where you have to clean up the outside from the slime and only have 2 or 3 minutes. It took me at least a dozen tries.

Fathom Zero Sep 8th, 2010 11:46 AM

The controls in GTA IV weren't mentioned because they weren't an issue to anyone with fingers. You and your muscular dystrophy seem to have a problem with it, which is fine. It makes me happy to know that you wasted money on a game you couldn't play, you baby, one that most other people in the world beat.

DougClayton4231 Sep 8th, 2010 01:30 PM

I beat GTAIV and RDR. The cars handled like boats, the cover systems were abominable, Roman wouldn't stop calling me to go look at titties, the PC version barely ran, and 40% of the game consisted of driving to a place or away from the police. We must have played completely different games, because everyone seems to love GTAIV's dick all in their collective mouths.

I respect your opinion Fathom, but there's no need to get offensive to me about it. Talk about the game.

Fathom Zero Sep 8th, 2010 02:05 PM

Quit being a holier than thou, passive aggressive cunt.

I didn't think the cars handled like boats, the cover system was fine, having bitchy people call you was just part of the game, and, frankly, it's wholly your fault for getting a game that didn't run well on YOUR PC. GTA IV and its expansions run perfectly fine on my computer, and I built it for about $300 at the beginning of the Summer from old parts. The game is very CPU dependant.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:20 AM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.