I think it's called paying the same amount for less chocolate.
Watch one of the protagonists be a robot. What a twist!
A big emphatic YES to this. Refused were easily one of the best heavy bands of the 90's.
Two tickets for Atlanta, GET. I don't care how expensive it was, it's going to be worth it.
This brings back some memories. Before I gave up on guitar, the Wild Arms opening theme was one of the first things I learned how to play. I think I'm going to have to download the game on PSN.
There's definitely some photochopping going on in the Morrigan picture, but it's still probably the best one I've seen. Other than maybe looking a little too friendly, it's spot on.
If it's yet another zombie game, I'll be upset.
This is the kind of review I was looking for, Stephen, well written, thought out, and executed. Give us this over gut checks any day. I'll probably still play this game, but perhaps when it drops in price.
I have a feeling all the Gut Check hate has a lot to do with this.
I admit, I was mostly going on Fahey's reply. The fact that's not really a review so much as an explanation why -he- isn't buying the game now as a reason why we shouldn't buy the game now set me off. I should have done my own gut check, so to speak, to make sure I didn't say anything silly. Oh, the internet, thou hast bested me yet again.
Then let's look at the actual gameplay content of your, and Evan's, comments. Your first paragraph goes as far as to describe, with very few exceptions, the entire main Kirby franchise. Even Kirby Superstar, which is probably one of the most popular of the Kirby games, with all its "stories" was just a series of variations on a theme. Epic Yarn was indeed a standout game, likely because it strayed from the path, so to speak, but it most certainly did not stray far. Your second comment mostly laments the loss of the memorable yarn visuals, but they couldn't exactly come out with the same game idea twice, could they? HAL and Nintendo would just be accused of rehashing/recycling/being lazy. Damned if they did, damned if they didn't? As for comparing it to other games, that's probably the fairest part of your statement, but without building upon them, they come off as cheap.
Evan's take offers little more than a complaint about difficulty spikes. Legitimate enough, and a bit shallow without context, but I've been playing Dark Souls recently, so my sense of difficulty is skewed at the moment.
I haven't played the game yet, as it came out only yesterday, and I am in the middle of a number of games at the moment, which would make the purchase of yet another unjustifiable. I think the issue I'm having has to do more with the nature of these "gut checks". Not to speak for anyone else, but you don't have to scroll much to see similar discontent. There will always be Opinionated People On The Internet who will take issue with every subjective statement you make, but these don't even have the benefit of being properly fleshed out. The description itself says that you've played "a lot" of the game, which is pretty indeterminate, and the other writers are "chiming in", which is to say they haven't played or thought out any more than you have.
All that said, is it kosher for me to say how nice it is that you actually bother to respond and defend your words, instead of refusing to acknowledge us unwashed masses, groveling at the feet of the almighty blogger? Just sayin'.
Then let's look at the actual gameplay content of your, and Evan's, comments. Your first paragraph goes as far as to describe, with very few exceptions, the entire main Kirby franchise. Even Kirby Superstar, which is probably one of the most popular of the Kirby games, with all its "stories" was just a series of variations on a theme. Epic Yarn was indeed a standout game, likely because it strayed from the path, so to speak, but it most certainly did not stray far. Your second comment mostly laments the loss of the memorable yarn visuals, but they couldn't exactly come out with the same game idea twice, could they? HAL and Nintendo would just be accused of rehashing/recycling/being lazy. Damned if they did, damned if they didn't? As for comparing it to other games, that's probably the fairest part of your statement, but without building upon them, they come off as cheap.
Evan's take offers little more than a complaint about difficulty spikes. Legitimate enough, and a bit shallow without context, but I've been playing Dark Souls recently, so my sense of difficulty is skewed at the moment.
I haven't played the game yet, as it came out only yesterday, and I am in the middle of a number of games at the moment, which would make the purchase of yet another unjustifiable. I think the issue I'm having has to do more with the nature of these "gut checks". Not to speak for anyone else, but you don't have to scroll much to see similar discontent. There will always be Opinionated People On The Internet who will take issue with every subjective statement you make, but these don't even have the benefit of being properly fleshed out. The description itself says that you've played "a lot" of the game, which is pretty indeterminate, and the other writers are "chiming in", which is to say they haven't played or thought out any more than you have.
All that said, is it kosher for me to say how nice it is that you actually bother to respond and defend your words, instead of refusing to acknowledge us unwashed masses, groveling at the feet of the almighty blogger? Just sayin'.
Screw this, Kirby's Dream Land was the first game I ever bought for myself and I've made it a point to play every Kirby game since. Nevermind the fact that there are many interesting games out right now has no logical bearing on whether or not the game deserves a purchase. Why not make that decision based on, oh I don't know, how the game actually plays?
Oh my god, that image, it's beautiful.
I don't really care about Felicia Day either way, but going that far to make her likeness in the game is a bit too much fanboy pandering for my tastes. Unless this can offer more than Legacy did, which wasn't much in the first place, then I have a feeling I'll be sitting this one out.
I'll play it, but it's sad to know now that Namco saying the characters would be older really meant next to nothing. I was hoping for some more interesting designs.
Batman TAS skin? Day one purchase.
I hope this doesn't start another anti-video game shitstorm. The last thing we need is people blaming this on games, instead of his clearly unhinged beliefs. Not only does it create an separate headache, it misses the point entirely.
I still keep dreaming.
Trollmancer? If it doesn't offer any benefit to either player, then that seems awfully god damned idiotic. If the caster got something for the Gravelord killing another player, or the player got some kind of reward for defeating then Gravelord, that'd be one thing. If it exists purely to frustrate other players, then I imagine a few things happening; there will be a lot of Pyromancers, Grave/Troll lording the fuck out of each other, or players playing offline. The risk/reward of invading other games was just fine. Why bother with something that's essentially the same, but without either risk or reward?
This will still probably be my personal GOTY (I love Demon's Souls to death), but this is a potentially unfortunate blemish on what should be a fantastic follow-up.
This will still probably be my personal GOTY (I love Demon's Souls to death), but this is a potentially unfortunate blemish on what should be a fantastic follow-up.
That's an awful lot of assumption for a single screenshot. I said nothing about how it might play, only that this still photo bears resemblance to the setting of a sci-fi film, which has little to nothing to do with its country of origin.
Almost feels a bit "Blade Runner". That's always a good thing.
