-
Re: The General Gaming Thread!
Well, I decided to perform Mission 5 in Sacrifice for James instead. It's not quite as impossible as Stratos'. Besides, James is a cool guy and Stratos is a jerk. I finished it, but I wonder if I'd get a boon for banishing the enemy wizard in addition to destroying the device...
With that said, the AI in this game is really rather stupid. The enemy kept making suicide attacks at me, after which I always ended up with at least a few of his souls. It accomplished nothing for him, because even though I'd also suffer heavy casualties, I could collect my souls at my leisure whereas he would leave a few after retreating.
-
Re: The General Gaming Thread!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Morty
Well, I decided to perform Mission 5 in Sacrifice for James instead. It's not quite as impossible as Stratos'. Besides, James is a cool guy and Stratos is a jerk. I finished it, but I wonder if I'd get a boon for banishing the enemy wizard in addition to destroying the device...
With that said, the AI in this game is really rather stupid. The enemy kept making suicide attacks at me, after which I always ended up with at least a few of his souls. It accomplished nothing for him, because even though I'd also suffer heavy casualties, I could collect my souls at my leisure whereas he would leave a few after retreating.
James is basically the one sane, nice guy.
Well, there's another deity who is also trying to save everyone, but you'll have to figure out who it is yourself. And anyway, Stratos has all the style.
The Dynamo mission is one of the more memorable ones, all told. I have fond memories of rushing it using Sirocco and beating the level within about two or three minutes. And yeah, AI's dense, but it's so overpowered that it wins anyway :smalltongue:
-
Re: The General Gaming Thread!
Stratos has style, but his style involves self-righteously manipulating everyone.
Anyway, I finished that mission, banishing Buta. It was pretty enjoyable, yes. Banishing Buta was pretty easy, as I was lucky enough not to get magma in my face and he had donated most of his souls to be in suicide attacks. After I rushed the Dynamo, I was left only with two Sylphs and Gammel. I summoned a Taurock hastily and managed to destroy it just in time.
-
Re: The General Gaming Thread!
I just remembered the time earlier this year, was playing Gears of War 3, doing the campaign, and we broke the game by killing a bunch of enemies we weren't supposed to. There's one point when a ridiculous amount of big guys with shields and stuff come out, and you're defending the fortress, and have to, like, try and kill them.
Only the game doesn't actually tell you that you're not supposed to be able to kill all of them before at least one of them reaches the gate and breaches it.
It was a very well-placed grenade, that one.
Only the game got stuck, and no more enemies came, so we had to reload and let them through this time.
-
Re: The General Gaming Thread!
I hate it when games do that, require a loss. Puzzles that require death as the only solution.
There was a boss fight in prince of persia that I got stuck on for 2 hours. Why? Because you are suppose to run away and leap to your death, abandoning the princess.
Yeah. Somehow that never occurred to me.:smallmad:
-
Re: The General Gaming Thread!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Forbiddenwar
I hate it when games do that, require a loss. Puzzles that require death as the only solution.
\
Personally I am fine with it but only when it is obvious, like starting a new RPG, you have 20 health and the dude has 200,000 health. If I *think* I can win, then I am going to spend hours to win (until I look it up and curse for wasting so much time).
-
Re: The General Gaming Thread!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dublock
\
Personally I am fine with it but only when it is obvious, like starting a new RPG, you have 20 health and the dude has 200,000 health. If I *think* I can win, then I am going to spend hours to win (until I look it up and curse for wasting so much time).
Personally, I believe that Planescape: Torment handled it wonderfully. Requiring death in parts, I mean.
-
Re: The General Gaming Thread!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dublock
\
Personally I am fine with it but only when it is obvious, like starting a new RPG, you have 20 health and the dude has 200,000 health. If I *think* I can win, then I am going to spend hours to win (until I look it up and curse for wasting so much time).
My mind harks back to the golem of a man named Dalton in a time period of 12k B.C. in a 1995 SNES RPG (no spoilers, heavy detail). The first time, you can't beat it, second time, you fight TWO AT ONCE, third, you fight the Overlord, and he's four times as strong as the last two, but... Spoiler
Show
It's afraid of heights. And you're fighting on the wings of a plane.
The game?
Spoiler
Show
It's Chrono Trigger, obviously.
-
Re: The General Gaming Thread!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dublock
\
Personally I am fine with it but only when it is obvious, like starting a new RPG, you have 20 health and the dude has 200,000 health. If I *think* I can win, then I am going to spend hours to win (until I look it up and curse for wasting so much time).
Word. I remember when I played Breath of Fire 2 back in the day on the SNES. The fight against the male version of Katt for her love or whatever, I wasted every single healing item I had in that fight, and doled out 256k Damage to that bastard(FYI, the final boss of the game ONLY HAS 10k!). Granted, I realized after I dished out 50k damage to him that it was apparently a fight I was meant to lose, but by that point, I was was annoyed and decided to vent by beating the snot out of him until I ran out of items. Then I just re-loaded a save and let him wipe the floor with me.
-
Re: The General Gaming Thread!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Cogwheel
Personally, I believe that Planescape: Torment handled it wonderfully. Requiring death in parts, I mean.
Well, the critical thing with PS:T was that you would always come back after a death--that was the whole schtick of your character, after all!
-
Re: The General Gaming Thread!
Yes, those annoying hopeless boss fights. I guess I can see how they might be necessary for the story, but they're pretty tricky to pull off.
So, what's the best way to go when the plot calls for the player to lose? The hopeless boss fight is one way: Upside is that it shows the player just how badly they were outclassed, downside is the player feels like they've wasted their efforts when it turns out there's nothing they could have done. You could throw the players a bone and give them some sort of reward for managing a victory, even if it doesn't change the story (eg The Chrono Trigger example, where beating Dalton's Golem gets you experience and tech points, but Dalton captures you anyway); losing players can at least console themselves that they were fighting for something.
There's also cutscene-based defeats. I'm certain we've all fought a boss who got right back up and smacked the player down after losing, but still sent us to the "Game Over" screen after winning. I'm equally certain that none of us have enjoyed the experience. It pretty much cheats the player out of a hard-won victory. Actual cutscenes might be the safest way to go, though the player might still be left screaming "I could have taken him!" (plus that sort of thing gets horribly abused to make players lose to, say, random members of the city guard).
My favorite plot-mandated defeats were the ones in The World Ends With You, actually. To win the hopeless fights in that game, you had to survive for a set amount of time against a horribly overpowered enemy. You're not so much fighting to win as you are fighting to not get splattered so quickly that the plot doesn't even have time to catch up. I believe the idea is that, for instance, an invincible boss might only want to rough you up and scare you a bit, but he's strong enough that he really could kill you without trying. As such, the player is encouraged to fight as hard as possible, but they're still nowhere near winning when the "He's too strong!" cutscene kicks in.
(Actually, that's a lie. My favorite plot-mandated defeat is against Cauthrien in Dragon Age. The plot dictates that you lose the fight and get captured, and odds are pretty good that you'll be too stunlocked to waste effort fighting back on your first playthrough. If, however, you defy those odds and manage to win, the game skips the next chapter entirely and jumps straight to you confronting the villain. But I realize that's rarely practical.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Triscuitable
My mind harks back to the golem of a man named Dalton in a time period of 12k B.C. in a 1995 SNES RPG (no spoilers, heavy detail). The first time, you can't beat it, second time, you fight TWO AT ONCE, third, you fight the Overlord, and he's four times as strong as the last two, but...
Spoiler
Show
It's afraid of heights. And you're fighting on the wings of a plane.
Of course, when you fight the two golems at once, you've got the armors that absorb various elements. And the golems' main gimmick essentially lets you dictate which elements they use...
-
Re: The General Gaming Thread!
Can Saint's Row 3 be played local on the PS3 (as in, split screen?)
-
Re: The General Gaming Thread!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mewtarthio
Actual cutscenes might be the safest way to go, though the player might still be left screaming "I could have taken him!" (plus that sort of thing gets horribly abused to make players lose to, say, random members of the city guard).
Speaking of cutscenes, does anyone else find it annoying when your character gets to do impossibly cool stuff in cutscenes that you know is not possible when actually playing the game?
-
Re: The General Gaming Thread!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
factotum
Speaking of cutscenes, does anyone else find it annoying when your character gets to do impossibly cool stuff in cutscenes that you know is not possible when actually playing the game?
A version of that is the famous "I'm a level 30 wizard but I still need a key to open that door." syndrome. Only game off the top of my head that doesn't succumb to it is Morrowind (and the other Elder Scrolls games, probably).
-
Re: The General Gaming Thread!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mewtarthio
(Actually, that's a lie. My favorite plot-mandated defeat is against Cauthrien in Dragon Age. The plot dictates that you lose the fight and get captured, and odds are pretty good that you'll be too stunlocked to waste effort fighting back on your first playthrough. If, however, you defy those odds and manage to win, the game skips the next chapter entirely and jumps straight to you confronting the villain. But I realize that's rarely practical.)
Yes, that one was an example of a good way to do it.
One of the most jarring examples of this sort of thing was the first fight with Letho in Witcher 2 - after you beat him, which isn't easy, he knocks Geralt on his ass and escapes anyway. Way to go. :smallannoyed:[/QUOTE]
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Cespenar
A version of that is the famous "I'm a level 30 wizard but I still need a key to open that door." syndrome. Only game off the top of my head that doesn't succumb to it is Morrowind (and the other Elder Scrolls games, probably).
You still need lockpicks or spells to open every crappy wooden door instead of hacking it to pieces with your huge enchanted dwemer waraxe or blowing it up. So I wouldn't say they avoid it. Breaking down doors was possible in Daggerfall, though.
-
Re: The General Gaming Thread!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Cespenar
Only game off the top of my head that doesn't succumb to it is Morrowind (and the other Elder Scrolls games, probably).
Skyrim definitely has doors which are locked and require a key no matter what...you can't even open them with the Skeleton Key, AFAIK.
-
Re: The General Gaming Thread!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Morty
You still need lockpicks or spells to open every crappy wooden door instead of hacking it to pieces with your huge enchanted dwemer waraxe or blowing it up. So I wouldn't say they avoid it. Breaking down doors was possible in Daggerfall, though.
Hmm, true, but at least they weren't plot-locked, was my point. Still, as you said, not a perfect case.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
factotum
Skyrim definitely has doors which are locked and require a key no matter what...you can't even open them with the Skeleton Key, AFAIK.
Oh. I wouldn't know, I didn't play Skyrim.
-
Re: The General Gaming Thread!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
factotum
Speaking of cutscenes, does anyone else find it annoying when your character gets to do impossibly cool stuff in cutscenes that you know is not possible when actually playing the game?
I don't know why but the words "Bayonetta" and "Devil May Cry" appeared in my brain.
-
Re: The General Gaming Thread!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
The Succubus
I don't know why but the words "Bayonetta" and "Devil May Cry" appeared in my brain.
There's a trope for that: Cutscene and Gameplay Segregation.
Arkham City: Lockdown is surprisingly awesome. It's like Infinity Blade, but combat is a bit more on the offensive, instead of waiting for an opening, you can counter moves right into an stunned enemy. There's no exploration either, you just fight enemies with no "breaks". You even can get old batsuits. In fact, the new update added the Adam West Batsuit!
-
Re: The General Gaming Thread!
Well, I've finished Sands of Time. Inexplicable slo-mo nonwithstanding, it was fun. I've already played Warrior Within, so Two Thrones is next if I get the opportunity.
-
Re: The General Gaming Thread!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Morty
Well, I've finished Sands of Time. Inexplicable slo-mo nonwithstanding, it was fun. I've already played Warrior Within, so Two Thrones is next if I get the opportunity.
I highly reccomend Two Thrones. I found it to be a much better game than Warrior within, but perhaps thats just me. Still liked the whole series though.
So thanks to steam I managed to pick up the entire Halflife series this week. This being my first time playing any of the Halflife games (I know gasp! and all that :smalltongue:), I'm finding that even with its dated graphics that Halflife the first is still an awesome game.
-
Re: The General Gaming Thread!
Do any of you guys know if Saint's Row 2 and Saint's Row 3 can be played split-screen on the PS3?
-
Re: The General Gaming Thread!
Warrior Within had great combat, but the grim 'n' gritty atmosphere really was a little over the top.
Also, there's nothing more annoying than winning a mission handily but losing one of your heroes... which is what just happened to me in Sacrifice. I guess I'll have to re-do it, since the hero is pretty useful. The hero units are generally quite an exception to Sacrifice's general dynamic - if a normal unit dies it's no big deal as long as you pick up the soul. But the hero units die for good.
-
Re: The General Gaming Thread!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Morty
Warrior Within had great combat, but the grim 'n' gritty atmosphere really was a little over the top.
Also, there's nothing more annoying than winning a mission handily but losing one of your heroes... which is what just happened to me in Sacrifice. I guess I'll have to re-do it, since the hero is pretty useful. The hero units are generally quite an exception to Sacrifice's general dynamic - if a normal unit dies it's no big deal as long as you pick up the soul. But the hero units die for good.
Oh, ouch. Who did you lose?
-
Re: The General Gaming Thread!
Gammel. The strange thing is, I reloaded and made sure he survived... but he still didn't show up in the next mission. Faestus was next to my altar, but Gammel was gone.
-
Re: The General Gaming Thread!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Morty
Gammel. The strange thing is, I reloaded and made sure he survived... but he still didn't show up in the next mission. Faestus was next to my altar, but Gammel was gone.
Yeah, I think he just up and vanishes at some point. Pity. He's none too useful, but I liked the voice actor. And also some of his lin- HAVE AT YOU!
-
Re: The General Gaming Thread!
He's pretty tough, and he's one less Ikarus I have to spend three souls on.
On another note, I'm in the final mission now, but the last few were really easy. The one in which I had to destroy Charnel was especially dead easy, if you pardon the pun. The two enemy wizards just sat on their butts as I killed their creatures, stole their souls and destroyed their altars.
-
Re: The General Gaming Thread!
Yeah, anti-Charnel is generally trivial. Try anti-James as Pyro, however, and know pain.
Also the last level is a pushover. But that's okay because Tony Jay.
-
Re: The General Gaming Thread!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
factotum
Speaking of cutscenes, does anyone else find it annoying when your character gets to do impossibly cool stuff in cutscenes that you know is not possible when actually playing the game?
Not really. Usually because the sort of things that the characters do in cutscenes would, if its in the scope of the game's normal mechanics, be highly annoying and fiddly to pull off. Either that or it's something the game can't actually handle with its normal mechanisms, which would probably result in an QTE. I'd rather watch a cutscene than play most QTEs.
-
Re: The General Gaming Thread!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Cogwheel
Yeah, anti-Charnel is generally trivial. Try anti-James as Pyro, however, and know pain.
Also the last level is a pushover. But that's okay because Tony Jay.
I wouldn't call the last level a pushover, but it's not all that hard either. Speaking of which - is it possible to un-guardian creature from a Manalith? I have two Boulderdashes I guardianed to the two Manaliths near my altar to repel Marduk's initial attacks, but they're of no use now that I've pushed forward.