Too Human 1UP review C-

Just read in the Gamespot review that when you die, you get sent back to a checkpoint, but all the damage you've dealt to your enemies remains. **** that! It's Bioshock all over again, man!

WHHHHHHHYYYYYYY do developers think this is a good idea?:|

And while I hate that design choice to the point where I consider it game-breaking, it's funny that Bioshock's reviews almost never mentioned that as a negative, but they are with Too Human. Don't get me wrong, I think that design conceit is the most broken thing introduced to gaming in the last twenty years, but it's odd that it was totally awesome when Bioshock did it, and now it sucks with Too Human. There are reviewers just tripping all over their own incosistent stances with this game. Oh well, I guess it's better to be right late than never. Still, this guarantees that I'll not be buying the game -- it's a deal-breaker. I'm not going to support any company making games that want to coddle the audience. Challenge me, or don't bother making the ******* thing.

Shame-usBlackley

I think the difference is that you start right back ready to go in Bioshock so one doesn't necessarily focus on it, but Too Human makes you go through the same valkyrie animation which you can't skip and that just makes it stand out alot more, plus in Bioshock when you die it's likely against a strong foe like a Big Daddy, so going back to face off against one still presents a challenge.

Yeah, Bioshock's sense of immersion was off the charts. It's too bad I played it before the patch went up, because the "we don't want to challenge your delicate sensibilities" design choice was a huge immersion-breaker.

I mean, I can only think of one game where cheating death made sense in recent years, and that's Braid. In a shooter that is supposed to be all about tension and claustrophobic fear, it kills the mood.

Shame-usBlackley

What did the patch do to Bioshock? I would like to beat the game as I only got half way through but the Chambers pissed me off too.

Well, I'm still getting it. Reason being: it takes the loot whoring from Diablo 2 (the only part I liked) and adds combat that doesn't suck. And at least the story tries to give a social commentary, unlike every other hack-n-slash out there.




The following is my take on the whole thing, if you want to talk about it, PM me, I'd rather not clutter up the thread.

Also, I get the feeling that a lot of the press is basing their reviews for this game against some unattainable golden standard, rather than other titles of similar ilk, which is what they do for most games. Which leaves games that try to mix things up (such as Too Human) entirely dependent on how they rank against this golden standard, as opposed other games of its kind, which there really haven't been before. Advent Rising suffered the same fate. It was a fairly unique type of game (still partially a shooter, I know), which had many of the same issues that other games had, but for whatever reason, seemed to be rated in pieces rather than the sum of its parts. Like, if the reviewer hasn't come across something like this before, they break it down into components and view each one individually.

All I'm saying is, Advent Rising was panned, but I liked it enough to play it four times (in a week) before trading it in. Assassin's Creed was given substantial demerits for being repetitive, but for me it wasn't boring in any way. Because I didn't overanalyze.

[QUOTE="Shame-usBlackley"]

Yeah, Bioshock's sense of immersion was off the charts. It's too bad I played it before the patch went up, because the "we don't want to challenge your delicate sensibilities" design choice was a huge immersion-breaker.

I mean, I can only think of one game where cheating death made sense in recent years, and that's Braid. In a shooter that is supposed to be all about tension and claustrophobic fear, it kills the mood.

F1Lengend

What did the patch do to Bioshock? I would like to beat the game as I only got half way through but the Chambers pissed me off too.

It added an option to turn them off. There was also an achievement added for beating the game on Hard with them turned off (I think -- I never played the game beyond one playthrough).

Somewhere Minda_Cubed is crying.Archon_basic

I had a feeling my name would be dropped in a Too Human review thread, hah. I was pumping everyone up about this game what, six-seven years ago when the first GC video showed up at Spaceworld? Good times. Had a feeling the game wouldn't live up to expectations considering I hadn't read a single overwhelmingly positive preview in the past two years. It's a shame, and since I'm assuming alot was riding on the success of this franchise within Silicon Knights, hopefully it won't cripple them.

But that's two of my favorite non-EAD developers from last gen (Silicon Knights/Factor 5) struggling immensely after leaving Nintendo's wing. You can tell how much impact Nintendo had in quality control for these guys.

Nice to see guys like Blackley still kicking it over here. Not so nice to see Taru still using the same dumb smileys in every reply for the past five plus years.

[QUOTE="Archon_basic"]Somewhere Minda_Cubed is crying.Minda_Cubed

I had a feeling my name would be dropped in a Too Human review thread, hah. I was pumping everyone up about this game what, six-seven years ago when the first GC video showed up at Spaceworld? Good times. Had a feeling the game wouldn't live up to expectations considering I hadn't read a single overwhelmingly positive preview in the past two years. It's a shame, and since I'm assuming alot was riding on the success of this franchise within Silicon Knights, hopefully it won't cripple them.

But that's two of my favorite non-EAD developers from last gen (Silicon Knights/Factor 5) struggling immensely after leaving Nintendo's wing. You can tell how much impact Nintendo had in quality control for these guys.

Nice to see guys like Blackley still kicking it over here. Not so nice to see Taru still using the same dumb smileys in every reply for the past five plus years.

Taru:

[QUOTE="Shame-usBlackley"]

Just read in the Gamespot review that when you die, you get sent back to a checkpoint, but all the damage you've dealt to your enemies remains. **** that! It's Bioshock all over again, man!

WHHHHHHHYYYYYYY do developers think this is a good idea?:|

And while I hate that design choice to the point where I consider it game-breaking, it's funny that Bioshock's reviews almost never mentioned that as a negative, but they are with Too Human. Don't get me wrong, I think that design conceit is the most broken thing introduced to gaming in the last twenty years, but it's odd that it was totally awesome when Bioshock did it, and now it sucks with Too Human. There are reviewers just tripping all over their own incosistent stances with this game. Oh well, I guess it's better to be right late than never. Still, this guarantees that I'll not be buying the game -- it's a deal-breaker. I'm not going to support any company making games that want to coddle the audience. Challenge me, or don't bother making the ******* thing.

EvilTaru

I think the difference is that you start right back ready to go in Bioshock so one doesn't necessarily focus on it, but Too Human makes you go through the same valkyrie animation which you can't skip and that just makes it stand out alot more, plus in Bioshock when you die it's likely against a strong foe like a Big Daddy, so going back to face off against one still presents a challenge.

Dude, all it does is waste my time. Having infinite tries and having all progress be saved means I never have to get good at the game to win. In effect, the game doesn't reward a skilled player over a guy that just charges people with the wrench.

I'll agree that it isn't quite as bad in Bioshock as it is in Too Human though. In Too Human, it sounds like Diablo in which half the fun is supposed to come from powering up your character to make him awesome. If you can't lose, it doesn't matter if you are totally decked out in awesome gear or wearing a pickle barrel. Most of the fun from Bioshock is just looking at the world and seeing the story play out, so not being able to lose doesn't interfere with it as much.

I think if the game goes half-price it´s mine anyway.I don´t think the demo was outstanding,but it had something that makes me want this game,may the reviews as bad as they like.Plus I don´t give too much about 1up´s and GS´s Reviews.Look at the Lost Odyssey-Review which definetly earned 9.0 and didn´t get it because there was no FF-Logo on it.Maybe this game whould be rated better if a DMC-Logo was shown on the cover?I really don´t know...and when it´s cheaper it´s worth the risk to find out.

[QUOTE="Archon_basic"]Somewhere Minda_Cubed is crying.Minda_Cubed

I had a feeling my name would be dropped in a Too Human review thread, hah. I was pumping everyone up about this game what, six-seven years ago when the first GC video showed up at Spaceworld? Good times. Had a feeling the game wouldn't live up to expectations considering I hadn't read a single overwhelmingly positive preview in the past two years. It's a shame, and since I'm assuming alot was riding on the success of this franchise within Silicon Knights, hopefully it won't cripple them.

But that's two of my favorite non-EAD developers from last gen (Silicon Knights/Factor 5) struggling immensely after leaving Nintendo's wing. You can tell how much impact Nintendo had in quality control for these guys.

Nice to see guys like Blackley still kicking it over here. Not so nice to see Taru still using the same dumb smileys in every reply for the past five plus years.

Judging by the demo of Too Human and the full version of ED, Too Human is the less broken game. SPOILER ALERT In ED continually replenishing magic enabed players to completely heal their characters' damaged bodies and minds at any given point without penalty. Also once one figured out the obvious technique of decapitating enemies, all non-boss enemy encounters became easier than falling off a log. END SPOILER

You have a stronger case for 'suffered without Nintendo' with Factor 5, but if a company needs Nintendo to point out that its a bad idea to ship with the problems Lair shipped with (horrible controls, terrible camera, poor level design) those guys have no business in the industry. Its a stain on Sony that they actually shipped that sewage instead of cancelling it outright.

Of course, Nintendo is comfortable shipping games just as horrendous (looks at Geist).

I think if the game goes half-price it´s mine anyway.I don´t think the demo was outstanding,but it had something that makes me want this game,may the reviews as bad as they like.Plus I don´t give too much about 1up´s and GS´s Reviews.Look at the Lost Odyssey-Review which definetly earned 9.0 and didn´t get it because there was no FF-Logo on it.Maybe this game whould be rated better if a DMC-Logo was shown on the cover?I really don´t know...and when it´s cheaper it´s worth the risk to find out.

Ash2X

Lost Odyssey was shiny garbage crippled by a series of lazy design decisions (characters getting jumped by giants in an open plain, failing to react and looking bored as screaming monsters charged them, etc). Its no wonder MS decided that as they did with the broken Mass Effect, advertising the heck out the game but not offering a demo which would let people experience the gameplay for themselves was the way to go.

In terms of boldness and quality FF12 and Persona 3 completely embarrass the hidebound, barely competent LO. Lost Odyssey is the best current gen jrpg (that has seen release in NA anyway), but that's kind of like being the best Uwe Boll movie.

This has been explained, but the comparison of this perplexing game to BioShock when so many games are switching to this type of regeneration was bizarre, as BioShock for the PS3 and BioShock 2 and BioShock the movie are coming plus its 30+ GOTY awards and accolades it's hard not to laugh. An enthusiastic supporter of Jack Thompson convinced himself otherwise too.

Here's the quote: the death animation is a big complaint in all reviews, good and bad.

"So death is inevitable, but Too Human's greatest oddity is its method of punishing you. There's a minor in-game consequence: Your weapons take some damage, which makes them less effective, and you get deposited at the most recent checkpoint. However, all damage that you previously did to your enemies will remain, so you are just starting from where you left off. Yet the real punishment is aimed at your convenience. Every time you die, you will be forced to watch a Valkyrie slowly descend, take Baldur into her arms, and lift him toward Valhalla. It's a beautiful animation, and the stunning, glowing Valkyrie is one of the most wonderfully crafted character models that you're likely to see in a while. But the quality of the vision is of little consequence considering that it lasts seemingly forever, and you cannot skip it. It is impossible to imagine how a development team could have thought this forced death sequence was a good idea--and depending on which cl-ass you choose, you could be seeing it rather often. It's one more example of the game's stilted, awkward pace."

The reviewer mentions it again later:

"the Valkyries will soon be making their sluggish rounds"

There's also a screenshot at that point in the review of the Valkyrie with the complaint again emphasized for elementary readers.

I'm wondering what the reaction at Microsoft will be one this all calms down. They might not care as long as the game sells a decent amount, but of course we don't know how much money MS will have sunk into it once you tally everything up. They also may just want nothing to do with Dyack after the long string of fiascos that have led up to the game's release (bad E3 demo, Epic lawsuit, GAF, etc).

Speaking of GAF...I wonder how they're responding to the reviews. :P
Teufelhuhn

Their reaction... GLAD WE BOUGHT FFXIII! kidding :P I hope someone doesn't jump and filter my posts here...

I'm disappointed. I'm a big fan of anything related to norse myth and I've been eyeing this game ever since my friend showed me a trailer from ign two years ago. I heard that Lost Odysee wasn't as bad as many reviewers portrayed so this doesn't mean the game failed to deliver or anything. It's not for all people.

Edit: IGN review:

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/899/899826p1.html

When you die in Diablo 2 enemies don't regain health, so I don't see it being a huge issue in Too Human either. Unless hatred of the concept is a relatively new thing.DJ_Lae

[QUOTE="DJ_Lae"]When you die in Diablo 2 enemies don't regain health, so I don't see it being a huge issue in Too Human either. Unless hatred of the concept is a relatively new thing.Teufelhuhn

No, but you do lose a large portion of your earnings for everytime you get your ass beat.

[QUOTE="DJ_Lae"]When you die in Diablo 2 enemies don't regain health, so I don't see it being a huge issue in Too Human either. Unless hatred of the concept is a relatively new thing.Teufelhuhn

No. Your equipment suffers damage and you have to pick it up where you died but otherwise there's no penalty. On Nightmare and Hell difficulties you loose some XP but you can't drop down a level, simply go back to the start of the level you're in currently (which would take a LOT of deaths in itself).

[QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"][QUOTE="DJ_Lae"]When you die in Diablo 2 enemies don't regain health, so I don't see it being a huge issue in Too Human either. Unless hatred of the concept is a relatively new thing.BladesOfAthena

No, but you do lose a large portion of your earnings for everytime you get your ass beat.

True, forgot about that one. Then again money is completely worthless in D2 :P

When you die in Diablo 2 enemies don't regain health, so I don't see it being a huge issue in Too Human either. Unless hatred of the concept is a relatively new thing.DJ_Lae

We've all heard of Diablo, but some of us predominately console guys have never played it, so Bioshock was our first brush with the 'enemies stay dead' school of design.

[QUOTE="Ash2X"]

I think if the game goes half-price it´s mine anyway.I don´t think the demo was outstanding,but it had something that makes me want this game,may the reviews as bad as they like.Plus I don´t give too much about 1up´s and GS´s Reviews.Look at the Lost Odyssey-Review which definetly earned 9.0 and didn´t get it because there was no FF-Logo on it.Maybe this game whould be rated better if a DMC-Logo was shown on the cover?I really don´t know...and when it´s cheaper it´s worth the risk to find out.

CarnageHeart

Lost Odyssey was shiny garbage crippled by a series of lazy design decisions (characters getting jumped by giants in an open plain, failing to react and looking bored as screaming monsters charged them, etc). Its no wonder MS decided that as they did with the broken Mass Effect, advertising the heck out the game but not offering a demo which would let people experience the gameplay for themselves was the way to go.

In terms of boldness and quality FF12 and Persona 3 completely embarrass the hidebound, barely competent LO. Lost Odyssey is the best current gen jrpg (that has seen release in NA anyway), but that's kind of like being the best Uwe Boll movie.

[QUOTE="DJ_Lae"]When you die in Diablo 2 enemies don't regain health, so I don't see it being a huge issue in Too Human either. Unless hatred of the concept is a relatively new thing.CarnageHeart

We've all heard of Diablo, but some of us predominately console guys have never played it, so Bioshock was our first brush with the 'enemies stay dead' school of design.

Well, to be fair Bioshock really didn't need the instant-revive mechanic, mostly because it ruined a lot of the atmosphere they were trying to create.

Diablo's more about getting loot and bashing monsters to death, so having the ability to use a town portal to sneak back to the battlefield and continue wailing on a stubborn boss is nice. You also have to cast a town portal or enable a nearby waypoint in order to do so easily, of course, so it's not completely automatic.

I don't see Too Human being hurt much by it either, especially in the light of its other (and more glaring) problems. Even some MMORPGs maintain enemy health when you die, but it works there because the structure is totally different than a first person shooter that's trying to immerse you in the game world.

(I also think Bioshock had many bigger problems than the auto-respawn, but that's enough stuff for another thread)

Well, to be fair Bioshock really didn't need the instant-revive mechanic, mostly because it ruined a lot of the atmosphere they were trying to create.

Diablo's more about getting loot and bashing monsters to death, so having the ability to use a town portal to sneak back to the battlefield and continue wailing on a stubborn boss is nice. You also have to cast a town portal or enable a nearby waypoint in order to do so easily, of course, so it's not completely automatic.

I don't see Too Human being hurt much by it either, especially in the light of its other (and more glaring) problems. Even some MMORPGs maintain enemy health when you die, but it works there because the structure is totally different than a first person shooter that's trying to immerse you in the game world.

(I also think Bioshock had many bigger problems than the auto-respawn, but that's enough stuff for another thread)

DJ_Lae

In a way it does make things a lot easier since it kinda nullfies the point of using first aid packs but personally I actually didn't mind it at all. From a game design perspective, there's little difference between that and being automatically taken at a checkpoint for everytime you died.

[QUOTE="Ash2X"]

I think if the game goes half-price it´s mine anyway.I don´t think the demo was outstanding,but it had something that makes me want this game,may the reviews as bad as they like.Plus I don´t give too much about 1up´s and GS´s Reviews.Look at the Lost Odyssey-Review which definetly earned 9.0 and didn´t get it because there was no FF-Logo on it.Maybe this game whould be rated better if a DMC-Logo was shown on the cover?I really don´t know...and when it´s cheaper it´s worth the risk to find out.

CarnageHeart

Lost Odyssey was shiny garbage crippled by a series of lazy design decisions (characters getting jumped by giants in an open plain, failing to react and looking bored as screaming monsters charged them, etc). Its no wonder MS decided that as they did with the broken Mass Effect, advertising the heck out the game but not offering a demo which would let people experience the gameplay for themselves was the way to go.

In terms of boldness and quality FF12 and Persona 3 completely embarrass the hidebound, barely competent LO. Lost Odyssey is the best current gen jrpg (that has seen release in NA anyway), but that's kind of like being the best Uwe Boll movie.

You say it´s bad because of Random Encounters?Maybe some feel it´s out of time,but the fact that it was close to older RPGs made it by far better then most RPGs in the last years.Look at the pretty weak FF12...not totally bad,but a game without Story and uninteresting fighting system isn´t really the peak of gaming...I had also fun with it,but against LO it looks like a half-finished game.If FF10-FF12 whould at least half as well made,I whouldn´t have cared too much about LO,but they just simply aren´t.I think LO got exactly what seems lost in FF...the game got a well made Story (even if it´s not too special),stays true to itself from beginning to the end and it doesn´t try to make experiments that no one needed (like a MMO-like Fighting system which only big difference is the lack of interaction).

It´s classic in every way and I prefer it over every wanna-be new.There are of course also positive developments.Look at the pretty good Persona 3...which was great exept that it almost killed what´s great about 1 and 2.It´s pretty limited compared to them,still fun.Going new ways isn´t always bad.But if you want a RPG as it should be there aren´t much exept Lost Odyssey,Blue Dragon and Dragon Quest 8.Too bad if you not liked it,LO is more then worth finishing.

Neogaf is going insane, I love it. Dyack trashed gaf in some interview, and now Gaf had the most epic banning in the history of forums. :lol:

dvader654

Neogaf is going insane, I love it. Dyack trashed gaf in some interview, and now Gaf had the most epic banning in the history of forums. :lol:

dvader654

I'll admit, some the guys over at Neogaf can be real pricks but at the same time I always get an enormous kick out of the comedic repertoire and gafisms. Whenever I feel the need for a laugh, I just head on over there. :lol:

[QUOTE="dvader654"]

Neogaf is going insane, I love it. Dyack trashed gaf in some interview, and now Gaf had the most epic banning in the history of forums. :lol:

Archangel3371

The owner of NeoGAF issued this statement about Dyack, and his banning:

Dyack: "NeoGAF...I would say is probably the worst forum." Response.

[QUOTE="CarnageHeart"][QUOTE="Ash2X"]

I think if the game goes half-price it´s mine anyway.I don´t think the demo was outstanding,but it had something that makes me want this game,may the reviews as bad as they like.Plus I don´t give too much about 1up´s and GS´s Reviews.Look at the Lost Odyssey-Review which definetly earned 9.0 and didn´t get it because there was no FF-Logo on it.Maybe this game whould be rated better if a DMC-Logo was shown on the cover?I really don´t know...and when it´s cheaper it´s worth the risk to find out.

Archangel3371

Lost Odyssey was shiny garbage crippled by a series of lazy design decisions (characters getting jumped by giants in an open plain, failing to react and looking bored as screaming monsters charged them, etc). Its no wonder MS decided that as they did with the broken Mass Effect, advertising the heck out the game but not offering a demo which would let people experience the gameplay for themselves was the way to go.

In terms of boldness and quality FF12 and Persona 3 completely embarrass the hidebound, barely competent LO. Lost Odyssey is the best current gen jrpg (that has seen release in NA anyway), but that's kind of like being the best Uwe Boll movie.

The system which runs Gears of War could have managed enemies (or as in the case of Persona 3, blobs representing enemies) on the exploration screen of Lost Odyssey. To elaborate on my other point, its silly that the characters locked in mortal combat are as vacant looking and fidgety as people in line at the DMV, even if at that moment in combat a monster is charging towards them. I'm not arguing that the textures weren't shiny or that the music wasn't nice, I'm saying that from a design standpoint, much more could have been done...

[QUOTE="CarnageHeart"][QUOTE="Ash2X"]

I think if the game goes half-price it´s mine anyway.I don´t think the demo was outstanding,but it had something that makes me want this game,may the reviews as bad as they like.Plus I don´t give too much about 1up´s and GS´s Reviews.Look at the Lost Odyssey-Review which definetly earned 9.0 and didn´t get it because there was no FF-Logo on it.Maybe this game whould be rated better if a DMC-Logo was shown on the cover?I really don´t know...and when it´s cheaper it´s worth the risk to find out.

Ash2X

Lost Odyssey was shiny garbage crippled by a series of lazy design decisions (characters getting jumped by giants in an open plain, failing to react and looking bored as screaming monsters charged them, etc). Its no wonder MS decided that as they did with the broken Mass Effect, advertising the heck out the game but not offering a demo which would let people experience the gameplay for themselves was the way to go.

In terms of boldness and quality FF12 and Persona 3 completely embarrass the hidebound, barely competent LO. Lost Odyssey is the best current gen jrpg (that has seen release in NA anyway), but that's kind of like being the best Uwe Boll movie.

You say it´s bad because of Random Encounters?Maybe some feel it´s out of time,but the fact that it was close to older RPGs made it by far better then most RPGs in the last years.Look at the pretty weak FF12...not totally bad,but a game without Story and uninteresting fighting system isn´t really the peak of gaming...I had also fun with it,but against LO it looks like a half-finished game.If FF10-FF12 whould at least half as well made,I whouldn´t have cared too much about LO,but they just simply aren´t.I think LO got exactly what seems lost in FF...the game got a well made Story (even if it´s not too special),stays true to itself from beginning to the end and it doesn´t try to make experiments that no one needed (like a MMO-like Fighting system which only big difference is the lack of interaction).

It´s classic in every way and I prefer it over every wanna-be new.There are of course also positive developments.Look at the pretty good Persona 3...which was great exept that it almost killed what´s great about 1 and 2.It´s pretty limited compared to them,still fun.Going new ways isn´t always bad.But if you want a RPG as it should be there aren´t much exept Lost Odyssey,Blue Dragon and Dragon Quest 8.Too bad if you not liked it,LO is more then worth finishing.

I have played jrpgs since Phantasy Star, so Mistwalker's determination to crank out shiny versions of games which could gameplay and game design wise, would be comfortable on my Master System really irks me. Mistwalker is a who's who of jrpg developers, but all they are doing is following a two decade old formula rather than experimenting.

FF12, which took chances, is exactly the type of game I like to see. As a fan of Matsuno's byzantine political plots which reduce the main hero to one of the actors I had no problem with the story of FF12.

*Shrugs* But if you think perfection was achieved 20 years ago and that any attempt to mess with the formula is undesirable, I can see how you could enjoy Mistwalker's work.

As for Persona 3, it feels quite a bit different than the first PS1 Persona game but while I miss the negotiations with monsters, I'm comfortable with most of the changes.

[QUOTE="Archangel3371"][QUOTE="CarnageHeart"][QUOTE="Ash2X"]

I think if the game goes half-price it´s mine anyway.I don´t think the demo was outstanding,but it had something that makes me want this game,may the reviews as bad as they like.Plus I don´t give too much about 1up´s and GS´s Reviews.Look at the Lost Odyssey-Review which definetly earned 9.0 and didn´t get it because there was no FF-Logo on it.Maybe this game whould be rated better if a DMC-Logo was shown on the cover?I really don´t know...and when it´s cheaper it´s worth the risk to find out.

CarnageHeart

Lost Odyssey was shiny garbage crippled by a series of lazy design decisions (characters getting jumped by giants in an open plain, failing to react and looking bored as screaming monsters charged them, etc). Its no wonder MS decided that as they did with the broken Mass Effect, advertising the heck out the game but not offering a demo which would let people experience the gameplay for themselves was the way to go.

In terms of boldness and quality FF12 and Persona 3 completely embarrass the hidebound, barely competent LO. Lost Odyssey is the best current gen jrpg (that has seen release in NA anyway), but that's kind of like being the best Uwe Boll movie.

The system which runs Gears of War could have managed enemies (or as in the case of Persona 3, blobs representing enemies) on the exploration screen of Lost Odyssey. To elaborate on my other point, its silly that the characters locked in mortal combat are as vacant looking and fidgety as people in line at the DMV, even if at that moment in combat a monster is charging towards them. I'm not arguing that the textures weren't shiny or that the music wasn't nice, I'm saying that from a design standpoint, much more could have been done...

[QUOTE="Ash2X"][QUOTE="CarnageHeart"][QUOTE="Ash2X"]

I think if the game goes half-price it´s mine anyway.I don´t think the demo was outstanding,but it had something that makes me want this game,may the reviews as bad as they like.Plus I don´t give too much about 1up´s and GS´s Reviews.Look at the Lost Odyssey-Review which definetly earned 9.0 and didn´t get it because there was no FF-Logo on it.Maybe this game whould be rated better if a DMC-Logo was shown on the cover?I really don´t know...and when it´s cheaper it´s worth the risk to find out.

CarnageHeart

Lost Odyssey was shiny garbage crippled by a series of lazy design decisions (characters getting jumped by giants in an open plain, failing to react and looking bored as screaming monsters charged them, etc). Its no wonder MS decided that as they did with the broken Mass Effect, advertising the heck out the game but not offering a demo which would let people experience the gameplay for themselves was the way to go.

In terms of boldness and quality FF12 and Persona 3 completely embarrass the hidebound, barely competent LO. Lost Odyssey is the best current gen jrpg (that has seen release in NA anyway), but that's kind of like being the best Uwe Boll movie.

You say it´s bad because of Random Encounters?Maybe some feel it´s out of time,but the fact that it was close to older RPGs made it by far better then most RPGs in the last years.Look at the pretty weak FF12...not totally bad,but a game without Story and uninteresting fighting system isn´t really the peak of gaming...I had also fun with it,but against LO it looks like a half-finished game.If FF10-FF12 whould at least half as well made,I whouldn´t have cared too much about LO,but they just simply aren´t.I think LO got exactly what seems lost in FF...the game got a well made Story (even if it´s not too special),stays true to itself from beginning to the end and it doesn´t try to make experiments that no one needed (like a MMO-like Fighting system which only big difference is the lack of interaction).

It´s classic in every way and I prefer it over every wanna-be new.There are of course also positive developments.Look at the pretty good Persona 3...which was great exept that it almost killed what´s great about 1 and 2.It´s pretty limited compared to them,still fun.Going new ways isn´t always bad.But if you want a RPG as it should be there aren´t much exept Lost Odyssey,Blue Dragon and Dragon Quest 8.Too bad if you not liked it,LO is more then worth finishing.

I have played jrpgs since Phantasy Star, so Mistwalker's determination to crank out shiny versions of games which could gameplay and game design wise, would be comfortable on my Master System really irks me. Mistwalker is a who's who of jrpg developers, but all they are doing is following a two decade old formula rather than experimenting.

FF12, which took chances, is exactly the type of game I like to see. As a fan of Matsuno's byzantine political plots which reduce the main hero to one of the actors I had no problem with the story of FF12.

*Shrugs* But if you think perfection was achieved 20 years ago and that any attempt to mess with the formula is undesirable, I can see how you could enjoy Mistwalker's work.

As for Persona 3, it feels quite a bit different than the first PS1 Persona game but while I miss the negotiations with monsters, I'm comfortable with most of the changes.

@ Carnage:

I really don't understand your hate for Lost Odyssey, nor do I really empathize with your feelings about the character's emotions as they are getting attacked, my characters (maybe they are better than you often times react with a counter or if they are attacked they yelp or scream (that is all I need). Since the game is turn-based, I don't really care too much about the pseudo-reactions of my characters while they are being attacked. While I'll say that FF12 was definitely an overall better game, it was not the better jrpg, its gameplay is basically not even in the same categeory, and the characters were all robotic and uninteresting to say the least...But hey I guess that's better than melodrama that is the rest of the series. Even with all of its cliches, Lost Odyssey manages to produce characters that I care about it. They feel real, they have long drawn out backstories, and game knows exactly when to throw in some humor so that it doesn't feel too pretentious. Lost Odyssey is one of the most immersive jrpgs I've ever played, and I usually only like jrgs that are on par combat wise with the Grandia series. It is the type of game that you get out, what you put in, and it takes a considerable amount of dedication to really get the full experience with tons of secrets and plot development.

@ Ash: Comparing DMC4's gameplay to Too Human's would be like comparing steak to liver. Too Human suffers from awful pacing, huge wide open boring spaces full of void, and dual analog combat that I could easily play with half a hand on the controller and while looking at the screen only with my peripheral vision. DMC4's combat is deep, fast paced, and the enemy a.i. doesn't consist of passive aggressiveness in the most literal sense of the word.

Well maybe it could have or maybe not. I think it's really hard to tell just by looking at the game because there are a number of differences between the two games being from different genres. For RPG's there is usually alot of things running and preloading in the background. It's possible that it was intentionally done so as to make load times as short and as seemless as possible. Personally if it was between this or having the same faceless blobs over and over again while it is somewhat nice to be able to avoid them whenever possible I would hardly miss them if they weren't there. I'm not really sure I get the criticism about the characters not reacting to a monster prior to hitting them in battle. I can't really think of any RPG turned-based or otherwise that does something like that. I can't really say that that would add anything to the game having a character do or say something akin to "OMG! I'm about to get hit!" everytime a monster attacked. Seems like it would just end up being tedious after awhile although I guess it could be funny sometimes on how the developer made characters freak out.Archangel3371

Ditto

Well maybe it could have or maybe not. I think it's really hard to tell just by looking at the game because there are a number of differences between the two games being from different genres. For RPG's there is usually alot of things running and preloading in the background. It's possible that it was intentionally done so as to make load times as short and as seemless as possible. Personally if it was between this or having the same faceless blobs over and over again while it is somewhat nice to be able to avoid them whenever possible I would hardly miss them if they weren't there. I'm not really sure I get the criticism about the characters not reacting to a monster prior to hitting them in battle.I can't really think of any RPG turned-based or otherwise that does something like that. I can't really say that that would add anything to the game having a character do or say something akin to "OMG! I'm about to get hit!" everytime a monster attacked. Seems like it would just end up being tedious after awhile although I guess it could be funny sometimes on how the developer made characters freak out.Archangel3371

Okay, I'll say it another way. The graphics (in terms of resolution) took the next step, but the animation didn't. It doesn't make any sense for a characer to cycle through various idle animations up until they are either attacking or being struck by an enemy. A guy who sees a monster charging towards him should tense up, dodge or block, not ignore them up until he is struck. Persona 3 is a great example of characters that don't merely act, but react.

@ Carnage:

I really don't understand your hate for Lost Odyssey, nor do I really empathize with your feelings about the character's emotions as they are getting attacked, my characters (maybe they are better than you often times react with a counter or if they are attacked they yelp or scream (that is all I need). Since the game is turn-based, I don't really care too much about the pseudo-reactions of my characters while they are being attacked. While I'll say that FF12 was definitely an overall better game, it was not the better jrpg, its gameplay is basically not even in the same categeory, and the characters were all robotic and uninteresting to say the least...But hey I guess that's better than melodrama that is the rest of the series. Even with all of its cliches, Lost Odyssey manages to produce characters that I care about it. They feel real, they have long drawn out backstories, and game knows exactly when to throw in some humor so that it doesn't feel too pretentious. Lost Odyssey is one of the most immersive jrpgs I've ever played, and I usually only like jrgs that are on par combat wise with the Grandia series. It is the type of game that you get out, what you put in, and it takes a considerable amount of dedication to really get the full experience with tons of secrets and plot development.

@ Ash: Comparing DMC4's gameplay to Too Human's would be like comparing steak to liver. Too Human suffers from awful pacing, huge wide open boring spaces full of void, and dual analog combat that I could easily play with half a hand on the controller and while looking at the screen only with my peripheral vision. DMC4's combat is deep, fast paced, and the enemy a.i. doesn't consist of passive aggressiveness in the most literal sense of the word.

HiResDes

If daring to innovate means that a game isn't considered a jrpg in your eyes, we'll just have to agree to disagree.

As for your love of long, drawn out backstories, I don't mind the technique ('Woah! Repressed memories are coming back to me... again!') but I don't think hour long flashbacks are required to establish character nor do I think a game's characters have to be the axis around which the world spins.

1. If daring to innovate means that a game isn't considered a jrpg in your eyes, we'll just have to agree to disagree.

2. As for your love of drawn out long, drawn out backstories, I don't mind the technique ('Woah! Repressed memories are coming back to me... again!') but I don't think hour long flashbacks are required to establish character nor do I think a game's characters have to be the axis around which the world spins.CarnageHeart

1. I don't know, I think their is definitely a lot of room for innovation, but I'm not all that great crazy about the gambit system, and I think the game has more in common with an mmorpg than a jrpg. I would love to see developers incorporate emotional systems similar to that found in the Thing and The Resident Evil Outbreak series into an jrpg, and I would also like combat to evolve using Grandia as the model for a good battle system.

2. I wholeheartedly agree, and honestly I didn't read all of the dreams myself, but the few that I did really did enhance my view of the characters...I do feel it could have been handled a lot better, but the fact that it was there was enough for me.

[QUOTE="CarnageHeart"]1. If daring to innovate means that a game isn't considered a jrpg in your eyes, we'll just have to agree to disagree.

2. As for your love of drawn out long, drawn out backstories, I don't mind the technique ('Woah! Repressed memories are coming back to me... again!') but I don't think hour long flashbacks are required to establish character nor do I think a game's characters have to be the axis around which the world spins.HiResDes

1. I don't know, I think their is definitely a lot of room for innovation, but I'm not all that great crazy about the gambit system, and I think the game has more in common with an mmorpg than a jrpg. I would love to see developers incorporate emotional systems similar to that found in the Thing and The Resident Evil Outbreak series into an jrpg, and I would also like combat to evolve using Grandia as the model for a good battle system.

2. I wholeheartedly agree, and honestly I didn't read all of the dreams myself, but the few that I did really did enhance my view of the characters...I do feel it could have been handled a lot better, but the fact that it was there was enough for me.

Yeah, The Thing was really interesting. I remember getting frustrated because it wasn't clear why or how some people were turning, but like you said, it had some clever ideas that other game developers should rip off of.

Back on topic, Dyack spoke to OXM UK about the launch.

He said that the reason it's getting low scores is because it's TOO innovative, TOO fresh of an experience, and reviewers just don't know how to react when a game doesn't follow a set derivative mold. "But what we're also seeing is for the people who don't like it, generally just don't get it. And it's because we've created something so innovative and different," he says. "It's ironic, it just shows that human nature of if you don't understand something, you immediately attack it. It's pretty interesting in that regard." He also said, "I think we took for granted how innovative the game was.

So, if you want to get a good review score, do not even think of making a game that is just oozing with excess innovation from its seams. Otherwise, you'll be critically hammered, because reviewers aren't intelligent enough to see it for the work of art that it is.

That, or maybe the game is just hugely mediocre and a disappointment, but he's in denial. That's possible too. Could be either or.

Back on topic, Dyack spoke to OXM UK about the launch.

He said that the reason it's getting low scores is because it's TOO innovative, TOO fresh of an experience, and reviewers just don't know how to react when a game doesn't follow a set derivative mold.

argianas

And this is less than 2 weeks after Braid came out, right? ;)

[QUOTE="argianas"]

Back on topic, Dyack spoke to OXM UK about the launch.

He said that the reason it's getting low scores is because it's TOO innovative, TOO fresh of an experience, and reviewers just don't know how to react when a game doesn't follow a set derivative mold.

Skylock00

And this is less than 2 weeks after Braid came out, right? ;)

:lol:... no kidding.

Back on topic, Dyack spoke to OXM UK about the launch.

He said that the reason it's getting low scores is because it's TOO innovative, TOO fresh of an experience, and reviewers just don't know how to react when a game doesn't follow a set derivative mold. "But what we're also seeing is for the people who don't like it, generally just don't get it. And it's because we've created something so innovative and different," he says. "It's ironic, it just shows that human nature of if you don't understand something, you immediately attack it. It's pretty interesting in that regard." He also said, "I think we took for granted how innovative the game was.

So, if you want to get a good review score, do not even think of making a game that is just oozing with excess innovation from its seams. Otherwise, you'll be critically hammered, because reviewers aren't intelligent enough to see it for the work of art that it is.

That, or maybe the game is just hugely mediocre and a disappointment, but he's in denial. That's possible too. Could be either or.

argianas

That was the same response Eggebretch gave to critics of Lair (we were too stupid/stubborn to understand how great the motion controls of Lair really were). By way of contrast, far, far, far more talented developers such as Kojima and Miyamoto listen to what gamers have to say, as opposed to merely calling them stuck in the mud idiots. I'm not saying that great designers let other people dictate their games, but they respect their fans and give their arguments serious consideration.

Looks like MS hasn't been scared off by all the shenanigans.

http://www.mcvuk.com/news/31545/Too-Human-trilogy-very-exciting-says-Microsoft

Microsoft has confirmed to MCV that it is committed to releasing a trilogy of Too Human games – and compared the narrative pull of the story to Star Wars and Lord Of The Rings.Teufelhuhn

Uwe Boll somehow manages to get funding for his movies and acquire the rights big name games and lure in big actors, so I guess Dyack's ability to do so in the videogame industry shouldn't surprise me. One has to wonder if any of MS's top decision makers are gamers though.

[QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"]Looks like MS hasn't been scared off by all the shenanigans.

http://www.mcvuk.com/news/31545/Too-Human-trilogy-very-exciting-says-Microsoft

Microsoft has confirmed to MCV that it is committed to releasing a trilogy of Too Human games – and compared the narrative pull of the story to Star Wars and Lord Of The Rings.CarnageHeart

Uwe Boll somehow manages to get funding for his movies and acquire the rights big name games and lure in big actors, so I guess Dyack's ability to do so in the videogame industry shouldn't surprise me. One has to wonder if any of MS's top decision makers are gamers though.

The reason Boll got so much financial support was because of a German tax loophole. They recently plugged up that hole, which coincidentally is right about the time he slowed down pumping out game titles, and admitted he may have to start upping the quality of his films a bit.

Still, I love MS comparing the trilogy to SW and LotR. Some reviews said they do a poor job of explaining the backstory, and pretty much all the story happens at the final fight.

Why did they ban Dyack just now? I dont get it, they didnt ban him before when he started that retarded thread of his, but now when he's finally contributing to the forum, they ban him. :|

GAF was supposed to be the place where all the industry vets were welcome....... this is retarded.

[QUOTE="EviLore"]As Confucius once saidrragnaar

I stopped reading there. Can you say self-centred, pseudo-intellectual, pretentious windbag? That's NeoGAF in a nutshell. It's like the Pitchfork of game forums.

I don't really give a crap about Dyack or Too Human, but NeoGAF truly is the worst forum out there.