CAlNlAC's forum posts
[QUOTE="dragon_master11"][QUOTE="stereointegrity"][QUOTE="dragon_master11"][QUOTE="stereointegrity"]dude u give us no reasons u just come in and give an opinion..if u came in with some facts..maybe a link or something then ill give it to ustereointegrity
So you want a link to confirm DLC for 360?
nope cause that is ur opinon that dlc will make the game better..Uhhh...No. DLC will make the game better, how could you say thats opinion?
how will it make it better?I think the question you should ask yourself is how can it make it worse? Anyway, as for me I still on the fence on which version to get so I'll probably wait for the reviews to come in before I buy. I gotta say though I'm leaning a bit to the 360 version just for fact of the DLC. So assuming both versions are idenical out of the box I'll go for the 360 version.
Yeah, so far I'm 9 hours in and I also have yet to see these so called 10-30 second load times. Seems like many reviewers may have exaggerated on that a bit. That is unless of course later on in the game the loading gets way worse, but I don't see why it would. Guess I'll just have to wait and see. As for the dialouge thing, I haven't seen anyway to change it to auto like you're asking.For people who've played the game a bit:
I'm about 4 hours in...when do the load times get "unbearable"??? :roll:
I've yet to notice anything longer than a 3 second load. Feels like a normal jRPG to me...
Also, battle intros are a bit long-winded but not even close to the 10-30 seconds some of the reviews have claimed...:|
It seems that some reviewers haven't played a disk-format jRPG before :lol:
-
Also, is there a way to make the dialogue progress automatically during in-game cutscenes?
I'm absolutely HATING the fact that I have to press a button just to hear the next line of dialogue :( Seems like a whiny complaint but considering some cutscenes are 10 mins long...it gets a bit tedious :?
-
and...why the hell does Kaim look totally different in the CGI scenes?
For the first time in my long jRPG history, a character looks better in-game versus CGI :|
It's...pissing...me...off...:evil:
ss_49
[QUOTE="BioShockOwnz"]uhh....High A to high AA isn't mediocre. Infact, its "great" according to gamespot. a 2.5/5 at gamespy, a 3/5 at x play, a 6/10 at gamesradar. It got a 82, and 88 at ign and gametrailers.[QUOTE="numba1234"][QUOTE="Vandalvideo"][QUOTE="ImaPirate0202"]It's gotten mediocre reviews so far.numba1234
And most logical gamers would think IGN and GameTrailers were the more reliable sources.
Why? IGN, and GAmetrailers rate on a 7.0 scale. A game can't score lower then 7.0 unless it is really really bad. That said, they don't give low scores to ANY game. Turok, Kane and Lynch, Timeshift, and many other games scored AA at gametrailers. I would say these 2 sites, are the worst sites for reviews. Depending, if you want to hear if your hyped game scores well (there is no way a hyped game is oging to score lower then a 7 there), then those sites would be great. But if you want an accurate potrayal of the game, that contains opinions, and other stuff, then those sites are terrible.Gametrailers in their review didn't mention once technical problems, such as loading, frame rate, and other things.
Actually, Gametrailers did mention both the loading and framerate issues. They just didn't make it the focus of the review. I dunno, maybe they didn't find those issues very problematic to make a big deal about it.
Log in to comment