Off-Topic General Discussion - Page 5158

On June 09 2015 02:13 TheYango wrote:

This is really underselling the Battle Network series a lot. The second and 3rd entries in the series definitely made many meaningful improvements to the gameplay formula (at least, no less than Pokemon does from entry to entry). 4 and 5 were kind of just bad games, but 6 radically changed the basic gameplay to be the most refined in the entire series.

Really though, I feel like the Battle Network series was a little before its time. The game would be a lot more engaging with online multiplayer, and would probably be much more popular now with the current "collectible gaming" craze than it was in its own time.

With regard to Starforce, it wasn't that it didn't innovate--rather, it tried to do so in all the wrong ways. They dumbed down gameplay elements in ways that didn't actually make the game simpler or more accessible, and so ended up with a game that was just as complex, but didn't have any of the depth or engagement of it's predecessors.

On June 09 2015 02:13 TheYango wrote:

This is really underselling the Battle Network series a lot. The second and 3rd entries in the series definitely made many meaningful improvements to the gameplay formula (at least, no less than Pokemon does from entry to entry). 4 and 5 were kind of just bad games, but 6 radically changed the basic gameplay to be the most refined in the entire series.

Really though, I feel like the Battle Network series was a little before its time. The game would be a lot more engaging with online multiplayer, and would probably be much more popular now with the current "collectible gaming" craze than it was in its own time.

With regard to Starforce, it wasn't that it didn't innovate--rather, it tried to do so in all the wrong ways. They dumbed down gameplay elements in ways that didn't actually make the game simpler or more accessible, and so ended up with a game that was just as complex, but didn't have any of the depth or engagement of it's predecessors.

On June 09 2015 02:07 WaveofShadow wrote:
I'd like to think I could perform a routine pretty easily if someone wrote the material for me.

On June 09 2015 02:18 WaveofShadow wrote:

I agree with the MMBN analysis with the added response of 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it.' I think I would have played MMBN 1-14 even if they continued on the way 1-3 were. The minor innovations were nice/cute and all, but the gameplay (and to a way lesser extent, story) throughout was solid and it were what made the games, similar to the original MM series. You can actually see that many of the later games in MM series were way less popular than the original few because of how far they deviated. (MM6 v MM2, MMX7 v MMX2)

On June 09 2015 02:17 onlywonderboy wrote:

Yeah except you would probably have to do microtransaction to buy new chips, ew.

Battle Network 3 was my shit back in the day, I recently just thought about going back to play in on an emulator.

On June 09 2015 02:19 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:


"I can do this job if someone did the majority of the hard work for me."

On June 09 2015 02:27 Frolossus wrote:
the battle network franchise is easily my favorite capcom one behind maybe phoenix wright.
3 and 6 were so fucking good

On June 09 2015 02:30 TheYango wrote:
OWB, you definitely should give BN3 another go. Having replayed the series in the last 2 years, 3 definitely holds up. Pretty much my only complaint about it is that you can't finish the post-game without linking to the other game (you have to get the chips from the other game in order to face the Omega Navis).


lol I went to Wikipedia to look up Capcom franchises to contest this statement.

Ghosts 'n' Goblins is another great franchise that Capcom hasn't done anything with recently.

On June 09 2015 02:28 WaveofShadow wrote:

I'm not sure how you think written material is all there is to performance.

On June 09 2015 02:32 WaveofShadow wrote:
Or like....ever

For both games, Capcom offered optional additional microtransactions designed to decrease the difficulty of the game. These included such options as to enable unlimited lives, increase the power and durability of weapons and armor, grant new abilities such as a triple jump, or remove traps and simplify stages. Reviews praised this method of optional DLC designed solely to assist the player as opposed to selling additional game content.

On June 09 2015 02:34 TheYango wrote:

Well apparently it got some PSP/iOS releases in the last decade.

But when the iOS games get this:

You know what to expect.

On June 09 2015 02:33 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:


I said majority not entirety didn't I?

On June 09 2015 02:23 JonGalt wrote:
Being on stage I have no qualms with. I have always wanted to do it but just haven't taken the time. I'm starting to jot stuff down instead of being productive at work.

I have no recording but when I do go to an open Mic night I'll try and record myself.

But thanks for all the advice/info. I just need to focus and flesh out a routine instead of it floating in my head.

#FREEcomedy

On June 09 2015 02:28 WaveofShadow wrote:

I'm not sure how you think written material is all there is to performance.

On June 09 2015 02:17 TheYango wrote:

The death of Sonic happened well before the release of Sonic Adventure. The inability for Sega to release a good flagship Sonic title for the Sega Saturn contributed to the loss of faith in Sega as a whole, both for their consoles, as well as for Sonic.

Sonic Adventure/Adventure 2 were the last ditch effort to keep Sega's grip on the console market alive. They're generally well received, but as a whole, fan impressions of Sega were already shot with the successive failures of both the Sega 32x and the Sega Saturn, compounded with the lack of a good Sonic game.