Support NeoGAF

[AstroLad]

After this I think I'm looking forward to the first Uncharted 9.0 more so than the game. This has been even better than the first round of Motorstorm reviews.

Fun Factor through the roof.

 

[Rodeo Clown]

The demo for GH3 is so excellent, Im glad Neversoft and Red Octane did such a great job with the game.

1UP's 9.0 vindicated. That demo was awesome and the song selection of the game looks great.

i dont know why You guys banned me. I read them for fun, and perhaps just to get another take on it. Sometimes there's a quality to a game that I've actually missed, and a good review, a rare thing indeed, might be able to pinpoint that. And then I read some reviews written by known buttholes just because I need some easy agitation to go with my morning coffee. There's the odd review where I'm actually looking for information on whether a game is worth a purchase or not, but the aforementioned poor standards in reviews makes that a rare occurrence.

wat

 

[AltogetherAndrews]

i dont know why You guys banned me. I read them for fun, and perhaps just to get another take on it. Sometimes there's a quality to a game that I've actually missed, and a good review, a rare thing indeed, might be able to pinpoint that. And then I read some reviews written by known buttholes just because I need some easy agitation to go with my morning coffee. There's the odd review where I'm actually looking for information on whether a game is worth a purchase or not, but the aforementioned poor standards in reviews makes that a rare occurrence.

The hell?

2) The diminishing returns comment praised the PS2 more than it insulted the PS3. UYA looked incredible. It's hard to wow Joe (apparantly) when the previous game already looked ridiculously awesome.

They looked ridiculously awesome, for PS2 games. But they were certainly still very much PS2 games, and this is certainly very much a very good looking PS3 game. If Joe is so blind that he can't spot the leap, then fair enough. But he probably shouldn't admit it, at least not if he intends to go on talking about and rating graphics quality.

 

[Tieno]

i dont know why You guys banned me. I read them for fun, and perhaps just to get another take on it. Sometimes there's a quality to a game that I've actually missed, and a good review, a rare thing indeed, might be able to pinpoint that. And then I read some reviews written by known buttholes just because I need some easy agitation to go with my morning coffee. There's the odd review where I'm actually looking for information on whether a game is worth a purchase or not, but the aforementioned poor standards in reviews makes that a rare occurrence.

What? Dupe account, wtf?
Shit is getting interesting by the minute.

 

[Haunted]

WTF @ Jericho!??
The demo was very good! WTF!? can someone post a summary of the review?

What demo were you playing? Score sounds about right judging from the demo.

 

[Jenga]

I love this thread.

 

[AltogetherAndrews]

What? Dupe account, wtf?
Shit is getting interesting by the minute.

He quoted one of my earlier posts, but added that part in the beginning. I think he's trying to suggest that me and Darj are the same person, but I could be wrong. Well, I hope I'm wrong, because that'd be an embarrassingly weak effort on dude's part.

 

[Chumly]

i dont know why You guys banned me. I read them for fun, and perhaps just to get another take on it. Sometimes there's a quality to a game that I've actually missed, and a good review, a rare thing indeed, might be able to pinpoint that. And then I read some reviews written by known buttholes just because I need some easy agitation to go with my morning coffee. There's the odd review where I'm actually looking for information on whether a game is worth a purchase or not, but the aforementioned poor standards in reviews makes that a rare occurrence.

da fuck?

 

[Rodeo Clown]

tree-sitty. I'm trying to get my hands on the PS3/Wii versions this week, and I'm not sure what the status of the PC code is. I'll check with GFW nerdz.

Ah, okay.

 

[RumFore]

Ok...why is that post so shocking that so many are quoting it and saying wat, wut, what?

 

[Haunted]

Ok...why is that post so shocking that so many are quoting it and saying wat, wut, what?

Why did you change your name? I almost didn't recognise you.

 

[GhaleonEB]

Ok...why is that post so shocking that so many are quoting it and saying wat, wut, what?

Go back two pages and read the posts of Darji. It's so worth it. He got banned, and it now appears is posting using an alt account.

 

[jjasper]

All this because the game got scores of between 8.5 and 9.5. Man some people need to get out more.

 

[noonche]

Two points:

1) Up Your Arsenal is my second favorite platformer ever. I don't think the animation comment your seaching for is important at all.

2) The diminishing returns comment praised the PS2 more than it insulted the PS3. UYA looked incredible. It's hard to wow Joe (apparantly) when the previous game already looked ridiculously awesome.

Just from playing R&C 1-4 and the demo of Future I'd agree with Joe's comment on graphics. Future looks better, but it is not the jump that happened from PS1 to PS2. Maybe I'll disagree when I get the actual game (hopefully later today). I also concede that I'm comparing how Future actually looks to how I remember R&C 3 looking.

 

[MirageDwarf]

I'm kind of disappointed that ForutnateSon didn't join Darji and others. I give this thread 8.5.

Make it happen, 1up.

 

[Ploid 3.0]

Just from playing R&C 1-4 and the demo of Future I'd agree with Joe's comment on graphics. Future looks better, but it is not the jump that happened from PS1 to PS2. Maybe I'll disagree when I get the actual game (hopefully later today). I also concede that I'm comparing how Future actually looks to how I remember R&C 3 looking.

After reading Joe's review I have to agree and go a step further saying that the game looks butt ugly and move like stick figures compared to what I played on psx with spyro. Insomniac was too far ahead of their time.

Spoiler

lol I'm kidding. I thought that was very funny. ratchet2vsratchetfuture.jpg

 

[I AM JOHN!]

You know what I love reading?

This message is hidden because Darji is on your ignore list.

That.

EDIT: Oh Thank God he's gone.

 

[noonche]

Spoiler

lol I'm kidding. I thought that was very funny. ratchet2vsratchetfuture.jpg

You can joke, but I'd like to see some of those comparison pictures. I never said the game didn't look better. Merely that the jump from Spyro to R&C was much larger than the jump from R&C to RCF.

 

[Druz]

He quoted one of my earlier posts, but added that part in the beginning. I think he's trying to suggest that me and Darj are the same person, but I could be wrong. Well, I hope I'm wrong, because that'd be an embarrassingly weak effort on dude's part.

Whoops, I thought I quoted Darj... you guys post similarly.

 

[Ploid 3.0]

You can joke, but I'd like to see some of those comparison pictures. I never said the game didn't look better. Merely that the jump from Spyro to R&C was much larger than the jump from R&C to RCF.

It's in the ratchet and clank future official thread. Too comparison shots. One of similar setting, and one of huge boss fights. R&C ps3 made the PS2's look flat and boring. I guess that's how R&C made spyro look also, and spyro still seem graphically good due to it's cartoony nature.

Still pictures don't account for the game in motion also, and ps3 ratchet once again makes a big leap past ps2's. Also the sound and use of voice work throughout the demo while playing. Also the amount of things on the ps3's, image quality, and such brings it up from just being prettier.

 

[Captain Glanton]

i dont know why You guys banned me. I read them for fun, and perhaps just to get another take on it. Sometimes there's a quality to a game that I've actually missed, and a good review, a rare thing indeed, might be able to pinpoint that. And then I read some reviews written by known buttholes just because I need some easy agitation to go with my morning coffee. There's the odd review where I'm actually looking for information on whether a game is worth a purchase or not, but the aforementioned poor standards in reviews makes that a rare occurrence.

We need to sticky this thread to every GAFer's forehead.

 

[noonche]

It's in the ratchet and clank future official thread. Too comparison shots. One of similar setting, and one of huge boss fights. R&C ps3 made the PS2's look flat and boring. I guess that's how R&C made spyro look also, and spyro still seem graphically good due to it's cartoony nature.

Still pictures don't account for the game in motion also, and ps3 ratchet once again makes a big leap past ps2's. Also the sound and use of voice work throughout the demo while playing. Also the amount of things on the ps3's, image quality, and such brings it up from just being prettier.

Hmm, no, I don't really think the jump from Spyro to RC is the same as the one to RCF after looking at those screens. RC1 made me think that Spyro looked not only barren and empty, but also bad. RCF doesn't make me think the same thing about PS2 RC.

Either way, the game looks like a ton of fun. Hopefully Best Buy has it today as I'll try to pick it up on my way home from work; in 20 minutes. I'm certainly willing to revise my opinion upon playing the final game.

 

[Ploid 3.0]

Oh great for you then.

 

[BlueTsunami]

Instead of posting in this thread, some of you could be grinding in some random JRPG like FFT: War of the Lions.

 

[AltogetherAndrews]

Whoops, I thought I quoted Darj... you guys post similarly.

Yeah, sure we do. You're weak.

 

[Druz]

Yeah, sure we do. You're weak.

That wasn't a jab. I thought there was only one person fighting with a dumb opinion, in a rush I copy pasted your shit. Really, it is a tragically dull mistake that you've dressed up as something else.

 

[Gigglepoo]

That wasn't a jab. I thought there was only one person fighting with a dumb opinion, in a rush I copy pasted your shit. Really, it is a tragically dull mistake that you've dressed up as something else.

The other poster, the banned one, apparantly doesn't even speak English. Granted, he would be posting at ridiculous hours if he really lived in Germany, but he claims that he doesn't even know English. So it's a pretty big insult to be confused with someone who can't correctly string two words together.

 

[Ten-Song]

stop reading our site.

But then he wouldn't be able to bitch about your reviews! Where's the drama in that? That'd be like me not liking the show "Heroes" but instead of ranting about it, I just don't watch it and let the people that like it be and don't talk shit to them. That's no fun at all!

 

[freethought]

Long post

Sorry for not quoting your post but I'm stuck using my PS3 web browser and it has an absurd character limit.

Anyway, why do you keep referring to R&C? I didn't even mention the game and I've never even played one. I am a huge Mario fan though and I think your analysis is way off.

I'll start by saying that the water pack isn't really new since every Mario has introduced new power-ups and abilities, plus the default hover ability was, in my opinion, a detriment to the game. Besides, if R&C doesn't get credit for adding new gadgets and abilities, I really don't see why Mario should.

Secondly, the 'secret' areas were excellent, but they were a very natural progression from the three boss stages in SM64, which if you remember were linear and abstract platforming levels.

As far as level design, personally I think SM64 trumps SMS both in terms of ingenuity and varied settings so I'm a little confused to hear you say it shows a clear evolution.

 

[Drinky Crow]

hint: evolution doesn't necessarily equal better; it can safely and accurately mean "increased complexity," which is what sunshine offered over mario 64. i personally liked sunshine better than sm64, which i thought was a dreadfully dry experience, but on the other hand, my definition clearly allows for a preference of mario 64 as well. hurr.

that said, this has become a thread about ratchet and clank, and why sony fans are so adamant that it be scored as a 90% or above. (and given the simple answer: they need ammunition in their fanboy wars, legitimate attempts at criticism be damned. of all the terrible reasons people champion games, this is the one reviewers are LEAST guilty of, thank god.) i can't imagine why you'd want to address mario 64 versus sunshine in a vaccuum given this thread's context, but hey: that's you.

 

[Brandon F]

hint: evolution doesn't necessarily equal better; it can safely and accurately mean "increased complexity," which is what sunshine offered over mario 64. i personally liked sunshine better than sm64, which i thought was a dreadfully dry experience, but on the other hand, my definition clearly allows for a preference of mario 64 as well. hurr.

Really though? I would have thought the horrendous 'raft' based sections, extreme abundance of timed challenges, overkill of repeated mini-boss stuffing, and often irksome camera and collision niggles would have given you the same "eff this!" feeling SMS gave me.

Granted the water was awesome looking, the airtime occasionally astounding, and those micro-platformer levels were something to savor from a mostly half-baked Mario venture.

Edit: I also find it humorous(or maybe desperate) that Sony fans are clinging so hard to R&C5 as the savior of PS3. As mentioned, the only real update this game provides is improved grafix and new weapons to level. I was sold the moment the sucker was announced, based entirely on past enjoyment of this B-grade franchise, but not a single factsheet descriptor has up-ended the proverbial teatable. It's more Ratchet, and that's just dandy for the fanbase.

 

[Drinky Crow]

i didn't love sms; i merely liked it. i don't operate on the binary ROX/SUX scale most of you do. MOST games I merely like. (as maf once observed, most of the games he plays he'd give a 6-8. "loving" a game is utterly, profoundly rare.) i found a lot in it to annoy me, but when it was on, it was on -- i loved the larger and more complex levels; i liked fludd; i liked clearing paint for some creepy ocd reason; i liked the linear platforming sequences; and i liked fiddling with nozzles (hur hur).

 

[Ten-Song]

Really though? I would have thought the horrendous 'raft' based sections, extreme abundance of timed challenges, overkill of repeated mini-boss stuffing, and often irksome camera and collision niggles would have given you the same "eff this!" feeling SMS gave me.

Granted the water was awesome looking, the airtime occasionally astounding, and those micro-platformer levels were something to savor from a mostly half-baked Mario venture.

I loved Sunshine, but felt it was more of a step to the side more than a push forwards. It was good, but felt more like they made it just because the Gamecube needed a "true" Mario game. Still far from a bad title though.

Also, the bitching for R&C needs to stop, it got good scores.

 

[Gigglepoo]

Also, the bitching for R&C needs to stop, it got good scores.

Pssh, only if you consider 8.5 "good."

 

[freethought]

i can't imagine why you'd want to address mario 64 versus sunshine in a vaccuum given this thread's context, but hey: that's you.

Actually I was originally addressing your comment about the lack of growth in the Ratchet games by saying that conventions are part of the way we define genre. I used Mario as an example in my post and you responded with what I deemed to be a very flawed analysis of the growth of Mario between the two 3D titles that I felt compelled to respond to.

Oh, and I'm well aware of the definition of evolution and outside of the secret areas (which were a tragically small part of the game) I did not find the level design in SMS to be any more complex than SM64. You also mentioned the increased variety of settings in SMS which I most definitely disagree with.

Anyway, as you say, you're far more interested in bashing a game you haven't played than having any sort of reasoned discussion so I'm running away from this thread.

 

[Drinky Crow]

Oh, and I'm well aware of the definition of evolution and outside of the secret areas (which were a tragically small part of the game) I did not find the level design in SMS to be any more complex than SM64. You also mentioned the increased variety of settings in SMS which I most definitely disagree with.


Anyway, as you say, you're far more interested in bashing a game you haven't played than having any sort of reasoned discussion so I'm running away from this thread.

a. the areas in sms were larger and more complex than those in sm64. there were also more ways to interact with those environments. i never said anything about variety in "settings".

b. where have i bashed r&c outside of stating that i do not prefer it? and what would lead you to believe that i haven't played r&c 5?

c. pussy!

 

[bud]

 

[Ramenman]

What the HELL?

You know, bitching about 8.8 for Zelda TP is really stupid.

Which means, bitching about R&C (which is admittedly a lower caliber game) getting 8.5 is really stupid. It's STILL a good score, dammit.

But you know what make you look like your brain is plain dog food and rabbit livers shot from behind with a 12-gauge shotgun ? It's bitching about R&C getting 8.5 AND ALSO 9.0 ans 9.5

What. the. fuck.