...or should that be reLEGION? See, I can make punny monsters too.
I played, but never beat Dragon Quest VIII. Dragon Quest IX shares a lot of similarities to its predecessor, both in looks and style. However, I can't recall religion being so heavy and in-your-face in DQXIII. Sure, you still had to pray at a church to save your game, and there were a couple of abbeys to visit and priests to converse with, but the main quest was never so into the Almighty and capturing magical fruit (hello, Adam; hello, Eve) and gathering benevolence from lowly villagers to appease a great glowing tree. Yet, despite its overbearing nature, the religion in DQ9 doesn't bother me, and I know why--there's so much other stuff to keep me busy. I can do side quests, I can grind for levels, I can grind for alchemy items, I can make alchemy items, I can explore bookshelves or old caves or treasure maps...and so on. I'm about 45 hours in, and just passed a part that was All Religion, All the Time. It *was* tough to sit through, but now I'm once again free to do whatever I want.
Also, I feel like I should mention I use a priest in my party of 4 and he's a great healer/buffer, but he's also mighty with a spear. This ain't no normal priest to say the least.
I never understood what the motivation behind doing this was... Were they afraid of offending Christians or non-Christians? I can't really see either being offended by a video game reference to God.
In the SNES era, Breath of Fire 2 managed to escape scrutiny... I mean, (spoilers) you're basically fighting an evil version of the Catholic church at the end. That, and the last boss has an uncanny resemblance to Jesus. (end spoilers)
Sin & Punishment Star Successor apparently had some pseudo-religious references cut from the game. An entity known as "God" in Japanese was changed to "The Creators" for the west. Whatever you call it, it was never actually seen in the game and was barely mentioned more than two or three times, so I guess maybe they decided it would be easy to change, unlike in DQIX where the overarching theme and setting are sort of religious.
I called it "shooter deja vu" in my first hour review of the game, but was always hoping there'd be something new.
I felt the same way. Except, for me, the feeling started something like 2 hours into the first game.
Wow, that was an insane first hour.
Also, the game's cover is one of the more confusing ones I've seen in a while.
I agree with most of what you said, though I don't know how fair it is to compare Gears 2 and Galaxy 2. Galaxy's style of gameplay just lends itself better to a cookie-cutter sequel because the platforming-centric gravity gimmick allows for so much creativity in level design. Galaxy 2's "level-pack" presentation doesn't hold it back at all, because all they need to do are make some cool orbs floating in space and bam, it's done. I think it would take a lot more effort to add new content to a genre that has you plodding around on the ground and shooting things. Still, Gears 2 doesn't add much in its gameplay and I didn't find it worth playing for story alone. I never even started the final chapter, I'd had enough by that point.
I think one thing that would make a stellar boss fight would be to have mario somehow have to launch the boss just outside of orbit, then hit something else to make the boss come back and you only "Deal damage" by making him burn in the atmosphere?
Too much? lol
i've been playing it for a couple of days.. the storyline gets interesting. you just need to put up with the random battles and stuff..
I definitely have to check this out sometime. Will have to convince a friend to buy it :P
I have been playing this game for a hile and absolutely love it. it can be a bit tediou at time ut once you get into the action its amazing.
Cool, thanks for the tip!
One thing we've never seen is changing gravity, as in like different amounts of force on Mario. The gravity has always been pulling on Mario the same amount, I think it would be cool to long jump a hundred feet or triple jump really high in the sky. I don't think I would like it if they actually increased the gravity (making Mario slow and plodding), but if anyone can pull it off, I bet Nintendo can.
I think there's potential for more callbacks to previous games too, Super Mario Galaxy 2 almost felt like it was reaching back to Super Mario World a lot with the music selection and feel of some of the Yoshi levels. I wouldn't mind seeing some ideas from Yoshi's Island implemented like Touch Fuzzy, Get Dizzy kind of stuff or even more cannon interaction like in Mario 64.
There's a lot of complicated stuff with the force of gravity they've just been ignoring, like using the gravity of one planet to swing you around and rocket you in another direction.
At this point I wouldn't be surprised if we see another Galaxy or not, it could really go either way. I guess it's just a matter of whether or not Nintendo has the next gimmick ready or not.
Great review, and glad you enjoyed the game as much as I did. Even so, I think a third game might be pushing it...how many more great ideas could they possibly squeeze out of this gravity gimmick?
The green stars may have actually been my favorite parts of the game. Pure platforming goodness for the most part, some of them encouraging you to experiment with things you wouldn't otherwise. A few were hassles and many were as simple as a triple jump, but there were definitely some doozies.
just reading your very accurate and lovely review of bioshock2 and i just thouht i would tell you (if u didnt already know) how to get the scrounger tonic its a level 4 research from a thuggish splicer. i love this game and i like to try and get all achivements for it so hope that my information was helpful and i hope you do the revie for bioshock 3 (and there is going to be one!).
I'll have to pick these games up at some point. I need a change of pace from the RPG-style games I've been playing lately (ME, Final Fantasy: Dissidia)
Lots of interesting games in that list. Tons of diversity too.
greg 2 noob
to love this game. But couldn't do it. It taught me something about my tastes though which was very helpful to learn.
I've learned that I'm a methodical gamer. As opposed to a frantic gamer, or a run-n-gun, or a sniper. I like to go slow, take my time, and analyze each encounter. I like to divide and conquer at MY pace. Naturally, thats not going to be possible in every game type (which is as it should be). But I've found those games where it IS possible are much more enjoyable to me. I like to be able to choose when an encounter occurs. I found I didn't enjoy the "fight comes to you" factor in L4D. I still own the game, and like many games, I plan to finish it because I recognize it's quite good. But when it comes down to deciding what disc to put in the tray, it never seems to make it after that first time in the machine. But I love that you love this game. :)
I found RE and Dead Rising to be much more up my alley as far as game design is concerned.
note: I've only ever played it solo. I don't generally play games online unless it's with friends and none of my friends were playing this game the same time I was.
PS. Great review. :)
I don't think it's for everybody, there's definitely an audience it shoots for (Haha...ugh) and while I think a lot of people that aren't even fans of shooters can appreciate this game, it's not for everyone. My brother-in-law hates this game as well.
But there are a lot of guys like me that loved this game. Hell, it won over 40 industry awards.
The fact that the idea for L4D came from playing variations of Counter-Strike is pretty cool, and that attention to detail and unorthodox thinking are two of the reasons even I can appreciate Valve.
As for Left 4 Dead, my roommate bought it for the 360 and was disappointed to see that it only had two-player splitscreen. I know splitscreen as a whole is dying out, but you'd think a game that's specifically meant to be played with 4 people would make the extra effort to keep us from going back to last-gen 007 games for our four-man splitscreen shooty fun. And though I can appreciate the move away from traditional shooter mechanics to the horde-defense style L4D uses, I just didn't find it all that compelling to replay. One run through each campaign was enough for me, so I had the game in my rear-view mirror within a few days. I probably would have enjoyed it more on PC with four friends willing to play online, the way the game was designed to be played, but oh well.
I agree, the reason way i hate this game is Tartarus is quite possibly the most boring thing i have ever seen in a game with the fact that it is 70+ hours game that doesn't have the kind of plot or gameplay to justify a game of that length. i really can't blame you for hating RPGs now, Stuff like item synthesis/creation/Offensively useless items and treasures/walking simulators are such a terrible game mechanics IMO and all modern RPGs seem to utilize it to pad game length. I miss old RPGs where it is all about adventuring in new world , simple variety and economic sized like FF6, FF7, terranigma, chrono and Suikoden 2.
I thought the same thing at first. But Left 4 Dead 2 just really leaves it in the dust. More special infected (the spitter and the charger are really fun to play is in versus), the introduction of melee weapons (and you can't have a second pistol or even use the first until you fall down if you've got a melee), a "Mutation" mode consisting of odd variations and changing every week), and generally more balanced level design. Perhaps one of the biggest differences is in the crescendo events and finales, which now require action rather than just waiting and surviving until it ends. For example, in two of the L4D2 finales, you must fill a car with gas before you can escape in it.
Also, I noticed you said that you use the 360 version because you can splitscreen. There's a way to set it up on the PC so that it's splitscreen, if you've got at least one USB controller (one player can use mouse and keyboard OR controller, other must use controller). Apart from the availability of mouse/keyboard controls, which are generally considered to be superior for shooters, there's a world of mods, many of which are really cool. Some great new levels, some sweet ports of levels from other games, there's even one based on Super Mario 64.
What if I said I sold this game soon after buying it because I couldn't get into it? I'm not much of a multiplayer guy though, but with the right game (ie. Borderlands), things do seem to click sometimes.
It's good, but not great. I've played so many shooters, and while the first Half-life remade the shooter what it is today with its amazing story telling that hadn't been seen before, I'm afraid this game was sub-par compared to what I had hoped it would be.
I played and beat Half-life 2 once, then I went and played Halo 1 and enjoyed myself more, but I guess I can be picky too. Most of the gamers my age didn't start off with Wolfenstein and Doom before they played Super Nintendo, and competitively playing online shooters and Age of Empires when his classmates were playing Poke'Mon.