Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
Comments
I've never even played the original. I'm mostly just asking if it's worth spending six bucks on.
I love Link's Awakening. It's probably got the best story in a Zelda game next to Majora's Mask (dat emotional involvement to a world, meng). It's also possibly the last Zelda that had some actual challenge to it. 6 bucks is a steal, considering it's usually still sold for around 20 in most swapmeets.
?
Did we play different games with the same title? Because the LA I remember has almost no story.
> I dunno if it's got any new features. It's on the 3ds virtual console, so probably not.
It might have the DX's extra features minus the ability to print because no way to implement gameboy printer. Either way get it, it'll be worth it.
I got Skyrim off of Steam, as well as Knights of the Old Republic as a side purchase, because it was seven bucks and is probably a great game.
What should I expect out of these games, as a question for people who played them?
I know what you mean, but Link's Awakening was a game I found to be very emotional at the end. No doubt Forz will understand when he completes it. LA wasn't heavy on story, but it was fantastic in terms of narrative, using its medium to hit all the right places.
^ KotOR is great. It was released just a few years after Neverwinter Nights, when BioWare were still in their stride. While I generally dislike hybrid real-time/turn-based systems, KotOR at least allows you to set up chains of orders.
Skyrim is the best TES has ever been, which doesn't really count for a lot in core gameplay. All the same, there's no other game quite like it for experiencing a sandbox fantasy world. Like any other TES game, its strength is that it can use your curiosity against you to self-generate experiences using its versatile content. Don't expect a deep gameplay experience, but it's a worthy experience all the same.
The only thing I know about LA is that it's the Zelda with more cameos in it
the first half of LA is more or less "Oh hey, you're the new guy. Alright, Go and fetch these quest items, man. Go go, chop chop."
Second half is "Taking the chance to go back to your world means destroying ours and all who dwell within, particularly all the villagers you've befriended and especially your potential love interest.
Welcome to flavor country."
Unless
I thought you guys were talking about L.A Noire
I played Skyrim. The first go-round looked choppy as hell on my little computer, I had to downgrade the visuals to make it run properly. I did have fun customizing my character so it had a beautiful beard and it was cool to take in the sights, even if I had it at the lowest detail setting. The first person perspective felt awkward, so it was great that third person gameplay felt better.
Seems pretty cool so far, even if I'm new to the type of RPG Skyrim is.
For once, I agree with Alex when it comes to Skyrim. Bethesda is really good at making great game worlds on a macro level but tend to falter on the micro level.
Playing through Skyward Sword, I'm a litle jarred at how condensed and linear the game is. Aside from a lack of sidequests and a dissapointingly empty overworld, I just don't have the same sense of openness and adventure as I did with the past Zelda games, and I finally understand why. They said during development that they wanted to take the strongest and most popular aspects of the games, the dungeons, and expand on them.
And I now understand that that's exactly what they did. The entire world of Skyward Sword is one really, really big dungeon. Skyworld is really nothing more than a massive lobby, and all the areas in Hyrule itself are dense, superlinear forward paths that you slowly push through via the completion of challenges and solving of puzzles. Where at the end you slay a boss and claim a treasure. At which point you are taken straight back to the lobby that is Skyworld, where another linear forward path is unlocked that you must trek through, loot, and return to the lobby. Repeat until the final everpresent path is unlocked wherin lies the endboss.
It sounds a lot like the previous Zelda games the way I explain it, but the difference here is that the provinces of Zelda games in the past felt like, well, provinces. They were huge, open, organic, fully explorable areas filled with all kinds of things to do, characters to meet and stuff to get. The dungeons felt like just one piece of the landscape. In Skyward Sword, the opposite is true. The landscape feels like an extension of the dungeon.
Not that this design is a BAD thing, mind you. But here's my problem with it: If you want to make a Zelda game where the entire game world is a big dungeon, just put me in a big dungeon. Don't give me this beautiful open-looking landscape and a vehicle with which to traverse it if you're not going to give me any incentive to go anywhere but from one dungeon to the next dungeon.
It's still an amazing game, though.
I think that's what killed the game for me, though. While it's not the FFXIII sort of linear(go down this corridor for two hours!), it didn't particularly strike me as very Zelda-like. There's little enemy variety at all, strange for a game built around complex combat, and the overworld is barely there, instead we have "one big dungeon" that has worse design than the actual dungeons, which actually had some ingenious ideas. There's a lot of filler too, mostly consisting of fetch quests involving "get item A to enter the next area!" or use that godforsaken dowsing bit to find your way around, like a glorified game of "hot and cold" that you used to play on the playground. Everything felt like a "teaser" for a bigger and better game, something that applies the motion control mechanics to a less restricted world and a more traditional overworld.
Much of this wouldn't be so bad if games such as Xenoblade showed that vast, organic and varied overworlds can be pulled off remarkably well on the Wii. Hell, Xenoblade pulled off a lot of great things Nintendo themselves seemingly forgot how to do with Skyward Sword.
And I reiterate, I LIKE this design choice, I just feel like it's a game that doesn't play how it looks.
inb4 Malk and I disown you both
Ya just gotta stop tryin' ta be somethin' yer not.
i now hereby officially disown you both
you are dead to me
I didn't mind the linearity so much, as I heard that the environments were going to be large dungeons before getting the game. It did end up creating a more focused experience, if nothing else. My biggest disappointment if that I thought the new combat mechanics weren't harnessed to the appropriate level of potential, which can mainly be put down to enemy behaviours. There weren't very many ways to use the strike compass interestingly, and the combat felt static as a result of the focus on strike angles over relative positioning.
right
you're disowned too, Alex
why don't you believe meeeeeee
^^ When I read about that, I thought they meant "We're putting dungeon-like features into the overworld". Not "We're turning the world into a dungeon."
The word "Dungeon" has now lost all meaning.
Mostly I just hated the motion controls more than anything. They were an unwieldy hassle that made the gameplay a question of fighting the interface to get what I wanted instead of playing the game.
fucking disowned
welp
at least i still have juan
right
i'm sorry alk
i have no choice
i have to disown you too