Jump to content

Parksey

Members
  • Content Count

    265
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

2,890 profile views
  1. Parksey

    Switch - Too many ports?? (Ports Die Twice)

    Whoever said gaming has a rich back-catalogue that needs to be taken forward with us each generation is right. However I do wish that Nintendo especially, would make this a persistent digital Virtual Console. I'd happily pay a sub if it meant I could access any past Nintendo game on their onlone service. I know that this is unlike to happen given that they sell Gameboy games on the 3DS for £8. As it is though, most of their stuff is just dormant. Neither making money for them or getting paid. I would object to them charging for each individual title if they had it all up there. Instead we get a painfully slow dripfeed of select titles, before it's on to the next generation of consoles and we start again. Why aren't old games persistently available? Anyway, I don't mind ports personally, as I left the UK and my Wii U behind back in 2014 and barely got through any titles for it bar MK and Super Mario Bros. So a lot of these ports are brand new. I'm guessing, given the uptake on the Wii U, this is the same for a lot of people, and also Nintendo's reasoning behind the rereleases. I'd feel differently if I'd actually played them, I guess. I can see why it must be annoying for those who rinsed the Wii U. It'd be interesting to see how the two systems compared over a two year period, and what games were released for each. I know the Wii U also got quite a few ports (the Zelda games, Monster Hunter, loads of third party stuff) and that it probably didn't host anything quite up to the standard of Breath of the Wild (2 years in, anyway) and Mario Odyssey. But I would imagine that actually, the two systems probably had a similar number of good first party stuff at the respective points in their lives. What I do feel, is that the Wii U was arguably the more daring system. This is a little odd, given that I actually think Nintendo dialled back on their own tablet controller and never really utilised as well as they should have, but I do think that perhaps the Wii U's output was a little more diverse. This is countered by the fact that the Switch has basically become my indie game platform of choice. I used to get that stuff on my PS4 and Vita but now I'll automatically just get it on the Switch. It's great for that stuff, and really helps the gaps between releases. I guess we don't really know if ports actually stop or slow down new releases or not. My inkling is that even if we didn't have ports, the new titles would still be releasing around the same time. And yeah, there is a sense that Nintendo know we will pay for portable versions of their recent stuff. They are absolutely right on this. But I also think most gamers want portable versions of their games. In this sense, is it taking advantage of that or pandering to your audience. I imagine most people complaining of ports on the Switch, nevertheless have a dream port stuffed in the back of their mind that they would clamour over and immediately buy should it be re-released. So it's definitely not always a case of "ports=bad", but obviously as it's an older game, everyone's mileage with a port differs. Not a new title, where obviously the entire world has never played it until release, you get a much more mixed audience for an older game. Saying that, the prices are definitely off. But again, this is perceived value. I've never played Hyrule Warriors. By and large, it's a mammoth game with load of content and has received a lot of praise on here. If I bought it for £30-40 I could easily get my money's worth out of it. But I played and finished Super Mario Bros U so wouldn't want to play that again for anything more than £15. At that price point it would definitely get my attention, but I'm not desperate. So even price is an odd thing to judge. What is a brand new experience for some is maybe going to deter people who have played it and would only revisit it if it was cheap. It's also the age old argument of whether Wind Waker, which was worth £40 in 2003 is still worth that in 2019. It's still the same game and the HD port obviously improved it even, but then some gamers don't like the idea of the price tag holding up 15 years later. But then, age is never really a determiner of value or price in other industries. I wouldn't expect to pick up, say, the first Harry Potter book or Apocalypse Now for a quid despite them being 20 or 40 years old now. They generally get re-released or republished (with fancy new covers too). Price and value are hugely subjective. I wasn't interested in Mario and Rabbids, a brand new game and a brand new IP which was highly praised, at full price. But as soon as it was £15 I immediately snapped it up and wanted to play it. I'll probably find out what value I attach to it once I do play it. So yeah, we've all just wasted 10 minutes of our lives watching me sit on the fence. Good job everyone.
  2. Parksey

    Nintendo eShop (Software Chatter)

    I wish I'd read these replies earlier this morning. I always wanted Y-L on the Switch for portability, but the Switch Tax meant it was £34.99 as opposed to just over a tenner on PS4. The current sale finally pushed it down to a more palatable price so I bought got. Hopefully nostalgia for Rare's late 90s output will save it.
  3. Parksey

    Destiny 2 - Sekiro's out on Friday

    I don't agree with a lot of that. Though this could just be me reacting to a lot of it, as I don't like the overwhelming about of salt Destiny brings out in its fans. I don't buy that there's no story, just that it's not delivered through cut scenes. Bungie said that this would be the case with the Annual Pass content - no cut scenes, campaign missions or new locations, but delivered in other ways. I'm not a massive lore hound, but generally the community think that what has been revealed in this season so far is pretty good. The set up is quite interesting and is, hopefully, going to have a pay-off in the future. It's definitely building up towards something. Seeing as Bungie have said they weren't going to create any campaign-esque story content, it's about as good as they could make it without all those bells and whistles. It requires you to lean in to the lore a bit and if you don't like to do that, then fine, but don't complain it's not there. Same with the Forges which definitely did have a story behind them but, again, this was delivered in other ways. Fans like the lore. It's not personally my preferred way of getting the plot and background details but the community like it and I don't begrudge Bungie doing it this way. As for Gambit Prime, it's a week or so old, so definitely has a few things that need ironing out. The primeval phase is very invader-focused, and I think in general a lot of players are way too passive when it comes to invasions. The new maps actually make it harder to be team wiped, as they aren't just a big open area with three separate parts now. You can hide much easier and ambush the invader while they are going somewhere else. I think a lot of players basically don't like the "P" part of the PvEvP experience. They'd rather it was just the mote-banking and primeval-slaying against the other team, and see the invasions as a frustrating distraction instead of a fundamental part of the game. Of course, there should be an option for solo-queuing but I go in solo quite often and it's often okay as long as you don't come up against a team. I've never had the clock run down either. The buff eventually stacks high enough that you can burn the primeval. This is meant to be endgame content too, so I think it's fine that it's hard, and focused around a competitive experience. It's meant to be equivalent to competitive in Crucible, or a Raid-like activity. I think some people expect all aspects of the game to appeal to them at all times. I also don't know why there's a massive aversion to teams, in what is basically a multiplayer PVE shooter. The game is designed, generally, around a fireteam. It's absolutely fine if you don't want to play in a team, but you can't expect a game with that focus at its core, to tailor itself to you. With the fireteam function on the Destiny app, there's a really easy way of grouping up now, and often people are fine with no mic or communication, so you can at least get a team going easily. The only thing I really agree with is the nerfing. Shotguns definitely needed tweaking - if 99% of players are using a shotgun then something's up. A certain type of shotgun and shotgunner were dominating. I can understand a little with Whisper and Jotunn too, as they were becoming de facto choices. I know Bungie don't like it when a certain exotic becomes "inevitable" for an encounter, so they probably want them brought down a little. I would rather they looked at buffing other weapons though, though generally I do think most of what they were looking at were weapons that gave you a lot of power that other options didn't. I know that I rarely used anything but a machine gun, Jotunn/shotgun and a pulse rifle in most things. I still think the game is probably the best it's ever been, and haven't been disappointed with the annual pass. I never expected DLC - it's not DLC, after all - but more a stream of stuff across the year, rather than a big DLC drop. Remember, we got nothing after The Taken King until a small drop in the April and then Rise of Iron in September. There were big content droughts in Destiny. At least now, there's generally always something to do. You might not want to do it, but that's often personal preference. In my eyes, the Annual Pass has been worth the couple of quid per month for what they've given us, and it's an improvement on what happened in Y2 of Destiny 1. My only criticism is that the PvP side has been neglected a bit. I'm not a massive Crucible player, though I don't mind it and I don't get the absolute huge amounts of salt other players give it, like they'd rather this whole other half of the game didn't exist because it's not for them. But it hasn't had much content for a while. A few new maps, or even old D1 maps that were made for 6v6, would help it out a bit.
  4. To be honest, those owning only physical media are hardly as secure as they were in previous generations. Think of how many updates, patches and fixes drop over a game's lifespan now. Sure, if you download them at the time I guess life is rosy, but those servers aren't going to be around forever. Those discs are effectively going to be severely borked if anyone tries to pick them up for a retro collection in a few generations' time. That's before we discount how a lot of games have "live services now". Something like Destiny is going to be a hollow shell if you can't get it online, if it even works offline at all (pretty sure you get booted whenever your WiFi drops). If you're buying a launch day experience when you get a disc, then once they switch the servers off, presumably that's all the disc versions can ever be. And think of how fudged some titles are on arrival...
  5. Parksey

    Nintendo Switch

    Mario V Rabbids is worth the £15 it is currently on sale for on the eShop right? Surprised it's down that low. Nintendo "sales" usually have full blown games at £33 or something.
  6. Parksey

    Destiny 2 - Sekiro's out on Friday

    Strike armour isn't really a thing we need - they are more than doable already - but if they wanted to push the scoring aspect further, then they could create Strike-focused sets that conference bonuses which could be a consideration when you push for a Nightfall high score. Problem is, the Nightfall high score as if is now is pretty meaningless. The Nightfall itself isn't really that important by itself anymore, as you have so many other avenues for powerful gear.
  7. Parksey

    Destiny 2 - Sekiro's out on Friday

    Yeah they need to basically make Year 1 stuff relevant again. It's odd that they won't take the effort to basically double their loot pool and weapons. I really like the Leviathan raid armour, it's design and colour scheme. But there's no point using it, so I might as well just stick the shader on Y2 stuff. I've always thought Destiny had the potential to be a great "armour game" but they sort of neglect that side of it. It needs to be more like Monster Hunter, which has you actively grinding to get stuff that looks cool or infers certain bonuses. Gambit armour having perks for gambit next season is a definite start. They need to do it for Strikes and Raids too.
  8. Parksey

    Destiny 2 - Sekiro's out on Friday

    I actually don't like the idea of them selling Forsaken exotics yet, and never understood the clamour for it. The Forsaken exotics aren't just something for September or October - by and large, the are the exotics for Year 2 of Destiny 2. That spans until next September. Sure, the Annual Pass is adding a few others, but the Forsaken content is the bulk of Y2. They aren't something you should amass quickly. I've been playing fairly steadily since launch and have all but one of the Forsaken Hunter exotics. I started playing my Warlock recently and got one piece the other day. They feel rare and, well, exotic again, after Vanilla D2 gave them away constantly. I don't like the idea of just walking up to a weekly vendor and buying an exotic (or two, or four) each week. I used Xur to catch up on old exotics I missed, having not got Warmind and Osiris until Forsaken launched. I would rather current exotics come from gameplay, not a vendor, and the vendor used for those who want to catch up.
  9. Parksey

    Destiny 2 - Sekiro's out on Friday

    I'm still grinding for that last Braytech schematic. Had three drop weapons I already have. Heard that if you do the Nascent Dawn 1/5 quest with an alt character you get given one (you do) and that if you have the other weapons with you, you'll get one you don't already own (you don't). Just need the Frigid Jackel and then it's the long grind for the six remaining Mercury weapons. But at least that's not RNG stacked on RNG unlike the nodes, and I'll probably still get it before I get the Dredgen and Cursebreaker titles.
  10. Parksey

    Destiny 2 - Sekiro's out on Friday

    Yeah I really like that encounter too. As you said, even when you're at max light and rolling decent gear, it never becomes an automatic win and you still need to work together and be effective. It helps that it's so quick too, so restarts and failures are never a problem, and it gets properly thrilling when you're at the top in that third stage and realise it's close. It sort of feels like getting caught up in the wave and that knife-edge tension of being afloat and having it drive you forward, but with always the sense that it could pull you under with it.
  11. Parksey

    Nioh - Feudal Souls

    To be fair, the level jump is massive for those multi-boss fights - you're meant to go in to New Game+, level a bit more and hunt out green gear, and then go back and fight them. But yeah, I tried them and they weren't fun. They aren't bosses designed to be together (like, say, O+S in Dark Souls) and they just rely on the cheapness of having two or three at once for difficulty. As for level design,I liked the core story stages, most of them were decent. But it was annoying that often the sub missions just reused loads of content, or where the story levels in reverse. I feel they could have cut them, but dropped the level requirements in the main story to compensate. Still, there's a lot of content for your money. The combat system means that even the sub missions are still relatively entertaining, if a bit uninspiring in design. Definitely an area they could improve for the sequel. I don't mind the missions being self-contained areas though, rather than a Dark Souls-style connected world. It enabled them to move across the whole of Japan and a variety of areas, without worrying how to link them all together believably.
  12. Parksey

    Destiny 2 - Sekiro's out on Friday

    No spoilers, but the next encounter is going to be a tough one with just five. It's really intense.
  13. Parksey

    Let's talk about Loot Boxes

    I don't mind virtual currency if it's implemented elsewhere - for example, if you earn a number of credits from in-game activities or levelling up, and then you can top that up with your real-life cash, that's fine as you need a uniform currency amount for all those things. Of course, it's additionally good that you can earn this currency in-game naturally too. But, more often that not, the in-game currency is onto applicable to real-life money you are putting. This is a massively con to mask the among your spending. In this case, companies should be forced to put it in monetary amounts so it's transparent to the consumer. Surely you wouldn't get away for this at, say, Sainsbury's, if you had to change your money in to Sainsbury Dollars at the store entrance and then go around doing your shopping, buying a loaf of bread for 1 Sainsbury's Dollar (which by the way is actually a tenner) or whatever nonsense these game companies have you doing. Didn't one of the AC games have about four in-game currencies at one point? Madness.
  14. Parksey

    Nioh - Feudal Souls

    This is very vague "knowledge" based on me playing the game a while back and completing it, but only on the base vanilla difficulty and not going deeper into the New Game+ stuff. My impression was that basic armour rating didn't make that much difference. It's more the perks that it has that improve your character. Plus, like Dark Souls, defense is broken down in to various subcategories from what I remember, like magic defense, fire defense, lightning defense etc. The big difference with armour is when you have a set and the various pieces give you a bonus. I don't think you'll see that much of a gain of one armour is 100 and another is 150. Again, my memory is a little hazy as it's been a while since I played the game. It also depends on which enemies are one-shotting you. The weaker ones shouldn't, but some of the Oni can kill you pretty quickly if you're careless, regardless of level. And unfortunately I do think Nioh has more bullshit one-hot kills than Dark Souls. You can often get caught in a combo or an attack and be unable to get out of it. There are a few attacks that can kill you straight away (can't remember exactly but I'm sure there's one Oni that has a grab attack where he basically just bites your head off). There are also your base stats to go off too and your character build. Light armour is going to be more about being nimble than protection and if you don't have the health then obviously you're going to be closer to death when something hits you. In Nioh, I always felt more vulnerable than in Dark Souls. By the end game in Dark Souls I can usually tank a fee hits, but in Nioh I always felt stuff could kill me if I let my guard down or it depleted my Ki. Conversely, I think offensively I felt much more powerful in Nioh - with the various stances, weapons, combos and living weapons, I felt I could often kill overpower bosses. Plus I feel like dodging and Ki management is the key to the game, rather than being able to absorb hits.
  15. Parksey

    Nintendo Switch

    Out of interest, how is the Switch version of The Binding of Isaac? I have it on. My Vita albeit it was free with Plus so seeing as my sub has lapsed, I'd have to pay £7 to play it again. Currently the Switch version is £17 which seems decent value. Not sure how much the physical version goes for usually.
×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.