Turn-based DS steampunk game whaaaaaaaat?

[Panthera]

Or play more FF Tactics and mope that they should make a true sequel, and attempt to keep the art style the same but with true 3D so the sprites don't look as janky when you turn/tilt the camera. Whine about JRPGs all you like, but that game is the SHIT. Although it does involve a fuckload of grinding. But combat remains fun so in my mind, that's not a problem. It's when shit gets tedious that I start quitting.

Get a PSP if you want awesome tactical RPGS. That's practically all I have it for. Jeanna D'Arc, for instance.

 

[Annie Mitsoda]

Yeah, that's what kills me. I'm not really keen on the price of PSPs, but goddamn if they don't get all the neato TB RPGs (like the remake of FF Tactics, which is the one I referenced before and not Tactics Advanced which I feel is too dumbed-down and shiny). There's no reason the DS shouldn't have that same kind of love!

Also, I would murder for a new Shining Force that isn't a bullshit brawler. PLEASE GOD. But there is no God there, only SEGA. And thus my cries are in vain!

 

[Panthera]

For strategy RPGs on the DS, there is Fire Emblem, Front Mission, Luminous Arc (don't know how good that one is), Rondo of Swords, Disgaea, and I'm probably missing a few. You could also track down Tactics Ogre or Rebelstar Tactical Command if you have a GBA slot.

But yeah, the PSP seems to be winning for strategy/tactical RPGs, and the DS for traditional RPGs.

 

[LeStryfe79]

Many of you here are so full of shit it's quite funny. Anything can be turned around to look bad with a proper use of wording. For instance, I could easily describe Wizardry 8 as being a bad game if I wanted to. Simply take 6 hybrid classes and that game is a walk in the park with REALLY annoying sound effects. Now, the level scaling in that game basically took away all grind but also removed any hope of playing that game with a unique party. What if I wanted to play through that game with a merry band of 3 bards? Well, that's too bad because clearly there were only a couple of BEST ways to play that game. Hell, the damn thing had almost NO story. What a piece of shit... Fairy ninjas, lol!

Atlus made a better wizardry for PS2. If you don't believe me, shut the fuck up and play it. That game had style, story, and better combat than any previous wizardry. In addition, that game let me make whatever party I wanted to. I personally love games that fuse new elements into old-school games. NWN2 SoZ did this pretty well, but not nearly as well as Wizardry TotFL. That game is a prime example of a Japanese company doing a superior job with a western concept. Thats not to say it happens often, but some of you are sounding like a bunch of broken records with your constant close-mindedness. In the future, I recommend you play a particular game before talking smack about it.

Also, Fallout 3 rocks. :D

 

[Hobo Elf]

Many of you here are so full of shit it's quite funny. Anything can be turned around to look bad with a proper use of wording. For instance, I could easily describe Wizardry 8 as being a bad game if I wanted to. Simply take 6 hybrid classes and that game is a walk in the park with REALLY annoying sound effects. Now, the level scaling in that game basically took away all grind but also removed any hope of playing that game with a unique party. What if I wanted to play through that game with a merry band of 3 bards? Well, that's too bad because clearly there were only a couple of BEST ways to play that game. Hell, the damn thing had almost NO story. What a piece of shit... Fairy ninjas, lol!

Atlus made a better wizardry for PS2. If you don't believe me, shut the fuck up and play it. That game had style, story, and better combat than any previous wizardry. In addition, that game let me make whatever party I wanted to. I personally love games that fuse new elements into old-school games. NWN2 SoZ did this pretty well, but not nearly as well as Wizardry TotFL. That game is a prime example of a Japanese company doing a superior job with a western concept. Thats not to say it happens often, but some of you are sounding like a bunch of broken records with your constant close-mindedness. In the future, I recommend you play a particular game before talking smack about it.

Also, Fallout 3 rocks. :D

 

[Luzur]

Also, Fallout 3 rocks.

 

[obediah]

But yeah, the PSP seems to be winning for strategy/tactical RPGs, and the DS for traditional RPGs.

What else is there?

Jeanna D'Arc. I have FF:T for PS1. I bought some other jap tactics game, and it was unplayable - there was a 2-3 second load time between words, and it would take 10 seconds to navigate the menus to do something and another 10 for it to happen. Worst game ever. The D&D Game was bastard shit. The 40K game was awesome. I wish the reviewer retards where smart enough to play it, I would have been happy with a new game on the same engine (maybe some tiny additions for fun) every 6 months. That may have been the last PSP game I bought.

 

[LeStryfe79]

No, fallout 3 is quite superior to fallout 2. Although I quite enjoyed the extra dialog offered by the hookers in the 2nd installment, I found it paled when compared to the difference in combat fluidity. That slow, no tactics shit of a system in fallout 2 was crap. Don't even try to pretend otherwise. Also, though Fallout 2 had its great moments, combat was a huge part of the game, and ultimately dragged it down. I did NOT like Oblivion, but I feel Bethesda has learned from those mistakes, and made a truly ingenious game with Fallout 3. The only reason I waited so long to play it was due to the asinine comments I read on this board. These were mostly lies, and you fuckers should be ashamed of yourselves. Fallout 3 has great presentation, C&C, character customization, and combat. I feel sorry for anyone too stupid to see that. You folks obviously hate yourselves.

The fact is that fallout 2 was EASY, and that's the way pussies like it. I loved it at the time cause I was playing it with a friend of mine who stinks at video games. He was the DM in our group who always had to have his way and never liked a challenge. I watched another friend of mine play a cool talkin black man with no combat skills in Fallout 3. That character was amazing and could never have existed in the previous installments. No, the game wasn't perfect, but it was a hell of a lot better than the shit I played in the late 90s. I'm not sure how most of you form your opinions, but I know now that they're totally worthless.

 

[Lonely Vazdru]

I'm not sure how most of you form your opinions

Same as you I'd say. And just as subtly.

Nice trolling attempt though, I'm too old to take internet drama seriously, but you'd have had me enter "argue/fight mode" in real life, for sure.

 

[LeStryfe79]

I'm not sure how most of you form your opinions

Same as you I'd say. And just as subtly.

Nice trolling attempt though, I'm too old to take internet drama seriously, but you'd have had me enter "argue/fight mode" in real life, for sure.

Whatever. My thoughts are genuine. If you intend to take them aggressively, that's your prerogative. Don't kid yourself, however. The only reason ANY of us are here is for internet drama...

That and comedy of course.

Now, take it up the ass like a good boy! lol

Also, PM me if you really want to fight in RL. I'm not extremely strong, but I AM crazy, and I routinely run marathons. I'm 30, so I won't fight you unless your 18-45 years old. I normally don't believe in violence, but sometimes poor behavior is downright funny. I don't even care if I lose, I just wanna see if your a pussy or not! WINNER BUYS THE OTHER ONE HIS DRUG OF CHOICE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

 

[Lonely Vazdru]

My thoughts are genuine. If you intend to take them aggressively, that's your prerogative.

That slow, no tactics shit of a system in fallout 2 was crap. Don't even try to pretend otherwise.... These were mostly lies, and you fuckers should be ashamed of yourselves... I feel sorry for anyone too stupid to see that. You folks obviously hate yourselves.... I'm not sure how most of you form your opinions, but I know now that they're totally worthless.

Whatever you say sport. :wink:

 

[GarfunkeL]

No, fallout 3 is quite superior to fallout 2.

Hahahahahaa :D :D :D

 

[Edward_R_Murrow]

For instance, I could easily describe Wizardry 8 as being a bad game if I wanted to. Simply take 6 hybrid classes and that game is a walk in the park with REALLY annoying sound effects.

Except you level pretty slowly and still have to play well. So it's bullshit.

Now, the level scaling in that game basically took away all grind but also removed any hope of playing that game with a unique party. What if I wanted to play through that game with a merry band of 3 bards? Well, that's too bad because clearly there were only a couple of BEST ways to play that game.

That's untrue. Just ask Jasede or any of the other Wizardry fan. Any party can win, you just have to play well enough. Don't take a gimped party if you aren't up for the challenge.

Atlus made a better wizardry for PS2. If you don't believe me, shut the fuck up and play it.

Great argument.

That game had style, story, and better combat than any previous wizardry.

Explanations help, ya know? Makes your stuff seem less like vacuous bullshit.

In addition, that game let me make whatever party I wanted to.

That's wonderful. Some people prefer a challenge as opposed to a game you can steamroll with anything.

Also, though Fallout 2 had its great moments, combat was a huge part of the game, and ultimately dragged it down.

Same with Fallout 3, except more so.

Fallout 3 has great presentation,

Bullshit. Graphics look like shit compared to contemporaries, animations are terrible, and so is the voice acting.

C&C

There are some quests with great design, yes. But much of the game is shit fetch and kill quests. There are choices, but no consequences.

character customization

Bullshit. It's TESified. All characters easily can become master-of-everything with little problem. It's Ninja-Mage-Cartographer syndrome all over again. There is very little customization compared to the previous installments.

combat

Combat is complete shit and everywhere. Complete shit FPS combat is far worse than mildly shit turn-based to me.

I watched another friend of mine play a cool talkin black man with no combat skills in Fallout 3. That character was amazing and could never have existed in the previous installments.

No black people in Fallout 1&2? THE HUMANITY!

I'm not sure how most of you form your opinions, but I know now that they're totally worthless.

I'm sure that you form your opinions by melting down when someone insults your precious jRPGs and hulkout on the internet, and I think that devalues them quite a bit, in addition to the fact that you are spouting some serious bullshit.

 

[Luzur]

Also, PM me if you really want to fight in RL. I'm not extremely strong, but I AM crazy, and I routinely run marathons. I'm 30, so I won't fight you unless your 18-45 years old. I normally don't believe in violence, but sometimes poor behavior is downright funny. I don't even care if I lose, I just wanna see if your a pussy or not! WINNER BUYS THE OTHER ONE HIS DRUG OF CHOICE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

nah, a dance-off is way better then some fist fight.

 

[1eyedking]

There are some quests with great design, yes. But much of the game is shit fetch and kill quests. There are choices, but no consequences.

Wait...what?

 

[LeStryfe79]

Also, PM me if you really want to fight in RL. I'm not extremely strong, but I AM crazy, and I routinely run marathons. I'm 30, so I won't fight you unless your 18-45 years old. I normally don't believe in violence, but sometimes poor behavior is downright funny. I don't even care if I lose, I just wanna see if your a pussy or not! WINNER BUYS THE OTHER ONE HIS DRUG OF CHOICE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

nah, a dance-off is way better then some fist fight.

Indeed! Besides I would have fought dirty anyways, in an attempt to procure some nice crack/ cocaine :twisted:


Also I'm well aware that FO2 and Wiz8 are great games. I'm just making a point that new games and jrpgs aren't all shit. To automatically think so makes you no better than those who mindlessly follow what is popular. Counterculture seeks the same sense of belonging as pop culture, and therefore is nothing but a hypocrisy. Just because you're older doesn't mean you're any wiser. Quit living in the past. Progression is a constant battle of give and take, my friends.

 

[FeelTheRads]

Quit living in the past... *PR bullshit*

Hi, Pete!

 

[sportforredneck]

Atlus made a better wizardry for PS2.

Rage.

 

[Micmu]

No, fallout 3 is quite superior to fallout 2.

Hahahahahaa :D :D :D

I laughed hard to this one, too. Someone has to teach kids not to compare very dissimilar games, especially by (sub)genre. Perhaps comparing it to Öblivion would be better, no ?

 

[Hobo Elf]

No, fallout 3 is quite superior to fallout 2.

Hahahahahaa :D :D :D

I laughed hard to this one, too. Someone has to teach kids not to compare very dissimilar games, especially by (sub)genre. Perhaps comparing it to Öblivion would be better, no ?

But I thought that Fallout 3 = Oblivion ? It isn't going to be a very interesting comparison.

 

[LeStryfe79]

Why Fallout3 > Oblivion

1. The elder scroll's system of character advancement is quite self-destructive for those who think "outside the box". Thankfully this has been replaced by a more conventional system in Fallout 3.

2. Oblivion has a very generic fantasy setting, and is very much Rome + Tolkien. Fallout3 actually makes you feel like you're there. Everything from the random debris and NPCs to the radio stations serve to make its setting the most engrossing I've ever played.

3. Bethesda does ranged combat better. While melee is still a little clunky, I found using guns to be a pretty smooth and fun experience in FO3. The heavy reliance on melee in a fantasy setting automatically gives Oblivion a disadvantage here.


Why Fallout3 > Fallout2

1. The combat is MUCH better. I'm not a big fan of fps, but the simple run and gun combined with sneaking and V.A.T.S was far more fun than the shit in FO2. Although that game had its moments, there were too many times where I had to wait 5 minutes for all of the hookers in town to take their turns. Not only that, but the bullshit of random encounters clearly played too large a role in that game.

2. The world in FO3 is deeper and more convincing. The realistic NPCs, old world radio songs, and gritty environment trump the crappy gangster/alien motiff and retarded story arcs found in previous installments.

3. FO3 is newer, and quite frankly it benefits greatly from far better production quality. Extra down-loadable content and a modders toolbox blow this game into the stratosphere, well beyond the fun yet trivial thrills to found in FO2.


Deal with these facts, fuckers. I've got no problem with those who prefer the old FO, but many of you portray FO3 as a pedestrian shooter with lite RP. This is not the case, and such lies make me question the size of your cocks. I'm not sure why some of you form such biased opinions, as you'll only end up wallowing in your own semen and self loathing.

 

[Emotional Vampire]

RPG Dream Team Delivers Steampunk Nostalgia To The DS

Dream Team you say? Sound's p. interest-

From the creators of Dragon Quest V, Final Fantasy III and IV for the DS, Thousand Arms, Fatal Frame, and Grandia

What the fuck kind of dream team was this again?

Well, let's carry on. Steampunk is pretty interest-

Cohesive, anime-inspired art direction that effectively captures the game's turn-of-the-century charm.

FFFFFFFFFFFFFFF

 

[Emotional Vampire]

Why Fallout3 > Fallout2

1. The combat is MUCH better. I'm not a big fan of fps, but the simple run and gun combined with sneaking and V.A.T.S was far more fun than the shit in FO2. Although that game had its moments, there were too many times where I had to wait 5 minutes for all of the hookers in town to take their turns. Not only that, but the bullshit of random encounters clearly played too large a role in that game.

2. The world in FO3 is deeper and more convincing. The realistic NPCs, old world radio songs, and gritty environment trump the crappy gangster/alien motiff and retarded AI found in previous installments.

3. FO3 is newer, and quite frankly it benefits greatly from far better production quality. Extra down-loadable content and a modders toolbox blow this game into the stratosphere, well beyond the fun yet trivial thrills to found in FO2.


Deal with these facts, fuckers. I've got no problem with those who prefer the old FO, but many of you portray FO3 as a pedestrian shooter with lite RP. This is not the case, and such lies make me question the size of your cocks. I'm not sure why some of you form such biased opinions, as you'll only end up wallowing in your own semen and self loathing.

 

[Edward_R_Murrow]

Also I'm well aware that FO2 and Wiz8 are great games. I'm just making a point that new games and jrpgs aren't all shit.

And you're tilting at windmills here. Nobody ever said new games were shit. My favorite game I've recently played was Ninja Gaiden 2 that came out last year, and it's damn amazing.

As for jRPGs, most are shit. Their design is warped by their customers wanting things that are counter to good design. They want long, linear stories with 50+ hour gameplay. That necessitates a shit-ton of filler, which is bad. Just like the market in the West demands their RPGs be action-y and have lots of uber loot to grab, which is also a recipe for shit in most cases because action RPGs blend all the tedium of bad RPGs with all the brainlessness of bad action games. Or that "sandboxing" is necessary, which makes for oodles of cut and paste content (why hello thar Bethesda).

Not all jRPGs are terrible. I enjoyed Paper Mario because it stepped away from the traditional jRPG formula and was integrated a lot more adventure and platforming elements and wasn't afraid to make a well-paced game at the expense of not being able to brag about 50+ hour playtime.

Charles Barkley Shut Up and Jam Gaiden took the jRPG formula and made it better too by trimming all the fat away and making a nice, short, enjoyable experience.

Quit living in the past. Progression is a constant battle of give and take, my friends.

Same as above. Stop spouting a bunch of straw-men.

Why I like Fallout3 better than Fallout2 but present it as objective reality

Fixed.

1. The combat is MUCH better. I'm not a big fan of fps, but the simple run and gun combined with sneaking and V.A.T.S was far more fun than the shit in FO2.

The combat is MUCH better. I'm not a big fan of fps, but the simple run and gun combined with sneaking and melee was far more fun than the shit in Street Fighter 2. Thus Halo had better combat than Street Fighter 2.

This argument is weak as hell, man. You can't compare the two like that in anything but a subjective way. To compare them objectively would require different means.

The reason people round here say Fallout 3 combat is shit (or worse than previous Fallout's) objectively is like this:

1.) Compare each game's combat to games with similar design.

Fallout 1 and 2 would be compared to more traditional RPGs and turn-based strategy. When done, it doesn't stand up too favorably. At best, it's mediocre, but I feel it tends more to the crappy side.

Fallout 3 would be compared to "shooter RPGs" and FPS. When done, it's not standing at all. Just about any FPS shits all over it by virtue of far better mechanics and enemy/encounter design, and so do "like games" such as System Shock 2, Deus Ex, Bloodlines, and Mass Effect. It's bottom of he barrel.

2.) Compare their positions in their respective "genres".

Fallout 1 and 2 deliver kinda crappy turn-based combat. Fallout 3 delivers terrible FPS combat. Thus Fallout 1 and 2 have "better" combat. You may like one better, and that's fine, but don't go trying to pass something off as higher quality merely because it's different and more to your tastes.

Also consider...combat plays a much larger role in Fallout 3 than either Fallout 1 or Fallout 2. All but 4 or so quests involve some sort of dungeon-diving or combat of some sort.

Not only that, but the bullshit of random encounters clearly played too large a role in that game.

Hey look...more bullshit.

Random encounters were all about your character build in F1&2. If you dropped your luck stat, then you got a lot more negative ones. It was your fault. You could also invest points in outdoorsman to reduce them further, or just read the scout's handbooks scattered around the wastes. They were very easy to minimize, and were hardly numerous to begin with.

Contrast to Fallout 3, where going between any two places I'm constantly bombarded by combat encounters with nothing I can really do to avoid them. Radscorpions, robots, and deathclaws (and the like) just pop up and start running for me. Enclave vertibirds show up and drop off whole squads at my location. An you say random encounters dominated the original Fallouts?

2. The world in FO3 is deeper and more convincing. The realistic NPCs, old world radio songs, and gritty environment trump the crappy gangster/alien motiff and retarded AI found in previous installments.

Nice straw-man. I've never argued that Fallout 2's setting wasn't kind of retarded. And I think most old-school Fallout fans agree. Fallout 1 is the game we're using as the basis for the Fallout setting, which not only established it, but was the only one to actually make it coherent and believable. Any doubts? Let's compare things.

-Fallout 1 showed many different types of communities, from farmers like Shady Sands or Adytum (hydroponics), traders like Junktown and the Hub, raiders, the Brotherhood, and the Master's collective. How they survived made sense to a degree and survival was important.

-Fallout 2 had theme towns and an entire city of nothing but gangbangers, whores, and drug dealers. It also had a town full of scientologists and kung fu fighters. Basic survival felt like a triviality. It was all about the lulz in Fallout 2, but at least it was kinda funny.

-Fallout 3 has people pretending to be vampires, super-heroes, a huge place in one of the biggest cities in the wastes dedicated to a cheap Americana museum, a hotel with electricity and everyone dressing in 1950's clothes and styles, and a town full of children. Same thing as Fallout 2, where survival seemed on the backburner in most places, cheapening the post-apocalyptic atmosphere. Add in Bethesda's terrible writing and plot inconsistencies and the setting becomes a joke, though no intentionally.

FO3 is newer, and quite frankly it benefits greatly from far better production quality.

How? The aesthetics aren't all that great. I mean, Gears of War pulls of a better post-apoc look than Fallout 3 does and does better gore. In it's day, Fallout looked snazzy and had amazing art direction. The voice-work is terrible and doesn't compare to Bloodlines, Mass Effect, KOTOR, or just about most any game. Fallout back in the day had some nice voice acting with good talent. The writing is terrible in Fallout 3, while Fallout 1 had simple, but functional writing.

I mean, in ten years I expect better production values if your gameplay is going to tank.

Extra down-loadable content and a modders toolbox blow this game into the stratosphere, well beyond the fun yet trivial thrills to found in FO2.

Better call killap and TeamX and tell them all their work is shit compared to the great stuff we've seen from Bethesda's DLC and the Elder Scrolls Community. Restoration Pack? Heh, that's nothing. Check out my Improved Bittercup mod.

 

[Turok]

The platform force the gameplay turn-base like old machines force turn-base on games like x-com or others of his time.