(08-06-2014, 08:33 AM)Mass Distraction Wrote: I don't think I really have a game that would have ruined a franchise for me, I tend to like all the games I buy.

I'm more of the same. There are a few exeptions to the rules, but I normaly see the light in most games. The ones I haven't are already listed all over the fourms.

(08-06-2014, 08:33 AM)Mass Distraction Wrote:

(08-05-2014, 08:20 PM)gamemaster1991 Wrote: Resident Evil 6: Just an overall worse version of RE5 (which I liked).

Version? I was so much different from RE5 that the only thing they had in common was Chris as a playable character.

It's as much a version of RE 5 as RE5 is a version of RE4, which I only see miner points in. RE6 just seems to an action game that wants to keep the franchise alive.
The part that I see RE5 in is bringing back familiar faces to get people to buy it. You could have changed the character's names and the title of the games and lose nothing. This is why we have Dino Crisis and not Resident Evil: Jurassic Park.

(08-06-2014, 03:19 PM)BumblebeeCody Wrote:

(08-06-2014, 02:41 AM)Melcadrien Wrote: But turning the main character, Dante, from a pizza-eating badass into a vulgar druggie killed what truly made Dante.

The new Dante does eat pizza (it's found in his trailer within the first part of the game) and Dante hasn't taken drugs in DmC.

(08-06-2014, 04:32 AM)RepentantSky Wrote: I haven't played the newest DmC and have absolutely no interest in Castlevania, it's pretty clear the latter of those two games only has a success when it repeats the boring jump and whip controls of the first game.

That's the problem there though. A lot of people haven't played DmC, Resident Evil, Castlevania, FFXIII and are willing to dismiss it based on what the herd say. Before giving it a try, it's always given a perceived negative reception and others follow suit whether they have played it or not. Fair enough I rag on games but that only because I've played them. I've still yet to play Diablo 3 and despite the already bad feedback I know of, I still have to play it for myself in order to form a valid level of criticism. Not just DmC, there's only so much you can tell people to actually play the game before judging but there's other games like Lollipop Chainsaw or Dragons Crown.

This is another one I don't get. Fans are complaining about a redesign and reboot of a game that....... plays the same? Ok, so the characters don't act like the originals, but people are complaining about things that don't happen because they haven't played it. If the game is bad, than it's bad, but If people are going to say "it's bad because I won't play it," than it's not bad (as far as you know). The only good reviews I've seen of the game (as far as I remember) are from people who ignore the characters redesigns or from people who never heard of the games before. Also these people say that it's still better than Devil May Cry 2 (what ever that means).

P.S. FF13 is still a bad game and I have played it. No game should get better 20 hours in. I should be good at the start.

I'd just like to point out that Paper Mario (64) is hands down one of my top ten games of all time, and I don't think Sticker Star ruined the series. That being said, I do believe that Super Paper Mario ruined the series.

Hey you guys know what we should do with one of our most celebrated, turn based rolelaying IPs?

GTA V, I guess?

It's not the worst thing to come out, but it was really underwhelming.

Bigger map amounted to really nothing of interest, really. Most of it was empty desert/forest, and the "last heist" didn't feel like a last heist at all.
Inner city had barely anything you could just walk into, like GTA IV did.
They got rid of the street vendors, which is disappointing when you go to the Pier to gioof around in, only to find you can just go on the Ferris wheel and can't even play mini-games there.
There's a race-track and a casino, but turns both are just decoration. Can't gamble at the casino or bet on horses.

Online is even more boring. Most the unique NPCs (bodybuilders, etc) are just absent. Getting money is grindy as hell and really seems to encourage that "buy fake money with real money" thing, which I'm not a fan of.
Only way to really get money is to do races, and if you want to race on the same track again, it takes like 5 minutes to reload everything, even if the area used is relatively small. Any other mission was not worth playing because of the load times and pay-out.

Only actual fun I had was mostly hunting down bounties in semi-creative ways, like launching them over a cliff by clipping them with a plane-wing or waiting on higher ground and sniping them as they hid on a train. Or dropping C4 from above onto a guys Tank as he basically goes around being the joy-kill.

(08-06-2014, 04:38 PM)gamemaster1991 Wrote:

(08-06-2014, 08:33 AM)Mass Distraction Wrote:

(08-05-2014, 08:20 PM)gamemaster1991 Wrote: Resident Evil 6: Just an overall worse version of RE5 (which I liked).

Version? I was so much different from RE5 that the only thing they had in common was Chris as a playable character.

It's as much a version of RE 5 as RE5 is a version of RE4, which I only see miner points in. RE6 just seems to an action game that wants to keep the franchise alive.

But isn't by that logic every sequel ever to any game just a "version" of them? RE5 is way closer to RE4 than RE6. In RE6 there are no tank controls, you can move while you aim/shoot/reload, you have generally more freedom to manouver your character, your weapons aren't tied to your person, there are multiple campaigns and even the AI is way better. I really don't see how those two games can be considered a "version" of the other.

(08-06-2014, 04:46 PM)Arjahn Wrote: I'd just like to point out that Paper Mario (64) is hands down one of my top ten games of all time, and I don't think Sticker Star ruined the series. That being said, I do believe that Super Paper Mario ruined the series.

Hey you guys know what we should do with one of our most celebrated, turn based rolelaying IPs?

Spoiler

MAKE IT INTO A SHITTY F*CKING PLATFORMER WITH FLOATY CONTROLS AND THROW IN FOUR HUNDERED POINTER GIMMICKS THAT NOBODY OR THEIR GRANDMAS ARE GONNA GIVE A FLYING FUCK ABOUT.

Don't forget lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots and lots of text.

(08-06-2014, 09:21 PM)G-Haven Wrote: GTA V, I guess?

It's not the worst thing to come out, but it was really underwhelming.

Bigger map amounted to really nothing of interest, really. Most of it was empty desert/forest, and the "last heist" didn't feel like a last heist at all.
Inner city had barely anything you could just walk into, like GTA IV did.
They got rid of the street vendors, which is disappointing when you go to the Pier to gioof around in, only to find you can just go on the Ferris wheel and can't even play mini-games there.
There's a race-track and a casino, but turns both are just decoration. Can't gamble at the casino or bet on horses.

Online is even more boring. Most the unique NPCs (bodybuilders, etc) are just absent. Getting money is grindy as hell and really seems to encourage that "buy fake money with real money" thing, which I'm not a fan of.
Only way to really get money is to do races, and if you want to race on the same track again, it takes like 5 minutes to reload everything, even if the area used is relatively small. Any other mission was not worth playing because of the load times and pay-out.

Only actual fun I had was mostly hunting down bounties in semi-creative ways, like launching them over a cliff by clipping them with a plane-wing or waiting on higher ground and sniping them as they hid on a train. Or dropping C4 from above onto a guys Tank as he basically goes around being the joy-kill.

I also had this problem with GTA V, compared to GTA IV I thought V sucked. Sure gameplay and graphics were improved but I feel as if GTA V was focusing on heist most of the time throughout the game. The protagonist, when compared to the GTA IV era protagonist (Niko, Johnny and Luis) were boring and I didn't like them. The online though is what I enjoy and that's because I play with my friends so I end up having a good time.

DmC was a game that I think also could've been better. It's probably due to my personal preference but I didn't enjoy the setting DmC had compared to Devil May Cry 1 & 3, I loved that kind of castle setting so when I played DmC I really couldn't get used to it's setting. I think the gameplay was improved because I had fun with the gameplay but everything just set me off. The fact that a series I freaking loved was changed around with a story I didn't enjoy was the main factor unfortunately. If it was something brand new then I thought it would've been a major success but the fact it was a reboot of Devil May Cry is what set a lot of fans off from this game.
Did it kill of the series though...? So far it did do a decent job of burying the game series with a good amount of fans of the original series but did create other fans that haven't played the original.

Finally the last game I think ruined the series (hopefully it didn't) was Final Fantasy XIII. I bought it first day and started playing right away and it just sucked. Especially the battle system, I thought Final Fantasy VIII's battle system was garbage because of the draw mechanic but this Final Fantasy XIII takes the cake. Most of my battles consisted of tapping A on the auto option. I really tried liking this game to the point I had to try the game 3 more times because I was suck at certain parts but I just can't... this game was just horrible. I think Final Fantasy XV has to be amazing to bring it back to the top.

Can we safely say that The Godfather II ruined the game itself? It just felt rushed and it wasn't even that good compared to the first game.

I thought of a better one, in the sense that I have actually played it: 1942 Joint Strike. I'm not sure if it tried to be a remake of the original or a completely new title in the 19XX series but my God how boring it was. No trophies, reeeeeally short even for a downloadable title (played through it in under an hour), super easy, no unlockables and absolutely no replay value whatsoever. It was a dry and boring game. No wonder there has been no 19XX game since that.

Deleted it from my PS3 after beating it since there was no reason to keep it there, especially when I have the far superior 1943 Kai (from 1987 as opposed to this game's release year of 2008) also downloaded and the unofficial spinoff Strikers 1945 II on disc.

I haven't actually posted games I think ruined the series.

Well, okay.

Halo 4 is a big "wow how the fuck did you fuck that up 343, you even had people who worked for bungie on your team what the actual fuck is wrong with you" well let me give you guys the detailed reason to why and how they fucked it up.

Firstly, they hired people who fucked HATED Halo to design and play the game. So that's a great start, let's hire people who hate the game to tell us why they hate the game, nothing can go wrong from NOT listening to the fans. And the reason why they did this was because their Y input would be perfect to replace this X input.

So yeah, you have that. Then some guy named Holmes (don't let the name fool you, he's an idiot) who had somehow wormed his way into being the dev for this game saw the very first Halo 4 product really early in development, and everyone loved it because it was "very traditional" except for that retarded idiot who said it was "too traditional" and scrapped the entire fucking thing.

I could go on, but I really just wanted to bring the two main fucking points that have annoyed me so much about Halo 4. The fact they hired people who hated Halo to give reasons on how to improve it was retarded. Why bring in a minority of people to change the game to their liking to affect the fucking majority of players in general still pisses me off to this day.

There's a whole article about it here so if you want to get angry like me go ahead.

Another game I'd like to mention, but even though I find it to still be a fun game and a good series is Saint's Row 3.

See, the thing about SR3 was that the first two were about a street gang just being a street gang it was GTA but with the one thing GTA lacked. Being part of a street gang. It was fucking amazing, and SR2 was so fucking good, the amount of shit that happened along with the humour and even the super serious parts that made you know that your gang wasn't fucking around. If you've played SR2 you know what they did to get to the other gangs and it was fucking brutal.

Then we go to SR3 where they're sellouts who do nothing, Gat being the only good character from the original games then dies literally 10 minutes into the game, and never comes back. The game is so dumbed down you never get to actually fight the guy who killed Gat he just dies in a cutscene and then you deal with two other gangs one which is just a l33t hacker group and the other who is just a wrestler. It's really stupid how they changed the game to be like this, and SR4 didn't improve on it either they just turned it into DC Universe Online and gave the MC superpowers. It was better than SR3 but I don't get why they can't just fucking return to the original Saint's games.

I can't really think of anything else, but these two games really did ruin their series.

Lords of Shadow 2 did a greatjob at it.

Maybe my personal biggest disappointment of the last gen.