nekunando Posted August 16, 2014 Posted August 16, 2014 But yeah, as soon as I saw Journey at 100 I knew I disagreed with the list. Yeh It shouldn't be anywhere near the top 100 : peace:
Retro_Link Posted August 16, 2014 Posted August 16, 2014 Yeh It shouldn't be anywhere near the top 100 : peace:You have no heart. LOL I've just realised Melee isn't even on the list and Brawl is!
Aneres11 Posted August 16, 2014 Posted August 16, 2014 97 for SMG2 is too high. Amirite @Aneres11 *high-five* But yeah, as soon as I saw Journey at 100 I knew I disagreed with the list. Haha totally high five. We'll be burned alive for saying this.
Serebii Posted August 16, 2014 Posted August 16, 2014 You have no heart. LOL I've just realised Melee isn't even on the list and Brawl is! Well, Brawl is better than Melee
Aneres11 Posted August 16, 2014 Posted August 16, 2014 Well, Brawl is better than Melee Ohhh no. No no no.
drahkon Posted August 16, 2014 Posted August 16, 2014 Yeh It shouldn't be anywhere near the top 100 : peace: Well, Brawl is better than Melee What the fuck is wrong with you people
Sheikah Posted August 16, 2014 Posted August 16, 2014 Well, Brawl is better than Melee No way are we letting this one slide. Not considering how you went on at me for doing the exact same thing: You didn't state an opinion, you stated something as an empirical fact, stating that there is no creativity remaining in Nintendo, just a sequel culture. That was not given as an opinion, you were stating that as a fact, and that is why I countered it, because it is not a fact. That is how it is worded. Your entire post is stated as if it's fact. ... See. Perhaps you should be more concise or add an ", at least in my opinion" at the end if you wish to convey something as an opinion. Amazing that so soon after you would destroy your own argument.
Serebii Posted August 16, 2014 Posted August 16, 2014 Just messing with you guys :p Though Brawl has better characters and even many better stages. The tripping mechanic is what annoys me.
Goron_3 Posted August 16, 2014 Posted August 16, 2014 Well, Brawl is better than Melee Brawl was released unfinished and completely broken. There was no balance and the online play was hilarious. It also had tripping. The only thing Brawl had over Melee was content but it should have had more content as it was released later. You should check out the 'What was wrong with Brawl' thread that was on Gaf a few weeks ago. 10 pages of people that had no interest in competitive smash saying they disliked Brawl. Hilarious. Edit. Just seen you were kidding. Thank god. *hugs*
Retro_Link Posted August 16, 2014 Posted August 16, 2014 (edited) Personally the only way I found Brawl better, was the cutscenes. Intro, worse. Menu's, worse. Graphical style, worse. (preferred the cartoony brightness of Melee to Brawls gritty 'realism') Levels, worse. (too many 3 platform layouts) Although it did give us the Wind Waker level. Speed, worse. Single player mode, worse. No Break the Targets. Was disappointed in the new characters and clones. Though it was packed full of more Nintendo goodness!! (Although I'd rather the actual game be better and do more justice to the content) Edited August 16, 2014 by Retro_Link
The Bard Posted August 16, 2014 Posted August 16, 2014 Since when are Empire an authority on anything? The way these lists usually work is the editors each submit a top ten list. The positions on the list are heirarchised by point values which then go towards that game's overall score when everyone's lists are compiled. Basically they're an aggregate of a magazine staff's favourite games which makes them meaningless because they don't look at games as a personal experience nor do they rank them by cultural impact. They're some indeterminate place in between. tl;dr lists are wank, we all know what games are going to be on them, so their relative positions are just an excuse for someone somewhere on the internet to flare up in herpes-like righteous indignation. Also Brawl was the Phantom Menace of videogames.
Cube Posted August 16, 2014 Posted August 16, 2014 I enjoyed Brawl more than Melee. I also like The Phantom Menace.
Tamazoid Posted August 17, 2014 Posted August 17, 2014 (edited) I enjoyed Brawl more than Melee. I also like The Phantom Menace. I completely agree with you on the Brawl point. While I do agree that the balancing is broken, I honestly don't play Smash for a competitive game, I play it when with a group of friends since it is such a great multiplayer experience. Brawl perfectly fit that requirement, and amongst some of my friends seemed slightly more accessible than Melee. While I did thoroughly enjoy Melee, when I'm with friends these days we always go to Brawl instead of Melee, albeit one friend is a fringe competitive player so he always insists on Melee. However, there is no way I can do so regarding The Phantom Menace. Defending that is like defending the plotline of Other M. Edited August 17, 2014 by Tamazoid
Goron_3 Posted August 17, 2014 Posted August 17, 2014 I completely agree with you on the Brawl point. While I do agree that the balancing is broken, I honestly don't play Smash for a competitive game, I play it when with a group of friends since it is such a great multiplayer experience. Brawl perfectly fit that requirement, and amongst some of my friends seemed slightly more accessible than Melee. While I did thoroughly enjoy Melee, when I'm with friends these days we always go to Brawl instead of Melee, albeit one friend is a fringe competitive player so he always insists on Melee. However, there is no way I can do so regarding The Phantom Menace. Defending that is like defending the plotline of Other M. I just couldn't play Brawl on a casual level because it was too slow and floaty. I found the matches went on too long and that it wasn't 'exciting' enough. Judging by the recent thread on GAF many casuals felt the same way. Hopefully Smash 4 is somewhere in the middle of both games, as I can understand why some casuals found Melee too difficult. In fact, even I found Melee too technically demanding, and that's the reason why I actually prefer Project M to Melee. The fact that you can pull stuff off in Melee like this is beyond my capabilities: The thought of controlling 2 Ice Climbers individually...god damn.
Sheikah Posted August 17, 2014 Posted August 17, 2014 Brawl wasn't a patch on Melee, Melee felt fast and intense while Brawl just felt too floaty and you could trip up. I am a casual player but it doesn't take long to be reasonably good enough that you appreciate the pace when playing a similarly skilled friend.
Retro_Link Posted August 17, 2014 Posted August 17, 2014 Out of interest what are the go-to stages on Brawl? I thought most if them were pants, compared to the likes of... well, pretty much very stage in Melee...
Goron_3 Posted August 17, 2014 Posted August 17, 2014 Out of interest what are the go-to stages on Brawl? I thought most if them were pants, compared to the likes of... well, pretty much very stage in Melee... You know what stage I loved in Melee? The Termina Bay one! And I loved the music on Hyrule Temple. So good. From a competitive stand point, the levels were still awesome. Final Destination, Battlefield, Yoshi Story, Fountain of Dreams (DAT MUSIC), Pokemon Stadium, Mute City, Dreamland, Kongo Jungle... Need I go on?
Sheikah Posted August 17, 2014 Posted August 17, 2014 There's that game and watch level where if you're pikachu you could grab people and send them backwards for an insta-kill. That was fun.
Wii Posted August 19, 2014 Posted August 19, 2014 Ubisoft says “Nintendo customers don’t buy Assassin’s Creed” Ubisoft is releasing two Assassin’s Creed games this year, but Wii U isn’t getting either of them. Wondering why this is the case? While speaking with Game Informer at Gamescom last week, Ubisoft CEO Yves Guillemot explained: “It’s very simple. What we see is that Nintendo customers don’t buy Assassin’s Creed. Last year, we sold in very small numbers.” Guillemot also spoke about Ubisoft’s shift in focus on Wii U: “What we see is that they are very interested in Just Dance, very interested by other kinds of games. So what we are trying to do is to focus more on the types of games they are interested in.” And what of Watch Dogs, which has long been planned for Nintendo’s console? Fortunately, Guillemot once again confirmed that it’s still in the pipeline: “[Watch Dogs] is coming to Wii U. It will be the only mature game we publish on it.” http://nintendoeverything.com/ubisoft-says-nintendo-customers-dont-buy-assassins-creed/#more-169933 Pretty insulting. Just Dance? Really? I wouldn't p1$$ on that franchise.
Helmsly Posted August 19, 2014 Posted August 19, 2014 http://nintendoeverything.com/ubisoft-says-nintendo-customers-dont-buy-assassins-creed/#more-169933 Pretty insulting. Just Dance? Really? I wouldn't p1$$ on that franchise. I can't really argue with what he's saying here. They released Assassins creed on the Wii U and hardly anyone bought it, meanwhile Just dance is selling well on the Wii U and the Wii, so the audience is pretty clearly telling them what they want.. Its not really insulting, just the reality of the situation.
Serebii Posted August 19, 2014 Posted August 19, 2014 I can't really argue with what he's saying here. They released Assassins creed on the Wii U and hardly anyone bought it, meanwhile Just dance is selling well on the Wii U and the Wii, so the audience is pretty clearly telling them what they want.. Its not really insulting, just the reality of the situation. To be fair, with AC3 and AC4, they half arsed it. The quality of the ports were subpar (even worse than 360 and PS3 when the Wii U CAN do better) and they even insulted Wii U owners further by not bothering to provide the DLC to them. I can't help but see the third parties with "mature" titles on Wii U being a self-fulfilling prophecy
Dcubed Posted August 19, 2014 Posted August 19, 2014 (edited) I can't really argue with what he's saying here. They released Assassins creed on the Wii U and hardly anyone bought it, meanwhile Just dance is selling well on the Wii U and the Wii, so the audience is pretty clearly telling them what they want.. Its not really insulting, just the reality of the situation. Yeah it's true. You can say that they could've done much more with them, but you can't say that Ubisoft didn't at least try with those games. They did at least give Wii U owners parity for the most part. Watchdogs arguably had the most potential of them all, but that has since had its legs chopped off at the knees (both in terms of the Wii U version and every other version too - as it abandoned its potentially awesome premise in favour of becoming a bog standard GTA clone with a hack-to-win button), so that's not gonna do anything for the Wii U now... It's a shame, but we're lucky that Ubisoft supported the console for so long anyway so I can't really complain. It's not like we're getting any other 3rd party support outside of the occasional project being rescued or otherwise paid for by Nintendo and the occasional independently developed game (I'd rather not use the term "indie" as it has become somewhat of a derogatory term and not all of these projects are small scale!) at this point anyway Edited August 19, 2014 by Dcubed
Serebii Posted August 19, 2014 Posted August 19, 2014 Yeah it's true. You can say that they could've done much more with them, but you can't say that Ubisoft didn't at least try with those games. They did at least give Wii U owners parity. Watchdogs arguably had the most potential of them all, but that has since had its legs chopped off at the knees (both in terms of the Wii U version and every other version too - as it abandoned its potentially awesome premise in favour of becoming a bog standard GTA clone with a hack-to-win button), so that's not gonna do anything for the Wii U now... It's a shame, but we're lucky that Ubisoft supported the console for so long anyway. Well I'd have said parity if their ports weren't subpar, but yeah they did at least release them.
Recommended Posts