Search Results

I find you clever, like a Xatu.

Thought it fit your perceived attitude. Also, Umbreon's cool.

Well...alright.

I just like Dio.

Umbreon seems fitting for you.

You's a Mawile.

I'm thinking Tentacruel.

You's a Quilava.

Not Pikachu, but a Pidgeotto.

Wait, they didn't put Jotoro and Dio? Da fuck, mang. I don't even read/watch Jojo and I still want to play as them.

But it does bog standard much better than Kingdom Hearts II does with its mess of subplots. I know it's not original, but I still like the way the story was told in the first Kingdom Hearts. I still do enjoy Kingdom Hearts II, but it's impossible for me now to not see all the missed potential and botched writing.

While you may prefer staying on the ground and mashing buttons, I myself actually liked that the first Kingdom Hearts focused on more elements than the combat. And while you consider it an awkward mashup...it's already a mix of Disney and Final Fantasy. I dunno, just thought it was odd to make that point. While it doesn't have much platforming or puzzles, Kingdom Hearts II has a bunch of awkward mini-games, which I didn't really enjoy any of. (Though I do have to state that I haven't played Kingdom Hearts II: Final Mix, so I can't account for the additions to its platforming and such.)

Whenever you need some more MP? The cool thing about having those Summons is that they were never overpowered to the point where you need to use them, but still useful so that you can choose to use them. I legitimately rarely used my summons in Kingdom Hearts II due to how overpowered the Magic and physical combat in that game was.

I was more referring to Call of Duty: Ghosts, in which you follow the leader for about 6 hours. Maybe I could have chosen a better game series to reinforce my point: that a development team having spent more time with a series doesn't automatically mean it'll get better.

Just keep watching it for a while longer. If you don't dislike it yet, you still have a chance. I think that, by around episode 11, you'll have experienced enough of the initial plot and characters and such to really get a feel for the series. If you aren't invested by the end of episode 11, the series just might not be for you.

For one, I don't really care to compare cutscenes in games. They're obviously going to improve with each game, and they're probably the least important part of the game's design. The game's actual plot beats Kingdom Hearts II's to a pulp.

Also, you could complain that Kingdom Hearts: Final Mix had some clunky platforming and puzzles, but most of Kingdom Hearts II is RUN FORWARD AND HIT THING. Legitimately, you barely even need to jump in Kingdom Hearts II, and the reduction of puzzles broke the variety of gameplay into more button mashing and hitting Triangle. Magic isn't useless; it's simply not overpowered like it becomes in some future games, and summons being useless...yeah, no, I recently saw my friend beating down Kurt Zisa through implementing timely summons of Bambi. If anything, the summons in Kingdom Hearts II are more useless.

Experience behind a game doesn't mean jack if the actual design doesn't improve. The newer Call of Duty games aren't better just because the development team has been making those games longer.

I preferred the experimentation of combat present in Birth By Sleep, and I actually really liked the plot in that game (although I also really liked Kingdom Hearts: Final Mix's plot as well,) along with being able to play as three different characters. I just wish the Disney worlds were nearly as detailed and their plots as relevant as they were in Kingdom Hearts: Final Mix.

I'll be the guy who explains his preference for the original films over the reboot:

Andrew Garfield was a terrible Peter Parker in the reboot. His attempts in The Amazing Spider-Man to act "awkward" felt so fake to me, like he was simply phoning it in. He looks too good to play Peter Parker well, because (at least to me) Peter Parker needs to begin his journey as the awkward guy. He didn't create his Spider-Man suit like Tobey McGuire's Peter did in the original Spider-Man film; HE JUST BUYS IT. And he doesn't seem to learn jack shit at the end of the film. His last line goes so far as to reject one of the lessons he was supposed to learn from his journey. This Peter Parker was just plan unlikable to me, and I don't understand the appeal behind changing Peter Parker from the "uncool bullied geek" to the "cool nerd." It alienates a lot of the people who first came to love Spider-Man; they could relate to Peter's struggles as an adolescent person, and they became emotionally attached due to this. The reboot's Peter barely seems to struggle with money or transportation or getting attention or really anything short of remembering how to do his job right (seriously, his final battle against the Lizard kinda...sucked.) His charisma contradicts the dichotomy that's supposed to be present between Peter Parker, who nobody really cares for, and Spider-Man, who the public love (or hate, but it's still attention all the same.)

However, Andrew Garfield as Spider-Man is pretty good, but I don't see his portrayal superior to Tobey McGuire's portrayal honestly. Both did great jobs in the suit, and I did like that they started the reboot with Peter using web-shooters. I just don't think the new Spidey has much of anything over the old one.

And one of the biggest faults to me with the reboot was that the tone of the film was too serious. The original Spider-Man films, even (or especially) the 3rd, all had a sense of camp to them. They knew how silly their premise was, and they embraced it, so that when serious events did happen, they had a lot more impact. It served to make the films much more effective emotional roller coasters. I didn't get that sense from The Amazing Spider-Man nearly as often. Granted, when the film did manage to have fun with itself, it was great (Stan Lee cameo, anyone?) But the film suffered from far too often conveying the "SUPER SRS BZNESS" syndrome, as The Dark Knight Rises and Man of Steel both did. I mean, for God's sake, the plot of the Lizard was MAKE PEOPLE LIZARDS TOO, and they didn't even have Spidey make one joke about it? Not to mention that I hated how the death of Uncle Ben was portrayed in the reboot. It didn't feel sad or sympathetic. Just empty. I fault the writer and director though, not Martin Sheen.

Also, the suit for The Amazing Spider-Man 2 looks much better to me than the suit in the first reboot film. The trim around the eyes was far too prominent, I couldn't stand the stupid looking shoes of that suit, and it sorely lacked the belt. I'm glad to see the new suit seems brighter too. Spider-Man should be a hero who wears bright colors after all, because he's at his best when he's joking with super villains and enjoying his powers.

I second this.

ASFHFASFA I WAS GONNA POST THIS

Anyway

Metal Gear Rising OST:

First, my favorite track.

Then, battle your rival.

Lastly, prepare for the final battle.

Also, Devil May Cry 3+4 OST:

The obvious choice.

Taking out Berial.

Nero's own battle music is nice too.

I could do more, but maybe later.

First: the fact that they're trying to apply the same Dark Knight gritty realism brooding darkness feel to freaking SUPERMAN. THE GUY WHO LOOKS LIKE THIS:



While I don't completely hate Man of Steel, it misses the mark a lot with the character of Superman. Far too much time spent with Krypton when we could have gotten the necessary details in less than 5 minutes, a very confusing message about whether Clark should be Superman and help people or LET PEOPLE DIE FOR HIS SECRET (the writers really shouldn't have tried this because it ended up as a mess with Clark's dad who is supposed to be a huge inspiration for his persona,) splintering Clark's life into so many mixed up flashbacks and flash-forwards that we barely get to see him develop from the overwhelmed child with god-like powers to the hero he's supposed to become, Lois Lane's interesting characteristics being dropped during the second act, allowing him to destroy a city during the Zod battle (protecting the city is usually Superman's most important objective,) the film utterly lacked a sense of the joy about being Superman until the last 3 or so minutes, that dreadfully forced romance between Clark and Lois with little chemistry, and introducing many supporting characters that...ultimately meant nothing after their first few minutes on screen to move the plot forward.

But hey, them action scenes. And it was still more entertaining than Superman Returns. But did we really need another superhero origin film? Can't we be done with these?

My hopes for this new film are so low after The Dark Knight Rises and Man of Steel that it couldn't possibly be as disappointing as I'm expecting, which means at least that even the least impressive stuff can seem more impressive. At first, I was skeptical about Batman and Wonder Woman having their origin films skipped, but it actually sounds like a good idea now...though I'd still have preferred if they each got their own individual film anyway, simply to establish their character (NOT THEIR ORIGINS AGAIN.)

Ah, ok, I can see how people could prefer the original to the remake.

In what ways?

While I actually enjoyed the combat system of Re:Chain of Memories, and found the plot and cast to be quite good (Axel and Namine and Repliku FTW,) the levels were just so...bland. Also, the door unlocking system was bullshit.

I provide.