Page 5 of 8

Re: Ever felt let down by a franchise?

Posted: Sun Aug 08, 2010 8:27 am
by EvilRyu2099
Personally they should have made the presentation and graphics for SFIV like Blazblue, with the mechanics similar to SFIII only to add maybe multiple SA's instead of just selecting one.. The roster should have changed as well, make it like Tekken where you are progressing with the timeline.. Don't bring back the old characters because of fanboys of the original SF II... I loved the fact that SFIII tried to change the whole series and evolve the gameplay.. The character designs of SF III> SF II.. Make new characters, it's time for a change..

Re: Ever felt let down by a franchise?

Posted: Sun Aug 08, 2010 9:48 am
by AppleQueso
AwesomeMonstar wrote:Also, to keep things going smoothly here for this thread, Call of Duty has been dissapointing me ever since 2, sonic since adventure, midway since abandoning the smash tv/ total carnage franchise (not fair, I know.) and silent hill since 2.


I've occasionally heard a lot about folks disliking Silent Hill 3, though its not too common. I'm curious about what didn't you like about it. Was it the length? The cult? The fact that it was a direct sequel to the first game?

Re: Ever felt let down by a franchise?

Posted: Sun Aug 08, 2010 1:25 pm
by the7k
AwesomeMonstar wrote:Now SFIV, I can understand why people say it's a step backwards in terms of mechanics, especially since third strike is often places as the most refined, perfect fighting game of all time, but what did you find wrong about the presentation, while I'm on the topic do you also think that SSFIV was a misstep for the series?

SSF4 was a lot better, and a step in the right direction. It's not there yet, but at least they're getting there.

I find the presentation of SF4, however, to be god-awful. Whenever you go from just about any 2D fighter, and then SF4, you'll notice it. Like this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=grt9xLu2lXM
Marvel vs Capcom 3 and Tatsunoko vs Capcom both seem to be doing a much better job of capturing the feel of a 2D fighter with a 3D engine, with just the graphics alone.

As for Soul Caliber, I whole heartedly agree that the "tower crap" was not only a lazy substitute for the series normal robust and entertaining single player game play (something I find exceedingly rare in fighting games, which makes this mistake sting all the worse), but also completely forgettable. However, I have not trifled with online play on SCIV, only head to head with friends and found the game extremely enjoyable that way, and as somebody who I believe has often defended KOFXI for the same reason (though I could be wrong), do you think that it is still a good game at it's core?


King of Fighters XI's online play, I've never been able to experience because I ain't Japanese. You must be talking about KOFXII. KOFXII's online play was flawed as well, but in a different way. Basically, it was laggy, with some inputs not coming out when you put them in. Not good, but I only experienced this maybe one out of two matches.

Soul Calibur IV, on the other hand, had worse lag (we're talking 2-3 second delays between inputs), AND had buffering, where the match would pause for right in the middle of the action - sometimes for going on a minute, and sometimes more than once during a match. I'd consider myself extremely lucky if I didn't experience the bulk of this - even my better matches had me experience at least a little lag. http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x6a4y8 ... videogames

Also, hate to say it, but I have different standards for SNK Playmore and Namco Bandai. Considering all the financially difficulties and how small they are, I think of SNKP more as an indie dev or something similar. Namco Bandai, on the other hand, is a huge f'ing company, and one of the oldest, most popular and most visible in Japan. When they screw up, it just seems inexcusable to me.

Re: Ever felt let down by a franchise?

Posted: Sun Aug 08, 2010 5:15 pm
by Rurouni_Fencer
lisalover1 wrote:
Tullaian wrote:Every Final Fantasy after 7. They were getting better from 4 to 5 to peeking at 6. 7 was kind of a plateau then the whole series fell off the side of the cliff and has been rolling down hill since.

Blasphemy; Final Fantasy IX was amazing.


I am seconding this as well.. IX is a far better game than both VIII and XIII combined!

Re: Ever felt let down by a franchise?

Posted: Sun Aug 08, 2010 6:33 pm
by AppleQueso
Rurouni_Fencer wrote:
lisalover1 wrote:
Tullaian wrote:Every Final Fantasy after 7. They were getting better from 4 to 5 to peeking at 6. 7 was kind of a plateau then the whole series fell off the side of the cliff and has been rolling down hill since.

Blasphemy; Final Fantasy IX was amazing.


I am seconding this as well.. IX is a far better game than both VIII and XIII combined!


That's not really saying much :lol:

Re: Ever felt let down by a franchise?

Posted: Mon Aug 09, 2010 3:22 am
by BlackDS
swiftzx wrote:I also haven't liked the recent Tony Hawk games.

Exact Opposite for me. I got the newest Tony Hawk for Christmas (American Sk8land), and I loved it, 100%ed it twice, spent hours making custom boards and sounds, one of my favorite games. THen, I bought the older games, (Pro skater for various systems, Pro skater 3 for N64, something for Gba as well) and I though they were all rubbish. I bought the motion game as well, even a greater disappointment because i spent more than 2 dollars on it. :(

Re: Ever felt let down by a franchise?

Posted: Mon Aug 09, 2010 8:31 am
by Ack
AppleQueso wrote:
AwesomeMonstar wrote:Also, to keep things going smoothly here for this thread, Call of Duty has been dissapointing me ever since 2, sonic since adventure, midway since abandoning the smash tv/ total carnage franchise (not fair, I know.) and silent hill since 2.


I've occasionally heard a lot about folks disliking Silent Hill 3, though its not too common. I'm curious about what didn't you like about it. Was it the length? The cult? The fact that it was a direct sequel to the first game?


I've heard a lot of people declare Silent Hill 2 the best. I don't think he necessarily means Silent Hill 3 is bad or dislikes the game, he just doesn't feel it's up to par with SH2. Granted, while SH3 is my favorite, SH2 was a near-perfect horror game, perfectly molding every piece of design, from limited combat to plot to monster design, to form one incredible portrait. The difficulty settings also work well, not just making enemies hit harder and take more damage, but in some cases upgrading what they used to take you down (ever encounter a nurse with a pistol? She sees you long before you see her). After the incredible presentation of the second game, SH3 just didn't live up to it for some folks. They love it too, just a bit less than SH2.

Re: Ever felt let down by a franchise?

Posted: Mon Aug 09, 2010 2:36 pm
by AwesomeMonstar
Ack wrote:
I've heard a lot of people declare Silent Hill 2 the best. I don't think he necessarily means Silent Hill 3 is bad or dislikes the game, he just doesn't feel it's up to par with SH2. Granted, while SH3 is my favorite, SH2 was a near-perfect horror game, perfectly molding every piece of design, from limited combat to plot to monster design, to form one incredible portrait.

Precisely. I even like SH4, though many do not, I think the series kind of peaked at 2. Plotwise, that game is unrivaled in the series to me.

Re: Ever felt let down by a franchise?

Posted: Mon Aug 09, 2010 2:46 pm
by AppleQueso
Ack wrote:
AppleQueso wrote:
AwesomeMonstar wrote:Also, to keep things going smoothly here for this thread, Call of Duty has been dissapointing me ever since 2, sonic since adventure, midway since abandoning the smash tv/ total carnage franchise (not fair, I know.) and silent hill since 2.


I've occasionally heard a lot about folks disliking Silent Hill 3, though its not too common. I'm curious about what didn't you like about it. Was it the length? The cult? The fact that it was a direct sequel to the first game?


I've heard a lot of people declare Silent Hill 2 the best. I don't think he necessarily means Silent Hill 3 is bad or dislikes the game, he just doesn't feel it's up to par with SH2. Granted, while SH3 is my favorite, SH2 was a near-perfect horror game, perfectly molding every piece of design, from limited combat to plot to monster design, to form one incredible portrait. The difficulty settings also work well, not just making enemies hit harder and take more damage, but in some cases upgrading what they used to take you down (ever encounter a nurse with a pistol? She sees you long before you see her). After the incredible presentation of the second game, SH3 just didn't live up to it for some folks. They love it too, just a bit less than SH2.


Well I think my view depends on whether he despises SH3 or simply considers it a step down from 2. I've met a couple of folks who absolutely hate 3 with a passion, believe it or not.

Re: Ever felt let down by a franchise?

Posted: Mon Aug 09, 2010 10:39 pm
by Ack
I don't understand those people, AppleQueso, but then again I've played Silent Hill 3 way too much. But I believe AwesomeMonstar's previous quote shows what I meant: he likes it, just not as much. I've enjoyed every Silent Hill game I've played for one reason or another, yet I still come back to say 3 is my personal favorite when asked. It doesn't mean I dislike the rest of the series, though admittedly there are things they tried I didn't care for in certain titles. I just feel SH3 was the most enjoyable for me to play.

Going back to the original question, are there any franchises you guys have played where a single title really let you down before a return to quality in the rest of the series?

I'd have to throw the Red Faction series in as a contender there. The first game was excellent, but the second just felt sub-par to me, especially after the entertaining plot in the first. Level design didn't mesh right for me, and the limited geo-mod capabilities really annoyed me. But despite being a very different experience, Red Faction: Guerrilla has been an absolute blast for me.