Dvader said:

No GG splatoon 2 is not CoD. One game in CoD has you flying spaceships doing aerial dogfights, zero g gun fights, hook shots to attach to walls and run along them. Another let's you hack robots to turn them into teammates, get into mechs, one had  levels where you planned where your guys would load out like a mini strategy game. And some COD are old war games with none of those skills. That's NOT the same as a game with the EXACT same gameplay all the time across two games. If in this game some levels let you jump into vehicles, had stages with exclusive mechanics and weapons, then that's an actual change.

The single player being the exact same structure just shows me how little effort they put into changing anything. It could be great and be the same amount of levels but I know it's going to feel like more levels and not something new. Which is fine, again galaxy 1 and 2 are these kinds of sequels. But it seems clearly not mario galaxy to odyssey, that's what I am saying.

The last COD games I played were BLOPS and BLOPS 2 and they were similarly shit. Despite crappy novelty sections like flying that jet thing. Most of the "novel" stuff is cinematic guff that has no impact on gameplay like the rock climbing which is virtually a QTE, crappy zip lining. Hacking robots was shit too and yes, I remember that mini strategy game thing too - again barebones, half the time didn't work, shoddy controls, throwaway junk.

COD does feel like exactly the same gameplay again and again (grenades landing at your feet constantly - crappy AI - dodgy controls) which is why I gave up on it after a good run. Being military scenarios and having World War 2 vs modern military settings isn't much of a difference, even when the setting seems novel. Vehicles were/are junk too, it's like a rail shooter, even the horse stuff.

Maybe I have a different point of view, because all the so called new things I've tried in BLOPS and past call of duty games has been pretty shit and I have a low opinion of the series - but then I was always a single player campaign guy with those games and aside from WOW and MW most of the others I've played are 6/10 games to me. I'd rather have great gameplay redux than throwaway junk and a bad game.  

"It needed to go from SMB1 to SMB3 level jump I felt and I doubt it does that."

Who says it needs to do that? Again.... pre-conceptions. I never expected or needed the sequel to have some revolutionary leap.

Many other sequels don't have that kind of jump, why is it a problem this time? Splatoon is Splatoon, its structure is the game. Reminds of people complaining that Metroid Prime 2 and 3 were like Metroid Prime 1. Well no shit, they are sequels and the first game established the games structure and gameplay systems. And those games are still pretty unique within themselves, no one is doing good versions in 3D of this gameplay style. Same goes for Splatoon - it's unique unto itself - or even Smash Bros - whose sequels to me feel redundant. You can't expect the first sequel from a new game to throw everything out and do revolutionary things as a base expectation. It's nice if you get that, but you can't create your own expectations about something that was never promised then complain it wasn't delivered.  

gamingeek said:

One would assume that a bigger install base would have more people to play these big games, that's all I meant. If XB1 had a PS4 like userbase, if it was as popular then its exclusive titles would be more popular? *shrugs*

SupremeAC said:

Vader, why do you feel Splatoon needed a SMB to SMB3 jump?  I'm not even sure something like that would be possible without changing the nature of the game, making it more of a single player experience.  I try to imagine such a game and Glitch ik the system springs to mind.  Anyone remember that game?  

Needed a jump like that's for it to be called a true sequel. Instead it's a  basic quick sequel with minor changes that we see all the time. What I object to is GG complain that's not a valid complaint when for some people it might be. I feel you didn't like this he first didn't nintendo do anything at all to address that, no. They don't have to they've are sticking to what works but it deserves to be called what it is.

After 17 years, I finally just got done playing a bit of the intro to Half Life....on the Dreamcast!

It feels pretty surreal playing a version of a game that was never supposed to be out there for the public to see. Dreamcast never got a killer story based FPS, and this was supposed to be it. I remember being very pissed off when they cancelled it in favor of the PS2. Just as I was when they cancelled Legacy of Kain: Soul Reaver 2 & Shenmue 2. But hey, it's playable now for anyone who wants a copy so fuck it.

How does it compare to the PS2 version? Well there seem to be some pluses and minuses. The PS2 version is better overall, but who knows if the Dreamcast copy was ever fully optimized to be the best it possibly could be. With the fact that Unreal and Quake were both better on the Dreamcast, I'd say Gearbox didn't bother getting this version fully polished when they probably knew for awhile it was going to get canned. PS2 definitely has better controls thanks to the lack of a second stick and second set of shoulder buttons on the DC pad...but the DC controls are still surprisingly good thanks to some nifty customizing they did, where pressing the left trigger acts as a shift to change all the other buttons to a different command. Kind of like what you'd see in a console RPG port of something like Dragon Age.

This version supposedly uses the DC keyboard and mouse too, but I don't have those anymore. If so, obviously that would be the way to play it.

Graphically it's pretty similar to PS2, but the PS2 seems to have a higher polygon count....environments don't look as sharp on the DC. But the Dreamcast version seems to have better lighting and special effects here and there....at least so far. But the one area where  the PS2 version is the definite winner is the loading times. Loading was nice and quick on the PS2. The Dreamcast version seems to load twice as much and three times as slow as the PS2 build. For a game back in 2000 it wasn't horrible, but still a bit much. But again, I'm sure they would have been able to fix this in a retail copy.

All in all though, really cool to be able to experience this on the Dreamcast. Well worth the $20.

Samsung Galaxy is the top of the line Android phones, but I've been a pretty devoted consume of Sony smart phones for the past few years (that makes me unwashed Android user). Their Xperia line of phones has served me extremely well. I've found them a lot easier to use than anything Samsung has released.They're not quite as powerful mind you, but they've always been effecient. Plus they work especially well when connecting them to the PS4 and PSN network. Not sure I'd 100% recommend them to everyone, but they are definitely something to consider.

robio said:

You already have a Raspberry Pi. What on earth do you need a SNES classic for? You've already seen the light dammit!

Its not for me!