- Messages
- 417
- Tings
- 3,550
Bzzit said:Haha just kidding dude, welcome!![]()
Thank you ^^
Bzzit said:Haha just kidding dude, welcome!![]()
On the contrary, my friend. I own around 20 PS3 titles, and only one of those is an FPS. You clearly just aren't looking hard enough.Rayfanboy said:the Xbox 360/PS3 just doesn't have a very big library of games that aren't first-person shooters or gore-fests,
I actually really liked the style, and to be frank if it wasn't for the PS1, PC and (whatever else R1 was originally released on)'s graphical limitations, I'm guessing all of the characters would have had limbs from the start. Hence really, I think they were simply trying to do now what they just couldn't do back then.BzzitTheMoskito said:Rayman Origins Was A good Game when it comes to the platforming/ gameplay. But i dint like how they turned the Moskitos with the limbs, And the Magican Turned to A teensie.
Anyone who didn't think Origin's story was very weak probably needs their head checked, we all share your opinion there. I think.BzzitTheMoskito said:And The Story, Well i think the story was very weak.
Last I remember, that Rayman game wasn't being developed by Ubisoft.BzzitTheMoskito said:And when I read the wiki here, When They Had A Game, Rayman 4, A 3D game, where there is Band Land and other locations from the original game. And Dark Raymans Lair and stuff. It make me Sad that they Cancelled it, It looked like a good game
Not slightly, but a lotGenetic Destiny said:I hope Rayman keeps all his powers at the start of Legends. It'd kinda suck having to find them again. And, the game should be slightly harder than Origins at the least. That game was very hard, but I feel that sequels should always be harder (and better).
This poses some obvious problems.Genetic Destiny said:I feel that sequels should always be harder
Better? Yes.Genetic Destiny said:...sequels should always be harder (and better).
Okay, so Rayman 2 should have been harder than Rayman 1 and Crash Bandicoot 2 should have been harder than Crash Bandicoot? Sorry but I strongly disagree.Genetic Destiny said:I feel that sequels should always be harder
spiraldoor said:This poses some obvious problems.Genetic Destiny said:I feel that sequels should always be harder
Master4lyf1 said:Better? Yes.
Harder? Not necessarily, it's better to polish and refine what was given and make it more fun, rather than to increase diffculty, after all, games are made for entertainment, and increasing difficulty does not necessarily make it more fun.
TeensieKing said:Okay, so Rayman 2 should have been harder than Rayman 1 and Crash Bandicoot 2 should have been harder than Crash Bandicoot? Sorry but I strongly disagree.
I didn't really like Ratchet and Clank 2 that much tbh, and to make matters worse when the third came out (Which expanded on everything which was introduced in the second one), it felt even worse to me, just the fact that looking back on all of the ideas in that game now, they all seem a bit... Half baked.Genetic Destiny said:TeensieKing said:Okay, so Rayman 2 should have been harder than Rayman 1 and Crash Bandicoot 2 should have been harder than Crash Bandicoot? Sorry but I strongly disagree.
I admit that those games were easier than the originals and I had more fun with them (took me years to beat R1 and days to beat R2), but games like Donkey Kong Country 2, and Ratchet & Clank 2 managed to be better than their predecessors while being harder.
RayFan9876 said:I think that he meant sequels with virtually the same gameplay.
Crash Bandicoot games had virtually the same gameplay and if Crash Bandicoot 2 had been harder than the first one I would have never passed it, let alone Crash Bandicoot 3, which I got at the age of 5.RayFan9876 said:I think that he meant sequels with virtually the same gameplay.
TeensieKing said:Crash Bandicoot games had virtually the same gameplay and if Crash Bandicoot 2 had been harder than the first one I would have never passed it, let alone Crash Bandicoot 3, which I got at the age of 5.RayFan9876 said:I think that he meant sequels with virtually the same gameplay.
I have almost exactly the same feel. Maybe for me its just because i also expected more from RO.Haruka said:It is hard for me to admit but now that I played RO three times from the beginning until the end, and tested out co-op, the game feels already old to me and disappointing. It just became the least good Rayman game from all the 4 for me for some reason. As a fan, I noticed failures in it. It isn't a bad game but... it misses something. I'm disappointed now that I see the game wasn't what I expected. I got illuded back in 2011 since I was anxiously waiting for a new Rayman game for 8 years and I was eating the informations I could find in the Daily Bubble. I somehow think they already did that in purpose to bring the excitement to veteran Rayman fans.