Bradandez wrote:Ambidextroid wrote:But they're the best games in the universe so it's fine
Rayman 1 and 2? Best games in the universe?
*insert big picture here*
I believe you should do an effort to accept more the opinions of the others, not to mention to use smaller images.
Bradandez wrote:Shrooblord wrote:I like the idea of chronology being a factor in not being able to replay a boss; you beat the Guardian; he's dead. But then revisiting some levels and having doors reshut and the likes as if you've travelled back in time, that doesn't fit in that theory, so that's plain weird.
That's the fatal flaw in Rayman 2, beside the hand holding. There is no replay value. After you beat the game, the levels become barren and boring.
Adsolution wrote:Well, that's not really a flaw, that's just how the game was designed. I don't really know what they could have done to change that aside from changing the core gameplay itself.
+1
@Brad I would like you to explain then why in all these years I've lost my count of how many times I 100% Rayman 2 and not getting enough of it. Sure, the bosses could be replayed but Shroob's point has got some logic. I really don't think it harms the game as much as you are giving the impression. Fatal? Yes, right.
Everytime I read your posts lately concerning the old games, I start to believe more that you want to force people to like Rayman Origins rather than accepting the points of view of others by proving from point A to point B that RO is the best game, just because. I'm sorry to tell you this. Don't get me started on game preferences because I respect people's opinions as long they justify them properly. I don't have nothing else to add, just interpret this as an observation.
@Shroob Is it me or there's something different in your profile today?
I'l be right back with them!
