Drolpiraat wrote:
Oh but it does. There are people who, unlike you, not only play a game simply for its gameplay, but also for its story, environments, music, etc. Are you saying this is only important in tv shows?
I hate to say this, but yes. Well, movies too.
Drolpiraat wrote:True, Rayman 3 is not without its flaws, just like Rayman 2. The combat is often criticized in both games, and let's admit that Rayman 2's combat was worse than Rayman 3's. Rayman 2 also had less content. So why is it that many here think Rayman 2 is still a better game?
The combat in Rayman 2 is not worse. It's just basic. Why, you say? because the combat was not the focus. The focus was almost entirely in the platforming and the puzzle solving. Combat was more like a minigame in Rayman 2. In Rayman 3 it is a chore.
Critizicing the content of a N64 game is JUST. PLAIN. CHEAP. Seriously, we're being chronologically fair and you had to come up with content? if that's the case then Rayman Legends is the best Rayman game because it has online. The content in Rayman 2 was okay. Just take every other N64 game, like, let's say, Yoshi's Story, or even Super Mario 64. Do these games have more content than Rayman 2? For it's era, Rayman 2 has a pretty amount of content. And this is said by someone who played Rayman 2 a few years ago.
Yep, you guessed it. Because the Hall of Doors was starry and beautiful. The overall feeling (which depends largely on the atmosphere) of the game was simply better.
I didn't guess, then. The world is pretty and interesting for the age the game was released. But it's not the final appeal of the game in any way.
I agree, that was quite bad in Rayman 3. I hope they never do that again. But it didn't matter: Rayman 3's worlds had a better atmosphere and were quite a lot more interesting than the levels in Rayman Legends, which is why I will still replay Rayman 3 more than Rayman Legends (and Origins).
You're turning a terrible game design decision into a positive? woah... I... I guess you truly love the game but... well... ehm... woah.
Since when does every game need multiplayer?
It's not necessary, but it's a well received plus if added correctly. Rayman Legends added it correctly and made it innovative (At least on the Wii U... and partially on the PS Vita)
Either way, Kung Foot only gives hours of entertainment if you're willing to play the same game over and over and over again.
Like Call of Duty, Halo, Madden, etc. All of them are the exact same game when you replay them. The different strategies are what make it different everytime.
So why do you even prefer Rayman 2?
For the time it was released it was perfect. It has the perfect amount of content. Rayman 3 is a Gamecube game. For its standards it truly needed a little more content. Sometimes I feel like Rayman 3 is even shorter than Rayman 2.
Excuse me? Rayman Legends is far more linear than the 3D Rayman games. There are only a few levels I can name that weren't extremely linear in Rayman Legends, and they were: Mansion of the Deep, the Amazing Maze, uh... hmm... can't find any others at the moment.
Sure. Please name a few in Rayman 3.
I agree that Rayman Legends has a lot better platforming. You have to think about which path you take a lot in the invasion levels, for example. But a lot of that can be very frustrating. It's trial-and-error.
It's not like in Rayman 3 you had to restart the entire world if you didn't get the perfect amount of jewels with a perfect timing in one single area of one single level, right? That wouldn't be frustrating anyways, right?
Rayman 2 and 3 focused on the journey more than the platforming
No. Rayman 2 was almost entirely platforming. Which I appreciate.
This makes me wonder whether anyone can even compare Legends with Rayman 3.
Rayman 3 is for most the least liked in the original trilogy. The original trilogy, though, is considered like the symbol of perfection for the franchise. Newcomers like Origins and Legends are controversial because they're a return from the dark Rabbids era... and they make things a little different compared to previous entries. While Origins was great, it was terribly flawed despite of how good it was, so it couldn't enter the top 3 (at least for most of us), but Legends fixed those flaws and by how great it is, it truly seems like it wants to steal the third place. That's why there's a comparison between Rayman 3 and Rayman Legends. To see if a newcomer has finally reached enough glory to beat nostalgia.
I know for sure that I like Rayman 3 a lot more and will still replay it more than Rayman Legends, which I will likely never touch again after I unlock the final skins.
Meh. Your personal tastes I guess
I also know why I like it more. I tried to explain that in my last few posts and whether that makes sense to you or not is entirely up to you. I'm sure a lot of people share my opinion though, so you might want to think about it just a little.
Don't worry, I understand
I mean... it's what you like, isn't it? For a reason I prefer Super Mario Sunshine over Super Mario 64. It's not general consensus, it's just personal preference.
(Rayfist you're weak ¬¬)
Don't do this to me </3