Re: Off Topic
Posted: Wed Jun 05, 2013 9:28 pm
I guess we'll have to wait and see, though it does seem odd, given that every day we were greeted by a most gleeful countdown mocking us and our impending frustration.
The new layout is horrible in my opinion. Only thing I like is how you can make channel trailer. I need to find someone to make me epic channel trailerMaster wrote:I guess we'll have to wait and see, though it does seem odd, given that every day we were greeted by a most gleeful countdown mocking us and our impending frustration.
I noticed that, but I seen that for example 7zyzz7 has banner too. I did not know YouTube applied that too automaticly, and as we all know, Zyzz died in 2011Master wrote:It would seem the change has only been enforced on inactive accounts at the moment, my backup channel was changed.
How on earth is bland generic futuristic city better then Pac-Village? And I can usually tolerate character design changes (take a look at Spyro and Crash's newer games. Design is pretty bad, but characters are still more-less same - Crash is still really funny), but making Pac-Man into kid is something I will not stand for. It's not who the character is. Even TMNT reboots use still personality and turtles still act more-less same. That's not the case with Pac-Man. Imagine if Nintendo made a Kirby game where Kirby can fully talk and made him really agressive and threatning. That would be terrible. Companies should stick with same character personality always. Changing design is ok but I still find it unnecessary.sergiomonty wrote:According to OCG
I'm not a fan = I can't find an artstyle more attractive than the other.
Doesn't change the fact that I still like it. To be honest, I respect most of your comments, but I couldn't care less about your childhood. The game is clearly designed to appeal to the current generation, that's it. Even Sonic went through that weird phase. Rayman's situation is....slightly similar. However, if the game is good or not, that's a different matter. You can't say it's gonna suck just because it's not the same thing you've seen over and over again.OldClassicGamer wrote:How on earth is bland generic futuristic city better then Pac-Village? And I can usually tolerate character design changes (take a look at Spyro and Crash's newer games. Design is pretty bad, but characters are still more-less same - Crash is still really funny), but making Pac-Man into kid is something I will not stand for. It's not who the character is. Even TMNT reboots use still personality and turtles still act more-less same. That's not the case with Pac-Man. Imagine if Nintendo made a Kirby game where Kirby can fully talk and made him really agressive and threatning. That would be terrible. Companies should stick with same character personality always. Changing design is ok but I still find it unnecessary.sergiomonty wrote:According to OCG
I'm not a fan = I can't find an artstyle more attractive than the other.
Aw god dammit, it's just invisible to me due to my black layout!Keane wrote:Search option is located next to About.
Also, One Channel is fucking horrible.
Pac-Man Party was hated by fans so I assumed that Namco wised up and that new Pac-Man game will be like World series. Take a look at horrible game Bomberman Act Zero. It was different from older games, fans hated it, Hudson Soft made future Bomberman games like older games.sergiomonty wrote:Doesn't change the fact that I still like it. To be honest, I respect most of your comments, but I couldn't care less about your childhood. The game is clearly designed to appeal to the current generation, that's it. Even Sonic went through that weird phase. Rayman's situation is....slightly similar. However, if the game is good or not, that's a different matter. You can't say it's gonna suck just because it's not the same thing you've seen over and over again.OldClassicGamer wrote:How on earth is bland generic futuristic city better then Pac-Village? And I can usually tolerate character design changes (take a look at Spyro and Crash's newer games. Design is pretty bad, but characters are still more-less same - Crash is still really funny), but making Pac-Man into kid is something I will not stand for. It's not who the character is. Even TMNT reboots use still personality and turtles still act more-less same. That's not the case with Pac-Man. Imagine if Nintendo made a Kirby game where Kirby can fully talk and made him really agressive and threatning. That would be terrible. Companies should stick with same character personality always. Changing design is ok but I still find it unnecessary.sergiomonty wrote:According to OCG
I'm not a fan = I can't find an artstyle more attractive than the other.
The tv show sucks? sure it does. The videogame? we can't tell, Pac-Man doesn't seem to talk, so his "child-like" personality can be hidden perfectly for those who don't like that. And chameleon Pac-man seems like an interesting concept that could give variation to the game.
I must accept that the chomp-based combat looks clunky, but who knows, maybe it's self aimed.
Oh, and... Ehem...
Nintendo made a Kirby game where kirby can't swallow or float.
That made a huge polemic amongst fans, but still managed to be a great game.
-----
Also, I can't believe you're making such an scandal at this point. The franchise has been rebooted since Pac-Man Party:
I would be all for an updated 3D Pac-Man game if it managed to show a trailer that doesn't make the game look bland and already seem unbelievably repetitive in the trailer. Seriously, it's just him munching on stuff. I don't see any platforming or maybe a puzzle, perhaps some action. At least show us that the entire game doesn't take place in purple and blue Uninspired "We Can't Think of Anything Creative" Futuristic City. I think it's actually that damn city that just dissapoints me so much. Not a single pixel looks like anyone who worked on those models even gave a shit and are just waiting for their money to come in. Bland. Bland! BLAND!sergiomonty wrote:You can't say it's gonna suck just because it's not the same thing you've seen over and over again.
The idea of having power-ups is actually the most interesting thing in the trailer (Sadly) but there's no telling whether they will be good game changers or bullshit. And so far this game has show a lot of the latter.sergiomonty wrote:And chameleon Pac-man seems like an interesting concept that could give variation to the game.
If it's clunky then the gameplay sucks, and if it's self aimed then the game is too easy. Either way, a 3D game about eating things is fucking stupid. Be honest now, what is more appealing: Platforming trough space and defeating enemies that have clever locations with Mario, or being put in an empty circle with a bunch of ghosts thrown in it, walking up to them, and eating them with Pac-Man?sergiomonty wrote:I must accept that the chomp-based combat looks clunky, but who knows, maybe it's self aimed.
And many people hated it because it wasn't like usual Kirby. I'm surprised they're giving yarn another go with Yoshi. However, Epic Yarn looked like a good game in the trailer, and it was. Ghostly Adventures needs a little more of that good stuff.sergiomonty wrote:Nintendo made a Kirby game where kirby can't swallow or float.That made a huge polemic amongst fans, but still managed to be a great game
I wouldn't mind it being a Mario Party clone if it was decent. Generic visuals, lame minigames, and those kind of "The reboot needs to introduce new figures" characters. Why would you play as that snowman guy? I wanna be Pac-Man.sergiomonty wrote:Also, I can't believe you're making such an scandal at this point. The franchise has been rebooted since Pac-Man Party