Rayman Pirate-Community

oh god... that's even worse than the situation with the Wii/Wii U confusion on radio.

It is not the first time I see people typing badly Ancel's name. *Cough* Portuguese websites *Cough*.

*cough* mexican forums *cough*

Andale andale, arrib-*cough cough hack*

OK, it isn't this Thursday either:

http://www.nintendolife.com/news/2013/0 ... 013_europe

I guess the release of the Online Challenges will be day 25th April. It is a national holiday in here.

And by the way, I just read this interview: http://www.nintendolife.com/news/2013/0 ... lenge_mode

Hm, atleast we know that it's still coming, I guess the wait will be somewhat worthwhile.
I'm curious, given Legend's almost complete state, would it appear at E3? Or would Ubi just ignore it?

Of course they wouldn't ignore it. After all the hate the game has received, they must come up with something BIG to recover the hype of those whiny bitches. Also... something about that interview tells me that they're going for a third installment in the Origins/Legends series....

Master4lyf1 wrote:I'm curious, given Legend's almost complete state, would it appear at E3? Or would Ubi just ignore it?

Theu just can't ignore it with all the fame the new Rayman serie gathered (especially with the musical levels in demos). As E3 is a great place for advertising and boost up the incoming sales of many games for the companies which produce impressive games (or at least the most waited ones), it would be the best error Ubisoft could make since the continuation of teh lil' Rabbids...

The question is not about Ubi showing off some improvements to RL during E3, the question is about them showing them off with pride during E3, e.g. bringing the game to their major presentation and pretending nothing happened.

EDIT:

Nintendo Life interview wrote:NL: Rayman Legends is arguably built around the Wii U GamePad. How have you adapted the game for PS3 and 360?
EM: On Xbox 360 and PS3 we decided to keep Murfy as one of the main characters and one of the new features of the game. We think we found a good way to adapt Murfy’s gameplay to 360 and PS3 and will detail how later, so stay tuned!

So we have official confirmation of Murfy being there in PS360 version... in some capacity. Now what do we expect? Rayman Legends, Better With Kinect? Quick time events on the right stick? Multiplatform online multiplayer with Wii U owners stuck as Murfy? The possibilities are neverending!

On a serious note: the answer above seems to conflict with idea of Murfy being AI-controlled (using phrase "Murfy's gameplay" just sounds wrong with no Murfy's gameplay to me), so I'd take that as a hint towards Murfy being somewhat controllable on PS360s.

Eh... I don't know, if you need an Xbox controller to play as Murphy with the analog stick that would suck. The point of Murphy is the touch screen... I don't even know how are they going to try to make it work, with a normal controller it would feel very limited.

Anyways... I suspected it, since the box art of the PS360 versions clearly show Murphy (you can see the box art in the pre-order section of the official website). Then again...we just got more of Ubisoft's lies, Murphy is not exclusive anymore. Not the big deal, but it still depresses me.

sergiomonty wrote:Eh... I don't know, if you need an Xbox controller to play as Murphy with the analog stick that would suck. The point of Murphy is the touch screen... I don't even know how are they going to try to make it work, with a normal controller it would feel very limited.

Maybe it's Quick-Time Events... people nowadays seem to love incorporating QTEs everywhere.

Shrooblord wrote:

sergiomonty wrote:Eh... I don't know, if you need an Xbox controller to play as Murphy with the analog stick that would suck. The point of Murphy is the touch screen... I don't even know how are they going to try to make it work, with a normal controller it would feel very limited.

Maybe it's Quick-Time Events... people nowadays seem to love incorporating QTEs everywhere.

...

Seriously, what is wrong with quick-time events? Maybe they were overused in Battlefield 3 to be extraordinarily specific, but other than virtually that sole game they're simply there to add gameplay variety. If people can complain about quick-time events, they should be able to complain far more about the fact that Metal Gear games are now pretty short games with massive cutscenes taking up the majority. However, I don't complain about that, because that's the kind of game it is. I think that quick-time events are a lot of fun, and for the most part remove tedium (excluding Battlefield 3).

Well, the main problem with quicktime events is that they don't really add much to the gameplay. You don't know when one is coming, and when you notice the giant green button on the screen asking to be pushed, the times you push it, you don't really feel like you've made progress. It's just..."meh, whatever, let's continue with the story". And the times you die it doesn't even feel like you lost, you just feel like the game is shitting on you. Quicktime events are obviously not a pain in the ass like Jontron says here, but they don't really add anything proportional to the experience.Some people like quicktime events, and yeah, sometimes they're well placed and actually feel like you're playing the game and are completely concentrated on what's going on, and why not?, they indeed require some good reflexes, but they're really just not my cup of tea... for me, they're the most saddening way to add "artificial" difficulty to a game.

Understandable indeed, however the amout people complain about them is not proportional to the amount they actually appear in games. They're not nearly as common as people say they are, it's moreorless just one of those "over-exaggerated rumours" that only holds a partial truth.

Aren't quicktime events present in Rabbids Go Home for Wii?

I like how they were done in Blinx 2:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTpZdC95tZw&t=2m18s
because they're clearly announced even if the bloody Operator doesn't yell in your face about it (really, sometimes this game just holds you by the hand like you're a five-year old trying to cross a busy road, when in fact you're a perfectly operational, mobile and agile eighty-two-year old trying to cross a busy road - sheesh, game, I know what to do already).

But I like QTEs best when they're optional, like, they add something to the game if you execute them well, but you're free to ignore or miss them without (m)any consequences.

It's a gameplay mechanic, that's all really. They (the good ones, basically the vast majority) let you do things you wouldn't normally be able to do, while you still sort of feel like you're doing it.

Yes - I can see how they can make cutscenes more interesting because they kind of add to the experience of you causing stuff that happens in the cutscene, but they do have to be fair QTEs, of course.

I don't recall a QTE ever making me feel like I was doing something. They just aren't entertaining to me. Sure, they aren't always that annoying either, but I've never felt like they needed to exist.