crispy4000

Of course, this is the weekend I change ISPs. I probably won't get to play again until Monday.

They had a stage demo at E3:

PS4 has had a stellar year so far. God of War, Detroit, Yakuza 6 and Shadow of the Colossus was a strong line-up of exclusives for the first half. A few 'console exclusives' as well, for whatever that's worth.

I feel like Q1 next year is so stacked, they might as well delay to the Spring at earliest.

Since it wasn't posted here, the new trailer.

That's probably the shared experience of most people who played Melee at the time of release. Not everyone who owned a Gamecube prefers Melee to SSB4, but it's definitely not a popular opinion anymore to hold Brawl in higher esteem. This is a problem in most fighting games though. The competitive community naturally gravitates towards the character believed to be the best. But since Smash is mascot-based, there should be additional pressure for no character to be OP. It's actually been a bigger problem with Brawl (Metaknight) and 4 (Bayonetta) than Melee's Fox. A lot of people are happy to see Smash 4 being shelved because of the Bayonetta effect. The biggest culprit is L-canceling with those triggers. It's not only a poor mechanic from a design standpoint, but terrible for your hands after years of playing Melee. Thankfully, most platform fighters have moved away from that. Even those citing Melee as an inspiration. Wavedashing would come second, but it'd be fully addressed if the game let you assign block to a face button. I tend to put it on the Gamecube controller's X button for Icons, Rivals and PM.

This looks cool. Is this a new developer?

Dang. Anyways, resetera seems to think the split is this, through May: PS4 ~ 1.53 million NSW ~ 1.20 million XB1 ~ 1.13 million

What's your source on this? I miss the time when NPD gave actual hardware numbers.

Kind of ballsy to predict that Smash or Pokemon won't make Top 10. There were 3 Switch games in the top 10 last year, even with Nintendo's digital sales excluded.

Another notable game where better technology and an attempt at 'modernization' didn't help. I haven't played FFXV yet, but it doesn't sound like it brought the franchise back to its former glory either.

8 technically wasn't on the SNES. Rockman & Forte was. I actually don't mind 8 as much as 7's style. The sprites and animations in 7 are just really bad for judging jump distances.

Megaman is the big exception in my book. Megaman 7 was so jarring. It took Capcom until X to hit their stride on the SNES.

Reinvention is definitely good for that franchise, but I could also see Infinite being as polarizing to fans as 343i's other entries. If they do go open world with it, it'd be hard to reconcile that with the linear design with open spaces that Halo is known for. The current consoles would allow them to try it, sure. It might also end up being the wrong approach. A larger canvas doesn't necessarily result in a more prized picture. I feel much of the same applies to this talk about technology and modern game design.

I'm actually happy this game is coming this year. It should make up a little for so many games getting pushed for RDR2.

Nothing. I was just wanting to discuss how fun the NES ports still are. It all depends on the nature of what the restrictions mean for the game design. I've beaten both versions of TMNT2, and while I prefer the arcade, I'd still say both games work out similarly enough to each other in the end. Konami did an excellent job considering the power difference. It was a fantastic port. This might appear totally unrelated, but what are your feelings about Halo Infinite potentially being an open world FPS?

And they still ended up being better beat'em ups than pretty much anything else on the system. I bet most people experienced, or beat, TMNT2 at home on the NES.

Well, of course. The NES wasn't as powerful as new arcade hardware at the time. I was thinking more about when arcade to NES conversions resulted in a crap game.

TMNT might not be the best example. The NES ports were still awesome in their own right.

Less limitations and compromises is good, overall. But it's not always a net positive for a particular game or franchise. Or industry trends, depending on what you like. Compare BoTW's reception with previous Zelda games. Nintendo definitely needed an HD console to to pull it off. Lots of people ate it up and called it the best Zelda ever. But there's others like me who really don't think the freedom to make something like BoTW resulted in a stronger game. I might have preferred Skyward Sword on the whole. I'm still glad BoTW is what it was. At least in the context of that series, BoTW's design felt fresh.

I love RE4's campiness, personally. I don't often get into unsettling survival horror games, so the fact that it took some of the edge off was appreciated in my book. The whole Salazar chapter was so much fun.

Basically, what Bjomesphat said. RE4 wouldn't be as good as it is without some breaks too. The only thing I'd really criticize is the last boss, who felt a little too weak sauce. Especially up against the rocket launcher.

For me, I mainly feel that way about classic Resident Evil. Tank controls with static camera angles is where I personally draw the line. REmake still is worth suffering through it for. I'm happy to see RE2 at E3 abandon them.

It's really not though, when pacing encompasses all of that and level design, balance, spacing of plot points, etc. The game has aged wonderfully, IMO, as a result of the way those pieces come together. Not because it did one super-specific thing better than any other game back then, or now. So I'll gladly stick with 'pacing.' That's more about trend-setting than what RE4 is on its own, granted.

Never said it was. But if it's not, it's up there. Totally agreed on Bioshock, btw. Still a fantastic game. I don't understanding why there would need to be something else. Especially when pacing compasses so many things.