I have watched that movie every few weeks recently, it's so infinitely watchable.
It really is. I watched it a few weeks ago. The first time I saw it as an adult, I was stunned that it really was that good, and my childhood memories weren't tricking me. (He-Maaaaaaaaaaaaaaan!)
It really is. I watched it a few weeks ago. The first time I saw it as an adult, I was stunned that it really was that good, and my childhood memories weren't tricking me.
One of the times I watched it over the summer, I really paid attention to it. I never noticed how many of the jokes are just phenomenally amazing sexual innuendo.
Lots of Epic Mickey details(that are possibly just rumours, but are supposedly leaked from Game Informer). Discuss.
Epic Mickey looks pretty cool, and I might pick it up if Spector doesn't pull a Scribblenauts. Wikipedia lent credence to the "Disney World" idea, as they cited some job listings looking for animators capable of doing some "concept art of dark versions of Small World, Tomorrowland, Balloonland..." Those quotes have since been removed, probably by Disney itself.
I must say, I really dislike Disney as a company, but its feature films and video game collabs often are AWESOME. I've never played a Kingdom Hearts game all the way through, but the pieces I have played through were magnificent. It was one of the first Action RPGs I saw done correctly.
I don't think Epic Mickey will wind up like Scribblenauts. Everything I've heard about it has pointed more towards Okami, which is pretty fun from what I've played of it.
That's one of my concerns about the game. So far I've been enjoying Okami, but I'm not very far in the game and I can see how it could get repetitive and boring. I wouldn't want Epic Mickey to wind up like that just as much as I wouldn't want it to wind up like Scribblenauts, but right now there's no way to tell until some gameplay videos show up.
I have to agree with it working better as a movie, though. Hopefully it won't have a huge story-to-gameplay ratio. I think that's been a problem with several games lately- the story keeps going on long after the game has worn out its welcome.
Okami is pretty much one of the most repetitive games I've ever played. It may not be so in actuality, but I was bored with it after just a few hours, and it's a 20+ hour game. That fact was even more evident when immediately after that I played Twilight Princess, which was exactly the opposite of boring and tedious. My hope for Epic Mickey is that it can have some of the same gameplay that did make Okami fun, but have better uses for it than having boss battles that can last for half an hour.
I agree with what people say about Okami. It could have been a great game right in line with the 3D Zelda games, like Zelda 64. However, the game was far too spread out. You had to walk a long way to get from place to place. Fighting takes a long time. We always wish Zelda maps were bigger because they are jam-packed with things to do. Okami had lots and lots of empty pointless space that just forced you to walk.
Also, a lot of the things to do in Zelda, are fun, interesting, and unique. For example, you'll see a treasure chest and try to figure out how to get it. In Okami, you'll see 100 trees and have to paint every tree. Interesting game, vs. tedious manual labor.
Which boss and what on earth where you doing? Most bosses take less than ten minutes.
Take note that I specifically said can. And the boss I'm thinking of in particular is Orochi. Who you have to fight THREE times in the game. So if you think about it, the same boss three times, each taking 10 minutes or less, where the method of being him is exactly the same every time, it's basically equivalent to a half hour fight.
It has just occured to me that repeating the Zelda 64 games so many times has given me a somewhat warped view as I usually see how quickly I can finish any boss from the point I figure out it's weakness (In my most recent try, I took down Vovolga crazy fast.). By the third Orochi, I could probably finish it in five minutes as long as I was lucky enough when it comes to attacking the bell.
It has just occured to me that repeating the Zelda 64 games so many times has given me a somewhat warped view as I usually see how quickly I can finish any boss from the point I figure out it's weakness (In my most recent try, I took down Vovolga crazy fast.). By the third Orochi, I could probably finish it in five minutes as long as I was lucky enough when it comes to attacking the bell.
Yeah, I think that is sort of an issue. Bosses are typically about patterns, even across multiple genres. As soon as you recognize the pattern, that's it. If the pattern is too hard, it's too frustrating because you die before you can figure it out. But if the pattern is too easy, it's lame.
I think the way to go is to make a weak spot that is really really hard to figure out, but if you get it will make the fight very quick. However, also make it so straight-up directly attacking will work at least a little bit. That way at least you can do something while you are figuring out the weak spot. Also, if a player manages to live long enough to win without using the weak spot, good for them.
Okami is pretty much one of the most repetitive games I've ever played. It may not be so in actuality, but I was bored with it after just a few hours, and it's a 20+ hour game. That fact was even more evident when immediately after that I played Twilight Princess, which was exactly the opposite of boring and tedious.
Really? I liked Twilight Princess more then I thought I would going in, but it felt a little too by the numbers after Okami. Especially since as interesting as Midna was as a Zelda NPC, she fell flat compared to Issun.
Perhaps I need to play the games side by side again, although it would be quite a time sink to do so.
Really? I liked Twilight Princess more then I thought I would going in, but it felt a little too by the numbers after Okami. Especially since as interesting as Midna was as a Zelda NPC, she fell flat compared to Issun.
I personally found that Twilight Princess had more innovative and varied gameplay mechanics than any Zelda game to date. Also, each dungeon felt completely different from each other, which kept me going through them at a quick pace.
And I'm going to have to disagree with the other statement too. Midna may not be the greatest NPC ever (I'd point to the Uncharted games as the pinnacle for me), but she was downright refreshing compared to Issun, who felt to me like some horrible combination of Navi and Tingle, both of whom I surpremely dislike already.
And I'm going to have to disagree with the other statement too. Midna may not be the greatest NPC ever (I'd point to the Uncharted games as the pinnacle for me), but she was downright refreshing compared to Issun, who felt to me like some horrible combination of Navi and Tingle, both of whom I surpremely dislike already.
My problem is Midna becomes a lot less interesting after the third dungeon when she stopped being overtly evil. There were still some good moments after that, but it felt a little flat compared to the earlier part of the game.
I will concede that Issun definitely talks a lot more then Midna. However, I felt his interruptions to the game were far less disruptive to the game then Navi ever was (aside from the intro stage). I don't get the Tingle comparison though. How did Issun remind you of him?
I don't get the Tingle comparison though. How did Issun remind you of him?
My thought process tends to lump things together in categories that may not be terribly obvious. For me, Tingle represents the epitome of a horribly designed character made specifically for the purpose of being a comic relief and nothing else. I feel like Issun was created to be in that same category. If the creators hadn't tried so hard to make Issun be funny or likeable, I probably would've liked him more. As it is, I find him to be neither.
I don't get the Tingle comparison though. How did Issun remind you of him?
My thought process tends to lump things together in categories that may not be terribly obvious. For me, Tingle represents the epitome of a horribly designed character made specifically for the purpose of being a comic relief and nothing else. I feel like Issun was created to be in that same category. If the creators hadn't tried so hard to make Issun be funny or likeable, I probably would've liked him more. As it is, I find him to be neither.
I can understand actually understand your thought process, even though I disagree with your opinion about Issun. I didn't find Issun's humor to be forced, but if it fell flat for you then I can image that Issun's banter would get tiring very quickly.
I don't get the Tingle comparison though. How did Issun remind you of him?
My thought process tends to lump things together in categories that may not be terribly obvious. For me, Tingle represents the epitome of a horribly designed character made specifically for the purpose of being a comic relief and nothing else. I feel like Issun was created to be in that same category. If the creators hadn't tried so hard to make Issun be funny or likeable, I probably would've liked him more. As it is, I find him to be neither.
I think the exact same way, and I think everyone does subconsiously, whether they think about it or not. Either way, I though Minda was a great NPC, and I loved Twilight Princess, although it doesn't have much replay value at all. I hated Tingle and whoever that cap was in the Minish Cap- fuck that game.
Comments
THEN DIE!
Next time someone asks if you're a god, say "YES!"
I must say, I really dislike Disney as a company, but its feature films and video game collabs often are AWESOME. I've never played a Kingdom Hearts game all the way through, but the pieces I have played through were magnificent. It was one of the first Action RPGs I saw done correctly.
I have to agree with it working better as a movie, though. Hopefully it won't have a huge story-to-gameplay ratio. I think that's been a problem with several games lately- the story keeps going on long after the game has worn out its welcome.
Also, a lot of the things to do in Zelda, are fun, interesting, and unique. For example, you'll see a treasure chest and try to figure out how to get it. In Okami, you'll see 100 trees and have to paint every tree. Interesting game, vs. tedious manual labor.
Oh god, I just looked on Youtube.. the cutscenes.
I think the way to go is to make a weak spot that is really really hard to figure out, but if you get it will make the fight very quick. However, also make it so straight-up directly attacking will work at least a little bit. That way at least you can do something while you are figuring out the weak spot. Also, if a player manages to live long enough to win without using the weak spot, good for them.
Perhaps I need to play the games side by side again, although it would be quite a time sink to do so.
And I'm going to have to disagree with the other statement too. Midna may not be the greatest NPC ever (I'd point to the Uncharted games as the pinnacle for me), but she was downright refreshing compared to Issun, who felt to me like some horrible combination of Navi and Tingle, both of whom I surpremely dislike already.
I will concede that Issun definitely talks a lot more then Midna. However, I felt his interruptions to the game were far less disruptive to the game then Navi ever was (aside from the intro stage). I don't get the Tingle comparison though. How did Issun remind you of him?