Vastet's forum posts

  • 26 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Avatar image for Vastet
Vastet

2568

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

9

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

#1 Vastet
Member since 2004 • 2568 Posts

[QUOTE="vitrobliss"]Wow sheep are really insecure when it comes to handhelds.
They want the PSP to go away so badly, it's getting kind of sad.Maestri09

Kind of. Remember that Nintendo hasn't won any "system war" in the last ten years, so the fact that the DS is beating the PSP is a significant victory for Nintendo fans. It's also the more sweeter the fact that when the PSP was announced, nearly everyone wrote Nintendo off and sang the praises of Sony. This was supposed to be it; Sony was supposed deal Nintendo the final blow and become king of all console types with the PSP.

Now it looks like the PSP may be the first fall in Sony's imminent tumble.

Not quite accurate. I don't remember exactly when Sega stopped production on the Game Gear, but it was not 10 years ago. And there was a Game Gear compatible system back in 2000 or 2001 as well. And beyond cows, I don't think there were really all that many people who truly believed that Nintendo was about to be unseated. I have been quite surprised just how much of a victory the PSP has been, especially considering that it costs more than a PS2.
Avatar image for Vastet
Vastet

2568

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

9

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

#2 Vastet
Member since 2004 • 2568 Posts
[QUOTE="jetpower3"]If that makes the PSP a flop, what does that make the GC in comparison to PS2? bulletbill
saleswise it is a flop, but in profit, it passed the PS2's success in that catagorie.

Care to prove that?
Avatar image for Vastet
Vastet

2568

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

9

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

#3 Vastet
Member since 2004 • 2568 Posts
[QUOTE="gcuber123"]US sales for June:

DS 593k
PS2 312k
360 277k
PSP 221k
XBX 24k

Self owned. You just proved it's success, not it's failure. :lol:
Avatar image for Vastet
Vastet

2568

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

9

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

#4 Vastet
Member since 2004 • 2568 Posts
[QUOTE="Vastet"][QUOTE="Dave_NBF"][QUOTE="Vastet"][QUOTE="Dave_NBF"][QUOTE="Vastet"][QUOTE="Dave_NBF"]

If you are a console fan you cannot say "well it is EASIER to just point and click."  Yes I agree in theory it is easier because you have your whole hand to move the mouse vs just a thumb.  HOWEVER, when EVERYONE is using the same set-up, it solely relies on accuracy and reflexes.  You need talent to be able to judge your hand movements, mouse control, aim sights, etc. It all depends on relexes because you have much less time to react to an enemy or object than in a controller game...even with auto assist;)

Controller users have a harder time adjusting to the controls, but once that is mastered, it really just relies on knowing the maps and player behavior because there is not MUCH skill in using a controller.  Auto assist, slow reaction times, etc are just not good for FPS.  A 10 sensitivity is slower than a 1 sensitivity in CS:S.  Most people cant play snipers with a 10 sensitivity in halo2 because you lose too much control. 

It is no comparison. More skill is needed when playing FPS with keyboard in mouse for the previously stated reasons. Its reflex based on top of all the other things (map knowledge, player strats/behavior patterns, etc). 

Dave_NBF

I hate to break it to you, but you didn't end anything. The debate will rage on.

actually, I hate to break it to YOU, but refute ONE thing in my post.  You can't. Debated ended, you lose,  like usual.

Rofl. Self owned. I didn't attempt to refute anything because I agree with it. :lol: And yet the debate will rage on anyway.

actaully you just owned yourself harder because I wasnt talking to you but answering your post.  I was referring to anyone to refute my post.  Not you in particular. I did not know if you agreed or did not.  I was merely saying it should end because there is nothing to refute, hence, end the debate.

Self owned even harder! Rofl. This is funny. You suggested I lost something. The only thing I could have lost is an argument, yet I didn't participate in one. Hence you're just making a fool of yourself, and I'm loving it. :lol:

wow just wow. That made no sense, and you obviously have no idea what the hell you are talking about. Keep being like Mcdonalds and just "lovin it" then. 

It didn't make sense? Rofl. I might as well be talking to a rock. You go ahead and keep acting like a foolish overly defensive child with no intellect to back him up, and I'll go have intelligent discussion with other people. :lol:
Avatar image for Vastet
Vastet

2568

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

9

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

#5 Vastet
Member since 2004 • 2568 Posts
[QUOTE="Vastet"][QUOTE="Dave_NBF"][QUOTE="Vastet"][QUOTE="Dave_NBF"]

If you are a console fan you cannot say "well it is EASIER to just point and click."  Yes I agree in theory it is easier because you have your whole hand to move the mouse vs just a thumb.  HOWEVER, when EVERYONE is using the same set-up, it solely relies on accuracy and reflexes.  You need talent to be able to judge your hand movements, mouse control, aim sights, etc. It all depends on relexes because you have much less time to react to an enemy or object than in a controller game...even with auto assist;)

Controller users have a harder time adjusting to the controls, but once that is mastered, it really just relies on knowing the maps and player behavior because there is not MUCH skill in using a controller.  Auto assist, slow reaction times, etc are just not good for FPS.  A 10 sensitivity is slower than a 1 sensitivity in CS:S.  Most people cant play snipers with a 10 sensitivity in halo2 because you lose too much control. 

It is no comparison. More skill is needed when playing FPS with keyboard in mouse for the previously stated reasons. Its reflex based on top of all the other things (map knowledge, player strats/behavior patterns, etc). 

Dave_NBF

I hate to break it to you, but you didn't end anything. The debate will rage on.

actually, I hate to break it to YOU, but refute ONE thing in my post.  You can't. Debated ended, you lose,  like usual.

Rofl. Self owned. I didn't attempt to refute anything because I agree with it. :lol: And yet the debate will rage on anyway.

actaully you just owned yourself harder because I wasnt talking to you but answering your post.  I was referring to anyone to refute my post.  Not you in particular. I did not know if you agreed or did not.  I was merely saying it should end because there is nothing to refute, hence, end the debate.

Self owned even harder! Rofl. This is funny. You suggested I lost something. The only thing I could have lost is an argument, yet I didn't participate in one. Hence you're just making a fool of yourself, and I'm loving it. :lol:
Avatar image for Vastet
Vastet

2568

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

9

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

#6 Vastet
Member since 2004 • 2568 Posts
[QUOTE="Vastet"][QUOTE="Dave_NBF"]

If you are a console fan you cannot say "well it is EASIER to just point and click."  Yes I agree in theory it is easier because you have your whole hand to move the mouse vs just a thumb.  HOWEVER, when EVERYONE is using the same set-up, it solely relies on accuracy and reflexes.  You need talent to be able to judge your hand movements, mouse control, aim sights, etc. It all depends on relexes because you have much less time to react to an enemy or object than in a controller game...even with auto assist;)

Controller users have a harder time adjusting to the controls, but once that is mastered, it really just relies on knowing the maps and player behavior because there is not MUCH skill in using a controller.  Auto assist, slow reaction times, etc are just not good for FPS.  A 10 sensitivity is slower than a 1 sensitivity in CS:S.  Most people cant play snipers with a 10 sensitivity in halo2 because you lose too much control. 

It is no comparison. More skill is needed when playing FPS with keyboard in mouse for the previously stated reasons. Its reflex based on top of all the other things (map knowledge, player strats/behavior patterns, etc). 

Dave_NBF

I hate to break it to you, but you didn't end anything. The debate will rage on.

actually, I hate to break it to YOU, but refute ONE thing in my post.  You can't. Debated ended, you lose,  like usual.

Rofl. Self owned. I didn't attempt to refute anything because I agree with it. :lol: And yet the debate will rage on anyway.
Avatar image for Vastet
Vastet

2568

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

9

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

#7 Vastet
Member since 2004 • 2568 Posts

If you are a console fan you cannot say "well it is EASIER to just point and click."  Yes I agree in theory it is easier because you have your whole hand to move the mouse vs just a thumb.  HOWEVER, when EVERYONE is using the same set-up, it solely relies on accuracy and reflexes.  You need talent to be able to judge your hand movements, mouse control, aim sights, etc. It all depends on relexes because you have much less time to react to an enemy or object than in a controller game...even with auto assist;)

Controller users have a harder time adjusting to the controls, but once that is mastered, it really just relies on knowing the maps and player behavior because there is not MUCH skill in using a controller.  Auto assist, slow reaction times, etc are just not good for FPS.  A 10 sensitivity is slower than a 1 sensitivity in CS:S.  Most people cant play snipers with a 10 sensitivity in halo2 because you lose too much control. 

It is no comparison. More skill is needed when playing FPS with keyboard in mouse for the previously stated reasons. Its reflex based on top of all the other things (map knowledge, player strats/behavior patterns, etc). 

Dave_NBF
I hate to break it to you, but you didn't end anything. The debate will rage on.
Avatar image for Vastet
Vastet

2568

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

9

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

#8 Vastet
Member since 2004 • 2568 Posts
Actually I didn't die my first time through, though I had more than three hearts. I believe I got up to 15 before starting a new game and trying it without getting any heart bonus'. And no, I suppose it's not a requirement that you die in order to get a perfect score. But it doesn't feel like a game if you can't die. It feels more like a movie that you press buttons here and there to advance through. Granted, maybe I'm just better at it than some people. But this isn't the first time I have thought a game could have been better if it were harder. Heck, the strongest guys in the game(-bosses) were those axe wielding suits of armour. And it was no difficult feat to take them out without getting smacked once.
Avatar image for Vastet
Vastet

2568

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

9

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

#9 Vastet
Member since 2004 • 2568 Posts
[QUOTE="Vastet"][QUOTE="Uhcip"][QUOTE="Vastet"][QUOTE="Uhcip"][QUOTE="Vastet"][QUOTE="yoshi_64"][QUOTE="Vastet"]If the game is even moderately difficult to beat I'll be happy. That's Zelda's greatest flaw. You can beat the game without dying once. It is in fact one of the reasons I shake my head at anyone who claims it ever deserved a 10. Uhcip
Are you talking about OoT? It definately deserves the 10. I have no idea what you're talking about. WW was easy, but playing the old Zelda games, and you may find yourself dieing a few times. Especially the first game

OOT might have deserved a 10 if it didn't cater to children and wasn't insanely easy to beat. You fail.



catered to children ?
insanely easy ?
you must be very 'hard core'

I am, though I suspect that was intended as sarcasm. I do own the game and do enjoy playing it, but it did not deserve a 10.



thats your opinion
state it so please :)
its too hard to tell fanboys and gamers apart in this forum

99% of all posts in this forum is opinion. :P



hey you know what i mean :)

lol. Let me put it this way. I consider OOT a must play game. But I beat the game with 3 hearts without even getting the double hp. I consider that too far easy. Trying to get into the childish part would take awhile, but I doubt there are many people around my age who would deny it had a kids atmosphere. Since it's so easy and doesn't appeal to more age groups I wouldn't have given it more than a 9.5 at the very most.
Avatar image for Vastet
Vastet

2568

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

9

Followers

Reviews: 12

User Lists: 0

#10 Vastet
Member since 2004 • 2568 Posts
[QUOTE="Vastet"][QUOTE="Uhcip"][QUOTE="Vastet"][QUOTE="yoshi_64"][QUOTE="Vastet"]If the game is even moderately difficult to beat I'll be happy. That's Zelda's greatest flaw. You can beat the game without dying once. It is in fact one of the reasons I shake my head at anyone who claims it ever deserved a 10. Uhcip
Are you talking about OoT? It definately deserves the 10. I have no idea what you're talking about. WW was easy, but playing the old Zelda games, and you may find yourself dieing a few times. Especially the first game

OOT might have deserved a 10 if it didn't cater to children and wasn't insanely easy to beat. You fail.



catered to children ?
insanely easy ?
you must be very 'hard core'

I am, though I suspect that was intended as sarcasm. I do own the game and do enjoy playing it, but it did not deserve a 10.



thats your opinion
state it so please :)
its too hard to tell fanboys and gamers apart in this forum

99% of all posts in this forum is opinion. :P
  • 26 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3