Nah, I played on 360. What I mean by "twitch" gameplay is that it's a run 'n' gun shooter more than it's a tactical shooter. Running around like a madman, firing while running, and taking out three guys in as many seconds using auto-aim isn't my idea of what a military shooter should be about. But that's just me. Obviously it's wildly popular for a reason. I just can't get myself to play it over Rainbow Six: Vegas 2 or GRAW 2.
Dude, I hate SF3. The Xbox Live was actually great, I don't experience much lag (ethernet). Pros: Ken, Ryu, Chun Li Cons: The other characters were stupid, the aliens, robots, and mutant dudes were stupid, the last boss was stupid PARRYING = CAPCOM COMPROMISING FOR WHINNY SCRUBS WHO CAN'T REVERSE THROWS TURTLING=OVERRATED. the best SF players play at a very fast pace. the wait for you to jump and dragon punch people are scrubs. Overall:B ps: Note how on SF4, they didn't bring any of the stupid characters from SF3 along. they only brought back the good guys (SF2)
I agree COD4 rules. People who complain about "TWITCHING" are the people who suck. Its the same people who complain about THROWS on Street Fighter. Question to the SF2 Srubs, if throws were "WRONG" then why did they program that in?? I'll give you a hint for Street Fighter, if you anticipate a throw, you can throw them first. its called "REVERSE", when you play the later versions, it says "REVERSAL" . If you block, the tick and immediately go for throw against your opponent, you'll get it. Also throwing ranges differ for each character, so don't try that crap against good Zangief players.
What Auto-aim? Not online pal. Try running around and taking out 5 people like a madman, then getting an airstrike and airstrike their spawn and getting like 4 more kills.
To each his own. But I knew this post would piss you off. haha. I'm a HUGE sf2 fan, but SF3 just seemed to grab my attention and I played that religiously. Though I think I can still hold my own when it comes to sf2: world warrior up to super street fighter 2. But for you to rate sf3 a B, but SF1 an A? Seriously. Respect for old games, but uh...its frustrating as hell to play. I'm going to get ssf2t in HD and play you online. I look forward to see how badass you say you are in SF.
As others have said, online takes care of that. If you want a single player campaign with more tactical shooting, try turning the difficulty up to Veteran. You will get punished for running around like a madman and not using your cover, I guarantee you. And auto-aim (it's closer to assisting rather than a straight auto-aiming) is an option you may turn off.
you got xbox right? I know there are some skilled SF3 players that can parry like every single move, but I don't like that, it deters from the flow of the game. I'll be online. clutchcity93 SF, at that time, was revolutionary. Same with games like Double Dragon, sure they are basic compared to games now, but back then they were awesome.
I bought this game a while back since I enjoyed the first game. For some reason, I didn't seem to enjoy it. I can't really remember why, but I know I only played it for a few hours before putting it away. If no one else has played the game, I might try to pick it back up again sometime. I may have just judged it unfairly. I'm not particularly a big fan of it either, although for mostly different reasons. I should maybe even put up a review later just to offer a different perspective. Don't worry COD4 fans, I'll still give it props where it definitely deserves it. Speaking of which, I need to finish up with some fact-checking so that I can hurry up and post some of the other reviews I was working on. I meant to have more reviews up by this time.
Oh yeah, I realize there's no auto aim online. But I find that both online and off, CoD is going for a much more "arcadey" feel that GRAW or Rainbow Six, which just isn't my bag. I used to be a Quake 2 addict back in the day, but it just doesn't amuse me like it used to. As I already said, I meant "twitch-style gameplay." Where the shooting is more reactionary than tactical. As in, closer to Halo than GRAW. I'll stick with shooters that are more sim. Oh, I was on the hardest difficulty. I never, ever play shooters on anything but the hardest difficulty. Most games I really wish were a lot more challenging, actually. Like I said, I know CoD4 is a good game. I can't argue that. It's just not for me is all. I find RSV2 and GRAW2 to be much more challenging and interesting.
It's hard to find ANY game that's challenging anymore. With the plethora of settings and constant checkpoint saves, most single player games are easily winnable. We're raising a generation of wussies. Back in the NES days, if you played a game on easy mode, you'd either get an ending mocking you for playing easy or they'd even cut you off after half the levels and make you play it on normal. Hell, even games like Contra where you could cheat out the wazoo were still freaking hard. Even continuing your game sucked because most of the time instead of loading up something you had to use a password. And even more often than that, there was no continuing a game past game over. I like today's games better though.
I know! That's why I'm so thrilled when I find a modern game that's *actually* challenging. They're awfully rare. There are NES games that I remember as being "easy" that if I try to play now, I can't get past more than one or two stages. Double Dragon 2 and Trojan are good examples of that. I sorta wish for the old-school difficulty back, at least as an optional feature. It's just one more reason why I like Uncharted: Drake's Fortune... it has "Crushing" difficulty, or whatever it's called, where one shot kills you (Contra-style!). Now THAT'S challenging.
I have it. I popped it in once. Went a little way into the game and it didn't really grab me so I put it back into my backlog. I'll probably try it again sometime but the battle system didn't really seem all that fun. Oh, and I played Suikoden 3 as well. Solid rpg but isn't anything great. The best part of the game is the story, but there are times where it drrrrraaaaaagggssss. Didn't really like the trinity story telling system(going through the same story 3 times through different perspectives) either. I understand the rationale behind it, but think it just didn't add much and at times really messed up the flow of the story. And the battle system was pretty much just plain out bland. Not that it's a bad game, just that it isn't something you should rush to if you have great games to play. atm I'm plodding through persona 3 and ff5.
Folklore PS3, Action-Adventure <object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/RAGMnQAxEA8&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/RAGMnQAxEA8&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object> (old Japanese trailer, so some things are out-of-date like the town's name) Pros -A unique and strong narrative with a murder-mystery feel -Unique gameplay that is pretty fun and enjoyable -Great boss fights -Beautiful graphics and sound -Perhaps the best implementation of Sixaxis controls in a PS3 game -Interesting DLC given the genre Cons -Relatively short for a game of its type -Camera, controls, voice acting and presentation could all be much better -While they offer subtle differences, both characters offer relatively the same experience, and you're forced to play through both sides in order to complete the game -Loading of menus and areas can be a bit excessive (more so for the menus, which are integral to the gameplay) Final Comments Folklore turned out to be a sleeper hit for me. It has some pretty major flaws, but if you can overlook them, you'll find a game with a strong narrative and enjoyable gameplay. The game is only about 15-20 hours long (with only half of that being necessary probably), and unless you really enjoy the DLC and/or custom dungeons, there is relatively little replay value available. Because of this, it would be hard for me personally to justify purchasing it at $60. However, if you can find the game for around $30-$40 or less, I'd definitely recommend checking it out (or it can be a very good rental). Of course, first you might want to check out the demos on the PSN; if you find those to be enjoyable (you like the gameplay, don't mind the flaws), you'll probably end up enjoying the full game as well. Spoiler Story The story in Folklore revolves mostly around a young woman named Ellen and the town of Doolin. At the beginning of the game, Ellen receives a letter from her mother, who Ellen thought died when she was still a child. This leads her to the town of Doolin, a seemingly quiet town in a very rural area. It turns out that this may not be the innocent and quiet town that it appears to be, and you'll find out about its tragic history and how it relates to Ellen's own history as you progress through the game. Shortly after arriving in Doolin, Ellen also gains entry to the Netherworld, a place where one can visit with the souls of those who have passed away. The story seems to branch off in two directions, with certain story elements occurring in Doolin and certain elements occurring in the Netherworld. Ellen turns out to be the one the connects the two together. During the day, you'll try to uncover the truth about the events that have occurred in Doolin, including several murders. At night, you'll have to venture into the Netherworld to find the answers you seek from those who have passed away. In Folklore, you can play as one of two characters. Along with Ellen, you'll also play as Keats, a journalist for an occult magazine that finds himself involved in an interesting story. You'll have the option of playing a chapter as either character, and while certain things will be different, the story told in each chapter for both charcters is pretty much the same. The story can be a bit slow and boring at first, but it quickly picks up the pace, partly due to the whole murder-mystery take on things. Piece-by-piece, you'll slowly uncover the truth about the events that took place in Doolin, resulting in a relatively satisfying (if not a bit confusing) ending. The story is presented in 3 ways: beautiful CGI cutscenes, impressive in-game cutscenes, and not-quite-as-impressive comic-book style cutscenes. While unique, this style seems to be a bit lacking compared to the other two styles. You will grow accustomed to it, but the presentation would most likely have been much better without it IMO (assuming these scenes were redone in one of the other two styles). Here's a clip from the game that is used to setup the story (pretty much the first thing you see when you start the game, so not really any spoilers): <object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/rSuL_15O4fg&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/rSuL_15O4fg&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object> Gameplay There are 2 aspects of gameplay in Folklore. During the day, you'll be exploring the town of Doolin, searching for clues that will help advance the storyline. After talking to certain people and/or finding certain items, the darkness of night will overtake the town. Only at this time can you visit the Netherworld, which introduces the other gameplay style. This part of the game is sort of like an action-RPG where you battle enemies (called Folks) on screen while attempting to dodge/defend their attacks. After defeating an enemy, you can absorb their ID (basically their soul) by using the Sixaxis controls (more on this later). By doing this, you can then use that enemy's power to aid you in battle. You have the ability to map these powers to each of the four face buttons, and it is relatively easy to navigate your collection of Folks to switch out. Considering how often you'll be doing this, the process probably should have been worked on to make it a lot quicker (some long pauses involved in switching out Folks). Early on, the enemies can usually be taken out using a relatively straightforward approach. However, these battles begin to become more difficult as you advance in the game, meaning you'll have to figure out which Folk to use against certain enemies (EX: some enemies may need to be “frozen” in order to be attacked). This is especially true for all the boss fights, which can only be defeated using a certain combination of Folks. Fortunately, this combination is revealed in a storybook of sorts that you'll be able to find before fighting each boss. For example, an illustration of how to attack an enemy's weakpoint will be provided. This a minor thing, but the illustrations are a really nice touch and one of many things that gives Folklore its charm. The boss fights in general are usually pretty intense and satisfying due to their complexity. As you defeat Folk, you'll gain levels, providing you with more HP and more points to use for Folk attacks. By fulfilling certain requests (EX: Defeat 4 enemies of this type), a Folk's power will also improve. There are certain rare Folk that only appear under certain conditions, such as absorbing all the different Folk in an area (maybe 10-15 of them). While the gameplay is still roughly the same, Ellen and Keats do have different play styles. The main difference is that Ellen can equip different clothes that will affect her performance, while Keats can transform into a powerful form, capable of causing great damage in a short amount of time while also negating any possible damage that could be done to Keats. The camera and controls for the game are far from great. There is a lock-on in the game, but it didn't seem to work all that well for me. With multiple enemies attacking you all at once in different directions, you'll most likely end up fighting the camera and/or controls at various points in the game. It does get better once you get used to it, but not much. The one exception is the Sixaxis controls, which are probably the best out of all the PS3 games. The controls really improve the gameplay and add to the experience. To absorb the ID of normal enemies, usually just a quick flick of the controller will get the job done. Boss battles, on the other hand, require more complex usage of the Sixaxis, but you generally won't end up fighting the controls. The last boss fight seems to really stand out in my mind, partly due to the epic Sixaxis struggle that helped to end the fight. The game isn't particularly long given its genre. You can probably finish it in about 15-20 hours. This includes playing through the game as both characters. Perhaps I missed something, but this is a fact that isn't quite well-represented in the game IMO. I began the game playing each chapter as both characters, but as I became more interested in the story, I stopped playing as Keats so that I could continue the story as Ellen. I then reached a point that required me to play as Keats, which meant I had to put the story on hold (which was pretty close to the climax BTW...and remember, this is a murder-mystery of sorts) and replay through the majority of the game again as Keats. This was pretty annoying to me, especially since, as mentioned, the game plays relatively the same as either character. This was probably done to artificially lengthen the time of the game since the 15-20 hours would probably be cut down to 8-12 hours without it. You can create/download custom dungeons, and there is also some DLC that adds some Folks, quests, costumes, etc., although I didn't really spend much time with either (I think some DLC is free too?). Here's a short clip of the gameplay from relatively early on in the game: <object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/5586ua-svbQ&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/5586ua-svbQ&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object> Graphics The game has OK graphics from a technical standpoint, but where it really shines is in the art direction. Simply put, this is a beautiful game. The different worlds in the Netherworld can be truly breathtaking at times, and the games uses some interesting designs for the Folks themselves (probably based on some mythology, but I don't know for sure). Considering how impressive the game looks, it is a shame that the in-game engine wasn't used more often for cutscenes. Sound This game has a beautiful soundtrack to complement its graphics. Separately, they're pretty strong on their own, but together, they do create for a great experience. I think one reviewer described the experience as “surreal,” and I think I'd agree with that term. Unfortunately, the voice acting is not nearly as strong...in fact, it is actually pretty bad. Some songs from the game: <object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/9Vg-870E4ck&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/9Vg-870E4ck&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object> <object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/mVBCzQxH2G0&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/mVBCzQxH2G0&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object> <object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/DQiHm3V-scI&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/DQiHm3V-scI&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object> <object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Kn6pQLkZSdY&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Kn6pQLkZSdY&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
Fire Emblem: Radiant Dawn Strategy RPG, Wii <object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/JvpZNtphOic&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/JvpZNtphOic&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object> Pros -Lots of content (70+ characters, 60+ hours of gameplay, decent replayability, etc.) -Some nice things added to the usual SRPG formula, making it even deeper and more addicting -The game does provide a decent challenge compared to other similar games along with multiple difficulty levels Cons -Nothing really stands out in terms of its story, sound, and graphics -Lots of reading and horrible voice acting -More of a strategy game with RPG elements than a SRPG, which despite making the game more challenging, it might turn off fans of some other SRPGs. Final Comments I have a few major issues with this game, but in the end, it is a pretty good SRPG that offers a lot of content. Given the platform it is on, I think it stands out even more. There aren't many games like this available on the Wii, and if you like this style of gameplay, it certainly is worth checking out. Note that I haven't played any other FE games. I think newcomers like myself (or those that didn't play Path of Radiance?) will come away less impressed by the game (partially due to story events and partly due to getting used to the gameplay), but I don't really know for sure. I don't really want to count that as a con though, since I don't really want to dissuade people from trying out the franchise for the first time. Just note that some things will take some time to understand, assuming you even do pick up on what is going on. Spoiler Story To be honest, I didn't really care too much for the story of Fire Emblem. It was OK, and certainly better than a lot of games, if nothing else just due to the amount of effort that seemed to go into it. It basically involves several warring nations and the people involved in them. It is set in a fantasy world with magic, a powerful-and-mysterious black knight, and humanoids that can transform into beasts such as dragons, wolves, giant birds, etc. You'll control multiple characters under different vantage points, which allows you to see how the “other side” thinks about the situation. This is a pretty nice approach, although it is a little awkward to be controlling a team that you were just fighting against, or vice versa (not necessarily a bad thing, just different). In turns out that despite how these character meet (sometimes under hostile circumstances), they're all connected in some way, although you'll have to play the game to figure it out exactly. The story is fairly standard stuff as far as the “warring nations” style of plot goes (the last section of the game might be a bit different, but not incredibly so). It is fairly predictable, almost annoyingly so. For example, a particular character's true intentions are blatantly obvious the minute you meet him, but the characters in the game are truly shocked whenever they realize it for themselves. A few story elements seemed really dumb and not really well-explained as well, although perhaps I missed a few things. However, like I said, it seems like a lot of effort went into creating the game world. There is rather extensive section of the game that contains information on the the world, certain terms, the characters and their relations to each other. The characters themselves aren't particularly strong either, most/all of them being pretty one-dimensional. I didn't particularly care for the characters, but since some of them were introduced in the previous game (or games?) that I did not play, maybe I would have felt differently about some of them under different circumstances. I wouldn't normally worry about it, but this includes some of the major characters in the game, including arguably the most important character in the game. A lot of the game's story will be told by some unnamed (IIRC) person, acting as a narrator. Other events will unfold through text boxes with portraits on screen. This part isn't voiced IIRC, and there will be a lot of reading. There are a few CG cutscenes with voice acting, although not very many IIRC. I believe you can view these cutscenes again via a menu, and I believe there is also some artwork you can unlock. Gameplay The game is Strategy RPG, and doesn't really deviate from the normal gameplay that makes up the genre, which includes the addictive quality found in many decent SRPGs. You start on a grid, and you control the actions of several characters on that grid until your turn ends. Then, the enemy will act. Each character has a certain class that helps to shape his/her skills and attributes. The game uses this “triangle” system, referring to physical and magic attacks. Following a rock-paper-scissors format, each attack has one attack it is weak against and one attack it is strong against. This can be a pretty strong influence on the outcome of a battle, making it pretty important when you're trying to figure out a strategy. After a unit performs an action, he/she will likely gain EXP, and if that unit gains 100 EXP, it will level up (note that at certain levels, it will rank up IIRC). Units can have items, but only a limited number. This includes weapons, which also break down as you use them. As units use a particular weapon, they become more proficient at using it. After a battle is over, you'll get some gold, which you can use to purchase equipment, or you can even make your own. You can also gain some bonus EXP, which you can distribute after battles to help level up some of your characters (a good way to level up weaker characters). One of many interesting gameplay choices is the ability to create a support system between characters. Before a battle, you can setup up links between two characters, giving a small bonus to the stats of the characters; I think this bonus is only active when the two characters are close together on the battlefield, but I might be remembering wrong. This link will gradually grow stronger, increasing the bonus given to each character. Additionally, when battling in areas such as towns, you can enter buildings, resulting in a conversation that usually results in an item. If a character dies on the battlefield, he/she is lost forever (of course, if it is a main character, the game is probably over). Since it is relatively easy to make a mistake and leave a unit open to attack, I found this to be a bit annoying. This is especially true early on in the game, when you are using team that is relatively weak compared to characters used later in the game. Additionally, there are no “random” battles in the game, unlike say FFT, Disgaea, or other similar SRPGs. Factors like this make this game more of a strategy game with RPG elements than a Strategy RPG...IMO anyway. Since there are a limited number of battles, there is a limited number of EXP and gold in the game. This amount is more than enough to beat the game without much of a problem (although it could be much easier), but as an RPG fan, I really wished I could spend time improving the characters as I saw fit. Since I had a limited amount of EXP, I stuck with certain “goto” characters in battle in order to make them as strong as possible, ignoring some characters completely. Since a lot of units end up with fairly unique skills, especially once they reach the highest class possible, I sort of felt like I missed out on seeing some of these skills. While this does make make the game more challenging (the game is pretty difficult) and keep the story moving, I personally would have preferred more of an RPG approach. Despite my preference for more of an RPG approach, the game certainly has enough content to keep one satisfied. I can't remember exactly how long it took for me to beat it, but I think it was definitely 60+ hours. There are multiple difficulty levels and I think some secret characters, so there is some decent replay value to the game, especially since you can try playing the game a different way (maybe level up some characters that you ignored on the first playthrough). Minor note, but I'd probably recommend not playing with the Wii-mote. I had to use it, and while it is certainly possible to play the game this way, I think I'd much prefer a more traditional controller. Graphics Um...yeah, definitely not a strong point for the game. I haven't played any other FE games, so I don't know what the graphics looked like on the GC. I'm assuming they didn't differ much from Radiant Dawn though, and even those visuals probably didn't push the GC all that hard. But it is a SRPG, so graphics don't really mean much. I'm looking forward to playing Disgaea 3 for the PS3 some day, and it looks really similar to the Disgaea games for the PS2...each of which could probably be done on the PS1 (at least from a visuals perspective). So in conclusion, the visuals aren't great, but if they bother you, you're probably not a fan of this style of gameplay. Sound I don't really recall much about the soundtrack for the game, which probably isn't a good thing. Seemed to be pretty basic music that you would expect to find in a game like this. On the other hand, I do remember what the voice acting was like, even though voiced scenes were relatively rare (only during CG cutscenes or when the narrator is talking IIRC). And this isn't a good thing. It is really bad IMO. But like I said, you won't have to deal with it too much.
Thanks a lot for the info. Objectively it sorta looked like both of those were good games (Suikoden 3 got extremely favorable reviews), but I wasn't sure if they were really worth going after. I've had a couple people now tell me neither was particularly exciting, so I guess I'll just steer clear for now. Yay for this thread. It kept me from uselessly adding extra games to my collection. Now if some other people can tick a few more off my list, I'd be even happier... See, games like this make me happy that it's so easy to download demos. It looked like an interesting concept, but the combat didn't really grab me. Two very pointed questions for you: 1. Does the combat get WAY more interesting than it was in the demo, or does it get only slightly more complex? 2. Since it has that murder mystery feel, does the game totally hold your hand throughout "investigating" things, or does it actually require you to put an ounce of thought into it occasionally? Whatever the answers are, I agree with you that it's not worth buying full-price. When it's total bargain-bin I might consider it, though.
Guess it depends on what you find interesting. From what I can recall, it is definitely more complex. I don't think any of the Folks in the demos were particularly difficult to defeat, but starting with maybe the 3rd world, things start getting a little more complicated. As I said, some Folks repel some attacks and are only weak to some attacks, and you'll have to figure that out when fighting them (I think these might be in the storybooks as well, can't remember). Some even take a combination of Folks IIRC, like I mentioned in the review (first freeze, then attack with a slash Folk, or something like that). Maybe I'm just remembering the more complex enemies (maybe even some of the rare Folks), but even then, it's still more complex than the demos IIRC. Some parts of the game throw you in an area with multiple enemies which can be immune to some/most attacks, and they don't share weaknesses. Some of these larger enemies require a little more work to get their IDs, almost similar to the bosses although on a slightly smaller scale (especially compared to the later bosses). This was actually a bit frustrating now that I think about it. You would basically have to knock out 3-4 enemies in order to grab the soul of one Folk, hoping that the other enemies wouldn't get up and attack you while you were busy getting the ID. Which demo did you play BTW? I think I played 3 different demos of Folklore, although the combat wasn't all that different between them IIRC. Two different locations were featured, but they were just the first two worlds in the game, which aren't all that different from a combat perspective IIRC. In these worlds, you basically just bash the enemies with whatever Folks you want to use IIRC. I think a few enemies may have been different, although I don't know if they were featured in the demo (there are some differences between the worlds in the demo and in the final game). I will say that I enjoyed the gameplay in the demos. It pretty much just holds your hand. IIRC, you're usually either trying to find a person to talk to, or you're trying to find an item hidden in the town somewhere (these items are necessary to speak with the dead I believe). I think it was usually pretty obvious where you had to go. Even if it wasn't, the town wasn't particularly big, so you could simply just talk to everyone (which isn't a bad idea anyway), and look for items while you running around. If that doesn't explain things well, here's a basic example of how things would work from what I can recall (I made most of it up, so this doesn't spoil any events in the game): Say Ellen is looking for info about her mother. After talking to various people in the village, she finds out that someone named Jane Doe was good friends with her mother. She has passed away, but her daughter still lives in the town. You talk to her, find out a little bit of info, and then maybe she lets you have a picture of her mother and Ellen's mother together. You go to the Netherworld, beat a boss, and then you talk to Jane.
PixelJunk Monsters Strategy, PS3 (PSN Game) <object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/DkZJlKQpjwI&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/DkZJlKQpjwI&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="344"></embed></object> Pros -Great art-style and music -Addicting and challenging gameplay that is difficult to put down -20+ levels which gradually become more and more difficult -Remote play support Cons -No Online Coop (just offline) -Some towers don't seem very useful Final Comments A great PSN game that all PS3 users should check out. Like many Tower Defense clones, it can be incredibly addicting while also providing a pretty good challenge on the later levels. A few things could be improved, but given the price point and the type of game this is, there's not really much more you could ask for IMO. Note than an expansion has been released (PJM Encore), but I haven't had a chance to check it out yet. Probably just more awesomeness. Spoiler Gameplay As mentioned, this is Tower Defense clone with a few tweaks. For those unfamiliar with this sort of game, the basic idea is that you build towers on a map which are used to defend your base from an attacking force. There are a variety of towers which can be used to exploit the weaknesses of particular enemies. In PJM, your base appears to be a tribe of some sort, and enemies that get to your base will end up killing members of the tribe. If none are remaining, the game is over. In PJM, you control a character, possibly a member of the tribe, and use him to make towers across the map. There are trees all over the map, and these trees are where you can create your towers. In order to make a tower, you must have the necessary amount of gold, which can be obtained by defeating enemies,coming into contact with certain trees, or destroying a previously-made tower. You can also get gems the same (although I can't remember exactly if the last method will drop gems); these gems are used to upgrade towers instantly. Towers will slowly upgrade on their own as they defeat enemies, but you can speed up the process by standing by a tower. If you obtain the right number of gems, you can also unlock more powerful towers. Due to the variety of enemies, this will become a necessity as you progress through the game. That said, some towers didn't seem as useful compared to others (perhaps I didn't figure out the right strategies though). The game seemed well-balanced for the most part, but a few tweaks probably should have been done in order for the usage of some towers to make more sense. There are a few special levels, which will result in a special ability for the player if you complete it (EX: the first level will grant you the ability to run whenever you hold circle). Here's a playthrough of one of the early maps (minor spoilers if you want to figure it out yourself, but it shouldn't be hard to beat): <object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/8ympDI7b5ZQ&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/8ympDI7b5ZQ&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="344"></embed></object> There may not be many built-in aspects of the game that allow for replayability, but the gameplay is such that you'll probably continue playing certain levels over and over, even if you already beat the level. There are online leaderboards, which can also give extra incentive to players to replay certain levels in order to get a higher score. Although I haven't messed with it, the game does support Remote Play. There is also 2-player cooperative play, but only available offline. I prefer playing it in single-player mode, but I think the game could have been more enjoyable with online coop. And yes...I'm grasping at straws here. Graphics and Sound A really nice art-style showing how great 2D graphics can look on HD consoles. It also has a really nice soundtrack as well as good sound effects.
COD4 is by far the best first person shooter to date. It is not just a run n gun game. Have you played it online hardcore mode? Sure, set up the classes properly and you can run n gun a little but there is a lot of strategy in it. If you just spray and pray, atleast against me and my friends, you will get owned.
