Great game, wayyy over-hated. Fantastic dungeons, fantastic bosses, and until SS came out, Midna was the greatest character in the series.
You can go on without playing ST and PH though. Those actual bad experiences.
Screw you GMUN, ST was an awesome game and he should play it. PH not so much.
Anyway, haven't had much time to play until recently, just beat the third Silent Realm challenge. That was possibly the most terrifying experience I've ever had in a video game. Unlike the first two, I spent ages with the Guardians after me, and that was pretty damn intense.
Also, I'm amazed at how the game just keeps getting progressively better so far. It's paced itself perfectly. The combo of Sand Sea and Sand Ship was one of the best experiences I've had with games!
Also am I the only one who doesn't mind having to take a few measly seconds to read a bit more text. I mean, some of Fi's dialogue is a little redundant, but when we get to things like text speed, then it gets just finicky. There's a reason stuff like that doesn't come up in QA: nobody cares.
I'm not saying the game is perfect (though it is vying for the spot of my favourite Zelda game) but if you're going to complain about something, why that?
--
Something something something ^Poorly disguised anti-caps sig
From: The_Djoker | #360 Really?? So Batman didnt exist before the arkham games?? people relate to batman more than most games.
Thats like saying superman would be weak because of superman 64
He'd get a Superman 64 pic so it'd probably hurt him, yes. It's still going to be a game character contest, and Batman will be represented by his Arkham Asylum/City appearance. People will think of him from that. Remember, this is GameFAQs. We're talking about game characters still.
Also while the site does like it's anime, Goku and Vegeta would get anti-voted to hell. I mean, they probably wouldn't get tripled by Link, but they're both the product of a really polarising series and represented by some widely-disliked games.
--
Something something something ^Poorly disguised anti-caps sig
Also people who think that we need to add fleets of unknown quantities. A good bracket creates that on it's own. Look at last year. So many upsets, but not that many new characters. That's what we need.
I am still a major proponent of Robo-Hitler however.
--
Something something something ^Poorly disguised anti-caps sig
Also, other clarification: I'm not strictly AGAINST adding fictional characters, though I'm not for it either. I just don't think it's necessary for unpredictable matches, and the benefit from removing Link from the bracket is much greater. Doing both would be nice, but that negates the off-chance that one of the newcomers would beat Link.
I would rather we had a Link-less field where we opened up the field slightly, to characters like Dracula and Robo-Hitler (yes) who are both non-VG and VG-original so we can test the water somewhat. If they do abnormally well (which I doubt, based on this contest) then maybe it's worth it.
--
Something something something ^Poorly disguised anti-caps sig
From: Kotetsu534 | #254 Batman The Joker Wolverine Gambit Nightcrawler Homer Simpson Bart Simpson Mickey Mouse Donald Duck Simba Gandalf Aragorn Darth Vader Obi-Wan Kenobi Han Solo
Don't see any of them struggling to beat Ness or The Boss or whatever fodderline character you want to pick.
I can certainly see Gambit, Nightcrawler, Simba, and even Aragorn struggling. And that's all I'm really trying to say. You'll have the iconic main characters who do really well (but not well enough, they'd get stomped by Link) but I think Star Wars is really the only franchise where you can really get more than a good main character and good villain from.
--
Something something something ^Poorly disguised anti-caps sig
From: The_Djoker | #206 Hell, name me 15 non-VG characters who could beat Big Daddy, bearing in mind that this is GameFAQs.
Batman Joker Darth vader Luke skywalker Han solo Yoda Goku Vegeta Superman Spiderman Wolverine God Jesus Santa Bruce lee James bond
Never seen lotr might be someone from there
Also non vg characters literally SFF everything
"Bruce Lee"
"Fictional Character"
Also God and Jesus would be ineligible, Vegeta wouldn't, and I even have doubts about Goku (people hate DBZ to this day).
I mean, yes, you probably could get 15 non-VG characters stronger than Big Daddy on this website if you tried. But what would adding them really accomplish?
--
Something something something ^Poorly disguised anti-caps sig
From: WarThaNemesis2 | #204 I think it's worth pointing out that on GameSpot, The Goddamn Joker beat Ganondorf 55-45. Just because a site has Game in the name does not mean that everyone who goes there lives in a bubble where only video games exist.
It was Gamespot.
And that about sums that up.
--
Something something something ^Poorly disguised anti-caps sig
From: XIII_rocks | #158 Hell, name me 15 non-VG characters who could beat Big Daddy, bearing in mind that this is GameFAQs.
...really
Yes, really. I'm listening.
From: creativename | #159 Good lord, someone is using the Santa match to try and make Link look impressive? O_o Consider my mind thoroughly boggled.
Santa wouldn't be close to top 10 strongest non-VG characters and he almost broke 40% on Link. That was embarrassing for Link. And kind of embarrassing for the Noble Nine in general.
That's a match Link fans would be better off trying to forget. Freakin' Santa almost broke 40% on "lulz" votes alone. If I was trying to talk up Link's strength that's a match I'd like to ignore, and it would be the last thing I brought up.
Haha, what.
You underestimate Santa. He's the world's most widely known fictional character, and is just one of those characters everyone loves. And he had a whole host of advantages against Link. In that match, easily, easily the strongest fictional character. Not even close. And he still couldn't even come close to pulling it off.
--
Something something something ^Poorly disguised anti-caps sig
Are we still on the believing Gordon Freeman is weak thing. Especially since he wound up really overrated in the stats last year. I mean, he got 40% on someone who came close to Sephiroth!
From: creativename | #154 Yeah it's completely bat<poo> insane to think that non-VG characters wouldn't have the deeper field, by light years.
But who knows, perhaps he was simply stating the fact that most non-VG characters would be fodder in that there are millions of non-VG characters and most of them would be fodder :P I mean obviously that's true, after all! Most non-VG characters would be fodder since there's so many of them, heh.
But when you compare the top N number of entrants, say the top 64 or top 128, clearly the non-VG field will be vastly deeper and have less fodder.
What I'm saying is that there aren't many strong non-VG characters on this website. Operative phrase being "on this website". You'd have some stand-outs, to be sure, but I don't see what they would really add. None of them are coming close to Link here. Thing is, although there are many, many popular non-VG characters, how many would do well in a video game battle? Not that many, as most of their games are crap and they're playing to the wrong audience. Some, like Batman, would do well. But how many characters both have highly acclaimed and successful games and geek cred to draw in the votes? Not that many.
I mean, if you took a sample of the population and held a best fictional character battle, the non-VG field would be deeper, yes. But not here, in this contest. You would deepen the field, but you'd only be adding, at most, 10 worthwhile characters and none of whom would solve the problem with these contests: the LAW.
--
Something something something ^Poorly disguised anti-caps sig
Except for the fact that this is a gaming website, being asked to vote for characters who have been in video games, and that will inevitably weaken non-video game originating characters. Can you name 64 characters who have been in a game but didn't originate there that would do well? Probably not. Remember who's voting. You may be able to name 64 popular characters, but that sure won't translate into contest strength. There'd be a few who do well like Batman, but the overwhelming majority would bomb.
And even Batman wouldn't be a Link beater. In my opinion, the book was closed on allowing non-VG characters in when Link beat Santa on Christmas Eve with several amazing pic disadvantages. With 60%. Santa, the most known fictional character, and possibly the most beloved, with every advantage in his court, only looked low Noble Nine at best. Batman isn't beating that. Nobody is beating that. You allow other fictional characters in, and Link still destroys. You could have some fun matches, but you could have those anyway. The last character battle was a big success other than Link obliterating his half of the bracket.
That's why you need to remove Link (and place him in a championship match spot). Imagine how awesome the 2010 character battle would have been if you'd simply removed the Link matches. Hell, Mario probably would have beaten Cloud in the final, that would have been cool.
Thing is, if you take out Link, you have four potential winners depending on bracket set-up and shenanigans (Mario, Cloud, Snake and Samus). If you put in characters who didn't come from games originally, you have one possible winner. Spoilers: It's Link.
--
Something something something ^Poorly disguised anti-caps sig
I liked it, though it wasn't perfect, especially coming off of T&T. It did a lot of things right, but certain aspects felt rushed and failed to deliver, and it also clumsily handled some of Phoenix's character arc (which was mostly a good idea tbh). It is, at least, a lot better than JFA and a really good game. The bad stuff doesn't make the good stuff unimportant.
--
Something something something ^Poorly disguised anti-caps sig
Mostly pretty good, really like 4. But 1 is just bad. It's actually a pretty good idea, but not only is that nothing like Blue, it also contains what appears to be some kind of hand tool. That's just shockingly lazy, how did that even happen?
From: Haguile | #152 Last time a character got a picture from another character(Golden Sun related, I think) Bacon changed it after getting enough messages about it. Someone should let him know with a few tickets or so.
He did change Isaac's picture last year, but the only picture for Samus/Ridley vs. The Boss/Big Boss contained not-Samus, so maybe not.
From: GenesisSaga | #208 Not quite. It's definitely in the running, but it still has to compete with this:
Man why do people rag on that pic so much. It was great. Yes, the top image looked blurry and pixellated, but it had a really good image to make up for it. Especially loved the contrast in colours on right and left. If it had used a higher quality shot, it'd be up there as one of the best of the entire contest, maybe the best.
--
Something something something ^Poorly disguised anti-caps sig
From: ExThaNemesis | #103 What are the specials? I'm not watching anything that isn't the main line story!
Basically, due to David Tennant doing a stage run of Hamlet at the normal filming time (along with the entire production team changing) instead of a 2009 season they did 5 special episodes to make up for it. It continues the storyline, and none of them are skippable. Luckily, they're all quite good!
--
Something something something ^Poorly disguised anti-caps sig
From: GANON1025 | #054 I've never played a FE emblem, but it sounds like the one that comes with the ambassador set is not a good one start with and play? That's a shame, I wanted to try this series and honestly this might have been the only chance I got to try it.
Who said that
It's a great first game to play because unlike all of the others, it's a standalone and doesn't depend on a sequel or a prequel. It is different in some ways, but when you get down to it the core gameplay is the same.
It is one of the weaker entrants in the series, but it's a fine game and a very good choice for first Fire Emblem.
--
Something something something ^Poorly disguised anti-caps sig
Whoa, awesome list. Played most of those, but lost a few, and for anyone who hasn't played them you'd better believe you're in for a treat.
Given how unmanageable Pokémon/Golden Sun would have been, the only conceivable improvement would have been to swap the English translated Fire Emblems, but I can see why they wouldn't.
--
Something something something ^Poorly disguised anti-caps sig
As amazing as this would be, I'd much rather see them continue to bring back old franchises. And by that I mean make a Star Fox game. And have it be awesome. I mean, Retro could make an awesome Zelda game, but EAD already do plenty of that, so no need to involve them when they could be doing products that less capable developers may struggle with.
Also oh my god at the comments in that article. Now that's just stupid.
--
Something something something ^Poorly disguised anti-caps sig
I have seen nothing but love for Xenoblade on /v/, though I don't take /v/ opinions very seriously. There's a massive cadre of users who hate EVERYTHING there.
--
Something something something ^Poorly disguised anti-caps sig
Fun fact: In Europe, the Gamecube had more RPGs than the PS2 until, like, 2007.
Anyway, Xenoblade is nothing like ToS. As much as I love ToS, Xenoblade is better. Actually, it's the best RPG of the generation and that's nothing to do with the fact that it's on the Wii. And while ToS was closer to a "traditional" JRPG, Xenoblade mixes elements of JRPGs, WRPGs, and MMOs. It's kind of like a love letter to the entire genre.
But yeah, the only real ToS similarity is the fact that it's an RPG on a Nintendo console. In actuality, it's closer to Skyrim than ToS (though not quite like that either).
--
Something something something ^Poorly disguised anti-caps sig
But seriously, I kinda want to complain about some characters being too low, but then that would mean them replacing the ones who are ranked high. All the trolls are top-tier tbh. Except for that one guy.
--
Something something something ^Poorly disguised anti-caps sig
From: tereziWright | #359 I dunno, my MGS opinion has always been that the gameplay was dreadfully boring, and cutting out all the gameplay and running the cutscenes back-to-back would result in a better media product, so the over-the-top perfection of Bayonetta's gameplay being thrown into the series really doesn't seem like it could do anything but improve it to me.
Nah, this is all backwards. MGS's story and cutscenes, at least since MGS2, are an elaborate joke played on the player. The gameplay, though, is usually pretty awesome. Now, I'm glad that Rising is embracing the series' cheese factor rather than trying to be serious. However, the gameplay is my main concern.
Now, this definitely seems to fix the number one problem with the series, particularly the most recent console game in the series: this looks like it will actually have gameplay, and be fairly cutscene-light (whooooo). However, from what little we saw in the trailer... The gameplay just doesn't look very good. It looks like it abruptly slows down at times, and looks like the kind of thing that could come off as very clunky. Now obviously I'd need to play the game first to say so for sure, but I'm sure you can see my concern: that really won't mix well with the idea of fast-paced action.
It'll definitely be awesome to look at though, either way.
--
Something something something ^Poorly disguised anti-caps sig
Oh man, even for MGS that was hilarious. The game might suck, but it'll definitely deliver on sheer spectacle, and (hopefully deliberately) cheesy spectacle to boot. I was laughing for like half of that trailer-when "REVENGE WITH A VENGEANCE" popped up I just lost it.
I guess it's better than making me laugh unintentionally, like the series normally does.
--
Something something something ^Poorly disguised anti-caps sig
That is not the biggest moment in gaming history. There are many, many moments on that list far better. It's just a character death, far from the first, and far from the best.
--
Something something something ^Poorly disguised anti-caps sig
At least watch up to the end of Act 4. If you find Descend boring, then it's definitely not for you, but for me the last part of that act was really the turning point, though I liked it before then.
By the way guys, best song is this:
--
Something something something ^Poorly disguised anti-caps sig
wg-Okay, in fairness to SmartMuffin, he definitely puts a lot more thought into his arguments. It's just that like Bio in this topic, he does post unqualified statements he heard from wherever and accepts them as fact even if they really lack any evidence or basis. I do agree that Bio here is being much worse.
Ulti-Fair enough. I just don't like how some people seem to associate the term "nice guy" exclusively with doormats, but as long as we know the distinction, we cool.
Vlado-Absolutely right.
Bio-LOL
--
Something something something ^Poorly disguised anti-caps sig
I knew the foolish "beta" insult wouldn't be far along.
It's pretty sad really, that you have to resort to being so petty. It's nothing to do with being a beta, it's to do with not actually swallowing whatever I want to hear from somebody with no evidence or real argument. It's about actually thinking for yourself rather than being mindlessly herded along. It's about critically evaluating evidence and actual study.
Not just listening to any unqualified loon with a website.
--
Something something something ^Poorly disguised anti-caps sig
Statements like that are why nobody on the board takes you seriously.
I have to wonder why you care, though. You're so invested in a completely baseless argument by somebody who's only credentials are "has a website". Why do you put so much stock in some guy trying to get into other people's heads with no evidence or study whatsoever? You're acting just like a crazy fundie who's certain that Pokémon is evil just because they read it in some obscure Christian blog.
To put it simply, you are here what SmartMuffin is to politics topics.
--
Something something something ^Poorly disguised anti-caps sig
Oh god not the "nice guy" crap again. That has always just been some sort of weird agenda thing by people with low self-esteem to try and put down others and make themselves look better. Not the actual point (which I pledge neutrality on) but the way it is used. It has lost all meaning.
Seriously, these arguments are always pathetic because when you get dow to it, it just devolves into self-aggrandising and insults. Not to mention that the entire point is absurd generalisations based on people you don't know. It's all just a way of pushing down the people around you to say "yeah, I'm awesome, I can bang anyone I want unlike those NICE GUYS XFD". There will never be a civil discussion about the issue because of this.
But back to my main points. First, Bio, if you really want anyone to take Ladder "Theory" seriously, post an empirical study about it now. Go on, give us the hard evidence, if you think it exists.
And guys, seriously. Is it that hard to believe that not every guy wants to bang everything that moves?
--
Something something something ^Poorly disguised anti-caps sig
Most of my friends are female (very high female:male ratio in my area), and I find a lot of them attractive. And while I've been attracted to a few, I certainly think of most of them as friends and wouldn't want anything sexual even if they came onto me. And actually, that's happened.
In many ways, I actually prefer platonic relationships, but let's not talk philosophy. Because I want to talk science, and that's much better.
First up, ladder theory is not an actual theory. Theories have this thing called evidence, and come about from empirical study. Show me the scientific studies that corroborate with ladder theory, then we'll talk. Ladder theory is some guy's hypothesis likely based on anecdotal experience, and shouldn't be taken too seriously.
As for actual studies on the matter of friendship, from a biological perspective it is believed that friendships across (and within) genders can have biological benefits that improve lifetime reproductive success without sex occurring between friends.
And to repeat what somebody said earlier, if you want to have sex with everything you find remotely attractive and can't consider the idea of platonic love, you have issues. And that's not even getting into the implications for bisexuals!
--
Something something something ^Poorly disguised anti-caps sig
Now that I've read it all (so far) I actually think it's a pretty great list. Some moments, like 100 or 76 are pretty terrible (or in some cases not even moments) but the vast majority are either seriously great or you can at least see why they're there. Probably should have left the super-recent games to stew for a while though. Comes across as a bit too soon for those two.
--
Something something something ^Poorly disguised anti-caps sig
I read it for a bit, and honestly while 100 is astoundingly terrible, it's really not so bad. Actually it's pretty good ignoring the pointless racing game ones that could really be combined and/or apply to any damn game in the genre.
But yeah, talk about a bad first impression.
--
Something something something ^Poorly disguised anti-caps sig
