You got why I said I sweared to not wanting to post this....but i guess I don't see why I would stop....
Ok, first, that's not the main point, but the comparison is quite inaccurate.
pm64 is actually TTYD....it's really the same base, TTYD uses the same base as pm64. When I played pm64, I FELT there was AT THE VERY LEAST, a huge potential in the idea and I FELT it was CLEARLY enjoying. The ONLY thing TTYD did is to ENHANCE it.....not change it.
So, there's only one way my view would be invalid and that would be to not have the same base on the other games. However, I wanted to know if it was the case because a long time ago, I actually told I really didn't liked SS. I realised there was no way to know it EXCEPT the only thing I could try which was the demo of DT.
It has really the same base. It has expansions over SS, but that doesn't matter if I don't like the lowest level of the core gameplay.
meaning that unless you're telling me that SS base is forgotten (which I got it didn't), that comparison is pretty much inacurate because you compare a base I liked and one I didn't liked. If you were doing this with pm64 and spm, that would actually be indeed invalid of me, but to have the first and latest game having the same base and I know I didn't liked that base.....that is not asign of me being invalid, but observation of similarities.
Ok, I'm honestly almost wanting to end this with that....baseless claim, but if I was truly wanting to have every mario rpg be paper mario, first, I would not even think smrpg existed and second, I would actually HATE the M&L series.....this is clearly not the point I made.
smrpg isn't Paper Mario and I liked it.
smrpg is a mario rpg.
Therefore, your claim is not only wrong, but was based on the assumption that I thoguht M&L should not exist.
Seriously, read the text I write, I actually clearly told that I liked smrpg despite the very long bossoes for reasons I couldn't graps. Btw, both M&L and Paper Mario are based on smrpg which makes your claim less credible.
And I can`t believe you actually wrote the last 2 sentences. I said SEVERAL TIMES in THIS THREADS that I AM PICKY ON VIDEO GAMES TASTES. That is the reasons I only talk about those I liked because there's a numbers of games I didn't and you certainly won't find it interesting if I told everything why because I'm so picky. So, to say I'm tasteless ASSUMES that I'M NOT CONSCIOUS that I'm picky.....which considering the assumption, I really don't get how you came into this.
You actually just proved my points on the first game, you said it KEPT EVOLVING, not CHANGING. If I was actually liking the basic of the game, I would CLEARLY notice it, but I didn't and the latest game has the same base if your claim is true because it's just an expansion which IS THE FREAKING SAME AS TTYD AND PM64!!!!
....look, I just don't get why you haven't realised that it's the very core I don't like. That's design philosophies, you have to completely and drastically change stuff if you change this. You may not like the effects of it, but if you don't like it itself, it's worse.
I seriously don't get why you posted the pics because I did beat the game and I do know these places....we're indeed talking about the game....that wasn't neccessary.
huh geez, I SAID FELT REPETITIVE, NOT REPETIVE THEMSELVES!!!!
In fact, i seriously have yet to find an rpg that the battles aren't repetitive, because I got it's done on purpose for a good thing, BUT it brings the weakness of feeling it which is not really supposed to happen considering the genre is supposed to immerses you. Good example that did it right is earthbound, SUPER REPETITVE, but you don't feel it because the fights has mechanics to not have the feel to be too strong for you to be annoyed. And I loved the auto fight.
pm64 DID got into a way when it felt it, but the thing is, the presentation DECREASED the effect ENOUGH to not be much annoyed by it.
TTYD is the freaking best in this category because it makes WANT to be repetitive, I mean, try to find why the ch3 is just awesome.....it's JUST repeptitive fights and a boss.....seriosuly, there's big reasons why I praised that system so much.
What I was SAYING, is that SS FELT repeptitive, but not in a way that the presentation decreased it enough. THIS is what I was pointing out, but please, read the words.....
The L and R is not nitpicking. I realised it became a frustration to just do soemthing so simple. The reason I didn't elaborated on this is becasue I know for a fact it HUGELY improved after SS. I couldn't much felt it in DT, but I do recall to feel a bit weird with the button....but I don't think it was that bad as SS was. Basically, it's not a good input deisgn imo, but it shouldn't matter on the series because it got changed. The base however wouldn't (or unless they actually made the games in between completely change.....I don't think it does considering I only hear expansions stuff).
I learned that hub was kinda present with SS, it was never a problem.
For the changes, additions again. If I don't like the base, the additions will simply do nothing to me. That's like expecting to like TTYD if I didn't like pm64....there's a good chances it would be a disappointement....
And it's funny you mention the music because try try.....I listened to the ssb4 theme.....nothing. Actually, I listened the final boss theme in ssb4, don't remember the name and I felt a strange feel. I felt it could have gotten somewhere that had so much potential but just didn't....yeah, I honestly didn't really felt that the music had much on me.
Guys, you're all trying to tell me I don't like the result of the philosophy only, but I know it's the philosophy itself I dislike. I really don't get why anyone got it so far, but you know why I never wanted to post the thing I did....people wouldn't actually get it....I guess I was right.....
.gif)
.gif)
.gif)
.gif)
