Quantcast
Battletoads Gamescom Gameplay (Looks God Awful!)

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - Battletoads Gamescom Gameplay (Looks God Awful!)

JWeinCom said:
Azzanation said:

For starters, the heading of this thread stats (Looks God Awful) so clearly it has to be about how it looks.

So you can tell if a game is bad without even playing it? I will always disagree with this. Unless you actually play it for yourself you will never know. Also I mentioned the testers at E319 enjoyed the gameplay demo. So as much as people want to vote if a game is trash by there keyboard or to actually try it for themselves to know for sure, I leave my votes in pending until I try it for myself.

Also just wanted to add, people need to stop treating this game like some super budget AAA game. Its not, its an Indy game with MS's permission to be made.

I don't know if English is not your first language or if you just don't understand the colloquial usage of the word look.  "Looks" is frequently used as a shorthand for "Based on what I see, I anticipate it will be".

If I say "looks like rain"  I am saying "based on what I can observe I think there will be rain".  I am not saying that the sky literally looks like rain.  If my waiter brings me a steak and I say "oh that looks delicious", I am almost certainly not saying that the steak literally looks delicious, since it is impossible for something to somehow visually be delicious (unless you have synesthesia or something).  I almost certainly mean to say "based on what I can observe, I anticipate the steak will be delicious".  If I see a trailer of a movie and I say "looks boring", I am almost certainly not saying that the visuals of the movie are boring.  I am almost certainly saying "based on that trailer I anticipate the final product will be boring."  And when someone says "looks god awful" they are almost certainly saying "based on what I can tell, I anticipate this game will suck ass."

It is great to see someone who used to play the "english is not your first language" and similar dismissive talk to deny my points get the same threatment.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Around the Network

Needs some coherence, we have hard for a lifetime that Rare had freedom and that they decided tho make Kinect games, now it was MS that defined that even though claiming they had no say in anything Rare done?



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

DonFerrari said:
JWeinCom said:

I don't know if English is not your first language or if you just don't understand the colloquial usage of the word look.  "Looks" is frequently used as a shorthand for "Based on what I see, I anticipate it will be".

If I say "looks like rain"  I am saying "based on what I can observe I think there will be rain".  I am not saying that the sky literally looks like rain.  If my waiter brings me a steak and I say "oh that looks delicious", I am almost certainly not saying that the steak literally looks delicious, since it is impossible for something to somehow visually be delicious (unless you have synesthesia or something).  I almost certainly mean to say "based on what I can observe, I anticipate the steak will be delicious".  If I see a trailer of a movie and I say "looks boring", I am almost certainly not saying that the visuals of the movie are boring.  I am almost certainly saying "based on that trailer I anticipate the final product will be boring."  And when someone says "looks god awful" they are almost certainly saying "based on what I can tell, I anticipate this game will suck ass."

It is great to see someone who used to play the "english is not your first language" and similar dismissive talk to deny my points get the same threatment.

Uhhhhh... not really sure if that was aimed at me or him.  I sometimes ask that, because a lot of times English is not someone's first language, and if the issue seems to be one of comprehension, that's relevant.  .  In this case, command of the English language (how look is used figuratively vs literally) is the actual issue at hand.  If it came off as dismissive, that wasn't my intention.



Rare had all the freedom they needed when making Perfect Dark Zero, Banjo Nutz and Bolts, Grabbed by the Ghoulies, Kameo, Viva Piñata, Conkers Live and Reloaded etc. I wrote a whole article about this ages ago. 

Rare was underperforming and instead of MS sitting back watching Rare destroy all there IPs, MS asked them to make Kinect games which Rare was very successful with. Kinect is possibly the reason MS never closed Rare down due to the amount of success Rare had. So we should be thanking the move and Kinect for that very reason. 

MS only recently gave Rare all there freedom back where Sea Of Thieves was made, which turned out to be a success. Rare's next project is also out of freedom while we must remember that Battletoads isn't made by Rare, its made by a Indy studio DLaLa. Much like Killer Instinct wasn't made by Rare either but instead Double Helix / Iron Galaxy.



JWeinCom said:
DonFerrari said:

It is great to see someone who used to play the "english is not your first language" and similar dismissive talk to deny my points get the same threatment.

Uhhhhh... not really sure if that was aimed at me or him.  I sometimes ask that, because a lot of times English is not someone's first language, and if the issue seems to be one of comprehension, that's relevant.  .  In this case, command of the English language (how look is used figuratively vs literally) is the actual issue at hand.  If it came off as dismissive, that wasn't my intention.

It wasn't aimed at you, sorry if it looked like that.

I'm not native to English, but even in portuguese the "seems like" "looks like", etc equivalents aren't reduced to just seeing or sight. They have exactly the same purpouse you used of figuratively "seems like" being "from what I've experienced this situation is similar to this another so I induce this...."

The person you replied to have used 3 or more times the argument I don't speak english as native language to avoid a point or mock me (funny enough every other user, native or not, understood the point perfectly).



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Around the Network

I'm curious of the metrics of success the Kinect games and SoT are held to, don't remember any critical acclaim or sales blockbuster.

3 Kinect Sports, talk about great games and freedom to choose Kinect.

Kinect Sports 1 - 6.2M (on the hype of Kinect, was it bundled?) - Meta 73

Season 2 - 2.33M - Meta 66

Rivals - 620k (big success I'm sure) - Meta 60

SoT 1M sales and 69 Meta.

Well if Sony and Nintendo were to be held to such high standards nothing they do could be considered success.

Last edited by DonFerrari - on 23 August 2019

duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

DonFerrari said:
JWeinCom said:

Uhhhhh... not really sure if that was aimed at me or him.  I sometimes ask that, because a lot of times English is not someone's first language, and if the issue seems to be one of comprehension, that's relevant.  .  In this case, command of the English language (how look is used figuratively vs literally) is the actual issue at hand.  If it came off as dismissive, that wasn't my intention.

It wasn't aimed at you, sorry if it looked like that.

I'm not native to English, but even in portuguese the "seems like" "looks like", etc equivalents aren't reduced to just seeing or sight. They have exactly the same purpouse you used of figuratively "seems like" being "from what I've experienced this situation is similar to this another so I induce this...."

The person you replied to have used 3 or more times the argument I don't speak english as native language to avoid a point or mock me (funny enough every other user, native or not, understood the point perfectly).

Ah.  Yeah.  You could also find that definition if you use an actual dictionary instead of wikipedia.



JWeinCom said:
DonFerrari said:

It wasn't aimed at you, sorry if it looked like that.

I'm not native to English, but even in portuguese the "seems like" "looks like", etc equivalents aren't reduced to just seeing or sight. They have exactly the same purpouse you used of figuratively "seems like" being "from what I've experienced this situation is similar to this another so I induce this...."

The person you replied to have used 3 or more times the argument I don't speak english as native language to avoid a point or mock me (funny enough every other user, native or not, understood the point perfectly).

Ah.  Yeah.  You could also find that definition if you use an actual dictionary instead of wikipedia.

Funnier yet is to not even accept that was wrong and say you don't know english based on the wiki entry.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

DonFerrari said:
JWeinCom said:

Ah.  Yeah.  You could also find that definition if you use an actual dictionary instead of wikipedia.

Funnier yet is to not even accept that was wrong and say you don't know english based on the wiki entry.

And he had to ask how looking at something can make you feel something.  Guess he hasn't seen that special guy or gal yet.



pokoko said:
Zoombael said:

Original games as in what made the Battletoads franchise what it is (or was), drawing a destinction between then and now. Also "original games" as in, why reducing Battletoads to one game? You say the original wasn't very good, but what about Battletoads Battlemaniacs and Arcade? The "baseline" is definitely bigger than one "original game".

Are you being pedantic on purpose?  We're talking about a series where the first game is by far the best known and upon which everything else is based.  Even one of the games you mentioned is basically a remake and the other was a bomb that almost no one played.  The original game is the baseline for the franchise, like it or not.  

Nope. The franchise is the "baseline". You missed the point by a mile. Read my first reply to you, you ignored its essence: The major reason "fans" are dissapointed of the new BT, is because its generic artstyle and tone (PC Dark Queen) and gameplay is out of line. Wether you like the original games or not, how they play, how (un)successful they were, is irrelevant in this discussion.



Hunting Season is done...