Khuutra said:
That's only a reasonable assumption in the case where one can see that the reception of Zero Mission (sales in particular) is improved by these feature changes; it wasn't. If anything, the removal of difficulty is the only major change cited by reviewers, and whether or not those are noted in GFAQs or the GAFs doesn't change the fact that less story intrusion (because the game was no less linear) didn't improve sales at all. An "improvement" of Other M in the same vein is not a logical progression on its face simply because Zero Mission did so much worse than Fusion. |
You might disagree, but I feel my own experience is "reasonable". And frankly that's what I'm speaking to... after completing both I feel what people generally didn't like about Fusion was dialed down in Zero Mission (linearity, segmentation, story, etc). I guess you can argue against the ultimate market impact of that with lowered scores, sales archives, or whatever, but that's really beside the point. I just see a similar opportunity here, no more, no less. Sakamoto's not blind, there's a track record, and after the savage treatment Other M got, I'd naturally expect a much more dialed back, more conservative approach from his team next time. That sound reasonable?
OT, now I have to buy DOA Dimensions. The Ridley battle was really the highlight of Other M imo.







