| Original message ([an error occurred while processing this directive] Views )[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
Replies:
|
| Toxico 3061th Post
 
Platinum Carpet V.I.P- Board Master
    
    
    
    
     
|  "Re(3):Rage of the Dragons"
, posted Fri 27 Jun 11:15:
quote:
against Abubo or YOU'RE ALREADY DEAD guy, switch characters when they're doing a special or super. otherwise, don't do it at all (unless your active character is about to die). they'll almost always react to your switch with a grab or a super. if you get your timing right, you can switch character (qcf+BC to qcb+BC, or BC into a combo) your way into an easy win
Whenever you change characters with BC you can cancel the "Run" in any moment with a foward roll, backward roll or a dodge (f + AB, b + AB or AB). For Abubo roll backwars and you will evade getting grabbed. That will also help you get some "TAG" combos, but they are still hard to get.
Wall combos are lame; not only easy to get but unoriginal and in many case unbalanced; where characters like Pepe can get you to a wall from any parts of the screen. I haven't seen infinites but I have seen (done) 80% things. The only failure they produce is that they give you too many bar "to heal"; so just when you get your ass whopped change and leave the other character heal; change inmediatly because any hit you might recieve aside the combo will "destroy" the "healing bar".
About Cassandra, there is a small lag when she finishes the move; try to "see it" and exploit it... And yes, the game is shallow and unoriginal; I heard Matrimelee was 10 times better (it was made by the same time, but that you might know).
[this message was edited by Toxico on Fri 27 Jun 11:21] |
| Luisinan 348th Post
Bronze Customer
|  "Re(9):Rage of the Dragons"
, posted Fri 27 Jun 23:30
It might be a contraversial thing to say, especially because half of the folks in this board believe in the "give it a chance" philosophy and the other half believe in the "oh man this game is gonna suck " attitude, anyway the point I want to make is that I honestly think first impressions on a game are very good indicators of the quality of the game. For example...
ROTD. Early reports said the animation was a bit choppy, character designs were a bit boring and derivative (Terry clones) and the gameplay was too simple and derivative (like simplistic versus style gameplay). Did people's opinions change as time passed? Not really. No one cares about this game now.
CVS1. People were super excited but even the first impressions revealed this game wouldn't have much lasting value. The gameplay engine was too strict. SNK characters were neutered. Ryu was too strong. NIce presentation. These opinions haven't changed much over time. It was good game when it first game out, and it's a good game now.
CVS2. A ton of hype in the beginning. First impressions of the game were very positive and feelings for the game remained positive until the games tiers were discovered and roll canceling was discovered. Still, people like to play the game.
My point, first impressions are pretty accurate. If a game gets a bad first impression, rarely does it shake that off (I can't think of a game that negative reviews but was later lauded and loved). A game can be loved at first and then later be hated (CvS2).
The first impressions of SvC-Chaos don't seem very positive. Poor animation/graphics and boring/overly simplistic gameplay and of course, weak character selection. Honestly the general consensus on the game seems to me that it's an average to below-average fighter. There might be some interesting things to the game engine but nothing interesting has been discovered.
But who knows, I still think the game has a chance. But the first impressions don't sound too promising.
Bored? "160"
|
| Rugalbernstein 4275th Post
Platinum Carpet V.I.P- Board Master
| "Re(10):Rage of the Dragons" , posted Fri 27 Jun 23:37:
Actually, the "first impressions" for S vs. C are a hell of a lot more positive than the RotD ones were; the "first impressions" for Capcom vs. SNK 2 were quite bad, as well; people really slammed it, especially about the speed issues. Ignore what people say, play it for yourself, THEN judge. You have a right to be hopeful or skeptical; just don't go out of your way to try crush everyone else's hopes for games. Too many people here do this, it's vexing as hell. Heck, I didn't like posting at neo-geo.com because the place was one big bitch-fest at one time, but I honestly think the 'cafe has edged over it at this point.
Edit: Yeah, with ARC System Works... GG had good graphics, but was broken as hell. It's still fun and I enjoy it, but it's hardly a good example for slamming another company. The problem is that Evoga didn't do any work on RoTD it to speak of anyway, it was pretty much all Sun Amusement and Noise Factory. RoTD is a fun game; there's no real meat there, but that hardly means it's unplayable. If you really think it's that bad a fighter that you can't even play it and have some fun, you haven't played a truly bad fighter.
Best site EVER: Link Here
[this message was edited by Rugalbernstein on Fri 27 Jun 23:51] |
| Luisinan 351th Post
Silver Customer
| "Re(2):Re(10):Rage of the Dragons" , posted Sat 28 Jun 00:41
Rugal, you pointed out what I should have included in my original post. I'm talking about having a hopeful or skeptical attitude to new games. It's what TiamatRoar also said.
In my opinion, I think it is -okay- to be swayed by the first impressions other people make about a game. And I actually think it is a good thing in most cases. If there is a negative or less then enthusiastic opinion on a new game, then my expectations remain low and I am more skeptical-- therefore when I play the game, I will be less disappointed if the game indeed stinks. This of course is dangerous and the main argument that you and Juan make. If we are swayed to easily by the opinions of others, we'll develop an automatic opinion on a game that will be based more on what others say and less on what we actually feel about the game.
That's dangerous indeed. But for me, I'd rather take that risk then ignore what others say and let my hopes build so high that I become very disappointed and bitter when the game fails to impress me. You could argue, don't let your hopes rise so high. But that's hard-- like TiamatRoar has said, the lack of 2D games has made us very excited about anything new.
I was so excited when Playmore first opened the SvC section on their site. My head dreamed about every detail on the game. Now that I know more about the game and what others feel about it- I'm a lot less enthused. I will give it a good try. I will decide for myself if Iike the game. And I am already dissapointed-- I can't help it, the facts about the game and impressions don't boost my spirit over the game. If I play it and love it, I will tell everyone about it. I'm always yammering about 3S in srk.com even though hardly anyone plays it. I guess that's my point.
But I can understand what you and Juan feel. I dislike negativity and opinions formed from no experience. I think I'm better then other posters in that I just say that I'm skeptical about the game. Whereas others plainly say that it's not even worth a first try.
Anyway, long post but I think I got my point across.
Bored? "160"
|
|
|
"Re(1):Rage of the Dragons" 
why did you become a teacher? 
