What games do you 0wn?

[Reitsuki]

I guess Im pretty good at WC3. My current rec is 59-5, solo lv 16.

[kles]

Gah Wiseman, Tetris Attack is not like Tetris in the least, I hate the constant confusion in it's name...

[phaq]

good i was hoping you didn't wanna know which games i had, i can't even remember half the emulated shit i got. i don't think i owned anything since back in the 16-bit day. i used to kick the shit outta the 8-bit nes and the genesis.

[bassmandee]

I So own GII. I've beaten to many times that its not funny anymore. Sonic 1-Knuckles, Vectorman, and I used to own X-men clone wars on Genesis. Blitzball is easy, Out of the 3 times I played the first time at Luca I won the cup twice, they were on my first and third time through the game.
I get owned in Halo, Warcraft II, Starcraft, and Sonic Adventure 2. I never beat the bloody end guy.

[mrwiseman]

Most gamers get 0wned in Sonic Adventure 2. Actually, it's not the game difficulty, enemies or bosses what 0wn you, it's the terrible cameras and abundant stage holes.

I've never seen a game with such bad camera work. We could say they are so bad the game doesn't feel 3D but 2.5D. But I think it feels 0D. As for the void, stages, especially the last ones, have so much void you can fall in and lose your life. They don't look like stages, they look like the voidness of deep space with a couple random debris. Such bad gameplay (and other details) ruined a game that could have been one of the best games ever, and hurt the saga.

<font color="#101010" size="1">[ December 06, 2003 11:56 AM: Message edited by: -Wiseman- ]</font>

[Xellos]

I like SA2... cameras were never that bad, I could put up with em. I owned at Sonic/Shadow's levels, but the other ones sucked too much for me to ever get all the emblems.

[One Classy Bloke]

I think it's a lack of skill, or luck beating the Biolizard (the lizard that likes to have gay anal sex with space stations). I've only ever beaten him once... I'll be right back.

*15 min later*

Nope, it's just skill. I just beat him a second time ever. He's pretty much easy until you're in the air. You just need to watch the balls, and work your way towards the big red thing.

I guess i 0wn SA2 as i also have 170 emblems. I just need to get all A ranks, a chao emblem and do the boss and kart (lame) minigames.

To be honest, SA2 isn't really that bad. I enjoyed it, dispite the lame plot, the repeating of game styles and lack of good minigames.

As for the level design, you need to learn the level design. While they are linear, they still have a fair amount of secert areas. So what if you fall into the abbyss often, it's something to deal with. While the stages sometimes don't make sense, they are still well designed.

[mrwiseman]

I doubt it. They aren't enjoyable to play. They do have the thing all Sonic games have - you always fall on a bumper, have enough speed to do the looping, etc. so it plays fast and smoothly (except when you fall to the center of the world which happens often), but they don't have the clever designs of the Sonic Adventure 1 stages, which in return didn't have the great non-linear designs of the huge Genesis S3&K stages. And they are so linear they look like one of these 2.5D games. Besides, I wouldn't even say it's 2.5D, I'd rather say um... 1.5D+T? The reason is you can't go backwards either. The camera won't cooperate.

I loved SA2 at first. But as soon as I started playing, no, *before* I started playing, I started to notice the flaws. I really *wanted* to like this game. But I couldn't, despite all my efforts.

SA2 has one of the best graphic engines ever, and displays some of the best graphics ever. Such good technology ruined by stupid n00b designer flaws, like a poor menu system/interface, bad cameras, voices sounding too low (OMG this is just a numeric value you've gotta adjust), etc. Such stupid flaws. And stage design, it looks as if they tried to imitate the past greatness but failed to. Then there's the poorly designed gameplay and plot development. Now: do you notice something funny here? It sounds like the low-level programmers and the graphicians were great, yet they were poorly directed! It's design and direction what failed. And know what? Not curiously at all, Sonic Adventure 2 was the first to not be directed by Yuji Naka. Yuji Naka was just the producer - the budget guy who does nothing outside assigning Benjamins to this and that. It was a grave mistake to not use Naka-sama's great talent. Once again, sega did a moronic thing: they promoted the best developer they had to a simple director in charge of teh bux0rz. (Like he wanted it (he said he didn't like the job in at least two interviews I read.) And they had some random n0000b in charge of the direction of the new game of their *most important franchise*, a *high budget* game too. Results: money, technology, franchise, and Naka-sama's talent in what he's good at, WASTED. Way to go, sega. Give Caesar what belongs to Caesar, dammit! Besides, having Naka-sama at your service and not using him to design the best games ever is so stupid it should be illegal. Naka-sama was born to design the best games of the genre. He always did. And now they waste one of their best assets, OMG.

[Xellos]

I doubt it. They aren't enjoyable to play.

I like d SA2's sonic/shadow levels MUCH more thean SA1s. It's just that the other levels suck

<font color="#101010" size="1">[ December 06, 2003 08:11 PM: Message edited by: Xellos ]</font>

[bassmandee]

SA2 was horrible compared to all other Sonic games the Sonic team produced. I would almost consider it worse than 3d Blast as in story and camera. I forgot to add a few games to the list that I own. I so own SoA, NFL QBClub '96, Evolution, Evolution 2, Soul Calibur, and Goldeneye.

<font color="#101010" size="1">[ December 06, 2003 10:41 PM: Message edited by: Mallo ]</font>