Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by rgraves

  1. My apologies, I did of course mean 52. 52 different strengths of attack.
  2. Approximately 16.389% would have been better. Adding an extra 1/2 button would see that figure rise by 34.56% though. Do I need to add a smiley here? Really? OK, if you insist
  3. Wow! I hope that sells like hot cakes!
  4. So you're saying that because of one game, originally released on a completely different platform, the GBA needs 2 extra buttons? So if I design a game which uses 22 different strengths of attack and release it on the PS2, will the PS2 suddenly need extra buttons or will I just have released a game which was poorly designed for the console?
  5. That would rock - especially one of those ones you can roll up (note: insert winkey here). Although, if it doesn't then come with a ScrLk button I hope it fails miserably
  6. Of course we'd all probably prefer 4, but you have to remember that you posted this piece of drivel: You didn't say that you'd prefer 4 over 2 - you said that if it didn't have 4+ you hoped it would "fail miserably". You can't seriously stand by that can you?
  7. With a touch screen (if it has one, which I doubt personally) you'd just sweep your finger over the screen to pan the camera left or right etc
  8. Not enough for what though? For Advance Wars - one of the best games released on any system in the past few years? For Wario Ware? For Mario & Luigi? For Metroid Fusion? Just because a system doesn't have X number of buttons, doesn't mean it's going to be terrible. Surely the games count, not the number of fricking buttons that they use - that was my point.
  9. Yes, because everybody knows that you can only make great games when making use of 10+ buttons.
  10. rgraves

    Ffcc Pal

    So you wish that a fantastic game had never existed because you refuse to play it? Christ, get a grip.
  11. rgraves

    Ffcc Pal

    Hold on...If you "can't" play FFCC, why did you post this is another recent thread: Now either you have played the game, or you were offering advice to somebody about something you had no experience of at all - and what would be the point in that? I mean if you haven't played it, how do you know how fun or not it is with 1, 2, 3 or 4 players? Oh and it's not that you "can't" play FFCC, it's that you "refuse" to play FFCC. The problem is not with Square-Enix....
  12. I disagree - the game is glorious with 2, 3 or 4 players. Really, just playing it with 2 is still an absolute blast and it certainly shouldn't be passed over for fear of not mustering a 'full' team.
  13. Eh? The mould was used to make the sword - it's not used to go on the finished article in any way.
  14. Right now, Nintendo are planning on a US release. I'll be stunned if it's not shown at E3.
  15. It is getting a western release. Expect to see a translated build on show at E3. Maybe
  16. There isn't one - it's a GC exclusive.
  17. Dunno if it helps, but somebody over at NTSC-UK posted this (playing the JPN version):
  18. Nonsense, Seven Serpents was better!
  19. I'm sure a lot of them weren't. Touché?
  20. Absolutely, totally, 100% exclusive. Nintendo paid good money for the RE series on GC, and RE4 is going nowhere.
  21. AvP on the Jag was pretty tense. It had a great motion tracker beep.
  22. Isn't this one gonna have a quasi-first-person aiming mode built in though (see that first grab, and hence the widescreen only format)....should offer the best of both worlds Rejoice!
  23. Wow - thanks for that. You've just made me realise that all those hours spent playing them were actually wasted. I wasn't having fun at all. It was terrible, and I was just in denial.
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.