racketboy.com

BogusMeatFactory wrote:I don't think it is bad, but I don't think it is as good as people remember. Having played it a few years ago, I wasn't like, "Ewww," but I was not wowed.

The "ewww" part comes when you try to drive the vehicles on jak 2 and 3.

BogusMeatFactory wrote:

Xeogred wrote:Yeah Jak & Daxter isn't good. Stick with Sly Cooper and Ratchet & Clank.

I don't think it is bad, but I don't think it is as good as people remember. Having played it a few years ago, I wasn't like, "Ewww," but I was not wowed.

Yeah, I beat it a few years ago myself with the HD trilogy. It's totally fine, like a B-grade Rare N64 platformer. Like others were saying, I think Crash was way better though. Heck I even got the platinum for Jak 1 for some reason.

That said, 10 minutes of Jak 2 was enough for me and I was happy to write off the rest of this series for life. No need to touch it when I still have Sly 3-4 and the Ratchet remaster to play.

BogusMeatFactory wrote:

Xeogred wrote:Yeah Jak & Daxter isn't good. Stick with Sly Cooper and Ratchet & Clank.

I don't think it is bad, but I don't think it is as good as people remember. Having played it a few years ago, I wasn't like, "Ewww," but I was not wowed.

Yeah, I think you both got it right. It's not an awful game or anything, but it's really nothing special, especially with those two far superior series on the same console.

PartridgeSenpai wrote:

BogusMeatFactory wrote:

Xeogred wrote:Yeah Jak & Daxter isn't good. Stick with Sly Cooper and Ratchet & Clank.

I don't think it is bad, but I don't think it is as good as people remember. Having played it a few years ago, I wasn't like, "Ewww," but I was not wowed.

Yeah, I think you both got it right. It's not an awful game or anything, but it's really nothing special, especially with those two far superior series on the same console.

It's big draw was in the character animations. Even on the dreamcast, there wasn't much like it. It was so exaggerated and... bendy. At the time it was a big deal though.

Then when Daxter tries to crack his first snarky joke, you want to mute it immediately.

He was so freaking lame.

Xeogred wrote:Then when Daxter tries to crack his first snarky joke, you want to mute it immediately.

He was so freaking lame.

I don't mind the characters too much. I'm fairly neutral on the writing as a whole. I just don't think anything about the game is remarkable enough to hold my attention. The setting, the story, the presentation is all just so bland. And the gameplay is just a platformer. Nothing terribly special about it, just a platformer. It's almost like it really wants Banjo Kazooie but was made far too late to be relevant in the contest for that kind of mascot platformer.

POKEMON
I've never been able to get into these games, and I don't think I ever will. I've tried a few and was bored silly. Every entry seems to have the same basic design and plot. It's like every new Pokemon is just a remake of the last one. They are entirely about grinding, grinding, grinding. Sure the monster designs are cute, I get that. I guess I can understand how this tedious and repetitive game design could be fun for an 8 year old, but I don't at all understand what an adult gamer sees in it. I guess I was too old when Pokemon originally debuted and don't have the nostalgia slant millennials do. But on the real MT/SMT is proper Pokemon for grown ups. MT also predated Pokemon.

Exhuminator wrote:POKEMON
I've never been able to get into these games, and I don't think I ever will. I've tried a few and was bored silly. Every entry seems to have the same basic design and plot. It's like every new Pokemon is just a remake of the last one. They are entirely about grinding, grinding, grinding. Sure the monster designs are cute, I get that. I guess I can understand how this tedious and repetitive game design could be fun for an 8 year old, but I don't at all understand what an adult gamer sees in it. I guess I was too old when Pokemon originally debuted and don't have the nostalgia slant millennials do. But on the real MT/SMT is proper Pokemon for grown ups. MT also predated Pokemon.

Competitive play is what attracts a lot of older players. There is a ton of depth in the game, but the single player content doesn't require the player to understand or make use of any of it, nor does it do a good job of even explaining it (Probably due to fear of being offputting to the players that just want the simple game it appears to be)

Exhuminator wrote:POKEMON

I played the first generation when it came out in the US. Thought it was kind of cute. Didn't love it enough to keep going. I picked up one for the DS when it came out (Diamond and Pearl I think?) to see how things had changed, found out they really didn't. I got bored halfway through and that was that.

Though I got really into Dragon Ball Fusions for 3DS which is basically just Pokemon with Dragon Ball characters. Though I find the battle system of that game pretty fun.

I played through Blue, back when I pretty much played every RPG I could get my hands on. I wasn't even aware of the cartoon when I bought it, I just saw all the coverage in Nintendo Power and thought, "Game Boy RPG!"

They're solid, sure, but yes, they are also grind-heavy. Trying to catch a particularly rare critter wasn't unlike hunting down Metal Slimes (or Metal Babbles / Metal King Slimes later on) in Dragon Warrior. There was a time where I had less to play, and I would spend lots of time just grinding. I can't really do that much these days.

I have absolutely heard that the high-level metagame is pretty great. That's probably not too different from a lot of MMORPGs, too. I heard the same argument for World of Warcraft.

For the record, I still own some of the games. At least one of the GBA, DS, and 3DS entries. But I played for a bit and promptly forgot about them.