If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the Forum Rules. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Welcome to RPGamer's new forums running under Vanilla Forums! If you're run into any odd or strange issues after our software migration please see this thread for details

Mario & Luigi Preview

LaoKLaoK MemberFull Members
edited October 2003 in Latest Updates
The moment you've all been waiting for! This comes just as I'm finishing Paper Mario, and even though this one's made by different developers, I'm very optimistic. Although the smart money has this game getting delayed.

Comments

  • Happy HoboHappy Hobo Member Full Members
    edited October 2003
    I loved SMRPG, and I liked Paper Mario. Hope this one is good too.
    I would love to see Square and Nintendo join up and make a proper SMRPG 2, with Luigi as a playable character, of course.



  • Q. MulativeQ. Mulative Banned Banned Users
    edited October 2003
    No thanks, I don't need MORE of Squaresoft's half-baked attempts at minigames and play-extensions.
  • LordBrianLordBrian Member Full Members
    edited October 2003
    Uh...then it's a good thing Square has nothing to do with this one, I guess.
  • SeraphimHunterSeraphimHunter Member Full Members
    edited October 2003
    Loved SMRPG, hated Paper Mario. I'm a little skeptical of this title. I'll wait for the reviews before passing my judgment. Still, it's nice to see Luigi back, and having his name in the title alone is a great achievement for the poor guy.
  • BoomerangBoomerang Member Full Members
    edited October 2003
    I agree with SH. I felt that Square's influence was sorely missed in Paper Mario. If the reviews are reasonably favorable, I'll still buy it despite my reservations.

    Actually, the only thing I care about is whether or not Booster appears!
  • SeraphimHunterSeraphimHunter Member Full Members
    edited October 2003
    After reading a few more previews here and there, I really don't think I'm interested anymore. It's apparently for young kids, and well, I'm not. It's not to say that I hate all games like that (I have nearly every other Mario game...), but, well, I dunno. I just think that Nintendo is trying way too hard for some titles, or just not enough for others, and this game falls in "just not enough" for me. For others, it's probably what they've been having pipe dreams about, but for me, this game has no appeal anymore. And that's partly Paper Mario's fault. Oh how I hate that game...with a burning passion.

    If anything convinces me to pick this up, it's because Luigi is actually in a game WITH Mario. It's usually been one or the other (the Party games don't count). This is kinda like history, heh.
  • RosewoodRosewood Member Full Members
    edited October 2003
    Is this the first non-port Mario since Sunshine? Even if it isn't, it seems like it's been a long time...

    I enjoyed both SMRPG and Paper Mario, and now that I think of it, SMRPG was the first RPG I ever completed (and Yoshi's Island was my first platformer). Nintendo does well at playing to people's fond memories of their previous games, at it does least to mine, since I'm really looking forward to this one! smile.gif
  • Q. MulativeQ. Mulative Banned Banned Users
    edited October 2003
    The most improved feature from SMRPG to Paper Mario, other than the obvious, was the battle system. In particular, in SMRPG, even if your timing was perfect, you could still roll a miss on your attack. In Paper Mario, if you performed well, no die roll could tell you otherwise.
  • SeraphimHunterSeraphimHunter Member Full Members
    edited October 2003
    Yeah but what frustrated me was that it was just way too simple. The battles in SMRPG were hard and required a lot more strategy (especially in the way of FP). Paper Mario was a joke, and taking no more than 2 HP of damage each turn annoyed the freaking heck outta me...the puzzles had their moments however. I admit the style was pretty interesting and innovative, but a good style hardly makes a good game.

    That's probably the only game where Nintendo's kiddy image really shined through to me. I never perceived Mario as that kiddy til that game. confused.gif
  • Q. MulativeQ. Mulative Banned Banned Users
    edited October 2003
    Yeah, so much strategy:

    SMRPG:

    I take 20 damage. OH MY GOD I'M DYING! I ONLY HAVE 424 more HP left! OMG HOW HARD!

    Paper Mario:

    I take 2 damage, out of 5 total. If I can't take out three enemies within this round, I'm dead. Easy, or something.
  • DracosDracos Member Full Members
    edited October 2003
    </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Q. Mulative @ Oct. 16 2003,16:38)</td></tr><tr><td class="QUOTE"The most improved feature from SMRPG to Paper Mario, other than the obvious, was the battle system. ?In particular, in SMRPG, even if your timing was perfect, you could still roll a miss on your attack. ?In Paper Mario, if you performed well, no die roll could tell you otherwise.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
    I'm pretty sure you are wrong there. While it has been well, a few months since my last speed run of it, I'm fairly certain that an attack that hits perfectly on the time block would always hit. Similarly, a defense that hit perfectly on the defense block would always take zero damage. Now, given these were bare flickers of time, most of the time you got in the 'good' area, which would do a little less damage and would have a chance of missing. It was quite possible to mow through all of SMRPG without taking a single point of damage and dealing all double damage crits, even if well outside the reaction or timing abilities of most players.

    Dracos
  • Q. MulativeQ. Mulative Banned Banned Users
    edited October 2003
    Basically, that means Square expects you to be a robot in order to play this game perfectly, and the timing system is based more on luck than on skill, which makes it less than mandatory to learn. You could do equally well by rolling misses all your normal attacks and just deciding to fireball everything to death, using one of the plentiful Flower Tab/Jar/Boxes to refill and extend FP whenever you needed. I remember having pretty much an item block full of tabs, jars and boxes near the end of my last game, years ago. Mario, Toadstool, and Mallow, my team, only boosted in Magic the entire time.
  • DracosDracos Member Full Members
    edited October 2003
    Or rather that the game, like most RPGs, isn't intended for you to go through taking no damage and always striking crit o_O;. I don't see the logic in complaining about the possiblity of doing something that is normally not included in an RPG (Action or not). Generally, if you are playing an RPG, there will be some attacks you simply cannot dodge, block, evade. Do you complain about not getting through FF4 without taking a point of damage and dealing perfect criticals every strike? Such would be rather silly. And you misinterpreted what I meant by most can't do it. I was more referring to the whole 'consistently' aspect. There are some, myself among them, who can go fairly long stretches in that game without taking a single point of damage and dealing outrageous criticals with every strike. Can I do this for the entire game without missing? No. I'm not nearly that good by any means. I don't see where you are pulling 'luck' from. It is 'timing' and 'rhythm' throughout the entire game that matters. No matter how 'lucky' you are, you aren't going to complete a 100 hit super/ultra jump attack. It just won't happen. That requires timing and following the flow of it.

    It wasn't mandatory to learn the timing, this is true. But like optimizing your weapons, there is a significant difference between just tapping the attack button. Additionally, the game wasn't difficult. It was a Mario game of the SNES era. Why were you looking at it and expecting a difficult game? It was campy, fun, and designed in a way that could be enjoyable for both newcomers to RPGs and old hands.

    Dracos
    "I apparently need to be a robot to play baseball as well. Damn requiring great timing to hit every single ball tossed my way."
  • DeathDeath Banned Banned Users
    edited October 2003
  • Q. MulativeQ. Mulative Banned Banned Users
    edited October 2003
    </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Dracos @ Oct. 19 2003,21:41)</td></tr><tr><td class="QUOTE"Or rather that the game, like most RPGs, isn't intended for you to go through taking no damage and always striking crit o_O;. ?I don't see the logic in complaining about the possiblity of doing something that is normally not included in an RPG (Action or not). ?Generally, if you are playing an RPG, there will be some attacks you simply cannot dodge, block, evade. ?Do you complain about not getting through FF4 without taking a point of damage and dealing perfect criticals every strike? ?Such would be rather silly. ?And you misinterpreted what I meant by most can't do it. ?I was more referring to the whole 'consistently' aspect. ?There are some, myself among them, who can go fairly long stretches in that game without taking a single point of damage and dealing outrageous criticals with every strike. ?Can I do this for the entire game without missing? ?No. ?I'm not nearly that good by any means. ?I don't see where you are pulling 'luck' from. ?It is 'timing' and 'rhythm' throughout the entire game that matters. ?No matter how 'lucky' you are, you aren't going to complete a 100 hit super/ultra jump attack. ?It just won't happen. ?That requires timing and following the flow of it.

    It wasn't mandatory to learn the timing, this is true. ?But like optimizing your weapons, there is a significant difference between just tapping the attack button. ?Additionally, the game wasn't difficult. ?It was a Mario game of the SNES era. ?Why were you looking at it and expecting a difficult game? ?It was campy, fun, and designed in a way that could be enjoyable for both newcomers to RPGs and old hands.

    Dracos
    "I apparently need to be a robot to play baseball as well. ?Damn requiring great timing to hit every single ball tossed my way."[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
    In an R.P.G., you're expected to eventually win, as the computer doesn't care if it loses. Baseball is based more on fairness.

    What I'm getting at, is the die rolls and timing system do not mix to form something very fun. The inconsistency they provide the player with such a setup takes away from the enjoyment of getting it right, as sometimes, right still means a miss. You're theory of there being blocks of time where "Perfect Attacks" and "Perfect Defends" occur can't be supported on word of mouth alone. I'm going to need to see source code here if you're going to prove something silly like that. If you have been going through parts without taking damage or always dealing 2x damage, then that is more likely out of a run of luck than anything.

    Take for example the Geno beam. No matter how many times you try, even if you're early sometimes he'll jump up and do double, other times you're late and he still jumps, but most of the time, no matter when you let go, he'll do the normal attack. It pretty much depends on the die rolls, meaning that the action system itself really isn't worth much more than the gimmick-value of it.
  • LordBrianLordBrian Member Full Members
    edited October 2003
    </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td class="QUOTE"What I'm getting at, is the die rolls and timing system do not mix to form something very fun. The inconsistency they provide the player with such a setup takes away from the enjoyment of getting it right, as sometimes, right still means a miss. You're theory of there being blocks of time where "Perfect Attacks" and "Perfect Defends" occur can't be supported on word of mouth alone. I'm going to need to see source code here if you're going to prove something silly like that.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

    It's not fun? I'm gonna have to see some sort of proof if you want to convince me of something as silly as that.
  • DracosDracos Member Full Members
    edited October 2003
    *Whistles* I think Lord Brian hit this nicely on the head. I don't know what game you were playing, but I don't think it was SMRPG!

    Anyhow, since you don't seem to understand the baseball analogy at all and because I think it's such a nice one for this, I'll explain it a bit. Does an average baseball team hit every ball? No. Of course not. Do they still win? Well, yes. They don't have to hit every ball to win and they don't have to hit a grand slam every time to win either. For any given attack in that game, there was three 'ranges':
    Range A) You barely hit the ball. It goes somewhere in the field.
    Range B) You got a 'good' hit. It does extra damage or, using the analogy, gets all the way to the far outfield. Might it still be caught? Sure. There's those rare chances in which it happens. Amazing!
    Range C) A small subset of range B where it flies out of the outfield. Home run. It's out of the ballpark, not coming back, can't be caught.

    Do you have to hit all home runs to win or have fun in baseball? No, of course not. It'd be ridiculous whether it was run in person or run by a computer which you were supposed to beat (like, well, all baseball games). Same with SMRPG. You don't need to get all perfect hits or perfect dodges to have fun or win at the game. Nor is any sane person expecting to. The only ones who even consider the possibility of going through the whole thing and doing perfect attacks the whole time are those who study the timing and realizing they built in the 'possibility' of it, even if it's incredibly unlikely that you'd do it.

    Of course, you don't believe this because it isn't the 'source code'. Because, you know, the source code for Super Mario RPG is just floating around the net and can't be guessed at by examination. Can I know with absolute certainty? Hell no. Is my guess better than yours? I'd damn bet so. Heck, I even know how they probably implemented it, from studying a fair bit of source codes. An 'attack' code likes checks the weapon being attacked with and boots the input handling over to a function specific to that weapon type. From there, a timer function is initialized to the game clock current time, and input is waited for. Depending upon the time frame input is received on, certain numbers are crunched, and certain things happen before it initializes the input again and boots it out to the battle gaming functions again. Wow! That'd provide the exact type of effect we see throughout the game! Can I prove that they used exactly this method? No, and to ask is ridiculous.

    Albeit, the 'run of luck' hypothesis starts getting weird when I can do it a few hundred times in a row. And do it more than once in a game. No die system worth it's code would give that level of luck. Ergo, whereas my 'word of mouth' can suport what actually occurs in the game, yours requires that the dice system they are using be stupid and broken for at least three game cartridges as far as I've seen. I think I'll stick with the one that holds up to the test of time, rather that assumes the game is broken. Especially when you are making statements as silly as the one LB quoted.

    Dracos
  • Q. MulativeQ. Mulative Banned Banned Users
    edited October 2003
    It seems you don't understand your own analogy. The average baseball team wins and loses. The reasoning behind it is simple: There's another team involved, and they have to win sometimes, too. Squaresoft is making their game like baseball, in the way that you can lose at the drop of a hat, no matter how experienced you are at the game. The problem is, there's already a battle system in play, and this one interferes with it. The worst part is, they don't even try to compensate by providing you an accuracy stat to boost.

    What isn't fun, is getting perfect timing, and then seeing "miss" as your damage. If you enjoy that, then may I recommend "Defenders of Dynatron City" or "the Bouncer?" With some of the worst hit detection in history, these two games ought to top your list the moment you watch your weapon/fist ineffectively pass through your enemy. Or how about Hologram Baseball? You swing at a hologram of a ball and nothing happens, what fun!

    Your pseudo algorithm is the messiest drivel I've ever had to slog my eyes through, and I'm dealing with people who've never even seen computers, here. A more likely formula is that when the "timing button" adds a certain proportion to your damage, the roll to determine hits or misses is separate, and if it misses, it misses regardless of the timing roll.

    There's a better name for what I call a "run of luck." It's called "lying." I personally don't care how many hundreds of criticals you've landed, or how good you are at the game, but when you use a game-mechanics argument to brag, your credibility is shot.

    The fact is, SMRPG's system, as good as it may seem, will always lag behind that of Paper Mario because of the needless weight brought on by the two conflicting die-roll/timing systems. Paper Mario's natural system will always be better because of its consistent rewarding of timing skill, yet will also be more challenging because of the low HP and harsh punishment of missing defence.

    This beings me to another of Squaresoft's biggest faults: their need to deal hundreds and hundreds of damage at a time. To me, it's insulting to the intelligence, because it's just as good as 1 damage, but with a zero or two on the end to make the player think he's uber-powerful. If you like that, the all power to you, but know that dealing one damage to a 10HP enemy is just as effective as dealing 9999 to a 10000HP enemy.
  • LordBrianLordBrian Member Full Members
    edited October 2003
    First of all, I really don't remember the game being as extremely flawed as you make it sound. Granted, it's been a few years, but Mario RPG is not one of the games that stand out in my mind as one with horrible amounts of misses (that's reserved for games like Shadow Madness and FF11). Anyway...

    </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td class="QUOTE"This beings me to another of Squaresoft's biggest faults: their need to deal hundreds and hundreds of damage at a time. To me, it's insulting to the intelligence, because it's just as good as 1 damage, but with a zero or two on the end to make the player think he's uber-powerful. If you like that, the all power to you, but know that dealing one damage to a 10HP enemy is just as effective as dealing 9999 to a 10000HP enemy.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

    You're right. Now let's take another common feature from Japanese society, their monetary system. Why the hell is there a need to spend 100 yen when you can easily simplify things to 1 yen, much like 100 pennies reduces to $1? It's absolutely ridiculous! In fact, why would anyone want to use a currency where you have to pay an absolutely outrageous sum of 40,000 yen when you could just chop off those extra zeros?

    Give me a break.
  • DracosDracos Member Full Members
    edited October 2003
    That's odd, Mulative. Do you program? That was one straight from a class on game design, pretty much. Doing a time based multiplier off of what is the standard timer (the computer clock), would be a huge pain. Perhaps doable, but it seems completely illogical in my experience range given the way the whole computer time functions.

    Now, I last played the game...this summer. When did you? My credibility is shot by... saying the truth on how the game functions? Compared to making up #### about having perfect timing and missing (which would be an impossible to demonstrate thing. I simply claim, wonder of wonder, you don't have perfect timing!), this is 'incredible'? The concept that you simply don't have perfect timing all the time is ridiculous to you?

    You miss that I'm not 'bragging', so much as pulling in my own experience with the game to indicate how the game mechanic FUNCTIONS AT ALL. What am I supposed to say? "Yeah, I miss tweleve percent of the time regardless of what I do but I think it's something other than arbitrary?" That'd be retarded and lying at the same time.

    You know, if you are going to make that claim that Squaresoft made their game like that, you'll have to back to up by producing a fair bit of people who found they lost a fair bit of the time. I sure didn't find that to be the case. The only losses I can recall were against Culex when I used to try and fight him before doing the lazy shell quest and the volcano. I sure didn't find it to be 'balanced' for you to 'lose at the drop of the hat'. I'll posit an opposing theory here:
    "You just suck at the game."

    This theory has a simpler proving requirement too. It simply assumes that you are the only one with this 'problem' of finding the game balanced so you can 'lose' at the drop of the hat.

    Just a thought, Squaresoft has been making RPGs for a rather long time. Every RPG that has included a dice based accuracy from them has also included an accuracy stat (Or simply a mirror Evade stat to indicate that they are merely using the inverse of accuracy to determine hits) in my recollection. Care to provide one 'other' than this one to indicate some credibility behind them just 'forgetting' an accuracy stat? Preferrably from the same era?

    And last thought about this 'biggest fault'...hmm...

    "Zeromus, HP: 5"
    "Imp, HP: 4"

    Sounds brilliant, no? Who needs the zeros?

    Dracos
  • Q. MulativeQ. Mulative Banned Banned Users
    edited October 2003
    </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td class="QUOTE"That's odd, Mulative. ?Do you program? [/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'> ?Yes. ?I've been programming even since I discovered that if you boot an Apple II/c without a disk in it, it takes you right to a prompt where you can start typing lines in basic. ?I program in C++, Assembly, Java, and I've done a little Visual Basic. ?Currently, I like to play around with scripts in Flash.

    </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td class="QUOTE"Doing a time based multiplier off of what is the standard timer (the computer clock), would be a huge pain. ?Perhaps doable, but it seems completely illogical in my experience range given the way the whole computer time functions.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
    If you program, then it's pretty easy to understand. You have a RandomRoll function which returns what is effectively a to hit roll, and a GetTimedHit function which returns a number between 1.0 and 2.0 based on when you hit the button. ?Then the simple algorithm after the button is pressed:

    If(RandomRoll() > NeededToHit)
    {
    .....Damage *= GetTimedHit();
    }

    Also, there's the fact that toad tells you right in the beginning, after teaching you exactly when to hit the button "Oh, by the way, it doesn't doesn't always work" ?Now, is that the translators fault for misinterpreting "It always works if you're good," or are you going to throw some other lies my way?

    </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td class="QUOTE"Now, I last played the game...this summer. [/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'> ?I last played the game....this yesterday. ?And I can boot up the two games side-by-side at any time I'm not doing assignments in order to compare them. ?Here's something: ?Paper Mario had you travel through interesting environments while you fought or evaded enemies in creative ways. ?One example would be right near the beginning, where you have what could be a typical Mario level, and you might break a brick, out of habit, and suddenly an enemy lying on top, will jump from it, laugh at you for falling for the trick, and proceed to attack. ?In 7 stars, the best they could do was stand an enemy on a cannon so that you'd have to jump for it. ?In Paper Mario, you can actually fight the cannons themselves! ?Also, in SMRPG, it didn't matter whether you jumped on the enemy or vice versa, it was randomly determined who went first. ?In Paper Mario, you could hit an enemy many different ways from outside battle, whether by the hammer, jump, sneaking a bomb up behind it while it wasn't looking, &c. and deal the damage from that within as a "First Strike." ?The same thing could happen to you. ?Third, it's hard to believe, but SMRPG's characters attacks, have only one formula, "press 'a' at the right time.. ?Paper Mario had you pulling back on the stick for the hammer, charging and releasing body slams and shell strikes, shaking the stick to slap someone back and forth, and these were just basic attacks! ?Also, the skill set is a lot more creative. ?Rather than what is effectively "Jump, fireball, Jump2, fireball2, Jump3, fireball3." ?You have skills that actually have descriptive names, like "Hammer Throw." ?which allows you to hit a top-spiked enemy that's flying without having to jump for it. ?An alternative method would be to wear the Spike Shield Badge and jump on it anyway, but I prefer the former, more challenging method.

    </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td class="QUOTE"The concept that you simply don't have perfect timing all the time is ridiculous to you?[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
    Yes. ?Quite ridiculous. ?Nobody has perfect timing all the time, or musician would never have to record their songs multiple times.


    </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td class="QUOTE"You miss that I'm not 'bragging', so much as pulling in my own experience...[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
    ...and bragging/lying about it. ?If you miss twelve percent of the time, whether it's before of after, you still miss. ?The thing is, 7 stars doesn't tell you either way. ?Paper Mario does, with the indicator, you'll know exactly whether you were too early, too late, or just missed the movement completely.

    Here's a better idea. ?Ever played Terranigma? ?Usually, the way you levelled up was just fast enough that you'd deal 1-5 damage to the bosses. ?The boss fights themselves took a long time, but they were at least challenging, as opposed to dealing 9999 damage for ten attacks and defeating Zeromus without a scratch. ?Perhaps having a squillion HP would mean something if you had to chip away at it, 1 point at a time.



    </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td class="QUOTE"You're right. Now let's take another common feature from Japanese society, their monetary system. Why the hell is there a need to spend 100 yen when you can easily simplify things to 1 yen, much like 100 pennies reduces to $1? It's absolutely ridiculous! In fact, why would anyone want to use a currency where you have to pay an absolutely outrageous sum of 40,000 yen when you could just chop off those extra zeros?
    [/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
    So you're saying that the system is based on their money? ?That makes sense, as it could be a subconscious influence.



  • DracosDracos Member Full Members
    edited October 2003
    *laughs*

    Nice long dodge. I especially loved the long sidetrack comparing SMRPG to it's own sequel and pretending that was relevent to how SMRPG's system works. Or has the discussion gone on long enough that you've forgotten what was being discussed?

    Sheesh, I've really not seen such a broad "missed the point" in quite a while.

    </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td class="QUOTE"
    Yes. Quite ridiculous. Nobody has perfect timing all the time, or musician would never have to record their songs multiple times.
    [/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

    Congrats. You are correct. Not only does no one have perfect timing but the game design was...DEPENDING ON THIS! What happens if the player has perfect timing all of the time? The game would be too easy and you'd be able to head through without taking much damage at all. This would make a timing based system very bad in that case. But wait, since people don't have perfect timing, one can produce a game that retains challenge and fun with an expectation that they'll win some of the time and lose some of the time. God, let's just apply your ridiculous logic to a few other things.

    In shooter games, people occassionally miss. Generally, for almost all people, they lack the timing, accuracy, and memory to hit every single possible target as it flies out. But to hit and avoid damage, they require you hit every target flying your way! This must mean they are being 'unfair' or some similarly line! Heck, one could almost pretend that there was some random 'miss' chance if one wasn't good at it!

    You seem to have this weird concept that referring to Paper Mario as 'better' than SMRPGs system somehow intrinisically changes the mechanics of SMRPG. It doesn't. All it provides is an amusing dodge.

    Btw, I recall Terranigma, it was entertaining and also...an 'action' rpg where it was quite possible to dodge a fair bit of attacks. Additionally, if you found yourself only doing 1-5 damage, you probably weren't taking advantage of all the varieties of attacks that game had to offer. Additionally, why don't you head back to the beginning of one of the 'level' brackets right before it gets closed off in that game and see how much damage you do. Doing 'small' damage indeed. Anyhow, nice side irrelevancy!

    I wonder, can you discuss this without bringing in irrelevent topics? I never stated that SMRPG was better or worse than Paper Mario, thus all discussion regarding that isn't relevent to anything I've said. And your sideline into Square's greatest 'flaw', while highly amusing, isn't relevent either.

    I've made my theory which contains perfectly all the data yours does. Yours does not handle the data my experience does, so you toss it off as lying. Quite mature of you.

    Dracos
  • Q. MulativeQ. Mulative Banned Banned Users
    edited October 2003
    </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Dracos @ Oct. 23 2003,09:15)</td></tr><tr><td class="QUOTE"[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
    </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td class="QUOTE"Or has the discussion gone on long enough that you've forgotten what was being discussed?[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

    I think you have forgotten. This is about comparing and contrasting the game-mechanics of Mario's previous R.P.G. ventures against each other and speculation as to the sequel, as there hasn't been much information about it released, other than Peach's voice being replaced with explosives, and Mario and Luigi being controlled simultaneously, both outside and inside of battle. Our arguments pitted against each other are ineffective to changing each others' mindsets, but if you want to ignore the evidence that I present straight from the games themselves, citing it as irrelevancy, then I have no more interest in discussing this with you. If you have anything to say, then at least play the games again and find something within them that you can use against mine. I know of one thing, but I'll wait to see if you can find it before telling you what it is.
  • LordBrianLordBrian Member Full Members
    edited October 2003
    Dracos: In other words, he's saying not to argue with him until you feel like agreeing with his (wrong) points of view.
  • DracosDracos Member Full Members
    edited October 2003
    Yeah, except I didn't care about that Mulative. I just came in to indicate you were wrong on your analysis of SMRPG. Anyhow, I think Lord Brian has hit the nail soundly on the head. So I'll take my leave here. laugh.gif

    Dracos
Sign In or Register to comment.