Disgaea lets you rename items, and the D2 even lets you change the model of a weapon to any you've wielded prior.shrekfan246 said:Well, it's not an old game by any means, but I've been playing a fair bit of Fire Emblem: Awakening lately, and I really wish more character/story-driven RPGs let you reforge and name your weapons.
Case in point, my twin archers were wielding Conviction and Clemency respectively.
And they were great times.
That being said, I want more games akin to Tactics Ogre, Disgaea, Final Fantasy Tactics and not so much the systems in place in Agarest. The story is fine honestly, but the combat system pales in my comparisons to these prior mentions.
Here's where I both agree and disagree with you. If you were to compare Call of Duty and Battlefield based solely on those merits, then it's a simple logical deduction to presume they are quite similar, though it's far from the case in reality.xDarc said:Yep, this is the biggest and least discussed loss to gaming. FPS games got dumbed down to become a household product; the old stuff is locked up like the necronomicon and developers dare not speak it's name or read from the book. To do that would be to kill the cash cow that is Battlefield and CoD.
I always get a chuckle when I see people arguing about how BF and CoD are nothing alike- any game with a heavy movement penalty on cone of fire that forces you stop moving to shoot is an anti-twitch game and it's all the same to me.
That's why nobody likes old skool run and gun/twitch games- they were hard and you could be beaten mercilessly. The games these days, everyone gets kills, everyones a winner- and if you kill X people in a row, hell, the game will kill a few more people for you in the form of a kill streak reward. Way to go winner!
I can understand your dissatisfaction with the mechanisms in place in most modern shooter entries.
I can understand that you feel that these games may "cater" to those playing it, and perhaps be less 'skill-based' as a result of so many additional features.
I can understand the frustration involved with having something you enjoy mutate into something you do not.
However, is it not unfair to blame these games on the death of your beloved games? The market often decides what is predominant with a fair number of competitors copying the best selling franchise.
You know this already.
Is it not more accurate to assert that games with high skill floors would be less endearing than something a bit more simple and approachable? Whether people refuse or simply unable to "get on one's level" isn't grounds to denigrate the more successful evolution of the genre.
That said, you are correct in a number of ways. The world is quite large enough to accomodate entires of both styles, and it can be incredibly disappointing to see more attention showered upon aberrant versions of a game you adore. It's shameful to me that that there are so many more attempts at mimetic success rather than robustness and diversity within all genres.
You have my sincerest condolences, and trust me, I feel your pain in quite a similar fashion.