The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
i think that a really cool game would be one that had a control system like onimusha, graghics like the two towers, a story like medal of honor, set in medieval times, have continuous play (no missions/levels), and have epic battles like dynasty warriors (without magic, stupid controls, or over the top animations) and be as historically accurate and realistic as the moh seris!!!!
Do you agree?
- Why does no company try to make somthing origional like this?
Do you agree?
- Why does no company try to make somthing origional like this?
Page:
i think that a really cool game would be one that had a control system like onimusha, graghics like the two towers, a story like medal of honor, set in medieval times, have continuous play (no missions/levels), and have epic battles like dynasty warriors (without magic, stupid controls, or over the top animations) and be as historically accurate and realistic as the moh seris!!!!
Do you agree?
- Why does no company try to make somthing origional like this?
Do you agree?
- Why does no company try to make somthing origional like this?
what other ideas are better than this, i mean its just the best idea of all time and space.
gta games are so old, vice city really annoyed me when i got it, if the make this idea next time, i would buy it.
Zhuge Liang wrote:
> i think that a really cool game would be one that had a control system
> like onimusha, graghics like the two towers, a story like medal of
> honor, set in medieval times, have continuous play (no
> missions/levels), and have epic battles like dynasty warriors (without
> magic, stupid controls, or over the top animations) and be as
> historically accurate and realistic as the moh seris!!!!
>
> Do you agree?
> - Why does no company try to make somthing origional like this?
so your discribing the final fantasy series. it has great grafics, nice control system, continuous play, some are set in medievil times while some are futuristic/si-fi, and some are set in this kind of age. its not historicaly accurate as that would be dull, and predicable.
> i think that a really cool game would be one that had a control system
> like onimusha, graghics like the two towers, a story like medal of
> honor, set in medieval times, have continuous play (no
> missions/levels), and have epic battles like dynasty warriors (without
> magic, stupid controls, or over the top animations) and be as
> historically accurate and realistic as the moh seris!!!!
>
> Do you agree?
> - Why does no company try to make somthing origional like this?
so your discribing the final fantasy series. it has great grafics, nice control system, continuous play, some are set in medievil times while some are futuristic/si-fi, and some are set in this kind of age. its not historicaly accurate as that would be dull, and predicable.
morbo wrote:
> Zhuge Liang wrote:
> i think that a really cool game would be one that had a control
> system
> like onimusha, graghics like the two towers, a story like medal of
> honor, set in medieval times, have continuous play (no
> missions/levels), and have epic battles like dynasty warriors
> (without
> magic, stupid controls, or over the top animations) and be as
> historically accurate and realistic as the moh seris!!!!
>
> Do you agree?
> - Why does no company try to make somthing origional like this?
>
> so your discribing the final fantasy series. it has great grafics,
> nice control system, continuous play, some are set in medievil times
> while some are futuristic/si-fi, and some are set in this kind of age.
> its not historicaly accurate as that would be dull, and predicable.
The game i am describing is nothing like final fantasy, thats turn based versus 3 guys max or as i like to call it, crap. This would be fighting 1000's of people in battles like in braveheart or gladiator, with no bloody magic!!!!
> Zhuge Liang wrote:
> i think that a really cool game would be one that had a control
> system
> like onimusha, graghics like the two towers, a story like medal of
> honor, set in medieval times, have continuous play (no
> missions/levels), and have epic battles like dynasty warriors
> (without
> magic, stupid controls, or over the top animations) and be as
> historically accurate and realistic as the moh seris!!!!
>
> Do you agree?
> - Why does no company try to make somthing origional like this?
>
> so your discribing the final fantasy series. it has great grafics,
> nice control system, continuous play, some are set in medievil times
> while some are futuristic/si-fi, and some are set in this kind of age.
> its not historicaly accurate as that would be dull, and predicable.
The game i am describing is nothing like final fantasy, thats turn based versus 3 guys max or as i like to call it, crap. This would be fighting 1000's of people in battles like in braveheart or gladiator, with no bloody magic!!!!
Zhuge Liang wrote:
>
> The game i am describing is nothing like final fantasy, thats turn
> based versus 3 guys max or as i like to call it, crap. This would be
> fighting 1000's of people in battles like in braveheart or gladiator,
> with no bloody magic!!!!
um, i think that is called a stratgy game like cossacks. you control an army and you play as people in history and fight famous battles.
>
> The game i am describing is nothing like final fantasy, thats turn
> based versus 3 guys max or as i like to call it, crap. This would be
> fighting 1000's of people in battles like in braveheart or gladiator,
> with no bloody magic!!!!
um, i think that is called a stratgy game like cossacks. you control an army and you play as people in history and fight famous battles.
morbo wrote:
> Zhuge Liang wrote:
>
> The game i am describing is nothing like final fantasy, thats turn
> based versus 3 guys max or as i like to call it, crap. This would
> be
> fighting 1000's of people in battles like in braveheart or
> gladiator,
> with no bloody magic!!!!
>
> um, i think that is called a stratgy game like cossacks. you control
> an army and you play as people in history and fight famous battles.
where u control one guy like in onimusha
> Zhuge Liang wrote:
>
> The game i am describing is nothing like final fantasy, thats turn
> based versus 3 guys max or as i like to call it, crap. This would
> be
> fighting 1000's of people in battles like in braveheart or
> gladiator,
> with no bloody magic!!!!
>
> um, i think that is called a stratgy game like cossacks. you control
> an army and you play as people in history and fight famous battles.
where u control one guy like in onimusha
Zhuge Liang wrote:
> what other ideas are better than this
*thinks*
Baywatch the game would be fantastic
if you could get david hasselhof and the many baywatch 'actresses' to agree to have their likenesses to appear, then slap a great big 18 rating on it then it would sell more that grand theft auto
:)
> what other ideas are better than this
*thinks*
Baywatch the game would be fantastic
if you could get david hasselhof and the many baywatch 'actresses' to agree to have their likenesses to appear, then slap a great big 18 rating on it then it would sell more that grand theft auto
:)
you want a game were you conrtrol one guy, and have 1000s of people fighting under your control at the same time. if you can even set up a control system for that i would call it to complicated, as you have to keep an eye on the battle and you own charcter or you die. think about all you stipulations.
morbo wrote:
> you want a game were you conrtrol one guy, and have 1000s of people
> fighting under your control at the same time. if you can even set up a
> control system for that i would call it to complicated, as you have to
> keep an eye on the battle and you own charcter or you die. think about
> all you stipulations.
I agree. You can't really have all this stuff in one game without it losing the arcade atmosphere and style that you appear to want. You'd have to lose some of the stuff, or be prepared to make sacrifices of other kinds.
> you want a game were you conrtrol one guy, and have 1000s of people
> fighting under your control at the same time. if you can even set up a
> control system for that i would call it to complicated, as you have to
> keep an eye on the battle and you own charcter or you die. think about
> all you stipulations.
I agree. You can't really have all this stuff in one game without it losing the arcade atmosphere and style that you appear to want. You'd have to lose some of the stuff, or be prepared to make sacrifices of other kinds.
Page: