Why did it have to suck so much?

Why did it have to suck so much?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=NEMzaoieKuQ
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

I loved Ratchet & Clank 3 for over a decade but started to hate it just a few weeks ago, no idea why, anyone else know this feel?

checked

it didn't suck, it was only slightly disappointing

an eceleb pointed out flaws with its level design and writing
doesn't matter that he liked the game on the whole, because Sup Forums is full of sperglords

No

How good are these games compared to Jak and Daxter? Dunno whether I should play Jak II or the first R&C once I finish Yakuza.

Kill yourself

This, post haste.

IMO Ratchet does the whole shooter/platformer hybrid schtick a lot better than the Jak sequels. Even the first Ratchet game, generally considered to be the weakest, has much better shooting than either of the Jak sequels.

Only the first game has a decent platforming emphasis though, there's less of it in the second and it's almost gone in the third.

What a waste of quads. It was better than R&C2, which had some pretty shoddy level designs.

Can't believe such a get was wasted on a walking condom advertisement known as OP.

Ratchet 2 had levels which weren't corridors.

>eceleb makes shit point on a R&C3
>everyone hates it now

yeah, cuz the combat in R&C1 isn't fucking clunky as all fuck or anything. No strafing, and makes it hard to control the combat or aim when fighting.

or that R&C2 Giant Clank fights are the worst things ever, and weapons take forever to level up, and some get objectively worse(Lava Gun).

R&C3 may have its flaws, but its till a fun game with plenty of content. And its still has the best weapons in the franchise, only rivaled by possibly Deadlocked.

...

>best weapons in the franchise
yet it has the worst RYNO
what a letdown

So did R&C3 you fucking autist

Combat in Ratchet 1 is fine until the last few levels simply because enemies just aren't as aggressive as in later games. It's only when you get to Kalebo III and Veldin, where enemies shoot from a distance, that it starts to become difficult to handle.
Deadlocked had good weapons but there were barely any of them.

Going Commando is the 'master of none' game in the trilogy. Every aspect of it was done better either in either 1 or 3.

I genuinely hope OP dies prematurely, people who form their opinions by listening to some jobless losers nerd on about their contrarian opinions on the internet need to just be wiped off this earth.

lets not forget that you can't go "crazy" in R&C1 because the ammo isn't as plentiful and the game expects you to use the wrench much more often

I can just tell just by the covers that the edginess just ramps up throughout the PS2 era (that applies to Jak as well, of course). More edginess naturally means more fighting, less jumping, I guess.

OP doesn't give a shit, he's just baiting for (You)s.

holy hell what what a wrong opinion to have, kys

Because you have a small dick.

>guns take forever to level up
>only upgrade once(unless you play Challenge mode)
>that fuckin "open-world" sewer level
>expensive armor upgrade that is pointless by the time you are able to purchase it
>Giant Clank levels

R&C3 did a lot of things much better

Jak II and Jak 3 still have a decent amount of platforming, but there's a lot of other mechanics which you may or may not like. They're worth playing, but I don't think they form as complete a package as the Ratchet games.

Or how much bolt farming you have to do.

Stop making this thread 10 times a day.

>>that fuckin "open-world" sewer level
That was Ratchet 3.

I like Ratchet 1's economy. By the end of Ratchet 1 you only have about half the possible weapons in your inventory since your bolts are so precious. In Ratchet 2 and 3, grinding to unlock more weapons is much more encouraged, but I think that spoils the uniqueness of each run somewhat.

>R&C
>edgyness

no, Jak becomes some GTA-inspired shithole game after the glorious first game

but Ratchet always remains a bro through the series. The franchise never loses its humor, even in Deadlocked(which had the edgy-est cover).

isn't that right JUUUANITA?!

Don't forget to support TheGamingBritShow on his Patreon for his LEGENDARY content! Just legendary!

>I think that spoils the uniqueness of each run

why the fuck would you not want all weapons in your initial playthrough?

why wouldn't you want to fuck around with every possible weapon?

why would you wait for your next playthrough to use another weapon?

Ratchet Deadlocked is definitely edgy, but it plays it off well enough that it actually works. I think

>You will never be butthurt enough to make an hour-and-a-half-long video whining about how the reboot sucks
>You will never be a shitty person and resort to using clickbait which contradicts many points made in said hour-and-a-half-long video

What a tool

>2
>1
>3

you know it to be true

Sorry, on this, I'll just have to disagree. I found it irritating

have you never played an RPG? Or heck, even a Megaman game or Metroidvania? Having a different inventory each time you play a level makes it much more replayable, replayability being one of the things Ratchet 1 relatively lacked.

>metroidvania
Opinion discarded

>have you never played an RPG? Or heck, even a Megaman game or Metroidvania?

what the fuck does metroidvania or megaman has to do with limiting your arsenal through multiple playthroughs?

Metroidvanias are all about collecting everything possible and exploration.

Megamans are about having various power-ups and armors at your disposal.

thats wat makes them fuin, and i play for fun faggot

Megaman games are so replayable because you can tackle the bosses in any order you like, changing the weapons you have available in any particular level and giving you different approaches to try each time you play.
Same for Metroidvanias (at least, the truly nonlinear ones).

that is possible, but what possible reason is there to NOT use every weapon available?

In a initial first playthrough, if there is a weapon available, i wanna try it. There is no reason to wait for my next playthrough to use it, especially if there are means to getting that weapon on the first run. Waiting for your next playthrough is just asenine.

When you have all the weapons, why would you do anything other than spam the RYNO?
Sometimes less is more, because there's more of a reason to be experimental and creative.

Not him, but I got all the weapons, including the RYNO and I still used the others because the weapons were fun. Just because you DO have it, doesn't mean you need to use it all the time.

T𝖊sting

>people saying Going Commando is the best when you have giant clank levels and 2 planets where you have to go and collect 100 mcguffins for filler
Ironically. The ice planet actually turned into an inside joke at insomniac games where whoever makes a bone head decision gets a trophy named after that level.

but the RYNO is fuck expensive and you don't get it well into late game. By then you can have your fill of any weapon you want.

how dense are you?

>and 2 planets where you have to go and collect 100 mcguffins for filler
Only about 10 on each are plot mandatory and you can do that in 5 minutes.

Some people have this thing called restraint which I allows them to forego the easiest option available.

When I was a kid I chained NG+ runs using different weapons since I liked many of them. I liked beating on things with the plasma whip, using that mirror gadget on enemies in the few laser puzzle rooms, trying to see what I could and could not sheepinate or quack-o-ray.

Though that is one of the reasons I ended up disliking Going Commando comparatively to Up Your Arsenal and Deadlocked. The scaling in Going Commando was ass after entering challenge mode. The other two also had issues on this front, but Going Commando was the worst about it. Now I'm remembering that time I tried going through whole levels only using the tri-seeker bomb which did single bomb damage if you used lock-on with it and wasn't particularly powerful if you got all three bombs to hit normally either.

Bump

I thought something was off with NG+ in GC. After a while the enemies were hitting way harder and I felt like I wasn't doing anywhere near enough damage until a weapon upgraded.

Who cares? This game shits on Ratchet 1. That Ratchet1fag who made that video bitches about shit all the time. Same thing like he did with the 2016 remake video which he spends 80 minutes of bitching and whining about the most minor shit nobody cares about like the skill points.

Well it finally happened. It took over a decade, but now you finally found something to shitpost about concerning the original trilogy

Or the title screen...

Ratchet 1's title screen was comfy as hell, fuck you

>1
>3
>2
ftfy

Sure but how often do you sit and watch the title screen?
Not that you can anyway since it starts to play a video after about 20 seconds

Going Commando being the first game to implement actual number growth(in the original, everything damage-wise pretty much remained in the single digits with stuff like the visibomb and the commandos in Veldin being rare exceptions) got some things wrong with it.

This is most noticeable with the Ratchet and Clank 1 weapons accessible in GC, primarily the Walloper and Visibomb. Weapons that did insane damage in the original game which essentially do fuckall the first moment you can get either in GC. Literally takes multiple visibombs for a single mook when it oneshot near anything in the original game. The Walloper I was not even certain actually did more damage than the wrench which thinking back was also near useless in GC(though the wall climbing bug was one of my fondest memories with the game).

GC was scaled so that further enemies would require stronger weapons, however the way the numbers were scaled was so that the first few weapons didn't become much stronger at all while later weapons started off at higher bases and upgraded in relative scale to that higher base. Which makes the starting Machinegun and the Mini-Nuke completely worthless at endgame. This problem gets exacerbated in challenge mode.

I wasn't aware I said it was bad. I'm just pointing out that TheGamingBrit WAS nitpicking things. Calm the hell down.

That's one good thing about Ratchet 1, all of your weapons are useful for all of the game.

I figured. I never used the Visibomb gun or any of the original game's weapons because like you said they were doing piss poor damage. At least Up Your Arsenal fixed that.

>that part in the dev commentary about when someone decided to bring the visibomb back

I really hates this
I hated R&C2 so much

Finally get this cool ass lava gun
Does pretty good damage
1 planet later it does shit all damage and takes 50 ammo per enemy
Upgrade it and get the steaming pile of shit that is the meteor gun
It STILL does shit all damage

At least it was better handled in Up Your Arsenal. Turning into the Liquid Nitrogen Gun

this is why I'm not really fond of all the "RPG" elements the later games added, it just screws the balance

>all these falseflag threads coming out only after the TGBS video
>when the fucking video prefaced with him saying it was still good
Don't you have something else to shitpost about?

They don't

>bakisi isles
Mah nigga
Also metropolis was God tier

Infinitely better. Precursor Legacy is the only good game in the Jak and Daxter series. Jak II is a broken steaming pile of shit and Jak 3 is damn near a carbon copy. The shooting mechanics wouldn't be too bad if there was any way to lock on and/or strafe like you can do in every Ratchet and Clank game after the first one.

The real shit cherry on top of the shit sundae that is post-Precursor Legacy Jak and Daxter would be the inclusion of vehicles. Honestly they were so unnecessary as a regular means of transportation and much of the game revolves around them. It would have been better to just leave vehicles in the races and make Jak's means of fast transportation the hoverboard only.

>why can't the game just be easy?
lol

>dev commentary
I need to go through these some day, they seem interesting
>Walloper
Better than later games but still

Walloper only drops off towards the end because all of the enemies attack from a distance, but for most of the game it's GOAT.

Makes sense but I always defaulted to the wrench for some reason anyway.
Least it wasn't the RC2 levels of inbalance for it.

I like all the games in the series on PS2 because I never got a PS3 or PS4

I liked the gameplay, everything else was meh.

PS2 games were the best anyway. PS3 was still good but lost some of the magic.

...

nothing of value was lost

the PS3 games are ass, and removed all the fun shit from the PS2 titles, also the lore is shit

PS4 remake is ass, with less levels, butchered character personalities, shit music, and movie tie-in bullshit

>people talking about video games are just false flagging

I'm tired of people fucking up when they explain the Snowbeast Award. It's not 'you get a trophy for the worst level' or simply 'worst thing you contributed'

It's given to whoever codes the WORST FEATURE that still manages to ship in The FINAL RELEASE. The guy who made snowbeasts (and the rest of that level) was a junior dev on a pretty severe time-crunch; the snowbeasts hilariously break a ton of gameplay rules insomniac had set, including a complete disregard for the minimum wind-up frames an enemy attack should have.

3 also has the best controls. Lock-Strafe mode is the only playable mode in the damn series.

That said, nobody has ever been able to genuinely refute any of TGB's arguments since he uploaded that video. Really makes you think!

>he brings up that he had one week to do the level and that if anyone wants to try to do a a level in one week he'll give them an engine to work with and see how they do
could you guys do Sup Forums?
also correct me if im wrong about any of this

let me guess, Deadlocked is your favorite?

It had the best gameplay but worst level design. It's a good game.

Personally, I think his criticisms are fair. Now does that make UYA a bad game? Hell no,it's still a solid game from start to finish. If there's one thing I could think of refuting is his mention of the spaceship levels. Those weren't fun at all.

Could someone link me to this criticism video? I'd like to watch it.

Right here.
youtube.com/watch?v=NEMzaoieKuQ

its not about refuting his criticisms because they are valid but the fact that he makes them seem way worse than they actually are to the point where he starts scrapping the bottom of the barrel for arguments
without talking about any of the things that made people enjoy UYA more than the other games

Thanks user, you the mvp

It's true for both games, they start as lighthearted adventures with some cool ideas and as the series evolve, they get edgier and rely more on combat.
Jak 3 even had car combat

I find it hard to say Ratchet got edgier. They did it for one game and then just kind of stopped.

>Going Commando Master Race

He says it's a good game that he still enjoys less than a minute in, why is everyone acting as if he said it's shit?

Because some people want to stir up arguments, others are probably taking his words as gospel. I don't know. Most times, when people try to start shit with these threads, it instead devolves into people just reminiscing about the series as a whole

Is this bait? The game is fun.
I prefer Jak but Ratchet is better.

this is what passive aggressive criticism does and yes I just made that up

Jak II and III's problem is the lack of lock on with the weapons and things like that.

>tfw always preferred 2 to 3
>tfw no one will believe me
>tfw they will think I copied the e-celeb's opinion

keep enjoying yourself user no sense not to
also
>letting Sup Forums tell you what to enjoy

>tedious spaceship levels
>yeti level
>lame as fuck final boss

UYA was better. GC was still a great game overall, but it's not the best in the series like many proclaim. I'd also put ACiT above it.

I genuinely never found it to be that problematic. Not saying the games are great or anything, just my experience with them (and admitted bias towards them).