Let's All Hate Lucasarts Day to become Let's All Hate Lucasarts, Period?

[OB1]

... umm I described exactly where I was in the game so this should not exactly be a surprise...

And unless something big changes that's more than just 'so far' because the whole game style seems pretty consistent.

There's nothing wrong with the "game system" (whatever that means), but of course there are surprises in the story.

Yeah, because no PC games use left and right keys for turning left and right?

Maybe something like Grim Fandango where good controls are not important, but for an action game? NO!

Oh, it lets you use the arrow keys too. It's harder because those other keys are grouped around the WASD and you need a hand on the mouse all the time for attack, but if you remap some things you could get that to work... then it'd be even more like a older PC title (because most PC games used to use the arrow keys for moving)...

You don't get it. You're moving the character with your fingers when you should be moving her with a super-precise analog thumb stick. The fact that you cannot see that monumental difference shows your inability to differentiate between good and bad controls.

But you do a lot of it, so of course it's relevant.

There's not even a quarter of the combat that's in WW or even OoT.

Oh, you're right. I just chose the first thing I could think of for 'really good stealth'. I know that expecting it to match that is utterly unfair, but it's the standard for stealth, I'd say... it doesn't have to match Thief, but it could to a better job than it does.

You make me sick. BG&E is one of the best games of 2003 and all you can do is complain. Go back to playing shit like Gauntlet, ABF.

I quicksave enough. But not before every single room in a game! This is like a quicksave before every single room. Thus, in most ways more lenient.

With quicksave you can save wherever and whenever you want to!! Just because you're too damn lazy to press one key doesn't change the fact that it makes games much easier!

Oh, and it's not always F5...

As I said, the keyboard part of the controls is just fine. Oh sure it's not analog, but analog isn't necessary and the slower/faster keys setup works fine. The mouse is where any problems are. And you are right, it isn't meant to be used in the ways it is, as I said -- it's obvious that it's just a transferred analog stick and not controls designed for a mouse (which they could have done if they'd wanted to take the time, but they didn't...). Maybe it'd be better with a trackball actually... but it's not so bad that you don't get used to it, especially if you play many PC games... it might not be quite normal but it's close enough that after a little while you adapt.

You can also play Soul Calibur with a Dreamcast fishing controller, but if you can't tell that it's a billion times worse than using a joystick you're out of your mind. You sir are out of your mind.

Notice I'm not saying that this is better than the console one, because I haven't played them; just saying that I don't find the controls on the PC version so bad.

That's because you don't know what decent controls are.

Analog movement? Minor. I see no advantages and plenty of bad things to playing FPSes on consoles. I've tried to play PC FPSes a few times with my gamepads or joysticks... it's painful... okay console FPSes can do it better sometimes, but in no case has it been as good as keyboard and mouse.

FALSE. Analog movement makes a huge difference in FPS's, especially in stealth games like Deus Ex or Thief. Also, if you have normal thumbs (which you don't seem to have), aiming is not a problem and you can become almost as accurate as you would with a mouse. There are both disadvantages and advantages to using a kb&m setup or a dual-analog controller for a FPS, while using a kb&m for something like BG&E only has disadvantages. Try to prove me wrong. Please, I dare you to try.

Oh, and are you looking for advantages of the PC version? IGN says them in their review. If you have the system for it, the graphics are significantly better in the PC version than in the console versions. I'd bet that the dungeons at least (where the framerate is fine) on my system look better than any of the console versions... even at just 800x600 (I know 640x480 would get much better preformance, but I won't go down so low in res... not unless the whole game was unbearably slow, and it's not (and the slow parts are almost all not action parts (the only slower action scenes I'd had so far are when you have to fight baddies in the water with your boat, and there're just a couple of those)...

I know how powerful your PC is, and every console version looks much better than I'm sure it does on your PC. If you have a super-powerful PC then it could look great, but then you're still stuck with terrible controls.

Is ANYTHING quite like Zelda? Oh there are many action-adventure-rpg-ish games, but Zelda really is unique...

Action-RPG, the PC has in spades (yes many are top-down, but these are broad genres here...). Adventure-RPG (Quest for Glory's my thought here), the PC has a fair number of. Action-Adventure it has too.

Zelda clones? Okay, not huge numbers. But it has adventure games, and action games, and all of those varied subgenres... enough that BG&E isn't exactly alone.

You see? You can't even name ONE game like Zelda on the PC. It's simple, ABF. In order for a game to be somewhat similar to Zelda it has to share similar controls and feature action, exploration, and puzzle solving. That's it. Consoles are littered with games like that. PCs are not, because the standard control setup is not kind to third-person action games that do not control like FPS's.