• Topic Archived
You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
  1. Boards
  2. Ratchet & Clank: Into the Nexus
  3. I heard this game is like Megaman

User Info: Lacrymosa143

Lacrymosa143
7 years ago#11
Alright I got the collection. It's pretty fun so far.
3DS FC 3609-2373-4510 Ground: Phanpy, Marowak, Gastrodon

User Info: Skyminxyz

Skyminxyz
7 years ago#12
Lacrymosa143 posted...
Skyminxyz posted...
legendofskyland posted...
Lacrymosa143 posted...
should i play the collection first?


The collection is a good start. Just know that a LOT improves after the First game. Because in R&C1,
-There's no strafing
-There's no Upgrading weapons
-There's no Upgrading health(at least not the way it is through the rest of the series)
-The melee is a bit sluggish.

But it's still a fun game, the later installments just get a lot better. By the 3rd game they add the option to have dual stick aiming like other TPS if you prefer that.

Also, Into the Nexus ties into the 3 main PS3 games, Tools of Destruction, Quest for Booty, and A Crack in Time, so starting here would leave you really lost in the story department. If you feel like getting into the PS3 games, know that new copies of Nexus come with codes to download Quest for booty


Sometimes I wonder if I'm the only one who liked the first R&C the most, or at least better than GC. It reminds me of how you actually have to carefully aim/hit enemies like in the first Kingdom Hearts, while the later games have OP aiming. Going Commando also had bizarre amount of health per enemy, so much that it was the only game out of the first 3 I never played challenge mode.

In short a lot of the later Ratchet's just slapped on 'More Health" to make the series "feel improved upon". For example the first game has no weapon upgrades (until after you beat the whole game) yet other than the final area everyone can die it about 3-5 hits. While later games the enemies can take literally 40+ hits each! (looking at you GC...)


Not targeting you btw, just wonder why everyone enjoyed GC, since everyone had way too much health. Then the whole "hippy Ratchet" personalty unlike the first game as well, something they didn't "fix" back until Tools of Destruction (current game I'm at.)


I don't like Kingdom Hearts though


<.< Man when I get short comments likes these, it feels like an arrow went to my knee...and I still have to walk another mile to get home.

I know you meant no harm, but still..
"Stating your opinion on GameFaqs is a declaration of war" - anonymous.
FC:3093-7603-4670

User Info: DarkFlip22

DarkFlip22
7 years ago#13
I loved GC's racing mini game. As for the whole game itself it wasn't my favorite but I found it more smoother than the first game despite it's beefy health, especially when you have so many weapons in the game......
Down + Down Right + Right + PUNCH = Hadouken!
PSN: itzover9001 / SW: 7176-1459-4698

User Info: Lacrymosa143

Lacrymosa143
7 years ago#14
just beat the first game. Was pretty good, is also the first game were i like all the minigames in. Also swimming parts dont make me rage. I'm playing the 2nd part and i LOVE that the targetting is much better. The blaster in the first game sucked because i practically had to use it in first person for it to be usable. But I dont get what these gauges are for all over the menus and stuff.
3DS FC 3609-2373-4510 Ground: Phanpy, Marowak, Gastrodon

User Info: legendofskyland

legendofskyland
7 years ago#15
Lacrymosa143 posted...
just beat the first game. Was pretty good, is also the first game were i like all the minigames in. Also swimming parts dont make me rage. I'm playing the 2nd part and i LOVE that the targetting is much better. The blaster in the first game sucked because i practically had to use it in first person for it to be usable. But I dont get what these gauges are for all over the menus and stuff.


There is a video somewhere in the pause menu that explains them.

Think of the gauges below your health and weapon as experience bars. As you kill enemies they start to fill. When the one below your health fills up your health will upgrade. When the one below your weapon fills up your weapon will become a bigger, stronger version of itself.

User Info: VVVACCPLPNLY

VVVACCPLPNLY
7 years ago#16

Sometimes I wonder if I'm the only one who liked the first R&C the most, or at least better than GC. It reminds me of how you actually have to carefully aim/hit enemies like in the first Kingdom Hearts, while the later games have OP aiming. Going Commando also had bizarre amount of health per enemy, so much that it was the only game out of the first 3 I never played challenge mode.

In short a lot of the later Ratchet's just slapped on 'More Health" to make the series "feel improved upon". For example the first game has no weapon upgrades (until after you beat the whole game) yet other than the final area everyone can die it about 3-5 hits. While later games the enemies can take literally 40+ hits each! (looking at you GC...)


Not targeting you btw, just wonder why everyone enjoyed GC, since everyone had way too much health. Then the whole "hippy Ratchet" personalty unlike the first game as well, something they didn't "fix" back until Tools of Destruction (current game I'm at.)


Your argument is ratchet had too much health and was too happy in GC? Well the its not like the game doesnt get harder as you go, from fighting animals with no brain to fighting thuhs with flanking and cover tactics. Never mind their health increases, thats just makinh sure your spread your weapon level ups evenly and upgrade health too. And "happy ratchet"? Ratchet has to be angry and going on a revenge mission to be interesting? He is not kratos. There is character development. I dont want a brooding angry vengeful hero in this colorful lively universe. Sure he shouldnt be stupid cartoon happy, but jeez.
No, listening to Gangnam Style does NOT mean you're a Kpop fan. Now STFU and GTFO.

User Info: MasterVG782

MasterVG782
7 years ago#17
Yeah, if you want to play them in order, go with the first game, then Going Commando, Up Your Arsenal and then Deadlocked, although Deadlocked isn't really necessary.

As for the PS3 titles, you definitely start with Tools of Destruction, then go to Quest for Booty (comes free with new copies of Into the Nexus still, I think), A Crack in Time and finally, Into the Nexus.

All 4 One and Full Frontal Assault are completely unrelated in regards to storyline, and aren't exactly as great as the other titles, since they tried to incorporate different gameplay elements into those games. Plus, I believe both of those were developed by Insomniac's North Carolina branch, while the other ones were developed (as far as I know) by their main Burbank branch.
www.gamerguides.com

User Info: Skyminxyz

Skyminxyz
7 years ago#18
VVVACCPLPNLY posted...

Sometimes I wonder if I'm the only one who liked the first R&C the most, or at least better than GC. It reminds me of how you actually have to carefully aim/hit enemies like in the first Kingdom Hearts, while the later games have OP aiming. Going Commando also had bizarre amount of health per enemy, so much that it was the only game out of the first 3 I never played challenge mode.

In short a lot of the later Ratchet's just slapped on 'More Health" to make the series "feel improved upon". For example the first game has no weapon upgrades (until after you beat the whole game) yet other than the final area everyone can die it about 3-5 hits. While later games the enemies can take literally 40+ hits each! (looking at you GC...)


Not targeting you btw, just wonder why everyone enjoyed GC, since everyone had way too much health. Then the whole "hippy Ratchet" personalty unlike the first game as well, something they didn't "fix" back until Tools of Destruction (current game I'm at.)


Your argument is ratchet had too much health and was too happy in GC? Well the its not like the game doesnt get harder as you go, from fighting animals with no brain to fighting thuhs with flanking and cover tactics. Never mind their health increases, thats just makinh sure your spread your weapon level ups evenly and upgrade health too. And "happy ratchet"? Ratchet has to be angry and going on a revenge mission to be interesting? He is not kratos. There is character development. I dont want a brooding angry vengeful hero in this colorful lively universe. Sure he shouldnt be stupid cartoon happy, but jeez.


Well I said "hippy" not exactly "happy" per say. Hippie is technically a slang wrod back in the 60's which meant "overly calm about everything, which fits the bill in GC. But sorry for the misspelling, I can see the confusion.
In fact: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hippie

As far as the overkill health, fair enough, however its just a shame too many weapons had insanely poor balance by the halfway point (looks at snow word, *shudders*.) Btw I'm NOT complaining that Ratchet himself had too much health, but rather the ENEMIES were the ones who were overboard... O.o

Finally you heard right, I'd rather have Ratchet have an attitude and want revenge for a (silly but still personal) matter for going on his adventure, then just grin and foolishly fall for the obvious traps that the 2nd game gave him. He doesn't have to be "dark"(er) like Jak became, but at least show that he can still be ticked (again like in ToD). Heck just had an argument on the Sonic Boom board about why Sonic's "darker" 3d games usually objectively seemed better than the newer 3d Sonic games which focus a little too lighthearted in story, and only focus on game-play (instead of walking around a city to prevent being repetitive for example.)

Except SA 1, they game's landscapes were more of a pain then an addition praiseworthy aspect.
"Stating your opinion on GameFaqs is a declaration of war" - anonymous.
FC:3093-7603-4670
  1. Boards
  2. Ratchet & Clank: Into the Nexus
  3. I heard this game is like Megaman
  • Topic Archived

GameFAQs Q&A