Better than Shenmue 1&2: Your thoughts?

[iknifaugood]

I never want to be a hardcore fan of any franchise.
-Being a hardcore fan will make you over criticize new entries.
-hardcore fans hate every sequel that tries to bring anything new to the franchise instead of being a reskin of a previous game.
-And finally hardcores will mostly follow others than forming their own opinion about new entries.

Your logic breaks down in a few of your own examples and you're ignoring the more nuanced criticism that hardcore fans of a game bring to the table in favor of broad generalizations. I agree that hardcore fans can miss the forest for the trees and fixate on tiny details but sometimes, y'know, those details matter.

1.I loved playing TR 12(Shadow of TR) and yet "hardcore fans" hated it.

Does TR even have "hardcore" fans anymore? It's been re-imagined/rebooted like 4 times now. What do hardcore TR fans want?

2.I played Thief 4 and for me it was better than Thief 2&3 and yet "hardcore fans" hate it for not being a Thief 2 reskin.

Fans didn't like Thief 4 because it was too easy, had pointlessly huge empty levels, a boring story, and recast the main voice actor and was marketed as the follow up to Thief 2, one of the primordial stealth games AND the studio was coming off of the very well received Deus Ex Human Revolution.

3.I enjoyed MGS Twin Snakes and I even loved it's stupid cutscenes(MGS story is that dumb that deserves those cutscenes) but fans hated it for "ruining mgs storyline."

Fans thought it was a broken game because they didn't change any of the level design/enemy placement and gave you first person aiming from MGS2, which made many sections too easy. The cutscenes were over-the-top and didn't fit with the original or even the most OTTP stuff in the series at that point but on top of all that, it was a remake of a game from 1998 and it came out in 2004 as an exclusive title for Gamecube when the main series was continuing on Playstation... not something many fans considered overly necessary.

4.I consider SH shattered memories as the second best SH game but the hardcore fans call it a fake SH game.

I'm not aware of a huge backlash among fans for this game, it has generally positive reviews, especially compared to newer SH games. The most common complaint I've heard is that it's not very scary. And it's a Wii game so the controls are shit.

5.I loved and enjoyed RE 6 but hardcore fans consider it as the worst RE game even though that it was a far more enjoyable game than RE 5.(I even enjoyed it more than RE 7&2 original and 3 original.)

Totally agree. RE6 is a great time but I can understand why fans who play RE for the horror element hate the more action-oriented entries. I don't personally consider RE to be a very scary series.

6.Hardcore DMC fans call DMC 5 a 10/10 game but I just consider it as a weak sequel with a really stupid storyline.(DMC 1 and DMC 3 had far better plots and didn't force you to play as 3 characters)

So forcing you to play as 3 characters is suddenly a bad thing? Now who's the hardcore fan who hates change?

7.Hardcore Monkey Island fans hate Monkey Island 4 but I consider it equal to other MI games.

"Hardcore" MI fans largely dislike the series after 2 because the tone of the humor and characterization of Guybrush was noticeably different, especially because they introduced voice acting. It's not so much that they're hated, just different. They had different writers and creators, kind of like the different eras of the Simpsons. Plus as with all comedies YMMV, many fans of the original disliked MI2.

8.Hardcore GTA fans call GTA 3 as the worst 3D GTA game but I enjoyed it far more than VC and SA.

Again, I'm not aware of this huge backlash. Most people consider GTA3 one of the most important games ever made, GTA4 was even a return to it after the more bloated and over the top San Andreas. But even if you're right, this would be an example of fans enjoying changes to the series.

9.Hardcore Batman arkham fans call arkham knight as the worst game.
But outside of it's story it was really great.(Some even call it Batmobile the game which is pretty obvious that they have never played Batman Sega CD game.)

This is because the mechanics of the game that worked in smaller areas (Arkham Asylum and The smaller design of Arkham City) don't necessarily translate to a massive open world and that open world seemed to exist primarily so that the batmobile (which sucks) could exist. And, as you point out, the story was pretty bad.

I point all this out because the hardcore fans of those series had reasons for disliking those entries that were valid, the same way hardcore Shenmue fans have valid reasons for disliking 3. It's not always just blind fanboy rage.

 

[Dg1995]

Nah, they weren't valid.

Also lol. "Thief 4 had pointlessly empty levels." guess you haven't even played that game. Thief levels had guards and were full of hidden treasures.
And the game wasn't that easy especially if you disable lots of the hints.(Since today's stealth games always have lots of hints enabled by default)

It was better than Thief 2 where:
1.It used the same engine as Thief 1 with lots of reused assets and icons.
2.Had the worst Thief levels of all time.(It's final level was a very bad level)
3.Had robot enemies that replaced zombies and spiders. the latters were more better enemies.
4.Developers toned down the combat and resulted in forcing you to play stealth all the time.(Combat in Thief 1 was great for stopping you getting bored from playing it all stealth.)

Then we had Thief 3 where:
-The game was super buggy.(Floating bug happened to me a lot)
-You had bad city areas.
-The fonts were very big for the PC version.
-The ragdolls were bad.
-The levels were so small.
-You have lots of pointless items to buy that are just there to waste your money without having any value.(Lock practices)

MGS 1 twin snakes was also in a lot of ways better than MGS 1 and yet :
1.Twin Snakes has much less backtracking.
2.TS has far better graphics and has better framerate than MGS 1 on PS1.
3.TS has the game over if discovered option which the original one didn't have.
4.TS has much better tank boss battle.(Since Snake's aiming is much better than the way it was in the PS1 version)
5.TS didn't force you to select the keycard in order to open the doors.
6.TS has improved gameplay mechanics over the original one.(And even if you feel that they break the game you can not use them similar to the way that many MGS V fans recommend people to limit themselves from using OP weapons in order to make the game more difficult.)
7.TS added some really nice cutscenes that weren't in the original one.(Gray Fox slicing soldiers , Gray Fox vs Metal Gear and also liked this that Snake had a victory cutscene whenever you beat a boss loved the Snake vs Liquid cutscene that wasn't in the original one)
8.TS added enemies in one of the rooms that was just full of claymores.(Claymores that you can just pass by going prone)
9.Soldiers were also more smart compare to PS1 version.
10.And finally in TS you have a categorized inventory screen which the original one didn't have.

For other games, I have my own reasons to like them unlike the hardcore fans.(But Devil May Cry was much better when the whole game focused on 1 character unlike the latest one where you have 2-3 characters and have to relearn the game every time you switch your character.)

As for Shenmue 3, the story reasons aren't valid because Shenmue never had a good storyline.(There is a reason why Shenmue was mostly popular for being the first 3D open world game and having mini games rather than it's trainwreck storyline.)
Shenmue 1 should have ended at the point that Shenmue 2 ended but they just decided to overstretch the whole storyline and add filler characters that never gonna have any important roles in the next games.(Nozomi and I don't think Guizhang is going to appear in the next games.)

 

[mjqjazzbar]

Well, maybe you think Shenmue 1 + 2 have bad storylines, but I don't agree with you at all. I was dying to find out more the second Shenmue 2 ended. Shenmue 1 ends at the point it ends because they ran out of time, not because they intended Shenmue 1 to be a standalone game. You may recall the earliest previews showing Shenmue 2 content in Shenmue 1 trailers...

If you think Shenmue 1 & 2 have awful storylines and are only interesting because they're 3D open world games, I'm not even sure what you like about Shenmue 3 or why you were interested in Shenmue 3 in the first place. Did you expect Ys Net to release an epoch-breaking sequel 20 years later and with a small budget? I was looking forward to Shenmue 3 primarily because it would continue the story.

 

[iknifaugood]

Nah, they weren't valid.

Yes they were.

Also lol. "Thief 4 had pointlessly empty levels." guess you haven't even played that game.

Yes I have. It prioritizes size over detail which, combined with the lackluster story and low challenge, made exploring the levels more boring than the originals.

It was better than Thief 2 where:
1.It used the same engine as Thief 1 with lots of reused assets and icons.
2.Had the worst Thief levels of all time.(It's final level was a very bad level)
3.Had robot enemies that replaced zombies and spiders. the latters were more better enemies.
4.Developers toned down the combat and resulted in forcing you to play stealth all the time.(Combat in Thief 1 was great for stopping you getting bored from playing it all stealth.)

Then we had Thief 3 where:
-The game was super buggy.(Floating bug happened to me a lot)
-You had bad city areas.
-The fonts were very big for the PC version.
-The ragdolls were bad.
-The levels were so small.
-You have lots of pointless items to buy that are just there to waste your money without having any value.(Lock practices)

MGS 1 twin snakes was also in a lot of ways better than MGS 1 and yet :
1.Twin Snakes has much less backtracking.
2.TS has far better graphics and has better framerate than MGS 1 on PS1.
3.TS has the game over if discovered option which the original one didn't have.
4.TS has much better tank boss battle.(Since Snake's aiming is much better than the way it was in the PS1 version)
5.TS didn't force you to select the keycard in order to open the doors.
6.TS has improved gameplay mechanics over the original one.(And even if you feel that they break the game you can not use them similar to the way that many MGS V fans recommend people to limit themselves from using OP weapons in order to make the game more difficult.)
7.TS added some really nice cutscenes that weren't in the original one.(Gray Fox slicing soldiers , Gray Fox vs Metal Gear and also liked this that Snake had a victory cutscene whenever you beat a boss loved the Snake vs Liquid cutscene that wasn't in the original one)
8.TS added enemies in one of the rooms that was just full of claymores.(Claymores that you can just pass by going prone)
9.Soldiers were also more smart compare to PS1 version.
10.And finally in TS you have a categorized inventory screen which the original one didn't have.

You can like whatever you want and rank entries in whatever order you want. Doesn't change the fact that fan backlash is often rooted in a valid point.

As for Shenmue 3, the story reasons aren't valid because Shenmue never had a good storyline.(There is a reason why Shenmue was mostly popular for being the first 3D open world game and having mini games rather than it's trainwreck storyline.)

Well you like Metal Gear Survive more than MGSV so there's no accounting for taste.

Shenmue 1 should have ended at the point that Shenmue 2 ended but they just decided to overstretch the whole storyline and add filler characters that never gonna have any important roles in the next games.(Nozomi and I don't think Guizhang is going to appear in the next games.)

It was originally supposed to. Most of the flaws of S1 stem from it having to drag its story out to the length of a full game.

 

[Sonoshee]

As for Shenmue 3, the story reasons aren't valid because Shenmue never had a good storyline.(There is a reason why Shenmue was mostly popular for being the first 3D open world game and having mini games rather than it's trainwreck storyline.)

That's a slap in the face to the people who actually waited 18 years to see the story continued. Just because you didn't like it doesn't mean others didn't find it pretty special.
Granted there wasn't much of it in 3, but the fact remains.

 

[spud1897]

As for Shenmue 3, the story reasons aren't valid because Shenmue never had a good storyline.(There is a reason why Shenmue was mostly popular for being the first 3D open world game and having mini games rather than it's trainwreck storyline.)
Shenmue 1 should have ended at the point that Shenmue 2 ended but they just decided to overstretch the whole storyline and add filler characters that never gonna have any important roles in the next games.(Nozomi and I don't think Guizhang is going to appear in the next games.)

Hard disagree from me on this one. We know that Shenmue 1 was split into two games partly because of development time and size but also the scope of the project changed. So Shenmue 1 sets the scene for what was an epic Shenmue II with excellent story telling. There's a reason many critics rated it so highly for the best part of 15-20 years now. Check the beta footage there's plenty of Shenmue II areas in there.

Shenmue 1 isn't a train wreck, yes it does have what some would consider filler (forklifts) but it is actually well received among the majority of fans, so much so Yu Suzuki had to bring that part back. Shenmue 1 sets up the mystery of the mirrors, it shows Ryo in a state that goes against his fathers dying words. Ignoring the friendships to avenge his father, it carries on in both Shenmue II and III. I could go on.

If you didn't like it then that's fair game, your opinion is your opinion, but wording it in that sort of a way undermines a large majority who loved Shenmue 1 and 2, who waited 18 years to see a continuation. If the game was a trainwreck would it have captured the imagination of so many of us? Would it have smashed kickstarter records to fund Shenmue III? Would it as revered as it is by so many of us, despite what some people say about Shenmue III? The answer is no.

 

[lavrentis]

I struggle to pick a favourite between 1 and 2.

I know 2's story is so big and there's a big adventure and all.

But I probably spent more hours in Yamanose + Sakuragaoka as a kid then I ever did in Kowloon or Wan Chai.


The FREE music just epitomises the feel of that part of the game so well, unlike any other game I have ever played to this day.

That is what makes Shenmue special (and Shenmue 2 has this as well). It's hard to explain what I mean.

I think this is what Shenmue 3 lacks, I enjoyed it, but it's just not the same as the first two.

 

[Tsukuyomimagi99]

I never want to be a hardcore fan of any franchise.
-Being a hardcore fan will make you over criticize new entries.
-hardcore fans hate every sequel that tries to bring anything new to the franchise instead of being a reskin of a previous game.
-And finally, hardcores will mostly follow others than forming their own opinion about new entries.

1.I loved playing TR 12(Shadow of TR) and yet "hardcore fans" hated it.

2.I played Thief 4 and for me it was better than Thief 2&3 and yet "hardcore fans" hate it for not being a Thief 2 reskin.

3.I enjoyed MGS Twin Snakes and I even loved it's stupid cutscenes(MGS story is that dumb that deserves those cutscenes) but fans hated it for "ruining mgs storyline."
I also loved and enjoyed Metal Gear Survive much more than MGS V.

4.I consider SH shattered memories as the second best SH game but the hardcore fans call it a fake SH game.

5.I loved and enjoyed RE 6 but hardcore fans consider it as the worst RE game even though that it was a far more enjoyable game than RE 5.(I even enjoyed it more than RE 7&2 original and 3 original.)

6.Hardcore DMC fans call DMC 5 a 10/10 game but I just consider it as a weak sequel with a really stupid storyline.(DMC 1 and DMC 3 had far better plots and didn't force you to play as 3 characters)

7.Hardcore Monkey Island fans hate Monkey Island 4 but I consider it equal to other MI games.

8.Hardcore GTA fans call GTA 3 as the worst 3D GTA game but I enjoyed it far more than VC and SA.

9.Hardcore Batman arkham fans call arkham knight as the worst game.
But outside of it's story it was really great.(Some even call it Batmobile the game which is pretty obvious that they have never played Batman Sega CD game.)

Being a hardcore fan sucks.

A hardcore fan is simply someone who is more passionate about something than the average person. These fans have their own personal tastes like everyone else. Do not stereotype all fans just because they don't share your opinions.

As for Shenmue 3, the story reasons aren't valid because Shenmue never had a good storyline.(There is a reason why Shenmue was mostly popular for being the first 3D open world game and having mini games rather than it's trainwreck storyline.)

Shenmue 1 should have ended at the point that Shenmue 2 ended but they just decided to overstretch the whole storyline and add filler characters that never gonna have any important roles in the next games.(Nozomi and I don't think Guizhang is going to appear in the next games.)

I am another person here who vehemently disagrees with this assertion. The mark of any good story is to get you to care about the characters. I was sad yet hopeful at the end of Shenmue Chapter One: Yokosuka. I felt a mix of awe and melancholy at the end of Shenmue II. It's why I was excited to catch up with the old characters in Shenmue III; a testament to how good the writing was in the first two games.

In Shenmue III, however, I felt nothing for the new characters. In my opinion, that's a sign of mediocre writing. If I don't care about the characters, then you can't get me to care about the larger story. One of Shenmue's greatest strengths was always its story and what makes it distinct from other open-world games.

You're entitled to your opinion, but it is one you'll never convince me of.

 

[Rydeen]

In Shenmue III however, I felt nothing for the new characters.

You don't care at all about Ryo, Shenhua, Ren, Lan Di, or Niao Sun? I'm just not sure why everything would have to hinge on new characters, in supporting roles. What games even do as much as Shenmue III does with its supporting cast? I can understand not liking the supporting characters in the third game as much, but I'm just not sure how that changes things from good writing into poor writing.

Personally, at this point in the story, I don't feel it's really that necessary to make sure the supporting cast perfectly resembles that of 1 or 2, and potentially might even take away from the focus of the story: Ryo, Shenhua, Ren, the CYM.

 

[Tsukuyomimagi99]

You don't care at all about Ryo, Shenhua, Ren, Lan Di, or Niao Sun? I'm just not sure why everything would have to hinge on new characters, in supporting roles. What games even do as much as Shenmue III does with its supporting cast? I can understand not liking the supporting characters in the third game as much, but I'm just not sure how that changes things from good writing into poor writing.

Personally, at this point in the story, I don't feel it's really that necessary to make sure the supporting cast perfectly resembles that of 1 or 2, and potentially might even take away from the focus of the story: Ryo, Shenhua, Ren, the CYM.

I clearly stated in my previous post that I did not care for the new characters. As to how you reached the conclusion that I don't care for any of the legacy characters like Ryo, Lan-Di, Shenhua etc is beyond me. The goal of any writer is to create characters I can empathize with. In my eyes, most of the new characters (emphasis on new) introduced in Shenmue III felt one-dimensional. I simply did not feel anything for them.

To answer your other query, look at the first two Shenmue games and the memorable characters from them. Characters like Guizhang, Xiuying, Ren, Fangmei, Goro, and Mark were more interesting to me than Su Zixiong or Li Shiling. Grandmasters Feng and Bei had potential, but the former was not properly fleshed out after teasing us about Iwao's training while the latter served as nothing but a walking plot device.

Shenmue's story has always balanced its character development alongside its central conflict. Which makes sense since this entire story is about Ryo's growth. And that growth can only be as profound as the characters he comes across. Not every new character has to be this way, but when the new key characters don't feel engaging then how does Ryo actually grow?

To be fair, I don't know where this story is going to go in the future since its only forty percent complete. Therefore, it would be arrogant of me to assume the rest of the story is bad because I did not like one entry. I also still have faith in Suzuki's writing since everything has been planned out. So I am now simply looking forward to Shenmue IV.

 

[Rydeen]

I clearly stated in my previous post that I did not care for the new characters. As to how you reached the conclusion that I don't care for any of the legacy characters like Ryo, Lan-Di, Shenhua etc is beyond me. The goal of any writer is to create characters I can empathize with. In my eyes, most of the new characters (emphasis on new) introduced in Shenmue III felt one-dimensional. I simply did not feel anything for them.

I think you missed my point. I was also emphasizing the new characters in my post, but I was saying that I don't feel they're as necessary as they were in the first two games, because the main cast is more fully established now with Ren and Shenhua. What good does it really do to distract from the three main characters, and the antagonists, by spending a lot of extra time building up an intricate supporting cast in each game.

I mean, I get it. I enjoy a good cornucopia of characters, too. (I'm a huge fan of the Suikoden trilogy.) I'm just disagreeing with the idea that eschewing the supporting cast, to an extent, in favor of focusing on the main characters, is indicative of poor writing.

Shenmue's story has always balanced its character development alongside its central conflict. Which makes sense since this entire story is about Ryo's growth. And that growth can only be as profound as the characters he comes across. Not every new character has to be this way, but when the new key characters don't feel engaging then how does Ryo actually grow?

I meant outside of the Shenmue series. I'm not saying there aren't examples out there, either, just that most games don't even go as far as Shenmue III does with its entire ensemble of character, and how much individuality they're all given.

To be fair, I don't know where this story is going to go in the future since its only forty percent complete. Therefore, it would be arrogant of me to assume the rest of the story is bad because I did not like one entry. I also still have faith in Suzuki's writing since everything has been planned out. So I am now simply looking forward to Shenmue IV.

By showing Ryo's gradual maturing through his journey with Ren and Shenhua alongside him, and in opposition of the CYM, which is what I feel like Shenmue III actually does, and fairly successfully.

I get why fans are disappointed with the supporting cast in Shenmue III. However, I think it's potentially an impediment to the narrative to fracture the audience's attention with supporting roles, when the purpose at this juncture (I believe) is really in showing that Ryo has made friends that he wants (/will want) to 'keep close,' in Ren and Shenhua.

 

[Tsukuyomimagi99]

I think you missed my point. I was also emphasizing the new characters in my post, but I was saying that I don't feel they're as necessary as they were in the first two games, because the main cast is more fully established now with Ren and Shenhua. What good does it really do to distract from the three main characters, and the antagonists, by spending a lot of extra time building up an intricate supporting cast in each game.

I mean, I get it. I enjoy a good cornucopia of characters, too. (I'm a huge fan of the Suikoden trilogy.) I'm just disagreeing with the idea that eschewing the supporting cast, to an extent, in favor of focusing on the main characters, is indicative of poor writing.

As stated in my previous post, I believe that the growth of a character is only as strong as the supporting cast that helps them grow. This is something that can be done without detracting from the core cast or the central conflict. For example, Grandmaster Feng was someone who trained both Iwao Hazuki and Zhao Sunming. So you would think that he would play a pivotal role in the story and provide more context yet he didn't. Finally, as I stated in my previous post, not every character needs to be fully fleshed out, but when they play a key role they definitely should be.

I meant outside of the Shenmue series. I'm not saying there aren't examples out there, either, just that most games don't even go as far as Shenmue III does with its entire ensemble of character, and how much individuality they're all given.

A non-Shenmue example would be Final Fantasy VI.

By showing Ryo's gradual maturing through his journey with Ren and Shenhua alongside him, and in opposition of the CYM, which is what I feel like Shenmue III actually does, and fairly successfully.

I think this is where the disconnect comes from as I feel like Ryo really didn't grow in Shenmue III. Then again, only forty percent of the story has been told so it would be unfair of me to assume he'll never grow. This is why I hope we get a Shenmue IV.

 

[Creward]

I meant outside of the Shenmue series. I'm not saying there aren't examples out there, either, just that most games don't even go as far as Shenmue III does with its entire ensemble of character, and how much individuality they're all given.

Could you elaborate on this? I am curious since to me it did not feel like that in Shenmue 3, especially Niaowu.

 

[Rydeen]

As stated in my previous post, I believe that the growth of a character is only as strong as the supporting cast that helps them grow. This is something that can be done without detracting from the core cast or the central conflict.

I don't know. I tend to believe that events change people more than people change people. Iwao's death changed Ryo. It's going to take a similar shock to really change him again.

Spoiler

Ren's death.

Even still, I thought Ryo softened on his quest for revenge the most in Shenmue III, mostly because of Shenhua, and Ren.

Now, I love Xiuying, but I don't think every game in the series needs a new Xiuying, when the focal point has shifted to the main characters, and their journey together. It does potentially take away from their stories if we're focused on an extra three or four characters in large supporting roles, like Shenmue II, on top of a couple hundred unique characters of varying importance to flesh out the world. That's a pretty hefty task, and personally, I'd rather have the more fleshed out world.

It does seem like there are still some interesting characters yet to come, like Min Min, but I honestly get the feeling that people would've been cool with SIII if there were just a Joy, or Feng Mei dropped into Bailu or Niaowu. Not someone particularly relevant to the story, just a character to distract the player a bit more by involving herself in Ryo's life.

For example, Grandmaster Feng was someone who trained both Iwao Hazuki and Zhao Sunming. So you would think that he would play a pivotal role in the story and provide more context yet he didn't. Finally as I stated in my previous post, not every character needs to be fully fleshed out, but when they play a key role they definitely should be.

Do you feel the same way about Yuanda Zhu?

Final Fantasy VI.

Oof, that's a hard "disagree," from me, but at any rate, I have my own handful of examples. They still wouldn't amount to more than a small proportion of games, even in similar genres, though. It's more of a rhetorical question, anyway. If someone has compiled a list of games that have hundreds of uniquely defined characters, with their own personalities, and it amounts to more than a small fraction of games in related genres, then I'm happy to concede. I just feel fairly confident that that's not the case.

Could you elaborate on this? I am curious since to me it did not feel like that in Shenmue 3, especially Niaowu.

There's a guy in NIaowu who runs a concept cafe for training dummies--. Sisters struggling to sell sushi in China. A mask vendor kid struggling to feed himself. Even going through the section of the game where you try to figure out Ge's martial arts style reveals some different aspects about the martial arts shop owners. Specifically one I remember is that the guy at the end of Hanasaki Dori only recently opened his store, and admits to not being all that well versed in martial arts. The vendors along the water; particularly the one who is smitten with Ryo, and voices his displeasure with the 'hags' in the vendor alley cooing over Ryo. A shoe shop lady who jokes about cheating with Ryo. A barber who can't get over his balding head. A forgetful mask shop owner. The three people at the medicine shops: A dude clearly practicing necromancy in his off-time; A real doctor type, who doesn't have any of those sex drugs for you; A part-timer who really doesn't know much, but will be discrete about the herbs the older clientele is looking for.

Niaowu is really overflowing with characters.

 

[Tsukuyomimagi99]

Do you feel the same way about Yuanda Zhu?

No I don't. The entirety of Shenmue II was about finding him and I felt the payoff was worth it. He provided further context on the mirrors, why Longsun Zhao killed Iwao Hazuki, and provided Ryo with his next destination. In other words, he actually advanced the story.

 

[Zhenmue]

I like 3 but it feels somewhat unfinished and incomplete I was overall really enjoying the game and it definitely has that shenmue feel....... But the final in the castle and the ending really left a bad taste in my mouth and I will definitely play the game again and with the DLC to look forward to for some extra content will be welcome I feel now I know how poor the final is a second time round the negative impact will be softened by knowing what's to come

Story aspects aside the game is mostly great I have some issues with the fight engine and the grinding I'd be better with the grinding if there was more to it than just one inch punch rooster stance and horse stance that shit really made my thumbs ach

But the look and feel and character interactions most mostly good atleast in the first halfe

I ultimately came out from the whole thing once I got over the rubbish ending positivly

And some aspect was better than 1&2 but for evary step forward there was two steps back if other departments I think 3 is the weakest so far but far from being a bad game and overall not a letdown just certain aspect was

But I feel a decent foundation to build apon for shenmue 4 so bring it on

 

[Rydeen]

No I don't. The entirety of Shenmue II was about finding him and I felt the payoff was worth it. He provided further context on the mirrors, why Longsun Zhao killed Iwao Hazuki, and provided Ryo with his next destination. In other words, he actually advanced the story.

Fair enough. I think you could just as easily be cynical about it, and bemoan spending the better part of two games looking for this guy, only for him to reveal the motivation for Iwao's death, show Ryo a cheap party trick, and send him off to Guilin, though. He doesn't exactly mention how he knew Ryo's father, or really clear up any of the mysteries about his character. He ends up really being a plot device's plot device. (Y'know, like how people talk about Yuan.)

Feng may not sit Ryo down and have a long chat with him about Iwao, but what would Ryo even ask? 'What was my father like'? It's not as if he was an orphan, and didn't spend 18 years being raised by Iwao. He asked about Zhao's death, and Feng didn't know. I think the less cynical way to interpret this is that Feng, along Son, and the Abbots in Bailu and Niaowu, represent a sense of Ryo reconnecting with his father after his death.

 

[Bambi]

A hardcore fan is simply someone who is more passionate about something than the average person. These fans have their own personal tastes like everyone else. Do not stereotype all fans just because they don't share your opinions.

Absolutely spot on.

There are definitely contingents of fans on the extreme who are overly critical of a franchise they love but it cuts both ways, there are people on the other end of that spectrum that ardently defend everything a developer does no matter how objectively bad it is.

What I think makes this appear lopsided is that negativity is an incredibly strong driving force behind expressing feedback. I am not a passionate person, my own experience of something can range from average to pretty good and I won't think twice about it (let alone leave a review) but if I have a bad experience of something I'll make a complaint and am way more likely to discuss it with friends/co-workers etc.

 

[darksniper]

Shenmue II in my opinion is the greatest video game of all time. I hold that particular game in a very, very, VERY high regard. With that said, I share many opinions of those who feel like Shenmue III did not progress the story very much. Which is why I think it's not better than II. However the mini game content was a lot better than I thought it would be and it does a great job of keeping the player occupied compared to the first game.

What I will say though is even though Shenmue II is the GOAT, Shenmue III had the most impactful moment for me personally in the entire series.

Spoiler

When you're about to walk up those long set of stairs to go confront Lan Di at the end of 3, I just stood still for about a half hour while letting the music play. I went into a deep reflection about the 18 years of time and what it took to get to that very moment. Words can't even describe how much of a profound impact it had on me.

 

[HazukiFCBR]

I clearly stated in my previous post that I did not care for the new characters. As to how you reached the conclusion that I don't care for any of the legacy characters like Ryo, Lan-Di, Shenhua etc is beyond me. The goal of any writer is to create characters I can empathize with. In my eyes, most of the new characters (emphasis on new) introduced in Shenmue III felt one-dimensional. I simply did not feel anything for them.

To answer your other query, look at the first two Shenmue games and the memorable characters from them. Characters like Guizhang, Xiuying, Ren, Fangmei, Goro, and Mark were more interesting to me than Su Zixiong or Li Shiling. Grandmasters Feng and Bei had potential, but the former was not properly fleshed out after teasing us about Iwao's training while the latter served as nothing but a walking plot device.

Shenmue's story has always balanced its character development alongside its central conflict. Which makes sense since this entire story is about Ryo's growth. And that growth can only be as profound as the characters he comes across. Not every new character has to be this way, but when the new key characters don't feel engaging then how does Ryo actually grow?

To be fair, I don't know where this story is going to go in the future since its only forty percent complete. Therefore, it would be arrogant of me to assume the rest of the story is bad because I did not like one entry. I also still have faith in Suzuki's writing since everything has been planned out. So I am now simply looking forward to Shenmue IV.

This. That's why when you're fighting Don Niu in Shen2, far beyond in the story, you do a Double Blow and remember Yamaghishi-san. What do we have from Shen3? an imense void. Shenmue 3 is so much of waste of potential, that makes me cringe all the time i remember it exists.
I believe the inicial mistake was making it bigger that than it really needed. If they stick with the Bailu>Baisha and just a glimpse of Choubu/Niaowu plan, would be better. I'm sure of it. Filler or not, is a waste.