cobaltstarfire

You could play with people you do know? All of those games I could imagine playing online with friends and family pretty easily. My nearest family member is almost 4 hours drive away, and my nearest gaming friend lives in Boston (me being in Texas).

If you aren't too far along I can trade you a floette caught in the friend safari if you want, that'll make it a little easier to generate eggs to start out at least.

The face making game in Amie is activated by tilting your head to the side. Most people have trouble with it though cause most of the time once the game starts it won't recognize that you're making the right face and your pokemon will get disappointed.

I found the motion controls in skyward sword to be hard at first, which is to be expected with little experience using them. But as I learned and got used to the controls it got easier and was like second nature and flowed pretty well, much more fun than pushing buttons in the long run for me. I had the GC version of twilight princes, and I hated it The controls were awkward, and the story for whatever reason just didn't hold my interest very well. I wish there had been more games that managed to have useable motion controls like SS, most other games I think of either didn't really have much, or they did but they aggravated my elbow and wrist quite a lot. It's cool to hear that wind waker HD has at least some motion controls. It'd have been neat if it went the same way as skyward sword, but I guess that would have been a lot of extra work. If I had spare money I'd have gone right out and gotten the special windwaker wii u, someone permanently "borrowed" my gc copy and I've always missed it, never did get to finish collecting all the figurines....

I think violent games are fine, for other people. I know that I really can't handle them personally. Things like cartoon violence, or stuff that is "just a flesh wound" probably won't bother me (Like I can sit and watch my mom play something like ghost recon and generally not feel uncomfortable). I happily played bushido blade and stuff back in the day, and on the movie front I thoroughly enjoyed the ass kicking that was Pacific Rim (although that may not count since it's mostly aliens and not humans?). But as soon as you start having the blood and guts of any realistic being (humans, animals) getting ripped appart and strewn around I'm generally unsettled to the point where I can't even look or even listen. I think the easiest most recent thing that comes to mind for me on that is a few months ago I watched part of someone playing through bioshock infinite, and well...jeeze I won't be playing that game any time soon. I wish I had access to the articles I've read about it, but generally speaking violence in video games or movies and the like have not been found to be directly linked to normal well balanced human beings turning violent. I know that particular conversation has come up multiple times on this forum as well, because the media really likes to paint the opposite picture. The sad thing about these studies is that people ignore them, I remember early on when I was still in college I showed one of these studies to my child dev prof and she was basically threw it out because she didn't want to believe it.

I wish I could like posts... I'm wondering what the design philosophy for mega evolution is not in terms of their visual design but what they choose to give a mega evolution and why. The more that get released the more esoteric they feel.

I have to be honest I hadn't thought about the 3D aspect at all. Now that I am, I realized I never expected it to use the 3D at all.... Meh I guess? I don't have an opinion either way....

It just doesn't work for some peoples eyes very well. Just using myself as an example, I literally can't turn it up all the way if I want to be able to see the game, it'd be like trying to play crosseyed. Even with it tuned to the optimal setting for my eyes (which is barely turned on at all) it takes a lot of effort to be able to see the game clearly, which generally puts a lot of strain on my eyes and gives me a headache. (I still am a little disappointed that I can't use the 3D but that's life.) The 3D works a lot better on the 3DS XL though, so for people who want to use the 3D but haven't been able to have it "work" for them, give it a try on the XL? I played around with one at a demo station and it was much nicer than my normal 3DS as far as the 3D goes. I think I probably would naysay the 3D out of bitterness if I couldn't turn the 3D off. Not because I think it's a bad thing, but because I'd really want to play and wouldn't be able to.

Considering that there is the concern of causing damage to a child's visual development from using the 3D it really isn't that surprising they would put a slider on it. Not to mention all the other people who never wanted it, the people who get raging headaches from it, and the people who just can't get the 3D to work and instead get a jumbled up image for whatever reason. If you want to really want to see development into 3D dependent gameplay look up the Occulus Rift, it's a pretty nifty thing although the people working on it are deliberately going about it very slowly and methodically.

I can fit mine pretty fine in the inner pocket of my jacket, although not the outer one. It fits in my my pants pocket fine two, but I wear mens cargo pants (cause even girls cargo pants are cursed with small pockets) But to say the 3ds is not portable? It's smaller than the original Game Boy, GBC, and GBA when closed, that seems pretty portable to me. As far as portability for the age group goes, it seems unwieldy for us, but it's perfect for them. It's still smaller than most things parents are toting around for their kids (tablets, portable dvd players, ect) it's harder to lose and break, and most parents aren't going to let their kids carry one of these around alone whether it could fold up and be stashed easily or not. While I'd be skeptical of it for my own personal use it's absolutely perfect for young children and the way you'd expect them to use (and be allowed to use) it. I've said elsewhere and I'll say here though, even after seeing gameplay footage of it, that button placement looks rather awkward...

As far as the forge goes, as long as you always save up for 100% forge it won't really go any slower than it did before, it's probably even easier now that they just updated it so you can craft crystals down to other types. (My 5*'s have been super easy to heat up, the 4*'s have been the trouble due to a considerably lower drop rate in odd numbered stratums). Edit: also they just released an event with the black kats again, I didn't participate in it last time, so I don't really know what it's about or like but if you want to give the game another go for a couple of weeks now is as good a time as any.

Not to mention most digimon evolutions aren't generally temporary. The "partner" digimon in the various cartoons are not typical examples of digimon growth as they attain their evolutions only with the help of their humans. Otherwise digimon evolution is a natural progression of stages just like pokemon evolution is. That said, I'm interested in the mega evolution, although I feel like some of the pokemon would be better off with just a normal evolution rather than a mega one. I do wonder what implications this addition will have in the long run.

Well I DID say it seems like a pointless addition to the game (especially at face value cause I don't know anything about fairies in folklore). I could see it being a modifier type like flying seeing as how "fairy" encompasses a pretty broad chunk of mythological creatures. An all encompassing weakness is pretty easy though, fairies are typically weak to iron in some way or another whether it removes their powers, or outright kills them. As far as what they'd be strong against I couldn't tell you, since most stories have fairies simply being mischief makers or pulling one over on humans and stealing their babies, so I suppose they could be strong against normal types and also weak to psychics since psychic could probably overcome a fairies inherent cleverness. But now I'm just musing about it and I don't much feel like doing that. Although it's true, I disagree that fairy can't fit thematically because while I don't know much of anything about them I do know that there is a huge variety to them beyond "small, magical, have wings, and don't fight" that's a pretty narrow definition to what a fairy actually is. Either way I'm going to wait and see, as skeptical as I am of it, and as pointless of a typing as it seems to me on the initial thought, gamefreak is pretty good at digging up obscure things and putting them into their games. With the new region being set in a European equivalent it wouldn't surprise me if they did put in fairy type and then pull from all the folk lore surrounding them from Europe.

I'm not really sure a fairy type "doesn't fit" thematically we have dragon, bug, and ghost too. I feel pretty neutral on the possibility of a fairy type though, it seems like it'd be a pointless addition to the game but I don't think it'd really hurt anything either. I mean depending on the definition, all pokemon can be considered fae creatures, but I suppose if it is a real typing they're going more for things that are "magical" but not of a psychic, ghost, or elemental in nature.

Yeah that seems pretty plausible (I'm sitting pretty happily in the it's a new pokemon camp, I think it'd make a better story than it being a new form). I say it's probably nostalgia for me personally based on the difference of opinion between my guy and myself. He's only been playing for a couple years, I've been playing since red/blue, so he's definitely got the more objective reaction compared to me, who was pretty non plused at first until nintendo's website introduced it in a way that makes it seem like a completely separate species from mewtwo.