Ultrajeff :
none of what you said went to show any bias on my part, and the only way to not have a bias of something is to have no feeling towards it whatsoever, in which case it would be average in all ways and not stand out in any except that it is so average. 

that aside, i do not care about your opinion on the game. all you did was come in here and say "NUH UH I DONT LIKE UR REVIEW AND UR WRONG HERES WHAT U SHULD HUV SED!!1111" and i quite honestly do. not. care. go make your own review, but dont come here to cry that you have a different opinion and you dont like that my bias is different from yours. you clearly dont even know what a bias is.

i have no idea who keeps doing this, but i seriously hate you beyond words. be glad this is the internet.

Jordanv78 :

1: i actually have no idea how that happened, when i submitted the review it was from the SNES earthbound. i never even noticed it linked to some hack till now.

2: some. i dont "generally" like any system really, most are full of trash. i like games from the nes, but most are very bad.

3: again some, but rpg's are my primary genre of choice.

im not sure if ive played the nes game or not, if so it wasnt for long before i noped on out of there.  i do know however that ive seen videos and screenshots of it, and it honestly dosent look much different than the snes game. sure, earthbound looks slightly better. but i mean if you go from a 1 out of 10 to a 2, and everything else thats generic copy/paste garbage is a 3-5, who cares?

@darth unfortunately, the majority of video games do in fact suck. most are copy/paste trash with little to no improvements or even differentiation from that which they copy. even those which arent and simply follow a general template of sorts (genres) are more often than not, terrible for the same reasons. when i pick a game to review, it is almost always chosen at random. i play it, and that which stands out is spoken of. if all i can say about a game is that it looked generic and terrible with bleedy sprites as an example, well thats just the way it is. speaking poorly about a game is something you and everyone has to expect. not everyone likes the same thing as you, and condescending as it may seem, some have different and/or higher standards. i have no issue with people disagreeing with what i say, but last i checked thats not what the reviews are supposed to be rated on. so when people come in here crying about how i didnt love their favorite game, they are spamming. every single time.

@jordan troll reviews? excuse me? would you care to clarify that offensive accusation, or just ban me? because that is not acceptable.  so kindly explain yourself, or do your job and ban me if you truly think that because i dont like certain games that im a troll.

@moss did i anywhere say it should live up to the arcade version? no. i simply mentioned it to state that the arcade version looked terrible compared to everything around it, so complaining about this versions graphics in comparison is pointless. i suppose i have to be as basic as possible here. youre also focusing entirely upon how i said the game looks bad, rather than how theres no story, no presentation, no FUN, etc. just the exact same bland boring thing over and over.  try reading the whole thing next time.

you both seem to think that a "review" has to be praising a game for absolutely nothing. the game had terrible graphics, terrible gameplay, terrible quality sound, a boring and badly written story, terrible english, and has no good qualities. 

a game has to HAVE good qualities to speak of them. you cant just speak of mundane features like weak battles being finished for you instead of taking the 10 seconds to take 1 turn to kill them. those arent "good" features, they are just features.


  i would rather speak honestly of a worthless game like earthbound, than look for non existent positive qualities, that only look positive in comparison to the rest of the terrible game.

gamerforlifeforever2 : for my ratings here, i use an average of all my scores that this site requires us to grade by, and seeing as there is almost no difficulty, it drops the overall quality of the game significantly. while still being one of my favorite games of all time, and in my opinion the best pre ps2 game made, there is overall nothing to do except play the game (fight and move to the next area) and no difficulty, so gotta give it a low score on depth and difficulty.

Graphics: the graphics in Pier Solar (demo) are absolutely terrible. they have that od sharp yet blurry look of sega CD games, but with terrible choices of colors and oftentimes odd, like wierd blue or green dots sometimes on the borders of tiles, or some parts of characters. its all very eye wrenching and for being made well after the system was dead, these guys should have been able to program graphics at least on par with early genesis titles, not slightly better than a pirate chinese rpg for the nes.

Sound: its difficult to tell if its badly arranged, they had no idea how to use synthetic wave forms to make their instruments, or both, but the music in this demo sounds absolutely terrible. im sure the CD version music sounds better, but theres no excuse for them just deciding to put no effort into this sound.

addictive: no. its (the demo) a generic rpg thats over very quick. if it werent for the fact that you move i tiles in like 2 seconds, the game would be over far quicker.

Story: meh its well written, and by that i mean obviously by native english speakers. its not engaging, nothing out of the ordinary or special. theres nothing in this story for the demo to make me say "oh damn i need that"

depth: again, generic rpg. you have some kind of charge option in battle, but its useless in this demo because you lose ALL your charges anytime you get hit and need to charge for like 3-4 turns to have a small increase in damage, which you would have surpassed by simply attacking those 4 turns.

difficulty: meh. there really is none. youll find it difficult if you try to use that idiotic charge mechanic though.

Overall, this demo, if indicative of the actual game, tells me that the creators were basically making some chinese pirate rpg, but with text we can understand. a generic battle system, coupled with terrible sound and graphics, extremely slow movement, a bland and boring story, and all the same stuff weve seen before. i suppose they used some paralax scrolling here and there and other pointless features like that, but do those really make the game any better when everything looks like crap to begin with, and it plays like every other rpg you walked away bored from?

Ah Earthbound. A game lauded by many, given false praise left and right, where despite the many failings it has, they are all ignored and the programmers could do no wrong. i normally dont bother to include information pertaining to the games development or past, but for this one im going to do so at various parts. some of you are going to see a "rant" because of the low rating and general tone i will take against this game, but play the game and youll see for yourself that everything i say is true.

Graphics: Earthbound has good graphics for a late NES or very early release SNES game. for being 4 years into the system, there is no excuse. the character sprites are very poorly done, as if someone just learned how to code had taken his first steps at making game graphics. this is an apt comparison, because the team who handled most of the game, APE, was a fledgling company full of people who had no experience in coding anything before working there, and in some cases (will come back to this) were illiterate. all of the writing on buildings and whatnot is crooked and sideways, like a 6 year old makes his letters to appear cute, and the backgrounds themselves are generally poorly drawn and are difficult to discern exactly what is supposed to be in them. animation is essentially nonexistent, and battles consist of a non animated GIF with flashing colors or a solid color for a background. attack animations are either nothing, or something stupid looking like a bulls eye pattern stretched to cover the screen.

Sound: though there are claims of this game using real instruments, the proof is in the pudding. the bass drum sounds like a wet fart, the snares all sound like someone coughing into a mic.  all of the instruments sound terrible, and nothing like any actual instrument, and the songs are composed horribly, in a haphazard way that is generally painful to listen to. the sound effects are the same terrible sounds as used in the music, and dont convey anything properly.

Addictiveness: this game isnt addictive. its got a terrible story, with a generic battle system reminiscent of dragon warrior 2. everything is disgusting to look at, painful to hear, and depressing to read due to terrible writing AND translation.

Story: its important to note that the main writer for the game was illiterate. i do not have the links on hand, but it has been stated in several interviews. the story was written by this guy sitting next to another person who while literate, was not literate in whatever japanese script they were using, kanji i think? so basically they were writing the story completely blind. this coupled with the fact that the guy drew his inspirations for the story from movies he didnt understand, childhood memories he didnt understand, a culture he didnt understand, and on a medium (video games) that nobody at the main company understood, makes for a very poor story.

youre some magical hero who needs to find a couple other 6 year olds to go save the world from a giant fetus with baseball bats and pyschic powers. makes total sense right? its full of inconsistencies, plot holes, deus ex machinas, and overall bad writing. 

depth: there's either not much of anything to do other than fight, or the environment was just so bland and unengaging that i couldn't find anything.

difficulty: theres a small bit of difficulty here and there, but overall its a bit easier than most rpgs of the time.

there is so much wrong with this game that it cannot be simply explained via the required sections of this website. aside from looking, sounding, and playing terribly, its just overall boring. the character development is laughable if you enjoy horror, and within the first 10 minutes youll already have a very good understanding that there are alot of people who blindly praise a game just because other people do. there are no redeeming factors in this game, and the fact that these guys later made pokemon does NOT exonerate them from this crime.

erm what? youre not trying to kill the girls, youre trying to save them. did you even play the game, or just read other reviews of it? clearly you didnt pay any attention if you played, or you would know that you are not trying to kill the girls. oh wait. CLEARLY YOU DIDNT EVEN PLAY THE GAME. that is literally ALL that you do. 1/5 review because you clearly have not played the game you are reviewing. though your assessment of the quality of the story, graphics, sound, and game are 100% accurate. maybe even a little too high rated.

why is it that any time i review a crap game that has nothing "good" about it, theres always some kids to come along and say "waahhh dont just talk bad about this game with nothing good about it"? 

is it that hard for you to believe that the game just plain sucks in every facet? try playing it and youll see. the most fair review is an honest review, and an honest review of any pacman game, unless theres some mystical gem ive missed somewhere, is to point out all its flaws, while ignoring its non existent graces.

Oh Pacman. The infamous series that is oh so "classic" in the video game world. Its barely a game, barely works, and has 9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 different versions that are all exactly the same. Played any other pacman? Than you have played this one as well. Now on to speaking truth about this abomination.

Graphics: well, when the FIRST Pacman came out in 1980, it was not even comparable to most other arcade games, and the Sega Master System does it no better. The graphics are still as simplistic as they can possibly be, there's barely anything in the game, a handful of fruit that look vaguely like fruit, 4 "ghosts"  that are just a palette swap of one another with a different movement speed,  no background, and walls that consist of just solid colored lines. Whether arcade or SMS version, these games all lack any real detail, and as such cannot compare to their competition. Supposedly there's some "cut scenes" which I haven't bothered to view, and can only imagine they are the identical pacman and Mrs. pacman wandering around mazes being chased by ghosts. 

Sound: hahaha. You get a couple of bleeps and bloops. You get nothing but the utmost annoying sounds that don't resemble anything at all, that just play constantly. If you don't want to mute this after 10 seconds, you've likely got hearing problems to begin with.

Addictiveness: none. You "navigate" through mazes that all look the same(even if there is a very small variation between them), only to eventually play the game over and over.  seeing as the only "hard" thing about these games is the terrible controls that require you to hold the direction you want to turn long before you hit an intersection, its really just a simple game of navigating through a maze where the "enemies" largely ignore you, and grabbing the white dots. Oh yeah. So fun.

Story: there is no story. Its pacman. You wander through....just look at the above paragraph. There's your story.

Depth: once again, check "addictiveness" for the depth in this game. Its about as deep as a 1/100th" deep puddle of water. 

Difficulty: it only has -any- difficulty, as said before, because the controls are terrible, and sometimes one can forget that and not turn when they want/need to. Otherwise, its just boring.

for some inconceivable reason, these games are heralded as a "classic" when there were MUCH better games out when this was. The fact is, that ALL of these games are considered "classics". Everything pacman related however, has been unimaginative, badly written in the few cases where there was a story, and overall boring and pointless. If you have an authentic Pacman or Mrs. Pacman arcade machine from the 80's, I will pay you list price for it so I can burn it to the ground and rid the world of one more embarrassment to video games. But this is Sega Master System, so ill give you 3x its value(1$) and burn it with slightly less splendor.

seeing as you skipped over every aspect of the game except how many fighters you have and that its "like street fighter" im going to say 1/5. terrible review lacking any detail whatsoever. 

TheJmsGamer : no you dont. use google drive, and upload them there, then download them onto the other computer.

dont waste money on outdated and pointless hardware like usb memory sticks and memory cards. upload to a cloud, and download from said cloud.

Mistress : in all honesty, a disclaimer is pointless except to inform users that their actions are in fact illegal. or maybe to say that david isnt responsible for what we post. i could quite easily write an accurate disclaimer and fix the faq, but  see, accurate would involve informing people that they, and david, are partaking in illegal action, and at any point in time (as unlikely as it is) you can get your door kicked down by the feds, and tossed into a prison with the quickness. not something most people want to tell their userbase.

i think the best way to go about it would simply be to state that downloading roms is not legal in any way, but the likelyhood of legal action taken against users is highly unlikely based on past performance. that and just saying "yes, you have to download the games to play them" instead of "no, you dont download anything".

maguc : i accept merriam webster only as a defintion source. and yes, i know what "genderqueer" is, but people using it dosent change what it is. its still gay bashing.

Mistress : did that at the beginning of the year. since then there have been parts of the "disclaimer" removed, but nothing actually updated to display accurate information. i brought up most of my stated points herein, and you dont need a lawyer to understand the law, you just need to spend 10 minutes reading about said la(s)

maguc : i dont know what fake definition youre quoting, but this is the REAL definition pf pansexual.

exhibiting or implying many forms of sexual expression


in very few people does pansexuality have anything to do with ones sex. most who identify as pansexual, in fact do so because they have a sexual attraction to different species, not because they are gay or bi. because "transgender" isnt actually a gender. nor is "gender queer", a terribly derogatory term used by the media, and a handful of propaganda spreaders. 

protip: any time you call a persona queer based on sexuality, in ANY way, you are gay bashing.

you people seem to miss the VERY important aspects of the illegal activities partaken by, and touted as legal by, the owner of this site. these things NEED to be updated. defending the false statements and outright lies by saying "lol errbody knows that its not legal" is idiotic, and obviously not true because there are still threads made occasionally, and little kids asking, if this IS actually legal. and every single time, people ignorantly tell these kids that it is, when in NO WAY SHAPE OR FORM IS IT.

theres this little thing called honesty. it goes a long way. and from what ive seen, david practices this in a very sparing amount, and gives even less of a care about it. these things arent "outdated" they are outright lies that have been stated for quite some time, and have always been lies.

as for "leading to trouble" well guess what? so can this kind of lying. it can easily lead to a class action law suit, to criminal charges being filed against the owner and possibly some administrators of the site, and guess what? pretty much anybody here can start the process necessary for this to be so. because lying to your userbase and telling them they are NOT downloading things when they in fact are, is in fact highly illegal.

oh yeah. and copyright infringement is ALWAYS a felony. and most, if not every, game here is exactly that.  so yeah, you definitely cannot argue that, or you have no idea what copyright infringement is.

ive always look at bisexuality as "half gay". nothing wrong with it, but thats what it is. sometimes you choose you want a man, sometimes you choose a woman. its the same as being hetero or homo, except instead of choosing the same thing every time, you mix it up.

now PANsexuality, thats a different story entirely. though i still dont care what you choose to have sex with, banging animals is quite a bit different than banging another man.