/vr/ - Retro Games

good first half, bad second half 5/10
>Dude, remember al those characters you had? Well go get them again lol

>>5499856
The original Metroid is a shitty game. Zelda is a 6/10 as you said.

Thankfully they have amazing hacks that make them into actual worthwhile games.

>>5499856
Metroid and Metroid II are games I'd consider 6/10. They're good but the first game is a little too monotonous all around and the amount of grinding it encourages completely destroys the pace of it. And the second game fixes some of the first game's issues, has more interesting movement mechanics, but is pretty straight forward and lacks interesting bosses. Super Metroid is the masterpiece and probably the biggest jump in quality I can think of in a sequel.

The Legend of Zelda is amazing. When the one major issue that shitposters can muster is "how was I supposed to know to bomb a wall?" then I think it's safe to say the game is pretty good.

This thread speaks the truth, Fortnite has *simply* thrown off the curve (inb4 seething boomers)

>>5499863
>Playing for the story.

>>5499856
So what's a 10/10 for you?

>>5499856
Well, it was the first game of it's type. Action adventure really wasn't a thing then, and RPGs were still i their infancy.
So imagine being back in the 80's, playing some platformers and some archaic garbage games when all of a sudden this comes out. And every game of this kind since then has taken things from it or ripped it off to some degree. Not just flat out zelda clones, but action adventure, RPG, survival horror and so on.

So it really is one of the most important and arguably best games ever made.

>>5499856
Magic of Sheherezade is superior in every way.

>>5499945
The turn based battles are a little on the shitty side.

>>5499856
Zelda II is the only good Zelda game.

>>5499974
I kinda wish Zelda 2 had some items you could use in combat, the sword play is a lot of fun but I miss the boomerang. I'd love another Zelda 2 style game that's really combat focused.

>>5499924
Are you saying FF6's gameplay is good?

>>5499950
The army guys you can hire make them more fun.

>>5499975
I'm surprised there's not a hack that makes Link's sword longer yet. It shouldn't be too hard to do.

It's ridiculous that he's walking around with such a short knife, and it makes the gameplay really awkward too.

>>5499863
It's the buggiest fucking game ever made.

>>5499993
>Any%
>6m 21s
That's pretty glitched.

>It's a solid 6/10. No more. No less
dont force me your shit opinion!
next

>>5499974
hot takes like this aren't interesting unless you have a single fact to back that up

>>5500027
Zelda II is the only game in the series to actually attempt to advance the Zelda formula.

The added RPG elements and the more advanced combat system brought much needed depth and a more satisfying challenge. It was the only game in the series to be designed for the experienced gamer, the old guard who grew up playing arcade games. In that sense, Zelda II is the only true sequel.

All Zelda sequels since then have been nothing more than dumbed down remakes of the original, designed to appeal to casual gamers.

>>5499983
It's very obviously good. It's an ATB JRPG with Street Fighter inputs, collectible monster and terrain-based abilities, tons of depth and a unique take on magic learning. The only problem is its way too easy. I have replayed FF6 so many times.

>>5500087
>It's very obviously good.
KH2FM's gameplay is "obviously good"
FF6's gameplay is generic atb.

>>5499856

Above average.

>>5499856
How about games that were never good, and only achieved notoriety through constant shilling by marketers.

>>5499856
>What are some other average or slightly above average retro games that people hail as masterpieces?
SOTN and Suikoden 2.
>>5499890
>The original Metroid is a shitty game
It really is.
>>5499945
It's ordinary. Crystalis is the best game of its type from that generation.

>>5499856
Piss easy RPG with shit graphics. Only thing that made it a fad was constant marketing and leveraging autists who have to "collect everything."

Zelda along with Metroid and a few others were some of the earliest NES games to really impress people and realize that console gaming could be more than Atari shit.

>>5499856
Average game with good story and immersion for the time. The best part about the game was the hacks done by people with no affiliation to the game--Team Fortress and Counter Strike.

>>5500931
forgot pic

>>5499993
>look up bugfix hacks in RHDN
>there are 100+ and most of them fix giant fucking bugs that really fuck up the game
Jesus.

>>5499939
>>5500926
Okay boomers, the point of this thread isn't to dispute the importance of the game, it's to point out that it hasn't aged well. It's not even close to being "one of the best games ever made" in the modern era.

>>5500124
>generic atb.
So based and red pilled?

>>5500934
>>5500931
Shit taste probably an idfag

>he believes in best games list

Often heralded as one of the best Dragon Quest games. Strong story (albeit a bit rushed in some regards) but weak in terms of gameplay and music. No customization in terms of party. You have monster hunting, although interesting, there are no other jobs/classes and weapon skills. Other DQs like DQ III, VI, VII, excel in this regard.

The music is also so-so, outclassed by the FF games during at area. Also not as good as the music in III and IV.

Overall 7/10.

>>5500920
Do you not remember how huge the game world felt for a Game Boy title? It’s nit much to look back on but for the time that amount of content in a handheld seemed immense, even moreso with Gold/Silver

>>5500920
Its popular because it has a roster of 150 customizable "characters" with unique movesets. You can hate Pokémon as a game, but if you don't understand why it's popular you're a retard.

>>5500082
Good

Zeld 2 also had some incredibly original tunes.

To OP: psychonaut

>>5501529
One has to wonder why some people even post on a retro game board if they do not like retro games.

>>5501761
Of course not, people knocking these games are zoomers.

>>5500931
Name something better faggot.

>>5499901
>When the one major issue that shitposters can muster is "how was I supposed to know to bomb a wall?" then I think it's safe to say the game is pretty good.
This is a really good point

>>5500920
What a shitpost

>>5501529
>>5499856
So to get this straight, every game on the Nintendo is gonna be a <6/10 soon with every year coming? The whole console is just gonna be shit because it can't hold up to the newest triple A pay to win graffixx game?
With each decade it should start crawling to the next consoles, in 10 years every game on snes is gonna be <6/10, five years after that n64 <6/10 and so on...until in 2047 /vr/ as a whole is just gonna be a 6/10 place to be. Will you then finally just fuck off again back to /v/ if you just like modern games?

>>5502751
Not them but it is the way things usually go, not just with games. As things progress and more is produced expectations change. What was groundbreaking in 1980 may still be decent 30 years later, but when part of the original appeal was how groundbreaking it was compared to it's contemporaries wears off so does a portion of the appeal.

>>5502759
So you are saying the Mona Lisa is a 6/10 cause we can use technics nowadays like Laser printing that weren't imaginable back then?

>>5502765
It's still and 8 or 9 but unironically, yes.

>>5502768
Kek, okay, go watch the newest Michael Bay movie...

>>5502771
It's hard to know if you're baiting, but obviously not everything new is good, just as not everything in Davinci's time was equally good, there are always peaks and valleys.

>>5502795
you can't take historical context out of the equation when rating something and hope to be taken seriously

>>5502816
I didn't mean to imply otherwise.

>>5502837
Your Statement said that there have been things in the past considered good and Bad, but that means there have been 10/10 in past time which still should be 10/10 today, that is not what you intended to say, both Statements (considering you are also
>>5502768) contradict each other then. Without the historical context everything is trash if it doesn't have the newest "Update". Sokrates was shit cause he didn't know what a proton is, for example.

>>5502847
Yeah a real 10/10 will tend to retain tgat status, but that's a tiny tiny fraction. Progress is real and continual. Mona Lisa (da vinci in general) was breathtakingly above most of it's contemporaries, and is still notable for that historic achievement. But a new portrait of the same level of quality is now unremarkable.

>>5502864
So why isnt loz the Mona Lisa of it's time? There Was nothing like it, and looking back at Information Material like magazines everybody praised it as the 10/10 game for its historic achievement in what gaming can do... Where is the difference?

>>5502889
Well it's not quite as remarkable as the Mona Lisa, but it is in a very similar category of being groundbreaking for it's day but not perfect or groundbreaking on such a high level. Also a 10 point scale is a little small to really be comparing things like this. Even 100 might not be enough.

Now the vitrtuvian man, which is about so much more than just a simple portrait, despite not being as fancy at a glance than the Mona Lisa is a true work of near perfection that won't age in the same way.

>>5499856
0/10 argument.
Try to criticize something about the game without coming off like a lazy zoomer, a retard who doesn't understand games, or a pleb with no taste and I might be willing to give your rating some credit. Most LoZ criticism is unconvincing.

>>5501529
>Okay boomers, the point of this thread isn't to dispute the importance of the game, it's to point out that it hasn't aged well. It's not even close to being "one of the best games ever made" in the modern era.
No that's not the point of the thread. If it was, you'd actually be able to make that point. This thread is actually just about how you and the OP literally cannot stop sucking each others cocks.

>>5502912
How did this answer the question of loz Wanderung from 10/10 to 6/10? For it's category "picture", the Mona Lisa got a 10/10. For it's category videogame, LOZ got 10/10...Moving the goalpost much? What does the comparison to virtuvian man help in any way? That would be the Super Mario bros of pictures, doesn't change anything of LOZ

>>5502924
More perspective. The 10/10's weren't really warranted, or rather far less do than the Mona Lisa which is still incredible.

>>5499856
In its time it was amazing. At this point, even the game boy sequel is 1000x better. It didn't age, but while I remember it fondly, I'm not rushing to play it like when I was 10.

>>5502934
We are moving in circles bud, if I say now that Mona Lisa is a 6/10 then the statement is invalid, it's not incredible in any way nowadays and aged like milk, what an awesome argument. It looks like shit in comparison to the new marvel endgame poster :^)

>>5502759
Some games and design elements are timeless, though. A chess board is 8x8. Designing a chess-like game to be played on a 16x16 board isn't automatically better, even though based on the retarded logic of modern gamers it would have to be.

OP's Legend of Zelda is a really good example of a game that makes the most of the hardware available, in terms of aesthetics, graphic design, music, and gameplay mechanics. Every single sprite design is unique, memorable, and clearly conveys meaning to the player. The whole game is designed around a few fundamental mechanics. The game introduces most of these mechanics to the player in the first 3 levels without any tutorial. Difficulty scales very well. Abilities, both enemy and player, are clearly balanced on the gameplay mechanics with careful attention given to delays, angles, weaknesses and immunities.

The game is very non-linear while having a clearly intended order. Through most of the game, a typical player should have several different objectives available to pursue if the current one is too difficult or frustrating. Rewards are almost all useful and finding them always feels good.

The reason the game is held as a masterpiece of game design is because this kind of thing is hard to get right, but when you do the results are timeless. Plenty of games have come and gone on better hardware with better graphics and 20 years of software advances that still fail on any number of these metrics.

There are some measures that don't hold up. The number of items is limited, the number of bosses are limited, there aren't many terrain types and the terrain itself can look rather bland. But these are fairly minor criticisms.

Rogue is an example of a game that did a few things really well but other things have obviously aged. Without getting into it too much, the ASCII graphics, while they have a unique charm, are nothing like the iconic designs of the Legend of Zelda sprites.

>>5502912

>>5502979
We're not moving in circles you're just trying your best not to understand lol.

>>5502981
Yeah Chess is pretty well perfect and Legend of Zelda is no Chess.

>>5502998
>Legend of Zelda is no Chess
Suppose I say it is? There are literally zero arguments in this thread supporting a claim to the contrary. There is no criticism at all of the game itself, it's all pointless question-begging.

>>5503001
I would laugh at that supposition. Incidentally I wouldn't put LoZ at a 6, more likely an 8 or so but that's kind of beside the point. You get the idea.

>>5502994
It would be so cool if there were spots where you could bomb an edge wall in one dungeon as a shortcut into another dungeon.

Your favorite game, OP. That one is pretty bad. Back to /v/.

>>5499856

>>5503040

I suppose it was great for it's time

>>5499856
I think i'd give it more of a 7 but I can definitly see where you are coming from. The game is really shit with some of it's secrets and the combat and controlls take some getting used to with the grid like design. I personally like Zelda II More but I would call that game a 7/10 too

>>5499863
Dumbed down WRPG gameplay without the story/graphics of the later games.
>hurr it's because Ultima's gameplay is too advanced for da NES
Square are brainlet-tier

>>5502995
Nice arguments you brought up there pal, let's end this discussion here, you have nothing to bring of value.

>>5503046
That adds to the game...what of value exactly ?

>>5503082
Fuck u faggot?

Ff7 is a 3

>>5503082
makes it look like Minecraft

>>5503072
>Ultima
>Deader than Jimmy Hoffa
>FF
>still trucking
Sasuga westcuck.

>>5499863
5/10 bait

>>5499993
Never played a bethesda game. Fallout 3 on PS3 would literally chug if you played it too long and then crash or just randomly delete your save.

>>5499856
Doom, thief, planescape torment are all meme tier trash. Luckily, thief is so shit that it only took 3 games to kill the franchise and crpgs are so unappealing that the entire genre died and the remnants are reduced to begging for Kickstarter bucks.

>>5499926
River City Ransom

>>5503080
Lol

>>5502751
Super Mario Bros is still a great, fun game that can be played without a guide. Zelda is not.

>>5503562
Are you a brainlet? Do you want a another walking simulator to enjoy instead?

>>5503576
>dude, you don't want to spend the entire day burning random bushes and bombing random walls to progress in the game? what are you, a brainlet?

>>5503583
Ah you want to be handhelded.

>>5499856
I don't see why a lot of people claim it as the best zelda game ever, that's so fucking false this is a game you need a guide for without one you are fucked.

>>5503152
THE ABSOLUTE STATE OF /VR/

>>5503082
so I am assuming you only play text-based games?

>>5503683
Truth hurts eh?

>>5503719
go back to /v/ zoomer

>>5503152
100% based

>>5503796
Shit taste

>>5503006
>I would laugh at that supposition.
I laugh at the supposition that Legend of Zelda is not a classic and a masterpiece of good video game design.
The point is that no one in this thread has done anything to establish the credibility required for a rating to be meaningful. You rate LoZ an 8/10? So does my cousin's pet rabbit. Who cares?
Case in point, if this anon can't play LoZ without a guide his brain power is probably on par with a rabbit: >>5503562

>>5501761
It was so good I have an early memory of playing it at Chuck E Cheeses and ignoring everything else, even friends and pizza.
I'd just killed a wild Pikachu by accident and my little dick was so hard at the idea of catching one.

>>5503128
>FF still trucking
To the nips great shame.

>>5499856
At least it was a mediocre action game with some secrets in it as opposed to modern Zelda that are puzzle games for retards.

It’s the only Zelda where I still get a true feeling of mystery

>>5504491
>>5503128
FF effectively died with FFX. The survival of Final Fantasy in name is more about corporate commitment to the brand than anything else.

>>5504598
>FF effectively died with FFX
yeah, quality-wise, but not in terms of commercial viability

>>5500082
>its only good if it uses a different formula

>>5501529
Cut the "hasn't aged well" bullshit. That always was and always will be a piss poor excuse used by kids born well after these games were made to excuse the fact that they're too spoiled by modern gameplay conveniences to simply git gud.

>>5503583
1. You don't have to burn a single random bush to progress in the game (at least not in the first quest).
2. You're an idiot if you can't guess which spots to bomb.

This thread is sponsored by /v/.

>>5504605
Yeah all I'm saying is that if EA had wanted to continue exploiting to Ultima brand the way Square-Enix has exploited Final Fantasy, they could have done it. Ultima IX wasn't so bad that it killed off all interest in the franchise and Ultima Online was quite successful.

Basically the fact that WRPGs don't have many franchises that date back to the 80s like Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest can be attributed to a few issues.

1. Continuing stories in a single setting (Pools of Radiance, Baldur's Gate) vs standalone-stories that share only some gameplay conventions (Final Fantasy).
2. Corporate issues that may have little or nothing to do with game quality.
3. Intellectual Property complications (eg losing a D&D license).

Those all contributed to a trend of western brands having a shorter average lifespan than Japanese games, at least for videogame RPGs. (Madden football has been a solid franchise since 1988).

>>5504476
I'm not saying it's a bad game. It's certainly a very good adventure with some fun exploration and puzzles and was certainly influential. Bit comparing it to Chess which is a nigh perfect game of strategy that people spend decades trying to master is downright silly, and that's giving the benefit of the doubt that you're actually being serious asking me to compare them.

>>5502751
Zelda 1 definitely has some issues that exist because it was a huge pioneer of the ideas it set forth, though it still has many points to offer of its own compared to the other Zelda titles. However I will agree with others that it has some annoying mechanics such as obtuse bombable walls and overworld secrets that just don't hold up today. Games like SMB1 don't have issues like this and are as presentable now as the day they came out. It's bad to take a broad brush and strike out entire libraries of games for being old, but there are definitely many annoyances in old titles that people put up with back on release but wouldn't if it launched tomorrow for example.

>>5502759
Rogue is still a fun game in 2019 but the roguelike formula has been way way WAY improved upon.... like, I would much rather play Nethack or DCSS than Rogue most days...


and I think Zelda 1 still holds up very well. It's a marked improvement over other action-adventure games like Tower of Druaga or Hydlide...

>>5505682
>Rogue is still a fun game in 2019 but the roguelike formula has been way way WAY improved upon.... like, I would much rather play Nethack or DCSS than Rogue most days...

Yup that's precisely why I picked it.

>>5505671
> SMB1: Need to jump to punch random blocks hoping to find power ups and coins.
> Zelda: Need to bomb random blocks hoping to find power ups and coins.

Look, this whole "bomb random spots" meme is overstated. In the 1st quest (which, btw, came with a map that the developers expected you to use) hides anything of importance in places that look like they should be susceptible to bombing or burning if you have half of a brain. I was able to figure this out when I was 7 years old. The obscure spots tend to hold rupees, a potion lady, or the penalty for paying the door man.

Zelda plays a bit clunky because you can't move in all 8 directions, but all NES games have control limitations like that and it's what made that generation of games more challenging than the next.

Notre Dame was a 6/10 nowadays anyway, just look at their Website. You dont have to wait in line, it's fireproof and you can go there whenever you want, 10/10 cultural visit.

>>5505686
yeah I just wanted to add that when I first discovered it in like 1998 I thought it was fun as heck XD

Telengard is another example of an early PC RPG that didn't really stand the test of time, but is still fun in short bursts.

>>5503082
It gives someone 5 minutes of "OMG NINTENDO HIRE THIS PERSON RIGHT NOW". So nothing important.

>>5504769
>1. You don't have to burn a single bush to progress in the game
You literally have to burn a bush to enter level 7. First quest.

>>5505708
It was created by nintendo... well the first gif.

>>5505706
I was obsessed with Rogue in the 80's but never came close to beating it because it was just one of a load of DOS games a friend of the family put on our first computer so I never had a manual. Then it wasn't till we finally got internet rather late that I discovered Nethack, and only went back and beat Rogue after playing it for a long time. I went back and played it a bunch during some of the Rogue threads we had a couple years back and agree It's still pretty fun but doesn't really hold a candle to what the genre became.

>>5505712
To be fair, it's an unique Bush that hinders your way, very suspicious. No other Bush on the whole map has this attribut, and probably some old fart tells you about it

>>5505712
Way to conveniently drop the word "random."

I want to burn Zelda's bush.

>braindead magic spam combat that pauses the entire game
>barebones story that may as well not exist
>bland as shit dungeon design
>"amazing" soundtrack is actually like 3 good songs while the rest of the OST is unmemorable
sequel is so much better, shame it never left japan officially

>>5505902
3 players kinda made it pretty damn fun though. I get what you're saying though.

>>5505712
That's level 8, not 7.
If you have to go around burning random bushes to find level 8, I guess congratulations on having the IQ of a dog.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzbW1gyemU4

>>5505687
>you can't move in all 8 directions
this was pretty obviously a deliberate game design limitation as there's other diagonal movement in the game. Also, games that have diagonal movement on the NES (eg Chrysalis) don't have better combat than Zelda

>>5505587
>Bit comparing it to Chess
Read the whole post faggot.

1. There are timeless elements of game design. Chess is an example of a timeless game.
2. I list, in detail, elements of Legend of Zelda that I consider timeless.

There is no direct comparison to chess. You added that in your own fucking mind because you wanted to be an annoying faggot. In fact I didn't even compare any individual gameplay elements, though I will now.

I brought up Chess merely to prove that timeless elements exist and that these elements are not automatically improved with increased complexity (eg 64 squares vs 256 squares). For a braindead obvious comparison, you have posters considering 8-directional movement is unambiguously better than 4-directional movement. This is no different than claiming Chess would be better if Rooks could move like Queens. Obviously, limiting Rooks to 4-directional movement is an element of the game design. Limiting Link's movement is also an element of the game design.

The point of bringing up Chess is not to say Zelda is as good as Chess, which is not only a nonsensical thing to say it's also a retarded thing to argue about. The point of bringing up Chess(or any sport or board game) is to think about games in terms of their rules and components rather than just a vague sense of realism and complexity.

>>5505902
Dear god I came in the thread to post this.

>>5499856
Baldur's Gate

>>5499856
>What are some other average or slightly above average retro games that people hail as masterpieces?
ff7, nothing is memorable about it except the story, and that's not good news if you're talking about a videogame

>>5505938
Zelda 1 is neither as good or as timeless as Chess. At least you agree it was a riddiculous comparison.

>>5504764
>>5504476
Seething boomers, stay mad. Zelda 1 aged like milk, and nobody with a brain thinks that trial and error burning and bombing is good game design.

>>5506098
apparently a lot of people do since it's so critically acclaimed.

>>5499856
Pretty much every 10/10 people shill is above average or actually shit. Chrono Trigger and Doom are a few exceptions.

>>5499856
your not old enough to appreciate it. back then ram was almost nonexistent. no room for side quests or complex bosses and even unique image tiles. they didnt even have 16 bit color FFS so the palettes get reused

its not what you can do in the game.in that regard its kind of limited. its that it was a free roam game where you can collect various weapons and kill stuff

now do you get it. in a time well before GTA and TES you could wander around get weapons and kill stuff without constrained levels getting in the way. after you complete that level the only way to ever go back is to fail to a game over or reset

>>5505965
Holy shit you are stupid

>>5506098
If the only argument you have against Zelda 1 is the bushes and bombs it's quite safe to disregard your opinion as being both stupid and uninformed.

>>5506512
Zelda was good but not a masterpiece. Sorry that offends you.

>>5506098
>"Oh no, it takes trial and error to find hidden treasure, just like in real life!"
Kill yourself, zoomer.

>>5505902
>sequel is so much better, shame it never left japan officially

>certain bosses counter you when you use offensive spells or screen wide special attacks
>attack speed is far slower than in secret of mana
>annoying characters
>weaker soundtrack
>hiding most menus because a far slower, clunkier menu system when the ring menu system is already there
>can't run in battle so if there are more monsters on the field you have to shuffle towards them, even worse when in certain dungeons have monsters spawn on the other side of a path so you can't fight them but they can still hit you with spells
>game occasionally moves your player controlled character automatically
>less weapon variety seeing as each character is tied to one weapon type
>class change is a neat idea but due to the counter system some bosses have, special attacks aren't as useful
I disagree.
Secret of Evermore is the best.

>>5506582
I'm not offended by your opinion. I'm offended by your inability or unwillingness to mount even a pitiful, inarticulate defense of your opinion.

>>5506631
I don't see much point, I think it's plainly obvious. I also think you're much more invested in this than I am.

>>5506645
yeah I'm interested in talking about videogames on a board about videogames imagine that. Why are you here?

>>5499856
They did some crazy fucking shit for the metatiles in this game. I have no idea why, seeing as the rooms outside dungeons turned out pretty shit anyway

>>5506706
I am also interested in talking about video games. But having to spell out why freaking Zelda 1 isn't a masterpiece of game design near the level of Chess isn't worth my time.

>>5505671
Like >>5505687 pointed out, bombing walls and burning bushes to progress really was not any kind of issue in the first quest, and as far as secrets go, I really do not understand what people are getting at when they criticize games for having obscure secrets. I mean, they're called "secrets" for a reason: They're supposed to be hidden rewards that are tough to find. They aren't necessary for progression, they're bonuses for players who decide to explore. Clearly marking them or putting them right in the player's path completely defeats the purpose.

>>5506946
You got BTFO by that guy already. Please leave this site now before you embarrass yourself even more.

>>5501529
1. Thread is about shit opinions
2. Games don’t age

>>5505556
WRPGs are played on computers not consoles. That's a big difference.

>>5506747
>They did some crazy fucking shit for the metatiles in this game
It had to fit in 128k.

>>5499856
>this bait
>again
mods are guilty of treason

>>5507154
The game manages to get away with being quite huge because it only has something like two main tile sets (the dungeons have different palettes but the tiles are the same).

>>5507141
What are you even talking about? I didn't btfo a single thing

SMB also uses some insane compression tricks and reused assets to fit in 40k.

>>5507152
Sure but it doesn't have to be a big difference as far as brand longevity goes. Dragon Quest was 1986. The only currently active, popular WRPG franchise I can think of that even comes close is Elder Scrolls, which is still 8 years younger(ES: Arena is 1994).

Early WPRGs:
- Ultima (dead)
- Wizardry (dead)
- Might and Magic (revived)
- Gold Box series (dead)

Meanwhile for JRPGs you have
- Dragon Quest
- Final Fantasy
- Megami Tensei
- Ys

And while it's true PCs mostly sucked until the 90s, the franchises I listed thrived on home computer and successfully transitioned to PC, so that's not really the issue. Most of them seemed to die out near the end of 5th gen due to at least in large part to corporate decisions or legal issues not directly tied to success of the games themselves, other than maybe not being as wildly popular as the JRPGs to singlehandedly save doomed companies like 3DO.

>>5500087
The problem with FF6 combat gameplay is that it's unbalanced and lacks taste.
- Stats are fucked up with Magic being extremely powerful and others being almost useless.
- Defense-piercing trait is too powerful
- Too many abilities require tradeoffs that involve removing control from the player (Dance and Rage, obviously, but also moves like Cyan's and Sabin's auto-target moves that give you more powerful attacks on a random target). This might seem like a good idea at first but in the long run removing decisions from the player makes combat less engaging.
- Awkward difficulty balance as the game progresses, such as when your party mana pool quadruples after a single event and you never have to worry about out-of-combat healing resources for the rest of the game.
- All the characters have similar base HP and MP values, there's minimal variety there.
- There's too much overpowered gear in the 2nd half of the game. Elemental shields are easily obtained and trivialize most of the dragon encounters. The Snow Muffler is also not hard to get and nullifies tons of damage types. Ultima is easy to get. Given all the multi-hitting gimmick equipment it's easy to build a party that can deal 70k+ damage in a single round in a game where no enemy has greater than 65k hitpoints.

Notice how the only people defending Zelda 1 as a "masterpiece" in this thread are boomers. Just because you were okay with playing mediocre games during your childhood doesn't mean the rest of us should just accept it too.

>>5508104
Dumbest Generation kids: go back to /v/.

It was a mistake including ShitStation and Nintendo 0/64 in /vr/ because it attracts dumb kids like you.

Adventures of Link feels a bit more expansive and not as claustrophobic as the first game.

>>5508131
Is a bigger game though, right? A 256k ROM versus 128k.

>>5508137
AOL was originally for the FDS, so it was 128k. In adapting it for cartridge, they added a bunch of stuff including different palettes for each dungeon and two new bosses.

>>5508131
You can tell their programming skills improved as well, it doesn't suffer from slowdown and flicker from trying to get 50 sprites on screen at once like the first game.

>>5508104
Where does it mention it's only boomers you infantile?

>>5508104
Zoomers never learned how to win arguments when shitposting fails.

>>5500124
>KH2FM's gameplay is "obviously good"
....

>>5508104
I'm one of the older farts on the board and I think it's deffinitely a good game, but certainly not a masterpiece.

>>5507908
The only legitimate criticism is that the evade bug nullifies the use of some equipment and makes items like the Aegis shield too strong.

Everything else that you mention about item configurations is a feature not a bug, and is only "broken" if you play the game so much that you know how to get all of the best items really quickly with things like moogle charm raids or how to quickly trade them all in the coliseum.

But that takes a lot of playing time or a visit to gamefaqs. Play the game through legitimately and you won't end up with 2 Minervas, the Ragnarok sword, early bum rush, and a whole slew of other strong items in the first 3 hours after finding the Falcon.

>>5500082
No, every game afterwards has either been trying to clone OOT or LttP if its a handheld Zelda.

>>5509967
Which was Phantom Hourglass trying to be?

>>5510080
LttP

>>5501631
kind of late but 100% this. I've only played IV and V but it blew me away how V gets held in higher regard to IV.

>>5509864
Wrong, it's all legitimate criticism. They're flaws and weaknesses in the game design and gameplay itself. In fact I didn't even mention the evade bug since you can patch that these days very easily.

Yes, your excuses are at least semi-valid. When people play Final Fantasy VI with the low standards of a first playthrough as a kid who doesn't really pay close attention to mechanics or play aggressively, these problems aren't too noticeable. The game is certainly fun. That doesn't mean the flaws aren't there, and that other games in the series don't have these problems (well, IV and V don't, VII is worse about the gimmicky over-powered abilities but at least stats are balanced).

And no, you absolutely don't need a guide to get overpowered gear. In fact, I find it actually helps make the gameplay more engaging to have a guide and a plan a route through the WoR that doesn't get you overpowered too quickly. The game suggests starting at Zozo, where you can find an Ice Shield, Thunder Shield, Aegis Shield, Red Cap, and Gold Hairpin. All very powerful items even without the evade bug.

The Ice Shield and Thunder Shield in particular ruin the Ice Dragon fight in Narshe which is actually fun if you go there without a bunch of ice-nullifying gear. It's hard to imagine ever arriving at the Fire Dragon in a state where he poses any challenge whatsoever thanks to all the easily-obtainable fire-resist gear. Really the only dragon that can't be trivially cheesed is the Storm Dragon.

And it's not just because the game is "too easy" it's because the itemization was poorly done. Too many easily-obtainable items nullify, absorb, or halve damage, and most enemies aren't designed to accommodate it. Rock/paper/scissor stuff should just make fights easier or doable, not trivial and boring.

>>5510725
Not that guy and not really a fan of VI and certainly agree It's not perfect but it's deffinitely better than a 5/10 and has pretty decent gameplay for a jrpg.

>>5510751
Yeah I'd agree there too. 7/10? 8/10? I am not good at putting numbers on stuff. I'm not >>5499863, I just don't think that street fighter inputs, collectible monsters, and the magic learning system makes the gameplay obviously good.

>>5510762
The blitz inputs are little pointless but the other stuff is neat even if it makes the game too easy. I'd give it maybe a 7.5, better than most final fantasies but not amazing.

>>5510725
> And no, you absolutely don't need a guide to get overpowered gear. In fact, I find it actually helps make the gameplay more engaging to have a guide and a plan a route through the WoR that doesn't get you overpowered too quickly. The game suggests starting at Zozo, where you can find an Ice Shield, Thunder Shield, Aegis Shield, Red Cap, and Gold Hairpin. All very powerful items even without the evade bug.

The game tells you the suggested order in the WoR. Not sure why you'd need a guide for that.

> The Ice Shield and Thunder Shield in particular ruin the Ice Dragon fight in Narshe which is actually fun if you go there without a bunch of ice-nullifying gear. It's hard to imagine ever arriving at the Fire Dragon in a state where he poses any challenge whatsoever thanks to all the easily-obtainable fire-resist gear. Really the only dragon that can't be trivially cheesed is the Storm Dragon.

Finding equipment to nullify enemy strengths is like the lynchpin of turn-based RPGs. If you think that this is a weakness, you just don't like the genre. Go play FFVII, FFVIII, or anything FFX or later - they did away with that kind of stuff completely.

> And it's not just because the game is "too easy" it's because the itemization was poorly done. Too many easily-obtainable items nullify, absorb, or halve damage, and most enemies aren't designed to accommodate it. Rock/paper/scissor stuff should just make fights easier or doable, not trivial and boring.

I found the game challenging in my first few playthroughs, and there was enough hidden content to keep me replaying it. But that was in 1995 when there were no internet guides to tell you how to break the game's difficulty.

> The game is certainly fun.
End of discussion, really.

>>5512039
>The game tells you the suggested order in the WoR.
No it doesn't. It suggests Zozo first, which leads to Cyan's dream, who mentions Gau, and I'm pretty sure there's no guidance after that. Meanwhile, based on levels of the enemies and bosses, Narshe is the best place to start (except maybe Umaro's cave).
>Finding equipment to nullify enemy strengths is like the lynchpin of turn-based RPGs
No it's not, and frankly if you think this you clearly have no idea what makes a good turn-based battle system.

There's nothing inherently wrong with gear that has elemental resistances. The problem, as I stated, is when encounters are trivialized by items, especially late game encounters that are clearly supposed to be cool and challenging like the "Eight Legendary Dragons." The problem isn't that Ice shields and Fire shields make the Ice Dragon battle easier. The problem is that simply wearing them makes you effectively invulnerable for the entire battle.

>Go play FFVII, FFVIII, or anything FFX or later
Or FFIV, or FFV. Apparently FFVI is the only game that does this, and it's supposed to be the genre-defining one? FFIV does have an item that lets you absorb all elements. It's also a cursed item that ruins your stats (stats actually matter in FFIV). It has an ice shield that makes you strong vs fire and weak vs ice, and a fire shield that does the opposite. And a diamond shield that is strong vs lightning. But in FFIV, short of exploiting moonveil consumables you never wind up in a situation where 50%-100% of your party is nullifying or absorbing every single attack.

>End of discussion, really.
No, not really. A game being fun doesn't mean its flaws aren't there. If you didn't want a discussion you shouldn't have challenged the criticism.

>>5505965
>he cannot get enough

>>5512039
>But that was in 1995 when there were no internet guides to tell you how to break the game's difficulty.
I played it at release (NA) too. I had no trouble figuring out this shit. The Storm Dragon wrecked me hard but somehow I beat it (and it wasn't until later I discovered that motherfucker is the highest level Dragon of the 8 and the only one with an unblockable aoe). But then coasted through the rest of the game, except for the Dinosaur forest and the MagiMaster. Also I didn't find the secret area with the blue dragon and Raiden until I got the guide (which you could browse in the magazine rack in the bookstore if you wanted to). Also didn't get the paladin shield or Strago's Grandtrain Lore.

True, I didn't figure out that you could boost Sabin's MagPwr to make blitz overpowered. But finding Bum Rush wasn't hard at all and it's not like you really need to juice it for it to be an exceptional attack. I probably didn't notice that boosting vigor and strength was a waste of time. But I sure as hell made sure to boost magic power for Celes/Terra/Locke/Relm/Strago. I figured out the Vanish+Doom exploit on my own (that one's easy once you notice spells always hit YOU when you're invisible). I didn't get every Colosseum item but I got a lot of them. Save scumming and playing trial-and-error to see what you get is not hard just tedious.

>1995 when there were no internet guides
1996: http://www.thegia.com/uoshp/ff3/text/faqs/ff3myn20.txt
1995: https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/ps/562865-final-fantasy-vi/faqs/5000

Decent gameplay, but with incredibly subpar spritework. It's hard to take a game seriously when everyone looks so goofy and my character looks like he's wearing a mumu instead of a tunic, really dampens the experience.

>>5512221
but anon, it always was a mumu

>>5512108
>No it doesn't. It suggests Zozo first, which leads to Cyan's dream, who mentions Gau, and I'm pretty sure there's no guidance after that. Meanwhile, based on levels of the enemies and bosses, Narshe is the best place to start (except maybe Umaro's cave).

The suggested order per the game after Falcon:
> Already have Edgar, Celes, Setzer, Sabin
> Cyan (dream sequence is NOT hinted at here) -> Gau -> Shadow -> Relm -> Strago -> Locke

Somewhere in there you have to remember to check up on Terra and decide to raid Narshe for Mog and Umaro.

>>5500008
That is not correct.

>>5512282

https://www.speedrun.com/ff3

>>5512305
>https://www.speedrun.com/ff3
>Final Fantasy III
>The one released on the NES

Oh my sweet summer child...

>>5512319
It's the one with the opera scene? That's a bit longer.

https://www.speedrun.com/ff6

>>5512221
>there will never be a glorious 1995 SNES Zelda with top-tier 16-bit pixel art

Makes me so fucking mad

NES FF3

>>5512332
Yeah, just a bit.

>>5499945
you can't seriously believe that.

>>5503015
Wouldn't that be cheating though?

>>5512675
I wouldn't say it's "superior in every way" since the two games focus on different things and have different strengths, but I can understand thinking that Magic of Scheherazade is better than Zelda overall. It's a really good game.

>>5499926
For me it's Sonic Adventure _

>>5513353
Big's Big Fishing Adventure 3

>>5499856
Reminder that numerical scores like "6/10" are absolutely meaningless and only serve as a marketing tool for magazines and as a crutch for people who can't articulate their own thoughts.

>>5499856
if the only zeldas ever made were Zelda1 and BotW, they'd both be 10/10

but instead:
Z1 6/10
BotW 8/10

>>5503040
These fucks wouldn't know color theory if it smacked them in the head.

>>5515039
How does this make sense in any way, does the existence of other zelda somehow comprimise the quality of a specific game?

>>5503040
I would play this.. Is this actually a completed game?

>>5515051
In what sense?

>>5515039
Your retardation is off the charts.

>>5515312
It was an internal thing developed during Breath of the Wild by Nintendo.

>>5512167
I'm not saying that the game was some overly difficult thing to figure out, but simply that the game offered enough challenge the first few times through to be fun and you wouldn't know how to break the mechanics without a guide.

I died plenty of times on bosses until I could figure out their weaknesses with what equipment/relics I had available. To me, figuring out how to deck out your party is part of the strategy of a turn-based RPG and FFVI does it better than most.

Yes, this becomes completely broken when you know how to do early moogle charm raids, level your party early on using a turbo function on the river loop, vanish + doom trick, or boost everyone's magic power to infinity.

>>5512108
> The problem, as I stated, is when encounters are trivialized by items, especially late game encounters that are clearly supposed to be cool and challenging like the "Eight Legendary Dragons."

I don't know why you have the impression that the 8 dragons are supposed to be some super-difficult side quest.

> Or FFIV, or FFV. Apparently FFVI is the only game that does this, and it's supposed to be the genre-defining one? FFIV does have an item that lets you absorb all elements. It's also a cursed item that ruins your stats (stats actually matter in FFIV). It has an ice shield that makes you strong vs fire and weak vs ice, and a fire shield that does the opposite. And a diamond shield that is strong vs lightning. But in FFIV, short of exploiting moonveil consumables you never wind up in a situation where 50%-100% of your party is nullifying or absorbing every single attack.

FFIV is equally as easy as FFVI. The difference in FFIV is that the pace of play is significantly slower, which makes the game overall less enjoyable.

>>5515342
It's actually different. I did some googling..

It's called "Breath of the NES" and it was inspired by the Nintendo one. There's a demo out there, but he got a nasty letter from Nintendo, so he won't be completing it.

>>5515343
>I don't know why you have the impression that the 8 dragons are supposed to be some super-difficult side quest.
Motherfucker do you know what the word TRIVIAL means?
The 8 dragons aren't supposed to be "super-difficult" Jesus fuck. But they are late-game optional bosses not early-game "here's how the mechanics work" bosses. You should not be able to slap on a couple of shields and be COMPLETELY invulnerable to the boss's attacks.

> The difference in FFIV is that the pace of play is significantly slower, which makes the game overall less enjoyable.
Just the walk speed, which can be patched easily.
The battle pacing and story pacing are both superior in IV. The main drawback of IV relative to VI is that the world is smaller and you don't have the ability to customize. (Although if you care about replay value you can just play FF4 Free Enterprise which gives you both a non-linear open world and ability to customize your party).

FF4 also doesn't have as many elaborate plot sequences like the Opera House or Gestahl dinner.

Most WRPGs suck

>>5516717
Agreed.

>>5499856
The reason it is called a masterpiece, is because:
- it codified action-adventure genre. Before, "action-adventure" referred to weird obtuse Atari games like Adventure or ET that could be finished in 5 minutes, but absolutely required you to read the manual. In contrast, while it might need trial and error, everything to understand the game is right inside.
- It was the first open-world game. Period. Sure, there were RPGs with 'open world' like Ultima, but they boiled down to a map screen. Here, you can actually physically walk from one end of the map to the other, everything has a physicality to it.
- It was one of the first games ever that felt like an adventure. You weren't playing for highscore, and you weren't even just walking right to the next level - you were dropped in a world, on your own, with only your wits to help you. If you're dumb, you will die instantly because you'd skip the sword.
- The more you explore, the easier the game gets as you get extra stuff. That was mindblowing back then.
- In-game NPC dialogue and a real storyline in an action game. And like, actually helpful dialogue, not "Princess is another castle" bullshit.

In other words, the reason why this alright game is remembered so fondly is because it invented all of those concepts.

>>5516686
>But they are late-game optional bosses not early-game

So this illustrates my point. You have created, in your mind, what the dragons *should* represent instead of what they actually represent.

In reality, the dragons are encountered as you go through the WoR. You fight the first one approximately 2/3 through the game (Storm Dragon), and if you have enough shields to make his attacks trivial then you are doing a moogle charm raid.

Additionally, if you have enough ice shields/flame shields to give one to each of your party members to fight the ice dragon on the first encounter, that means that you are doing Narshe after the Cyan dream sequence (ie, out of the recommended order), or you already know how to effectively trade items at the Coliseum.

The battle pacing and story pacing are both superior in IV. The main drawback of IV relative to VI is that the world is smaller and you don't have the ability to customize. (Although if you care about replay value you can just play FF4 Free Enterprise which gives you both a non-linear open world and ability to customize your party).

No. The main drawback of IV is that after you command a party member to use a spell, he sits there thinking about it for the next 30 seconds. This is much more prominent late game than early game. FFVI doesn't add nearly as bad of a time penalty based on the strength of the spell you command.

>>5515039
That makes sense.

>>5518880
>You have created, in your mind, what the dragons *should* represent instead of what they actually represent.
It is reasonable to assert that the eight legendary dragons, encountered in the latter half of the game, will not be a trivial challenge. I'm not saying they should be particularly challenging. But you shouldn't be able to win trivially just by equipping a single item before the battle.

The Ice Dragon's attacks break down into:
1. full-party AoE Ice damage (roughly 43% of the time)
2. N.Cross freezes a party member for a duration (22%)
3. Physical attack (35%)

It also counter-attacks 33% of the time with a physical attack.

The Ice Shield, easily obtainable on Mount Zozo, absorbs the ice attacks. The odds of the dragon physically attacking 3 times in a row (not counting counters) is something like 1 in a 100. This means that with even a single ice shield, it's almost impossible to lose this fight. Keeping everyone alive to get the magic point reward is only slightly more challenging (especially if you have the Thunder shield).

>the main drawback of IV is that spells have cast times.
So basically you're admitting you prefer dumbed-down gameplay with less depth so long as there are pretty graphics and gimmicky combos.
>This is much more prominent late game than early game.
Although the cast times do get skewed a bit by the end of FFIV, for most of the game it adds a layer of depth to the combat and tactical decision-making where you have to weigh the risk of the spell delay with the value for casting it. There are good spells with 0 delay, also: (Virus, Nuke, Cure4).

>FFVI doesn't add nearly as bad of a time penalty based on the strength of the spell you command.
So far as I can recall, FFVI doesn't have any penalty. I believe the only time you have any delay at all in FFVI for spellcasting is when you use the Gem Box do dual-cast, which is barely noticeable unless you're specifically looking for it.

>>5515051
What the fuck do you think 'color theory' is?

>>5521517
Yeah, I've been waiting for him to explain himself. That shot looks fine to me.

>>5519737
On your first play-through, if you have more than 1 ice shield (obtained from Mt. Zozo), you've been using a guide. Either that, or you did Narshe a lot later than the game suggests.

That 1 ice shield won't protect your character from being instantly frozen, so it's still very possible to die on the ice dragon.

>>5523478
Forgot to say: Or there's a third option where you return to fight him when you've obtained more items and leveled up, which is an option in every RPG up to that time. The only thing that differs in FFVI is that the non-linear nature of the game allows you to explore elsewhere to obtain items rather than flat-out grinding for levels.

>>5523478
>On your first play-through, if you have more than 1 ice shield (obtained from Mt. Zozo), you've been using a guide.
Are you kidding me? If the thought doesn't occur to you to visit Doma Castle after recruiting Cyan to explore and see if anything happens, then you apparently have never played a JRPG in your life.

Being frozen isn't permanent and the dragon's ice attacks will heal you faster than his physical attacks will damage you. Unless having everyone frozen or dead causes game-over, which it might, I can't remember, this is nothing more than an annoying inconvenience.

And again, you're completely missing the point that this entire argument disappears if either:

- The Ice Shield is made reasonably difficult to obtain (eg in Kefka's Tower, Phoenix Cave, etc.).
- The Ice Shield's weak point is made relevant by having the Ice Dragon use some kind of wind attack that it uses rarely.
- Make The Ice Shield only halve ice damage instead of absorbing it (or maybe nullify ice and halve fire).

And, you're also missing the point that this was just one example. Almost every single dragon can be nullified like this. You might see the red dragon cast flare, but will probably only see fire attacks. Float Rings and Gaia Gear nullify all damage on the Earth Dragon. Odds are you'll be wearing 4x reflect rings anyway when you encounter the Holy Dragon and can snore through that fight. Gold Dragon, same thing, but at least in that case you're running with 3 parties and might not have a party optimized to fight it. The Skull Dragon is made easy with ribbons but whatever, I'm fine with one of the eight being a status-gimmick fight. The Blue Dragon can be cheesed with Tortoise shields but at least that requires a random drop or steal to obtain.

So that basically leaves only the Storm Dragon that isn't a complete and total joke of a fight.

>>5499856
NES Metroid is a horribly made game completely killed by the simple fact you start at 30HP if you die/load a password.
Dragon Warrior 1 is flat out trash, being nothing but grinding with no tactics outside of trying to healtank shit, which good luck doing that without the healmore spell at the end of the game

>>5524626
Metroid is solid and I disagree with that.
I agree about DW
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bgh30BiWG58

>>5526983
NES Metroid really is ruined by that. Not to mention anything about how the Ice Beam is half the damage of the starting beam and youre forced to use it, or the bosses that are basically a slugfest of you spamming missiles until they die

>>5524626
a big problem I have with metroid is all the bland, repetitive vertical segments right near the beginning of the game.

>>5524571
> Are you kidding me? If the thought doesn't occur to you to visit Doma Castle after recruiting Cyan to explore and see if anything happens, then you apparently have never played a JRPG in your life.

If you go to Doma to explore after recruiting Cyan, there's really no reason to sleep there since you'll most likely be at full health. Additionally, if you do Doma that early then you are going to be horrendously under-leveled for that sequence.

> And again, you're completely missing the point that this entire argument disappears if either:

I'm not missing anything. The issue you describe is only a problem if you go out of sequence or use a guide to farm late-game items earlier in the game. Yea, you might have one, possibly 2 characters who can hard counter some of the dragons' spells, but if your party is entirely decked out with a hard counter you've been farming things.

I get it - you don't like equipment that can hard-counter enemies. If you want more challenge, just don't equip them.