/vr/ - Retro Games

I used to play this game as a kid every now and then and could never figure it out. Very cryptic.
Beating it without a guide would require you to draw out every screen neatly on paper, then patiently map and detail all the secrets you find until you've thoroughly documented the entire labyrinth.
I forgot what this game was called for many years, but the music always stuck with me. Once I figured out what it was called again and read about it I was surprised to see that Yuzo Koshiro made the soundtrack

>>9830279
I ended up googling where to find the shield, but otherwise it wasn't too bad. Each character has their corresponding corner of the map to explore basically.

>>9830279
Nope.
I had fun with this and Scorcerian. Just use guides and jam to the music erryday.

Game was so much fun and the last game Falcom made that was so creative was Nayuta no Kiseki which is my 2nd favorite game of all time.

>>9830792
>Each character has their corresponding corner of the map to explore basically.
But the game doesn't give you any indication on which corner "belongs" to which character. The game gives you pretty much no direction whatsoever.

Sucks because the gameplay is really fun, a 2D platformer dungeon crawler with a huge world to explore, but it's just way too cryptic and the game gives you no feedback or direction.

>>9830279
As a kid and I loved it but never got THAT far. I was 22 when I came back to beat the game for the first time, never used a guide or map. I wish I could forget about the game and come back and rediscover it. It's wonderfully fun.

It's less complicated than a lot of people think. Once you start using the key item that "unlocks" a character's section, it actually becomes fairly linear, with the labyrinth-puzzle being the span of a couple screens at most. And once you catch on to the music themes, which usually happens when you notice both the fairly linear section you can ONLY complete with that particular character, then the rest of the game makes a lot of sense.

The first obvious stop is picking up the gloves for Dad at the fish, because it's literally the first fork you can take without going deeper, and without more items, you won't really get anywhere, although once you get one of the items in his section you could technically back out and switch to that character I guess. And you can do Pochi's section at anytime iirc.
The rest of the game essentially falls down like dominos after Dad. Even if you aren't particularly skilled, I think everybody but the Mom has the freedom to run with an Orb, so even in the worst case scenario if you've made progress but are about to die, softlocked, or whatever else, you can bail to safety and come back and be ready for it.

I think almost everybody just got stuck with Dad's block move mechanics. The manual actually did a lot to explain it from what I've heard, but I was too retarded for that as a kid. Just a few screens over however you'll find a mostly useless area of blocks that are stacked in such a way as to encourage you "accidentally" manipulating the blocks in the less obvious ways.

>>9830279
>beat
>beat
>beat
Why are zoomers across this board so obsessed with "beating" games? Why are they so fixated on checking off boxes just so they can say they did it? Are they even aware of the possibility that a game can be enjoyable for reasons other than seeing the ending screen?

There are plenty of games I never "finished" that were still immensely fun and provided dozens, if not hundreds of hours of entertainment. Whether or not I cleared them was a question of whether I really wanted to try THAT hard to do so. A lot of times I'd just enjoy the exploration and the adventure and trying new things, and if I got bored or stumped I'd play another game, and then come back and have fun all over again. Infinite enjoyment.
There's only a few games I fell in love with to the point I just HAD to clear them to see it through to the very end, but that is NOT a detriment on all the others.

Games are for having fun.

>>9831748
beating games is fun though.

>>9831748
>Why are zoomers across this board so obsessed with "beating" games? Why are they so fixated on checking off boxes just so they can say they did it? Are they even aware of the possibility that a game can be enjoyable for reasons other than seeing the ending screen?

Exactly what people can't get good and beat games would say

>9831748
>you don't NEED to beat the game to enjoy it!