[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Maintenance is complete! We got more disk space.
Become a Patron!

/vr/ - Retro Games

View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 5 KB, 248x192, gameover.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
4517619 No.4517619 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

Was there ever a good reason to not have continues?

>> No.4517623

muh 1cc

>> No.4517626

to make you be careful of your lives

>> No.4517627

Continues have no place in traditional platformers. If your'e doing something that involves heavy exploration/adventure stuff like Zelda 2 their needed because you don't want to constantly repeat that.

Dealing with finite lives and having an endurance struggle is part of the experience and a huge source of challenge. Even when I played games with infinite continues sometimes I would just reset at a game over and start all over.

I think if you want to make the game accessible to children giving them 3 or 5 continues is fine.

>> No.4517632

>Was there ever a good reason to not have continues?

So you would get good.

>> No.4517778

For your epeen

>> No.4517791

Mickey mania, what version is this screen from OP?

>> No.4517821

OP's pic is from Land of Illusion for MS/GG

>> No.4517847

Yes because people are too dumb to avoid credit feeding and only do what games force them to do. So they fuck up the whole game without even realizing. Devs should have done that way more considering the state we're in now. Sadly it was mostly limited to games with checkpoints where credit feeding isn't as big of an issue.

>> No.4517858



>> No.4517867 [DELETED] 
File: 700 KB, 725x1000, Elphelt.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I love how the people in this thread are pretending that classic game developers were altruists trying to lead humanity on the right path by teaching them to persevere when in reality most of the posters in this thread are underagefags who have never 1cc'd a game and are just speaking out their ass to sound cool.

In reality, developers not giving continues for their games was a product of greed; notice how it stopped being a thing as game rentals died down and purchasing games at full price became more common as places like Blockbuster died? Konami even went so far as to remove features like infinite continues from the Japanese versions of games because game rentals were more common overseas. They wanted kids to have to practice their shittily designed games by purchasing them and focusing more time into it. That's why arcade ports also only gave you like 3 lives max; can't let the poor people pay 70 bucks for an arcade cartridge and then prevent them from wanting to put in quarters at the arcade.

1cc challenges and shit contribute absolutely nothing to humanity in the slightest and you're a fucking retarded delusional basement dweller high on crack if you think the devs ever cared about that. Non-shitty games like Mega Man and Ninja Gaiden offered infinite continues for a reason. 1ccs should be self-imposed challenges by autists with too much free time on their hands, not programmed into the game itself.

Anime titties.

>> No.4517872

That's nice and all, but Bayou Billy is still the best

>> No.4517873

I remember fapping to him after seeing him in that Captain N episode as a kid. Good times.

>> No.4517874

People have went over this a million times. Yes, devs did care about that which is why they blocked you from secret endings, bosses, levels, loops and saving your scores if you continued. It has nothing to do with altruism either you mongoloid, it's in the devs' best interest to preserve a strong sense of risk vs reward, excitement and challenge if they want to make good games, all of which disappear when credit feeding. Though even if it was purely greed, it doesn't matter in the slightest because it makes games far better.

>> No.4517876

>console gaming
>mickey mouse
who cares

>> No.4517889
File: 264 KB, 616x900, Elphelt.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

So you admit it was clearly greed in those cases, that's all I needed to hear. Also, the vast majority of games didn't have 1cc rewards, you realize that right? Only a select few did, I'd wager not even 1% or close to it. Also also, it takes the average person a lot of practice and effort to 1cc them. Meaning you'll still have to put in a lot of quarters or spend a lot of time with the game (usually by buying it) to accomplish that goal. Meaning that a small pool of people are still contributing a larger than average fund to their games.

BTW I'm not shitting on the 12 arcade games with 1cc rewards (because you know, those are still actually fucking playable and only have added bonuses if you go above and beyond) but rather the overwhelming amount of games with absolutely no reward for 1ccing games but instead intentionally making them frustrating and nigh-unplayable without Game Genies or the like. Most people here have only played a select few quality titles but having played most of the NES, SNES, Genesis, etc libraries I can safely tell you that most of the games are shovelware that fall under this category.

>> No.4517901

>So you admit it was clearly greed in those cases
Nope, did no such thing. I said even if it was greed, it wouldn't make a difference. In reality, it was pressures of the arcade format (greed), pressures from the players and a genuine desire to create good games. The developers had to balance it all, saying it was just greed is idiotic especially since they took efforts to keep their games well balanced and good DESPITE the pressures of greedy arcade owners
>Also, the vast majority of games didn't have 1cc rewards, you realize that right?
Nope. Most of them did since they either reset or don't save your scores if you continue

Also console games were a mess that didn't quite know what they were doing, this discussion is primarily relevant for arcade games

>> No.4517906

Scores are reward, playing for a longer time is reward, a lot of arcades don't even allow continues, you are completely retarded.
If anything a problem with earlier arcade games is that infinite loops are too generous so you can literally play them for hours with one coin if you are good enough.

>> No.4517909 [SPOILER] 
File: 1.37 MB, 905x1280, 1515729128350.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I'm just going to save more headache and point out that I'm pretty sure you're on a completely different book here since I'm explicitly talking about console gaming and the OP is using console gaming for his topic image

Or are you just trying to get me to post more ecchi pics at this point by farming replies from me? Because I mean, wish granted?

>> No.4517912
File: 298 KB, 1024x576, christmas_elphelt_by_itzxjustxnano-d9kgwlq.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I've literally never been to an arcade that didn't allow continues but this thread isn't for the specifics about adding 1 point when you continue in an arcade game or whatever the fuck you guys are going on about, it's clearly in regards to console games that never offered any continues period. Hence I brought up arcade ports of games that had no continues since that would prevent kids from playing the arcade versions where you could credit feed.

>> No.4517915 [DELETED] 

console ports of arcade games*
Fuck I'm tired

>> No.4517918

>I've literally never been to an arcade that didn't allow continues
And this fag calls other people underage, jesus.

>> No.4517921

Bro I live in the middle of bumfuck nowhere, is it different in big cities and they have to force people away from cabinets due to long lines or something?

>> No.4517925

Continues were an innovation, golden age era arcade games didn't have them

>> No.4517926

For the 3rd time, this is in regards to console games.

>> No.4517930

Yes I know I'm just pointing out that arcade games without continues are extremely common and are the games people associate with arcades in general

>> No.4517932
File: 60 KB, 426x448, 15 - 1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Ah, I was mainly thinking of some NES and Genesis ports of arcade games that had continues in the arcade version. Fair enough.

>> No.4517934

And so they did in the ports.

>> No.4517937

Extra lives and Continues are residual from the highly cancerous arcade era.

>> No.4517946
File: 32 KB, 512x512, Scott Pilgrim Mario.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>Super Mario Bros 3 without any extra lives would be an improvement

>> No.4517952

Truly, all those "gamey" elements like challenge are archaic af!

>> No.4517954

I think he meant that every single game should only let you have one chance and then you restart from the title as opposed to the other end of the spectrum, being modern games where there aren't even any game overs at times and even if there are you just restart from 5 seconds ago.

>> No.4517960

Roguelikes can be pretty fun though
>cancerous arcade era
You know damn well that's not what he meant anon.

>> No.4517964

There are some games where one try to win works. I really like what OneShot did with the concept (the original, not the Steam remake version)

>> No.4517970

Speaking of roguelikes, it's kinda funny how modern gamers are more accepting of permadeath than they are of limited lives.

>> No.4517984

Goes to show that they'll accept and rationalize anything if it's filled with progression systems, gambling elements and other types of skinner box shit. It's roguelites that are truly popular, too. Only a tiny fraction of the players can come anywhere close to 100%'ing those games, and those genuinely like the challenge instead of running on addiction. The whole "new experience every time" aspect draws people in too in concept, even though in practice 9 times out of 10 it ends up feeling about as samey as static games while providing more simple challenges.

>> No.4518229

It's just a different style of challenge, more endurance-based. If you want games with checkpoints every second you have plenty of options nowadays.

Also, unfortunately this >>4517847
Too bad arcade gaming had to die due to this.

Animu poster, fuck... Back to >>>/v/
We've gone through this already, home gaming could have been based on very long and easy games from the beginning, people just actually enjoyed the games for the challenge and was thus demanded. Of course what you are saying is true but you're missing the whole picture. Also, you guys need to stop assuming people here never 1CC as if that was such an impossible task or something.
So you can't enjoy something intrinsically without some extrinsic reward? Good to know, modern gamer.

Sup /v/ how's that new year goin'

Which is why modern roguelikes (roguelites) have progress systems from session to session while in older ones you always started from scratch. Modern gaming IS progress system addiction and/or cinematic no challenge stuff.

>> No.4518238

hyuck hyuck you gave me a (you)

>> No.4518240

I swear to god "progress systems" should've been insta-ban. Only retards use that word.

>> No.4518248

>passive-aggressive reply with exactly 0 arguments
>wanting bans for anyone who doesn't share your opinion
Shit post, shit poster

>> No.4518257 [DELETED] 

I'm so fucking glad Arcades have died, you're disgusting sexist toxic culture deserved to die.

>> No.4518260

You're welcome, here, have another: (You)

If you don't recognize them for the true cancer that killed the industry then you are ignorant on the matter. Sure, they can be non-intrusive if you're not a grindy player; doesn't change the fact that their inclusion and focus over time has killed people that enjoy video games traditionally for their challenge since progress system junkies far outnumber us.

>> No.4518263

At least try harder to hide that you're trolling, anon.

>> No.4518265

>killed the industry
Seems to be doing fine to me.

>> No.4518267

I meant they killed the industry for people that enjoy video games traditionally for their challenge; I'm aware video games don't kill lol

>> No.4518268

I"m not trolling, you're so called 1cc culture suck and I"m glad your dead.

>> No.4518269

Read here >>4518267
progress system junkies far outnumber us.

>> No.4518271

How about enjoying practicing sports, playing an instrument, learning a second language, doing charity work or establishing a family for challenge? How about that?

>> No.4518272

That's good, because you're toxic masculinity

>> No.4518276

All that is fine as well, anon. Lamenting a hobby we liked died / is dying due to a newer and bigger mass of people that demand 0-challenge cinematic and/or riddled with progress systems games is not that strange.

>> No.4518279

Nigger. YOU are the cancer.

>> No.4518281

You should have various hobbies in addition to playing difficult games, yes. Nobody is saying otherwise. Difficulty doesn't have much to do with time investment, I'm willing to be that I play games far less than the average JRPG fag for instance.

>> No.4518284

Also, me again: I can still enjoy all the games from the past, including all the ones I didn't play, it's not like they've disappeared. But it's still sad to know there won't be barely, if any more of these, just that.

>> No.4518285

Yet you spend an insurmountable amount of time shitposting on 4chan.

>> No.4518287

You say all this embarrassing gay dumb shit but I doubt you've played even 10% of the MAME catalog.

>> No.4518290

Speak for yourself, I never shitpost.

>> No.4518291

>there's only 1 person that enjoys arcade games on /vr/

What the fuck is this "argument"

>> No.4518292

Come on now, anon. You're part of the problem.

>> No.4518294

You wine about no more gay Arcade shit but I doubt you've been through 1/10 of the mame catalog, how is it hard to understand? You want me to draw, Gen Z?

>> No.4518295

There might as well be, nobody cares about Arcade cancer. It's so dead even the trolls have moved on. There's only you and me here and we'll be trolling each other for years to come because you're pathetic and you will never grow out of 4chan.

>> No.4518356
File: 421 KB, 617x907, Sol Badguy (2).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>Guilty Gear

>> No.4518359

>Even when I played games with infinite continues sometimes I would just reset at a game over and start all over.
hahaha, a bit much don't you think?

>> No.4518641

Okay, troll, why is it important to beat 100% of MAME'S library? Aren't you aware of how many games (and "games") that is? Why not focus on the 10% most fun games you can find?, which is still A LOT?
There are at least a bunch of arcade fans here on /vr/, nice try.

Sure, Guilty Gear is not manga/anime styled, at all!

>> No.4520363

The first few Guilty Gear games were released on PS1, Dreamcast, and Wonderswan you dumb fuck. Therefore, Guilty Gear is relevant to this board just as much as any other classic game franchise with artwork made by Japs is. Therefore, kindly fuck off.

>> No.4520367

You got it wrong, buddy, I'm not saying Guilty Gear isn't retro, I'm just saying its art-style is manga/anime inspired, since that other anon seems to imply it isn't. I don't know where you got the "not retro" complaint from, manga is old.

>> No.4520539

You made it sound like Guilty Gear wasn't relevant to /vr/ though by using the term "anime poster" when by that logic any Japanese game posted here should belongs on /v/

>> No.4521079

traditionally dickery from developers to make it take longer to beat a game, and therefore feel more like it was worth the $50 you paid for a game back in the day. A few old games are also purposely hard because the guys who made it didn't do a good job finishing later levels and hoped players would never get to the end anyway.

>> No.4521193

I meant that he was avatarfagging with anime like a /v/tard. I like Guilty Gear, played XX Slash a lot some years ago.

>> No.4521421

It makes you improve your skills.

>> No.4521425

Don't use that word, you may scare the resident /v/ shitposters.

>> No.4521601


>> No.4522380

t. savescummer and/or credit feeder

>> No.4523337

Are you sure you got your meme right?

>> No.4523343

No meming here

>> No.4523850

so sad

>> No.4523852

What's this post even supposed to be mean?

>> No.4524005

why people on this board are so obsessed with the way you play a game

>> No.4524262

Because arcades got bad reviews and reputation due to being credit fed and deemed too easy, short, simple, etc.
For some reason people feel forced to credit feed and then declare the experience not worth it instead of trying to actually play the game.

>> No.4524345

What the other guy is trying to say is that credit-feeding not only killed arcade games but ruined their reputation.

Take your favorite game genre. Imagine that someone devized the absolute most miserable way to play your game genre. Than they went around prosyltizing that play method while at the same time there have been nearly 30 decades of all the major outlets for game info declaring your genre shitty and giving every game from it a bad review and all of them play that horrible method.

The other reason is that having a board where everyone is casual basically kills all discussion: just like at /v/ everyone there is casual and they don't discuss games because casuals are not obsessed with games.

>> No.4524349

The reason was mostly related to extending the life of your game. A videogame was only a few hours in length, and then you were done. High-scores are one thing, but to "beat" a game usually was enough for the player.

The use of continues and difficulty based around finite lives is designed to extend the lifespan of your game (one could say artificially but some also may argue the limited attempts are part of the design).

For what purpose does Ninja Gaiden suddenly stop having reasonable checkpoints? Why does Ghosts and Goblins require you to beat it twice? These answers tie into the same concept of extending the lifespan of a game for the sake of making it last longer. Not through content but through an accessibility barrier.

>> No.4524351

In games with infinite continues you get good faster since that means you can on practicing the parts you currently suck at rather than always starting from the beginning.

>> No.4524403

Exactly. For some reason people think this topic is targeting arcade games though.

>> No.4524435

>For what purpose does Ninja Gaiden suddenly stop having reasonable checkpoints

There is no such concept as 'unreasonable check points' idiot. It's a matter of opinion what is and is not 'reasonable'.

>Why does Ghosts and Goblins require you to beat it twice
It's called a second loop. Almost every fucking game had them. GnG was just unique in that it provided a story reason for the second loop.

You're not good at this. To address your general point that games are hard to make them longer. People actually enjoy difficulty: when Ninja Gaiden is 'unreasonable' that might be a difficulty concept to get but people actually have fun with the games being tough. We're at a point now where every pretty much every arcade or arcade style game is free yet people still play with limited credits and demand that games be designed around that, because it is how they get their enjoyment.

If a game is not enjoyable people stop playing it. No one is going to sit down and play GnG if they aren't enjoying it just because it's 'long'. They could go outside, watch tv, read a book, or masterbate.

>> No.4524730

He's just an underage /v/ poster.
Thank you for expanding my point.

>> No.4524737

Challenge from endurance is the most boring kind.

>> No.4524751

At least recognize it's still legitimate and up to the player. If you like checkpoints every second you have plenty of options nowadays, not so much for older style endurance challenge outside of self-imposed stuff nowadays. And here is why some of us complain: a type of challenge we like has become almost extinct.

>> No.4524760

Sure I just grow bored when endurance is talked about like it's makes a game good. No one would say that juggling two pins flawlessly for an hour isn't difficult. But it's no where near as impressive or interesting to warch or do as juggling 8 pins for 5 minutes flawlessly.

>> No.4524764

A lot of arcades are both based on endurance as well as overall difficulty (try credit feeding Truxton 2 for instance). In console games it's true that games with infinite continues in theory are easier overall when comparing individual parts but it ends up not being the case usually.
I'll give you one example: there's Splatterhouse 2, a made for console game. The Japanese and US version are identical afaik except for this: the Japanese one has 5 hit points and limited continues, while the American has 4 hit points and unlimited continues. So the American as slightly harder individual sections (about 20%) but I wouldn't say it's an easier version overall. This happens a lot. Made for console shmups usually are the harder games in their platform and almost always have limited continues.

>> No.4524773

I the first paragraph I meant "In console games it's true that games with limited continues...", sorry if I made things confusing.
So yeah, In general I mean that yes, in theory making more checkpoints and having infinite continues allows you to make a game with harder individual sections. But in practice they usually slapped the infinite continues in easier games just to keep the "fair" tone (see: Mega Man series).

>> No.4524775

>A lot of arcades are both based on endurance as well as overall difficulty

Yeah and mostly in the sane boat to my eyes. I get that some out there like that in a game and that's cool.

>> No.4524784

>mostly in the sane boat to my eyes.
By this you mean fair challenges? If so, yes, particularly if you stick to Japanese games. Single player fighting games are an exception though; they are ironically easier yet cheaper than say shoot'em ups, beat'em ups or many others.

>> No.4524798
File: 2.74 MB, 520x377, tumblr_p1stv92SnV1qb5qxmo1_540.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I meant boring challenges, at least to me. I love fighting games, but think they're awful in single player mode. Okay for practicing execution and timing, but pretty bad otherwise.

>> No.4524807

Fighting games solo could be pretty decent actually (and I do enjoy them) but for some reason I don't understand they usually aren't very difficult to clear yet have some occasional cheap stuff.
For instance, in Street Fighter Zero 2 the second half of the opponents you face cheat and will sometimes do much more damage than usual and/or have impossible startup or recovery times for their attacks or hit stun. You could hit them with a crouching medium kick and immediately eat their super while they should still be on hitstun.
Other games, like SFZ3 will read your inputs and do something to counter what you've inputted.

>> No.4524828

>but for some reason I don't understand they usually aren't very difficult to clear yet have some occasional cheap stuff.

Fighters are really all about mind games. Knowing what your opponent can do in a given moment and trying to second guess them so you can do something to fuck them over. Meanwhile your opponent is doing the same thing and the baxk and forth sparing ensues.

AI, particularly as it existed in the retro era games we're talking about can't do any of that. And as a result, the only way to make fighting the computer any real challenge at all is to give it the ability to cheat via reading your inputs, not charging moves etc.

The end result is that it doesn't teach you to fight well or think strategically on your feet. It teaches you to find what the AI is worst at dealing with and spam it with that. It has the dual effect of taking one if the most interesting genres and ripping out everything interesting about it, while at the same time making someone who practices that way potentially even worse when they do try playing for real.

>> No.4524836

All I know is that when I play games that have unlimited continues, passwords or saves by the time I'm at stage 5 I can barely remember stage 4 since they reward my progress even if it was accomplished by sheer luck so I have a tendency to forget these games but it doesn't bother me. Different games, different people, different moods.

>> No.4524890

It's not skillful to continually complete the same easy levels you start on. The part I died in is for example in Area 3, let me at least START at area 3 and not make me play areas 1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, and 1.5, 2, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, and 2.5 again. I already showed I can do those, it's just artificially lengthening the time it takes, i wanna try the new stages i'm having trouble with

>> No.4524891

Well, these games are dozens of decades old, there isn't much to "discuss" unless you find the one guy who it is new to and you circle jerk with him, which leads to posters calling you out to "get a room"

>> No.4525096

okay which game pleb

>> No.4525214

I know all of this though it's still weird that even if being easy they still add occasional cheapness that doesn't actually increase the challenge that much.
This. When you are forced to endure every part you get very familiar with the game and appreciate it to its fullest.
You're right, this is where scoring systems come into the equation: once you the beginning seems boring to you, you can start playing them for score to challenge you and, in most cases, get more lives for the latter stages. Also, read >>4524836
Yet we have multiple fap/waifu threads right now lol

>> No.4525301

The opposite of an endurance challenge is that every screen is bullshit hard but you get save-state check points. In contrast to limited credits where you must master each section to be able to beat it consistantly, what you are talking about is something where you only need to luck out once to clear it.

Which is basically how shitters play tough games on emulators. That's what your advocating for and it's probably the type of gamer you are.

>> No.4525369

I am in a similar boat to this and why I never liked manybold games like this. Auto-scrollers are the worst for it, but I get bored very quickly replaying the same thing over and over.

So for example if I know I can beat the first three levels of Gradius reliably without getting hit, then playing through them just to get to level 4 where I am still learning isn't fun. It just feel like a chore at that point.

>> No.4525396

Going through the first 3 levels of gradius with perfect mastery is a 'chore'?

Do you ever have fun with games at all?

>> No.4525406

If he can't even beat stage 4 that fag probably can't beat consistently the first 3 stages.

>> No.4526414

Yes, most meme hard modern games are exactly this. RIP arcade-style challenge.

>> No.4526715

Your second example is still an endurance challenge, because you would need to juggle for 5 minutes straight. You compare it to an extreme endurance challenge, but it's an unfair comparison. A more apt one would be comparing 30 minutes of juggling 2 pins to juggling 8 pins once or twice and saying "I'm done". Nobody is advocating for challenge purely about endurance, a balance is necessary. An endurance heavy challenge has innate flaws too, but many of them can be remedied with practice modes and scoring.

>> No.4526754

It would hardly make any difference, really. When did you last game over in SMB3?

>> No.4526910

>juggling 2 pins to juggling 8 pins once or twice and saying "I'm done".
lol so much this

>> No.4526943

Not him but it's similar to Tetris where you want to start fast, not start slow and get to fast where it's fun

>> No.4526948

they're called clubs, pins are for bowling.

>> No.4526960

Gradius starts pretty fast, the first stage is very demanding to do perfectly. That's how pretty much all limited credit games are. There's a few warm up screens and than it starts getting very tense very fast.

>> No.4526961


>> No.4526965

Never understood this meme. It's bad to correct somebody? somebody once informed the the world was going to roll me

>> No.4526973

As a man that regularly plays arcade games with only one credit and who enjoys this as the highest form of gaming for me, you're a bit off. There's plenty of games where the first few minutes quickly, if not instantly become trivial. If it weren't for the scoring link to lives playing them for suvival would quickly become boring, and in some cases this actually happens since either scores doesn't give you anything or it only gives you one life and getting that score is very easy so you don't have to try hard (see: Batsugun's first two stages or so / DonPachi's first three stages or so.)
In my case when I played DonPachi A LOT the first three stages were very trivial and boring to me, I began to play them for score just to not get bored since I always got the only extra life that you get through scoring early on (like in stage 3 or even earlier) and then proceed to get murdered dozens of times in Stage 4. The amount of time it took me just to get to the second half of Stage 4 was huge, all the while having an extremely easy time with the earlier stages.

>> No.4527114
File: 1.51 MB, 300x200, kob50_6058092.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>I know all of this though it's still weird that even if being easy they still add occasional cheapness that doesn't actually increase the challenge that much.

Exactly, because fighters in versus mode can be one of the greatest genres ever, but in single player mode they're among the worst.

No, the contrast is fighting games where you need to have mastery over the controls and execution and then on top of that have to think strategically on your feet.

When every time I play the first three levels of Gradius, they're exactly the same? Where after I've played level 1 ten times I remember exactly when every enemy formation is going to show up? Yes, to me that becomes a chore.

That's not to say you have to agree, but to me personally yes. That's super boring. I will say though that what I look for in a game and how I judge it is based on how often I get to make an interesting decision. So by the time I know something well enough to make it through without being hit, there's little left of what I find interesting.

Again that's just me. I don't find perfecting my score nearly interesting enough to keep playing the same level over and over. But that's not to say I think someone who does shouldn't enjoy that.

Of course there is always a balance of skill and endurance in everything. It's when it's heavily weighted to endurance that I find it less interesting. Also I stand by my analogy. Someone trying to juggle 8 pins, fumbling through it once and then declaring they are an 8 pin juggler is absolutely not what I am talking about. I agree that person isn't really playing. But I am not, nor am I talking about people like that.

If you want to use that analogy then it would be someone who can at any time juggle 8 pins flawlessly for 20 seconds but maybe not more than that. But even that gets away from the point.

>> No.4527125

I find it funny how you always post a KoF gif, it's almost amatarfagging at this point lol No complaining, though

>When every time I play the first three levels of Gradius, they're exactly the same? Where after I've played level 1 ten times I remember exactly when every enemy formation is going to show up? Yes, to me that becomes a chore.
>That's not to say you have to agree, but to me personally yes. That's super boring. I will say though that what I look for in a game and how I judge it is based on how often I get to make an interesting decision. So by the time I know something well enough to make it through without being hit, there's little left of what I find interesting.
>Again that's just me. I don't find perfecting my score nearly interesting enough to keep playing the same level over and over. But that's not to say I think someone who does shouldn't enjoy that.
Indeed, even having somewhat different tastes sometimes I agree: >>4526973

The 8 pin one time analogy is mostly for how a lot of "modern gamers" that think they like challenging games actually play through stuff getting a bit lucky and then saving the progress in the numerous and frequent save points without limits.

>> No.4527138
File: 17 KB, 216x161, elenaqjn3ro1_250.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Yeah, I have others but KoF is my favorite series and I've collected the most gifs of it. So if I'm going to toss something beside a post it's a likely pick.

I do totally agree on a gamer modern or otherwise being lame for fumbling through something, save stating and then thinking themselves awesome for it.

I'm just saying that's not the only approach to tackling a hard game and why I was bringing up fighting games as the counter example.

>> No.4527153

Fighting games are very cool though a bad comparison since most of the fun is "yomi" multiplayer related. They are essentially a very technical and reaction-based marathon match of rock-paper-scissors, which doesn't sound like fun when read like this but they actually are (unless you are very bad with inputs or are playing against button mashers; you can easily win but there's not much enjoyment to get from them).
Crafting a fun challenge for a single player experience is tougher. I think you mentioned previously you liked games that had RNG to keep them fresh (like oldschool roguelikes and arcade puzzle games) so they always require meaningful choices even in the beginning, which certainly is an admirable approach.

>> No.4527169
File: 122 KB, 800x557, disappointment.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Yeah exactly. Really I'm talking about my specific tastes. And fighting games being great does rely entirely on having a competent human opponent. And I know my tastes also aren't the norm. Tons of people love platformers, shmups and beat em ups and I think it's great they do. They're just not my cup of tea a lot of the time.

Fantasy Zone and Bangai-O are good examples of shmup-like games that I quite enjoy. In Fantasy Zone, just being able to choose going left or right from the start and tackle the level more organic fashion made it interesting enough that I played the game quite a bit. Even though the last level and especially boss kinda sucked.

>> No.4527175

Sorry to tell you but I think the fighting game community is quite bigger than for other single player arcade games like shooters or brawlers. I wouldn't say endurance based challenges are at all popular nowadays outside of a few niches, most harder games coming out are heavily checkpoint based with unlimited saves.

>> No.4527203
File: 473 KB, 500x310, ecco_lqyqh0g3MR1qk26dzo1_500.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I'm fine with all that. Fighting games are big enough now that even semi niche ones get a big enough player base to make it interesting. A lot of modern games might seem boring for one reason or another, but to me that's no different from earlier eras. I never really cared what the majority were doing so long as I found games I wanted. And even with my weirdo tastes I've always felt like there's more on my plate than I have time for.

And just to say, I do get a little the appeal of perfecting something through replaying. I literally couldn't tell you how many times I've played through the Ecco games (mostly the first) just because I enjoy how it plays so much. But that's really more like playing in a sandbox that happens to have levels than perfecting anything.

>> No.4527206

>I do get a little the appeal of perfecting something through replaying.
I mean there's this huge speedrunning community nowadays, so yeah lol (not into that myself)

>> No.4527209

>Someone trying to juggle 8 pins, fumbling through it once and then declaring they are an 8 pin juggler is absolutely not what I am talking about. I agree that person isn't really playing. But I am not, nor am I talking about people like that.
Then what are you actually saying if you're not proposing that as an alternative? Just that challenge coming from making you perform simple actions for a long time is boring. Everyone will agree with this. I personally agree with it too, though see it as a necessary evil which is also counterbalanced with things I've mentioned well enough. Otherwise you essentially would have to abandon the idea of a game having a difficulty curve, and it would just result in needless frustration since it would make restart syndrome even worse.

>> No.4527210

Of course, I was talking about myself. For sure lots of people love speedrunning.

>> No.4527215

Fighting games are supposed to be about two extremly skilled people/mutants/robots in a 1v1. So there is not endurance element unless it's a tournament setting.

Shmups and platformers are about a single super solider/pilot basically taking a whole army by themself. Of course there is an endurance element.

>> No.4527220

Beat'em ups are literally "one dude against the entire neighborhood" lol

>> No.4527225

No clue about classic roguelikes, but action-roguelike hybrids suffer from the same problem despite their RNG because as you learn the games and the situations that can pop up those choices start to become second nature. It's a problem with smooth difficulty curves.

>> No.4527229

>Then what are you actually saying if you're not proposing that as an alternative?

Someone who can at any time pick up 8 pins and juggle them consistently for 30 seconds. To me that's more interesting to watch as well as in my opinion a more impressive feat than being able to juggle 2 pins for an hour.

Someone who juggled 8 pins for 30 seconds once but can't do it consistently, yet talks about it like they're awesome would be a colossal tool.

Sure. I'm just saying one's very interesting to me, the other isn't so much. Not asking you to agree though.

>> No.4527235

>as you learn the games and the situations that can pop up those choices start to become second nature.

This does happen, as really happens with all single player games eventually. But if you're playing without relying on spoilers (which is the fun way imo) then in a roguelike it can take a long time before you get to that point and a lot of good times along the way. That's just when you know it's time to move on to a new one.

>> No.4527256

>Someone who juggled 8 pins for 30 seconds once but can't do it consistently, yet talks about it like they're awesome would be a colossal tool.
Welcome to modern hardcore gaymers.

>> No.4527261

>80s and gaming up till the mid 90s
You juggle 8 pins for an hour Some really hardcore people juggle chainsaws instead

>mid 90s to earl 2k
You juggle 4 pins for periods of 10 minutes at a time and drop them a lot

>later 2k and onward
You juggle 2 pins for 30 seconds at a time. Sometimes you don't even do proper juggling and just sort of fidget with them in your hands.

>modern gaming
you watch someone merely hold a single 1 pin in his hand on stream. You have never touched a pin in your life but talk about them online all the time and argue about which pins are better.

>> No.4527265

With some exceptions like manic shooters pretty much spot on.

>> No.4527284


>> No.4527287

They did kill it for people that enjoyed the more traditional style of video games since they outnumber us by A LOT so their demand rules the supply. We get very few releases these days though we have a lot of cool games from back then to not get bored.

>> No.4527304

fair enough

>> No.4527307
File: 10 KB, 275x155, 1512568988172.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

yes, its confusing, because you got lifes and continues. Its like when you got 2 healthbars that do pretty much the same thing,,,

>> No.4527315

There's a difference. When continuing it resets your score. May not seem like a difference to a lot of you, particularly if you're young (like got into gaming during the 5th gen) but scoring is a thing and some games have cool scoring systems.
Also, you usually can't get extra continues but you can get extra lives (and by scoring a lot of the time).

>> No.4527350

Health: the easiest thing to recover, you might even get it heale to full at the end of each stage. This is is sort of your 'safe' zone for making errors, you can bounce back from losing health as long as it doesn't hit 0. You also can't gain more than your starting amount

Health is recovered from relativily unhidden or unrisky sources

Lives: Losing a life is more serious. You lose all power ups and might get sent back to a checkpoint. This is the point where a play error starts seriously hurting. Lives can also be raised above your starting amount so you can horde them from the early stages if you never die and collect 1ups.

1ups are earned either by getting huge amounts of score or from incredible hard to find secrets, often involving risking your entire life to get it. Or as an extremly lucky drop off enemies.

Continues: You basically never earn continues new continues, these are fixed. Spending one punishes you harder than losing a life, you get sent back further and probably lose more. Resets your score. Sometimes you get locked out of actually beating the game at all if you use them.

>> No.4527361

Based anon. Too bad this design is called "obsolete" nowadays.

>> No.4527404

>You also can't gain more than your starting amount
theres no law against that, eg splatterhouse

>> No.4527414

That's unusual, though. As well as games that give you more continues.

>> No.4528823

Rember that releses weren't frequent back then either. It wasn't like now when 50 games get released every day.

>> No.4528837
File: 51 KB, 840x672, laughing neckbeard.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Replaying the same levels that you already fucking beat over and over again is boring. If you enjoy completing the same levels for several hours, you may have autism. Replaying things that you ALREADY MASTERED is not challenging. In fact, it's the fucking opposite of challenge, it's easy to beat something you've already beaten.

>> No.4528867

>50 """games""" get released every day.

>completing the same levels for several hours
Almost nobody does this, your typical arcade player may start from the beginning once or a few times before trying another game or having had enough for that day or for some hours and proceed to do other stuff. Even then, you can improve your score if that's your thing.

>> No.4528910

True, but the checkpoint kiddies who complain about having to restart don't come close to mastery. As soon as someone takes away their crutch they'd find themselves getting killed repeatedly by early levels they've supposedly "mastered", i.e got through once because of the odd lucky attempt.

>> No.4528937

>you're right but I don't want to admit i'm wrong

>> No.4528980


It's okay, I don't expect someone like you to understand.

>> No.4528993

They are barely games due to them sucking so much. There, had enough?

>> No.4529002

No, please keep going! Your incessant whining about how everything that wasn't made exactly for you is shit and you need to mash the citation mark key like a retard to show how upset you are over it.

>> No.4529006

Wrong about what? I said the same thing you did earlier in the thread. I'm adding that people's standards for "mastery" have become so low that they cannot be taken seriously.

>> No.4529013

Even ignoring the ones that weren't made for me nor all the folks with a taste for traditional video games A LOT of Steam Greenlight is unadulterated garbage not even thought possible before in the worst cases of shovelware. You can't deny this.

>> No.4529015

Mastery is unlocking achievements now lol

>> No.4529024

They look exactly like bowling pins, so yes, you are being pedantic.

>> No.4529027

Damn gramps you've been out of the loop huh? Greenlight is gone so the standards are EVEN LOWER now.

>> No.4529031

Yeah, I don't buy shit from there and I only hear from it from a few friends.
Wait, even lower? How the fuck?

>> No.4529037

You pay something like 100 bux and your game gets on steam which lead to a flood of irredeemable garbage that even Valve had to start cracking down on. Anyone who defends the situation must be fucking retarded

>> No.4529039
File: 1.96 MB, 320x224, tumblr_obwyfhzbRY1u6jjy9o1_400.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>A LOT of Steam Greenlight is unadulterated garbage not even thought possible before in the worst cases of shovelware

There's a lot of crap, no where near a ton old DOS shit. As if your """""""""""""wasn't already proof this is how I know with certainty how much you're talking out your ass. Everytime I see a post with that it's the same.

>> No.4529042

That other anon is selling the "50 new games every day" as a positive lol

You're right DOS/Amiga era was also pretty bad for computer games with few exceptions. But PC gaming got better on average shortly after, certainly better than an over-flooded market with too much DRM.

>> No.4529052
File: 1.78 MB, 1920x1080, 1. Corporate-Servers.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Yeah see to me It's always been a sea of shit I didn't like both bad and good (Mario and Gradius while well made bore the fuck out of me) but at least these days there's so much more. Despite everything that is bad I've never been more swamped with games.

And I am sorry to troll so hard sometimes, but goddamn when I see people crying as hard as he is and typing """"""""""""""games"""""""""""""" all the time, it's just really fucking funny.

>> No.4529056

Finding good games in a constant sea of garbage is a game in itself now if you're into that lol

>> No.4529069
File: 2.88 MB, 250x188, 061bomissiles.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

It always has been from my perspective, that's what I'm saying. I don't think it's a bad thing, it's way easier now to look for what you want.

Also to be clear, I don't regard the popular games I don't like as shit. They're just not games that interest me. I think it's great there were and are people enjoying Mario and Gradius just the same as Call of Duty or Gone Home. It might all be stuff I don't like, but if someone else is then good on them in my book.

Whining is intrinsically funny though, so sometimes it's hard not to poke.

>> No.4529072

FIFA 18, best selling game of the year in Europe. Will forever be remembered as the true classic it is.

>> No.4529469

>Gone Home

Yeah it's great that people have been conned into looking at literal shovel-ware to make the standards for games drop.

>> No.4529637

>I don't like and it wasn't made for ME so it's shit

Yeah we know how you think.

>> No.4529701

It's an adventure game but with puzzles that make Freddie the Fish, a game meant for toddlers, seem deep.

And you're comparing it to Gradius, Super Mario, and COD. LOL

>> No.4529724

Thanks for proving my point extra hard.

>> No.4531189

Fuck that "brave" piece of shit

>> No.4532696

Brave how?

>> No.4532971

It was called brave in reviews due to being feminist friendly or some crap like that.

>> No.4534297

And that offends you?

>> No.4534389
File: 101 KB, 480x480, Thinking_Face_Emoji_large.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>infinite continues
>not set back to the very start of the stage

>> No.4534391

I think he's it's basically trying to destroy the standards for both "bravery" and gaming.

"offends" how dare he become upset when people try to dismantle what he loves!

>> No.4534394

>when people try to dismantle what he loves!

someone made a game you dont like you melodramatic bitch

>> No.4534398

You're intentionally twisting the narrative. The only person saying they don't like the gaming being made here is you: that's a smoke-screen. It's the same thing you did before: saying should just shut up and let the standards for their games become twisted (no to mention the standard for "bravery").

>> No.4534404

Isn't it kind of obvious that it depends on the game? For a lot of shmups it would be pretty dumb to have unlimited continues. But for a game like Mega Man it just makes sense. And I think the developers of the games generally make the right choice because they understand the game they're making. They can also change how far continuing sends you back at different parts of the game, like world 6 in Ninja Gaiden and the end of Mega Man 4. There are plenty of games that have a good reason but that doesn't mean having unlimited continues is bad either

>> No.4534410

How does it "just make sense" for Mega Man? When I was a kid I would sometimes reset back to the start intentionally because I got tired of just using continues on the same stage I was stuck on over and over.

>> No.4534418

I think it's because they wanted Mega Man to be a set your own difficulty type of game. The unlimited continues allow really low skill players to farm e-tanks and what not if need be, and use the continues to memorize the boss weaknesses and exploit them, and at the same time more skilled players can do buster only runs and even reset the game like you. I do think it's different from brute forcing your way through a game like Gradius with unlimited continues until you get 1 good attempt. I can't satisfactorily explain why though I'll admit

>> No.4534424

Megaman plays fine with limited continues. It's not a fun way to play if there are gimmick stages but than again gimmick stages are not much fun anyway.

>I think it's because they wanted Mega Man to be a set your own difficulty type of game.

Considering they only had a difficulty setting in one game this is a terrible theory. They could have let you simple select the number of continues as many games did.

>The unlimited continues allow really low skill players to farm e-tanks and what not if need be
You can't even do that in all the games and that's a very weak way of difficulty balancing and doing that is a miserable experience. They didn't balance too many action games around the ability to grind back than, that's a modern game phenomena.

>I do think it's different from brute forcing your way through a game like Gradius with unlimited continues until you get 1 good attempt.

That's because in Gradius the game gets easier the less you die because it takes 2-3 stages to get to full power. In Megaman you keep your power ups, even the ammo that you loose is pretty easy to recover.

>> No.4534514

It does but I think the unlimited continues are fine too. Also I meant an organic difficulty scaling, not a menu setting that changes the game. MM2 'normal' isn't even the real game anyway. Yeah you can't farm e-tanks in all the games, but they put e-tanks in a few specific spots where they obviously meant for it to be possible, like right where you spawn before boss rushes etc., and then take them away in spots where they don't want it to be possible. And I think it shouldn't be a pleasant experience, that's the price for making it easier. Graidus specifically wasn't the best example, I mean games in general that get sort of ruined by unlimited continue abuse. Mega Man is fine with limited continues but unlimited continues don't hurt it either.

>> No.4534560

>Also I meant an organic difficulty scaling
I have no idea what you mean by organic. If you mean a difficulty players set for themself that doesn't work out. Players need to constantly resist the urge to take the easy path and the vast majority do not: as proof you'd just have to look at how people played when they were given arcade ports with infinite contues, they credit feed.

Another reason is that a developer who actually made the game has a fair better idea of what a good difficulty would be than a player who hasn't even cleared the game. If they wanted to make it accessable to less hardcore players they would add difficulty settings. It preserves the fun of the game without doing miserable grinding, games should be fun. As I said this is the reason grinding in action based retro games was extremely rare because grinding is not fun unless the entire game is based around (like say a dungeon crawlwer)

I think limited continues allows devs to get away with bad game design. On average games that have a limited number of continues, or that cost money per continue tend to have tighter designed levels. With infinite continues if you design a lousy section of the game it's not a big deal because the player need only do it once.

>> No.4534562
File: 68 KB, 675x900, 00j0j_9lUHHhC8apB_1200x900.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]



>> No.4534586

the 'organic' element is I think that players who are good enough generally do not put themselves through grinding for e-tanks, cause they do just fine without it. players who need it die over and over anyway so it comes naturally. it's kind of similar to how you can grind to be overlevelled in an RPG if you're not smart enough for whatever reason to beat a boss or you were unprepared in a way that you can't correct without restarting. And I think I jsut thought of what it was that makes unlimited continues awful in some games...it's mainly health. Mega Man gives you a big ass health bar. In some games you die in one hit. In a game where most of teh difficulty comes from dying in one hit, unlimited continues make the game feel pretty empty and meaningless. In Mega Man if you die it generally means you actually got destroyed in a way that was probably totally fair. If you brute force your way through a 1-hit game by credit feeding the game is just not fun, and a lot of those games are about memorization, because dying one hit generally means you die when you reach a level you haven't made it to before by some unforeseen obstacle or enemy. but you dont' have to memorize shit if you're just continuing repeatedly as you make it to each next step of the game. whereas winning a boss fight in mega man is satisfying regardless of how many continues you used to get there, because it's a large health pool fight on both ends, and you actually have to learn the fight to beat it once unless you're using the RPS weapon counters.

>> No.4534620

>the 'organic' element is I think that players who are good enough generally do not put themselves through grinding for e-tanks, cause they do just fine without it

More like grinding for e-tanks is fucking boring and you want to avoid boring stuff. If it were not as boring more people would do it. I feel it cheapens the feeling of victory because you have to limit yourself. A very satisfying victory is when you can manage to get your hands on and it's still tough. Imposing your own limits doesn't provide the same feeling as challenge because you know you could remove your limits at any time.

Mega man forces you to beat the stages without loosing too many lives. If you loose to many you can't make it to the boss. If you make it to the boss on your last life you might have low hp and the fight is very tough. It's the same condition as beating game with limited credits but just a more softcore version because your progress is saved after you beat a stage and as you said mega-man has tons of hit points, even more than that he gets health drops way more generously than in other games.

>> No.4534784

>a game like Gradius with unlimited continues
You guys always get caught here. You don't play these games, the Gradius series doesn't let you continue. If you mean the watered down console ports then OK.
The Mega Man series in general is very clearly tailored to be fun to people with varying degrees of skill. They just opted to integrate it without difficulty settings in a more "organic" way: encouraging very easy to figure out self-imposed challenges.
When you play them and see that the boss weaknesses destroy the bosses, unless you are a very low skilled player that needs this feature, you'll think: next time I'll try buster only so I can appreciate this boss's pattern! After all, you have to do this with at least one of the bosses, so you get to feel the difference between fighting normally and murdering them in a couple of hits / stunlocking them with no chance to retaliate.
I'm not saying this is the best approach or anything, just what they tried. The games also have a very distinctly fair design in their stages with very few exceptions of strict memorization in some earlier games.

>I think limited continues allows devs to get away with bad game design. On average games that have a limited number of continues, or that cost money per continue tend to have tighter designed levels. With infinite continues if you design a lousy section of the game it's not a big deal because the player need only do it once.
This is very true, and add dying in one hit to the list (tho I think you meant unlimited here). The more demanding the game is (by not being forgiving), the more tightly designed it has to be, this is why arcade games are of a higher standard than their home counterparts.

>> No.4534806

If people weren't such lazy idiots who always pick the path of least resistence, this kind of "organic difficulty" approach would be the best. That's what a 1cc is anyway. It's SORT of a self-imposed limitation in the sense that you don't have to do it, but just like the buster-only challenge in Megaman, it's one that the games were clearly balanced for.

>> No.4534810

Is this serious or trolling? I legit can't tell at this point.

>> No.4534817

He's right though, the developers decided to see what kind of barebones garbage they can make, and the hipster idiots lapped it up and shilled it endlessly because it "challenges norms". So brave!

>> No.4534826

1CC is not exactly the same. Most / the good arcade games are balanced around being able to 1CC, they just give you the option to continue due to the potential profit since they are very highly challenging. But it's not efficient to credit feed in terms of game time for you, particularly if you suck a lot.
The issue came with arcade perfect ports and emulation where you have infinite free coins. I think it's very easy to understand how negating all the challenge of the game by credit feeding kills the experience, but for some reason the average player doesn't. I've argued how credit feeding killed arcade-style games on home systems due to this.
In any case, it's still not the same since infinitely credit feeding negates ALL the challenge. In Mega Man you still need to do stuff since you are sent back to a checkpoint (like in other arcades such as Truxton 2), in fact I've met people who suck at games incapable of beating some easier Mega Man games.

>> No.4534837

So you legit think that something not made for your tastes is garbage? Lol.

>> No.4534860

I'm not talking about Megaman's continues, I'm talking about things like mega buster only runs. The games were clearly balanced for these types of runs (outside of 1 maybe) because otherwise there is no challenge and you won't even see all the boss attacks. This is analogous to games with infinite continues and no checkpoints in some ways. Despite it being so obvious that buster-only runs are the best way to appreciate the game's level and boss design fully, there's still many people who think it's nothing but a still self-imposed challenge. It's sad that this kind of approach to game difficulty is undermined by the stupidity and laziness of players themselves, because it's perfect at letting people control their own experience.

>> No.4534868

>so you...
>so you're saying...
Do posts starting with these ever do anything but put words in other people's mouths? Fuck off idiot.

>> No.4534873

By that same token though most modern games can be seen in the sane way. Like mega man and Mario, they're set up to be "beatable" by almost anyone but the mechanics leave room for a lot of fun self imposed challenges. Except now doing a non-buster or no powerup run would likely get marked as an achievement for you.

>> No.4534874

Sure then, we agree on that.
I think this happens to a degree too in stuff like Symphony of the Night. There are some incredibly and blatantly unbalanced weapon combinations that absolutely destroy the game. You could just walk with the OP shield in front of you and breeze through the Inverted Castle as if it was a walking simulator. But the game starts off slightly challenging. It's almost as if it's giving you the option to break it for if you find that stuff fun or you utterly suck, but you don't HAVE to.

>> No.4534876

I took your own words though. If you're just saying you personally don't like tgem at all that's cool. But it didn't sound like that's what you were saying.

>> No.4534880

Except most moderns games (and even a sizable number of older ones) don't lend themselves nicely or as smoothly to self-imposed challenges. Buster only is very obvious and makes the game more fun unless you suck.
Most self-imposed challenges are just contrived stuff there for when you're just too good and are bored with the game.

>> No.4534885

To a certain extent yes, but that only applies for some self-imposed challenges. For example doing a no death run of modern games designed around checkpoints will be a nightmare because they don't shy away from wasting your time with tutorials, cutscenes, set pieces which aren't interactive, "atmospheric" sections, etc. There are also no systems that matter in the long term like extra lives, and there's rarely anything resembling scoring systems. If the games were designed so well that these kinds of challenges would not only be possible but fun, I doubt anybody would complain.

>> No.4534886

I'll further my point:
A natural or organic self-imposed challenge would be buster-only in Mega Man. To give yet another example, no-bomb runs in arcade shmups would be one: it gives you the satisfaction of never having to resort to them and a lot of games give you score for not using them so it's encouraged.

A contrived self-imposed challenge would be one where the game itself doesn't encourage it in any way and it's something you do out of boredom and creativity. Kirby Runs in Mega Man are like this (you can only use the last weapon you've got until you defeat the next boss), as well as Nuzlockes in Pokémon.

>> No.4534989
File: 182 KB, 700x496, DSCF6545copy_zpsdd1270eb.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I'm not sure I agree, modern games seem open to a lot of possibilities. Dragon's Dogma was one where I liked it for feeling somewhat like an open world Monster Hunter, but the leveling system made you too strong too fast for me.

But being open world I was able to make my own challenge and rush to fight a drake with a low level character.

After a couple of deaths, my successful run at it was incredible. Am hour and a half fight against this giant drake that would one-shot kill me with anything other than a glancing scratch. It went through over a week of in-game days and when it was night time on top of the drake the area was crawling with goblins...

>> No.4534993
File: 174 KB, 700x446, DSCF6548copy_zps0881c003.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Shit it was fun though, and that's the kind of entertainment that a lot of modern games are great for. A huge sandbox where you can set things up and make awesome challenges.

>> No.4535001

I unintentionally did something similar with the cursed dragon by going in severely underlevelled. It was a dull experience, the fights in Dragon's Dogma don't have enough attacks to make an interesting 10 minute experience, much less an hour long slog. You pretty much have to do self imposed challenges there anyway because otherwise only one hit kill attacks are a threat and the stamina system might as well not exist. Not a great game.

>> No.4535006

Meh to each their own, it wasn't Monster Hunter but it was still a lot of fun. Far more interesting than any play of Mega Man was.

>> No.4535015

It's a nonlinear game with progress systems, no shit it's harder to rush through while ignoring most of the optional stuff. When you compare linear older games to newer ones that are still linear this becomes more clear.

>> No.4535031
File: 1.35 MB, 500x415, kofmxo2_500.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Sure, but I'm not talking about straight challenge I'm talking about fun and how the organic nature of the game lends itself to making your own challenges.

Sure you can play through Mega Man or Gradius with no powerups to make it harder, but it also makes it duller. I find both those games pretty boring in the first place though so we're both affected by our biases.

>> No.4535038

So let me get this straight, rather than playing something where you're constantly learning how to overcome new challenges and building new strategies, you'd rather fight 1 monster with like 5 attacks for an hour and a half? Incomprehensible.

>> No.4535051

Oh, it's you again lol You don't like these to begin with, why care?
Anyway, Mega Man's weapons can be fun in the actual stages but they absolutely murder the bosses that are weak to them, so fighting them with their weakness makes the experience duller than doing so with the buster or other weapons.
Gradius increases the rank by having more powerups, anon. It's what makes checkpoint recovery feasible, you only need a bit of speed up to beat anything, and it's the first in the line of powerups: also, every checkpoint has at least a few red enemies to kill so you can properly get your speed up and maybe missiles instantly.

>> No.4535065
File: 15 KB, 336x392, Zaxxon.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

It was using the learning and strategies I had done on my first playthrough that made going for the challenge fun. And no, while it wasn't on the level of an amazing set in KoF with a really good opponent, but I was comparing it to games like Mega Man and Gradius.

That's partly my bias for not liking memorization based games >>4527114 >>4525369 To me, an organic experience is almost always more interesting because there are at least choices to be made.

I would never say Gradius isn't hard or takes a lot of practice and skill. But to me it looks more like learning to play a hard piece of music than learning to play a game. For those who like that, I applaud them but even when that's what most games were I didn't care for them.

>> No.4535068

>You don't like these to begin with, why care?
The same could be said about the other side. I've been open that we're clearly both talking about our biases here.

>> No.4535069
File: 274 KB, 640x448, puyp1_drac.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Ohh and before you jump on it, I'm not saying there are never decisions to be made in auto-scrollers, I just find them limited and not as interesting as the genres I do enjoy.

Also I don't think my prefered games are "better" they just appeal to me and my tastes. People who love Mario, rock on.

>> No.4535078

It is very much like learning how to play a game since there are many viable strategies you can take, and they aren't all obvious. Your strategies will also evolve as you learn the game, Gradius is actually a great example because rank manipulation is a big part of the later games, and the level design is dynamic and reactive to your actions. Meanwhile something like what you did in Dragon's Dogma is literally just learning one simple strategy (admittedly dependent on your build) and repeating it for an hour. It's Simon Says : endurance edition.

>> No.4535079

>memorization based
>Mega Man and Gradius
A game being static (read: not random) and not having an human opponent doesn't make it "memorization based" (except for a few parts here and there). A memorization based game or genre would be rhythm games.

>> No.4535086

Well, forgot to add that these reaction-based static games may feel memorization based if your reaction times, reflexes and ability to input and stuff are very bad (read: if you suck at the action part).

>> No.4535089

Gradius is a memory game, Mega Man isn't. In Mega Man you have enough health to play some random romhack and take on stuff you've never seen before if you're a good mega man player. Gradius you die in one hit so you have to know what's coming to beat it. In Mega Man you just need to be good at Mega Man, in Gradius you need to be good at the levels in Gradius.

>> No.4535092

>A memorization based game or genre would be rhythm games.

That's pretty much what I'm saying. When I look at Gradius, Zaxxon etc (less so Mega Man but still somewhat) they look more like rhythm games to me than what I think of as a true game.

The level scrolls, the enemies come along in sequence and you move your ship to dodge, shoot and collect the power ups, and when you're successful you get to watch the whole thing scroll by.

I get that's reductive, and there's more to it. But in a nutshell it's why they've never appealed as much as something like a fighter, puzzle game, roguelike etc. Those are more like playing a game like tennis or chess.

>> No.4535095

Not really, Gradius is just generally way more difficult, so it's harder to play without memorization. If you actually look at the games, there are only a handful of parts where the challenge isn't foreshadowed well in advance. Many games in the series like 1, 2, gba games, Gaiden, Rebirth and such are doable with almost no memorization. You're thinking of R-Type, and even that only gets memorization-heavy in the later levels.

>> No.4535096

Gradius is not a memory based game except for the volcano parts earlier on. It being unforgiving doesn't mean it requires memorization, what it requires is execution skill. Of course, it becomes easier by memorizing since it's static, but that's not the point, it's not Simon Says.
By your logic Mega Man 2 would be memory game just because of Quick Man stage and disregard pretty much the rest of the game which is reaction based.

>> No.4535102
File: 23 KB, 637x371, Rogue_Screen_Shot_CAR.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I do agree, but since Mega Man's level layout is the same each time you play it, I lump them together a little.

And yes I know it's odd for me to be on forum for old games when a solid 90% of them never interested me. But that's the case for all games, and the games that I do like, I really fucking like. So whatever.

>> No.4535103

Except you can't do shit in a rhythm game unless you memorize the song first while games similar to Gradius allow you to beat them the first time if skilled enough. In fact, I have blind 1CC'd a few games. There are some exceptions like the final stretch of Salamander but they're that, exceptions, not the whole game.

>> No.4535109

By your logic Roguelikes are also memory based since they become easier once you know the enemies, what items do, etc.
And fighting games require memorization for the inputs, combos, hit confirms, hitboxes, etc. you can beat the single player and bad players without but memorization improves your game.
Your argument is poor, man. That memorization can make you better in a game where you aren't required to memorize to beat it doesn't make it a memory game.

>> No.4535112

the poitn is if you're good at video games you play Gradius except with an entirely different set of levels, you'll need some grinding to beat it, but I bet the first time you played Mega Man 9/10 you beat them pretty fast.

>> No.4535114
File: 573 KB, 2816x1864, DSCF3446.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

True. I likewise beat sega master system Space Harrier my first try and it was fun. And there's been the occasional shmup I liked enough to beat. Gaiares' upgrade system kept me experimenting long enough that I ended up beating it (on a Nomad no less). But that was also when I was working a night job with very little else to do. Since then I've barely ever played it again.

But I'm talking in generalities. It's why I played Bangai-O and Fantasy Zone longer. Or why it's fun to set some weird challenge in an open world game and try it.

>> No.4535118

"Some grinding", "pretty fast". Very vague terms. You're right that a blind 1cc of most Gradius games is UNLIKELY, but so is a blind 1cc of Megaman 9 unless you do something silly and grind 9 lives on each level. Actually I would say that if you're an experienced Gradius player who never played 1, you're more likely to blind 1cc it than an experienced Megaman player is likely to blind 1cc Megaman 9. Anyway, this doesn't say much about how memorization-heavy the games are because anything difficult will require a lot of practice before you can beat it. That's just the nature of difficult games.

>> No.4535120

Yes, but the learning process is long and there are never clear choices. A good roguelike regularly throws you into situations where even when you know everything you can (full spoilers) the choice before you is still unclear.

And by the time you have learned it so well that even those decisions are rote, it's time to move on. That takes a long time if you don't spoil though

>> No.4535128

Same applies to shmups or any other genre. You will 1cc the games before coming up with good, safe routes. Most of my clears are very sloppy, and it can take dozens of hours to refine my strategies to a point where I'm consistent at the games. And that's not taking scoring into account...

>> No.4535129

>because anything difficult will require a lot of practice before you can beat it. That's just the nature of difficult games.
that's the point though..if you're playing a game with an identical engine, mechanics, controls, etc., just in a different set of levels from the one you have experience in, if you're skilled at that game the skill will transfer. and of course this exists in Gradius, but not as much because the skill in Gradius is more heavy into level memorization than Mega Man. and of course I have to admit the rate at which one memorizes a set of levels they've never played before is a skill and talent in itself. I'm sure a tiny tiny portion of people could blind 1cc Gradius, but they are definitely in like the top 1% of the top 1% of shmups players.

>> No.4535130

Not at all in my experience, and not in this anon's experience either: >>4535114
You seem to be bad at general execution; maybe you have little practice, maybe you aren't as good in general. It's OK, you just need to recognize these are doable assuming high skill. Mega Man 9/10 are easier to beat because... well, they are less challenging. But not because they are less memory based.
That's nice, I like games like that as well, just don't insult static games by saying they are memory based.

>> No.4535131

I agree. Not saying Gradius is bad or the people who like it shouldn't. Just like not saying everyone should like Rogue.

But it's why I would load up Rogue to play probably 10 or 20 times for every one time I played Zaxxon or Spy Hunter or Mario or whatever. Those games were neat, but they didn't have the same draw and I got bored of them faster.

I've never gotten bored of KoF98 ever. (multiplayer)

>> No.4535137

He seems to not have devoted much time into these to know. He doesn't have to, if you're not into them it's OK. But insulting them by calling them memory games crosses a line.

>if you're playing a game with an identical engine, mechanics, controls, etc
This is the thing, it's very hard to find two traditional/arcade games that are exactly the same. You always have to get used to new mechanics, weapons, etc.
Imagine Mega Man dying in one hit and needing to beat the whole game in 3 lives (more by picking 1ups). It's not that different, it's just that Gradius is more demanding and less forgiving.

>> No.4535145

I'm both >>4535114 and >>4535120
I know they're not 100% memorization always but I'm generalizing to express why my tastes are how they are.

Whatevr you like for whatever reason is awesome.

>> No.4535148

Memorization is something you resort to when your reaction times aren't enough to carry you through a game in a consistent manner. This can either be the result of games poorly conveying their threats/mechanics to the player, OR it can be the result of the challenges just being too difficult even if you do know that they're coming and know how to get through them. Gradius for the most part falls into the latter category. You could technically say that it makes it more memorization-based, but that's not inherently true and just comes down to player skill. Saying that the skills it uses are so game specific that you will HAVE to memorize them is blatantly false.

>> No.4535152

Well yeah those are easy console games, no surprise there. Arcades is where it's at. 90's games truly started exploring the possibilities of the genre. Early console shmups are fun, but largely very simplistic.

>> No.4535154

The average good classic static arcade game is like 90% reaction (being good) and 10% memorization.
>Memorization is something you resort to when your reaction times aren't enough to carry you through a game in a consistent manner.
Exactly this, and since they weren't made with every player in mind some folks will have to resort to memorization to clear if they are one of those with lower execution skill.
>it can be the result of the challenges just being too difficult even if you do know that they're coming and know how to get through them.
This is essentially the arcade model for profit. They needed to make hard games to satisfy operators, but they also needed to be fun to players. Strict memorization challenges were extremely rare in the arcades (example: Dragon's Lair, justified by it being amazing looking then I guess) because most players don't find them fun, so they resorted to this to make the games challenging: assuming only those with the highest skills could clear them, and the lesser skilled had to put more coins to either credit feed or practice to memorize the harder parts.

>> No.4535189

Yeah I know Gradius is hard, and I'm not saying it doesn't require genuine skill. Just that there's a large memorization factor. if there weren't the variety of valid level designs to try and minimize memorization requirements would be very tiny and ultimately make it less interesting.

>> No.4535193

reading your posts I was going to recommend competitve multiplayer games to you, especially fighting games and FPS since there's an endless supply of novel situations to adapt and react to. RTS is like a mix of rote and novel situations

>> No.4535203

Large memorization factor? Taking the laser weapon to the first volcano boss and then again when volcanoes come in the fourth stage (still the first half in a 15 minute loop) is a large part of the game for you? OK.
He likes fighting games already if you pay attention, he's a big fan of KoF98 for instance.

>> No.4535298

Do you claim the volcanoes are the only level memorization necessary in the game based on them not meeting a standard of reactable frames you have or what?

>> No.4535316

Average human reaction times

>> No.4535321
File: 52 KB, 640x480, Budokan - The Martial Spirit (Unl) [c][!]006.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>The average good classic static arcade game is like 90% reaction (being good) and 10% memorization.

I'm not sure I'd agree with that ratio exactly, but sure. What I'm getting at is why even though there is difficulty, if level 1 is the same every time I play, I tend to get bored of it pretty fast. Even if level 8 is wicked fun and super hard, if I know just getting there means playing through a bunch of levels I've done many times before it doesn't feel worth my time. Especially when I can play another game that isn't like that.

But also I should say that though I love games, they're only one of my hobbies. So any time I spend on them has always been precious. I would never put someone down for loving to play shmups, it's just never something I've been interested putting time into.

Indeed, fighters are my favorite genre of all time. Even since their most rudimentary days I've thought they're some of the most interesting games.

FPS a little, played the hell out of Tribes 1 and 2, but arena shooters don't grab me enough to invest. Same with RTS which seems cool, but not as cool as fighters so with my limited time I never really got into them.

>> No.4535330

the thing is reaction time changes depending on your expectations. there is some overlap between reactions and predictions. KoF anon knows what I'm talking about.
If you know something is going to happen (such is the case in any reaction time test like the ones where you click as soon as the screen changes color) your reaction time will be faster than if it's something you don't know is coming. pure reactions are actually very uncommon if it's not significantly slower than human reaction time. it's different for something that's hardwired, like involuntarily pulling your head back when a snake strikes at you, but video games are very cerebral.

>> No.4535343

Yeah I know, most actions in-game aren't reactive but predictive but you need some kind of baseline to work with, which will never be strictly accurate as there are too many variables at play. Though it's very safe to say that something which demands you to react so fast it exceeds average human reaction times is unreasonable unless its foreshadowed by some other means or the consequence for failure, neither of which apply to the volcanos in Gradius.

>> No.4535379

Unless you suck as this anon's saying >>4535316 , then yes IIRC.
We've been through this, scoring alleviates the problem. If this is such a big issue to you then savestate if you feel you have fully mastered an area, I guess.
We're assuming everything can be beaten by reaction, not prediction, except the part with the volcanoes. Unless you suck.
>most actions in-game aren't reactive but predictive
Wut, I think you got this backwards.

>> No.4535393

>Wut, I think you got this backwards.
No, you anticipate attacks before reacting to them, and then make predictions based on things like speed and trajectory to time your dodge. Reactions play a big part in the whole process but you need to direct your attention and anticipate attacks and such for your reaction times to actually matter.

>> No.4535406
File: 245 KB, 240x180, KoF8fc_6058092.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>We've been through this, scoring alleviates the problem.

It doesn't come anywhere near for me. Maybe if other genrers didn't exist, but really just not my cup of tea. Gaiares was alright when I was bored and at a time when I was trying to get into them. But in general if I'm going to play a game, something like that just doesn't hold enough interest.

Again, way too many games and way to little time. Going for a slightly higher score on the same auto-scrolling level after I've played through it 5 or 10 times (let alone 50) doesn't appeal at all.

>> No.4535414

If you can't beat Gradius blind minus the volcanoes you just suck. good post
>Wut, I think you got this backwards.
most are mixed. if you're playing a multiplayer game and there are multiple options you expect your opponent might use, but instead of going for semi-lucky reads you're waiting until after they use the option and reacting, you'll react faster if he does one of the options you're anticipating. the further you narrow down the number of options you expect, the faster you react. if you are extremely confident of what he's going to do, you can throw out a predictive counter option before you can even see that he's using that option. In Gradius, it's the same thing every time, and even when you're reacting, your reactions are enhanced by familiarity.

>> No.4535441

>good post
It's what happens when you've actually played and beaten a game, your opinion is suddenly backed by facts lol
Was Gaiares more fun due to being able to experiment with different weapons each time? Interestingly, the Gradius and Parodius series focuses on this later on.

>> No.4535446

He's not saying that, though. His argument (and mine too) is that it's doable if you don't suck, not that it's guaranteed or even likely.

>> No.4535449
File: 63 KB, 640x480, gaiares l.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>Was Gaiares more fun due to being able to experiment with different weapons each time?

Yeah. Different runs I'd try going for different weapon types and that made it interesting. Also I was working a night security job so had a lot of free time and the novelty of a portable genesis. Also a good friend who had always been into shooters was away on a Mormon mission. So I made it part of mine to try and get into some of these kinds of games and have something for us to write back and forth about.

I tried a few on Genesis, Gaiares stuck partly cause of the upgrades but also the wackiness was cool

>> No.4535457

Have you tried the later Gradius and Parodius games? They have either a lot of different characters/ships to choose from or highly customizable weapons.
Sure, in Gradius you can only choose not to take powerups and between double/laser, but starting with II ARC you have four weapon combinations to choose from, and it gets more varied later on. In Gaiden you can even customize the order of the powerup bar, so you can say put Options first.

>> No.4535462

well of course it's doable

>> No.4535469

In memorization based games like say Dragon's Lair, rhythm games, etc. it's not. This is the key distinction.
Memorization helps in every game ever, in some more than others. But just a few require it for the whole game or even most of it unless you suck.

>> No.4535471

Yeah I've played some of them some. Actually I did beat Gradius V (easy and shiny) but most of them I get bored of. And under different circumstances I wouldn't have stuck with those two either.

Again, in a vacuum of no other games or having endless time things might be different. But as is there's just too much more interesting stuff competing for my time.

>> No.4535579

You may actually prefer euroshmups, actually, as silly as this may sound to some.

>> No.4535736

Maybe? What makes them different? I did enjoy Fantasy Zone where you could go left and right as well as Bangai-O and Defender was the first video game I really liked.

I think a procedurally generated shmup could maybe be kinda neat. Randomized enemies, waves and level layouts.

>> No.4535746

Procedural shmups would be very hard to make engaging, their challenge usually comes from tightly designed formations of enemies and bullet patterns.

Anyway, on euroshmups: It's how western shmups were made on PC, such as Tyrian, Stargunner or Jets n Guns. Levels are longer but you can permanently save between each one, You have A LOT of options for weapons and other configurations to try and unlock as you go on, since between each stage there's a shop to buy with the money you get from each stage. The games are more forgiving, with health bars, shielding systems and the like. The problem is that they are nowhere near as nicely nor tightly designed as Japanese arcade shmups, but I think they can still be fun. Tyrian is free on GoG, btw.

>> No.4535748

And Stargunner is free there, too, forgot about that. Jets n Guns isn't, though it's not retro.

>> No.4535813
File: 416 KB, 500x432, comitDy1qmo396o1_500.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>their challenge usually comes from tightly designed formations of enemies and bullet patterns.

Yeah I can see that, I was just throwing it out. I liked Tempest, which while not random always felt random. And Asteroids to an extent, but that was pretty limited. Geometry Wars was cool.

On a similar sort of vein, I've also never liked Beat em Ups for similar reasons. But Comix Zone added enough with different routs and little puzzles that it kept the game interesting the whole way through and like enough I occasionally revisit. That was another Nomad game.

>> No.4535816

Ohh and the options and stage saves sound cool, but less so the health bars and shields. If I was going to I'd probably just play another Jap shmup but treat each level as it's own game.

>> No.4535840

You seem to prefer western style shmups. What do you think of twin stick ones like Robotron?

>> No.4535943

What about games like Castlevania or any sidescroller where you have a limited ability to defend yourself as well as a tendency to backflip into the pit you just hopped if a butterfly runs into you?

Would anyone argue that these demand good execution? I agree that whether you memorized it or not, a shooter requires good execution. For something like Legendary Axe (which I do like a lot) it was always more about "these enemies must be dispatched in this manner" and "these 2 platforms have a second axethrower off screen" which you memorize through repetition and then there's not much challenge left. As opposed to like Ninja Gaiden (NES) which is a decent challenge no matter how many times you've played it.

I would say these games are at least 60% memorization by the time an average player completes them.

>> No.4535989

These are mostly console games if you've noticed, platformers were scarce in the arcades. They weren't profitable there for whatever reason even if the genre was the most popular of that era in home systems.
So it could easily be stuff to make the games longer to try to "justify" the price, strict memorization while not requiring too much execution seems the best to make games longer without excluding consumers, but this isn't very likely so I don't know.
NES Castlevania in particular is a lot about memorizing what subweapons to pick for each challenging section and where the "numbers" are so you can abuse them. If not dodging some of the patterns is quite a task due to your very stiff and limited movement. Still, I'd say the first half of say Castlevania 1 isn't hard but right at stage 4 and onward it begins to feature this kind of gameplay style more.

>> No.4536021

>3 lives, score system
losing a life meant you get set back to the last checkpoint, and only the points you scored from that checkpoint until you died are lost
losing all your lives meant the pic in OP, and if you select continue you will still get set back to the last checkpoint(or at the start of the current level at worst), but you lose all of your points.
I never gave a shit about score, so to me having 3 lives + continue option if i lost all 3 of them equals to having infinite lives, and the entire system loses its meaning.

Not having a continue option means that once you lose all your lives it's game over, you HAVE TO restart from the very beginning.
Depending on the game, this has always been the better option for me, because depending on the level structure and enemies positioning, having to be careful to not get too much damage or lose a life contributed to the tension of exploring the level, in contrast to going in careless because who cares if i die, i can always continue and the game eventually becomes more a thing of knowing what's next and moving accordingly or even anticipating your moves knowing they'll be effective on something that is not on the screen yet.

Memorizing might be good for personal challenges or speedruns, but for the challenge the game itself is proposing, it might be a very negative thing.

>> No.4536043

This guy gets it, though he maybe should try some games with cool scoring systems. Other than that nailed it.

>> No.4536062

Castlevania doesn't have demanding execution at all. It's about simple timing and strategy. That's actually what makes people like it, I think. Everything has a pretty simple solution, and once you've figured it out actually executing it is easy so you're always moving forward and figuring the game out. If you pay attention to game difficulty, the most popular "hard" games are like this.

>> No.4536081

This mostly applies to CV1 and 3 tho, the 16-bit ones have better controls and are more execution based, even if being overall easier games.
>If you pay attention to game difficulty, the most popular "hard" games are like this.
Sure, arcade games aren't as popular as moderately challenging console games with infinite/a bunch of continues + checkpoints.

>> No.4536116

I wouldn't say so. The items became less prominent, but they were still about simple timing challenges. And then you have IV's sloppy level design, where half the enemies can be dispatched safely from behind a wall. You won't hear Ninja Gaiden described as "hard but fair" very often, even though it's the same kind of gameplay but more dense and demanding.

>> No.4536120

I only said they are more execution based than before, not thay they have very high execution requirements.
It's much more doable to beat the 16 bit vanias in your first sitting due to the improved movement which lets you actually react a bit more instead of dying and then returning with the holy water with number III or something.

>> No.4536546

I only rented Smash TV once and thought it was neat but didn't rent it again and have never gone to emulate either of them.

Herzog Zwei was cool if you consider that related.

>> No.4536568

It's not really related but it's cool indeed.

>> No.4536580

You've made me consider retrying though. How different was Robotron?

>> No.4536582

From Smash TV I mean.

>> No.4536585

Just try it and draw your own conclusions, it's not like doing so will be a huge timesink. Have fun.
IIRC Smash TV is by the same guy, just a later and more complex game.

>> No.4536590

Solid advice, I'll give it a whir next time I'm looking for something new and actiony.

>> No.4536598

If you like these consider 2017's Nex Machina, my GOTY. Also by the same guy. Too bad it flopped to the point of making the devs forego making more arcade-style games.

>> No.4538636

is this on genesis

>> No.4539192

Nope, it's Land of Illusion for the good old Master System

>> No.4540345
File: 86 KB, 960x720, gfs_68762_2_7.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

This game is great!

>> No.4540734


My head. For a second I thought it was Castle of Illusion for MS since it seems so similar to that.

Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.