
Zelda II is the best Zelda.
Smash Brothers is just watered-down 2D Power Stone.
Zelda II is the best Zelda.
That's just weird. What.... Why? How?
I prefer Twilight Princess to Ocarina of Time.
WOO BOY. I didn't wake up looking for a fight, but you made a liar out of me!
Smash Brothers is just watered-down 2D Power Stone.
This I can agree with. Powerstone on the Dreamcast/in the arcade is much more fun than any of the Smash games.
(I also don't play a lot of fighting games since I never had close friends that played it, and multiplayer has never been my jam.)
I super hated Spelunky. It seemed like it was getting so much love everywhere. I really tried and wanted to enjoy it - I played single player, I tried multiplayer, I played over and over, even making it to later dungeons eventually. But in the end, I just couldn't force myself to like it. It was frustrating and just not that fun. I'm feeling annoyed just thinking about it now.
I super hated Spelunky. It seemed like it was getting so much love everywhere. I really tried and wanted to enjoy it - I played single player, I tried multiplayer, I played over and over, even making it to later dungeons eventually. But in the end, I just couldn't force myself to like it. It was frustrating and just not that fun. I'm feeling annoyed just thinking about it now.
I feel this way about FTL and, to a lesser extent, Void Bastards.
I super hated Spelunky. It seemed like it was getting so much love everywhere. I really tried and wanted to enjoy it - I played single player, I tried multiplayer, I played over and over, even making it to later dungeons eventually. But in the end, I just couldn't force myself to like it. It was frustrating and just not that fun. I'm feeling annoyed just thinking about it now.
I couldn’t stand Spelunky until I played it using a controller. Then it was pretty good.
I super hated Spelunky. It seemed like it was getting so much love everywhere. I really tried and wanted to enjoy it - I played single player, I tried multiplayer, I played over and over, even making it to later dungeons eventually. But in the end, I just couldn't force myself to like it. It was frustrating and just not that fun. I'm feeling annoyed just thinking about it now.
I am of your thinking entirely. I think I just don't like platformers enough to master either the physical precision for deliberately-frustratingly-hard ones like Super Meat Boy and Celeste, or the mechanical adventure ones like Spelunky, Rogue Legacy, or the various metroidvaniae.
Platformers are my favourite genre, but I didn't enjoy Spelunky either. However, in my case it's because I dislike roguelikes. The game seemed pretty good though if you like that sort of thing.
d4m0 wrote:I super hated Spelunky. It seemed like it was getting so much love everywhere. I really tried and wanted to enjoy it - I played single player, I tried multiplayer, I played over and over, even making it to later dungeons eventually. But in the end, I just couldn't force myself to like it. It was frustrating and just not that fun. I'm feeling annoyed just thinking about it now.
I feel this way about FTL...
It's treason then...
Not only is the ME3 ending a great ending, I wish it had more cutscenes to play out the battle above even more, and maybe have some of the characters live/die based on game decisions, similar to what we saw in ME2.
Despite all of the strategic options and features, every Total War battle ends up the same: My clump of soldiers will crash into your soldiers until we have no idea what's going on, there's no time to enjoy the detailed graphics on each soldier, and the chaos is over in 5 minutes.
The best Total War battles were in the first 3 games (Shogun, Medieval, Rome), and since then it's been nuts.
With that said, I love and play every single one of them.
I recall there being a time where I would declare Columns a better game than Tetris. No one ever agreed!
I recall there being a time where I would declare Columns a better game than Tetris. No one ever agreed! :grin:
There's contraversial and there's just plain bonkers!
I guess maybe Spelunky is not so controversial! I actually really enjoyed Super Meat Boy, and I'm playing through Celeste right now and loving it. I think with those games there was an actual feeling of progression, like in SMB you'd get to another world eventually, and in Celeste you're getting to the top of the mountain. Spelunky felt exactly the same over and over, even with the procedurally-generated levels. There wasn't much to it. Maybe that's what it was. I hate procedurally-generated levels. Give me something short but hand-created over something extended but procedural any day (No Man's Sky is a rare exception!).
I guess maybe Spelunky is not so controversial! I actually really enjoyed Super Meat Boy, and I'm playing through Celeste right now and loving it. I think with those games there was an actual feeling of progression, like in SMB you'd get to another world eventually, and in Celeste you're getting to the top of the mountain. Spelunky felt exactly the same over and over, even with the procedurally-generated levels. There wasn't much to it. Maybe that's what it was. I hate procedurally-generated levels. Give me something short but hand-created over something extended but procedural any day (No Man's Sky is a rare exception!).
I never got Super Meat Boy. That kind of “we’re going to make this game difficult and then laugh at you for failing” motif is not something I’ve ever enjoyed.
RnRClown wrote:I recall there being a time where I would declare Columns a better game than Tetris. No one ever agreed! :grin:
There's contraversial and there's just plain bonkers!
I don't know about Columns, but Puyo Puyo for sure!
Puyo Puyo?
*Googles*
Dr. Robotnik's Mean Bean Machine!
Puyo Puyo?
*Googles*
Dr. Robotnik's Mean Bean Machine!
Hahaha. I know the game, but never played it.
Djinn wrote:Zelda II is the best Zelda.
That's just weird. What.... Why? How?
Zelda II is an awesome action-platformer in the style of Ninja Gaiden, Castlevania, or Faxanadu and I just really love platformers. It has its flaws, for sure, but it's so much fun to play.
I do love the other Zeldas too, but Zelda II slightly edges out Link's Awakening as my favourite Zelda.
Confession. I quit Skyrim after 5-10 minutes of intro and playing because I thought it was too much railroading my options. Couldn't get into it afterwards, despite all the raving reviews.
I quit Skyrim pretty quickly because I couldn't break the magic system the way I had been doing since Daggerfall.
I quit Skyrim pretty quickly because I couldn't break the magic system the way I had been doing since Daggerfall.
They added a function where you can reset any skill that reaches 100 and refund your perk points while keeping your overall level. Casting Soul Trap on a dead body for about 20 minutes gets you to 100 Conjuration. So keep it up until you are at the level/perk points you want. FYI this was fixed in the Unofficial Patch mod.
No Man's Sky gets worse with every update. Was thinking about this earlier. They've added some cool QoL stuff and prettiness, but the actual gameplay features just push it further away from being the game I originally wanted and purchased.
maverickz wrote:Djinn wrote:Zelda II is the best Zelda.
That's just weird. What.... Why? How?
Zelda II is an awesome action-platformer in the style of Ninja Gaiden, Castlevania, or Faxanadu and I just really love platformers. It has its flaws, for sure, but it's so much fun to play.
I do love the other Zeldas too, but Zelda II slightly edges out Link's Awakening as my favourite Zelda.
While there's no way I'd call it the best, I think it's a fantastic game that in no way deserves the bad reputation a lot of people give it.
Kid Link is stupid, and I wish it had never taken off.
I get it as a concept for Ocarina of Time, and I don't mind it there ... because he becomes adult link, and adult link takes on Ganon. I could never take Wind Waker seriously. A child is not going to defeat the greatest evil in the world.*
*Unless it's Earthbound, in which case I am 100% on board.
You're questioning the internal logic of a game in which said boy rides a sentient talking ship and can control the weather (and time itself) by blowing into a lump of branch.
You're right. It may be silly, but Kid Link is where my suspension of disbelief ends.
For whatever reason, I re-purchased Tomb Raider (2013) today (I have in on PS4, but I prefer to have things on PC now, and it was less than $4, so it won't make a dent in my budget), and I started replaying it.
I really like the gameplay, but I wish the story was more in line with the previous games: pulpy, dumb, and it did not take itself seriously. Why everything need to be gritty now is beyond me.
As a side-note, I also purchased Tomb Raider Angel of Darkness out of morbid curiosity (since it's the one game, along with Shadow of the Tomb Raider, that I haven't played in the series), but I have failed to get it to work with JoyToKey for whatever reason. I don't know if it's worth spending the time to figure out what's wrong. Probably not.
I'm grumpy Fire Emblem is veering from it's position as punishing tactics RPG to "waifu simulator". I'm sure the new game is great for those who like story, but I've always played FE for the challenging gameplay and glorious pain of losing a valued character. The only other game that has ever given me that same level of painful satisfaction is ironman mode in X-COM. Fire Emblem used to be that, but so much more...Because characters had their own personality and niche.
The new game is so...easy. Even on hard, it's a cakewalk. The rewind feature is completely counter to what Fire Emblem is to me, and while I can't criticise, the new direction they've taken with it (it's clearly making them money), it's not why I play Fire Emblem.
What tipped me over the edge is the new maddening mode. I was hoping it would bring back some of the challenge, maybe bring the option to disable the rewinds, but it's just over-inflated stats and artificial difficulty all over the place.
I really, really want to keep enjoying Fire Emblem, because the series has provided some of my favourite gaming moments. But this new direction may just not be for me, and that makes me sad.
It’s a different thing now. I liked Three Houses, but I think of it like a Persona game that happens to have easy SRPG combat. I don’t really think of it as a classic Fire Emblem game.
Balance is really the key issue, IMO.
Set aside the focus on relationships for a moment. I think anytime you introduce variable ways to beef up your party outside of combat you risk creating a balance problem.
Compared to Fire Emblem 7, Sacred Stones had a balance problem because you could grind random battles.
The focus on supports and the resultant buffs and bonuses has only exacerbated that problem in games starting with Awakening.
Ok top of that they started selling DLC. The series went from games that were perfectly balanced to games where Intelligent Systems didn’t actually have much control over how much growth your party might have in a given playthrough.
As a result I feel like the games have gotten easier and easier.
I still enjoy it sometimes for what it is, but it’s not the Fire Emblem we grew up with.
Pages