|
Post by elektrolurch on Sept 29, 2014 14:18:55 GMT -5
The 2600 proved it could do better when subsequent Pac-Man games were released on it, but I never owned any of those. The original Pac-Man was my only experience with the series on the 2600, and for as ugly as it looked, it was still discernibly Pac-Man. And ultimately, that's all I cared about. -Tom I never owned any of the other 2600 pacman games, but I still own 10+ pacman cartridges, after already giving away many......... mh, after those discussions I think i might start a general atari discussion thread...
|
|
|
Post by shelverton on Sept 29, 2014 14:20:14 GMT -5
There are games I'd like to be able to defend, but I don't have the confidence to make a "winning" argument as far as they go. I'd love to be able to defend the SaGa series. I just don't feel I have the biting rhetoric or acidic tongue to browbeat (or guilt, shame, or humiliate) somebody who's convinced that it's trash into liking it. But that's the point: You shouldn't have to argue about things like this. Defending a game by simply saying: "I think it's great, I love playing it and that is that!" is a valid argument IMO. You could go on explaining what you like about the game, but after that you've made your point and has automatically "won" in a sense. And if someone says: "NOOOO but the SaGa games are weeeird and you can't like them because I have proof you can't!" they're stupid. I wish people would someday realise that their opinion is not the law, but internet unfortunately doesn't work like that. EDIT: I must say however that I never feel "attacked" in this forum for liking a game, but then again people in here are more intelligent than everywhere else so it's to be expected. Thank god.
|
|
|
Post by wyrdwad on Sept 29, 2014 14:31:43 GMT -5
I will always defend the greatness called Shenmue. EDIT: Oh, and METROID II and Other M. People generally liked Metroid II, didn't they? Agreed on Other M, though. The story and cutscenes are awful, but the actual stage designs and gameplay are fantastic -- I much, *much* prefer Other M to the Prime games, if only because I'm not forced to play in first-person. -Tom
|
|
|
Post by moran on Sept 29, 2014 14:32:24 GMT -5
There are games I'd like to be able to defend, but I don't have the confidence to make a "winning" argument as far as they go. I'd love to be able to defend the SaGa series. I just don't feel I have the biting rhetoric or acidic tongue to browbeat (or guilt, shame, or humiliate) somebody who's convinced that it's trash into liking it. But that's the point: You shouldn't have to argue about things like this. Defending a game by simply saying: "I think it's great, I love playing it and that is that!" is a valid argument IMO. You could go on explaining what you like about the game, but after that you've made your point and has automatically "won" in a sense. And if someone says: "NOOOO but the SaGa games are weeeird and you can't like them because I have proof you can't!" they're stupid. I wish people would someday realise that their opinion is not the law, but internet unfortunately doesn't work like that. EDIT: I must say however that I never feel "attacked" in this forum for liking a game, but then again people in here are more intelligent than everywhere else so it's to be expected. Thank god. Rational debate is a lost concept on the internet. I will always defend the greatness called Shenmue. EDIT: Oh, and METROID II and Other M. Metroid II needs to be defended? I never knew that it was looked down upon. Its a great game.
|
|
|
Post by Feynman on Sept 29, 2014 14:36:06 GMT -5
There's a certain amount of internet revisionist history similar to the classic Sonic games going on with Metroid II, where it's becoming increasingly common to hear people say "Metroid II isn't very good."
Which is nuts, because Metroid II is quite enjoyable, and even something of a triumph considering the hardware it runs on.
|
|
|
Post by Terrifying on Sept 29, 2014 14:41:28 GMT -5
Well, I remember the reviews and scores of METROID II, and they weren't really rosy so to speak. Here's just a very few on mobygames
|
|
|
Post by PooshhMao on Sept 29, 2014 14:43:15 GMT -5
I really want to appreciate Metroid II more than I do, since I love (love) the series, but Metroid II puts me off, every time. I completely lose track where I am or where I need to go.
|
|
|
Post by Weasel on Sept 29, 2014 14:43:32 GMT -5
There's a certain amount of internet revisionist history similar to the classic Sonic games going on with Metroid II, where it's becoming increasingly common to hear people say "Metroid II isn't very good." Which is nuts, because Metroid II is quite enjoyable, and even something of a triumph considering the hardware it runs on. Metroid 2 was my first; I bought it before Super was announced. It was great, if a bit confusing, and it holds up well today with what I consider one of the greatest game boy soundtracks and a nice assortment of upgrades.
|
|
|
Post by moran on Sept 29, 2014 14:44:36 GMT -5
That's just weird. I can understand the Sonic criticisms since I don't and never have liked the games, but Metroid II was a vast improvement over the original in almost all areas. And is still quite playable today.
|
|
|
Post by Allie on Sept 29, 2014 14:58:37 GMT -5
There's a certain amount of internet revisionist history similar to the classic Sonic games going on with Metroid II, where it's becoming increasingly common to hear people say "Metroid II isn't very good." Which is nuts, because Metroid II is quite enjoyable, and even something of a triumph considering the hardware it runs on. Metroid 2 was my first; I bought it before Super was announced. It was great, if a bit confusing, and it holds up well today with what I consider one of the greatest game boy soundtracks and a nice assortment of upgrades. Metroid 2 is weird to me. A friend of mine ended up having 3 copies of that game. He wasn't really very fond of it, so somehow over the period of about 2 years, I ended up with all 3 copies of it. And I wasn't very fond of it either. I was out-and-out terrible at it, and kept ending up in the flooded areas and dying.
|
|
|
Post by The Great Klaid on Sept 29, 2014 15:11:00 GMT -5
I will defend Castlevania 64 and its semi-sequel expansion forever. Yes, it has the stupid bomb part. Yes, the controls are wonky as shit and the camera suffers from a terrible case of early 3D game awkwardness. But aside from the stupid bomb level, the core game is great. It has great level design, excellent platforming, the whip-using character controls and fights like a Belmont-type character should. Beyond the one terible level and the technical issues is a quality action/platformer that to this day is far better than any other 3D Castlevania game. If Konami had continued to improve and iterate on the gameplay in Castlevania 64 instead of scrapping it and focusing entirely on metroidvanias, the Castlevania franchise would probably be in a better place today. Actually, in that vein I liked Lament of Innocence. I'm not sure how people still view it, but back then people seemed kind of hard on it. I thought it was fun. A lot of fun really, and kind of sad that every action game became Devil May Cry or God of War recently, because I liked the slower, platformy pace of it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2014 15:16:34 GMT -5
Lament of Innocence was a more honest and self-assured attempt at a 3D CV than the N64 games, but the incredibly dull environments, dearth of RPG elements and lack of any reason to engage with enemies when you weren't forced to ruined it.
Curse of Darkness made some welcome steps forward in this regard, but the inherent dullness was still all too present. I think they could have taken a few more hints from the DMC series, which IIRC Igarishi has openly praised.
|
|
|
Post by shelverton on Sept 29, 2014 15:23:56 GMT -5
My only problem with Lament of Innocence was the level design. I had to look at the map at every turn cause I could never get a feel for the layout of the different levels. "Where am I?" was my most frequently asked question going through that game. Also, I kept hoping for some vertical areas to mix things up but there wasn't a lot of that. The game is beautiful though, much more so than Curse of Darkness a few years later. It is also, IMO, a better Castlevania than LoS ever was. I might replay it one day, if only for the EXCELLENT atmosphere, visuals and soundtrack.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2014 15:28:00 GMT -5
I wonder if IGA would have finally perfected the 3D CV formula if he had been allowed to finish the PS3/360 Alucard game that got canceled. I'm sure it would have fared better than Mercury Steam's effort, at least.
|
|
|
Post by masamvne on Sept 29, 2014 16:14:20 GMT -5
I am convinced Mega Man Battle Network 4 is the greatest Mega Man game and will hear no argument otherwise.
I also have very fond memories of Mystic Quest Legend, and think Mirror's Edge is one of the best and most inventive games of the millenium hands down.
As for Castlevania, I find it hard to go back and play the old linear style games like Rondo of Blood after getting used to the fluidity of movement in Aria of Sorrow and SotN... maybe it's just before my time.
|
|