|
Post by Discoalucard on Mar 18, 2008 20:44:47 GMT -5
www.hardcoregaming101.net/captainsilver/captainsilver.htmI think I threatened to do this one last week. Like a lot of Sega Master System games, I remember reading about this in catalogs and magazines when I was a kid, and thought it would be pretty awesome. Well, it isn't, but by the time I had realized that, I already had a few hundred screenshots and a majority of the article written in my head, so I figured, why not? The SMS game is actually kinda alright. The NES version is pretty lame, and the arcade version would be cool if it weren't so masochistically difficult.
|
|
|
Post by ReyVGM on Mar 19, 2008 0:27:18 GMT -5
"Jim is an awful pirate. Early in the game, if he steps in a water fountain that's approximately a foot deep, he'll immediately drown. "
This is one of the funniest lines I've ever read!
This game reminds me of Amagon (NES), which is also unforgiving difficult. But for some reason I kept playing it and playing it thinking I *might* beat eventually.
I didn't.
|
|
|
Post by Discoalucard on Mar 19, 2008 7:35:38 GMT -5
I agree, Amagon always looked like it might've been cool.
On some level, Captain Silver kinda reminds me of Capcom's Trojan, but I think I only played that once so I may be delusional.
|
|
|
Post by ReyVGM on Mar 19, 2008 7:37:11 GMT -5
Ugh.. Trojan. I have nightmares from the NES version.
|
|
|
Post by zzz on Mar 19, 2008 8:08:13 GMT -5
On some level, Captain Silver kinda reminds me of Capcom's Trojan, but I think I only played that once so I may be delusional. They kind of resemble each other graphically.
|
|
|
Post by Ryu the Grappler on Jul 12, 2011 2:34:40 GMT -5
I actually discovered Captain Silver and (both of its ports) not long ago and yeah, it's not so great. I really wanted to like it, but the game is way too cheap with its hit detection.
I don't know, but this rant about "retro fans" who prefer difficult games out of place in this article. The difficulty of Captain Silver is mostly due to poor hit detection and design choices than any thoughtful intention. It seems very whiny and uncalled for.
How many "high profile" third-party games were truly available on both platforms? The majority of the ones available on the Master Syster were published (and usually developed) by Sega themselves. There are many "high-profile" arcade games that were ported only to the Famicom/NES (practically everything by Konami) and a few that were only available on the Mark III/Master System (R-Type comes to mind). It often was a matter as of what Sega could get, seeing how very few third party publishers actually supported the platform.
Is there any evidence that Tokuma Shoten actually developed the Famicom version? It feels very similar to pretty every other NES game made by DECO (RoboCop, Bad Dudes, Werewolf). DECO didn't publish many of their Famicom stuff in Japan compared to their US division.
|
|
|
Post by Discoalucard on Jul 12, 2011 6:58:50 GMT -5
Oh it is very called for. Every once in awhile I run into that really irritating elitism that will insist that anyone who decries a difficult game for being terrible is a whiny softie. That's not the case in every instance (you see this with stuff blatantly awful like Spelunker, even!) and this is precisely the game that should shut those people up. There is a difference between "difficulty" and "terrible design" and I'm not sure people always grasp the difference.
You're referring to the few games that I mentioned in the paragraph you quoted? It even says there weren't many - the point is that the ones that usually got ports on both systems were the top tier games and Captain Silver isn't at all. (Cloud Master would qualify for this too, although that isn't so much terrible as just mediocre.)
This one I'm not sure about it. I can't find any evidence otherwise, but you may be right.
|
|
CRV
Full Member
Posts: 222
|
Post by CRV on Jul 12, 2011 8:57:56 GMT -5
Is there any evidence that Tokuma Shoten actually developed the Famicom version? It feels very similar to pretty every other NES game made by DECO ( RoboCop, Bad Dudes, Werewolf). DECO didn't publish many of their Famicom stuff in Japan compared to their US division. FC Captain Silver was Data East except for maybe the programming, which I guess was by Jorudan.
|
|
|
Post by Ryu the Grappler on Jul 12, 2011 13:03:13 GMT -5
Oh it is very called for. Every once in awhile I run into that really irritating elitism that will insist that anyone who decries a difficult game for being terrible is a whiny softie. That's not the case in every instance (you see this with stuff blatantly awful like Spelunker, even!) and this is precisely the game that should shut those people up. There is a difference between "difficulty" and "terrible design" and I'm not sure people always grasp the difference. Yeah, but I also noticed there's somewhat condescending tone towards arcade games like in the Ikari article ("Ikari Warriors is an arcade-designed game through and through, with its apparent prerogative designed to royally suck the quarters right out of hopelessly determined gamers") and in the TwinBee one, where one of the console sequels got praised because its easier than its arcade predecessor ("Pop'n Twinbee has a great advantage over Detana: being born on console, it isn't designed to suck quarters. "). A lot of these arcade games can be completed in one credit with practice. Even Captain Silver has a "no-miss" superplay video on Nico Nico Douga. The only arcade games that were true quarter-munchers were mostly stuff by Midway, since the credit-feeding seems to be a bit more prevalent among American arcade game players. www.nicovideo.jp/watch/sm2527094I would've mentioned Bubble Bobble and probably Ys (which had a Famicom release), which were released while the Master System was still a viable platform in Japan and America. Ninja Gaiden was a late release that came out only in Europe, while Strider came out after Sega got the license to port the arcade game on the Mega Drive (although the Master System port was developed by U.S. Gold/Tiertex) along with other CPS ports that were available on both platforms ( Forgotten Worlds, Mercs, Ghouls 'n Ghosts). My point is that whatever games were available on both platforms were mostly circumstantial based on what Sega could get and which third-party company was willing to support them. The biggest question is why Captain Silver? If Sega could've ported any DECO game to the Master System, why not something actually popular like Karnov or Bad Dudes? FC Captain Silver was Data East except for maybe the programming, which I guess was by Jorudan. I saw the credits on Mobygames, but I didn't see any shared staff members between Captain Silver and other DECO games for the NES, so I wasn't certain myself either.
|
|
|
Post by Ryu the Grappler on Jul 12, 2011 14:28:24 GMT -5
Also, a minor correction.
There's only three stages in the arcade version (not counting the second loop). The "third level" mentioned in this paragraph is really just the first portion of the rest of the third stage and not really an entire stage by itself.
Replaying the game recently, the first two stages and the beginning of the third are not that hard once you upgrade your Magic Power to its fullest level and maintain your distance from foes. For some reason, you can touch certain enemies as long as their attacks don't hit you. Its when you get to the platform jumping mountain segment when things get really cheap. The landing detection is a bit off at times and you can fall off even if you're clearly standing on the ledge of a platform.
|
|
|
Post by Shellshock on Jul 12, 2011 20:39:53 GMT -5
The only arcade games that were true quarter-munchers were mostly stuff by Midway, since the credit-feeding seems to be a bit more prevalent among American arcade game players. www.nicovideo.jp/watch/sm2527094Oh, my friend, that's not true. Let me refer you to, for example, Legendary Wings owner's manual: www.arcade-museum.com/manuals-videogames/L/legendary-wings.pdfI found out about this very same subject when writing an article about it years ago, and I was both surprised and pissed off. In short, the standard game play time for arcade users back in the 80's was considered to be around the 2 to 3 minute mark per quarter. Arcade operators were specifically encouraged to adhere to this by developers in boards' instruction manuals, by adjusting difficulty levels and other variables. But some if not most arcade developers designed their games with this principle in mind from the ground up. Sure, if you were really good at one of them, you could 1cc it. And some games were a lot more forgiving (like Golden Axe) and allowed for easier 1cc. But most of them were not, and adding quarter after quarter to beat them was what the companies that made them and arcade operators wanted from the start.
|
|
|
Post by kyouki on Jul 12, 2011 21:23:39 GMT -5
Quarter feeding is a North American (possibly also European) phenomenon, so keep that in mind when you read that manual. In that kind of environment junk like most Midway games and Dragon's Lair etc thrived.
Japanese arcades have a totally different culture, and (good) Japanese arcade games were designed with that in mind. It was a balancing act between the operator (maximize profit), the developer (make games that operators will purchase), and players (have a good time for a reasonable amount of money).
Japanese players were not dropped off at the arcade with a $5~10 roll of quarters to feed into machines, like most kids in the US. Typically they would stop by before/after school/work with a couple hundred yen to spend, and it would be stupid to waste your pocket change on a game that requires you to spend 2000 yen just to play through it, no matter how good you are. So Japanese players wanted games where as they got better they could last longer and longer on a single credit.
I'm not familiar with either Captain Silver nor Legendary Wings, so I can't say if they are goods games or not. If they can't be cleared by an expert player in a single credit, though, I suspect they are not good games.
|
|
|
Post by Ryu the Grappler on Jul 12, 2011 21:30:28 GMT -5
Shellshock, you have to keep in mind that manual was written by Capcom USA and a lot of Japanese arcade game developers were forced to make the American versions of their games harder for greater profits. That's why you get bullshit like having to insert more credits for power-ups and extra characters in Double Dragon 3 or health-draining time limit in Dark Adventure. If you compares the Japanese and Worldwide fliers with those of their American counterparts, you'll notice that the Japan and World fliers often talk about the game's features (like its controls and power-ups), whereas the American ones usually talk about how much money it can make. Just compare the Worldwide flier of Shinobi with the American one. flyers.arcade-museum.com/?page=flyer&db=videodb&id=6345&image=1Not, once do they talk about "profits". Now here's the American one. flyers.arcade-museum.com/?page=thumbs&db=videodb&id=6153The entire selling point is that the game is so good, you might need to use the box it came packaged with to store all your cash. And that's just one example. flyers.arcade-museum.com/
|
|
|
Post by justjustin on Jul 12, 2011 23:50:05 GMT -5
During my few semesters in Japan I went to various arcades on a weekly basis. They had a lot of the classics all the way up to the latest stuff. I never saw anyone continue except a few times when the player obviously made a huge blunder, but then went on to dominate whatever they were playing. So the few people who did continue knew what they were doing. Designing a cheap/poorly balanced game will only get it kicked out of a Japanese arcade-- or any good arcade. No one wants to keep wasting money if they die all the time.
|
|
|
Post by Shellshock on Jul 13, 2011 1:49:33 GMT -5
Good points there! I don't know much about arcades in other cultures other than here, but I can tell you that at least in Argentina (and maybe South America) very few players, no matter the age or how hardcore or casual they were, ever considered continuing their games after a Game Over. This most likely has to do with the economy being a lot worst than in first world countries, so growing up, anybody I have ever known and gone to the arcades with ALWAYS started from scratch after losing. It's the best bang for your buck because you get to play longer per quarter. This was true to the point that continuing a game was largely considered cheating and a waste of money, and beating it on a single quarter was the only way one could really claim to have defeated the machine.
But I don't think arcade developers of the 70's and 80's cared much about things like how fair, unique, artistic, or ground-breaking their games were. Cabinets were more like vending machines, and their manufacturing companies cared more about making money off of this new hot trend than being proud for their designs, intellectual property, or the game's balance and fairness. I really do think, different cultures aside, that the "2 to 3 minute per quarter" holds true for most arcade games of the time. Regardless of it being explicitly or implicitly enforced, or if it indeed was ever adopted by game providers and game consumers consciously or unconsciously, just think about how many games of the 70's and 80's fall into this category. If you are a casual player, this is the amount of time a quarter will last you. If you are a good player, you can stretch it to 5 or 7 minutes. If you are hardcore, like most of us, you can do 10 to 20. Or maybe even 1cc if you are truly a game master! But 1cc'ing a game back then involved some abnormal dedication and exploitation of tricks and/or glitches.
|
|