|
|
Post by edmonddantes on Aug 29, 2016 16:35:28 GMT -5
Sonic is well-rounded when he jumps or spindashes.
EDIT: Yeah unfortunately puns are the most I can do. Unfortunately "well rounded" is a criteria more objective than I have any sort of brainpower for. I'm the kind of guy whose mind tends to exaggerate either the goods or the bads.
|
|
|
|
Post by jackcaeylin on Aug 29, 2016 18:06:44 GMT -5
I think I mostly disagree with you. Some games have no 'heavy weak' parts. Some have no 'heavy strong' parts. Some have neither, they are just average. Note the distinction between just weak/strong and 'heavy' weak/strong. "Weak/strong" is when a game has many levels, and some are more fun than others. That's always happens. 'Heavy' weak/strong is when something stands out so much (whether positively or negatively) that it feels almost like a different game. Or when one aspect of a game is awesome, and another is terrible. Like a great story and dull gameplay. Or good gameplay, but ugly graphics/annoying music/story that does not make sense. Sure, there are plenty examples for the above. But there are also many games that are fairly uniform and pretty consistent. And if they are consistent in a good way, we can call them 'well rounded'. Also - what do you mean by 'genre' in your context? 'Genre' as a type of game (action/adventure/puzzle/whatever) or as an aspect of a game (art, storyline, gameplay)? If it's the former, then looking for a game well-rounded in all genres does not make sense, because a game typically belongs to one or two genres. If it's the latter, then (other than that it is perhaps not the best word to use), I'd say that you may be right that there is not a single game that is awesome in all the aspects you listed, but for some kinds of games they are can be irrelevant, or omitted entirely and the game can still be good. You gave too much thought about my short compressed and weak sentences. I am sorry if some sentences are unclearly (it is kinda late in my timezone) with weak parts and strong parts I didn't mean things like comparing dungeons designs, but rather certain mechanics and philosophy of the gamer itself, for example: How long does the game need to understand that A button means jump. Does it need 0,22 second or 0,89 seconds? God of War 3 was in that part pretty terrible and the game needed time to respond the "button answers". Now the question is: How do we know if it should be fast or not? Was it intentionally or unintentionally? As times flies and many things got mixed during videogaming, it is really impossible to say what a well rounded game means. It isn't only this jump mechanic. This can even applied to a story. Most people claim that FF VII or Trails in the Sky 2nd had the best story of videogames history. Now the question is: the organisation in Trails in the Sky 2nd had many times to wipe out the hero group (at least 7 times), but they let them always go. If we ignore that part, it is still a great game. Some people would claim this error is beyond awfulness, thus the story lost its coolness/meaning, other people would say error happens and it is still a game with great story. Nobody can tell if it is well rounded in that part or not. You have to create your own rules with the title: What does a good story means? When is it bad? When is it good? When is it well rounded? When is the story so bad that is good? How do we imply it with the term "well rounded" in that part? It can't really be compared, because even if many games are better or worse in a certain aspects it doesn't lead to a bad/good result. It always depends on the game itself and it makes it well round in that part or not, which is highly subjective. You have to create rules, it is like the term genre. It can be meant for art genre (architecture, stone, picture on paper, realistic approach, surreal etc), mechanic (art, storyline, gameplay, even the interface organisation) or systems(action/adventure/puzzle) and these parts can be intertwinded. I admit that my approach was kinda naked/nihilistic (I know not the best term) with the term well rounded. I disagree, a game can be in one genre or more than 2, which means you can only compare it, if it had the same axiom, for example, you have two SRPG's, one has a grid system, another not, thus you can't really compare if it is well rounded in the part of troop movement(because grid and non grid), but you can compare if the char design is well drawn or not, but that create the question: intended or not?, used in that way?, because of the world itself or just a psychological idea to show that if you are beautiful or not is not important. In the end you can't compare the char designs, maybe with prequels or sequels if they share the same principle. regarding your last sentence: "some aspects can be irrelevant", which is highly subjective. Some people would thing that part is important, but that is also one of the great things of gaming, a game can't have every pattern. It can be well rounded on his own, but not well rounded with games, which had a different mindset or pattern. I am sorry if some things are unclear. The english language is kinda my 4th language and some stuff sounds unfinished or not clearly, when I use this language (except if I use business english, but that is not the same) Yours sincerely Jack Caeylin |
|
|
|
Post by metalmat on Aug 29, 2016 23:38:47 GMT -5
I will be a Sega man 'til the end. Sonic 1 and Fantasy Zone 2 (the Master System version) are my picks. Yes, I prefer Sonic 1 to its sequel, even if absolutely everybody always say Sonic 2 is superior... The levels' settings are far superior. It's not for nothing that when you see a Sonic promo pic, he's always standing in front of the first level's loop-de-loops. Also, the music is better. And well, it's Sonic 1... it's pure unaltered fun. I can't really disagree with Sonic. It is easy to play, a ton of fun and has a bunch exploration. Plus the music in the Sonic games is the Bees Knees. |
|
|
|
Post by Colonel Kurtz on Aug 30, 2016 0:41:24 GMT -5
Sonic is well-rounded when he jumps or spindashes. EDIT: Yeah unfortunately puns are the most I can do. Unfortunately "well rounded" is a criteria more objective than I have any sort of brainpower for. I'm the kind of guy whose mind tends to exaggerate either the goods or the bads. Marble Madness and Super Monkey Ball are rolling good times. |
|
|
|
Post by dr_st on Aug 30, 2016 3:08:54 GMT -5
I am sorry if some things are unclear. The english language is kinda my 4th language and some stuff sounds unfinished or not clearly, when I use this language (except if I use business english, but that is not the same) I'd say that for a 4th language your English is very good.  I understand your points. However, I would not look into the question here as deep as you seem to be looking into it. Your examples are good and clear, but there are two things to consider: 1) There is inherent subjectivity in every discussion of this type "best game / worst game / most bla-bla game". 2) "Well-rounded" does not mean "perfect in every aspect", as the "nihilistic" approach would dictate. A game also cannot incorporate all possible aspects (genres). There is no such thing as a "universal game" which has everything. Therefore, in my mind, to get the characteristic "well-rounded", a game needs to: a) Have several relevant aspects (e.g., a Solitaire card game, which is very one-dimensional, will not be in my mind considered "well-rounded", no matter how good it is). b) Be "very good" in every aspect relevant to it. Which aspects are "relevant" can sometimes be argued. I think that most people would agree that "world explanation and background" is not relevant in a sports simulation, but there can be heated debates on whether storyline is relevant or not in a first person shooter. |
|
|
|
Post by jackcaeylin on Aug 30, 2016 12:59:06 GMT -5
I am sorry if some things are unclear. The english language is kinda my 4th language and some stuff sounds unfinished or not clearly, when I use this language (except if I use business english, but that is not the same) I'd say that for a 4th language your English is very good. I understand your points. However, I would not look into the question here as deep as you seem to be looking into it. Your examples are good and clear, but there are two things to consider: 1) There is inherent subjectivity in every discussion of this type "best game / worst game / most bla-bla game". 2) "Well-rounded" does not mean "perfect in every aspect", as the "nihilistic" approach would dictate. A game also cannot incorporate all possible aspects (genres). There is no such thing as a "universal game" which has everything. Therefore, in my mind, to get the characteristic "well-rounded", a game needs to: a) Have several relevant aspects (e.g., a Solitaire card game, which is very one-dimensional, will not be in my mind considered "well-rounded", no matter how good it is). b) Be "very good" in every aspect relevant to it. Which aspects are "relevant" can sometimes be argued. I think that most people would agree that "world explanation and background" is not relevant in a sports simulation, but there can be heated debates on whether storyline is relevant or not in a first person shooter. I don't like to be praised(it is kinda embarassing xD), but this time thank you 1) I completely agree with you 2) I didn't want to sound that a game has to be perfect in every aspect, but sometimes it is hard to find out, if an aspect was purposely like that, because the developers tried to express a certain value. (It would be interesting to play a game with a New Game+ directors comment about certain aspects, when you reached an area or found an item or something similar, to see the intention of the creator.) I agree there can't be an universal game. 3) [a+b]: This depends on the approach and which judgement rules you set. If you want to compare Solitaire with every genre or card game genre or with Solitaire games itself (for example Spider Solitaire), then you will find different results, but in the core I agree with your statement. Yours sincerely Jack Caeylin |
|
|
|
Post by shelverton on Aug 30, 2016 18:02:04 GMT -5
I think one series that really comes to mind here is NES Mega Man, and the game that would take the cake is probably Mega Man 3. The game looks good, sounds good, plays good, is fun, challenging and.... just really well rounded. I can't find any real flaws in it.
I personally prefer Mega Man 2, but I can definitely see that 3 is a more polished game. Mega Man 2 is rough in places but it has a... bigger heart, maybe? Or maybe it's nostalgia talking.
After Mega Man 3, the series became less well rounded simply because the "fun" part got lost a bit, at least for me. I also think Mega Man 4 is a little rough around the edges, in addition to worse music and not being a very charming game, excuse my french... It just seems a bit rushed compared to 3. By the time MM 5 and 6 had come out I had already moved on.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bumpyroad on Nov 8, 2017 12:23:18 GMT -5
The recent reviews of NFS Payback have been all over the place, but it actually made me to take a trip down memory lane, stop right at NFS Most Wanted '05 and remember how it used to roll. I think, it might just be that one more game to add it to this thread. I was gonna mention NFS: Hot Pursuit 2 & Underground, but then realized Most Wanted felt like a better and more complete package, than those before it. HP 2 had police chases, but it lacked that pseudo open-world structure, which made every track a bit more fun to drive. Underground attempted to fix that, but omitted chases altogether. Most Wanted had all of that, plus some nice challenges and objectively amusing story with blacklist jackasses and tuning on top. So called "rubber-banding" aside, the game was pretty gold, it even made me go and try the Black Edition and the 5-1-0 one.
|
|
|
|
Post by 320x240 on Nov 8, 2017 12:39:57 GMT -5
Ninja Spirit, Irems crowning achievement.
|
|
|
|
Post by Snake on Nov 8, 2017 13:36:02 GMT -5
Racing games: Gran Turismo 6. Don't like the soundtrack? Make your own music play list. Graphics, superb. Gameplay, accurate and perfect. It is a game where you definitely get your money's worth. Half the time, I don't even "play" the game. I'm just looking through cars, customizing, reading info, etc.
RPGs: Final Fantasy VI. Great plot, ensemble cast. One of the best soundtracks in the history of gaming. Vibrant, charming graphics. Reasonable length. Accessible to beginners.
Ditto for Chrono Trigger. Final Fantasy IX and Final Fantasy X. Well-rounded in gameplay, great mood, easy to get into.
Platformers: Megaman 2. Megaman X. Megaman X4. Contra. Dracula X:Rondo of Blood. Super Castlevania IV. Donkey Kong Country. I would put in Castlevania III, but the difficulty level is a bit above what the casual gamer would be willing to deal with. Megaman X4 and Rondo of Blood has just enough of a challenge to be enticing, without being punishing. In terms of overall experience, those games are complete packages.
Puzzle Games: Puzzle Fighter 2 Turbo, Puzzle Bobble 2. Super soundtracks, colorful, easily accessible, plus you can play with friends.
Fighting Games: Street Fighter Alpha 3. It's not overly complex, great roster of characters, great balance. In terms of gameplay, it's my favorite for all of Street Fighter.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bumpyroad on Nov 8, 2017 15:11:53 GMT -5
Dracula X:Rondo of Blood. Super Castlevania IV. I'm not entirely sure what, but it always seemed to me - something's off about Castlevania IV (i almost want to put it down as soon as i start it). I'd agree on Rondo of Blood tho, it's a pretty fulfilling experience. |
|
|
|
Post by Snake on Nov 8, 2017 16:17:05 GMT -5
Gasp! Say it ain't so Bumpyroad!  Aside from maybe the jumping mechanics, I can't think of a bad thing for Castlevania IV. The ability to whip in all directions might put the game on the easy side. |
|
|
|
Post by Bumpyroad on Nov 8, 2017 17:03:32 GMT -5
Gasp! Say it ain't so Bumpyroad! Aside from maybe the jumping mechanics, I can't think of a bad thing for Castlevania IV. The ability to whip in all directions might put the game on the easy side. Boring/drab visuals, 'squeaky' sound effects and huge, but so pedestrian Simon's sprite always gets in my way. It's one of the earlier SNES titles, so it's all forgivable, but it's also a bit forgettable too, imo  |
|
|
|
Post by GamerL on Nov 8, 2017 18:57:25 GMT -5
Fighting Games: Street Fighter Alpha 3. It's not overly complex, great roster of characters, great balance. In terms of gameplay, it's my favorite for all of Street Fighter. Street Fighter Alpha 3 has always been my favorite Street Fighter as well. Anyway, a good recent well rounded game would be Prey 2017, good graphics, innovative features, good music and good story. |
|
|
|
Post by Serah on Nov 11, 2017 2:39:31 GMT -5
Nier: Automata comes to mind. It's got satisfying combat, a pretty enjoyable narrative, gorgeous audiovisual presentation (emphasis on audio) and does genre mixing better than any other game I can think of.
It's not perfect, other games do each of those individual things better and the levelling up system is totally superfluous but there's really nothing major that the game does poorly. Every aspect of it is at least good and is frequently great.
|
|
