|
|
Post by toei on Jun 17, 2017 12:08:33 GMT -5
So, what's the verdict on that one? Been meaning to give this one a shot, but the silence has me kinda skeptical. Would I be better off picking up River City Ransom Underground instead? Was gonna play with a buddy who's only okay-ish at the genre but enjoys it quite a bit, in case one of the two has super brutal difficulty. The steam reviews are mixed-to-bad, and pretty much everything I've heard makes it sound like a travesty. Incredibly easy, terrible enemy AI, ugly mismatched graphics (you can see that for yourself in the trailer, the background are hideous)... I love Double Dragon and I was ready to pay for it for a friend to buy just to play it at his house, but it just looks so crap. Apparently River City Underground is not that great, either. |
|
|
|
Post by 8 Bit Dreams on Jun 17, 2017 12:19:53 GMT -5
So, what's the verdict on that one? Been meaning to give this one a shot, but the silence has me kinda skeptical. Would I be better off picking up River City Ransom Underground instead? Was gonna play with a buddy who's only okay-ish at the genre but enjoys it quite a bit, in case one of the two has super brutal difficulty. I think you might be better off with RCRU as the game has much more depth than DDIV, you'd probably get more bang for your buck, I heard that RCRU is a bit grindy though but I'm not sure if it be less with two players. DDIV Seems pretty low budget and its NES aesthetics are pretty inconsistent in a bad way. |
|
|
|
Post by alphex on Jun 17, 2017 16:24:07 GMT -5
I love Double Dragon and I was ready to pay for it for a friend to buy just to play it at his house, but it just looks so crap. Exactly the situation I'm in, then. RCRU has a considerably higher Steam and Metacritic score, so I guess it's gonna be that one then. |
|
|
|
Post by spanky on Sept 10, 2017 10:27:47 GMT -5
So this popped up on the Switch shop. Is it worth 7 bucks? I'm a pretty big fan of the series, including Neon.
|
|
|
|
Post by Magma MK-II on Sept 10, 2017 10:36:51 GMT -5
It looks and plays much like the NES version of Double Dragon II.
|
|
|
|
Post by toei on Sept 10, 2017 12:37:54 GMT -5
It looks and plays much like a bad romhack of the NES version of Double Dragon II. Fixed. |
|
|
|
Post by Kokoro on Sept 10, 2017 15:48:15 GMT -5
They should have just done a sequel to Double Dragon Neon instead. I think the main problem with Double Dragon IV is that it really shows just how much the NES games have aged. Don't get me wrong, they are nice little beat 'em up games considering how old they are, but after the release of Neon, going back the 8-bit style just feels weird. If they were to make the graphics 8-bit, at least have the gameplay more closely resemble that of Neon.
I have not played Double Dragon IV yet, but based on what I heard about the game, and my experience with the originals, it seems to be the case.
|
|
|
|
Post by spanky on Sept 11, 2017 20:08:27 GMT -5
OK, I picked this up out of curiosity, hell it was only 7 bucks.
It's...kinda weird. The 8-bit aesthetic doesn't bother me at all, I actually like that stuff. Still, it suffers from that problem a lot of "retreaux" games have, where some of the graphics are just a little too nice to be 8-bit and they clash. It's mainly in the backgrounds. The sprites are fine though. And those cutscenes are ugly as sin.
Oh and the music sucks. Aren't Arc System Works games supposed to have great music?
Generally, I don't mind how it plays. I've always seen the DD games as a slower, more defensive beat em up. In Final Fight, you can blow through hordes of enemies. DD forces you to play more slowly and try to take on enemies one at a time. It starts off easy, but in the second half of the game, enemies swarm you and it's tough to get away from them. Even more annoying if you have no way to manually duck, so you'll get clobbered by projectiles all the time. It's even worse when you're on a 2D plane and can't even move out of the way.
I sort of appreciate the old school design approach to the game. No difficulty settings, no shops, no experience levels. The game gives you all the tools you need at the beginning of the game and you've got the rest of the game to make that shit work. Still not sure how I really feel about it. I think I need to beat it before I can give it a final opinion. It definitely needed some more time in development to smooth out the rough edges.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 12, 2017 12:33:44 GMT -5
It looks and plays much like a bad romhack of the NES version of Double Dragon II. Fixed. Yeah pretty much- there just isn't enough new content. Even Double Dragon 3 had more going on. Sure you could argue playing the enemies adds more content but that feels hilariously undeveloped (most have no run animation ffs) and the majority of the game relies on cheap AI exploits to get by... |
|
|
|
Post by toei on Sept 14, 2017 13:07:00 GMT -5
They should have just done a sequel to Double Dragon Neon instead. I think the main problem with Double Dragon IV is that it really shows just how much the NES games have aged. Don't get me wrong, they are nice little beat 'em up games considering how old they are, but after the release of Neon, going back the 8-bit style just feels weird. If they were to make the graphics 8-bit, at least have the gameplay more closely resemble that of Neon. I have not played Double Dragon IV yet, but based on what I heard about the game, and my experience with the originals, it seems to be the case. It's really a step back from the original series, since the SNES game, despite the flaws resulting from its rushed development (the low framerate, mostly), was more advanced. Instead of legitimately pursuing the series, hey went for that '80s nostalgia thing that's (still) so popular, and to make it worse, they did it wrong - awful enemy AI, no legit challenge, horrible background graphics that clash with the sprites. |
|
|
|
Post by alphex on Sept 14, 2017 13:49:05 GMT -5
I'm more surprised that this low-effort cash-in was done after ArcSys aquired the license. I thought they had people who know what they're doing at hand, and it's not like it costs more to spend the development time actually designing a good game.
|
|
|
|
Post by 1983parrothead on Sept 15, 2017 1:58:29 GMT -5
Seems like the Double Dragon series turned out to be lacking as much effort added to them as the massive Kunio-kun franchise.
Technos Japan and of course their country love anything Australian like Mad Max films, as well as Bruce Lee, although some say Japan and China have moderately bad friendship to each other, but not everyone in both regions. That's a possible reason why some American gamers said "The Lee Bros. look like Kenshiro."
As for gameplay, body movements in Karate Champ and Double Dragon arcades resemble each other.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kokoro on Sept 16, 2017 1:59:06 GMT -5
They should have just done a sequel to Double Dragon Neon instead. I think the main problem with Double Dragon IV is that it really shows just how much the NES games have aged. Don't get me wrong, they are nice little beat 'em up games considering how old they are, but after the release of Neon, going back the 8-bit style just feels weird. If they were to make the graphics 8-bit, at least have the gameplay more closely resemble that of Neon. I have not played Double Dragon IV yet, but based on what I heard about the game, and my experience with the originals, it seems to be the case. It's really a step back from the original series, since the SNES game, despite the flaws resulting from its rushed development (the low framerate, mostly), was more advanced. Instead of legitimately pursuing the series, hey went for that '80s nostalgia thing that's (still) so popular, and to make it worse, they did it wrong - awful enemy AI, no legit challenge, horrible background graphics that clash with the sprites. Basically, the enemies are too cheap or something? |
|
|
|
Post by toei on Sept 16, 2017 14:53:50 GMT -5
It's really a step back from the original series, since the SNES game, despite the flaws resulting from its rushed development (the low framerate, mostly), was more advanced. Instead of legitimately pursuing the series, hey went for that '80s nostalgia thing that's (still) so popular, and to make it worse, they did it wrong - awful enemy AI, no legit challenge, horrible background graphics that clash with the sprites. Basically, the enemies are too cheap or something? Not active/aggressive enough. |
|
|
|
Post by Bumpyroad on Nov 14, 2017 16:13:00 GMT -5
Just seen someone calling Double Dragon Neon a "wink-at-the-camera ironic hipster farce" in defense of Double Dragon IV. Looks like it's in danger of losing its chair by the DD table. How hilariously bad can it get? I assumed Double Dragon II: Wander of the Dragons always holds this sort of 'privilege' nowdays  . |
|
.