|
|
Post by Feynman on Feb 17, 2011 20:31:36 GMT -5
What's wrong with a game being "too hard" anyway? Because some people would like to be able to enjoy the experience of a certain game without being stuck on it for too long. There's a difference between "challenging" and "frustrating". Once something crosses that line, it's no longer fun. No game should ever have a single moment that isn't "fun". But some people think that getting stuck and working out how to progress optimally is essential to enjoying the experience of a game, particularly when it comes to action games. If games were never allowed to have frustrating moments that aren't "fun," if everybody just threw down the controller and said, "Welp, I tried a few times but I failed so fuck it," then an awful lot of all-time classics would be doomed to obscurity for not being "fun." For a sizable chunk of the population, those frustrating moments are fun. Demon's Souls is a huge cult hit exactly because it doesn't shy away from potentially frustrating moments. Ghouls n' Ghosts, the entire Contra series, post-Gradius shmups in general, and hell, you could even make a case for the classic Castlevania series. All of them have plenty of moments that could be considered "too hard," but that doesn't stop them from being held in high esteem by a very large group of players. Just because the game doesn't let you effortlessly clear the game on your first try as though seeing the end is an indisputable right granted simply for buying the game, that doesn't make it "too hard." Far too often, "too hard" is confused with "requires practice." Failure is part of what makes games fun. In order for winning to mean anything, failure needs to be a prominent, significant option. It's especially important in short, arcade-style action games, because the need to practice and improve to progress further and get better at the game is the only thing stopping people from credit feeding through once or twice, then never touching it again. Not everyone is going to like that kind of difficulty, and that's fine. There are tons and tons of games that aren't frustrating at all. Those kinds of games are the majority, in fact! What isn't fine is when some idiot journalist arbitrarily declares a game is "too hard" just for not adhering to the modern "progression is a right, not a privilege" philosophy. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2011 20:44:38 GMT -5
The question was posed, an answer was given. I'm not judging people for preferring either approach. For myself, I know that I have way too many games to feel good about one where I get stuck for an inordinate amount of time.
Having said that, I'm really enjoying Uprising, and have had a ton of fun with games like Espgaluda II and Mushihimesama Futari. On average, though, I'd prefer to get through my games as quickly as possible, just to clear more stuff off of my backlog.
|
|
|
|
Post by vetus on Feb 17, 2011 21:00:02 GMT -5
I played it today and boy, it's so awesome. My only complains are the annoying, pointless enemies' screams and the fact that you have two characters to choose from while the rest of them you have to pay in order to download them.
As about the the reviewers who complain about the difficulty (which is casual-friendly but without disappoint the hardcore gamers, just like Death Smiles)...give them to play the original Hard Corps in order to feel the REAL pain. Buhahahaha!
And as about the Guilty Gear/BlazBlue look it suits well on the game. After all, we're talking about a game which the original one had lots of influence from Gunstar Heroes and with more japanese-style on the visuals and no so much holywood action movie-style like the classic Contra games.
|
|
|
|
Post by Feynman on Feb 17, 2011 21:21:34 GMT -5
The question was posed, an answer was given. I'm not judging people for preferring either approach. For myself, I know that I have way too many games to feel good about one where I get stuck for an inordinate amount of time. Having said that, I'm really enjoying Uprising, and have had a ton of fun with games like Espgaluda II and Mushihimesama Futari. On average, though, I'd prefer to get through my games as quickly as possible, just to clear more stuff off of my backlog. I apologize if I came across as aggressive or confrontational... that wasn't my intent! There isn't anything wrong with not wanting to play very hard games. Like anything else, what kind of difficulty is appropriate is a largely subjective thing. However, that's why it annoys me when professional reviewers mark a game down for being hard. It's okay to mention in a review, "This game is very hard, and you can expect to spend a substantial amount of time replaying stages in order to progress." That's an informative statement. However, when a reviewer says, "This game is hard, so it sucks," and then marks the game down fr it, that isn't cool. Informed gamers and genre fans generally don't even read reviews (at least not for the purpose of purchasing decisions). Just about anybody who frequents gaming sites, keeps up with the latest news, reads forums and whatnot almost certainly already knows whether or not they're going to like a game beforehand with a very high degree of accuracy. However, for the less informed gamers, I can't help but wonder how many people get scared away from "hard" games they would otherwise love by reviews that make the game sound worse than it really is. And I could go on all day about how stupid the x/10 and other such quantitative review measurements are all crap in the first place, but that's been beaten to death and certainly doesn't need another discussion here. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2011 22:09:28 GMT -5
Glad to see I'd misunderstood! Yeah, there's definitely a time and place for difficult games. I consider Demon's Souls to be the game of the year for 2009. The difficulty completely makes that game what it is. Honestly, it's kind of puzzling to see how popular that game became, considering how easy most stuff is these days.
As for Uprising itself, I've been playing only on Arcade mode so far and have yet to beat the first stage. I've managed to beat the bosses, but somehow didn't time the final jump correctly. Even so, I'd still say this game is completely fair. It's just a matter of practice and memorization, like any good "difficult" game. Now if only I could get past those damn sliding walls in Ikaruga...
|
|
|
|
Post by justjustin on Feb 17, 2011 23:08:05 GMT -5
Anyone know how the heck you use all those special moves? Apparently Sayuri has some homing jump and palm something-or-other attack. I've tried strategically mashing buttons a few times and no luck. I definitely have them set to being on in the Rising Mode shop menu.
Also the leaderboards finally work. Last I checked some person had a score of over 100 million in Arcade Mode. I don't even understand how that's possible unless you get a 50 million bonus at the end of the game or something. Does the game loop? Apparently there's a lot to learn...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2011 23:30:19 GMT -5
I'd like to know how you're supposed to beat the game without killing 50 privates.
|
|
|
|
Post by justjustin on Feb 18, 2011 14:36:33 GMT -5
This game has a lot of extra lives. I've found 12 up through stage 6. I made a topic on gamefaqs cataloging their locations: www.gamefaqs.com/boards/997471-hard-corps-uprising/58178799Stage 2 is insane, I got the multiplier up past 30x. I'm beginning to see how people get those really high scores. |
|
|
|
Post by acidonia on Feb 18, 2011 14:47:03 GMT -5
The game beat all Stages in Uprising mode is a bit buggy. I beat the game online with a someone who could do the game and did not just contantly steal all your lives when they died It took just under 2 hours and was on our final continue by the end started with 13.
After we beat the boss I did not get the beat all Stages Achevement I think because on my Final life I missed the Jump to finish the Stage the other player did not though. Then today I just had a Quick go online with someone who was not that good beat first stage with some lives left and the achevement unlocked.
Yeah this is a great game do not know if ill ever try to ever beat it on Arcade mode though.
|
|
|
|
Post by munchy on Feb 19, 2011 2:13:29 GMT -5
Just got this game today. It's pretty awesome; the upgrades are cool and don't take away from the challenge. My main complaints are that the boss fights go on kinda long and your guy's default walking speed is sloooooow.
|
|
|
|
Post by X-pert74 on Feb 19, 2011 7:30:26 GMT -5
I just played the 360 demo, and it was pretty fun. I didn't have any issue with the controls; moving with the analog stick is fine, though the normal run really is too slow. The dash is also a little too fast for my liking though. A happy medium would have been best, but either way I enjoyed what I played of the game. I don't have the money yet, but once I can afford it I'll pick up the game ASAP
|
|
|
|
Post by munchy on Feb 21, 2011 2:47:44 GMT -5
So did anyone else notice the Castlevania easter egg in the last stage? So awesome... it seems like these guys have an obvious appreciation for Konami's old games. I'd love for Arc System Works to make an XBLA Castlevania... it'd beat the tar out of Harmony of Despair, anyway. (And hopefully they'd have the sense not to make it all robots and anime sword guys and shit.)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 8, 2011 13:02:15 GMT -5
New character out today. Anyone have a chance to try it out?
|
|
|
|
Post by justjustin on Mar 8, 2011 23:15:52 GMT -5
Wow, had no idea there was another character. I bought the extra two already and, in the end, didn't feel they were worth it. Harley is generally pointless when he plays practically like Bahamut and Krystal, and Sayuri makes the game hilariously easy until the second half of the last level where the game isn't well balanced for her. I don't need to spend a few more bucks just to mix things up.
I've had my fill of the game for now, but after having spent a good amount of time with it I can say that despite all its flaws-- broken scoring, too many extra lives, frustrating platforming sections in the last few levels, and the second half of the game being more boring than the first-- it still manages to be one of the best 2D action games in a very long time. For one, it's highly commendable that this is a NEW action game and not some "retro revival" or trip down memory lane garbage. That was Contra 4's problem, and I didn't even bother with Contra Rebirth. Secondly, it actually builds upon things that have already been done in the genre (and more specifically the Contra series) and adds more speed and complexity. Maybe not perfectly, but it was a good try. It at least encompasses the old Contra games and doesn't simplify or dumb things down. The problems with the game are not due to Uprising misinterpreting the Contra series. I've seen plenty of people writing that "this isn't Contra." It totally is, just with its own scoring problems, generally boring level design in the second half of the game, and strange habit of tossing out extra lives like crazy.
I much prefer Uprising over efforts like Contra 4. Contra 4 played it safe, didn't necessarily do anything wrong (or right), and it was an okay game. Uprising screws up more, but that's because it just has more guts and advances the 2D action genre. Overall it's way more interesting.
|
|
|
|
Post by X-pert74 on Mar 9, 2011 4:52:52 GMT -5
I think I actually prefer Contra ReBirth over Contra 4. It's kind of short, being only 5 levels long, but the gameplay in it is pretty nice, and it feels like it's at least trying to be new with the level design. Compared to Hard Corps: Uprising it doesn't seem so new, but I enjoyed it.
|
|
