Forums

Topic: Making games challenging again...

Posts 61 to 80 of 152

Bankai

And wait, board games don't use dice? I'll admit I don't play many board games, but I'm pretty sure luck and randomness are still pretty prominent, regardless of if dice are used or not.

Nope. You haven't played many board games. Try anything from the "Eurogame" genre of board games. Which is the stuff that is selling these days. Very little randomness, if any, and almost no luck involved in who wins.

Bankai

Viewtiful_Joe wrote:

Games with poor game design are bad games. Bad games don't get sequels mi amigo.

To answer your question here it is:

Mega Man does not have poor game design. The layouts are very well thought out. You are always introduced to the enemies before hand resulting in a difficult learning curve for you to figure out. Trial and error for many. Like what egoraptor was saying the enemy placement is perfectly placed so you won't get hit by enemies from nowhere.

Take Mega Man 9's Galaxy Man's level. The first floor you will realize that the UFOs are steadily coming for you in an up-and-down motion. Place so perfectly that you can avoid them without hesitation. Which is giving you the amount of time to take into account their movements to decide the best COA. (A lot of us here have played MM9 and MM10. So just go play it and realize on your own how great the levels are designed.)

Going all the way back to Mega Man 2.
[youtube:99xFEm-4I1I]

At 0:07 the big head appears from nowhere. The second it appears you are introduced to drills coming from each end before you actually reach it. Along with that are the little guys coming from the sides of it are also introduced in the same way. Up until 1:01 nothing is cheap. 1:15 you are up against Air Man minions that blow you away. Placed perfectly for you to blast them away immediately as shown. And there you go.

Mega Man 6.
[youtube:EL-i-irRoG0]

Witness up until 1:00 every enemy is placed the way egoraptor and I have been saying. They are placed perfectly so you can take them out regardless.

What am i doing? Watching this makes me feel like so powerful. I just gave you two random Robot Masters to watch and explained a third as proof. These three examples are exact proof as how Mega Man is flawless in many ways. One being level design. Bazinga.

Also visit this man's Youtube channel. He inadvertantly shows you how awesome Mega Man is in every way including the difficulty.

There we go. Wasn't so hard now, was it? I can respect your point of view now. I don't necessarily agree with it, since requiring pixel-perfect skills is still something I would argue is cheap, but now I can agree to disagree.

Chrono_Cross

It wasn't hard at all. The hard part was trying to comprehend the fact you had no idea where I was coming from. Hmmm. Also it's not necessarily a point of view. When comparing platformer's layouts to Mega Man, Mega Man is superior.

Now answer my question Polka dot. Why does Mega Man have poor level design? (It's because you're bad it, right?)

Edited on by theblackdragon

Just for you.
"I'm just a musical prostitute, my dear." - Freddie Mercury

Slapshot

From a game design standpoint, Mega Man is absolutely genius. It took the limitations of the NES, worked around them and created levels that evolved the gameplay through a subtle 'clue' system that gives you hints as to how the next section needs to be played to progress further into the the level. It also offers some of the tightest controls known to gaming. Mega Man is, and always will be, a staple series for the gaming industry - even if it's becomes strictly a retro title. I'll have my children playing the series ten years from now, just so they can experience a pure 2D platformer.

@Viewtiful_Joe You know, egoraptor is going to be a contestant on the third season of the PSN reality show: The Tester?

3DS FC: 4382-2029-8015
All my News and Reviews in One convenient place!

My Nintendo: Slapshot82 | Nintendo Network ID: Slapshot82 | Twitter:

Bankai

If Mega Man has bad level design, then you're also saying the same thing about NInja Gaiden, Contra, Super Mario Bros ect ect. What makes them that much different in this so called cheap & random bs?

I struggle to think of a single NES game that has good level design. I really, really struggle to. SMB3 perhaps, but even then, those later levels were just ridiculous.

And before someone goes "oh you must just hate retro," I don't, but any entertainment medium in its early days has some massive flaws that later were removed because they don't work. Before Citizen Kane films looked nothing like modern films, and indeed, Citizen Kane isn't important because it was a good film - it's important because it introduced the narrative structure that films to this day follow religiously. Before then, narrative in film was a raw and rough thing, at best.

And literature. Oh, literature. Read the really early novels, such as Moll Flanders, and try and tell me that they weren't enormously flawed things that successive generations of writers have fixed.

Exactly the same with video games. Level design is a very core part of the video game narrative, and in the early days it was universally flawed. This doesn't mean those games are bad - because they're still fun, just like The Cabinet of Caligari (a pre-Citizen Kane film) and Moll Flanders are still a good, and important film/ book to watch/ read and study - but there's a reason that, with the exception of tiny budget throwback titles, we've largely done away with them.

Don't hate the game because you're skills aren't up to speed or you're not willing to put up with a bit of trial and error.

That's as silly as me telling someone not to realise Moll Flanders is a flawed novel because their reading isn't up to scratch.

Bankai

Why does Mega Man have poor level design? (It's because you're bad it, right?)

Pixel perfect jumps. They're as utterly dumb as a board game that requires you to roll a six to win. Sure, eventually you'll roll that six, but it's a bloody frustrating time in the process.

Chrono_Cross

PolkaDotChocobo wrote:

Why does Mega Man have poor level design? (It's because you're bad it, right?)

Pixel perfect jumps. They're as utterly dumb as a board game that requires you to roll a six to win. Sure, eventually you'll roll that six, but it's a bloody frustrating time in the process.

That's it? An exaggeration that doesn't explain anything to why the game designs bad. The last thing that is wrong with Mega Man is the jumping.

You can do better mi amigo. Come on now.

@Slapshot
Yeah I saw that months ago about him getting into it. I never really heard anything about that stuff though. I hope he wins. egoraptor is one of the funniest people on the internet. He deserves it! By the way, what's that competition like? Do they play competitive video games or what?

Just for you.
"I'm just a musical prostitute, my dear." - Freddie Mercury

Bankai

That's it? An exaggeration that doesn't explain anything to why the game designs bad. The last thing that is wrong with Mega Man is the jumping.

Relying on memorization is not skill. That's rote learning. Rote learning is be definition the very opposite to skill.

Edited on by theblackdragon

Kaeobais

PolkaDotChocobo wrote:

And wait, board games don't use dice? I'll admit I don't play many board games, but I'm pretty sure luck and randomness are still pretty prominent, regardless of if dice are used or not.

Nope. You haven't played many board games. Try anything from the "Eurogame" genre of board games. Which is the stuff that is selling these days. Very little randomness, if any, and almost no luck involved in who wins.

Fair enough, but to say randomness doesn't fly is bogus, considering Clue, Monopoly, and Yahtzee are still among the most popular board games of all time.

Also, no need to get insulting.

The best strategy in the game: go up stairs and pause balls.

Bankai

Shadx wrote:

PolkaDotChocobo wrote:

And wait, board games don't use dice? I'll admit I don't play many board games, but I'm pretty sure luck and randomness are still pretty prominent, regardless of if dice are used or not.

Nope. You haven't played many board games. Try anything from the "Eurogame" genre of board games. Which is the stuff that is selling these days. Very little randomness, if any, and almost no luck involved in who wins.

Fair enough, but to say randomness doesn't fly is bogus, considering Clue, Monopoly, and Yahtzee are still among the most popular board games of all time.

Also, no need to get insulting.

Have a look back. I wasn't the one that started the insults.

Clue, Yahtzee and Monopoly are popular board games still for a variety of reasons: They've got strong brands, they've well marketed, and they're games that everyone already knows how to play. You can pull Monopoly out at a party, and no one needs to learn the rules. None of that contradicts the statement that "random dice rolls are broken game design." I've also got one of the world's most important game developers to back me up on that: have a chat to Reiner Knizia.

Have a look over at Board Game Geek and see what games the actual board game people are playing.

Edited on by theblackdragon

Chrono_Cross

PolkaDotChocobo wrote:

Relying on memorization is not skill. That's wrote learning. Wrote learning is be definition the very opposite to skill.

Actually it takes skill to overcome those obstacles. To memorize and explore every hidden secret and to use those secrets to your advantage. To know the boss's weaknesses. To know where the enemies are and how to work around them. It takes absolute skill. Especially if you can do that with multiple games. (Like me.)

Oh wait Chocoboy can't do it so it doesn't take skill. But Demon's Souls takes skill because he can do it. Speaking of which is a cheap game and at best has terrible enemy placement over any Mega Man game.

And yet you only have one miniscule reason to hate on Mega Man. Shame.

Just for you.
"I'm just a musical prostitute, my dear." - Freddie Mercury

Kaeobais

PolkaDotChocobo wrote:

Shadx wrote:

PolkaDotChocobo wrote:

And wait, board games don't use dice? I'll admit I don't play many board games, but I'm pretty sure luck and randomness are still pretty prominent, regardless of if dice are used or not.

Nope. You haven't played many board games. Try anything from the "Eurogame" genre of board games. Which is the stuff that is selling these days. Very little randomness, if any, and almost no luck involved in who wins.

Fair enough, but to say randomness doesn't fly is bogus, considering Clue, Monopoly, and Yahtzee are still among the most popular board games of all time.

Also, no need to get insulting.

Have a look back. I wasn't the one that started the insults.

Clue, Yahtzee and Monopoly are popular board games still for a variety of reasons: They've got strong brands, they've well marketed, and they're games that everyone already knows how to play. You can pull Monopoly out at a party, and no one needs to learn the rules. None of that contradicts the statement that "random dice rolls are broken game design." I've also got one of the world's most important game developers to back me up on that: have a chat to Reiner Knizia.

Have a look over at Board Game Geek and see what games the actual board game people are playing.

I wasn't referring to just you. Everyone needs to chill a bit.

And I'm sure the "board game people" like Monopoly and Clue as well. Just because randomness subtracts or even removes skill, doesn't mean it makes it a bad game. Sure you might not like it yourself, but I think it's quite unfair of you to say that any game that uses any form of randomness is badly designed. In some cases, randomness can make something better. Just look at Minecraft.

Also, I second that memorization does take some amount of skill. Memorization comes from practice, and practice makes perfect, right? You wouldn't say a musician is bad at what he does if he played songs by memory, would you?

Edited on by theblackdragon

The best strategy in the game: go up stairs and pause balls.

Bankai

Just because randomness subtracts or even removes skill, doesn't mean it makes it a bad game.

That's exactly what I've been saying from the start! Why can't people actually read what I post before reacting to it?

Sure you might not like it yourself,

Who said I don't like Monopoly? I like Monopoly a lot.

I really, really don't understand why people have this black and white binary thing going on: Either it's perfect, or it must therefore suck? Bad game design elements are in Monopoly. They're in Mega Man. They're in Final Fantasy. I love Final Fantasy, I love Monopoly, I like Mega Man.

And yet you only have one miniscule reason to hate on Mega Man. Shame.

Here's an idea. Don't take a criticism about a game you like personally for a change. I know you like to overreact whenever anyone dares to criticise something you like, but believe it or not, I'm not ruining your life here.

Now, with that more positive frame of mind, try reading what I've written again. I didn't hate on Mega Man at all.

Edited on by Bankai

CanisWolfred

WaveBoy wrote:

PolkaDotChocobo wrote:

If Mega Man has bad level design, then you're also saying the same thing about NInja Gaiden, Contra, Super Mario Bros ect ect. What makes them that much different in this so called cheap & random bs?

I struggle to think of a single NES game that has good level design. I really, really struggle to. SMB3 perhaps, but even then, those later levels were just ridiculous.

For F*** sakes.
Mega Man 1-6, 9 & 10, Contra, Ninja Gaiden 1-3, Castlevania III, Super Mario Bros 2 & 3, DuckTales just to name a few.

You use 5 of the cheapest fun games in history to back up your point. You're right, this is getting hilarious.

Edited on by CanisWolfred

I am the Wolf...Red
Backloggery | DeviantArt
Wolfrun?

theblackdragon

we can have this conversation without the insults. all of you need to chill out, thank you.

BEST THREAD EVER
future of NL >:3
[16:43] James: I should learn these site rules more clearly
[16:44] LztheBlehBird: James doesn't know the rules? For shame!!!

3DS Friend Code: 3136-6802-7042 | Nintendo Network ID: gentlemen_cat | Twitter:

Chrono_Cross

PolkaDotChocobo wrote:

I've yet to see a single convincing argument that Mega Man has good game design.

Implies you think it's bad. Game design wise.

But if you're going to hate on it please share more reasons. I'm not mad in anyway. More curious. Besides I don't get mad all the time when people don't like what I like. The only times I ever get mad or whatever, is when people mindlessly hate CoD or do the thing you're doing.

If you're going to state your opinion at least back it up a little. Otherwise I'm beginning to think you have no idea whats going on here.

Just for you.
"I'm just a musical prostitute, my dear." - Freddie Mercury

Kaeobais

To be fair, you also never said anything about liking Mega Man (at least that I noticed), and saying it has bad game design does make one think you dislike it.

As for the monopoly thing, I didn't actually mean YOU don't like it, I used the word "you" as a generalization, as in "some people might not like it".

But yes, when an argument on the internet gets as far as this, there's no convincing one side or the other, so we might as well move on.

The best strategy in the game: go up stairs and pause balls.

Chrono_Cross

True. This isn't really going anywhere. I proved my point.

Just for you.
"I'm just a musical prostitute, my dear." - Freddie Mercury

Gamesake

LordTendoboy wrote:

But without the risk & reward gameplay, what's the point of beating a game if you don't feel victorious?

There is no point to beating a video game. How much fun you have playing it is what matters. For a lot of people playing the same level over and over again until they memorize it isn't fun, it's frustrating.

LordTendoboy wrote:

challenge is what's missing in today's games.

I don't think it's missing. I think Team Ninja just took it all and put it into Ninja Gaiden.
Untitled

...in my pants.

This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.