People need to stop calling 3D platformers as collect a thons and just call them as Platformers really. 2D platformers require you to collect a lot of stuff and you don't see me complaining about that.
People need to stop calling 3D platformers as collect a thons and just call them as Platformers really. 2D platformers require you to collect a lot of stuff and you don't see me complaining about that.
True, especially when you consider much of the gameplay in Donkey Kong Country or Yoshi's Island, which had similar collection based gameplay on a 2D plane.
People need to stop calling 3D platformers as collect a thons and just call them as Platformers really. 2D platformers require you to collect a lot of stuff and you don't see me complaining about that.
True, especially when you consider much of the gameplay in Donkey Kong Country or Yoshi's Island, which had similar collection based gameplay on a 2D plane.
To be fair, that was a big part of my problem with Yoshi's Island. The focus on collectables hurt the pace of the game. A good Collect-a-thon is rare, because it requires a lot of naunce in placing the collectables so they're still conducive to good platforming sections while still promoting exploration. Donkey Kong Country got that perfectly, since it was a platformer first and foremost, and everything else felt like the reward for going off the beaten path. Banjo-Kazooie still felt like a rewarding platformer with most of the essentials placed in natural points of the game, while the hard stuff were usually some very good bonus stuff, like Honeycombs and Cheat-o pages.
That said, calling DKC or the original Yoshi's Island a collectathon is a Misnomer. They had a lot of things to collect, but you were never forced to get them. You could speed through the levels, and you'd still be successful based on your own skills. Collect-a-thons require certain amounts of collected items in order to proceed. Usually lots of collected items, actually. That's the problem with them, since it doesn't get more arbitrarily "game-y" than requiring X-amount of items to save the world...
People need to stop calling 3D platformers as collect a thons and just call them as Platformers really. 2D platformers require you to collect a lot of stuff and you don't see me complaining about that.
True, especially when you consider much of the gameplay in Donkey Kong Country or Yoshi's Island, which had similar collection based gameplay on a 2D plane.
To be fair, that was a big part of my problem with Yoshi's Island. The focus on collectables hurt the pace of the game. A good Collect-a-thon is rare, because it requires a lot of naunce in placing the collectables so they're still conducive to good platforming sections while still promoting exploration. Donkey Kong Country got that perfectly, since it was a platformer first and foremost, and everything else felt like the reward for going off the beaten path. Banjo-Kazooie still felt like a rewarding platformer with most of the essentials placed in natural points of the game, while the hard stuff were usually some very good bonus stuff, like Honeycombs and Cheat-o pages.
That said, calling DKC or the original Yoshi's Island a collectathon is a Misnomer. They had a lot of things to collect, but you were never forced to get them. You could speed through the levels, and you'd still be successful based on your own skills. Collect-a-thons require certain amounts of collected items in order to proceed. Usually lots of collected items, actually. That's the problem with them, since it doesn't get more arbitrarily "game-y" than requiring X-amount of items to save the world...
The problem with this is that since you rely on platforms to reach certain areas to get things, people complain about a lot of stuff that's there to get. I honestly had no issues with SM64 because of how much freedom that game gave you to explore with little to no particular platforms that are too hard to reach. Wario World has these puzzles that made players think on how to reach a platform inorder to reach the goodies rather than figuring out where the goodies are. Kirby games don't rely on platforms except in rare occasions where you would need them simply because of how easily Kirby can complete levels without them.
Still the fact that they are called collect a tons because you need to collect certain items to make progress is still stupid. What about the Sonic games in that case? The 2D games always request you to get the Chaos Emeralds in the end inorder to get the best ending.
For my unpopular opinion, my argument is how developers simply rant over at Nintendo that they aren't making powerful hardware like Sony and Microsoft and yet when things don't turn out well for them, they move over to phones and PC's....... I can understand PC's.....but phones? Like its just an underwhelming tech compared to the Wii let alone focus on where money's at.
@Artwark, yeah, I agree that they shouldn't be called collect-a-thons, but you have to understand that the problem isn't what you can collect, it's what you have to collect in the ones where they are indeed the objective. While I'm sure there are people who have complained about the amount of stuff to collect in Donkey Kong Country, they're arguments are invalid since Donkey Kong 64 exists, with twice as many things to collect and you're forced to get a large percentage of them in order to progress. That can be annoying unless they do it right, which a lot of developers missed during the supposed height of the collect-a-thon fad...
@Artwark, yeah, I agree that they shouldn't be called collect-a-thons, but you have to understand that the problem isn't what you can collect, it's what you have to collect in the ones where they are indeed the objective. While I'm sure there are people who have complained about the amount of stuff to collect in Donkey Kong Country, they're arguments are invalid since Donkey Kong 64 exists, with twice as many things to collect and you're forced to get a large percentage of them in order to progress. That can be annoying unless they do it right, which a lot of developers missed during the supposed height of the collect-a-thon fad...
I never played Donkey Kong 64 so I don't know how to argue on that aspect but I do know that the process you have to do to collect a thing isn't the fault of the term but rather the fault of the game/level designers. In Banjo Kazooie, if you want the best ending, you have to get every thing in the game inorder to do so which itself is a reward. Crash Bandicoot series has things that you need to get and most of the time, they are easy to get so its not that the forced collection isn't a chore but rather the process of getting them instead.
Triple Deluxe has these sun stones that you need to get inorder to make progress but honestly, they are not really hard to get as they can easily be collected and found with little to no challenge. So if at all challenge isn't there to get the thing, then getting it isn't fufilling either. So I guess this part can be debatable. But again, Platformers always have this process of collecting things whether its Metroidvania, Adventure, etc.
I guess then Nintendo is the only one who does it right because I never found 3D Land's Star Medals to be frustrating to get nor is Galaxy 2's Normal and Green Stars(Except that some Green Stars are ridiculous to get but very rewarding once gotten.)
Hero Mode is basically the low-heart challenges people regularly do anyways, though. What did you expect, them to make regular enemies take a zillion hits to take down? Because that's usually the alternative for an optional difficulty setting most wouldn't touch regardless. And adding health isn't difficult, it's tedious. Just ask Square-Enix, they're the masters of tedious "difficulty"...
No, I'd like them to make enemies smarter. Either more aggressive or more defensive. That's what an actual difficulty setting is supposed to do.
Except that wouldn't work for a lot of 3D Zelda games unless you design the whole game around them. Those games treat enemies as part of the puzzle aspect, and making enemies more complicated would basically mean that you're making more complicated puzzles. The dungeon layout has to be accomodating as well. Difficulty settings in general are a bad idea for a lot of games, and there's a reason Zelda went so long without them. Hero mode is basically the best that they could do. I'll agree that it's not great, and personally I would've preferred it if they didn't bother, and instead put those resources to use adding more worthwhile optional content (a hard dungeon you don't have to complete but provides you with an upgraded version of a weapon, for instance), but considering the popularity of self-limiting challenges and speedruns of Zelda games (seriously, I can't believe how many people did stuff like that even before streaming was a thing), I'm sure it made sense to Nintendo at least...
@CanisWolfred
Well I've been on a semi-hiatus for a while. Time to get back to this.
It depends on the enemy. Armos and Peahats are definitely part of the dungeon's puzzle/obstacle structure. But Stalfos, Bokoblins, Iron Knuckles, etc are not. Most dungeons are made up of several rooms with plenty of open space and only a few of these enemies designed solely for fighting. Making Bokoblins or Stalfos attack more aggressively will only make the combat more challenging to the player.
What people fail to consider about 'collectathons' is that in a lot of cases, the collectable objects are really just the 3D equivalent of the 2D platformer flag pole or exit gate.
To much of a degree, beating the likes of Mario 64 or Banjo Kazooie is in essence beating a certain number of 'levels' in the traditional sense, not collecting objects. The Stars or Jiggies are arguably closer to the seven mystical objects you collect in an RPG.
That said, are there elements that are annoying? Yes. But even those are arguably not that far from a traditional platformer in setup. Take the Blue Coins in Mario Sunshine. Annoying, but practically speaking, they're basically the 3D equivalent of the Dragon Coins or Red Coins from older Mario platfomers. Just that you save them the minute you collect them rather than after beating the level.
Actually, I'd say Sony had a ton of good 3D platformers on the PS2, especially if you include multiplatform stuff like Prince of Persia: Sands of Time. Then there's Ratchet & Clank, Jak & Daxter, Sly Cooper (had stealth elements, but the focus was mostly still on the platforming). In fact, I'd say most of Nintendo's outing that gen were mid-tier compared to those. Plus the Xbox had the second Blinx game, which was pretty good, IIRC.
Actually, I'd say Sony had a ton of good 3D platformers on the PS2, especially if you include multiplatform stuff like Prince of Persia: Sands of Time. Then there's Ratchet & Clank, Jak & Daxter, Sly Cooper (had stealth elements, but the focus was mostly still on the platforming). In fact, I'd say most of Nintendo's outing that gen were mid-tier compared to those.
I'm not sure Nintendo released more than like 2 or 3 platformers on the GCN. Which is...weird in retrospect.
I don't get why gamers are complaining about Capcom's on disc DLC. If it isn't forced down on your throat or if its something that's not needed to beat the game, then I don't see it being bad. If anything, having on disc will be faster to download.
I don't get why gamers are complaining about Capcom's on disc DLC. If it isn't forced down on your throat or if its something that's not needed to beat the game, then I don't see it being bad. If anything, having on disc will be faster to download.
It's on the disc, it should be content that's part of the game you paid for. Especially in the case of SFxT where some of my favorite characters are in that DLC. You didn't even get it with the special edition.
I don't get why gamers are complaining about Capcom's on disc DLC. If it isn't forced down on your throat or if its something that's not needed to beat the game, then I don't see it being bad. If anything, having on disc will be faster to download.
It's on the disc, it should be content that's part of the game you paid for. Especially in the case of SFxT where some of my favorite characters are in that DLC. You didn't even get it with the special edition.
Same thing can be said about Awakening. Its on the cart/digital and yet the content is optional even if there are certain skills and characters that are exclusive to it.
If a game is good in the first place, it doesn't need to be remade. Developers as a whole have been focusing too much on remakes, and I find it rather ridiculous. Why does everything have to be in HD? When Ultra HD becomes the new standard, are we just going to remake everything all over again? Developers need to accept that they did the best they could with the tech they had at the time and leave it the heck alone.
I'd love to see the focus switch from remaking everything to making the older libraries of games available digitally, standard definition and all. Nintendo started the push with VC, now let's see Sony make PS2 Classics available on PSN and Microsoft do the same with Xbox 2001 titles on XBLA.
I think part of the reason why remakes are there is that the developers want to fix their mistakes in the past and make it accessible for newcomers who tried playing the old games but just couldn't. After all, devs need to make money now and not something that they make in the past and remakes is one of the quickest ways to make more money out of it. Prime Trilogy exists for those who want the complete series in one and at the same time, made it more accessible.
If a game is good in the first place, it doesn't need to be remade. Developers as a whole have been focusing too much on remakes, and I find it rather ridiculous. Why does everything have to be in HD? When Ultra HD becomes the new standard, are we just going to remake everything all over again? Developers need to accept that they did the best they could with the tech they had at the time and leave it the heck alone.
I'd love to see the focus switch from remaking everything to making the older libraries of games available digitally, standard definition and all. Nintendo started the push with VC, now let's see Sony make PS2 Classics available on PSN and Microsoft do the same with Xbox 2001 titles on XBLA.
Becuaes sometimess it can be hard to go back to a game when the graphics have aged, especially when you remember them being pretty good and have upgraded them in your head. It nice to play some of your old favorites with upgraded graphics.
Becuaes sometimess it can be hard to go back to a game when the graphics have aged, especially when you remember them being and have upgraded them in your head. It nice to play some of your old favorites with upgraded graphics.
Fair enough, but I revisit old games all the time and I personally never have that problem. The way I see it, the graphics were good enough for me the first time. Why can't they be now?
However, I totally understand the "upgrading it in your head" thing and I'm guilty of doing that myself, mostly to PS1 games. I was watching videos of the original Spyro trilogy the other day, and the character models were way less detailed than I remember!
As much as I love the N64, I can barely stand to play any of the games on it anymore. They are just so muddy and blurry looking. I can play them on my PC in HD and it's great, but on original hardware (or VC) I can't be bothered.
Forums
Topic: Unpopular Gaming Opinions
Posts 2,181 to 2,200 of 12,984
Please login or sign up to reply to this topic