The following thread is brought to you by: A passionate retrophile
This thread will be dedicated to what I personally consider to be one of the most hated Nintendo 16-bit games of all time (next to Drakkhen, Lillehammer '94, Bubsy ..... 1 (no one likes 2 in the slightest, not even me), et al). Now, before anyone says anything, I'd like to point out that no, this game is not perfect by a longshot; in fact, I hesitate to say that it's great. But honestly, I don't think this game is that bad, and I think there's more good to it than people give it credit for.
Okay, so the problems first. First of all, the retconned plot; in the first game it was Satan/Tanzra who cast God/Master in a deep slumber in a big battle long ago, therefore having to put up with the former's forces once he wakes up. In ActRaiser 2, Satan/Tanzra led a coup against God/Master, and so the latter defeated the former, but despite that Satan/Tanzra's forces have vowed vengeance wreaking havoc in the world. So really, the outcome's the same no matter what happens; and how does this fit in the ActRaiser continuity? It doesn't. Another setback was the fact that it eviscerated town simulations in favor of complete action, which angered followers of the original (and micromanagement fans). There's the difficulty too, but more on that later. The final problem was that it's not an ActRaiser game; the only things connected were the main protagonist and antagonist, the Heaven/Sky Palace and Hell/Death Heim, and the title (which doomed this game from the start). Ignore the captions, these screenshots were captured a long time ago by me
So given that there were these offsets (not to mention Yuzo Koshiro's less than stellar score considering his track record), what is there to like about this game? Well, for starters, it looks pretty. After Actraiser/ActRaiser and SoulBlader/SoulBlazer, Quintet upped their game (figuratively speaking) with gorgeously detailed and in-depth visuals. Examples are the golden castle of Stormrook where it begins outside with the moon above a blue forest backdrop, and then once you get inside there is gold sparkling everywhere even as you travel (the dragon boss is even covered with gold, even when there's gold all around him). Another one is Tortoise Isl. where it's all submerged underwater (kind of like Atlantis) and you get to see the depths of the ocean the farther you travail; the Demon's Cave adorned with spiderwebs lingering in the foreground also looks good with the ants whose heads were inspired by the late H.R. Giger's xenomorphs. Ants with Alien-like xenomorph heads, how can anyone not like that? That is just the coolest thing ever! But anyway, the bosses themselves look good as well (the aforementioned gold dragon, the flame boss in the volcanic area, even Satan/Tanzra himself). I thought the sword controls were implemented better (no more small delay before every swing, you can lunge your sword to your heart's desire) and were given more variety. The magic was given more range depending on how you were positioned and the fact that God/Master got wings to fly with was neat too but could be a detriment to your fall if not used wisely (don't want to slide upon landing on the ground, even on small platforms? Don't worry, you just need to hold down long enough so you won't accidentally fall off the edge). There is the difficulty that I should talk about. I don't know if anyone's noticed, but despite the dark and serious theme ActRaiser 2 could be a bit tonally incoherent; God/Master, the areas, and the major bosses look really serious and detailed while the minor enemies and mid-bosses just don't mesh. I mean look at this Picasso ghost for instance: that's not intimidating, that's just silly! Also, unnecessary Streets of Rage-like starburst effects when the sword makes contact tend to take you out of the game at times too
One of the major sources of hatred for this game lied in the way that it challenged gamers. Now I think I get where Quintet was trying to go with this, but most gamers thought that it was frustratingly hard and some claim that it's, for lack of a better word, impossible. Part of the fault may lie in the area design, but think about it for a second. You're a heavenly deity sent down to Earth to help those that believe in you and stop any major threat like monsters, and you know that it's not going to be a cakewalk. That's precisely the point and part of what makes this game for me personally: playing the role of God is not an easy one (which Quintet captured so perfectly that it's a little sad that it could not have been implemented in a better game). You will face a lot of challenges on your way, you will have to get back up no matter how many times you get knocked down, and you will succeed if you keep trying. Perseverance, patience, observance, and steady pacing (not rushing) are key; yes it can get a bit frustrating at times, but if you have a strong will then anything is possible. That's not to say that it isn't hard (it is; especially on the hardest difficulty), but nowhere near as impossible as its often clamored to be. And once you get to the end, once you manage to finish, if you're willing, the weight gets lifted on your shoulders and you'll feel rewarded, making the trek all worth it (especially on Hard mode, there is a beautiful-looking scene in the end). If there's ever an ActRaiser 3, which I highly doubt at this point, I wouldn't be surprised if a centaur midboss happened to be in it
There is a high-score aspect, but it is completely pointless (you only enter your name after you beat the game, and you'll always end up at the top). So really, that's just a moot point. I liked how ActRaiser 2 took risks with its darker theme and the way that it presented itself (including the representations of the deadly sins), and here's a positive you'll rarely hear about: passwords, which in my opinion was a better choice of continuing your progress than through that one (emphasis on "one") save file in the first title. With the original game if there were people to wanted to play it, an individual would have to wait until another individual finished the game in order to play it themselves. And really, who wants to wait? It may have been an early Nintendo 16-bit title, but considering that Super Mario World had three save files, Pilotwings had a password system, and anyone could play F-Zero at any time, Quintet just up and did not handle this right by comparison. ActRaiser 2, on the other hand, does not require one to finish the game in order for the other to play it (and with passwords there is an advantage, as regardless of anyone's progress you could always keep your own). The harder the difficulty the more silly-looking enemies and awesome-looking bosses to wage battle on
I do have my own quibbles with this game, and I do have caveats about ActRaiser 2, but I personally like it for what it is: an action game. Not sequel, because as a sequel to the original it's not really good, but as a game on its own I think it's got a lot going for it. Gamers tend to forget that the first game wasn't perfect either (whether it be the pure and challenging Japanese original or the localized edition with significantly dumbed down difficulty) and as overexposed as I personally find Actraiser/ActRaiser to be (if not for the fact that it gets more coverage, acclaim, and actual rereleases while the other Quintet games remain SFC/SNES-exclusive and are left behind I wouldn't feel this way; you'd think that demand would be equally high for all these games but oh no, "let's not do the sensible thing and give current-gen gamers a chance to experience these wonderful games; just give them ActRaiser and nothing else, because we're sorely under the impression that that's the only Quintet title worth giving a damn about!"; whoever's got the license, they don't care anymore (think back to '07), they just don't), I kind of understand why it's got the following that it's got. It was a bit of a new experience at the time, and even though the platforming segments weren't that special, what made the game in the end was the micromanaging town simulation segments (and the take on the God-like system was something that was rarely seen and experienced before) which left a stronger impact despite its much lighter tone and the package's brevity (also, Koshiro's soundtrack in the first was memorable).
ActRaiser 2, I feel, was a victim of expectation. It's sort of like the first two Superman movies with Christopher Reeve, and what a huge impact it's had on movie-watchers and comic book fans over the years considering their high size and scope; when Superman III came people were expecting a hit, only to find that it wasn't really on par with its two predecessors. But if you take into account the impact Superman and Superman II had on audiences, regardless of whether the third movie would've been good or not, it was going to be disappointing no matter what because the first two movies were really good. Same with the game; the first Actraiser/ActRaiser was a huge hit and scored well with the public and the critics (even though it's the prima donna of Quintet games, and I should get over this... I'm the only one that I feel has noticed this, that's why I sound upset about this) and no matter how good or bad ActRaiser 2 was going to be, it would've disappointed no matter what because the impact the first game left was insurmountable by comparison. You can make a more challenging ActRaiser, and you can push the boundaries, explore something new, and even take risks, but take away the element that made the original what it was and you're left with an ActRaiser in name but not in soul. It's not as good as the original (well, the Japanese Actraiser at least) but I like to play ActRaiser 2 once in awhile, and I can appreciate its good qualities because it's obvious that Quintet put a lot of effort in this one just like they did the rest (it's in naming it "ActRaiser 2" that they fumbled and messed up).
But while I appreciate the effort that was put in this game, I understand how it would drive away and upset people (fans of the original included). I'm not saying it's a masterpiece by any means, but I do think that it's worth giving a look on its own merits. Don't think "sequel" if you're playing or want to play this, think "game", because I guarantee you that you're less likely to be massively disappointed by treating it as a game than you would if you were treating it as a follow-up. It's not a bad game, but compared to say Xandra no Daibōken: Valkyrie to no Deai (someone had to say it) it makes ActRaiser 2 look like a piece of cake by comparison. Make of it what you will. I wanted to get it all out of my system.
I'm certain that there are some people out there like this game as much as I do, maybe more (if not less); much like its got its detractors (which I get, it's not for everyone). I'm curious to hear what others in this forum have to say about this game, I wouldn't even mind a discussion on it if someone asks. In the meantime, it's late.
To each their own
TL/DR - ActRaiser 2 is a bad sequel but a good game on its own imo
I agree that Actraiser 2 was a good game on its own. However, I loved the town building portion of the original game, so for me, removing that basically killed the game for me.
Actraiser 2's shortcoming is that it's not a sequel, at least not one that the original fans wanted.
@Dreamz - I definitely concur regarding that. Had Quintet given it a different name instead of the one it got, it would've still been criticized for its difficulty but I don't think it would've gotten anywhere near as lambasted by the public as it is now. Which is unfortunate really, because deep down I think there is a great game that wants to come out but is slightly hindered by its own flaws (some more offturning than others), which ends up just making ActRaiser 2 simply good [as its own game] (not great).
The only problem I have with this game is that it's cheap as hell. On it's own its mediocre game with great graphics and music, but with atrociously bad game desing decisions - this game looked rushed back then and it still looks like it to me.
I love the first one, but my problem with the secons is, like I've said bad decisions. I would have nothing against getting rid of sim parts - problem is, the map stayed which to me was annoying as hell. There is no point in the map whatsoever. With this goes level design - the jumps they expect you to do and enemy placement just screams "cheap" and "lazy".
It almost looks like all the resources had gone to make great graphics and music, and later they thought "damn, the release is near, and we need to actually make the game", so they cut some parts and made some atrociously bad things like with powers... What they did with the combos was stupid and at times it didn't even work.
The truth is, if it wouldn't be called Actraiser 2, it woud've been only remembered for great music and graphics and faded into obscurity like the character in the end.
@Dave24 - ... just the graphics; the music I thought was disappointing for Yuzo Koshiro's standards, one of his weakest (I get that ActRaiser 2's score was inspired by Mahler's compositions in part, but the problem is due to the underscoring and the low quality of the sound (by the way, when the score gets tallied up when you finish a stage the sound effect for the score is so low that it may as well not even be there) it just doesn't leave a strong impact when compared to the first title's music; which was big, bombastic, and action-packed by comparison). And yeah, while I personally like this game for what it is I will concede that not every decision that Quintet made for this "sequel was bright. Sadly, there is a lot of truth in that statement you've said; it would've faded into obscurity if not for the poorly chosen title.
I never played the series, but I could understand the hatred. A first game should establish a strong foundation for a series by introducing mechanics that make it popular. It is incredibly foolhardy to leave those mechanics out in a sequel, which leads to said disappointment. This is why I don't support a genre change for Zelda. I don't want an entirely different game with a name slapped on it unless it's some spin-off
Current games: Everything on Switch
Switch Friend Code: SW-5075-7879-0008 | My Nintendo: LzWinky
The first Actraiser/ActRaiser is good and all, imo, but the problem I have with it is it's just one of the most overexposed games ever (and I'm talking developer-wise). In that it gets lots of recognition, lots of applause, garners top spots in countdowns, is solely included in the 1001 Video Games You should Play Before you Die guide (at least if I recall correctly that's what its called); and it got not one, not two, but three re-releases (the first one was technically modified for a super arcade, and the second one was a tiny modified version made for a cell phone; the third re-release was actually the whole game on the Nintendo Wii Virtual Console back in '07). I get it, professionals like Actraiser/ActRaiser, that's great, good for them; what about the other games that Quintet made? You know, the ones that never got an official re-release to this day? Like SoulBlader/SoulBlazer, ActRaiser 2: The Crusade to Silence/ActRaiser 2 (the very game that I talked about here), Gaia Gensōki/Illusion of Gaia/Illusion of Time (whatever), Slapstick/Robotrek, and perhaps the best game ever made that never officially reached American shores Tenchi Sōzō/Terranigma??? Don't these games deserve a second chance at life too? Is demand not as high for all six Quintet-developed games? ... I'm sorry, but there is no justification for this negligence; it doesn't matter whether you end up liking them or not, all these games deserve to be experienced by everyone especially by current-gen gamers (not just one)! And while I sort of like the first Actraiser/ActRaiser (which incidentally was Quintet's first 16-bit game), I can't help but liken it to the first kid in the family that always gets special treatment while its five younger siblings are all but ignored because the other five Quintet titles don't get as much attention by comparison (if at all). I don't care who's in charge of Quintet's license right now, but they've got no excuse to focus all their resources on one game. One game should not take precedence as far as re-releases are concerned; either re-release or remake all of them, or if you're just going to allow one to be played by current-gen gamers (while the other five aren't allowed) then don't re-release it at all (I'd understand if it was based on a program or movie and that's what preventing the games from popping up, but since they're not based on existing licenses, then that's not a good excuse). It makes me upset because no one else seems to acknowledge or even address this; I feel like I'm alone in thinking this way. I know not everyone is going to agree with this, but every time I think about it it makes me feel very upset (frustrated, even; but I get over it after awhile). That's just how I personally feel about this.
@WaveBoy - Well, I hope that you've got a lot of patience with you if you plan on embarking on this crusade to silence. You're going to need it. That, and perseverance, and strong will, and the willingness to face any challenge that is thrown at you. Just remember to go at a slow and steady pace as you play it. Luckily there are difficulty settings in case you want to start off slow and then challenge yourself a little more when you're ready. And yeah, Streets of Rage 3's soundtrack was another low point in Yuzo's music career.
I never played the series, but I could understand the hatred. A first game should establish a strong foundation for a series by introducing mechanics that make it popular. It is incredibly foolhardy to leave those mechanics out in a sequel, which leads to said disappointment. This is why I don't support a genre change for Zelda. I don't want an entirely different game with a name slapped on it unless it's some spin-off
What about Mario 64 then. That seems an example of when changing things significantly worked pretty well. Same could happen with Zelda to make it better overall. The Adventure of Link is one of my favourite Zelda's because it is so different I still like playing it.
“30fps Is Not a Good Artistic Decision, It's a Failure”
Freedom of the press is for those who happen to own one.
I never played the series, but I could understand the hatred. A first game should establish a strong foundation for a series by introducing mechanics that make it popular. It is incredibly foolhardy to leave those mechanics out in a sequel, which leads to said disappointment. This is why I don't support a genre change for Zelda. I don't want an entirely different game with a name slapped on it unless it's some spin-off
What about Mario 64 then. That seems an example of when changing things significantly worked pretty well. Same could happen with Zelda to make it better overall. The Adventure of Link is one of my favourite Zelda's because it is so different I still like playing it.
Mario 64 kept a lot of elements that still make it familiar with fans. Mostly characters, platforming (now in 3D) and several other things. Heck, I'd say Sunshine was more different than 64
Similarly, Zelda II kept some elements, though I didn't particularly care for it being too different.
Current games: Everything on Switch
Switch Friend Code: SW-5075-7879-0008 | My Nintendo: LzWinky
Lz Has a very good point. Sequels are meant to build on the foundations of the games that came before it. Save the drastic changes for new IPs, and don't even get me started on removing the elements that worked...
The other major difference is that ActRaiser 2 took out the Sim mode. That's half the gameplay cut!
(though I'll presume that's also why the first game only had one save file. It had more to keep track of than Super Mario World.)
@KingMike - Except that while Super Mario World was only half the size of Actraiser/ActRaiser (I'm pretty sure that it's an 8-MegaBit game, but Wikipedia now says its 16-MegaBits which doesn't sound right ... sounds about as believable to me as NCAA Basketball being 32-MegaBits (sure, a 1992 Ninty 16-bit game was really that size) ), it succeeds not just because of its three save files but because any one could play it at any time (even two player, albeit alternatively). With Actraiser/ActRaiser, it's an exclusively one player game, which meant that people had to wait until a gamer was finished with the game in order to play it themselves (and it wouldn't be a bad thing if there were more than one save file). If it couldn't allow more than one save file, then it may as well as implemented passwords (like ActRaiser 2 did). That's one of the issues I have with the original (outside of the fact that it got a re-release while the rest of the SFC/SNES Quintet fare did not... hey, maybe that's why they're called "Quintet": because they're a group of five games that no license holder took into consideration for current-gen gamers ).
Half the gameplay cut with a superior way of continuing your progress, and that's not a compliment I usually give to passwords (unless they're brief and to the point).
The harder the difficulty the more silly-looking enemies and awesome-looking bosses to wage battle on
so it has different enemies according to different difficulty settings?
i didnt know that...if i can beat holy diver, id like to think i could beat this...
the_shpydar wrote:
As @ogo79 said, the SNS-RZ-USA is a prime giveaway that it's not a legit retail cart.
And yes, he is (usually) always right, and he is (almost) the sexiest gamer out there (not counting me) ;)
@ogo79 - you get to fight more enemies on the harder difficulty settings (who've got a tad bit more health on harder modes as well), and on Normal and Hard after beating the Clock Tower you head to Hell/Death Heim where you face the boss gauntlet of the seven deadly sins and afterwards you get to face Satan/Tanzra. I wish you luck if you plan on playing ActRaiser 2's Hard mode; it'll take a lot of effort, believe me. The screenshots I took and showed here: those were all Hard mode, and that was back in October-November '11 (less than a month after I got it).
Lz Has a very good point. Sequels are meant to build on the foundations of the games that came before it. Save the drastic changes for new IPs, and don't even get me started on removing the elements that worked...
Heck, this was the reason I hated New Super Mario Bros. Super Mario Bros 3 and World had amazing elements in them that weren't used at all in NSMB
New Super Mario Bros. I thought was okay, personally (it's been awhile since I last played New Super Mario Bros. Wii, so I can't comment on that one); the very poorly named New Super Mario Bros. 2, on the other hand, is one of the few Mario platformers (perhaps the only one) that I didn't like at all (so much so that I refused to play New Super Mario Bros. U and Super Luigi U due to the same formula). Way too easy, very repetitive, and waaaaay too reliant on gold; the only upside for that one was that the 3D was good. And while I didn't like that 3DS installment in particular, I thought it was a work of Tolstoy compared to Yoshi's New Island, which I ended up not liking the most (in hindsight, perhaps I was too hopeful that it would be better than Yoshi's Island DS... nope! It was worse, and as a diehard fan of the original SNES game I was very disappointed at how unenjoyable and boring this sequel was. How do you make a Yoshi platformer boring?? How is that possible?!).
And that's another thing about ActRaiser 2; as challenging as it is, I don't consider it a boring game, for it constantly keeps you on your toes. The reason I'm more forgiving towards this game than I am Yoshi's New Island is because I have strong feelings for Super Mario World 2: Yoshi's Island, and my fondness for that game make it hard for me to accept that this was the best that Arzest could accomplish on the 3DS; I'm not a fan of the first Actraiser/ActRaiser, but I could still treat its follow-up (more or less) as a game on its own (as well as acknowledge its shortcomings). I knew what to expect of ActRaiser 2 before having played it, and that's why I'm not so hard on it. I guess my disappointment towards Yoshi's New Island is a little similar to others' disappointment towards this game, in a way (because I honestly expected a really good Yoshi's Island sequel instead of the opposite). Or maybe: this is a testament that sometimes, no matter how hard you try, the original is a hard act to follow.
Always enjoy your writing @WanderFan91, even if I have to take a nap halfway through. Though I have a copy of ActRaiser 2, I haven't played it a ton. I couldn't care less about the town sim being excluded in the sequel, really. I'm all about that action, Jackson and Actrasier 2 has it in spades and I just don't get the complaint towards the lack of an easy town sim. I would love to finally get around to playing it with the intent to complete it someday. Also, the game is gorgeous. Reminds me of Demon's Crest aesthetic which is one of my favorite SNES games.
To blessed to be stressed.
80's music makes me feel fabulous.
What Would Duane Do? Rynoggery
Forums
Topic: ActRaiser 2 - The Most Despised Ninty 16-bit Sequel Ever
Posts 1 to 20 of 33
This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.