2009-01-01, 02:12 AM
ChickenSkins Wrote:Ummm... isn't that the definition of a difficult game? Kicking your ass repeatedly until you've mastered it? Dying with no penalty is just bullpomegranate, plain and simple. How can you have challenge with no penalties being handed out? I'd consider that a much more real difficulty than spending 8 hours watching FMVs. Wait... Actually, I think it might be harder to watch the FMVs now that I think about it.
And Contra games pretty much fit the bill for short but difficult, incredibly easy to pick up and play, will likely be replayed many times, and good for their multiplayer options too.
[COLOR="royalblue"]Sure there's a penalty when you die, you start over from the beginning of the stage. I'm not suggesting that you have no way to die, that's just retarded. I don't see how having a "Game Over" life system can be considered a challenge when all it does is make you play the levels that you have already done well on untill you get to the level you were stuck at and oh, pineapple up again, and go all the way through the game again. Replaying the levels you're already decent at doesn't sound like a challenge to me.
If they needed "punishment" for doing poorly to make a hard game, then how would ROM hacks in general ever survive? The original Kaizo Mario and Kaizo Mario 2 both had the "infinite life" cheat handed out in a text file with the patching file. Not to mention the abuse of savestating in most romhacks to even be able to beat them.
Obviously some games do need lives, when its competition or seeing how long one can survive in a casual game, such as Galaga or DigDug or any old arcade style game. [/COLOR]
If they needed "punishment" for doing poorly to make a hard game, then how would ROM hacks in general ever survive? The original Kaizo Mario and Kaizo Mario 2 both had the "infinite life" cheat handed out in a text file with the patching file. Not to mention the abuse of savestating in most romhacks to even be able to beat them.
Obviously some games do need lives, when its competition or seeing how long one can survive in a casual game, such as Galaga or DigDug or any old arcade style game. [/COLOR]
Quote:Zaotsu:
A great lifespan is what replaying and long games offered in the past.
A nice example for this is a game called Laser Lights, which I haven't managed to finish yet. There are few replayable games I recall now, like the graphic adventures that you could finish in different ways, platform games such as Biomenace and Prehistorik and Duke Nukem and so on.
And simple games like Fuzzy's Space Minigolf, Minesweeper and Pipelines have more playability than a few games I remember now... c'mon.
[COLOR="RoyalBlue"]To compare Minesweeper and Pipelines to games that have story in terms of replayability? Of course they will win out, They're designed to NEVER be beaten, to be something you pick up for a bit, mess around, and then drop. It doesnt matter if you're the best Minesweeper person in the world, or the worst, neither person will ever "beat" the game.
I've never heard of Laser Lights, Biomenace, or Prehistorik, so it would be unfair for me to judge those, and I barely remember Duke Nukem.
I'll agree that there is often little replayability in some games, mainly because of how static they end up being. One decent one that has come out recently though is Left4Dead for the PC and 360, partially because of the added random Director factor. I can't say that most RPGs offer much replayability, and that includes old and new. Many are getting on the lengthy side, such as FFXII and FFTA2, both of which need obscene amounts of time if you want to fully beat the game, i.e. sidequests, dragons that take 2 hours at max level to beat, etc.
I've recently had my ass handed to me a lot by the Disgaea series, but that's probably because I'm a noob at the series overall, and the playstyle is so much different than most other SRPGs that I've played.[/COLOR]
I've never heard of Laser Lights, Biomenace, or Prehistorik, so it would be unfair for me to judge those, and I barely remember Duke Nukem.
I'll agree that there is often little replayability in some games, mainly because of how static they end up being. One decent one that has come out recently though is Left4Dead for the PC and 360, partially because of the added random Director factor. I can't say that most RPGs offer much replayability, and that includes old and new. Many are getting on the lengthy side, such as FFXII and FFTA2, both of which need obscene amounts of time if you want to fully beat the game, i.e. sidequests, dragons that take 2 hours at max level to beat, etc.
I've recently had my ass handed to me a lot by the Disgaea series, but that's probably because I'm a noob at the series overall, and the playstyle is so much different than most other SRPGs that I've played.[/COLOR]