i seriously dont understand, the whole reason why games were so fucking hard back then, like said above, is because there wasnt a ton of memory to keep levels/maps. making the game a massive grind with it's "skill" just extends the game's life. like most games back then werent even fair. a prime example is castlevania. the ONLY way to beat the game was to plan out where to get items and collect hearts and find fucking wall chickens. the first part could be found through just trial and error, but the last part is just by pure luck or reading a guide. and if you were good at the game, it would be only like 40 minutes long.
plenty of games back then had artificial difficulty and it was to always extend the gameplay time.
like imagine if you played a modern action game like maxpayne with literally no checkpoints between levels, everyone would be bitching up a storm saying how it should be part of every game now in days. this is pointless whining since the game makes it a choice and the actual game is still very challenging.
i mean if you REALLY wanna bitch, the konami code gave contra players a handicap of 30 lives instead of 3, and that was back with the NES. granted it didnt prompt you, but it was always there if you wanted to beat the game without the massive learning curb of trial and error.
[QUOTE=NoNameForEvil;42996896]Game overs have NEVER been fun. They really don't have a purpose anymore, apart from making the process of getting back to where you were tedious. Like, look at SMB3. When you get a game over, you have to redo every level that you've completed in that world. I don't know about you, but repeating things I've already fucking done isn't fun.[/QUOTE]
my point exactly, every time it didnt save a checkpoint in a level when im playing a modern game i fucking get pissed and have zero fun doing the same shit over again to get where i was.
It's funny because even when I used the white tanooki suit on a few levels, I still died over and over and over again :v:
This may not really matter, or I may just be sounding nitpicky here, but as you may have noticed getting the suit seems to give you 1000 more points? So not does taking the suit give you invincibility throughout the level, but it also gives you more possible points. For example, say a level only contains 7000 points through defeating monsters and getting coins and whatnot (I haven't played the game unfortunately), the only way to get more than the original 7000 points is to actually go back and take the suit. Really dumb of Nintendo to add this feature, so people don't just have the ability to cheat, they also get a BONUS for it.
[QUOTE=Kool Kids Klub;42997068]This may not really matter, or I may just be sounding nitpicky here, but as you may have noticed getting the suit seems to give you 1000 more points? So not does taking the suit give you invincibility throughout the level, but it also gives you more possible points. For example, say a level only contains 7000 points through defeating monsters and getting coins and whatnot (I haven't played the game unfortunately), the only way to get more than the original 7000 points is to actually go back and take the suit. Really dumb of Nintendo to add this feature, so people don't just have the ability to cheat, they also get a BONUS for it.[/QUOTE]
you also dont get secret levels and i doubt it keeps a score without a penalty, so you pretty much HAVE to get better if you want to unlock the other secret levels. it doesnt hurt anyone and people who are offended are being way too melodramatic.
[editline]27th November 2013[/editline]
i mean nintendo could have charged a fee to have the suit if they REALLY wanted to like other games sometimes do.
[QUOTE=codemaster85;42996873]i seriously dont understand, the whole reason why games were so fucking hard back then, like said above, is because there wasnt a ton of memory to keep levels/maps. making the game a massive grind with it's "skill" just extends the game's life. like most games back then werent even fair. a prime example is castlevania. the ONLY way to beat the game was to plan out where to get items and collect hearts and find fucking wall chickens. the first part could be found through just trial and error, but the last part is just by pure luck or reading a guide. and if you were good at the game, it would be only like 40 minutes long.
plenty of games back then had artificial difficulty and it was to always extend the gameplay time.
like imagine if you played a modern action game like maxpayne with literally no checkpoints between levels, everyone would be bitching up a storm saying how it should be part of every game now in days. this is pointless whining since the game makes it a choice and the actual game is still very challenging.
i mean if you REALLY wanna bitch, the konami code gave contra players a handicap of 30 lives instead of 3, and that was back with the NES. granted it didnt prompt you, but it was always there if you wanted to beat the game without the massive learning curb of trial and error.[/QUOTE]
Older games were designed around getting as many quarters from the player as possible.
It's silly to complain about it. Yeah, it's easy for casual players to beat the game. But they [b]know[/b] they didn't do it legitimately. Bragging rights are still intact, noobs still have incentive to get better.
What pisses me off far more is something like the death mechanic in Bioshock: Infinite where dying is just a temporary setback and the game [b]completely[/b] removed the idea of trying again until you get it right. At least with the tanooki suit you can still die from falls and have to start over.
[QUOTE=Larikang;42999613]It's silly to complain about it. Yeah, it's easy for casual players to beat the game. But they [b]know[/b] they didn't do it legitimately. Bragging rights are still intact, noobs still have incentive to get better.
What pisses me off far more is something like the death mechanic in Bioshock: Infinite where dying is just a temporary setback and the game [b]completely[/b] removed the idea of trying again until you get it right. At least with the tanooki suit you can still die from falls and have to start over.[/QUOTE]
I agree with ya. I don't mind giving struggling new players a gimmie so long as it's not something like an unbalanced factor in a multiplayer game towards other players competitively (and this gives the suit to all the players since all of them would have to fail the level multiple times) and if it doesn't actually fuck with the challenge of the game due to being optional. There should be punishment for failure, but simultaneously you shouldn't just shit on the players with sheer difficulty.
I do mind if it's something like the Wii version of New Super Mario Bros, though - apparently even getting the Super Guide to pop up whatsoever essentially mocks you by having something on your save file not be shiny when you complete the game. Purely cosmetic, but I know that'd be irksome towards some completionists or perfectionists out there. :v:
My little brother has problems with hand eye coordination making it hard for him to play modern games, and even the early sonic or mario titles. Something like this goes a long way when I'm thinking about picking up a new game for him to play.
Ninja Gaiden may be a harder game difficulty wise, but at least you can grasp the idea of the controls and mechanisms easily. It's not like Super Mario Sunshine where you gotta learn okay, this is the F.L.U.D.D, and it has a supersoaker mode that if you hold it down you can aim and if you press X it goes into jetpack mode with three settings and this and that and blah blah blah blah. My little bro's 6 years old and has a learning disability. It's not easy for him to grasp everything at once, and I'd like for him to have fun with the games he has. If that means putting on godmode after he fucks up a few times, that's perfectly fine with me.
To me, the hate on this concept is the same as someone going "Oh, you're learning to play guitar with Rocksmith? Bullshit, back in the day we learned how to play guitar with an old tape recorder and actual lessons! We had a dude sit us down and teach us chords! We had sheets of paper that we had to read notes off of, not some videogame to do it for us!"
It's not damaging videogames. There's no white tanooki suit in Dark Souls 2. And while games may not be as hard as they were back then, they sure are more complicated. I don't see an issue with giving someone a push if they're stuck.
[QUOTE=Hoboiam;43000412]And while games may not be as hard as they were back then, they sure are more complicated.[/QUOTE]
And thank god for that. I'd never shell out 50 bucks only to be stuck on first level replaying it tens of times to grind "skill" to pass it only to face the same problem on next one. If I get stuck on some part I will fire up god mode and complete it that way because I don't care about bragging rights or any gamer cred junk. And it's nice if I have the option to do that from within game instead of having to fiddle with third party tools. Especially on consoles where that is nearly impossible. I don't know about others but failing in the same spot over and over again is very infuriating and no longer fun.
[QUOTE=Hoboiam;43000412]My little brother has problems with hand eye coordination making it hard for him to play modern games, and even the early sonic or mario titles. Something like this goes a long way when I'm thinking about picking up a new game for him to play.
Ninja Gaiden may be a harder game difficulty wise, but at least you can grasp the idea of the controls and mechanisms easily. It's not like Super Mario Sunshine where you gotta learn okay, this is the F.L.U.D.D, and it has a supersoaker mode that if you hold it down you can aim and if you press X it goes into jetpack mode with three settings and this and that and blah blah blah blah. My little bro's 6 years old and has a learning disability. It's not easy for him to grasp everything at once, and I'd like for him to have fun with the games he has. If that means putting on godmode after he fucks up a few times, that's perfectly fine with me.
To me, the hate on this concept is the same as someone going "Oh, you're learning to play guitar with Rocksmith? Bullshit, back in the day we learned how to play guitar with an old tape recorder and actual lessons! We had a dude sit us down and teach us chords! We had sheets of paper that we had to read notes off of, not some videogame to do it for us!"
It's not damaging videogames. There's no white tanooki suit in Dark Souls 2. And while games may not be as hard as they were back then, they sure are more complicated. I don't see an issue with giving someone a push if they're stuck.[/QUOTE]
It is absolutely damaging videogames. Why? Because you're not inspiring people to get any better.
You hit a hard part of a game, you die a shit load of times, but eventually you get the knack of it and finish the level. You've learned something, you've improved at the game and it has allowed you to overcome a challenge.
You use this tanooki suit bullshit, you sleep through the stage, you sleep through every stage. You do not improve, and you continue to suck. Not only does the game become more dull because there's no challenge, but you essentially ruin a shitload of other games because you still suck
[QUOTE=NoNameForEvil;43007752]Except the video games that don't have a white tanooki suit. That being almost every single videogame ever made. That's like saying the 30 lives cheat in Contra damaged videogames.
You mentioned the game becoming "more dull", but if you're a person who actually cares about that shit, you can just - wait for it - not fucking pick it up! You don't sleep through a stage, because you still have to pay attention. You still die from falling down pits, into lava, etc. The game doesn't play itself, guy.[/QUOTE]
Except the 30 lives Contra cheat was a secret, not something that shows up on screen trying to get your attention like you're advised to use it.
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;43007259]It is absolutely damaging videogames. Why? Because you're not inspiring people to get any better.
You hit a hard part of a game, you die a shit load of times, but eventually you get the knack of it and finish the level. You've learned something, you've improved at the game and it has allowed you to overcome a challenge.
You use this tanooki suit bullshit, you sleep through the stage, you sleep through every stage. You do not improve, and you continue to suck. Not only does the game become more dull because there's no challenge, but you essentially ruin a shitload of other games because you still suck[/QUOTE]
let's pose this question:
why do you care
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;43007259]It is absolutely damaging videogames. Why? Because you're not inspiring people to get any better.
You hit a hard part of a game, you die a shit load of times, but eventually you get the knack of it and finish the level. You've learned something, you've improved at the game and it has allowed you to overcome a challenge.
You use this tanooki suit bullshit, you sleep through the stage, you sleep through every stage. You do not improve, and you continue to suck. Not only does the game become more dull because there's no challenge, but you essentially ruin a shitload of other games because you still suck[/QUOTE]
Where was this outrage when Simpsons Hit and Run let you skip levels if you failed too many times? Was that okay because the game was rated T? Was it because nobody really bought that game? Was it because it wasn't a Mario title?
I skipped levels in Simpsons, you bet your ass I did. They were hard as shit. Did it mean I didn't improve at playing? Hell no. I got pretty darn good at it, but hit a handful of levels that I simply could not complete because of the difficulty. That doesn't mean I'm any worse at other open world games.
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;43007259]It is absolutely damaging videogames. Why? Because you're not inspiring people to get any better.
You hit a hard part of a game, you die a shit load of times, but eventually you get the knack of it and finish the level. You've learned something, you've improved at the game and it has allowed you to overcome a challenge.
You use this tanooki suit bullshit, you sleep through the stage, you sleep through every stage. You do not improve, and you continue to suck. Not only does the game become more dull because there's no challenge, but you essentially ruin a shitload of other games because you still suck[/QUOTE]
its not damaging unless its an unfair advantage with multiplayer. how is letting someone just enjoy their game if they get stuck a bad thing exactly? this whole post screams "fucking casuals" elitism.
[editline]28th November 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Re1nhardt;43007812]Except the 30 lives Contra cheat was a secret, not something that shows up on screen trying to get your attention like you're advised to use it.[/QUOTE]
except it was still around and was very common to be used to beat the game. just because it wasnt shown on the screen, doesnt mean it wasnt ever really used.
I remember seeing community created hints pop up in the level on earlier wii u mario games, I think that's kind of a cool example of social network tied into games. Another example is the guides in dota 2 or recently, steam reviews, but this is flat out patronizing.
If I had to play devils advocate, at least nintendo isn't making you pay to cheat like EA.
No one complained when you could skip parts of missions in GTA 5 if you failed too many times.
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;43007259]It is absolutely damaging videogames. Why? Because you're not inspiring people to get any better.
You hit a hard part of a game, you die a shit load of times, but eventually you get the knack of it and finish the level. You've learned something, you've improved at the game and it has allowed you to overcome a challenge.
You use this tanooki suit bullshit, you sleep through the stage, you sleep through every stage. You do not improve, and you continue to suck. Not only does the game become more dull because there's no challenge, but you essentially ruin a shitload of other games because you still suck[/QUOTE]
So make it so the stage isn't really 'completed' when you beat it with the Tanooki suit, not in completionist's sake anyway. Not to mention you have to die multiple times to get the suit; if you do this for [i]every[/i] level just to try and coast on through, even as a modern Mario game you're probably gonna start seeing shortages of lives real soon.
You people act like this thing is essentially the bane of all gaming existence, and rather aggressively at that.
[editline]28th November 2013[/editline]
Ontop of that, what happened to just playing a game? Folks would fling the term CASUALS around, but Nintendo brands their systems, and especially the Mario games, towards family fun. Having the White Tanooki Suit be an [i]option[/i] you can entirely ignore (unlike the Super Guide YES/NO prompts in other recent games) just broadens the range of players that can play the game, even if it's not wholly agreeable. Not everyone buys Mario for challenging platforming, some people buy it because they, y'know, want to have fun playing a Mario game. And in the end, isn't that what it's all about? Having fun [i]your way?[/i]
Not to mention Nabbit, in New Super Luigi Bros. U, is intentionally invincible to everything but insta-death obstacles/pits, and I don't see anyone really bitching about him.
[QUOTE=Cloak Raider;43007259]
You hit a hard part of a game, you die a shit load of times, but eventually you get the knack of it and finish the level. You've learned something, you've improved at the game and it has allowed you to overcome a challenge.[/QUOTE]
You can do all that IF YOU WANT. I don't have the luxury to spend hours replaying same level to get better at a videogame any more. Sucking at a game is not a crime either. Why are you so worried about how some other people might play a game they purchased?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
