Home › Forums › Ganymede & Titan Forum › Series VII, bad Dwarf but good comedy tv? Search for: This topic has 100 replies, 26 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 2 months ago by Ben Paddon. Scroll to bottom Viewing 50 posts - 51 through 100 (of 101 total) 1 2 3 Author Posts November 25, 2009 at 12:13 pm #106495 PhilParticipant >I present to you Donkey Kong Country. I’ll be honest…I didn’t enjoy it much at the time. I understand that the graphics were praised for being cutting edge, and maybe they were technically-speaking, but they always looked too muddy and busy for me. The gameplay didn’t much make up for it either…collecting bananas and riding on rhinos just felt like the off-brand version of collecting coins and riding on Yoshi. I DO admit that blasting from barrel to barrel was a lot of fun, though. I’m sure the game had its charms…but it didn’t really do much for me personally. I’d love to give it another spin, though…to see if I’d appreciate it more now…for some reason. I will give it another shot at some point, but the odds of it–or anything–unseating Super Mario World are pretty slim. November 25, 2009 at 12:43 pm #106497 Seb PatrickKeymaster The only game that threatens to (and some would say actually does) unseat SMW as best 2D platformer is Sonic 2, clearly. November 25, 2009 at 1:20 pm #106498 JamesTCParticipant Sonic 3 and Knuckles. November 25, 2009 at 2:42 pm #106499 Jonathan CappsKeymaster Any thread where it is claimed that a 2D Sonic only “threatens” to be better than any Mario game is fundamentally broken. November 25, 2009 at 3:50 pm #106505 Pete Part ThreeParticipant Haha. My poor fool. November 25, 2009 at 4:02 pm #106507 Jonathan CappsKeymaster No, not “Haha”! November 25, 2009 at 4:02 pm #106508 John HoareParticipant I must say, the past two years have been something of an eye-opener with me and Nintendo. I’d easily put Mario’s 2D platformers above Sonic now. They just feel far more relentlessly imaginative. But we are pitting great games against other great games here… November 25, 2009 at 6:01 pm #106517 Stabbim the SkutterParticipant Super Mario Sunshine gets a lot of flak, and I don’t think it’s fair. It’s the only Mario game that dared to do something different and creative with the series since…well…ever, and I prefer it to the extremely dull, unoriginal and impossible to control monstrosity that is Galaxy any day. >>>Super Mario World is better than Mario Bros 3, anyway. >>Word. Probably my favorite 2D platformer ever. >I present to you Donkey Kong Country. I’m not sure if Donkey Kong Country is better than Super Mario World. Donkey Kong Country 2, on the other hand, is an absolute masterpiece. I don’t think any 2D platformer can top it. November 25, 2009 at 9:31 pm #106523 RidleyParticipant Donkey Kong Country 2, on the other hand, is an absolute masterpiece. I don?t think any 2D platformer can top it. My favourite game of all time. and [Wind Waker] would have benefited hugely from black outlines if they wanted to cel-shade No it wouldn’t. I will give it another shot at some point, but the odds of it?or anything?unseating Super Mario World are pretty slim. How close did Yoshi’s Island get? I must say, the past two years have been something of an eye-opener with me and Nintendo. Why the past two? November 25, 2009 at 10:15 pm #106527 John HoareParticipant Why the past two? Because that’s when I got a Wii, and actually played their games. And realised what I’d been missing all this time. (Come to think of it, it’s three years now…) If only I’d had one of their consoles before! November 25, 2009 at 10:56 pm #106529 CarlitoParticipant > I?m not sure if Donkey Kong Country is better than Super Mario World. Donkey Kong Country 2, on the other hand, is an absolute masterpiece. I don?t think any 2D platformer can top it. Agreed, I should have specified that I didn’t mean that game specifically but the series. Saying that, the first DKC game is far more atmospheric and has better music… but the gameplay of the second one is fantastic, the whole experience… the third one is the weakest of the lot, seemed designed to cater to kids only. November 26, 2009 at 1:15 am #106540 Kris CarterParticipant Thread derailed epically! Free rum for all! November 26, 2009 at 4:37 am #106546 Ben PaddonParticipant > I prefer it to the extremely dull, unoriginal and impossible to control monstrosity that is Galaxy any day. You’re a mad man. Galaxy is perfection. November 26, 2009 at 9:17 am #106548 ori-STUDFARMParticipant I liked the Mario cartoon November 26, 2009 at 12:52 pm #106556 John HoareParticipant > I prefer it to the extremely dull, unoriginal and impossible to control monstrosity that is Galaxy any day. You?re a mad man. Galaxy is perfection. Concurred. And I thought the controls were perfect. Also, if anything, rather than being unoriginal, I thought Galaxy kept throwing too much new stuff at you – there were plenty of game mechanics (Boo suit, for instance) that I would have liked to have seen far more of. November 26, 2009 at 1:36 pm #106559 Ben PaddonParticipant On the other hand, Spring Mario can fuck right off. November 26, 2009 at 1:41 pm #106560 SomebodyParticipant And the camera could have used some tweaking (or at least a freer manual override). November 26, 2009 at 1:58 pm #106562 John HoareParticipant Never really had a problem with the camera (Luigi’s Purple Coins aside, perhaps). Mario 64 on the other hand… I do seem to be the only person on the entire internet who liked Spring Mario! November 26, 2009 at 4:16 pm #106574 TonguetiedParticipant I quite liked the idea of Spring Mario too, plus the Mario Bros cartoon that Ori-studfarm mentioned was one of my favourite cartoons when I was younger. I liked how the latter cartoon was based on Super Mario World(my favourite Mario title). November 26, 2009 at 6:03 pm #106575 Stabbim the SkutterParticipant > And the camera could have used some tweaking (or at least a freer manual override). This is where my problem with the controls lies. In Mario 64 you can move the camera around a little bit, but it’s still a bit stiff. In Sunshine you can move it around as much as you like. In Galaxy you have literally no control over the camera, which darts around all over the place as it pleases. This + camera-relative control + being able to walk on the walls and ceiling = clusterfuck. I’ll admit that Sunshine isn’t perfect (the second half of the game is a bit dull and the final “level” and “boss” “fight” is a disgrace) but every time I play it it sucks me in just like the 2D games do. But whenever I get Galaxy out I simply do not want to play it. I have to force myself into it, and I occasionally enjoy bits here and there, but on the whole it just doesn’t interest me. November 26, 2009 at 6:43 pm #106582 AndrewParticipant > In Galaxy you have literally no control over the camera, which darts around all over the place as it pleases. I’m a constant camera fiddler. Controlling the viewing angle has become a horrible constant in my 360 gaming. I can’t drive around in BTA without perpetually holding the stick to raise the camera high enough to improve my viewing angle of the road ahead. And I gotta say, I shook that instinct off very quickly when playing Galaxy. Now, I’m not a big Nintendo gamer, so it’s no like I really had any idea what to expect, but – in a world where NOBODY seems to have nailed a way to make a third person camera work perfectly in a 3D environment – I was amazed how quickly I just…let go. While it’s not close to 100% perfect, I’m not sure I’ve got many examples of the camera placement being BETTER. Certainly it never felt that the camera was going wherever it pleased. And I have to say, it’s probably the most chilled gaming I’ve done in a long time, while still being exciting and fun. November 26, 2009 at 10:35 pm #106589 Ben PaddonParticipant > In Galaxy you have literally no control over the camera, which darts around all over the place as it pleases. This + camera-relative control + being able to walk on the walls and ceiling = clusterfuck. November 27, 2009 at 12:01 am #106597 SomebodyParticipant > I?ll admit that Sunshine isn?t perfect (the second half of the game is a bit dull and the final ?level? and ?boss? ?fight? is a disgrace) but every time I play it it sucks me in just like the 2D games do. But whenever I get Galaxy out I simply do not want to play it. I have to force myself into it, and I occasionally enjoy bits here and there, but on the whole it just doesn?t interest me. See, Sunshine is the only one of the three 3D Marios that I haven’t played to the end – I got 70 stars (EDIT: Sorry, “shines”…), did the ludicrously easy Bowser fight, and put my GC away for a few years. My reaction to it is almost an exact copy of yours to Galaxy, for reasons including but not limited to the fact that it was too easy; that the FLUDD mechanism wasn’t a good idea to start with, then was horribly overused on top of that (and resulted in many of the basic moves of 64 being removed, most of which were reinstated in some form for Galaxy); that the game patronised you (remember the “BRUSH YOUR TEETH” prompt from FLUDD?!) and that there was so very little variety to the levels [And I would love to personally thank whoever made the decision to cut the voiced content right, right back for Galaxy. Those cutscenes were truly awful, and I think I timed the opening, non-skippable cutscene at something ridiculous like ten minutes before you could properly get going.] > http://stuff.benpaddon.com/images/wiimote-smgcamera.png Very often, though (and, unlike Stabbim, note that I said a “freer manual override” before I go any further), using the + just brings up a “nope” pictogram, even for a first-person look around [though, irritatingly, sometimes if you move just a teeny bit that’ll work, but far from all the time]. Even Mario 64 gave you more control than that (by trying one of the alternate camera modes, if nothing else). November 27, 2009 at 1:39 am #106598 Ben PaddonParticipant There are areas in SM64 that are camera-locked as well, y’know. I didn’t feel that the camera in SMG was any more or less difficult to use than the one in SM64. Most of the confusion I felt was when you found yourself on the bottom of a planet, but that was only for the first level or two and once I’d wrapped my head around the game physics I didn’t have any problems with it. November 27, 2009 at 6:32 am #106604 genericnerdyusernameParticipant The DS version of SM64 is ace, my sister tells me. November 27, 2009 at 7:02 am #106609 Ben PaddonParticipant Yeah, the controls aren’t as good as the N64 controller but they’re good enough. It has probably the best implementation of “bottom screen is analog controller” I’ve seen in a 3D platformer on the DS. It does handle better, though, if you have the thumb strap that came with the original fatty DS. November 27, 2009 at 2:05 pm #106629 redhead85Participant > I?m a constant camera fiddler. I thought the police had asked you to remove those dirty vids of yours from You Tube, Mr Ellard…? November 27, 2009 at 3:03 pm #106633 John HoareParticipant I *hate* having to control the camera in games. I want to concentrate on moving the character, not fucking around with the viewing angle. November 27, 2009 at 3:49 pm #106635 Ben PaddonParticipant In the GameCube version of Twilight Princess, I took to using the camera to steer Link, and the other night while I was playing Rayman 2: Revolution I realised I was doing the same thing there, too. November 27, 2009 at 4:12 pm #106636 SomebodyParticipant I did the same thing. It’s a logical extension of “trying to keep the camera behind you” (which, nine times out of ten, is where you want it in an open environment). November 27, 2009 at 5:33 pm #106638 Seb PatrickKeymaster And this is why I play first-person games and not third-person games. November 27, 2009 at 6:26 pm #106642 John HoareParticipant And this is why I play first-person games and not third-person games. You’re missing out on so many great games if you’re too strict with that, though! November 27, 2009 at 6:30 pm #106644 JamesTCParticipant 2 out of my three favourite games are third person, it is only specific games I have a problem with the camera. Can’t beat a bit of Crackdown and Metal Gear Solid. November 27, 2009 at 8:48 pm #106646 PhilParticipant >> And this is why I play first-person games and not third-person games. >You?re missing out on so many great games if you?re too strict with that, though! Such as…nearly all of them. November 27, 2009 at 9:59 pm #106648 ChrisMParticipant Yeah. I generally prefer third person to first person games. I have a tendency to get more disoriented with first person games. Besides it’s cool seeing your character do stuff! That being said 1st person games have their place, and there are some good ones out there. November 28, 2009 at 6:39 pm #106673 Seb PatrickKeymaster I’m not saying I don’t play third-person games at all, obviously. I just find having to control an entirely external camera along with your player’s movement intensely irritating. Not least when your character GETS IN THE WAY OF YOU BEING ABLE TO SEE WHAT’S ONSCREEN. It’s a PC vs console thing, basically. Historically, consoles have tended to do third-person games because they can’t really “do” FPS as well. And I’m a PC gamer, not a console gamer, so first-person is what I’m used to. Plus, it’s far more immersive. Not sure I appreciate the patronising suggestion that “first person games have their place”, though, and I’d say a hearty BOLLOCKS to the suggestion that “nearly all” of the best action/shooter games are third-person. Half Life 1&2, DOOM 1&2, Duke Nukem 3D, Goldeneye, Deus Ex, System Shock 2, Unreal Tournament, Quake, Quake II, Team Fortress 2 and a shitload of others would disagree with you. November 28, 2009 at 6:49 pm #106675 AndrewParticipant > consoles have tended to do third-person games because they can?t really ?do? FPS as well ?!?!?!?! You don’t mean NOW, right? You mean, like, two generations ago or something. Right? RIGHT?! November 28, 2009 at 8:40 pm #106677 Seb PatrickKeymaster Well, I still mean now to an *extent*. Twin joysticks will never, EVER compete with WASD+mouse as a control system, and no current console is as powerful as a decent-spec gaming rig, and the fact that third-person games are still so prevalent suggests that they’re a preferred option for people programming for consoles. However, you’ll note that I did use the word “Historically”, which you conveniently and rather selectively excluded when quoting me! And my basic point was – the PlayStation couldn’t do the 3D FPSes of the time, so they got Tomb Raider instead, and that’s what basically kicked off the whole third-person-action game genre. November 28, 2009 at 9:40 pm #106678 AndrewParticipant > I did use the word ?Historically?, which you conveniently and rather selectively excluded when quoting me! No selectiveness at all – indeed, my question was meant to get to the nub of HOW historical you meant by ‘historical’! Blimey, Seb… November 28, 2009 at 10:00 pm #106679 AndrewParticipant > Twin joysticks will never, EVER compete with WASD+mouse as a control system This, though, is a matter of opinion, surely? I bloody hate using a keyboard for gaming, despite growing up in a pre-console home of ZX Spectrums and then Amigas. I wouldn’t say the comfy, sit-back choice of a wireless controller can’t compete with sitting at a desk. Though I’d be more likely to game at the desk if I had a thumbstick-y controller… > the fact that third-person games are still so prevalent suggests that they?re a preferred option for people programming for consoles Really? I have zero stats on this, but it never seems to me that it’s being avoided – I’ve certainly never felt that FPS ‘doesn’t work’ on a console, or that the discovery of Halo as the old Xbox’s ‘killer app’ was remotely surprising for the format. Are there more licensed games for console than PC? (I have no idea.) Seeing the main character is a big deal in that instance – Batman or Buffy or whatever – as well as for the more character-centric fare like GTA or Prince of Persia. (I liked Mirror’s Edge a lot, but of the two free running-ish games the 3rd-person one left you with a sense of the hero, the 1st person one really didn’t.) I’m not sure I buy the argument that the games are forced to get more invested in making lead characters in order to justify the choice of camera viewpoint, rather than the camera choice coming from creative needs of both character and gameplay. I don’t see console FPS being avoided because it doesn’t really work so well. November 28, 2009 at 11:20 pm #106680 Seb PatrickKeymaster No selectiveness at all – indeed, my question was meant to get to the nub of HOW historical you meant by ?historical?! Blimey, Seb? But your question was “You don’t mean NOW, right?” To which I would answer… “No, I meant… historically!” ;-) But I do think that that historical trend has had an effect on the present, yes. Consoles can “do” FPS games now (although you’d have to apply extreme torture to get me to admit that Halo is any good), but third-person games are what the market is more accustomed to, and in my opinion that’s a direct result of the likes of Tomb Raider and the like a couple of generations ago. I liked Mirror?s Edge a lot, but of the two free running-ish games the 3rd-person one left you with a sense of the hero, the 1st person one really didn?t. True, but if Mirror’s Edge had been third-person, it would of course have lost its USP… November 28, 2009 at 11:59 pm #106685 AndrewParticipant > But your question was ?You don?t mean NOW, right?? To which I would answer? ?No, I meant? historically!? ;-) Right, but the past tense was still in the quoted line – ‘have tended’ – and since history goes right up to a mere moment ago, the question would have been the same. “Historically, G&T has contained a lot of swearing” can be seen as including an opinion on the way it stands now, surely? (Especially when followed by “And I prefer G&T. And it’s more immersive”.) The historical line could mean “It is as it ever was. Cunt.” I honestly wasn’t trying to misrepresent your point at all and I’m amazed it came across that way. I don’t disagree at all with the knock-on effect of a tech issue two generations ago – I quit gaming around that time so didn’t see much of what happened – and from what you’re saying it seems like that re-created an appetite for third person content, now in 3D. (Birthing a renewed desire for lead characters to watch/’star’, I guess – just as we had with Dizzy. Lara Croft would never have been so iconic in first person.) > True, but if Mirror?s Edge had been third-person, it would of course have lost its USP? Oh, absolutely. As a piece of playable entertainment, it’s better that way – my point was that a) Prince could done that if it wanted to, but it wanted to be ‘Prince of Persia’ rather than ‘Empire’s Journey’ (or some other, equally generic, name for a game that focusses on environment more than main character), because b) broadly speaking, third person games give you a stronger sense of your playable character. And it’s reasons like that, rather than concerns about consoles’ inability to ‘do’ FPS, that seem to me to drive the choice right now. Third person is no longer chosen because it’s preferable to FPS on a hardware/controller basis – it’s chosen because it suits the material and gameplay better. November 29, 2009 at 12:01 am #106687 ChrisMParticipant It?s a PC vs console thing, basically. Historically, consoles have tended to do third-person games because they can?t really ?do? FPS as well. I do think that consoles deal with the whole camera angle thing better than PCs. I.e. usually you have the left joypad for movement, the right for camera angles, and I find it quite intuitive. I can imagine providing similar with keys and mouse would feel a bit more clunky. Not sure I appreciate the patronising suggestion that ?first person games have their place?, though, Sorry, I didn’t mean it like that, although I can see how it might be read that way. I should have phrased it better. I just generally prefer third person games for the reasons given. and I?d say a hearty BOLLOCKS to the suggestion that ?nearly all? of the best action/shooter games are third-person. Ok, I think that’s probably directed at someone else as I didn’t say that, but I think you’ve got a case there for straight shooters. (That’s essentially what I meant by ‘have their place.’ Literally, that they work well within certain styles of play, rather than a dismissive put down.) For other games that involve a bloke/gal running around grabbing stuff and completing puzzles, be it RPGs or just stuff between the shooting I think the third person comes into it’s own*. Mind you, I’m not all that into straight shooters (although they’re fun now and again) anyway so I might be biassed for that reason. *Again, that’s not to say there aren’t some first person games that do that too. I’ve played a couple of games that employ both, allowing you to change perspective. Those are great. November 29, 2009 at 3:36 am #106690 PhilParticipant >I?d say a hearty BOLLOCKS to the suggestion that ?nearly all? of the best action/shooter games are third-person. I didn’t mean to suggest that nearly all action/shooter games are better in third person…just that you’d be missing out on the vast majority of great games of ALL genres if you stuck only to the first-person requirement. I didn’t mention action or shooter at all in my post…nor did you in what I quoted! You could say that about anything, of course. Limiting yourself to first-person would be just as foolish as limiting yourself to third. Or to puzzle games. Or to Cooking Mama. November 29, 2009 at 3:56 am #106691 Ben PaddonParticipant I’m definitely a keyboard+mouse guy, but there are some console shooters I absolutely adore. TimeSpliters 2 may be a perfect example of the FPS genre on a console, and the Metroid: Prime series didn’t do a bad job of mapping FPS controls to the GCN’s controller. November 29, 2009 at 7:35 pm #106696 RidleyParticipant Personally I only find the keyboard/mouse combo useful for RTS and point-and-clicks. Unless it’s Call of Juarez in which case using the keyboard and mouse probably helped disguise how laughably bad that game is. b) broadly speaking, third person games give you a stronger sense of your playable character. Such as being able to see their feet. …if you’re into that sort of thing. November 29, 2009 at 10:20 pm #106699 Ben PaddonParticipant You can see the feet in Left 4 Dead. November 29, 2009 at 10:25 pm #106700 RidleyParticipant In most you cannae. November 29, 2009 at 10:43 pm #106701 Ben PaddonParticipant Well yes, I know that. November 29, 2009 at 11:20 pm #106702 Jonathan CappsKeymaster In FPS games, being able to see your legs looks SHIT. Author Posts Viewing 50 posts - 51 through 100 (of 101 total) 1 2 3 Scroll to top • Scroll to Recent Forum Posts You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Log In Username: Password: Keep me signed in Log In