Let's just have a random video game chat - Lounge

JMan

Gowi wrote:

Not sure.

But yeah, I remember quite enjoying the old Mega Man games, though I never owned them (my neighbor did though), though I think my favorite one is the least Mega Man-esque of all of them: Mega Man Legends (PSX, 1997).

I think that corny fan movie has the answers to the matchup. Not sure. Storywise, that movie was a ecent representation. The redesigns kinda sucked.

Never had the original Mega Man games, but I acquired an NES from a friend. The games included the first three Marios, Duck Hunt, Zelda I & 2 (gold metallic), Mach Rider, Pro Am, Tiger-Heli, Wrecking Crew, Ice Climbers, Excitebike, Wheel of Fortune, Goonies II, TMNT I & II, Tetris, and probably a couple of other games.

ShaneSpear
Thread Killah

Moderator

I've always thought you can't beat Battletoads co-op because of Clinger Winger (the bike race.)

Did they fix that in a later version, or did you just consider that a win getting there (god knows I would.)

mickilennial
The Most Trusted Name in News

Gender: Female
Age: 35
Location: Detroit

ShaneSpear wrote:

I've always thought you can't beat Battletoads co-op because of Clinger Winger (the bike race.)

Did they fix that in a later version, or did you just consider that a win getting there (god knows I would.)

Yeah, that's the level with the infamous glitch; maybe my memory is shitty or I just remember getting that far with my friend (come on I was young as hell when this happened), so I assume we considered it a win.

But I don't remember outside of us feeling retrieved and going on to play TMNT III or whatever.

JMan

Taking a short water break from Tomb Raider (2013). It's easily one of the best games I've ever played in terms of thrills and suspense. It may become my second favorite video game. I don't know if the originals are like this reboot or not, but either way I am very interested.

mickilennial
The Most Trusted Name in News

Gender: Female
Age: 35
Location: Detroit

JMan wrote:

Taking a short water break from Tomb Raider (2013). It's easily one of the best games I've ever played in terms of thrills and suspense. It may become my second favorite video game. I don't know if the originals are like this reboot or not, but either way I am very interested.

No, Tomb Raider '13 took more from the Uncharted series in terms of mechanics and dynamic (which is ironic since the original Tomb Raider games influenced Uncharted despite being a lot rougher and frustrating at times). If you want a game like '13, play the Uncharted games. Classic TR is still great though, but '13 is my favorite Raider game.

SquishypuffDave

Gender: Male
Age: 33

I'm with JMan on not having to finish a game in order to be justified in evaluating it. Lots of games don't even have endings. Seems like a pretty unrealistic expectation. If Gowie hasn't beaten Pac-Man but believes it to be reviewable, then his argument falls down. If Gowie has beaten Pac-Man, then his argument is even worse because then criticism is the sole dominion of the most single-mindedly deranged members of society.

mickilennial
The Most Trusted Name in News

Gender: Female
Age: 35
Location: Detroit

SquishypuffDave wrote:

I'm with JMan on not having to finish a game in order to be justified in evaluating it. Lots of games don't even have endings. Seems like a pretty unrealistic expectation. If Gowie hasn't beaten Pac-Man but believes it to be reviewable, then his argument falls down. If Gowie has beaten Pac-Man, then his argument is even worse because then criticism is the sole dominion of the most single-mindedly deranged members of society.

For non-linear games, my "unrealistic expectation" would come down to content experienced and hours taken. My argument doesn't fall down for I did not detail my whole counterpoint to the ridiculous assertion you can evaluate a game for only two hours of experience.

If you think you can evaluate a whole piece of art by barely glancing at it, you're a fool.

JMan

Gowi wrote:

For non-linear games, my "unrealistic expectation" would come down to content experienced and hours taken. My argument doesn't fall down for I did not detail my whole counterpoint to the ridiculous assertion you can evaluate a game for only two hours of experience.

If you think you can evaluate a whole piece of art by barely glancing at it, you're a fool.

For short games, yes. For most games, like I just got thorugh saying, I've put in a lot more than two hours. The short amount of hours is why Wind Waker (at least 3), Pokemon Silver (Got like two badges), and a few others don't appear. It's really a mental estimation of.. I suppose a time to content ratio. Half an hour is enough to rate SMB if you get like three worlds in. I've gotten to 8-2. I misspoke when I said one or two hours. In fact, I was referring to older games which technically wouldn't take long to beat, let alone form an opinion. I can get through SMB within less than an hour, I can get through two or three dungeons in the original Zelda in two hours, a lot of the games a=on my list are from the early gens, so I used that as a rough estimation. I'm not sure how many of the old consoles you guys had. I has NES and Genesis. But a lot of them take so much less time, so that was my estimation. I can get through those classics in a snap. Mario, Sonic, Zelda, heck, original Metal Gear.

Gowi wrote:

No, Tomb Raider '13 took more from the Uncharted series in terms of mechanics and dynamic (which is ironic since the original Tomb Raider games influenced Uncharted despite being a lot rougher and frustrating at times). If you want a game like '13, play the Uncharted games. Classic TR is still great though, but '13 is my favorite Raider game.

Wish I could. We acquired a used PS2, not a PS3 or 4. But this works out. A lot of games I wanted to play are on the original two.

Applerill
Autistic Princess <3

Gender: Female
Age: 30
Location: Chicago

Skinny wrote:

Your parents must be so proud.

^

Guys, we already brag enough about how art apparently makes us better people. We don't have to turn this into a direct meritocracy.

Defago
Your Most Favorite User

Gender: Male
Age: 31
Location: Lima

JMan wrote:

Zelda OOT (Up to Shadow Temple)

You're telling me your #2 game in your top 10 list so far, you haven't finished.

I mean I get it that there's two kinds of games, the ones meant for replaying (such as pacman, MOBAs, most fighting games, most shooters) and others meant more as a story (Bioshocks, Dead Space, Zeldas, etc) with a bunch jumbled in between. In my mind, the first category falls more into the "sport" side of things. Like chess, like tetris, like basketball, you play it for the competition, the fun, and the game itself. On the other hand, games like Journey or MGS are there more for the story, the immersion, and in my opinion are more adequate experienced as a whole thing, whereas on replayable-based games there's not really a "whole thing" because the experience changes every time. So yeah, I totally get it "getting the game after getting the gameplay" on a game such as DotA, because the gameplay is the only thing that remains from match to match. But on a story-based, single-player, linear game with strong emphasis on one playthrough you gotta see the whole thing. The latter are closer to interactive movies than to sports.

Also, it's unrealistic to expect someone to have all the achievements 100% to finally be able to decide whether you like a game. However, come on, dude, you surely realize why people expect you to have beaten the main story of a fairly linear game before dropping it on the second spot of your list.