SHAME ON ALL OF YOU
Craig H. Heartwell
SHAME ON ALL OF YOU!
DID (DOES) ANYONE WHO USES THIS FORUM DO ANYTHING CONSTRUCTIVE IN LIFE?
After spending a couple of weeks away for Xmas, New Years, and the damned
FLU, I was anxious to get back to work just so that I could catch up on
this forum since I feel that I have a vested interest and a small obligation.
I DIDN'T MISS SH@T! You people are still filling the forum with pitiful
"Which machine is better?" and "Where's that rumored converter?" crap.
Look, if you love your machine, then LOVE YOUR MACHINE and don't be so ready
to criticize the other guy's. Damn good thing that we have a limited number
of machines to choose from (for now) - If this was rec.auto.roadsters the
"mine is better" traffic would be unbearable! Read Chris Songer's level-headed
responses and SHUTUP.
HAS ANYONE PLAYED A REALLY GOOD GAME LATELY AND HAVE CONSTRUCTIVE COMMENTS AS
TO HOW GAMES IN GENERAL MIGHT BE MADE BETTER?
--
cr...@sae.com
Administrator, SNES/SFC Compendium
James Hague
>
>After spending a couple of weeks away for Xmas, New Years, and the damned
>FLU, I was anxious to get back to work just so that I could catch up on
>this forum since I feel that I have a vested interest and a small obligation.
>I DIDN'T MISS SH@T! You people are still filling the forum with pitiful
>"Which machine is better?" and "Where's that rumored converter?" crap.
Geez, no kidding. There is a quite a preocupation with hardware. Look
back over the last eight years: the NES, SMS, TurboGrafx-16, Genesis,
Gameboy, Atari 7800, SNES, Lynx, Game Gear, Neo-Geo, and Atari XE/GS
were all introduced, each system with fervent followers and bashers.
Yet truly classic games are still very few and far between. Yes, fancy
hardware makes possible new sorts of games which weren't previously
feasable, but it just doesn't seem to be happinging. At least not very
quickly. Everyone is *still* going wild over the latest clone of Super
Mario Brothers and Scramble.
I'm not putting down any system, they all have their great games and
their losers. But for the most part, game quality and playability are
independent of the hardware.
>HAS ANYONE PLAYED A REALLY GOOD GAME LATELY AND HAVE CONSTRUCTIVE COMMENTS AS
>TO HOW GAMES IN GENERAL MIGHT BE MADE BETTER?
Yup. Is there anyone else who has a problem with how easily
"continues" are handed out in most home games? I can understand this
sort of thing in the arcade, where some people might not want to pay
$0.50 to go through the same level over and over again. Or where some
one might get a thrill out of shelling out $10 to finish a
scrolling-kick-punch game. But at home?
For example, the Genesis version of Klax lets you continue up to 21
times WITHOUT ZEROING THE SCORE. What's the point of this? IMO it
takes most of the challenge away from the game--I mean who cares if you
die, you'll just get another chance. You bought the game and you have
it in your living room and you can play it as much as you want. No
paying fifty cents a shot. Why would you want to make the game
*easier*?
Any thoughts? (Hold back the flames, please.)
--
James Hague
exu...@exu.ericsson.se
ALISIA WEST
-------> Oh you think that's bad, try getting reviews out of these people.
Craig Lipinski
<STUFF DELETED>
>>HAS ANYONE PLAYED A REALLY GOOD GAME LATELY AND HAVE CONSTRUCTIVE COMMENTS AS
>>TO HOW GAMES IN GENERAL MIGHT BE MADE BETTER?
>
>Yup. Is there anyone else who has a problem with how easily
>"continues" are handed out in most home games? I can understand this
>sort of thing in the arcade, where some people might not want to pay
>$0.50 to go through the same level over and over again. Or where some
>one might get a thrill out of shelling out $10 to finish a
>scrolling-kick-punch game. But at home?
>
>For example, the Genesis version of Klax lets you continue up to 21
>times WITHOUT ZEROING THE SCORE. What's the point of this? IMO it
>takes most of the challenge away from the game--I mean who cares if you
>die, you'll just get another chance. You bought the game and you have
>it in your living room and you can play it as much as you want. No
>paying fifty cents a shot. Why would you want to make the game
>*easier*?
>
>Any thoughts? (Hold back the flames, please.)
>
>--
>James Hague
>exu...@exu.ericsson.se
Well, if having infinite continues ruins the game for you, DON'T USE THEM.
If your argument is that it's too easy to just hit the continue and keep
going, YOU are making the game less enjoyable for yourself. I have several
games that allow many continues, but on the one's that I'd like the playability
to last longer, I just hit 'A' until the continue timer runs out.
Some folks enjoy many continues, so why ruin the game for them when you can justopt to use them or not depeding on your own preference.
In short, just say "No!"
===============================================================================
"Ever go to make a pork sausage and find that it's got HAIRS growin'
all over it?"
...And he gave me a look, that chills me to this day.
-The Dead Milkmen
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Craig Anonymous Melloncamp Lipinski c...@pd2.ccd.harris.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The views I express... Bla.. Bla.. Bla... are mine, not my employer's, Bla..."
===============================================================================
Jeffrey Spence Jeffress
>
> Yup. Is there anyone else who has a problem with how easily
> "continues" are handed out in most home games?
<mucho stuff deleted>
> Any thoughts? (Hold back the flames, please.)
Yep!
I like continues! In fact I would like indefinate continues.
net.people and game.gurus> oooo... yuck.... Why would anyone want to take all the
> challenge out of a game?!?
Back when I was ten, I had lots of time and little money. I didn't mind spending
weeks on end getting down the last super-duper-whiz-bang-kill the boss-win the game
trick to finish. In fact, I would have been pissed if the games were to easy ($20 -
$50 now - is hard to come by when you are ten). Now however, I have very little
time and slightly more money. I do not have the tolerance to play days on end of the
same stuff. I enjoy seeing and playing many different games.
I like the continues because they let me pick up at the hard part rather than replaying
what I already know I can accomplish.
I understand the frustation with games that are too easy (I consistantly complain
about computer defenses in sports games). However, with most jumpers, I prefer the
continues. Not to say that everyone should like continues, just that I do.
>
> --
> James Hague
> exu...@exu.ericsson.se
A thanks to Mr. Hague for consistant-good postings. I may disagree but I certainly
respect your opinions!
--
Jeff Jeffress
j...@comet.rice.edu
j...@lgc.com
Peter A. Cohen
>Yup. Is there anyone else who has a problem with how easily
>"continues" are handed out in most home games? I can understand this
>sort of thing in the arcade, where some people might not want to pay
>$0.50 to go through the same level over and over again. Or where some
>one might get a thrill out of shelling out $10 to finish a
>scrolling-kick-punch game. But at home?
The funny thing is, continues are usually handled very poorly in arcade games.
I've come across a rash of three-d shooters that require .50 down and .50 to
continue.
>For example, the Genesis version of Klax lets you continue up to 21
>times WITHOUT ZEROING THE SCORE. What's the point of this? IMO it
>takes most of the challenge away from the game--I mean who cares if you
>die, you'll just get another chance. You bought the game and you have
>it in your living room and you can play it as much as you want. No
>paying fifty cents a shot. Why would you want to make the game
>*easier*?
I agree with what some others have said on this subject. Just because the
option is there doesn't mean you have to use it.
The weirdest and heaviest game I've seen lately is a war simulation/shooter
called Herzog Zwei. It takes a while to get used to, and to lay out the
strategy for, but it's a hell of a game. Star Control is great, too.
The game I'm really anxious to try is StarFlight. I used this when I had a PC
a couple of years ago, and they've made some outstanding additions to it for
the Genesis. It encompasses a really vast universe to explore and/or plunder
(depending on what kind of starship captain you are), and takes weeks, if not
months, to adequately explore. It's along the lines of the strategy space
games we've all seen before, but it's a class act.
For a change of pace, I'm really into DinoLand (which makes use of the
much-dreaded continue). Pinball's a nice way to relax after a couple of rounds
of your favorite shooter.
- Peter
Jason J. Wang
I have some games that I would like to sell in order to get my cash flow back
to normal.
TurboGrafx games:
Ninja Spirit: $30
Yo' Bro: $35
Genesis games:
Columns: $20
Pat Riley's Basketball: $17
These prices include shipping and are definitely negotiable.
I've also got a TurboExpress with TV tuner (these two I want to sell together)
that I may be willing to sell if I can get a good enough offer. If not, I'll
keep using my TE as a television/Genesis monitor (works great as a small
monitor for a Genesis) and as a Dungeon Explorer/Military Madness portable
machine. Somehow, it just doesn't seem cost effective to me, so it goes up for
sale.
You can make offers or send comments to jjs...@phoenix.princeton.edu
Thanks.
Brett Bourbin
> times WITHOUT ZEROING THE SCORE. What's the point of this? IMO it
> takes most of the challenge away from the game--I mean who cares if you
> die, you'll just get another chance. You bought the game and you have
> it in your living room and you can play it as much as you want. No
> paying fifty cents a shot. Why would you want to make the game
> *easier*?
Well, recently I was working on a game and I had to make such a decision --
Do I let the player continue from this position with the same statistics (like
energy, strength, level, etc.) or start from scratch. I thought back to all
the games I cursed at because I had to go through these boring level/screens
just to get back to the same place where I left off. But let's face it, you
are playing a game to have fun, and if you can't finish an beginning screen
to get to some more interesting ones, how much fun is it.
My decision was to Competition Levels (since there could be multiple players
competing in this game). The Training level will allow you to continue where
you left off, and is a lot easier in many areas (but also restrictive in
others). The Tournament levels would each be harder (smarter AI players/faster
moving/etc.) but when you died, you died.
There was a mode where you could come back, but with half of the resources that
a new player would receive, but I removed it later.
I guess the point I am trying to make is the developer has to remember why this
person is playing the game -- to have fun. In my case, I gave the user the
choice to play it the way they wanted to (with some restrictions).
> James Hague
> exu...@exu.ericsson.se
--
__
Brett Bourbin \ / /(_ /\/ 11440 Commerce Park Drive
..!uupsi!visix.com!brett \/ / __)/ /\ Reston, Virginia 22091
br...@visix.com Software Inc (703) 758-2733
James Hague
>
>Well, if having infinite continues ruins the game for you, DON'T USE THEM.
>If your argument is that it's too easy to just hit the continue and keep
>going, YOU are making the game less enjoyable for yourself. I have several
>games that allow many continues, but on the one's that I'd like the playability
>to last longer, I just hit 'A' until the continue timer runs out.
>
>Some folks enjoy many continues, so why ruin the game for them when you can
I kind of expected someone to say this. What I object to is that such
games provide a way for a total moron to do as well as someone who is a
very good player WITH ABSOLUTELY NO PENALTY. At the very least, the
score should be reset to zero. It just takes away the fun when you
know that spending a few hours plowing through a game using continues
accomplishes the same end as weeks of practice, and there's absolutely
no way to differentiate the two.
IMO, having free unlimited continues is just bad design. In the
arcade, they literally cost the player something ($0.25, $0.50), but
being completely free changes the play of a game. There's no need to
play it safe or come up with any sort of strategies if, for all intents
and purposes, you are invincible.
--
James Hague
exu...@exu.ericsson.se
david r watters
>>Some folks enjoy many continues, so why ruin the game for them when you can
>>just opt to use them or not depeding on your own preference.
>
>I kind of expected someone to say this. What I object to is that such
>games provide a way for a total moron to do as well as someone who is a
>very good player WITH ABSOLUTELY NO PENALTY. At the very least, the
>score should be reset to zero. It just takes away the fun when you
>know that spending a few hours plowing through a game using continues
>accomplishes the same end as weeks of practice, and there's absolutely
>no way to differentiate the two.
Geez! Get a life would ya!
We have a jerk that hangs around our neighborhood computer store that constantly
interupts conversations on certain games to let us know that he has already beat
it, or has gotten a score we could never possibly get. Big Farkin Deal. Get a
life, get a job, or get a girlfriend. All three is best.
If I get as much satisfaction out of finishing a game using continues in the limited
amount of free time I have, as you do practicing every day... SO WHAT! I payed for
my copy... I deserve as much as you.
David
Craig Lipinski
>>
>>Well, if having infinite continues ruins the game for you, DON'T USE THEM.
>>If your argument is that it's too easy to just hit the continue and keep
>>going, YOU are making the game less enjoyable for yourself. I have several
>>games that allow many continues, but on the one's that I'd like the playability
>>to last longer, I just hit 'A' until the continue timer runs out.
>>
>>Some folks enjoy many continues, so why ruin the game for them when you can
>>just opt to use them or not depeding on your own preference.
>
>I kind of expected someone to say this. What I object to is that such
>games provide a way for a total moron to do as well as someone who is a
>very good player WITH ABSOLUTELY NO PENALTY. At the very least, the
>score should be reset to zero. It just takes away the fun when you
>know that spending a few hours plowing through a game using continues
>accomplishes the same end as weeks of practice, and there's absolutely
>no way to differentiate the two.
>
You do have a very valid point; but my point is, let the total moron have as
much fun as the video game master. We're not in competetion here... You should
take satisfaction in the fact that you finished a game without using a single
continue, and let the less advanced players just be happy about finishing the
game at all.
>--
>James Hague
Bill Harris
You betcha, Dave. I'm a new Nintendo owner and don't have
years of experience or countless hours to spend sitting
at the tube, so the continues work great for me. I'm a racer
and I've played both RAD RACER II and FORMULA ONE - BUILT TO
WIN. I bought the latter yesterday due to the continues
feature plus the fact that you can gamble and customize your
car. I find all these add up to a great game. My daughter
can't race well yet, but loves to help me risk the dough in
Vegas while my son is learning to race but loves to jump
into my game once in a while to race the hotter cars. We
would all be miserable going over the same old route every
time we started a game, but if we wanted to do that we could
sign in at entry level and go to it on this game we now own.
This way we can satisfy those nasty little weenies who insist
that their way to play is the ONLY way to play and want to
impose their standards on us to make themselves feel good.
In summary: The continues feature offers the player a choice
and that is always better than being forced to play only in
one mode. The operative word here is "PLAY" not "WORK". The
workin' man values his free time......
Drew Johnson
>back over the last eight years: the NES, SMS, TurboGrafx-16, Genesis,
>Gameboy, Atari 7800, SNES, Lynx, Game Gear, Neo-Geo, and Atari XE/GS
>were all introduced, each system with fervent followers and bashers.
>Yet truly classic games are still very few and far between. Yes, fancy
>hardware makes possible new sorts of games which weren't previously
>feasable, but it just doesn't seem to be happinging. At least not very
>quickly. Everyone is *still* going wild over the latest clone of Super
>Mario Brothers and Scramble.
I don't know... Maybe you are just reading to much rec.games.video :).
I got 6 games for Christmas, and have had time to try out 4. For the Genesis
I got Road Rash, Gain Ground, Gaires(sp), and John Madden '92. For the
TG-16, I got Silent Debuggers and Sonic Spike. I have played Road Rash,
Gain Ground, John Madden, and Silent Debuggers, and have not been disappointed
in any of them. They are all very entertaining, and none of them struck me
as re-hashes of other games (of course, I did not have the original John
Madden, but this is kind of a special case).
Now, how many of these games *needed* the hardware they ran on?
Road Rash - game play could probably be implemented pretty easily on
NES. However much of the attraction of this game is the graphics while
driving, so I would say, yes this was a game that needed the latest
and greatest.
Gain Ground - I really like the way this game plays, but it could have
easily been done on the NES (and probably is, for all I know).
John Madden '92 - definitely needed the latest in terms of hardware
in order to make it a winner.
Silent Debuggers - Looks like it would have been no problem on the NES.
So this is a 50/50 on making good use of the hardware advances that the
TG-16/Genesis provided over the NES/SMS.
I don't know what the marketability would be, but it seems to me that a good
home version of Stargate would sell extremely well. Can any of the machines
provide the horsepower to do this game justice? On a more selfish note, I
am particularly fond of Smash TV. I have not played the NES version of this
game, but I cannot believe that it is a complete port. Could any of the
machines out now handle the number of simultaneous bad guys that the arcade
machine manages? I confess that I do no know, but based on what I have seen
with other games, I would say that it is pretty unlikely. Now, if one of these
machines *was* able to support a complete port of Smash TV, then I can make
a pretty good case for pointing to that machine and saying "this machine
*really* stands out because...". Of course, to my knowledge, none of the
'big three' are all that much different from each other in terms of capability.
I guess what I am trying to say is, examination of what hardware can do is
*not* necessarily a futile effort when deciding what machine to buy. It just
so happens that in the current market, such an examination does not provide
a significant advantage to any system (as compared with the stronger arguments
of game selection, desired game availability, etc).
Have I contributed meaningfully to the discussion? I think so, but just
to make sure:
"The TurboExpress rules the handheld systems, and all the others eat sh*t."
There, now there is something to appeal to everybody :)
Drew
dr...@verdix.com
James Hague
>
>Geez! Get a life would ya!
>
>We have a jerk that hangs around our neighborhood computer store that constantly
>interupts conversations on certain games to let us know that he has already beat
>it, or has gotten a score we could never possibly get. Big Farkin Deal. Get a
>life, get a job, or get a girlfriend. All three is best.
Your buddy sounds pretty annoying. You have to wonder about people who
hang around computer stores all day...
>If I get as much satisfaction out of finishing a game using continues in the limited
>amount of free time I have, as you do practicing every day... SO WHAT! I payed for
>my copy... I deserve as much as you.
Yes and no. On the one hand you have people who get frustrated if they
can't finish a game within the first few hours; they just want to see
all the levels and the "ending" so they can stamp the game "solved."
Then you have people who want to play a game the way it was
designed--without resorting to cheats and a zillion continues. I can
see both points of view.
IMO though, it takes something away from the satisfaction of beating a
game when you know that someone can buy or cheat his way through it
without using any skill whatsoever. Imagine (real-life) baseball if
you could just try again whenever you struck out. All I'd like is
there be a way to differentiate between people who just want instant
gratification and those who really play. A different ending. An
asterisk on the high score chart. A lower score. Something...
I *do* have a life outside of the video game world, BTW, it's just a
hobby after all. I don't live and die by it.
--
James Hague
exu...@exu.ericsson.se
Todd R Johnson
I think many people in this discussion are forgetting an important
fact: Computer games are meant to be fun. I work all day (and
sometimes most of the night) so when I sit down to play a game I want
to escape and have fun, not do more work. Continues, saving, and level
selection are just part of the game design that must be taken into
account. I don't think that you can say that continues are always good
or bad. It all depends on the type of game (and the game itself) and the
target audience. What works for one game might not work for others.
Here are games that I think are fun and the type of continues that
they have:
Klax (Lynx): Unlimited continues, resets score to zero. Warps to
higher levels. You can start on higher levels. These features let you
play Klax in various ways. You can go for a high score from the start.
You can try to see how far you can get from the start. Finally, you
can just keep continuing to see if you can do various levels.
Chip's Challenge (Lynx): A password for each level. You need to go to
a level before you get the password, but if you get stuck on a level
you are asked if you want to go to the next level. It would be impossible
and boring to play each level when you restart---the levels take too
long to finish. Not allowing you to skip a level would mean that
people would get stuck at various levels and would probably stop
playing. (Of course, where you get stuck is probably not where I would
get stuck, so the skip level feature modifies the game for the
individual player.) Instead of getting frustrated with Chip's and
forgetting about it, I just usually go on and then return to the level
that I had trouble with at a later time.
Military Madness (TG-16): Password for each level. You need to visit a
level before you get the password. You couldn't play this any other
way---the advanced levels take hours to play. I do wish it would let
you skip a level after 10 or so tries.
Devil's Crush (TG-16): Password saves score and number of balls. I
usually just play from the start to get a high score, but I use the
password to try to beat the machine by scoring the maximum number of
points.
Legend of Zelda (NES): Save when you die, saves possesions and life
points. You restart with less then the maximum number of life points,
but it is fairly easy to max them out. You can also continue when you
die. When you are outside you start at the beginning of the map. When
you are in a Labyrinth you start at the beginning of the maze. You
continue with only three life points. This limited form of continue
and saving gives you an incentive to stay alive and keep playing, but
minimizes frustration when the unavoidable occurs.
Dungeon Master (Amiga): Save anywhere, saves everything. In addition,
when a character dies it can be resurrected, but it can take a lot of
work. DM is big and complex and wouldn't work very well without these
features. In fact, DM is one of the most well designed games I have
ever played. It has been out for several years now and still puts
most other (perhaps all) RPG's to shame.
Zarlor Mercenary (Lynx): There is no level select or continue, but the
game is short and part of the fun is building up your ship and trying
to get to the end.
Games that are fun, but need continues:
APB (Lynx): It takes me a half hour to get to level 12 and then I get
too many demerits and I have to restart at level 1. After doing this
several times I finally quite playing. APB is a fun game, but it needs a level
select or continue feature.
Scrapyard Dog (Lynx): I did fine until I reached the "vehicle in the
sewer" level. I get there with several men and still can't get through
the level. As a result I've stopped playing. Yes, I know that I can
warp past the level, but I'd like to play it out. A level select would
be greatly appreciated.
Bard's Tale (Amiga): You can save, but only if you go to an Inn. I
found it too tedious to extract myself from a dungeon just to get
healed and save.
---Todd
--
Todd R. Johnson Email: t...@cis.ohio-state.edu
Assistant Professor
Division of Medical Informatics
The Ohio State University
James Hague
>
>APB (Lynx): It takes me a half hour to get to level 12 and then I get
>too many demerits and I have to restart at level 1. After doing this
>several times I finally quite playing. APB is a fun game, but it needs a level
>select or continue feature.
>
>Scrapyard Dog (Lynx): I did fine until I reached the "vehicle in the
>sewer" level. I get there with several men and still can't get through
>the level. As a result I've stopped playing. Yes, I know that I can
>warp past the level, but I'd like to play it out. A level select would
>be greatly appreciated.
This discussion is starting to get a bit flamey (though the above
posting wasn't). I started this mess, so let me make a few final
comments and then bow out.
(1) Yes, video games are supposed to be fun. I'm not saying that they
should be made more difficult or that anyone has to play a particular
way. If you have fun, then so be it.
(2) Video games are also exactly that, *games*. You can win or you
can lose. They are goal driven: get a higher score, get to the end,
whatever. Much of the fun comes from the fact that the more you play,
the better you get. It is very satisfying to be able to accomplish
something you once thought impossible. Or to survive a close call. Or
to destroy a series of attackers with a minimum number of shots. You
get the idea. Of course, in order to win, you have to be able to lose.
There seems to be quite an effort to get rid of this aspect of things,
through cheats, unlimited continues, and such. IMO, this completely
changes the feel of a game. If a game gives you three lives, then
also provides unlimited continues without clearing the score, then
what's the point of having three lives to begin with? It's just bad
design.
(3) There are better alternatives to letting the player plow through
a game. Level selects, as Todd mentioned above, can prevent the player
from always having to start at square one. And having several
difficulty settings would accommodate players of varying skill. I
always thought the "teddy bear" setting for little kids on some of
the old Atari 2600 games was a great idea. Alternatively, you could
provide continues only up to a point. Dragon's Lair II does this;
you can blindly plow through the game only up to a point, but if
you want to get any further you need to actually learn how to play.
That's it. No more rambling. Remember, this all started with
someone's cry for a discussion about how to improve games; I just
gave it my two cents worth.
--
James Hague
exu...@exu.ericsson.se
The Fightin' Llama
have a Lynx and games like Chip's Challenge or Blue Lightening would
be unplayable if they didn't have password-protected access to
higher levels. I've currently suffering through Klax addiction and
the only reason I can see for it ending soon is that I can't easily
get to the last level I died at -- "I have to do all this AGAIN?"
Passwords offer a nice compromise between it being too easy to
continue and it being impossible.
'Course writing 'em down is a pain...
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
bboy...@ucsd.edu "My GOD, did you see the power and majesty radiated by
that llama?" "Well, of course I did, you fool..."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert A Jung
>I think many people in this discussion are forgetting an important
>fact: Computer games are meant to be fun. I work all day (and
>sometimes most of the night) so when I sit down to play a game I want
>to escape and have fun, not do more work. Continues, saving, and level
>selection are just part of the game design that must be taken into
>account. I don't think that you can say that continues are always good
>or bad. It all depends on the type of game (and the game itself) and the
>target audience. What works for one game might not work for others.
Agreed. Let's remember we're trying to have fun here. I myself side with
the "rig the game so that infinite-continue players can be separated from
the dedicated aces", but I think there are ways to do this without resorting
to "always play at level 1, no continues".
>Here are games that I think are fun and the type of continues that
>they have:
>
> [Good list deleted]
One other title I'd like to add:
GATES OF ZENDOCON (Lynx): A password feature lets you start on any level
that you have reached previously. The game can also be played at either
an "Easy" level or a "Hard" level. Two score sets are used: Games played
at the "Easy" level will have a lower score than games played at "Hard".
Granted, GoZ does this primitively (Hard scores = 100 x Easy scores), but
this is a great system to separate differentl levels of players, and also
allows you to skip to the more advanced stages.
--R.J.
B-)
//////////////////////////////////////|\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
Send whatevers to rj...@usc.edu | If it has pixels, I'm for it.
--------------------------------------+------------------------------Lynx up!
"If it moves, shoot it. If it doesn't move, shoot it anyway."
Harry Herman
><mucho stuff deleted>
>>
>> --
>> James Hague
>> exu...@exu.ericsson.se
I also prefer the continues. When playing RPG games (my preference), you
generally only start over from the last point you saved at. I don't do
well at shooters, but occasionaly rent them for something different. The
ones that don't offer continues, I get bored with (and pissed off at)
very quickly, since I don't like starting over from square one every time
I screw up. I don't mind having to repeat one or two screens every time
I die, but going through 5 or 6 screens, dying (or dying one too many times)
and having to start over at the opening screen of the game time after time
gets VERY OLD VERY QUICK.
If you don't like continues, you can always hit reset and start over. If
the continues are taken out of the games, then those of us who want continues
will not be able to.
--
------------------------------------------------
Harry Herman Corpane Industries, Inc.
UUCP: her...@corpane.uucp
Internet: herman%cor...@uunet.uu.net
Larry J Brackney
>I agree with what some others have said on this subject. Just because the
>option is there doesn't mean you have to use it.
I also agree on this point.
>The weirdest and heaviest game I've seen lately is a war simulation/shooter
>called Herzog Zwei. It takes a while to get used to, and to lay out the
>strategy for, but it's a hell of a game. Star Control is great, too.
Herzog has been out for quite a while, but I still think it stands out
as one of the best titles for the Genesis. The game offers a lot of variety
and challenge. Even when you get tired of the computer as an opponent,
you can take on a friend! Star Control on the other hand didn't hold my
interest as long. It was well executed, but isn't as varied as Herzog.
>The game I'm really anxious to try is StarFlight. I used this when I had a PC
>a couple of years ago, and they've made some outstanding additions to it for
>the Genesis. It encompasses a really vast universe to explore and/or plunder
>(depending on what kind of starship captain you are), and takes weeks, if not
>months, to adequately explore. It's along the lines of the strategy space
>games we've all seen before, but it's a class act.
This one is terrific. I bought it not to long ago, and I really am
enjoying it. I'd hesitate to lump it in with Herzog and Star Control
though. It's more of an RPG-type game. By the way? Can anybody give
me coordinates for the Shimmering Sphere? I know what planet it's on,
but I haven't been able to track it down!
>For a change of pace, I'm really into DinoLand (which makes use of the
>much-dreaded continue). Pinball's a nice way to relax after a couple of rounds
>of your favorite shooter.
You owe it to yourself to track down a copy of Devil Crash MD! This
game is truly amazing. It comes off as a well executed, highly playable
pinball experience!
- larry
--
/ Larry J. Brackney | E-Mail: brac...@mn.ecn.purdue.edu \
|-------------------------| S-Mail: 3116 Hilltop Dr. W. Lafayette IN 47906 |
| Mechanical Engineering | Phone : (317)-463-1602 (Home) |
\ Purdue University | (317)-494-6552 (Office) /
Larry J Brackney
>IMO though, it takes something away from the satisfaction of beating a
>game when you know that someone can buy or cheat his way through it
>without using any skill whatsoever. Imagine (real-life) baseball if
>you could just try again whenever you struck out. All I'd like is
>there be a way to differentiate between people who just want instant
>gratification and those who really play. A different ending. An
>asterisk on the high score chart. A lower score. Something...
Just curious. How do you feel about level selects, easter eggs, game
genies and the like? I agree that a player may well be cheating him/her
self by using such tricks. After all, such "tricks" reduce the play
life of a game. However, I've played quite a few games that I probably
would have smashed to silicon powder if it weren't for continues, or
some other trick which helped me along. I think you'll agree that it
is up to player to decide when such things are appropriate, and when
they serve only to shorten the playing experience.
On a related note: I seem to remember that Klax did zero your score
when you continued. (And the number of continues could be selected at
the option screen.) Maybe I'm just getting senile!
Be seeing you!
Elf
>
>Yes and no. On the one hand you have people who get frustrated if they
>can't finish a game within the first few hours; they just want to see
>all the levels and the "ending" so they can stamp the game "solved."
>Then you have people who want to play a game the way it was
>designed--without resorting to cheats and a zillion continues. I can
>see both points of view.
>
>IMO though, it takes something away from the satisfaction of beating a
>game when you know that someone can buy or cheat his way through it
>without using any skill whatsoever. Imagine (real-life) baseball if
>you could just try again whenever you struck out. All I'd like is
>there be a way to differentiate between people who just want instant
>gratification and those who really play. A different ending. An
>asterisk on the high score chart. A lower score. Something...
>
>exu...@exu.ericsson.se
I've noticed a recent trend in arcade games that will soon probably
come to home games, is in fact different endings.
In sf2 (arcade) if you finish on 1 credit you get a special screen
listing battles with comp vs comp. if you use more then 1 credit
you just get a sappy story.
also if you can finish the game without ever losing a battle, you
get a different funky ending that tells about the game makers.
there is also rumors about another ending that you can get to if
you beat the game with a certain character using only certain
buttons. and this ending includes an extra round of combat.
In general what's good for the arcade will eventually hit the home
market to, so don't despair to long.
-Elf
ps. sorry, sf2 stands for Street Fighter II
Marcus Harvey
>
>fact: Computer games are meant to be fun. I work all day (and
>sometimes most of the night) so when I sit down to play a game I want
>to escape and have fun, not do more work. Continues, saving, and level
>selection are just part of the game design that must be taken into
>account. I don't think that you can say that continues are always good
>or bad. It all depends on the type of game (and the game itself) and the
>target audience. What works for one game might not work for others.
Absolutely.
The hidden level select in Sonic makes this game for my friends and I.
There is _no way_ I have the time or inclination to fight my way through
the whole game _ever_ in my life. There are too many other things to do
like mountain biking, drinking, sleeping, kissing etc.
I enjoy playing video games. I like dfeating that baddie/jumping over those
lava pools etc. I like to see the next world/sprite graphics. I don't give
a monkeys hoot about high scores.
There's room for both the 10 year olds with Nintendo ROMS grafted into their
brains and old duffers like me who like to play a few rounds of 'Sonic in the
undewater bit' with me mates after the club (why don't they have a 'blind drunk'
mode on the difficulty setting?!?!).
I think *all* my MD games should have LEVEL SELECT on the options screen as
standard. Zero the score, don't enter it into the high-score table, fine by me.
Just let me have fun - MY WAY.
- marcus
mar...@uk.ac.pcl.sun - JANET
marcus%sun.pcl.ac.uk@ukacrl - BITNET/EARN
Patrick Sugent
>
>The game I'm really anxious to try is StarFlight. I used this when I had a PC
>a couple of years ago, and they've made some outstanding additions to it for
>the Genesis. It encompasses a really vast universe to explore and/or plunder
>(depending on what kind of starship captain you are), and takes weeks, if not
>months, to adequately explore. It's along the lines of the strategy space
>games we've all seen before, but it's a class act.
I didn't realize they changed stargflight when they ported it to Genesis.
Can you list some of the improvements? I'm interesting in buying the game
if it has been added to since I played it on my PC. It's still one
of my favorites.
Thanks.
Pat
Peter A. Cohen
Sugent) writes:
> I didn't realize they changed stargflight when they ported it to Genesis.
>Can you list some of the improvements? I'm interesting in buying the game
>if it has been added to since I played it on my PC. It's still one
>of my favorites.
I haven't had a chance to play it on the Genesis yet, but from what I've read
in mag's:
Different mineral scanning techniques
The land rover is configureable
The starbase is set up quite differently
Improved graphics, sound, and speed.
The StarFlight I am used to is the original CGA release, so these improvement
may have been incorporated into later releases...
...anyone who actually has the game is welcome to correct me...
jjf...@skcla.monsanto.com
> IMO, having free unlimited continues is just bad design. In the
> arcade, they literally cost the player something ($0.25, $0.50), but
> being completely free changes the play of a game. There's no need to
> play it safe or come up with any sort of strategies if, for all intents
> and purposes, you are invincible.
Free? $15 to $75 per cartridge is free? My time is also not free. If I get
20-30 minutes to play a game, I will. If it will take me hours to get through
a game to get to the interesting part, it's not worth it. That's why I stopped
playing Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles.
I am very fond of adventure/role playing games, where the puzzles are fun and
interesting, but having to play the first 90% of a game just to solve the last
10% OVER AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER is silly. That's why I may not play
Solstice much, even tho I just bought it.
My real peeve, though, is games where you can't save more than one player's
game, such as Final Fantasy. Both my wife and I like to play the games when we
get them, and to not be able to save two players means that we must either take
turns with one game, or wait till the whole thing is done? Yuck.
Joel Finkle
Internet: JJF...@skcla.monsanto.com
Bryan Newell
I have a few comments about the "changes" between the IBM release and the
Sega release of this game (StarFlight). I've played both and solved the
Sega version (with minor help from the "HintBook" :)
>I haven't had a chance to play it on the Genesis yet, but from what I've read
>in mag's:
>
>Different mineral scanning techniques
First off, the new mineral scanning is lousy. On the IBM, scanning
showed where above ground mineral deposits were, and also where
ruins and endurium were. The Genesis version shows you nothing but
a map and your location in relation to it. This was the single most
annoying thing about the game.
>The land rover is configureable
Yes, although the manual does not explain what *any* of the new
equipment does. It's pretty easy to figure out for some stuff
(Like "Extra Cargo"), but others are more difficult (Like
"Radar"... never did figure out what this did).
>The starbase is set up quite differently
Mostly just cosmetic. The same places are there, with the same
menus an' stuff.
>Improved graphics, sound, and speed.
>
>The StarFlight I am used to is the original CGA release, so these improvement
>may have been incorporated into later releases...
>
>...anyone who actually has the game is welcome to correct me...
bryan newell (v...@mentor.cc.purdue.edu)
Ken Goach
get a finite number of continues (10). Other games I
have played give only three continues.
Ten may sound like a lot, but on STAR WARS I have needed
them!
THIS POSTING DOES NOT REPRESENT THE OPINIONS OF MY EMPLOYERS.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Q: How many guitarists does it take to change a lightbulb?
A: Twenty-one. One to change the bulb and 20 to watch and say
"Oh, I can do that."
-------------------------------------------------------------