Reasons why this game isn't as good as Donkey Kong Country 2

#61SpunkySixPosted 4/21/2014 12:41:14 PM
ShadowN64 posted...
*sigh*

Context.

His first topic was to complain about "stupid shoehorned waggle controls". In which topic he told everyone they had poor reading comprehension (much like you do), and basically ranted about everyone who said the control-stick (instead of d-pad) was fine.


I should add here that said "waggle controls" aren't even mandatory and that pretty much everybody else knew that.
---
Tissue to the extreme!
I'd like to be a tree.
#62metroidhunterxPosted 4/22/2014 3:36:08 PM
ShadowN64 posted...
*sigh*

Context.

His first topic was to complain about "stupid shoehorned waggle controls". In which topic he told everyone they had poor reading comprehension (much like you do), and basically ranted about everyone who said the control-stick (instead of d-pad) was fine.

Then he posts this topic. And in the process begins to rant again, clearly looking for some kind of approbation or agreement. Cue my post.

Please try to understand context before tossing out the "learn to read" card (which honestly seems a bit childish).


Your apparent vendetta against him for his behavior in an earlier topic doesn't concern me. In THIS topic, the only one I give a **** about since this topic isn't called "Let's discuss all my past topics," his first post was perfectly reasonable.
#63AtzarPosted 4/23/2014 12:02:31 AM(edited)
So point by point, IMO of course:

1) Kremlings over Snowmads is very subjective. Functionally they have most of the same types (the normal baddie, the jumping guy, the guy you can't jump on / the guy you can't roll into, the big tough baddie, etc.) Personally I feel the Snowmads have much more personality and a better backstory, but if you like the Kremlings more then cool.

2) Diversity of environments is poor... Subjectivity aside, you're flat-out wrong here. The diversity in presentation and style from level to level (and frequently even within a single level) was arguably the greatest strength of TF. Again, if you prefer the level types from DKC2 then cool, but saying that this game lacked diversity is just false.

3) You're overstating your point here. Several of DKC2's animal buddies don't really change gameplay much (exceptions: Squawks and Squitter). Rambi wasn't featured more in TF because frankly there are only so many things you can do with a nearly-indestructible mount. The game gives you your opportunities to wreck things indiscriminately, which is fun for a bit but would get old quickly if they do it too much. Normal enemies are just horn fodder for Rambi, so the only real way to give difficulty is to force the player into fast-paced platforming, which they do. Where do you go from there? Retro made a smart decision by not using him more than they did - he's a fun gimmick, but he's also very limited in terms of gameplay. More buddies would have been welcome but similarly limited.

Keep in mind that the buddies were necessary in the SNES DKCs - they needed gimmicks to help differentiate one level from another of the same archetype. Since this game needs no help creating different experiences with each level, additional buddies were unneeded - they included Rambi as a nod to nostalgia and left it at that. I like the decision.

Also, the only difference between riding Squitter and being Squitter is the fact that you don't have to chase the bastard down when you get hit. Let's not oversell that distinction, because it's inconsequential.

4) False again. Irate Eight is a perfect example of a 'surprise moment' where you're racing against a giant enemy. Overall, I think the game is full of minor surprises that alter the way you approach a level (off the top of my head - the minecart levels have a few, like the water portion of the sawmill level and the changing POV in a few of the levels).

5) You say awesome, I say filler. More subjectivity.

6) Agree with part of this - having unique secret areas was appreciated in DKC2. But you're mad because they made the KONG letters actually matter? Puzzle pieces aren't worth getting because there are too many of them? Seriously?

I did like DKC3's bear traders - they had personality and were fun - but I had forgotten about the banana birds until you mentioned them. I hardly count a 'Simon Says' minigame as a lively portion of the game... just more filler.


I do take issue with the wording in your title - "isn't as good" implies a basis in facts, and there are few to be found in your argument. But when I instead take your opening post to simply be your opinion, then nobody can fault you on that (your perplexing stance on TF's variety aside). I disagree on many of your points, but to each their own.
#64FunkyKong84Posted 4/23/2014 3:53:49 AM
DKC2 is better simply because it did most of the things DKCTF did first. Just like SMB3 is better than NSMBU because it did all of those awesome things back in 1988.

Other than that, DKCTF is truly amazing and probably the second best DKC game.
---
MKW rooms: 5414-1751-1872, bikes: 2321-8230-2740
karts: 2193-9930-0913, 3DS: 1762-2720-2528
#65ShadowN64Posted 4/23/2014 5:08:17 AM
metroidhunterx posted...

Your apparent vendetta against him for his behavior in an earlier topic doesn't concern me. In THIS topic, the only one I give a **** about since this topic isn't called "Let's discuss all my past topics," his first post was perfectly reasonable.


Ah, you're beginning to understand! Good! I didn't really have an issue with his first post. Go back and read my posts. My first (responding to his first) treated his as reasonable (and responded to one of his points). My second post (responding to his second post) was calling him out for more of the same attitude he had in his first topic. And so on.

I begin to wonder if you aren't actually the TC with a different user name. Your attitudes are remarkably similar (condescending and derogatory) and you seem so eager to defend him ;)
---
The Shadow
#66metroidhunterxPosted 4/24/2014 4:55:23 PM
ShadowN64 posted...
Ah, you're beginning to understand! Good!

See what you've done here? You've illustrated that based on the degree of condescending attitude I showed toward you, a condescending response was warranted. Or would you continue to disagree in order to remain consistent? Either way, you've committed a similar act as the topic creator when he responded in-kind to the childish replies to his original post.

I didn't really have an issue with his first post.

Yet despite the ignorant non-responses that came pouring in, his one snotty rebuttal was unforgivable!

Go back and read my posts. My first (responding to his first) treated his as reasonable (and responded to one of his points). My second post (responding to his second post) was calling him out for more of the same attitude he had in his first topic. And so on.

Re-reading won't spontaneously put me in a state of enlightenment. I know exactly what I read. You took his response as a personal attack when you weren't even named. Were you intended to be one of the recipients of his message? I can't say for sure, but I would assume not since there were far more outrageous replies than yours.

I begin to wonder if you aren't actually the TC with a different user name. Your attitudes are remarkably similar (condescending and derogatory) and you seem so eager to defend him ;)

Remarkably so. You're welcome to believe whatever you want, even though you'd be wrong to think that way. Aside from "condescending and derogatory" nearly being a universal descriptor for the common Gamefaqs user, I've defended people on both sides of the fence. If what you're saying is true, then your arch-nemesis here has only been on one side of the fence the whole time.
#67ShadowN64Posted 4/25/2014 12:27:14 PM
Oh dear. Next time please remind me to never try to explain things to a contrarian.
---
The Shadow
#68metroidhunterxPosted 4/25/2014 3:12:12 PM
ShadowN64 posted...
Oh dear. Next time please remind me to never try to explain things to a contrarian.


There you have it. Again, you've illustrated your frustration with the use of condescension in a clear attempt to have a jab at me, yet this method is explicitly off-limits to others.
#69ShadowN64Posted 4/26/2014 5:30:34 AM
*sigh*
I have high hopes that one day your future self will view your immature self's posts with embarrassment.
---
The Shadow
#70SpunkySixPosted 4/26/2014 3:52:52 PM
ShadowN64 posted...
*sigh*
I have high hopes that one day your future self will view your immature self's posts with embarrassment.


No, see, now you really are being condescending, and it's derailing the thread. That's incredibly immature.
---
Tissue to the extreme!
I'd like to be a tree.