This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

so sick of the hard mode copout

#61Pato468Posted 1/28/2013 7:25:04 PM
Sophistication posted...
Pato468 posted...
I'm not sure I follow...you complain that you're tired of people justifying a game being short by having a hard mode that doesn't add new places to explore or things to do , yet you set Donkey Kong, Galaga and Pacman as exampled of games you thoroughly enjoyed. All three of which consist of the same basic "board", only it gets harder with each level, but that's it, no new places or anything...what's the diference?

Then you say you play on easy just to see the story quickly, be done with the game and go outside...yet you praise Ninja Gaiden for it's difficulty and making you replay 3 whole levels if you die, both of which go against your "play easy, finish fast" argument. Also, the whole j"ust want to see the story" hing goes against your liking of DK, Pacman and older arcade games, which were mostly only repetitive gameplay and minimal story.

LAst but not least, you complain about the gameplay requiring no skill, but there are plenty of games that are all about the skill nowadays, like DMC 3 for example (haven't played 4 or the new one)

Is there something I'm missing, or you're contradicting yourself?
What would an actual, real improvement to games be to you?


Yes, I only play todays games for the story 'cos that's all there is to them... gameplay takes a back seat to story. This is why I loved the clsssics, it was always gameplay above anything. There is no need to play a game on hard these days... there are no incentives.



As a general rule (with exceptions, like every rule) I consider nowadays gameplay more engaging than the one present at NES games, but to each his own. I must asl, though, whar was the incentive behind playing 74 Pacman levels (repeteadly, since I suppose you did it more than once), spending all that time to score points in DK or stages in Galaga? If it was the score, many modern games keep a score sistem
#62majin nemesisPosted 1/28/2013 7:36:27 PM
Sophistication posted...
Pato468 posted...
I'm not sure I follow...you complain that you're tired of people justifying a game being short by having a hard mode that doesn't add new places to explore or things to do , yet you set Donkey Kong, Galaga and Pacman as exampled of games you thoroughly enjoyed. All three of which consist of the same basic "board", only it gets harder with each level, but that's it, no new places or anything...what's the diference?

Then you say you play on easy just to see the story quickly, be done with the game and go outside...yet you praise Ninja Gaiden for it's difficulty and making you replay 3 whole levels if you die, both of which go against your "play easy, finish fast" argument. Also, the whole j"ust want to see the story" hing goes against your liking of DK, Pacman and older arcade games, which were mostly only repetitive gameplay and minimal story.

LAst but not least, you complain about the gameplay requiring no skill, but there are plenty of games that are all about the skill nowadays, like DMC 3 for example (haven't played 4 or the new one)

Is there something I'm missing, or you're contradicting yourself?
What would an actual, real improvement to games be to you?


Yes, I only play todays games for the story 'cos that's all there is to them... gameplay takes a back seat to story. This is why I loved the clsssics, it was always gameplay above anything. There is no need to play a game on hard these days... there are no incentives.


there was no need to play games on hard back then either also games these days have as much gameplay as story and there is always incentive to play on hard even if is just to challenge yourself
---
Swann:This is the last time.I'm tired of running damage control every time he makes a mess
Campbell:Right.You're the control,and if that fails,I'm the damage
#63Sophistication(Topic Creator)Posted 1/29/2013 1:49:22 AM
majin nemesis posted...
Sophistication posted...
Pato468 posted...
I'm not sure I follow...you complain that you're tired of people justifying a game being short by having a hard mode that doesn't add new places to explore or things to do , yet you set Donkey Kong, Galaga and Pacman as exampled of games you thoroughly enjoyed. All three of which consist of the same basic "board", only it gets harder with each level, but that's it, no new places or anything...what's the diference?

Then you say you play on easy just to see the story quickly, be done with the game and go outside...yet you praise Ninja Gaiden for it's difficulty and making you replay 3 whole levels if you die, both of which go against your "play easy, finish fast" argument. Also, the whole j"ust want to see the story" hing goes against your liking of DK, Pacman and older arcade games, which were mostly only repetitive gameplay and minimal story.

LAst but not least, you complain about the gameplay requiring no skill, but there are plenty of games that are all about the skill nowadays, like DMC 3 for example (haven't played 4 or the new one)

Is there something I'm missing, or you're contradicting yourself?
What would an actual, real improvement to games be to you?


Yes, I only play todays games for the story 'cos that's all there is to them... gameplay takes a back seat to story. This is why I loved the clsssics, it was always gameplay above anything. There is no need to play a game on hard these days... there are no incentives.


there was no need to play games on hard back then either also games these days have as much gameplay as story and there is always incentive to play on hard even if is just to challenge yourself


Yes, MGS 4 had a perfect blend of Gameplay and Story -- Save for all the time you sat there pushing X to skip all the garbage, incoherent, tripe drivel Kojima fills his splatters of games with.

I guess since you're pushing X to skip all that meaningless junk it could be considered gameplay... I guess... "rolls eyes"
---
It takes a true sophistocrat, like myself, to bring about total change to gamefaqs--you all love my judicious topics & the debate I bring.
PSN:sophistocrat
#64Pato468Posted 1/29/2013 6:27:48 AM
Bump.
I really want to know what was the incentive you found in the old games.

I do agree on MGS4, I was completely hyped to play it, I wa amazed at the gameplay and inmersion on the first level, then it came crashing down with little to no gameplay and horrible story.
#65majin nemesisPosted 1/29/2013 6:58:54 AM(edited)
Sophistication posted...
majin nemesis posted...
Sophistication posted...
Pato468 posted...
I'm not sure I follow...you complain that you're tired of people justifying a game being short by having a hard mode that doesn't add new places to explore or things to do , yet you set Donkey Kong, Galaga and Pacman as exampled of games you thoroughly enjoyed. All three of which consist of the same basic "board", only it gets harder with each level, but that's it, no new places or anything...what's the diference?

Then you say you play on easy just to see the story quickly, be done with the game and go outside...yet you praise Ninja Gaiden for it's difficulty and making you replay 3 whole levels if you die, both of which go against your "play easy, finish fast" argument. Also, the whole j"ust want to see the story" hing goes against your liking of DK, Pacman and older arcade games, which were mostly only repetitive gameplay and minimal story.

LAst but not least, you complain about the gameplay requiring no skill, but there are plenty of games that are all about the skill nowadays, like DMC 3 for example (haven't played 4 or the new one)

Is there something I'm missing, or you're contradicting yourself?
What would an actual, real improvement to games be to you?


Yes, I only play todays games for the story 'cos that's all there is to them... gameplay takes a back seat to story. This is why I loved the clsssics, it was always gameplay above anything. There is no need to play a game on hard these days... there are no incentives.


there was no need to play games on hard back then either also games these days have as much gameplay as story and there is always incentive to play on hard even if is just to challenge yourself


Yes, MGS 4 had a perfect blend of Gameplay and Story -- Save for all the time you sat there pushing X to skip all the garbage, incoherent, tripe drivel Kojima fills his splatters of games with.

I guess since you're pushing X to skip all that meaningless junk it could be considered gameplay... I guess... "rolls eyes"


i never skiped anything in MGS4 why would i do that to such awesome story?
I think you're just have problem follwoing stories
---
Swann:This is the last time.I'm tired of running damage control every time he makes a mess
Campbell:Right.You're the control,and if that fails,I'm the damage
#66Sophistication(Topic Creator)Posted 1/29/2013 7:47:16 AM
Pato468 posted...
Bump.
I really want to know what was the incentive you found in the old games.

I do agree on MGS4, I was completely hyped to play it, I wa amazed at the gameplay and inmersion on the first level, then it came crashing down with little to no gameplay and horrible story.


Incentive with old games like Galaga, fav game of all time, is competition.... to be the best. To know it better than anyone else. Which, while I'm not record holder, I'm certainly close to being one -- I have so much skill at galga and pacman it's not even funny. My incentive is to be better than my last play...
---
It takes a true sophistocrat, like myself, to bring about total change to gamefaqs--you all love my judicious topics & the debate I bring.
PSN:sophistocrat
#67majin nemesisPosted 1/29/2013 8:26:27 AM
Sophistication posted...
Pato468 posted...
Bump.
I really want to know what was the incentive you found in the old games.

I do agree on MGS4, I was completely hyped to play it, I wa amazed at the gameplay and inmersion on the first level, then it came crashing down with little to no gameplay and horrible story.


Incentive with old games like Galaga, fav game of all time, is competition.... to be the best. To know it better than anyone else. Which, while I'm not record holder, I'm certainly close to being one -- I have so much skill at galga and pacman it's not even funny. My incentive is to be better than my last play...


you can do that with any game
---
Swann:This is the last time.I'm tired of running damage control every time he makes a mess
Campbell:Right.You're the control,and if that fails,I'm the damage
#68nonexistingheroPosted 1/29/2013 8:30:25 AM
Sophistication posted...
Stanger5150 posted...
Higher difficulties used to unlock more levels. Double Dragon II and Golden Axe are excellent examples of this. I kind of like that.


Used to unlock... Yes, back when developers wanted to shoe horn a quality experience into the package without bleeding your wallets dry through DLC.

Rocket Knight Adventures 1 and 2 also had entire new levels and bosses depending on your difficulty setting... The point is, those days are gone forever... (and as Don Henley would say) "I should just let'em go, but..." And I can't remember the rest of the song right now.


Some games still have that. And even back then games that did more than just modify damage you take/get were pretty rare. Long story short, quit trolling.
---
Read the mania: http://www.fanfiction.net/~nonexistinghero
In SA2, it's Super Sonic and Hyper Shadow.
#69Pato468Posted 1/29/2013 8:42:03 AM
Sophistication posted...
Pato468 posted...
Bump.
I really want to know what was the incentive you found in the old games.

I do agree on MGS4, I was completely hyped to play it, I wa amazed at the gameplay and inmersion on the first level, then it came crashing down with little to no gameplay and horrible story.


Incentive with old games like Galaga, fav game of all time, is competition.... to be the best. To know it better than anyone else. Which, while I'm not record holder, I'm certainly close to being one -- I have so much skill at galga and pacman it's not even funny. My incentive is to be better than my last play...


That can still be done with many games. DMC 3 for example (haven't played 4 or the new one) had a big youtube/internet comunity of people posting their videos and scores in DMD mode, which required A LOT of skill, specially doing it without upgrades.
Fighters are another great genre for that, I'm not a fan of the Street Fighter/MvC type of gamr online, but I do enjpy Fight Night and UFC Undisputed, and it requires skill well beside juggling oponents a la Tekken or endless combos.

The Punisher game on PS2 had a great score system depending on how often you got hit.

Hell, even the most mainstream of games, like Call of Duty: MW2 require skill to finish the Special Ops om your own with a good score and a low time! RE5 (haven't played 6 yet) Mercenaries mode can br quite a challenge. I for ine suck at it, but I've seen people score over 500k points like it was nothing. Even if you're not into shooters or fighters, the same applies to other genres.

You can find a lot of games to try to be the best, many with a lot more complex and competitivr gameplay than the old ones.
If you like the old gameplay, platformers are always available.
#70L0ZPosted 1/29/2013 8:47:34 AM
dark souls would be a short as **** game if you killed every enemy in one hit
---
[Cell Broadband | 256MB XDR | RSX 256MB GDDR3]