I started replaying Jurassic World Evolution 2 the other day for the first time since launch. I HATED it at launch, but it they have made significant improvements to the game since then. It even seems to be better optimized now, as it used to perform quite poorly, but it runs generally better at all times now. It might actually have become a little better than its prequel, which used to unquestionably be the better game.
XoPachi wrote:.....Are there two Picorinne Softs?
Infinos Gaiden and Andro Dunos 2 were by Picorinne Soft.
But Disc Creatures is also by Picorinne Soft but their store pages are different on steam.
Picorinne Soft is a pair of 2 brothers. One of them makes STGs (Ryo) and the other makes RPGs like Disc Creatures (Satto), although I do believe they help each other out. It's probably just Steam being stupid, but I believe Ryo knows English to some extent judging by his conversations on the Steam message boards, so maybe try asking him about it.
Air Master Burst wrote:Just took a spin through Sonic 1 Forever and it's the best version of it I've played yet. The only options I used were the 7th chaos emerald and super cancel.
Every Sega kid should play it once just for the amazing catharsis that is turning Super Sonic for the fucking Labyrinth Zone boss chase.
lol yes, I did the same in Sonic Origins when that was released and it was incredible.
BrianC wrote:Sometimes the Steam entry shows the name of the developer but goes to the publisher page when I click on it. It's annoying.
From what I understand, that too is a configuration "problem".
Apparently, you can either have the page setup so that it shows the games from the same developer, or to have it ignore the developer field, and just go to the publisher's "curator" page.
And, some companies choose the later, to promote their page/titles, which indeed is annoying.
You'd be surprised how much of a non-issue the low framerate 2d character models are in practice, the platforming is silky smooth.
I really like this games sense of momentum in its handling, something that was sadly lacking from both A Hat in Time and Yooke Laylee. Once you get the timing for the super jump down you can really fling yourself across levels. And the game runs GREAT with keyboard/mouse.
Also very speedrun friendly.
Two working class dudes, one black one white, just baked a tray of ten cookies together.
An oligarch walks in and grabs nine cookies for himself.
Then he says to the white dude "Watch out for that black dude, he wants a piece of your cookie!"
Digged a little into a small corner of my Game Boy backlog this month.
First up, Bionic Commando was one I was looking forward to. Especially on these forums, it's been heralded as a bit of an overlooked GB gem.
Not sure it really deserves too much attention though. It's a good game, no doubt about it. But it's good because the NES Bionic Commando is good, while the GB iteration does very little to offer anything new, and is more concerned with being a portable version of the same game (as was kinda the standard for most GB games at the time).
Coming out four years later, a few things have definately been changed since the original, and especially the later stages go in marginally new directions - but overall the game aims to do the exact same thing, relying on the exact same gimmicks, and the exact same escalation of the required ability with well timed swings across dangerous gaps and bottomless pits, and even ends with the same well timed shot through the cockpit of a battleship (though no exploding Hitler face this time). Compared to the NES game, the GB one also expectedly suffers a little from the limited screen resolution. It's only a real issue in few places, but when you start missing some essential swings because the ledge you need to swing on to is still off screen, it can still get a little infuriating - and similarly, the game also suffers from poor handling of off-screen enemies.
I think it's worth a recommendation for someone looking to stock up on every good Game Boy game, but in the context of the brilliant NES game existing I don't really see any reason not to recommend that one over it. I really wish the Game Boy iteration would have aimed to work as more of a sequel, especially given the four year gap between them.
Metroid II, however, is obviously a sequel. It also enjoys a sizable time gap since its predecessor, but this one also sports a roman numeral in its title as it should.
I've heard very mixed opinions on this game, with some people loving it, and others deeming it the worst of the series. My expectations weren't too high, especially knowing its reputation of being a much more linear affair compared to what most of the better Metroid games offer.
I think the series had a bit of a rocky start despite the fun ideas and solid atmosphere of the first game. Super Metroid is arguably that concept fixed up and taken to its ultimate potential, but ignoring that, I honestly think Metroid II provides a really admirable alternate approach to fixing the issues of Metroid 1. Improved controls, new maneuvering skills, and the addition of huge multi-directional scrolling rooms all help set the game apart, but what I think is really commendable is how it ensures the player never gets completely lost, while still maintaining the excitement of blindly exploring mysterious sprawling caverns full of secrets. Thanks to the linear sequence of areas, you never really need a map, and there is never a reason to backtrack to earlier areas. But at the same time, each individual area really requires a methodic approach to exploring it in order to prevent getting lost, and I think this game actually massively benefits from not having an ingame map, while the same decision would have absolutely killed Super Metroid.
The game really expects the player to pay attention and always be on the lookout for hidden passageways, as many of them pay off well, while a majority of them are actually straight up mandatory. Those secrets feel obscure and at times hard to find, but they are deftly distributed and hinted at in a way that means you always have an intuitive feeling for where to look, rather than wasting time shooting inconspicious floors in random locations the way Metroid 1 somewhat controversially expects you to.
As far as pocket-sized Metroid games, I think Metroid 2 is about as competent as you can get, and in terms of linear Metroid games, it absolutely blows Metroid Fusion and Dread out of the water.
It clearly does get good at Metroid 2. I think it has a rocky start where the early rooms are mostly uninteresting, and enemy encounters are largely just few isolated instances of the same basic enemy. But it doesn't take long before the exploration aspects start taking hold and it becomes super engaging. The only way I can imagine not enjoying it is if you use a map to guide you through the game.
IMO the series' larger problems absolutely happen after Super Metroid.
Not for nothing, but the Remake on GBA of the first Metroid was good stuff. Yes the original aged badly, but there's the much better game on the GBA. So no need to even bother with the NES game.
Been in a N64 mood lately. Been playing Japanese Trouble Maker and the AWESOME Sin and Punishment. Actually, both very good games. Played a bit WWF No Mercy. Man, did I forget how good this game is.
I liked Zero Mission (the mentioned GBA remake) a lot, it especially felt like a relief after Fusion which I thought was really disappointing. It had a lot of the basic feel of Super Metroid, but I also think it generally completely lacked the core ingredient that makes Super Metroid as memorable as it is, and like most modern metroidvania games it just feels afraid of giving the player full control.
I really dislike quest markers in these sorts of games, especially when intentionally going off in opposing directions will just result in dead ends. Of course, Zero Mission isn't anywhere near as egregious as Metroid Dread in that regard.
Zero Mission is mostly great, but the shitty new tacked-on zero suit bit at the end can die in a fire.
AM2R might be the best Metroid, but Super is a fine game as well.
I remember liking Fusion when I first played it back in the day, but I've never been able to make it through again. I know it opens up some later on, but fuck getting there.
I'm playing Smash for the first time in 2 years and I'm remembering why I dropped this series for Rivals of Aether.
The stark difference in fluidity is some serious whiplash. Smash Bros just feels...wrong.
Air Master Burst wrote:I know it opens up some later on, but fuck getting there.
I don't think I understand what the point is, in opening up a metroidvania map once you've already explored most of it.
People must have massively different ideas about what the appeal in a metroidvania style game is compared to mine. Or maybe they were just lazy.
I think around that time Nintendo was first latching onto the idea of trying to be more user friendly and easy, hence the navigation points. Don't want little Jimmy to get stuck for a weekend and have his Mom return the cartridge to the store because he couldn't figure out that Kraid's lair was hidden in the elevator room.
RegalSin wrote:Japan an almost perfect society always threatened by outsiders....................
Instead I am stuck in the America's where women rule with an iron crotch, and a man could get arrested for sitting behind a computer too long.
I understand that part. Nevermind the fact that it's counterintuitive to everything the Metroid series stands for, my issue in this case is more the fact that it straight up defeats the entire purpose of the metroidvania design in the first place. Metroid Dread has basically the exact same issue, even though it does a better job at pretending it's not linear.
In short, I don't understand the purpose of a metroidvania structure if exploration isn't a part of it.
Fusion's problem is it wanted to cram a very strict linear narrative into a structure that is in no way built for it. Maybe if you look at it as a Cave Story style platformer instead of a metroidvania it would go down easier, but that's not what I play Metroid games for either.
Yeah I tried approaching it with that angle both times I replayed it, and it's not helping it much. The problem is it's not particularly great at that either.
It's not a bad game, it just does nothing interesting.
I like the original Metroid a lot. The 30 health thing is a tremendous caveat to be sure, and the game doesn't have the lavish controls of the post-2 2D Metroids, but it still rules. It's denser than the games that came after it, making for a more taut single-sitting playthrough, and its particular focus on being an open-ended search for combat powerups in flexible order that you can opt out of at any time is more interesting than the largely linear powerup gating that the series became about from Super Metroid on. (Super is a better game than the original on the whole, I think, but it isn't good in all the same ways the original is.) I can understand the first Metroid rubbing players the wrong way because of its abrasive qualities, but it's a much better game than its GBA remake, and I think it's one of the best (top three, at least) games in the series.
Fusion and Zero Mission are solid, likable games, but I think both of them took the wrong lessons from Super Metroid. They're both very rote sequels that don't add anything new to the formula or develop it in interesting ways, and enough of Super Metroid's puzzle game-like appeal is based around novelty to make it a hard game to iterate on repeatedly and straightforwardly. (Straight-up action games provide more fertile ground for continuously making iterative sequels - Castlevania, Contra, Metal Slug, etc - but you simply can't keep making powerup-gated exploration games with the exact same set of tools and puzzle solutions over and over and have them all stay interesting.) Fusion definitely does suffer for eschewing the traditional strengths of Metroid in favor of playing at being a straightforward action game, though its action is only mildly better than other entries and not enough to make up for its tradeoff. And Samus Returns is certainly much weaker than the excellent Metroid 2.
Sir Ilpalazzo wrote:I like the original Metroid a lot. The 30 health thing is a tremendous caveat to be sure,
I actually liked the health thing (not to mention how much more deadly the enemies are) compared to the other Metroids. I don't like how in all the later games you can pretty much just headbutt enemies after you get a few energy tanks. The OG is the only one that makes you take the moment to moment gameplay seriously throughout.
Last edited by HELLEPHANT on Sat Sep 03, 2022 1:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I have never understood why the 30 energy thing is a big deal. Just go get a fucking Energy Tank... there's one on the way to the Bomb that you can't miss since it's literally just sitting there waiting for you to get it.
To be fair, there are "only" eight in the entire game, and today's gamers think having to replay a segment is some kind of cardinal sin because 'iT's oUtDaTeD!!!"
RBelmont wrote:A little math shows that if you overclock a Pi3 to about 3.4 GHz you'll start to be competitive with PCs from 2002. And you'll also set your house on fire
Steven wrote:I have never understood why the 30 energy thing is a big deal.
Minimum % runs are a fairly popular thing among Metroid fans, I'm pretty sure some of them even have special clear screens for it. I can see how this would be a disappointment for people coming from the later titles.
The original Metroid is just as suited to low% runs as the later titles. If anything, all of the weird warp tricks and the free Missiles you get from Kraid and Ridley make low% even more viable. In this 11-minute speedrun, for example, the player collects a grand total of two Energy Tanks, the Morph Ball, and the Ice Beam.
I'm almost certain the game was designed around the possibility that players could miss (or avoid) most of the powerups. Why else would there be a second Ice Beam pickup in Norfair?
Last edited by WelshMegalodon on Tue Sep 06, 2022 10:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
RBelmont wrote:A little math shows that if you overclock a Pi3 to about 3.4 GHz you'll start to be competitive with PCs from 2002. And you'll also set your house on fire
Sir Ilpalazzo wrote:I like the original Metroid a lot. The 30 health thing is a tremendous caveat to be sure,
I actually liked the health thing (not to mention how much more deadly the enemies are) compared to the other Metroids. I don't like how in all the later games you can pretty much just headbutt enemies after you get a few energy tanks. The OG is the only one that makes you take the moment to moment gameplay seriously throughout.
Steven wrote:I have never understood why the 30 energy thing is a big deal. Just go get a fucking Energy Tank... there's one on the way to the Bomb that you can't miss since it's literally just sitting there waiting for you to get it.
Agreed that the higher difficulty level is a boon overall, but the issue is just how shit the health recovery feels to blind players who don't already have an idea of what to do. If you don't already have the screw attack and / or the varia, and you don't know where they are so you can beeline to them, recovery is a very arduous and unpleasant process - enemies do a pretty high amount of damage and most drop a very low amount of health, at a low drop rate. If you die in Norfair or Ridley's area, you basically have no option but to stop attempting to progress and grind for a ridiculous amount of time to get enough health for another real try.
Dying and losing progress is fine; the issue is that for blind players, Metroid doesn't just send you back but stops you from playing for an inordinate chunk of time. With experience, you know that the screw attack makes all traversal and health recovery trivial, that the varia is extremely useful, and where to find energy tanks in order to quickly refill, but new players are going to have a very rocky and unpleasant learning process. Metroid 1 is one of my top favorite games in the series regardless, but it's because of how well it matures into a satisfying, fast single-sitting exploration course as you learn it, not because of the initial learning hump.
To Far Away Times wrote:The hottest of takes:
The two GBA Metroid games are both better than Super.
I feel like they're significantly worse in every way short of Fusion having better boss fights overall. Smaller worlds, less interesting optional areas, worse aesthetics, direct repetition of Super Metroid's powerset and puzzle solutions, an increased focus on rote "puzzle solving" to progress.
Sir Ilpalazzo wrote:I like the original Metroid a lot. The 30 health thing is a tremendous caveat to be sure, and the game doesn't have the lavish controls of the post-2 2D Metroids, but it still rules. It's denser than the games that came after it, making for a more taut single-sitting playthrough, and its particular focus on being an open-ended search for combat powerups in flexible order that you can opt out of at any time is more interesting than the largely linear powerup gating that the series became about from Super Metroid on. (Super is a better game than the original on the whole, I think, but it isn't good in all the same ways the original is.) I can understand the first Metroid rubbing players the wrong way because of its abrasive qualities, but it's a much better game than its GBA remake, and I think it's one of the best (top three, at least) games in the series.
Glad to hear this take. I've never played Metroid 1 to completion, just dabbled in it every now and then throughout the decades, and always enjoyed the basic gameplay, atmosphere and feeling of being completely lost.
Some times in the near future I hope to really sit down with it and give it a genuine chance. Without any sorts of guides, and with a notebook nearby ready to draw a map.
I really love the fact that the correct ways to proceed are never the most obvious directions, and like WelshMegalodon pointed out, the game is meant to be obscure and confusing, and not designed around the idea that the player is expected to go for 100%. Like I also said regarding Romancing SaGa 2 in another thread, I think that's a really appealing approach in open-ended video games, and I wish we'd see more of that kind of design in modern days - but it takes guts to add things to a game that are genuinely missable.
I'm not playing, but I'm watching my friend play Brawl netplay. And I have to ask what in the FUCK were they thinking when they made MetaKnight. :l
This character's entire moveset is a recovery!!!
All controversy about the new art style aside, I'm genuinely excited about the new game as this was one of my favorite game series. They both came out when I was about in middle school, so they got me through some rough times.
I actually prefer the first Monkey Island to the second one, but both are great games. I’m also looking forward to the new one quite a bit. If it ends up only half as good as Thimbleweed Park, I’ll already be very happy. I put a lot of trust into Gilbert. I’m pretty sure he’ll deliver a quality product.
Metroid Dread has basically the exact same issue, even though it does a better job at pretending it's not linear.
