The laziest professional video game review I've ever read

[Sima Tuna]

I do wish I could give one piece of advice to indie devs in general though:

Please keep your scope/ambition in line with your time and budget. Make a smaller game and focus on replayability and enjoyable game mechanics. I see far too many indie games that end up failing spectacularly or staying in Early Access hell forever because the developers tried to be all things for all people. Make a small game first, please. And complete it. If it sells well, then you can gradually scale up your ambitions. But please don't shoot for the moon the first go-around, because very few games can stick the landing.

[BryanM]

Yeah and part of the problem is when devs without a strong conviction about their game start reacting to the chatter, if not see it as a guiding light. Does the Diablo 4 team know what they want to create or will they wait for youtube content creators to tell them how to fix it?

Imagine an alternate reality where From did seasonal updates complete with Ted talk/roundtable type developer announcements. Insert random guy with headset mic and high-pitched nerdy Todd Howardesque voice. "And we've been listening to fans. We're happy to reveal for Dark Souls season 2: easy mode!!" Applause. "And now . . . World's first reveal trailer. Dark Souls map mode. Fast travel anywhere. A golden arrow above your head will point to the next boss. No more getting lost. No more learning map layouts to progress." Thunderous applause. OMG From is listening. This is so hype. My body is ready. We did it. We complained so hard they changed the game.

Well yeah, those are two different things. An incompetent designer might as well listen to what their players want. And players that want an easy mode From game, have implemented the feature themselves.

Blizzard is incredibly unique by its design incompetence. They really had no clue what the hell their goals were besides "make another Diablo game". Reading their blogs is always a depressing way to spend an evening. (Gotta love that "we spent hundreds of hours to finally conclude: Mario should be able to jump.")

At the end of the day it doesn't matter. Bad designers will make bad games for no one. Good designers will make good games for somebody. Blizzard products will sell millions of copies because of invested fanboys who won't play a different game. It doesn't matter if you can make Ryu's hair pink in the next Ninja Gaiden or whatever - most things about a game are all skub wars.

Customer feedback can be very helpful, if used correctly.

---

A candid stream by one of the Starcraft 2 guys (whose dad is literally the no-life guy from the South Park Make Love Not Warcraft episode) mentioned the fact that the first $15 horsie in World of Warcraft made more money than Starcraft 2, is always one of those things. That shows hard work and effort really, really aren't always rewarded.

Of course they could make a free to play RTS with modular army pieces that harkens back to those games we used to love back in the day. But that would require them understanding what we loved about them in the first place, and also understand the current monetization models. Things like giving people hope and something to look forward to, instead of perpetually feeling trapped in the bottom of a dungeon with nowhere to go.

Hellgate London's subscription service sure did everything wrong... It was hilarious reading Gamasutra articles at the time about all the lessons about online games developers were learning at the time. Rule #1: Never ever divide your playerbase, when it comes to being able to play together. You can't wall off or monetize maps or zones.

Old boxed expansion packs always come to mind - fewer and fewer people bought them over time. MMO's were an exception since their players were affluent, continuously invested in the game, and used to renting game time with their money.

[Steamflogger Boss]

From games do have an easy mode tbh. It's called over leveling and using the broken equipment instead of whatever you want. But yeah..difficulty sliders...I hope we never see that in their games. It's getting harder and harder to find actually interesting video games.

@bryan: RTS is a dead genre sadly.

[BryanM]

Ok here's a fun genre: People giving the Playstation 1 Metal Gear Solid re-releases poor scores for being re-releases of Metal Gear Solid.

"I bought this game. It was exactly what it told me it was, not a tiny whiff of subterfuge or false advertising was used. I FEEL SO RIPPED OFF!"

I know all opinions are held. But jesussss....

[Sima Tuna]

Ok here's a fun genre: People giving the Playstation 1 Metal Gear Solid re-releases poor scores for being re-releases of Metal Gear Solid.

"I bought this game. It was exactly what it told me it was, not a tiny whiff of subterfuge or false advertising was used. I FEEL SO RIPPED OFF!"

I know all opinions are held. But jesussss....

Does the MGS1 re-release run at 60fps? Because one reason people shit on the MGS2 re-release is they cut the framerate in half. MGS3 is back down to 30FPS as well. I mean, it was originally 30, but then the old hd collection upped MGS3 to 60. So it's back to the original framerate.

[BryanM]

1 is supposed to run at 30, like the original game. According to Konami, the PSX2 games unnaturally lobotomized to 30 is only for the Switch version.

I did hear that there are some nontechnical doofuses setting it to the PAL version, in all its wonderful 50 hertz glory.

lol at the MSX games requiring Windows 10 and 8 GB of RAM. Every day we move further from god's grace.

The prices, are well, you know. 20 bux each is a little steep. I bought my copy of Snake Eater back in the day for 3 bux. Amazon sells it for 15. Which isn't unreasonable with inflation and them shipping the thing to your house.

We kind of got into high-priced old games in the Labyrinth thread with the Etrian Odyssey ports (the fonts were bad!). It's a bit more egregious here, with the lower cost of the original games and less work was done to port these.

[Marc]

https://youtu.be/n5c93sMt5LM?si=fX-c6SqM3Wpxzl21
Fuck this shithead.

Revenge is a gane for empty headed dickheads.
Yes I know it's not a 'professional' review. But fuck this cupid stunt

[Lander]

Man, formatting a full series analysis as a worst-to-best list makes for messy enumeration. Burnout Legends is like 2 and 3... Which we'll get to in about 10 minutes, so make sure to remember!

I'm guessing 3 is the one to play? Most of my hours are in Paradise, but I've been meaning to revisit the classics, and that one was a wild showpiece for the PS2 back in the day.

[Marc]

Man, formatting a full series analysis as a worst-to-best list makes for messy enumeration. Burnout Legends is like 2 and 3... Which we'll get to in about 10 minutes, so make sure to remember!

I'm guessing 3 is the one to play? Most of my hours are in Paradise, but I've been meaning to revisit the classics, and that one was a wild showpiece for the PS2 back in the day.

Personally, 2. 2 is a racing game with some crashing in. But 3, it's become arguably more important than racing well.
Heck, the original is a better pure racer than 3.

[Lander]

Interesting, I'll have to check out the original trilogy proper then. The point about crashing recalls my experience with Split / Second - hell of a spectacle while the novelty persists, but the racing underneath the on-demand disaster mechanic is a terrible rubberband-fest that wouldn't be fun on its own.
Though S/S is kind of infamous for that, so it's probably not a fair comparison.

[Marc]

Electric Underground. He reminds me of that daft cunt that threw around philosophy quotes and went batshit. It's just lazy elitism. His RE4RE stuff is so poor it's untrue.

[it290]

I had to check it out just to see what his claims were against such a superb game. The Kubrick comparisons had me groaning for sure... like c'mon dude, really, that's where you're going to go with this?

[Air Master Burst]

Interesting, I'll have to check out the original trilogy proper then. The point about crashing recalls my experience with Split / Second - hell of a spectacle while the novelty persists, but the racing underneath the on-demand disaster mechanic is a terrible rubberband-fest that wouldn't be fun on its own.
Though S/S is kind of infamous for that, so it's probably not a fair comparison.

Wait, really? I never really noticed rubberbanding on Split/Second, although most of my experience was split screen so maybe they toned down the AI racers for multiplayer? I used to regularly win races with enough of a lead that I could've crashed 2-3 times without getting caught by 2nd place. Once the drift handling clicked I was nigh untouchable by the computer.

Of course, I haven't touched it in like 15 years, so it's possible my memory is just trash.

[Marc]

Interesting, I'll have to check out the original trilogy proper then. The point about crashing recalls my experience with Split / Second - hell of a spectacle while the novelty persists, but the racing underneath the on-demand disaster mechanic is a terrible rubberband-fest that wouldn't be fun on its own.
Though S/S is kind of infamous for that, so it's probably not a fair comparison.

Wait, really? I never really noticed rubberbanding on Split/Second, although most of my experience was split screen so maybe they toned down the AI racers for multiplayer? I used to regularly win races with enough of a lead that I could've crashed 2-3 times without getting caught by 2nd place. Once the drift handling clicked I was nigh untouchable by the computer.

Of course, I haven't touched it in like 15 years, so it's possible my memory is just trash.

Yeah, same, played it through a couple of times in the day and don't remember anything too brazen.

[velo]

This "Arcade Economy" series keeps popping up in my YouTube feed. It's not lazy, but I thought you guys might enjoy it. In each video, the guy explains how much it costs to credit feed through a game, then rates it on a 1-10 scale of how "predatory" it is. For example, he says that Contra is the one of the hardest games he's ever played and gives it a 10/10 on the predatory scale, because it has limited continues.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-krhtJqgNU

[Daytime Waitress]

This "Arcade Economy" series keeps popping up in my YouTube feed. It's not lazy, but I thought you guys might enjoy it. In each video, the guy explains how much it costs to credit feed through a game, then rates it on a 1-10 scale of how "predatory" it is. For example, he says that Contra is the one of the hardest games he's ever played and gives it a 10/10 on the predatory scale, because it has limited continues.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-krhtJqgNU

Don't engage with the medium as a means of artistic expression; don't take enjoyment in your own capacity to become good at something; don't delight in the accumulation of communal knowledge to reach that second one there - just finish it and move on to next thing.

Devour it without tasting it.

If you can't finish it first bite, then it was obviously slapped together by incompetent chefs.

(There's definitely a certain poetry, though, to how it frames itself as some sort of PSA on corporate predation when at its core it's absolutely committed to the mindset of "don't ask questions, just consume product and then get excited for next product".)

[AGermanArtist]

Electric Underground. He reminds me of that daft cunt that threw around philosophy quotes and went batshit. It's just lazy elitism. His RE4RE stuff is so poor it's untrue.

Hah, yeah that review was a travesty. To write off the remake dismissing it as completely irredeemable is a joke. I've had two passes at the remake campaign and around 30hrs in Mercs totalling over 100hrs and objectively it's been handled rather well. It doesn't have the same thrill as the original had initially, but that aside it's a super solid game that's been influenced by Mikami's later work on The Evil Within which included mild stealth sections like those Mark took issue with. He also had a problem with parrying, but I do remember watching a video where Mikami encouraged "advanced players" to use parrying to deal with thrown projectiles, in the original.

[1KMS]

For example, he says that Contra is the one of the hardest games he's ever played and gives it a 10/10 on the predatory scale, because it has limited continues.

Is there an easier arcade game than Contra? Double Dragon, maybe? I'm surprised there are still people who are interested in arcade games as a subject but play them with glazed eyes. Very HG101 2005.

If you're going to call any arcade games cheap ("predatory" is still a bit ridiculous), you'd have to start with games like T2, Revolution X, and Rampage World Tour, which were intentionally designed to be unsolvable.

I wouldn't call any Mark_MSX reviews lazy. His RE4RE take reminds me of Ollie Barder, who also had a bee in his bonnet about control standardization, though in Ollie's case he was referring to multi-ton mechs controlling like humans.

[Steven]

For example, he says that Contra is the one of the hardest games he's ever played and gives it a 10/10 on the predatory scale, because it has limited continues.

Is there an easier arcade game than Contra?

Sonic 1, which is probably the easiest arcade game in existence.

[velo]

I'm surprised there are still people who are interested in arcade games as a subject but play them with glazed eyes. Very HG101 2005.

That's what caught my attention. It's not coming from some staff reviewer or retro gaming historian who's only talking about arcade games because he has to. This is a channel dedicated specifically to arcade games, run by a guy who is into arcade games, who has some first hand experiences in 90s arcades, purporting to be an informational resource to explain to the kids how things really were back in the day, with thousands of subscribers, that is blowing up enough that YouTube's recommendation algorithm really really wants me to watch it for some reason. But he's never even heard of not credit feeding.

He's already covered some unapologetically quarter-munchy games like Mortal Kombat and the US version of X-Men and rated them less predatory than Contra because they didn't cost as much money to see the ending, so I imagine it wouldn't be any different for T2 or whatever. Who knows what he'd say about a game that disallows continues altogether. If Contra's a 10/10 on the predatory scale (and a contender for "most difficult game ever made"), what's Gradius 3?

[Sima Tuna]

If somebody is going to review arcade games from the perspective of credit feeding, you'd think they'd ALSO be aware of which games are possible to 1cc versus which are not possible to 1cc. There are plenty of arcade games you can't 1cc. A lot of sports games use a timer, even really good sports games like baseball stars 2. You can't 1cc baseball stars 2 (I think) because you can't play a full game without putting in more money. It's a simple timer system. A game like that is, as others have said, unsolvable.

There are lots of arcade games like that, and others where your health always drains. Same basic idea as the credit timer for a sports game. Or I suppose, we could look at it as equivalent to those shitty mobile games that use energy bars that run down so fast to encourage you to feed in money.

My point is that a channel about credit feeding arcade games could be interesting if they actually knew anything about the 1cc arcade community or anything about fair vs unfair arcade game design. Sure, shitty arcade games exist. Good arcade games also exist that can't be 1cc'd because of a single shitty mechanic (like a timer.) But... That doesn't mean we should credit feed every arcade game! Lmao, even.

[Steven]

If somebody is going to review arcade games from the perspective of credit feeding, you'd think they'd ALSO be aware of which games are possible to 1cc versus which are not possible to 1cc. There are plenty of arcade games you can't 1cc. A lot of sports games use a timer, even really good sports games like baseball stars 2. You can't 1cc baseball stars 2 (I think) because you can't play a full game without putting in more money. It's a simple timer system. A game like that is, as others have said, unsolvable.

Is it any different on AES or is it the same there too? Neo Turf Masters loses its timer on AES, so maybe this game does the same.

[Randorama]

Well, Neo Turf Masters has really strict progression requirements, but in theory a player can 1-CC the whole four courses by staying well below the Par level. I believe that there are a few youtube videos of people achieving this feat (and, possibly clearing the game with "all Birdie" scores). I am too lazy to check sources on the exact requirements, but basically a player always staying below Par should be able to play all 18 holes for a course, and a player winning one tournament can access a second, third and eventual fourth tournament. I believe that winning a tournament requires scoring Birdies consistently, though, i.e. reaching final scores like -15 or so. Neo Turf Masters is an astonishingly beautiful but also incredibly hard game.

...and shameless self-promotion: I have answered the last two posts in the "Sports" thread, due to their relevance to the thread's topic (link is here).

[it290]

I'm 99% sure that Neo Turf Masters will game over after a single round of golf, regardless of whether you achieve 1st place or not.

[Sima Tuna]

Well, Neo Turf Masters has really strict progression requirements, but in theory a player can 1-CC the whole four courses by staying well below the Par level. I believe that there are a few youtube videos of people achieving this feat (and, possibly clearing the game with "all Birdie" scores). I am too lazy to check sources on the exact requirements, but basically a player always staying below Par should be able to play all 18 holes for a course, and a player winning one tournament can access a second, third and eventual fourth tournament. I believe that winning a tournament requires scoring Birdies consistently, though, i.e. reaching final scores like -15 or so. Neo Turf Masters is an astonishingly beautiful but also incredibly hard game.

...and shameless self-promotion: I have answered the last two posts in the "Sports" thread, due to their relevance to the thread's topic (link is here).

Neo Turf is possible to 1cc. As you say, there are videos of it online. If you keep getting Birdie or Eagle, you can stay ahead of the draining "lives" counter. Getting par won't do it though. Par drains 1 from your lives counter, so it's basically like a failure state.

I have tried for the 1cc here and there but I'm not good enough. It's too easy to have a really good 6 holes and then hole 7 goes triple bogey and you instafail.

I'm 99% sure that Neo Turf Masters will game over after a single round of golf, regardless of whether you achieve 1st place or not.

You mean 18 holes right? If you completed 18 holes without hitting game over then you got the 1cc.

[it290]

Yes, 18 holes. My normal scores are in the -15 range so I clear it pretty often, though not always getting first place (the computer scores are somewhat randomized). What Randorama described was clearing all 4 courses on one credit, which I don't believe is possible.

[Sumez]

Neo Turf Masters is definitely one course only. There is no "1CC of all courses".

I can't even imagine how taxing doing 72 holes would be. That's far too long even for a relaxed and chill game like this.

[Steven]

Par drains 1 from your lives counter, so it's basically like a failure state.

Depends on the game's settings, but by default par is neutral and you don't gain or lose anything for par. On AES, I believe this is fixed to this setting and can't be changed. In MVS mode, you can change the subtract holes setting to bogey, par, or give up.

It's too easy to have a really good 6 holes and then hole 7 goes triple bogey and you instafail.

lol you too, huh? I don't think I'll ever 1CC this game, but it would be nice. Setting it to subtract holes upon give up would probably make it a hell of a lot easier.

[Sumez]

Par drains 1 from your lives counter, so it's basically like a failure state.

Depends on the game's settings, but by default par is neutral and you don't gain or lose anything for par. On AES, I believe this is fixed to this setting and can't be changed. In MVS mode, you can change the subtract holes setting to bogey, par, or give up.

By default par subtracts one hole from your "lives" counter.

EDIT: Ok, I think the reason for your confusion is this. Every hole you play subtracts one from your "hole" count regardless of the result.
But since you need at least a birdie to add to that count, you will still lose one for every par you play. If every other hole is a birdie, you can only afford to play two pars on a course. Getting a par is basically the same as losing a life, and an eagle is getting a 1up. Just as Sima Tuna said.

[Steven]

Oh yeah, that's right, it subtracts one by default and then you lose an extra one depending on the game settings. It's pretty obvious that it's been too long since I played this game...