What [not shmup] game are you playing now?

[NYN]

Looking more into the many Prince of Persia, I arrived at The Fallen King for NDS. Yes, it means that controls are with the stylus without alternative. Suits me, buttons are too default, and they work fine for me. Start with a Mario map to pick stages, it's close to the roots with floor spikes, opening of gates, getting up platforms. Checkpoints, infinite lifes, no time limit, all make it rather mild. Bounty to collect, I have no clue what it is for. ; maybe for % completion. In W3 now, it seems to pick up. I'll keep playing. I am also interested in the The Forgotten Sands for DS, just to see for myself, since the Web is stingy about the fringe PoPs. There is even a tactic game: Battles of Prince of Persia.

[To Far Away Times]

Finished up my fourth play through of Castlevania Circle of the Moon. Have I mentioned that I really like this game?

[vol.2]

Finished up my fourth play through of Castlevania Circle of the Moon. Have I mentioned that I really like this game?

I've played it through thrice. Great game. I was making my way through the GBA games and I think I stopped just before finishing HOD and forgot about it. I have the carts, but I can't play on a handheld anymore because my eyes suck too much to see the tiny screen now, so I've been playing on a regular TV, and it's not quite the same as having the device with you everywhere.

I was hoping there would be another one some day, but it seem like all we are getting is this ugly looking garbage called Belmont's Curse.

But I guess if decent game devs hate Konami so much they won't work with them, and they go find second rate BS to continue the old franchises. Oh well.

[it290]

But I guess if decent game devs hate Konami so much they won't work with them, and they go find second rate BS to continue the old franchises. Oh well.

The devs who are making it also created Dead Cells, which is an excellent game, and the Castlevania expansion content for that. I'm not loving the art style either but I have no doubt at all that they can deliver a more than competent Metroidvania that is faithful to the series.

[vol.2]

The devs who are making it also created Dead Cells, which is an excellent game, and the Castlevania expansion content for that. I'm not loving the art style either but I have no doubt at all that they can deliver a more than competent Metroidvania that is faithful to the series.

I don't love the roguelike or roguelite genre very much, so I haven't played Dead Cells. Even if it's a decent game, I'm not sure I can handle looking at that artwork the whole time. It's so cartoonishly over-worked and juvenile. Like, what the hell is this Rob Liefeld ass thing? Horrible taste.

[NairobiNantucket]

The devs who are making it also created Dead Cells... I have no doubt at all that they can deliver a more than competent Metroidvania that is faithful to the series.

No doubt at all? I dropped Dead Cells almost immediately after I tried it a decade ago, as, after all the praised it received as a procedurally generated Metroidvania (with invincible roll dodging ) , I found, among other things, the maps to be pitifully subpar. The idea that algorithmically-spawned satisfying search-actions were already here was apparently too good to be true. Have the developers actually demonstrated competence in static exploration experiences elsewhere?

I'm not normally this sour but reading that dredged up my long displaced feelings regarding Dead Cells after not thinking about it in so many years. Sorry.
I truly think that was my last straw with nearly all contemporary gaming.

[Sima Tuna]

Most roguelite games I have played were either downright bad or painfully mediocre. It's the perfect "mid" game genre, as the kids would say. Aggressively Mid. Painfully Mid. But the mainstream likes it.

No, when it comes to procedural generation, give me a traditional roguelike every time. Most roguelite games fall into the trap of requiring or heavily suggesting a grind-centric world economy. One where you are intended to die your way to victory by purchasing upgrades that make the game easier. Dead Cells isn't to quite that degree of poor game design, but it definitely does become easier as you unlock more shit. Not in as direct a way as Rogue Legacy, but it does. The game challenges you to do those endless NG+ cycles of increasing difficulty, but I lost interest in that pretty quickly. Combat is solid enough in Dead Cells but it wasn't enough for me to care when that was the only major aspect of the game I could latch onto.

Compare that to a game like Brogue, Cataclysm or DCSS, where meta grinding is not only not encouraged but it isn't possible. Traditional roguelikes are much closer in ethos to arcade games, compared to roguelite games, which feel more like jarpigs at times.

Death in a roguelike game should be a complete reset imo. Always. It's like resetting the board after you finish a game of chess. The game is done! That's all! You don't get +2 movement to your Knight permanently for having made the match last so long.

But I think people who play more mainstream game genres really dislike the concept of a hard reset on death. Most of them aren't arcade game players so they aren't familiar with the idea of progression being something that happens in your brain rather than in the meta economy/structure of the game itself.

[it290]

No doubt at all? I dropped Dead Cells almost immediately after I tried it a decade ago, as, after all the praised it received as a procedurally generated Metroidvania (with invincible roll dodging ) , I found, among other things, the maps to be pitifully subpar. The idea that algorithmically-spawned satisfying search-actions were already here was apparently too good to be true. Have the developers actually demonstrated competence in static exploration experiences elsewhere?

I'm not normally this sour but reading that dredged up my long displaced feelings regarding Dead Cells after not thinking about it in so many years. Sorry.
I truly think that was my last straw with nearly all contemporary gaming.

Very little doubt—I mean Metroidvanias are a dime a dozen now and even super indie studios have been pumping out competent to good ones. I think the gameplay balance is actually easier to nail than a roguelite game, especially when you're doing a CV-style game with RPG progression; you just need to make it have some challenge without being too grindy. Let's face it, none of the Igavanias are particularly well-balanced either, and the most lauded one is arguably the worst balanced of them all.

That said, where SOTN excels is not in the game balance, but in the atmosphere, art, music, and I would argue most importantly just how good it feels to control Alucard, and I do have many reservations about their ability to succeed in those areas. So do I think it will be a competent to good MV game? Yes. Do I think it will be a good CV game? Maybe.

No, when it comes to procedural generation, give me a traditional roguelike every time. Most roguelite games fall into the trap of requiring or heavily suggesting a grind-centric world economy. One where you are intended to die your way to victory by purchasing upgrades that make the game easier.

I think the most competent roguelite games are the ones where the power ramp that you get from unlocking upgrades roughly coincides with the player's skill curve, so that you feel that as you progress you're getting more powerful but also that most of your progression is due to your increasing skill at the game and understanding of the game's systems and/or character builds. Off the top of my head, I'd say Returnal, Absolum, and to a lesser extent Hades are games that do this quite well. You won't clear the game immediately, but when you do it feels satisfying, and even after you've cleared it you can still challenge yourself by experimenting with different builds, or sometimes a bad run will just prevent you from clearing it easily.

Granted, this is different from traditional action games in that there's more RNG involved and there is some level of grind to win, but I think it's still largely an elegant and superior formula for most players: very skilled players can be satisfied by breaking the game early, moderate to skilled players get a satisfying difficulty curve and progression, and lesser skilled players can still clear the game and feel like they got their money's worth. It's a win-win, really.

And yes, I agree that the large majority of these games are downright mediocre to bad, but that's pretty much true of anything. It's not like most 8/16 bit platformers are above average, or most shmups, or most insert genre of your choice. If that weren't true, the whole concept of an average wouldn't exist.I think the fact that it might seem mediocre is that the core concept, which is pretty good, elevates bad games into seeming merely okay. There's nothing inherent to the roguelike formula that makes a good game worse, though.

If I wanted to be controversial, I might say that there is something about the JRPG formula that makes good games bad, but that's neither here nor there

Anyway, all of that said, to re-plug my last post, Age of Barbarian Extended Cut is way more joyful to play than any of these, so just check that one out!

[it290]

Death in a roguelike game should be a complete reset imo. Always. It's like resetting the board after you finish a game of chess. The game is done! That's all! You don't get +2 movement to your Knight permanently for having made the match last so long.

I mean, in Nethack you can randomly stumble across the corpses from your previous runs and loot them, is that cheating?

[To Far Away Times]

The devs who are making it also created Dead Cells... I have no doubt at all that they can deliver a more than competent Metroidvania that is faithful to the series.

No doubt at all? I dropped Dead Cells almost immediately after I tried it a decade ago, as, after all the praised it received as a procedurally generated Metroidvania (with invincible roll dodging ) , I found, among other things, the maps to be pitifully subpar. The idea that algorithmically-spawned satisfying search-actions were already here was apparently too good to be true. Have the developers actually demonstrated competence in static exploration experiences elsewhere?

I'm not normally this sour but reading that dredged up my long displaced feelings regarding Dead Cells after not thinking about it in so many years. Sorry.
I truly think that was my last straw with nearly all contemporary gaming.

Yeah this echoes my thoughts with Dead Cells. It's fine, I guess, but I would have preferred something that wasn't a rogue like. Unless this dev takes a big leap forward, I don't think they can hit the highs of the Castlevania series.

Also, I don't play Castlevania games for the challenge, I play them for the immaculate vibes (hence playing through games like SoTN, Castlevania IV, and Circle of the Moon several times) and the vibes look all wrong on that cel shaded Castlevania-In-Name-Only thing.

[it290]

I don't think you're wrong about the vibes, but this game isn't a Roguelike, it's already been confirmed to be a traditional Igavania style game.

[lastemperorjubei]

Bought the Switch 2 version of Mortal Kombat: Legacy Kollection, was recently discounted at Amazon Spain. I have experience with Mortal Kombat 2 SNES, Genesis and Arcade (emulation) and 1 but didn't play 3 because when the different versions released I was into the 32Bit Sega and Namco 3D fighting games like Virtua Fighter and Tekken. Mortal Kombat 2 is still my fav. (the character roster, the music, the atmosphere, the graphics like characters and backgrounds and the fatalities). 3/Ultimate has combos but to me it's not as impactful as 2. 1 is really limited compared to its successors. I also don't have experience with 4 and a short session showed me that it will stay like this. Instead playing 4 I'll keep playing 2 and 3 Ultimate. The SNES port of 2 was great. I like the qol features like the move and combo lists and unlimited time for fatalities.