Border Down on 1UP's Game Breakers list

Never_Scurred · Post by **Never_Scurred** » Wed Nov 08, 2006 4:37 am

Check out the article
It also mentions G-Darius too.

Limbrooke · Post by **Limbrooke** » Wed Nov 08, 2006 5:15 am

As little of Border Down I know, I really can't believe that comment.

'masochistic fans..." ?

I'm defintely not of that style nor do I hope to ever be, but I know Border Down seems like an interesting and well crafted game I'd like to eventually try out one day. Upon reading that segment I really don't know what the reviewer was looking for in a game and from the looks of things thoroughout the whole article, perhaps nothing is good enough.

That guy really needs to lay off the crack...err..Oblivion cause it seems to be only worthy mention.

EOJ · Post by **EOJ** » Wed Nov 08, 2006 5:26 am

As usual, that article is 100% garbage. If the loser actually played Border Down he'd know there are instances where you can choose your route (he states this is not possible), and that there are four different routes with four different end bosses, etc. Not to mention the remix mode which is like a free Border Down 2.

BTW, be sure to look at the next page of that article under the heading 'one life to live'. Hilarous stuff, complaining about how impossible it is to get to the end of an arcade game without unlimited continues!

GaijinPunch · Post by **GaijinPunch** » Wed Nov 08, 2006 5:40 am

I generally try not to read game articles...ever, unless I know who has written it and where they come from. Hence, I love reading Icycalms reviews. His tastes don't always coincide with mine, but I know he's not sold out, which is good enough for me. I can't say that much for....welll... any other major game publication (other than mine, of course, which I'll admit has holes in it).

D · Post by D » Wed Nov 08, 2006 7:51 am

Yeah exactly some of the so called reviewers are just full of it.
They pretend to have common gaming knowledge and think they are educating an audience. That's probably not even why they do it. It's probably just people that think they know everything. there should be a law against reviewing games of a genre that the reviewer doesn't like/know/care about.
I mean if I were to start reviewing pc FPS games, those reviews would probably get me killed

Ceph · Post by **Ceph** » Wed Nov 08, 2006 9:05 am

What a moron. And on the next page he complains about Under Defeat for giving you only 2 credits at first. You actually need to play the game to earn more and can't credit-feed to the end the first time you play it, bummer.

Really, Jess Ragan should be banned from playing shoot 'em ups. Or using keyboards.

DEL · Post by **DEL** » Wed Nov 08, 2006 9:13 am

WOW

! What a pile of shit on the printed page!

1up.com eh?!

Clueless, closed-minded trash.

Fighter17 · Post by **Fighter17** » Wed Nov 08, 2006 11:03 am

Yeah, most of it is shit. Limited Continues = shit, give me a break.

Never_Scurred · Post by **Never_Scurred** » Wed Nov 08, 2006 12:08 pm

I catch their video show...Its okay-very informative but hidden behind too much faux ironic hipster posturing...ugh...

ahnslaught · Post by **ahnslaught** » Wed Nov 08, 2006 12:20 pm

It almost reads like it's from someone who only started playing games after PS1 came out, since it sounds like they are completely unfamiliar with arcade style games.

If they have no knowledge of game history, how can they possibly write an article such as this? And get it past its editors? Just embarrassing.

TVG · Post by **TVG** » Wed Nov 08, 2006 7:16 pm

Once again, 1up delivers.*

*teh suck

Acid King · Post by **Acid King** » Thu Nov 09, 2006 6:29 pm

Can someone post the text of the article or PM it to me? The link never works and neither does 1up.com.

Ceph · Post by **Ceph** » Thu Nov 09, 2006 7:04 pm

Acid King wrote: The link never works and neither does 1up.com.

No loss there

It's several pages long, here's the section we were talking about:

1up.com hack wrote:DOWN WE GO

Submitted for your approval: A shooter on the Dreamcast with stunning futuristic graphics and sharp control. All would seem right with the game, but then you crash your ship and something unexpected happens. Instead of being sent back to a checkpoint, you're transported to an entirely different section of the game, leaving you disoriented and vulnerable to attack. You can only be in... the Border Down zone.

Why developer G.rev thought it would be a fantastic idea to split each stage of Border Down into three tiers, with the bottom two only accessible by losing lives, is a mystery even Inspector Clouseau couldn't solve. It would've been far better to let the player choose their path through each stage, like in G.rev's far more appealing PlayStation game G-Darius. However, it's likely that the team of former Taito programmers hoped to reach out to masochistic shooter fans -- the kind who demand nothing less than perfection from themselves and will play games endlessly until they achieve that perfection. You know them. It's the same audience that bought Ikaruga.

The Border Down play mechanic is exclusive to Border Down. You won't find it anywhere else, a blessing to the few remaining fans of classic shoot-em-ups. Even the boys at G.rev came to their senses when developing their next game, Under Defeat, going back to basics with an overhead-view shooter that pushed the Dreamcast hardware almost as hard as it pushed players.

Sometimes, you're better off sticking with tradition than anchoring your game to an idea that no one else has tried. Originality is nice, but sometimes there's a reason an idea has gone untested for so long.

Here's the second idiotic part:

1up.com hack wrote:ONE LIFE TO LIVE

You'll start out with just two credits in the Dreamcast's swan song, Under Defeat.

So you've bought a home version of your favorite arcade game, and you're thinking to yourself, "Now I've brought the arcade experience home; I can finally reach that last boss!" Well, maybe not. Chances are, you're only getting a dollar's worth of tokens out of that $50 game. Unless you're really talented or really persistent, you may never get to the end.

Limited continues were a huge issue in the golden age of the NES and Sega Genesis. You couldn't continue at all in the majority of the Nintendo Entertainment System's first games, and the later ones restricted your progress by giving you a small handful of credits. Game developers figured that limiting the number of continues would lengthen the replay value of their software and give customers more bang for their buck. All it really accomplished was dropping a brick wall in the middle of the games, leaving players wondering why they bought them in the first place.

Fortunately, the solution to this problem was simply to let nature take its course. Games became longer and more complex; as a result, limited continues became impractical. Today, the concept is rarely seen. Even games that limit your number of continues like Treasure's Ikaruga and Gradius V give you an opportunity to earn more. Many of today's titles not only let you continue whenever you want, but they also let you save your progress at any time.

JJG · Post by **JJG** » Thu Nov 09, 2006 7:10 pm

This reviewer is a freaking moron, jesus.

Ceph · Post by **Ceph** » Thu Nov 09, 2006 7:16 pm

Saving whenever you want, that's a brilliant idea for arcade-style games. That guy deserves a Pulitzer for this article.

JJG · Post by **JJG** » Thu Nov 09, 2006 7:20 pm

We should find this guy's email and make him feel like an idiot.

Ceph · Post by **Ceph** » Thu Nov 09, 2006 7:26 pm

JJG wrote:We should find this guy's email and make him feel like an idiot.

See, that's the problem with idiots, they can't feel it, otherwise the pain would make them stop.

Be that as it may, please feel free to post in his blog and convey your thoughts:

http://www.1up.com/do/my1Up?publicUserId=5592510

Interesting tidbit: Neither Border Down nor Under Defeat are listed in his collection... Arr, pirate.

BrianC · Post by **BrianC** » Thu Nov 09, 2006 8:13 pm

That article is messed up, but did you know that Jess Regan actually has a website with even more messed up reviews? The space invaders article actually nitpicks some versions of Space Invaders based on the font used.

Acid King · Post by **Acid King** » Thu Nov 09, 2006 9:20 pm

Ceph wrote:
Acid King wrote: The link never works and neither does 1up.com.
No loss there

It's several pages long, here's the section we were talking about:

Wow, what a jack ass.

Rob · Post by **Rob** » Thu Nov 09, 2006 9:26 pm

So you've bought a home version of your favorite arcade game, and you're thinking to yourself, "Now I've brought the arcade experience home; I can finally reach that last boss!" Well, maybe not. Chances are, you're only getting a dollar's worth of tokens out of that $50 game. Unless you're really talented or really persistent, you may never get to the end.

Hahahahaha.

I can't play my "favorite arcade game" for more than... 6-10 hours? When is freeplay unlocked? Shooters are doomed.

Gungriffon Geona · Post by **Gungriffon Geona** » Thu Nov 09, 2006 9:39 pm

I gave it a crack and added a comment, even though it probably won't get read.

Though reading his site this guy obviously likes games of the genre to quite an extent. checking his review section shows that he definitely plays a few. DDP, Parodius, Gradius RSGun, Ikaruga, Mars Matrix and a few others. all have pretty good reviews. perhaps it's a misjudgement?
I probably just made an ass of myself now. Maybe he just thinks G.Rev sucks?

Post by **Icarus** » Thu Nov 09, 2006 9:45 pm

The guy really likes Oblivion. Mentioned on almost every page.

JJG · Post by **JJG** » Thu Nov 09, 2006 9:46 pm

Yeah you just made an ass of yourself, wait you're him aren't you!?!

DEL · Post by **DEL** » Thu Nov 09, 2006 10:47 pm

I added a comment too.
Just for the Hell of it.

WarCheese · Post by **WarCheese** » Thu Nov 09, 2006 11:20 pm

Hello all:

I feel sorry for author of the article and all of those who are like him. To him, what makes a game "worth it" is to be able to see the last boss. You can't see the last boss because the game is hard, then you didn't get your money's worth...

Let me try an analogy... If you can't become an olympics level runner because it's hard to be one, then running is not worth your time. Instead, entering into the olympics should be made easier, so everyone can enjoy accolade...

Well... I think being an olympics runner actually mean something. Making it so that everyone can do it, then what's the point of being one anyways?

Call me an elitist, I'll take that as a compliment.

Cheers.

WarCheese

Twiddle · Post by **Twiddle** » Fri Nov 10, 2006 1:59 am

Icarus wrote:The guy really likes Oblivion. Mentioned on almost every page.

Oblivion has a worse rank system than Battle Garegga, most strongly targeted at those who powerlevel and grind, not unlike Battle Garegga punishing people for picking up everything that's not a bullet.

Shamefully, it's nowhere near as well balanced. Staying at Level 2 = easy mode.

Gungriffon Geona wrote: checking his review section shows that he definitely plays a few. DDP, Parodius, Gradius RSGun, Ikaruga, Mars Matrix and a few others. all have pretty good reviews. perhaps it's a misjudgement?

Credit feeding is possible on every one of those games. In Radirgy and UD, you get 9 credits max and I believe you have to 1cc Border Down to get Free Play (irony!)

(It takes a special kind of suck factor to not be able to get to the end of the game by the 9th credit after five or so hours of play)

Rob · Post by **Rob** » Fri Nov 10, 2006 2:09 am

Describing those games as having "pretty good reviews" is too kind. Again I'd like to point out that good rating does not mean it's a good review. Here are a few reasons he places Mars Matrix over GW2:

-in Mars Matrix you start with more weapons to choose from (oh boy!! piercing cannon + shield/shot)
-in Mars Matrix you can't panic bomb (obviously something not to be done in GW2)

These types of reviewers seem to rate something positively or negatively based on arbitrary factors. He could've just as easily said GW2 was better because you can panic bomb, while MM is "unfair." I think there actually was an implication that GW2 was unfair in that review. There's also the made too often mistake of attributing a game to the wrong developer (in this case Psikyo) and then comparing it to an actual Psikyo game. Dumb.

Also, MM and GW2 stole their shield idea from Radiant Silvergun.

Never_Scurred · Post by **Never_Scurred** » Fri Nov 10, 2006 4:10 am

WarCheese wrote:Hello all:

I feel sorry for author of the article and all of those who are like him. To him, what makes a game "worth it" is to be able to see the last boss. You can't see the last boss because the game is hard, then you didn't get your money's worth...

Let me try an analogy... If you can't become an olympics level runner because it's hard to be one, then running is not worth your time. Instead, entering into the olympics should be made easier, so everyone can enjoy accolade...

Well... I think being an olympics runner actually mean something. Making it so that everyone can do it, then what's the point of being one anyways?

Call me an elitist, I'll take that as a compliment.

Cheers.

WarCheese

Sir, I love your post, seriously, not being sarcastic...you can attribute that scenario to almost every worthwhile endeavor in life.

Pirate1019 · Post by **Pirate1019** » Fri Nov 10, 2006 6:52 am

Being a runner, I can feel Warcheese's analogy.

This guy is a fool. Plain and simple. I have never played Border Down or UD, but it seems self-evident that limiting credits is supposed to help simulate the arcade experience, at least to some extent. Winning a game on multiple credits isn't fun. I beat Ikaruga on 3 credits (I stopped trying after the first one), and had absolutely no satisfaction from it other than learning that the game is difficult enough that I will get my $50 out of it.

DEL · Post by **DEL** » Fri Nov 10, 2006 9:05 am

Pirate1019 wrote;

I beat Ikaruga on 3 credits (I stopped trying after the first one), and had absolutely no satisfaction from it other than learning that the game is difficult enough that I will get my $50 out of it.

Well yes, the zero satisfaction gained from credit feeding to the ALL is just one of the reasons why I replied to that 1up guy.

The following quote from the article is the one that got me to post a comment;

Even the boys at G.rev came to their senses when developing their next game, Under Defeat, going back to basics with an overhead-view shooter that pushed the Dreamcast hardware almost as hard as it pushed players.

Sometimes, you're better off sticking with tradition than anchoring your game to an idea that no one else has tried. Originality is nice, but sometimes there's a reason an idea has gone untested for so long.

Basically he's saying;

"Keep it simple for the thickos like me."