Cave's Ketsui(2002): Fair or just a coin-grave?

[drunkninja24]

Sure, it's kinda hard, but bad scoring system, are you fucking kidding me? Memorizer, gimme a break.

I'm inclined to agree. I don't find Ketsui's scoring system bad at all. I think it's one of Cave's best, actually. It can be tough, but once you get the general flow of the patterns, you can figure your way around them without too much trouble. I've definitely not memorized the game down pat, and I've been able to 1CC it. The Stage 4 boss is really what gives me the most trouble with those criss-cross patterns.

[gray117]

It's a hard game. It can punish you stage 3-4-5 ... kind of fair to me...

I seemed to find it an easier game to react to, and know what I wanted to do in order to survive, than say doj.

... don't remember offhand did the port have a novice mode [from date I presume this is about arcade game]? Perhaps new comers would find that more initial fun if it did.

I found the dfk novice mode a useful way to get a 'feel' for the later levels...

[Sumez]

There's quite a bit of memorization in Ketsui's scoring system, but it's nowhere anywhere as bad as DDP, because it allows you to break up your chains without penalty, like Futari Maniac. It's really among my favourites along with that one and EspGaluda 1 (and Guwange would be too, if losing your chain wasn't such a run killer)

[Deca]

Now I don't think Ketsui has a BAD scoring system, I just don't like it.

[Siren2011]

The only true unfair game would be one that could not be beaten by anyone, regardless of their experience with games, no matter how badly they wanted to improve. If you see progress in your playing after practice, then it is most likely a fair game.

[Danza]

Ketsui has my favorite scoring system of any CAVE game, different strokes I guess. I can't get beyond stage 4 boss, first loop yet. But I'm trying. I find it really to be a hard game but I wouldn't say it is unfair.

[Drum]

The only true unfair game would be one that could not be beaten by anyone, regardless of their experience with games, no matter how badly they wanted to improve. If you see progress in your playing after practice, then it is most likely a fair game.

I dunno, those Asshole Mario hacks are deliberately 'unfair', but they're beatable - they also have their own internal logic, so what I'm about to say might not apply.
I think if a game throws out situations where the only ways to deal with them are experience or luck, and if sense and judgement won't carry you, that's 'unfair'. Basically if you ask the question 'what am I supposed to get out of this?' or 'What am I supposed to put into this?' and the answer is something retarded, the game may be unfair. If you don't like the word 'unfair', I guess you can substitute 'badly designed' or something like that. I can't think of one that isn't problematic off the top of my head.

[Siren2011]

I just looked up a video for Asshole Mario, and it looks difficult but fair because progress is possible. The hypothetical game I speak of, that is to say a genuinely unfair game, would have a first stage boss or whatever that was programmed to be non-defeatable. Like, depleting its health bar would be impossible, and advancement in the game would be rendered impossible as well. This would be unfair, especially if the game looked promising. Of course, it could be called bad game design as well.

Basically if you ask the question 'what am I supposed to get out of this?' or 'What am I supposed to put into this?' and the answer is something retarded, the game may be unfair.

I'm not sure if I'm reading this right. The same questions could be asked by someone who has no idea how to play Ketsui, but that doesn't say anything about the game's "unfairness"; it says something about the player's lack of skill.

[Paradigm]

You're mistaking 'unfair' with 'impossible'. A beatable game can still be considered unfair.

[dunpeal2064]

You're mistaking 'unfair' with 'impossible'. A beatable game can still be considered unfair.

But by those standards, just sucking at a game makes it unfair.

Pretty much every puzzle type game could be lumped into "unfair" if the player cannot determain what to do.

It would have to be more universal, not individual. Heck, someone could say that bosses that you are required to die to are unfair, and that would make sense to a point. That doesn't make Megaman X an unfair game, or Silent Hill 3 (well... maybe Silent Hill, but you get my point)

[Paradigm]

But by those standards, just sucking at a game makes it unfair.

Err, no.

An example of a game I'd consider unfair is Castlevania II.

you get my point

Not really, no.

[Barrakketh]

You're mistaking 'unfair' with 'impossible'. A beatable game can still be considered unfair.

But by those standards, just sucking at a game makes it unfair.

No. You're confusing "unfair" and some degree of difficulty that is above the player's skill level.

"Unfair" would be poor game design, such as a boss that causes you to take damage when you attack it with no way to recover health, and has a health pool large enough that you would die to self-inflicted damage even if you were never hit by the boss. It's basically a way of saying "grind moar" in an RPG.

The Magi Master you have to fight in FFVI after getting the Gem Box almost qualifies, because even if you defeat it at a "low" level he casts Ultima before dying which is unblockable and unresistable. Normally the only way to survive is to have enough HP. However, Rasp and Osmose can be used to drain all of its MP. It'll die and be unable to cast Ultima due to lack of MP when you drain it all which is why I say "almost".

Heck, someone could say that bosses that you are required to die to are unfair, and that would make sense to a point. That doesn't make Megaman X an unfair game, or Silent Hill 3 (well... maybe Silent Hill, but you get my point)

Scripted events aren't the same thing. Yes, you're going to get your ass kicked by Vile at the end of MMX's intro stage. That's not unfair, there's no penalty for losing, it's something that was planned to happen.

Even in some games where you're destined to fail but have the potential to beat a boss but still get the "you lose" events after a battle because the plot demands it. The Tales series has lots of them, especially during a New Game+.

After each death in Ketsui in Stage 2 on the last pattern of the Boss there's really a moment where I thought "There was nothing I could have done to avoid that." .

Fixed that for you, bro.

Which part are you complaining about? The red bullets that require tap-dodging, the blue bullets that you should macro-dodge, or the large red bullets from the shells?

[dunpeal2064]

Hmm, I think I get this "unfair" you are talking about.

I assumed you were talking from the perspective of someone first playing a game and judging its fairness. Thats what I was talking about, and by that standard any memorizer would be "unfair"

Do you consider Last Hope unfair? Or stage 6 Gradius V?

If something is impossible it is unfair, but otherwise it is either just difficult or poorly designed.

Then again, I like a game kicking my ass, so I find most things "challenging", not "unfair"

Yay for the FFVI referrence, I think it applies in this case, that boss was quite tough for me to live through. However, anyone who "grinds" as a part of playing an rpg would not find that part even memorable, let alone "unfair"

That is why I was saying its hard to judge a games "fairness", as most of them are personal experiences. There are a lot of attacks in shmups that would straight kill me, without having a chance to notice them. However unfair that may have been the first time it happened, once you know its there its a different story

Hopefully I got my point across a little better.

[nZero]

Normally the only way to survive is to have enough HP.

Or do the Phoenix Cave subquest before the Tower of Fanatics and use Phoenix to learn Life 3 (Reraise). Still grinding but of a slightly different variety

[Sumez]

FFVI is one of my favourite games (if not THE), and I found a billion different ways to defeat the Magi Master (more or less..), so it's not like there's some obscure secret to it.
Sure, there's no way you can know he's going to cast that spell the first time you fight the battle, but it's part of the genre. It's really difficult to make truly strategic challenging JRPG battles (though FF6 isn't the best example of those) WITHOUT some use of trial&error, it's not really unfair.

[Barrakketh]

Normally the only way to survive is to have enough HP.

Or do the Phoenix Cave subquest before the Tower of Fanatics and use Phoenix to learn Life 3 (Reraise). Still grinding but of a slightly different variety

That's almost always one of the last things I've done every time I played FFVI. The Rasp/Osmose method is how I prefer to tackle it, even though it is slow it's still considerably faster than the other methods.

FFVI is one of my favourite games (if not THE), and I found a billion different ways to defeat the Magi Master (more or less..), so it's not like there's some obscure secret to it.
Sure, there's no way you can know he's going to cast that spell the first time you fight the battle, but it's part of the genre. It's really difficult to make truly strategic challenging JRPG battles (though FF6 isn't the best example of those) WITHOUT some use of trial&error, it's not really unfair.

Except it's not challenging. It's either a) level up until you have enough HP to survive, b) do the Phoenix Cave subquest first (IMO if it was meant to be a pre-requisite then the Tower of Fanatics should be blocked off until it was complete), c) take the long route and drain his MP.

If it wasn't for option for c I would consider it unfair. You can handle the enemies in the tower, you can handle the boss, he just has a "fuck you" attack for beating him.

For a fair example of something similar, take a look at Genius of Sappheiros. One of the stage six bosses (Yuyuko) will use a full-screen instant death attack on your party. If you haven't read, seen, or done this fight before it will get you the first time. However, by that point you should have several options to get around it:

• Alice can protect a party member, taking the instant death attack for them. That party member will live.
• Sakuya can kill Yuyuko while Private Square is active. Yuyuko won't use SFN.
• Yuyuko can be killed off with poison. She won't use SFN.

If you're using Nitori as a commander I think her second commander bomb (Hyper Camouflage) can also block it, but I can't confirm that.

[Siren2011]

A beatable game can still be considered unfair.

Please give an example for why this is so. I'm having a hard time following what you mean.

If you mean subjectively, for this particular person, the game is "unfair", then I see how that would be true, if the word is supposed to signify their limit of tolerance for a hard game.

But if "unfair" is used to blame the game for their own shortcomings, then such a proposition as "It's the game's fault I suck. It is too hard! Therefore, the game is unfair." would be untrue.

[Deca]

A beatable game can still be considered unfair.

Please give an example for why this is so. I'm having a hard time following what you mean.

If you mean subjectively, for this particular person, the game is "unfair", then I see how that would be true, if the word is supposed to signify their limit of tolerance for a hard game.

But if "unfair" is used to blame the game for their own shortcomings, then such a proposition as "It's the game's fault I suck. It is too hard! Therefore, the game is unfair." would be untrue.

Taito.

Still, I don't really like the word unfair.

[Jeneki]

Of all games, Ketsui unfair? Seriously?

See this topic on the XBLA game You Will Die. There was a much better discussion there of what "unfair" means in a shmup.

I feel the difference is in game design intention. If a developer decides they want a game to be hard but fully possible and repeatable with practice, that's fair. If a developer decides they want their game to be the hardest game ever for the sake of being the hardest game ever and doesn't care if anyone will ever be able to finish it, that's unfair.

[Hair]

Ketsui has tight controls, easily visable bullets which move slow enough to react to and no super-fast-instant-kill attacks, hitboxes that are smaller than the sprite etc... It is hard but fair. I laughed when I saw this thread because I have considered Ketsui a perfect example of a really hard game that is still very fair. I doubt (m)any people could 1cc Ketsui on their first playthrough, but it is not a memorizer. I won't even bother explaining why because it is obvious.

[shadowbringer]

MagiMaster's Ultima is tankable (depends on level and character, though -- or magicite choice for leveling up)

There's another way to avoid Ultima, which is to use one esper which uses a wind attack against the boss while carrying the party members with it; If the boss didn't die, the characters will attack it with the Jump attack, and those who haven't landed yet will not take damage from Ultima (and iirc they'll gain exp normally)


my opinion on asshole mario-style levels is that they're meant to be TASed, or played by people trying to emulate TAS-level execution. Not something to be played seriously, imho.
Unfairness examples that come to mind:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4VBfDfgiavM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nFJfN7DkUsc

[ratikal]

It makes me wonder if Battle Garegga was supposed to be a coin-grave with its rank. Could it just have been a coincidence that extend rates and suicides making the game 1CCable was unintentional?

[Despatche]

All arcade games are supposed to be "coin graves".

[NzzpNzzp]

Trafalgar is pretty horrible. The rest of the game's pretty fair though.

[Jeneki]

I recently had a shmup experience I would label as "unfair". Or rather, an "oops" glitch that had an unfair result.

Raiden Trad on SNES. When you defeat a boss, the game immediately takes control of your ship and moves you to the center of the screen. This does not, however, clear the screen of bullets. So I had an unfortunate incident where I destroyed a boss, and the autopilot sent me right into the last bullet on the screen with no way to avoid it. LOL Curse you, shoddy ports of the 16-bit days!

[Aisha]

It makes me wonder if Battle Garegga was supposed to be a coin-grave with its rank. Could it just have been a coincidence that extend rates and suicides making the game 1CCable was unintentional?

According to this, more income for arcade operators is the sole reason why Yagawa programmed rank into his games.

[drei :3]

One way a shmup can be unfair is if a hypothetical player with perfect reflexes and no prior knowledge of stage architecture and enemy placement can't always avoid getting hit. There should be a word for that.

[burgerkingdiamond]

Ghost's N Goblins for the NES is definitely unfair (I've cleared both loops, so I won't say it's impossible). Theres an element of randomness to it that makes it very difficult to clear consistently. Pair that with crappy controls and it is definitely an unfair game. With persistance and skill it's doable though. After torturing myself for about 6 hours or so to clear it I have never really played it again...

[Wonderbanana]

One way a shmup can be unfair is if a hypothetical player with perfect reflexes and no prior knowledge of stage architecture and enemy placement can't always avoid getting hit. There should be a word for that.

There is; non-existent.

[NzzpNzzp]

There is; non-existent.

I betcha nobody could dodge every shot in Ikaruga.