Gunstar Super Heroes -- on GBA, screens inside!

[Dylan1CC]

jp:

Things That Are Worse:
Level Design
Weapon Systems
Boss Fights
"Homage" Levels
Challenge

Levels: They are fine for a portable game, they have lots of variety, the enemy soldiers come fast and non-stop and the stages will still look and feel great when I play them on a GC-GBA player. Some of the stages are actually very long for a Treasure game.

Weapon systems: Weapon mixing was great in Gunstar Heroes, no doubt about it. But since you are slamming GSH for difficulty, let's be realistic: in the orignal game, besides Pink and Orange you can completely own many of the enemies and bosses by simply mixing in the homing shot as long as you aren't playing like a noob.

Boss Fights: Boss fights are worse? 7F is no less difficult than he was in the original if not slightly more difficult and his new transformations were very well done IMHO, especially his new 3-way "stingray"/spearing form. If the boss fights are "worse" then why is Black tougher to kill? And if they're so watered down, why is the final battle with Green tougher than it is in the Genny game?

And as another random example, Melon Bread does NOTHING but move around in the original game. In GSH he shoots flames all over the screen and puts up a heckuva fight even when you're using the charge beam. Off the top of my head, the only boss in the entire dice game that wasn't improved was the teddy bear which I assume was curry and rice's "replacement."

The only boss I will conceed is much easier is Golden Silver. Way too easy.

Homage levels: To each their own. I like the Afterburner stages but agreed that the Thunder Blade bit was not executed well at all.

Challenge: About even as far as I can see. IMHO, both the original and the sequel have an even number of parts that you can hammer into the ground and parts that require a lot more skill.

Anyways, I don't want to sound like I am talking down the original game. It will always be king. But I think some folks are looking at it with such rose tinted glasses that they are not seeing that this game as Moogs said, is a pretty darn comprehensive remake.

Anyways, I knew after this game was out for a week or two people would go from flat out loving it to saying it was "mediocre/disappointment." Oh well. I sure feel like I got my money's worth.

[Herr Schatten]

Boss Fights: Boss fights are worse? 7F is no less difficult than he was in the original if not slightly more difficult and his new transformations were very well done IMHO, especially his new 3-way "stingray"/spearing form. If the boss fights are "worse" then why is Black tougher to kill? And if they're so watered down, why is the final battle with Green tougher than it is in the Genny game?

Since when does "more difficult" equal "better"?

I agree with the people who say that the game is mediocre. Even if you ignore the downright horrible stages, the stage design is lacking. The run'n'gun stages, which are arguably the best part of the game, are sometimes quite long, that's right, but they consist mostly of 1-2 cool scenes per stage which are connected by long stretches of, well, nothing. (Not counting the enemies that are constantly pouring in.) The good scenes are in no way embedded into something that resembles a coherent stage design. Partly this has been a problem of the original game too, but it was far less evident there.

Almost everything that's good in GSH was taken more or less directly from the original game. I'm not even a fan of the original game, but GSH doesn't even live up to my expectations.

I think Treasure are way overrated anyway, so surely I'm biased, but honestly, not one of their games really justifies their legendary status. They did a lot of very solid games and GSH is not bad, but do they always have to shove ALL the ideas they have into their games? IMO, it would be much better for the games if they only put in the parts that actually work. Less is more sometimes. Just my two cents.

That said, I think the part of GSH I had the most fun with was actually the Flicky level. No, really.

[Neon]

do they always have to shove ALL the ideas they have into their games?

That sums up my thoughts about Silvergun rather nicely.

Since when does "more difficult" equal "better"?

Well, being way too easy can ruin a game, especially if there's little in the way of scoring depth...i.e. Blastwind on defaults

[jp]

Well, being way too easy can ruin a game, especially if there's little in the way of scoring depth...i.e. Blastwind on defaults

[sethsez]

All these g*ddamn sports games can continue to exist for these American gaming lamers...I don't care. I won't buy them anyway. Just as long as talented Japanese developers

Oh Christ, stop acting like only Americans play sports games and companies like Konami haven't made money hand over fist with them (yes, including in "WAI WAI SO HARDCORE ^_^" Japan). It's a bullshit attitude and gets really tiring.

As for GSH, it's lame. Nowhere near as good as the original, which itself wasn't as good as the best Contras. Treasure tends to have some serious issues with their stage design (notable exceptions being RS and Ika), and this follows in their proud tradition of great ideas marred by mediocre execution. They just never seem to fully polish their products, so all of their good ideas go to waste. Cool game mechanics mean nothing if the stages aren't worth using them in.

[Valgar]

As for GSH, it's lame. Nowhere near as good as the original, which itself wasn't as good as the best Contras. Treasure tends to have some serious issues with their stage design (notable exceptions being RS and Ika), and this follows in their proud tradition of great ideas marred by mediocre execution. They just never seem to fully polish their products, so all of their good ideas go to waste. Cool game mechanics mean nothing if the stages aren't worth using them in.

I don't think they have any issues, because I think of Bangaioh, Sin and Punishment, Mischief Makers, Alien Soldier, and then I can't really talk about some of the others since the games have nothing to do with that (Rakugaki Showtime). I also refuse to believe that the majority of their games arn't polished (though I cannot say the same for GSH), I think they are above and beyond most.

Gunstar Heroes doesn't need elebarote stages, that isn't what makes it fun for people, and if anything it would get in the way. My favorite stage is FINAL RUSH where you just fucking walk forward and blast/throw shit. I pee myself everytime I get to throw that guy in the UFO straight into the ground.

[Dylan1CC]

Boss Fights: Boss fights are worse? 7F is no less difficult than he was in the original if not slightly more difficult and his new transformations were very well done IMHO, especially his new 3-way "stingray"/spearing form. If the boss fights are "worse" then why is Black tougher to kill? And if they're so watered down, why is the final battle with Green tougher than it is in the Genny game?

Since when does "more difficult" equal "better"?

I agree with the people who say that the game is mediocre. Even if you ignore the downright horrible stages, the stage design is lacking. The run'n'gun stages, which are arguably the best part of the game, are sometimes quite long, that's right, but they consist mostly of 1-2 cool scenes per stage which are connected by long stretches of, well, nothing. (Not counting the enemies that are constantly pouring in.) The good scenes are in no way embedded into something that resembles a coherent stage design. Partly this has been a problem of the original game too, but it was far less evident there.

Almost everything that's good in GSH was taken more or less directly from the original game. I'm not even a fan of the original game, but GSH doesn't even live up to my expectations.

I think Treasure are way overrated anyway, so surely I'm biased, but honestly, not one of their games really justifies their legendary status. They did a lot of very solid games and GSH is not bad, but do they always have to shove ALL the ideas they have into their games? IMO, it would be much better for the games if they only put in the parts that actually work. Less is more sometimes. Just my two cents.

That said, I think the part of GSH I had the most fun with was actually the Flicky level. No, really.

A big fat "whatever" to this "reply" since you ignored 99% of what I said and contradicted yourself a few times ("Long run 'n gun stages where I shoot things suck, but the Flicky was the best part!" mmm hmmmm I just love jaded internet BS...).

Since you don't like Treasure anyways, I think I can chalk up everything you just said to personal taste. And yes, logic would dictate that a boss which is difficult is "better" than one that is easy as long as said boss's pattern is excecuted well, and IMHO, most of the bosses in GSH except Golden Silver fit into this category. And the fact still stands that Treasure put effort into making the bosses tougher this time. So, I am still not seeing the "mediocre" part where Treasure stole my money and made a really easy/dull game since they put effort into giving me the player new patterns and at times, more difficult bosses to contend with.

And they are not just randomly more difficult. Example: AGAIN, you cannot tell me that Black's mech in GSH doesn't feature improved movements and more difficult attacks than he did in the original game.

I think a way more solid example of a game that "changes too much" while upping the difficulty in a "bad" way is Contra SS which IMHO is more like an on foot R-TYPE game then a Contra sequel.

long stretches of, well, nothing. (Not counting the enemies that are constantly pouring in.)

Long levels with lots of enemies to shoot. Wow. This right here sounds like the time tested concept of a good platform gunner. I know, I just hate the parts in Contra NES where there is just "nothing" but enemies constantly pouring into all these "empty environments" with "only" one or two cool set pieces.

I am done with this thread for now. I don't begrudge anyone who likes the first game better and some folks like seth express their counter points well. But some of the comments in here are so whiny and nitpicky it blows my mind.

[Herr Schatten]

A big fat "whatever" to this "reply" since you ignored 99% of what I said and contradicted yourself a few times ("Long run 'n gun stages where I shoot things suck, but the Flicky was the best part!" mmm hmmmm I just love jaded internet BS...).

Whoa! Why so angry? It's not that I attacked you personally or something. And you obviously haven't read most of what I've written here or at least interpreted in a way contradictory to the meaning I intended it to have.

I didn't write anywhere that long run'n' gun stages suck. There's nothing wrong with them. I merely critisized their execution in GSH. And I didn't write that the Flicky stage was the best part. In fact I did write that the run'n'gun stages are the best part, if you mind re-reading my above post. What I wrote was that the Flicky level was the part I had the most fun with. I don't think the stage fits well into the game, but I had a lot of fun with it, because it is well executed and works, which is something you can't say about other parts of the game.

Since you don't like Treasure anyways, I think I can chalk up everything you just said to personal taste.

Fair enough.

And yes, logic would dictate that a boss which is difficult is "better" than one that is easy as long as said boss's pattern is excecuted well, and IMHO, most of the bosses in GSH except Golden Silver fit into this category.

Important part highlighted. I probably didn't make myself clear enough, but neither did you until just now, so there seems to be some serious misunderstanding here.

JP expressed his opinion that the bosses in GSH were worse than those in GH and you countered with the notion that they were more difficult. I just wanted to make a general comment about how difficulty and quality of a game are very loosely connected at best. To imply that a more difficult game is automatically better would be complete nonsense, IMO. Otherwise Gradius III would be automatically better than Gaiden, which it clearly is not. And Musha Aleste and Thunderforce III would be considered two of the worst games ever, because they are relatively easy. However, now it's clear that this isn't at all what you wanted to say. I misinterpreted what you said. Sorry.

AGAIN, you cannot tell me that Black's mech in GSH doesn't feature improved movements and more difficult attacks than he did in the original game.

I didn't and I won't. I didn't say anything about the bosses at all, actually. As explained above, my comment was meant to be far more general.

Long levels with lots of enemies to shoot. Wow. This right here sounds like the time tested concept of a good platform gunner. I know, I just hate the parts in Contra NES where there is just "nothing" but enemies constantly pouring into all these "empty environments" with "only" one or two cool set pieces.

Again, I didn't complain about long levels with lots of enemies to shoot. I complained about the execution of said concept in GSH.

Some parts of the stages are only there to artificially lengthen the stages while connecting the good bits, which are few and far between. As they are lacking substance, the stages are not really long, it only takes a lot of time until they are over. I'd have preferred shorter stages where I don't have to endure stretches of emptiness until I reach the good parts or long stages that are fleshed out at least a bit more.

Take a look at the execution of the run'n'gun formula in Contra SNES and Metal Slug Advance and tell me you don't see a difference to GSH. There are no empty environments in those games (Just to make this very clear: I'm talking about gameplay, not graphics), while there are plenty of those in GSH.

Seth summed up my feelings well:

Treasure tends to have some serious issues with their stage design (notable exceptions being RS and Ika), and this follows in their proud tradition of great ideas marred by mediocre execution.

If all of that sound just whiny and nitpicky to you, well, I can't help it. If you have fun with the game, more power to you. Actually, I do enjoy it too, I simply refuse to ignore its glaring flaws just because it's from Treasure and those devlopers are for some reason widely considered above and beyond criticism. Or as UFO put it:

Learning to appreciate gameplay gimmicks that're obviously flawed is telling Treasure to keep feeding us the same crap.

[BrianC]

So, anyone pick up the European Gunstar Future Heroes yet? There's a possibility that it could have been tweaked a bit from other versions. If it's more polished than the US and JP versions, I might import it.

[mrMagenta]

In my opinion you guys are being overly critical. sure, there are plenty of things that could be improved in the gamedesign, i agree on most of the points, but just because it's a treasure title doesn't mean it should be expected to be faultless.. with such high expectations everything will feel like a failure.

but all that doesn't change the fact that it's a really cool game, furious and fun. certainly one of the best games on the license-plagued GBA, and one of the visually most impressive.

it's ironic that guys who love turrican and all kinds of classics with plenty of gamedesign flaws can't handle a new game because in a short section the hitbox of your ship is too large etc.. imo gunstar super heroes is fully in the same spirit as the genesis game. extending with the flicky and afterburner sections doesn't feel out of character. the thunderblade part is frustrating though.. so i agree on that one. still awesome game.

[Michaelm]

Damned I'm still waiting for those new GBA SP with the better backlit screen to arrive here in europe. I'm getting this title though no matter what

[Dylan1CC]

re: Herr Schatten

Much apoligies. Was having a bad day coupled with the fact that yes, I misread and misintrepreted much of your post. My bad.

[Nemo]

My how Treasure has fallen.

[Herr Schatten]

re: Herr Schatten

Much apoligies. Was having a bad day coupled with the fact that yes, I misread and misintrepreted much of your post. My bad.

No problem at all.

[BrianC]

My how Treasure has fallen.

GSH is far from their worst game. Treasure is a hit or miss developer and GSH is probably a hit or miss game, much like Mischief Makers. Astro Boy and Gradius V are recent games from Treasure and they are both top notch games. Treasure hasn't "fallen" any more than back when they made Silpheed, Dragon Drive, or Light Crusader. Despite most of the bashing here, Gunstar Super Heroes seems to be more well received than those games.

[Neon]

My how Treasure has fallen.

http://www.gamefaqs.com/features/company/36590.html

I think this list leaves off their McDonald's license for Genesis too.

[Nemo]

My how Treasure has fallen.

GSH is far from their worst game. Treasure is a hit or miss developer and GSH is probably a hit or miss game, much like Mischief Makers. Astro Boy and Gradius V are recent games from Treasure and they are both top notch games. Treasure hasn't "fallen" any more than back when they made Silpheed, Dragon Drive, or Light Crusader. Despite most of the bashing here, Gunstar Super Heroes seems to be more well received than those games.

It's not their worst game, but only because it's saved by what was rehashed from the original. The talent well has run dry, they're out of ideas, why else would they have restorted to milking their own franchises and creating lifeless shells of games. Them mismashing a bunch of ideas together just isn't quarky and fun anymore, it pretty much just results in bad games.

[Valgar]

It's not their worst game, but only because it's saved by what was rehashed from the original. The talent well has run dry, they're out of ideas, why else would they have restorted to milking their own franchises and creating lifeless shells of games. Them mismashing a bunch of ideas together just isn't quarky and fun anymore, it pretty much just results in bad games.

What is a "talent well"? The people who work at Treasure are very skilled, and they would not lose that. Maybe they make sequels because they just want to or no one wants to publish and pay for their original ideas. Let's just wait and see what the Arcade team comes out with.

[Arcatech]

@ BrianC

Treasure did not develop Silpheed TLP. Despite what WD would want you to believe.

[LoneSage]

I think all that Treasure did with Silpheed: TLP was something with graphics, or maybe music. Nothing with the gameplay, AFAIK.

[jp]

My how Treasure has fallen.

GSH is far from their worst game. Treasure is a hit or miss developer and GSH is probably a hit or miss game, much like Mischief Makers. Astro Boy and Gradius V are recent games from Treasure and they are both top notch games. Treasure hasn't "fallen" any more than back when they made Silpheed, Dragon Drive, or Light Crusader. Despite most of the bashing here, Gunstar Super Heroes seems to be more well received than those games.

It's not their worst game, but only because it's saved by what was rehashed from the original. The talent well has run dry, they're out of ideas, why else would they have restorted to milking their own franchises and creating lifeless shells of games. Them mismashing a bunch of ideas together just isn't quarky and fun anymore, it pretty much just results in bad games.

Its almost like they're turning into Sega...