boo boo

Yeah, this is a ripoff of Urbans music thread, but this is for something different.

Music and video games are tied for my most time consuming pastime. I'm a retro gamer. The arcade, NES, Atari, SNES, Genesis, Gameboy, N64, even more obscure platforms like the Master System, MSX and Commodore 64, I play them all.

I too am an angry video game nerd. So this is for all those lost years of childhood fustration.

This won't be in any order, except for number 1.




100: The fact these games didn't have the Konami code

Seriously. WTF. You remember the Konami code for the first Contra for NES right? Press up up down down left right left right B A at the menu screen and you get 30 lives, which is how many lives you should have in the first place, Contra was f*cking hard, especially when you're a kid. You die from one hit, and yet without the code you have 3 lives, going through levels where sh*t is constantly flying at you, bullets, bombs, flame throwers and traps from every direction. Are you f*cking kidding me? 3 lives and death from one hit? There aren't even any shields or anything, holy sh*t. Guys like Nintendo were very generous with their powerups, extra lives and continues but not Konami, Contra was for the hardcore, Contra was like "f*ck you, if you want to play you're gonna have to give it everything you got" and the sequels are no exception. Still, the first game had the damn code so us wimps could have a fighting chance.

So, now you have Contra III for the SNES and Contra Hard Corps for the Genesis and what the hell? NEITHER OF THEM HAVE THE CODE? F*CKING BULLSH*T. These games are even harder too, greater range of enemies and the bosses are insane. Hard Corps especially, so what the hell is this sh*t? Why do they decide to use the code for some Contra games but not all of them? Why the inconsistancy? Hell, didn't they take the time to think and consider that most gamers back then were you know, kids? Sure once you get older, all that trial and error makes these games easier, but when I was a kid, Konami haunted my dreams.

__________________
It's only knock n' knowall, but I like it

http://www.last.fm/user/kingboobs

mr dave

thing is contra 3 was easier than its predecessors. especially with the fact that you could carry and fire 2 special weapons and spawned with your 2ndary when you died. by removing the code konami also created a much more significant feeling of accomplishment when you beat one of the levels.

besides back in the NES days the point of playing a game was to play it. not to beat it on your 3rd sitting or without having to start over at the beginning. while the games were geared for kids they should have had some decent hand eye coordination by that point. but you're right about some of the bosses they were crazy tough.

if i remember correctly the inclusion of the konami code in the original was a mistake. it was a tool for the testers to make sure the game was beatable and it was left in the final product as an oversight.

i also get the impression you rely on emulators for a lot of your old school gaming. the master system was not obscure in its day and the commodore 64 was most definitely not obscure. then again i'm not retro i'm just old school. hehehe

not sure where it fits in your list but you should have 'being able to get to the last level of the original ninja gaiden without dying and NEVER BEING ABLE TO BEAT THE 2nd TO LAST BOSS.'

__________________
i am the universe

boo boo

Contra 3 is not easier than Contra. Why? Because it didn't have the code, duh.

I mean c'mon, sure it's good for games to be challenging, but it's not like the code makes Contra a walk in the park, and even so, we're talking about an 8 level game that's hard as crap even with a stock full of lives, let alone just 3, if you're one of the hardcore that dosen't use the code then fine, that dosen't excuse not having ANYTHING to help gamers that are not quite as skilled. If the first game did it and was famous for doing so, then it dosen't matter if they indended it or not, as greatly associated with the series as it is it should be available for every game, Contra 4 has the code, they all should have had it.

And yes I use emulators. And no, Master System was not very popular even when it came out, especially in North America.

__________________
It's only knock n' knowall, but I like it

http://www.last.fm/user/kingboobs

boo boo

99: Ridiculously overcomplicated combos and finishing moves for fighting games

Mortal Kombat is a great example, yeah, those fatalities are awesome, but being able to do them requires having a photographic memory so you can remember the ridiculously extended button sequences you have to do and you have to do them JUST RIGHT, like being at a certain distance.

I mean did it HAVE to be that complicated? I say no. People say it makes it more challenging, but what kind of challenge is that? When I play the game I don't want to stop what I'm f*cking doing so I can look up a damn manual so I can learn how to do the uppercut into a pit fatality. You'd think all you have to do is an uppercut after your enemy is ready for a fatality but no, you gotta do Hold Block (Back, Forward, Forward) Low Kick or Hold Block (Up, Up, Up) High Punch and a variety of overcomplicated combos just to do a f*cking uppercut into the pit, did I mention the button sequence is different for every character?

F*cking bullsh*t, that sh*t pisses me off, I mean how are you supposed to memorize all that? Especially when you're playing in the arcades like I did. It's total guesswork and fighting game moves shouldn't be SO damn complicated that you have to look it up. I hate people that not only tolerate this but even embrace it. It pisses me off further when idiots diss Super Smash Bros for being a "button masher". Why? Because you can actually DO all the damn moves without a f*cking notepad? Because you can actually HAVE FUN playing it because the controls are simple like they should be and you shouldn't have to try and memorize something like up down left block down right just to do a f*cking kick or something?

Don't get me wrong, I say this as a fan of traditional fighting games and Mortal Kombat. Street Fighter didn't make it too overcomplicated for one, but Virtua Fighter is another story. More than anything Soul Calibur and Smash Bros shows how it should really be done.

__________________
It's only knock n' knowall, but I like it

http://www.last.fm/user/kingboobs

The Unfan

I sort of feel the opposite about fighting games. Street Fighter and Mortal Kombat are the height of the genre. Virtua Fighter isn't bad, its just different. Once you get used to it the game flows wonderfully.

Piss Me Off

I'm terrible at video games to be fair but i never got the hang of Mortal Kombat either.

Also Boo Boo, i was hoping for some sort of reply in the Smash Bros thread

__________________


Last FM
Rate Yr Music
Muxtape

boo boo

98: Sh*tty endings

Endings should never be afterthoughts, you went through all the trouble to beat the game, you should be rewarded with a good wrap up of the story, not just a plain "thank you" or "congratulations".

You remember how disappointing the ending to the first Super Mario Bros was? Thank you! Your quest is over. What the hell? Now look here princess, I fought my way through horrifying mushroom monsters and giant turtles, I've been told "thank you Mario but the princess is in another castle" 7 damn times, I just killed a giant f*cking fire breathing turtle dragon, and all I get is a simple thank you? Bullsh*t. You owe me some poontang, or at least a blow job.

Either way they could have done something more to reward the player or even progress the story.



^ How SMB could have ended.

Now Nintendo learned from this, most Mario games since have a good ending, the All Stars remake of SMB ended with Peach giving you a kiss, Super Mario World ended with you partying with a bunch of Yoshis, Super Mario RPG ended with you having a parade and Super Mario 64 ended with you getting that damn cake you were promised. It may not be much but it's something. Nintendo do happy endings pretty well, remember how Link To The Past ended? During the credits you see what happens to every character you encountered from your journey, because so many characters played a part in the story. Imagine if it ended with just a badly spelled phrase like "congratularations" or something? Even back then there should have been no excuse for stuff like that, video games are different from movies, you EARN the endings, that means you should actually get a damn ending.

I'm not asking for clever or complex endings, just a good happy ending and something to sum up the story. Many old games had the problem of just slapping together a simple text ending and that was it, made worse by lack of translators and awful grammar and spelling. Anticlimatic endings are the worst though, new games have this problem, a lot of them also leave cliffhangers for the inevitable sequel, Assassins Creed, God of War 2 and the first two Halo games are examples, that just pisses me off. Then there are ones that are just plain stupid, remember when Super Mario Bros 2 ended with everything being a dream? What the hell? So I achieved nothing? It was all just a dream? Bullsh*t.

Sonic 1 ended with Sonic running around with his little furry friends, brief and simple, but at least it's a good happy ending. Now Castlevania's ending was just pathetic, the castle crumbles and the text explains everything after that. WHY DO YOU NEED TEXT TO DESCRIBE WHAT HAPPENS? It's a video game not a damn book, show us something happening dammit.

Remember how most Metroid games ended? If you beat them in a certain amount of time, Samus shows you her tits, now THAT'S an ending.

__________________
It's only knock n' knowall, but I like it

http://www.last.fm/user/kingboobs

FireInCairo

oh i remember super mario bros two!!!!
i was soo angry!

__________________
O G MUDBONE: Only You can prevent forest fires.

boo boo

97: The cons of in game currency

You know what I'm talking about. Specifically the Zelda games. Now in the first Zelda game, rupees actually DID have value, they were hard to get, only two variations of them exist in that game, the red ones were worth one rupee and the blue ones were worth 5, you can only carry up to 250 rupees at a time but because they were scarce and items were more expensive than in later games they felt more valuable, and you earned them because you mostly only got them after defeating enemies.

But with Link To The Past that all changed, there were now 3 variations of rupees, green ones that are worth 1, blue ones that are worth 5 and red ones that are worth 20, this has been the standard for the series ever since. With purple ones (50), orange ones (100), silver ones (200) and gold ones (500) being added in later games. The problem is, now rupees are f*cking everywhere, all you gotta do is cut some blades of grass and break some jars and voila, instant rupees. So now rupees are way too easy to get, it dosen't take long to make it to your limit, which can be increased when you get bigger wallets, the final limit always tends to be 999. And no it dosen't take long to get that many.

So imagine the fustration of getting a silver f*cking rupee, worth 200 damn rupees, but oh wait, your wallet is full, but oh well, you'll never see that rupee again. Even worse when you haven't gotten the biggest wallet yet, because that means that rupee WOULD have been valuable to you if you had it. Moments like that really piss me off.

For one they need to increase the amount of rupees you can have (Phantom Hourglass did, you can get up to 9, 999) and more importantly make them more of a rarity. I mean c'mon, why are there so many damn rupees lying on the grass and stored in jars? Money isn't that damn easy to find in real life. It needs to be earned and therefore valuable.

__________________
It's only knock n' knowall, but I like it

http://www.last.fm/user/kingboobs

Urban Hat€monger ?

There is a thing worse than shitty endings and thats no endings.

Sometimes I wondered why I ever bothered playing Gauntlet

__________________