Topic: RE: Virtual Console Mondays: January 7th, 2008

[Svevan]

First chance this year to piss everyone off.
 http://www.nintendoworldreport.com/vcArt.cfm?artid=15065

 Last Friday Europe got the original Harvest Moon for the Super NES on their Virtual Consoles. I don't think Europe knows that this is the best game ever made, and that they need to thank their deity (who apparently doesn't wear any conspicuous religious symbols) for this blessed gift.    

In other news, StarTropics and King of Fighters '94 came out today in North America. The debate may rage elsewhere, though here at the Nintendo World Report I daresay our fans in the forums will understand more why we have recommended an outdated NES adventure game over a classic, some may even say “classy" fighting game. Perhaps the debate should center on narrative, which in adventure games usually leads the player to the exploration of locations and identification with a lead character, while in a fighting game the very code that holds the story is dead weight on the disc or cartridge. Yet at the same time I could see someone defend a fighting game for allowing a more fleshed out relationship between player and character, where the movements of the player translate so directly to those of the character that they seem to be in a communication with one another. Perhaps too the debate should discuss the importance of competition in video games, where fighting games (like puzzle games) seem to center on fighting an “opponent" who is singular and often human, while adventure games often have you fighting not just enemies in a world but the world itself.    

Or perhaps fighting games just suck. Tell me in our talkback thread. How wrong am I?      

   

   

StarTropics – NES

   

 Cost: 500 Wii Points ($5)
  Players: 1
  Controllers: Wii Remote, Wii Classic, GameCube
  ESRB Rating: Everyone (Mild Fantasy Violence)
  Released: 12/1/90
  Click here for a video preview  

   

 This sleeper classic from Nintendo combines Zelda-ish action stages with a maze-like overworld closer to Zelda II.  But StarTropics is no copycat -- it has a strange pacing and tropical style that set it apart from anything else.  The quirky story has young Mike Jones searching for his uncle, Dr. "J" Jones, and things get progressively weirder as you get deeper into the game.  Though not an extremely long adventure, StarTropics is challenging, crammed full of secrets, and truly unique.  You'll have no problem getting five bucks' worth of playing out of it (if you get stuck, don't be ashamed to check a walkthrough).  

   

 The way Mike moves and jumps can take some time to get used to, but it starts to make more and more sense as the game's level design philosophy is revealed.  StarTropics features great NES graphics and memorable music, too.  The original game was packaged with a letter from Dr. J that you eventually had to dip into water for a secret code -- this feature has been cleverly recreated in the Virtual Console's built-in manual.  One thing the manual doesn't explain very well is the inventory system; after pausing, press down to access Mike's magical items, including red potions and snowmen.  The second boss is nearly impossible without using the latter item.  Despite such confusing elements, StarTropics is a polished and unusual adventure game that holds up very well today.  Take this opportunity to catch up with a classic, semi-obscure little gem of a game. - Jonathan Metts  

   

   

King of Fighters 94 – Neo Geo

   

 Cost: 900 Wii Points ($9)
  Players: 1-2
  Controllers: Wii Remote, Wii Classic, GameCube
  ESRB Rating: Teen (Mild Fantasy Violence)
  Released: 1994
  Click here for a video preview  

   

 Full disclosure: I don't play or really like fighting games. I mean, I like the occasional Street Fighter, but only when I'm playing against someone of equal talents, by which I mean, someone who has never played a fighting game before ever.  

   

 So I drank a glass of Bailey's and spent an hour or so with King of Fighters '94. How is it different from other fighting games, as far as I can see? Well, it has a neat team system where you pick three characters instead of one, and when you die instead of just getting “another life" your character is tapped out and the next one rotates in. This adds some variety and challenge since you must know not only your character's moves, but the moves of all three of your opponents.    

 Other than that and the sharp music, I can't tell you what's so great about this game. It felt like a fighting game in that I pushed a lot of buttons, tried out some combos, fought to rise in the ranks, and failed. Am I willing to admit that I'm biased against fighting games? Sure. I'm also willing to state that anyone who plays this genre exclusively has some pretty messed up primary concerns in video gaming. But I'm not recommending the whole genre for fans, just any game that has you memorizing complex button combinations in order to play it competently. I got pounded into ground beef while playing this game, and there isn't much hope for me to improve. I honestly believe, or maybe it's hope, that most gamers just mash their way through fighting games. When it comes to that, King of Fighters seems mash-worthy. No cheap kills, no overpowered characters (and no interesting ones either), no sloppy level or graphical design. King of Fighters '94 is somewhat different from other fighters I've played, but not that much. - Evan Burchfield  

   

   

Props to VG Museum for the screenshots.

[GoldenPhoenix]

Well I think the everyone recommendation is questionable for StarTropics, not that it is a bad game (I think it is great) but dang it can be hard. Regardless it would be interesting to see what people think of this long lost gem of the NES, and hopefully we get the sequel as well. Oh BTW that whale still scares the crap out of me (Those that have played the game know what I'm talking about).

[planetidiot]

I agree with the recommended for fans ranking, but if fighting games aren't your think maybe someone else should write up the review?  I like the game a lot, and like 2D fighters in general.  But waiting for the superior sequels to the game is reason enough for a "fans" recommendation.  

I'm not going to argue fighting games merit any more than I'll argue why genre [X] is a waste of time.  Fighting someone at your skill level is stupid fun.

[Kairon]

I would think that the sheer number of fighting games that will be available for the VC dampens the recommendation some, just like the sheer number of scrolling shooters means it'd be a pretty exceptional title that would stand out.

[Svevan]

I don't think disliking the genre disqualifies me so much as my lack of experience. I DO play fighting games, just not a lot of them. I have tasted Mortal Kombat, I have been a Street Fighter, I have wielded the Soul Edge or whatever. None of these experiences really STANDS OUT. Perhaps with more experience I will one day understand the tiny differences between these games. If I do gain that experience and I still dislike the genre, I would say that I am just as, and maybe more qualified, than the person who has equal experience and loves the genre to death. Bias goes three ways: pro, con, and undecided. To me, the goal for the reviewer is to admit which bias he has rather than pretend that he can be "objective" in each situation.

When Harvest Moon comes out, I will likely try and steal the recommendation from everyone else on staff. As a Harvest Moon junkie, I believe I am qualified to recommend that game over any other game on the planet. I also believe that someone who hates Harvest Moon is qualified too, so long as when he plays the game he comes to the realization that it is the best game ever made.

I have been encouraging staff to download games that interest them and offer dissenting VC recommendations. One day, perhaps.

[ShyGuy]

I'm still waiting for Samurai Shodown.

[Halbred]

Looking back through screenshots of KoF '94, Mai's pixilated puppies don't sway with the same smoothness that I remember. *sigh* Nostalgia is my blatant foe!

*puts the new KoF game in my PS2*

*selects Mai*

*oggles*

[mekoex]

Okay, I'll have to admit I'm peeved. Why? Because reviews for a game in a genre the reviewer has no interest in was stupid back when EGM did it and it's just as stupid now. If you have no interest in the very foundation of a title you're covering, the review is worth, as the censored English would say, "eff all".

You realize that when a person reads a review, it's not because they care what your opinion is. If I wanted assorted opinions I'd find someone's crappy blog, and I view Planet GameCube's successor with a significantly higher air of legitimacy than that. When someone goes to look at a review, 9 times out of 10, it's to make a purchase decision. Hence, your review of KOF is worth jack squat.

There's a ton of things you could include in a review of a classic fighter that would actually be relevant to fighting game players, good or bad. Someone who grew up on Guilty Gear X or Street Fighter Alpha (a 10-year-old getting into either game when they came out would be in his late teens or early 20's by now) might appreciate a warning about rougher animation that they're used to, or hit timing that's significantly less immediately intuitive than the more recent, optimized games offer. In other words, "For Fans" might really not even remotely hit. Never mind some kid who *hasn't* played many fighters but finds them interesting might wanna give it a whirl, and nine bucks may very well be all he has to spend for the next month on games. Not everyone likes adventure titles, guy.

I've been playing video games since SF2 as well, and personally, I think KOF is a bit of a waste (it was basically SNK's answer to Street Fighter 2 and it didn't really get any better for the next 10 years, odd given the near-yearly sequels). However, think about how annoying this review process would be for anything else. Imagine looking for a grill for your summer barbecue. You go to Amazon, find one you might be interested in, and when you get to the editorial review, it's by some dick who does haute cuisine and finds the idea of using grills to put meals together disgusting. Then he blows a paragraph giving the item in question a cursory glance and insults its userbase. Exactly what good would that review do you?

The entire practice of reviewing something you don't like on a fundamental level is not only insulting at its core to your readers, it's outright irresponsible as a critic.  

[Djunknown]

Star tropics:Si. 'Nuff said.

I agree with the recommended for fans for KOF 94, but for other reasons. Hardcore fighting fans will want to start their collection of the KOF series here, the rest can hold out for the eventual, improved sequels. One thing KOF 94 has over SF2 on the VC is that it is essentially a perfect arcade translation, as opposed to a console port...

I do find it disturbing putting someone who isn't proficient at a particular genre to review something of said genre. The fact that Mr.Burchfield admitted to drinking an alcholic beverage during the review process, a genre that requires your full attention of mind and thumbs, is equally disturbing.

I don't play sports games like Madden,  NBA Live, NHL 2kX, etc and wouldn't even think of trying to review/reccomend those games because I know I'm not an authority. I would complain about the fundamentals of those games, just like Mr.Burchfield did. Yet I wouldn't have the audacity to say sports games suck, they're not for me.

Was NWR's resident fighting fan still on vacation?

[ShyGuy]

Ooh Mekoex challenges Svevan "critic/review theorem." How will Evan respond?  

I don't necessarily have a problem with a reviewer disliking the genre if he is upfront about it, self-aware enough to differentiate between his personal taste and the games actual flaws or bright spots. He also has to present his review in an interesting or entertaining enough way to make his critique worth reading.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

Quote
Originally posted by: S-U-P-E-R
hnnnnnnng

[Kairon]

I've got no qualms about someone reviewing a game in a genre they don't like. It's a bit of a handicap, but an earnest, observation-based, balanced, and critical effort is still possible and may even yield benefits above and beyond a so-called "expert" review.

Quote
Originally posted by: NewsBot
First chance this year to piss everyone off.

LOL.

[Galford]

Good choice for Star Tropics.  
It is easily a game everyone can play.

I can't say the same for the other game this week.

PS... I know some might find what I say ironic considering my forum name.

[IceCold]

Hmm, mekoex does have a point... aren't Windy or SUPER the resident fighting game experts? I wonder what rating they would give..

[Svevan]

Quote
Originally posted by: mekoex
Okay, I'll have to admit I'm peeved. Why? Because reviews for a game in a genre the reviewer has no interest in was stupid back when EGM did it and it's just as stupid now. If you have no interest in the very foundation of a title you're covering, the review is worth, as the censored English would say, "eff all".

You realize that when a person reads a review, it's not because they care what your opinion is. If I wanted assorted opinions I'd find someone's crappy blog, and I view Planet GameCube's successor with a significantly higher air of legitimacy than that. When someone goes to look at a review, 9 times out of 10, it's to make a purchase decision. Hence, your review of KOF is worth jack squat.

There's a ton of things you could include in a review of a classic fighter that would actually be relevant to fighting game players, good or bad. Someone who grew up on Guilty Gear X or Street Fighter Alpha (a 10-year-old getting into either game when they came out would be in his late teens or early 20's by now) might appreciate a warning about rougher animation that they're used to, or hit timing that's significantly less immediately intuitive than the more recent, optimized games offer. In other words, "For Fans" might really not even remotely hit. Never mind some kid who *hasn't* played many fighters but finds them interesting might wanna give it a whirl, and nine bucks may very well be all he has to spend for the next month on games. Not everyone likes adventure titles, guy.

I've been playing video games since SF2 as well, and personally, I think KOF is a bit of a waste (it was basically SNK's answer to Street Fighter 2 and it didn't really get any better for the next 10 years, odd given the near-yearly sequels). However, think about how annoying this review process would be for anything else. Imagine looking for a grill for your summer barbecue. You go to Amazon, find one you might be interested in, and when you get to the editorial review, it's by some dick who does haute cuisine and finds the idea of using grills to put meals together disgusting. Then he blows a paragraph giving the item in question a cursory glance and insults its userbase. Exactly what good would that review do you?

The entire practice of reviewing something you don't like on a fundamental level is not only insulting at its core to your readers, it's outright irresponsible as a critic.

You make some sharp points that hit me hard.

I feel I am a well-rounded gamer who can get some enjoyment out of all genres, including the occasional fighting game. I have played more than a handful and there is only one I can recommend to more than just fans of the genre, and that is Super Smash Bros. Perhaps Power Stone belongs in that camp as well. I must also admit that I am not an expert, and indeed do not like to play these games for long periods of time. I played this game for a short period, but it was still MUCH longer than I usually give a VC Recommendation, based on the level of content available here.

Your remarks about animation and hit detection are worthy. Our VC Recommendations are not supposed to be comprehensive reviews, but I cannot claim that I would have excluded comments on either of those topics had I noticed them at all.

Your comparison to Amazon reviews appears to be apt, until I remember that even though we do say the word "recommended," we are not JUST making purchase recommendations. I was not reviewing a tool, and I did not give it a rating that indicates its worth to you as a purchaser. I merely said that instead of recommending this game to everyone I know, as I would with Harvest Moon or Sin and Punishment or Gunstar Heroes or Super Mario Bros 3, I am only recommending it to fans. This fighting game was not able to sway the uninitiated. To me, there is no better definition of "Recommended for Fans."

Here's the toughest question I have to ask myself: how does this affect the hardcore fighting game player? Well, I don't know. If I want to justify my dismissal of this genre I suppose I can simply say that the amount of people who might define themselves as hardcore fighting game fans is smaller than most other genre fanbases. But I've obviously offended you, and I regret that. I wasn't meaning to be flippant, just honest. What does my recommendation mean to the hardcore? I think most of them will dismiss it. I don't know how to speak to them, other than to be upfront and say that I am a game player, I play a lot of games, and I don't feel disqualified from giving my opinion about this genre.

I disagree most of all with the premise that I'm not supposed to give my opinion. Sorry, but I am. A review can never be objective. A videogame is not a barbecue grill that either "works" or "doesn't work." Neutrality in art criticism is impossible; even a fighting game fan will prefer one fighting game style over another, and when that fan reviews a game as a critic, he rarely if ever reveals his biases. When critics do, they get flamed.

I'm willing to admit I may have been overzealously dismissive of the genre; I wanted to be light about the whole thing and invite criticism. My main point was that while playing King of Fighters I did not see inroads to enjoyment for myself, without having to step over some personal boundaries that would turn the game into a sport, not an art.

Quote
Originally posted by: djunknown
The fact that Mr.Burchfield admitted to drinking an alcholic beverage during the review process, a genre that requires your full attention of mind and thumbs, is equally disturbing.

I could post an equally long defense for why reviewing games with (or without) a drink is completely valid, but I do not want to get into it and instead hope that you don't feel too strongly about it and that no one else cares at all. For full disclosure, I often have a Monday Night drink of a glass of wine, or a beer, or anything else I have around as I am preparing VC Mondays and doing other personal blog-related duties. I have reviewed other games after playing them under the influence (but not over the legal limit, at least as far as I can tell).  

[planetidiot]

Quote
Originally posted by: Djunknown

The fact that Mr.Burchfield admitted to drinking an alcholic beverage during the review process, a genre that requires your full attention of mind and thumbs, is equally disturbing.

I have to disagree here.  Fighting games get more fun after everyone has had a few beers.  Of course playing the computer is a different story.  There's no way to get the computer drunk that I'm aware of... :C

[Nick DiMola]

To be fair to Evan, him not being a fighting game fan is pretty irrelevant. Most people aren't huge fighting game fanatics and don't really see the difference from one to the other, this review reflects that. If you are a fan, check it out for yourself, you probably already know about the game and have already decided whether or not you are interested. If this was a full fledged review I would say a fighting game fan would be a more applicable reviewer, but being that this is a simple review, Evan not being a fan of fighting games doesn't mean squat.

[Ian Sane]

The funny thing is even though Evan is getting flack for not being a fighting game fan, "For Fans" is still a dead-on recommendation.  The King of Fighters series gets better in later sequels and since this is the first game only completists would really have any need for it.

I think NWR needs a makeshift "review crew" format for these VC reviews.  Aside from different tastes in genres experience plays a big part in retro reviews.  Someone who played a game "back in the day" will have a different opinion than someone who is going in fresh.