Author Topic: Evan_B Presents: The Contrarian Corner  (Read 14832 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Khushrenada

  • is an Untrustworthy Liar
  • NWR Junior Ranger
  • Score: 38
    • View Profile
Re: Unbiased, Objectively Correct Reviews: Starting with Shovel Knight!
« Reply #25 on: September 09, 2015, 01:17:54 PM »
Yesssssss
Whoever said, "Cheaters never win" must've never met Khushrenada.

Offline Mop it up

  • And I've gotta say...
  • Score: 125
    • View Profile
Re: Unbiased, Objectively Correct Reviews: Starting with Shovel Knight!
« Reply #26 on: September 10, 2015, 07:30:32 PM »
Actually I like Gen II best, though Gen VI does some interesting things.

Offline Evan_B

  • Formally known as Bevan Ee
  • Score: 5
    • View Profile
Re: Unbiased, Objectively Correct Reviews: Starting with Shovel Knight!
« Reply #27 on: September 14, 2015, 11:48:22 AM »
SUPER MARIO 3D LAND-
There was a time when the Super Mario series was a visually and structurally fresh one. When each entry in the series, excluding Mario Bros. 2, was bursting with its own visual style and uniqueness. When powerups were new and unexpected.

Then, came the dark times. While New Super Mario Bros. was a visual upgrade, the titles that followed fell back on tired aesthetics, music, and predictable level design.

Super Mario Land was a handheld offshoot of the series that had strange and different design, from the quirky music and theme of the first game, the nonlinear and thematic world structure of the second. And then, you know, playing as Wario in the third game. So when Super Mario 3D Land was announced, I was puzzled by the name but excited by the prospect of another very different title in the Mario series. Instead, from the very first moments of the trailer, it was clear that this would be a rather generic experience. Gone were the stark visuals of the Land titles, the wacky architecture of the Galaxy games, and the fluid control options of just about any entry in the series, replaced by sterile art, inconsistent quality, and clunky mechanics.

Let's address the controls first. Why does Mario need a run button after years of analog control? It just doesn't make sense, and though it evokes the classic 2D formula, it's not really helpful in any way. In addition to making the movement controls more awkward, the robust moveset that Mario once had in past 3D titles has been diminished even MORE since the Galaxy titles, which at least streamlined it for a reason. The new moveset, again, attempts to remind us of the simplicity of classic Mario platforming, which, you know, if you actually wanted, you could just get a 2D Mario game instead.

The choice to try to make "the most 2D 3D Mario title yet" was a statement Nintendo stood by quite firmly during the release of 3D Land, but it feels more like a curse on the game than any sort of genius design philosophy. Gone is any sort of dimension or multiple directions I approach, exploration rewards you one or two shortcuts per world that don't really double back on themselves. The level design is marred by a stationary camera that is supposed to hold the player's hand but results in camera tricks and deaths more often than not. The segmented nature of most levels means the developers can split up platforming challenges, which kills the momentum found it even the most basic 2D offerings.

Of course, 3D Land isn't a particularly hard game. While some Mario titles have leveraged lighter difficulty with unique mechanics or interesting visuals, 3D Land uses a cheap, nostalgia-heavy gimmick- the Tanooki suit. And if you're worried you didn't get enough Tanooki in Super Mario 3, well... I've got bad news for you. This Tanooki doesn't even function in the same way. In fact, it's descent-slowing mechanic is already used by another powerups in the game, which actually makes BETTER use of it. So why is it there? To be used by Goombas, and Bowser, and to be stuffed into every question mark block. The difficulty of past titles, especially the 2D formula that is attempted here, relied heavily on surviving. Keeping powerups was key in trying to progress further in the game, but with the defunct lives system and save-states, the idea of progress has been stripped away and dealt a fatal blow with powerups like the Tanooki suit.

The aesthetic inconsistencies of the 3D Mario franchise have been acceptable to a certain degree- in Princess Peach's castle, there was a sense of traveling to different worlds. Galaxy got a pass for being visually inconsistent because everyone loves space. But in 3D Land, no effort is made to keep any sort of progression or consistency in aesthetic, and the developers have admitted it. Not only are themes thrown around, they are also geometric, bland, and lacking character with their patterned designs on boring backgrounds. Even the level selection layout manages to be more dull than Galaxy 2. While this may be excusable by some, for a series known to push aesthetic and one of Nintendo's major franchises, it's a bit disappointing to see such an uncoordinated and unexciting affair.

Simply put, while there aren't any particular signs that 3D Land was a rushed game, the experience I had playing it and the title that followed have brought me to that conclusion, if only because both games have almost identical design philosophies but only one gets it completely right. The final nail in the coffin, of course, is the absolutely ridiculous second campaign, in which the extra worlds EAD graced us with are mostly the same levels with a gimmick slapped on for minimal effort, locked off if you refuse to comb the rest of the levels for the collectable star coins. Of course, with a game so heavily focused on segmented action with "tight" platforming sections, some of these can be difficult to obtain if only because the level design doesn't encourage exploration in any way.

Some might say it's a gift, that we were blessed with these levels, except they exploit the flaws in the camera system and controls to an absurd degree and are also a second campaign to an already easy and short first campaign that just leaves a bad taste in your mouth.

Super Mario 3D Land is a mediocre entry in the Super Mario franchise. It's bland and easy while also taking every moment it can to smack you over the head with nostalgia. It is a title that represents what EAD does best- first going through growing pains and then perfecting an idea. This was the case with Galaxy 1 and 2, and it is also the case with this title and 3D World. To call it one of the best games on the 3DS is a bit disheartening to me, as it isn't even one of the best platformers on the system, and is way more overpriced than better platformers. It's most memorable moments are a Tanooki suit and a level so difficult you'll need TWO Tanooki suits to get through it, and that's not why I buy a Mario game. If it's the reason you folks do, by all means, go for it. But I won't be suckered by the hype again- a Mario title will have to fulfill a certain number of criteria for me:

-An interesting structure to the presentation, either via story, art, or a new gimmick.
-Clever mechanics that don't rely too heavily on a single powerup
-New ideas rather than a mish-mash of old traditions
-Good music
-Challenging platforming
-Effort
I am a toxic person engaging in toxic behavior.

Offline Evan_B

  • Formally known as Bevan Ee
  • Score: 5
    • View Profile
Get ready, bitches. This series is being revived with an all-new entry:

METROID: OTHER M

And just in time for Fates to bury all that was good about classic Fire Emblem...

FIRE EMBLEM: AWAKENING
« Last Edit: January 15, 2016, 12:19:45 AM by Evan_B »
I am a toxic person engaging in toxic behavior.

Offline Evan_B

  • Formally known as Bevan Ee
  • Score: 5
    • View Profile
Re: Unbiased, Objectively Correct Reviews: THE BABY THE BABY THE BABY THE BABY
« Reply #29 on: January 17, 2016, 02:50:16 PM »
METROID: OTHER M-

I'll be honest- character action games were not something I was aware of for a very long time. I see it more as a progression away from the action platformer, with a perfect case in the evolution of the Ninja Gaiden franchise. These games often focus on the skill and knowledge of the player mixed with enemy reads and cinematic visuals to create an action-packed experience. Many would cite Devil May Cry as a prime example, others might be familiar with the genre having played titles like God Hand or Bayonetta. It's not a particularly popular or successful genre of video games, which is likely how I avoided it for so long.

I used Ninja Gaiden as a reference point earlier because Team Ninja worked together with Metroid series creator Sakamoto to bring us Metroid: Other M, a game that is very interesting in itself. Other M is undoubtedly a character action game, albeit a very... easy one. A lite experience. There's a number of reasons for this, of course, which we'll touch on later. Other M's other claim to fame, of course, is it's gross characterization of the popular Samus Aran, which caused many folks to denounce the title as "the death of the franchise."

There are parts of Other M that are inexcusable. However, I'm here to do something that I don't normally do, which is defend a game considered by many to be quite mediocre. I'll start right away by saying that I love the Metroid series- I've played most of the games and consider Metroid Prime to be one of my favorite titles ever (and yes, I do love Super Metroid). I'm pretty well-versed in the Metroid mechanics and storyline, and I while I would never place Other M very high on my list of games or even Metroid titles, I think it has a few merits.

Controls:
I'll be saving the more atrocious aspects of Other M's design for later in the review, starting, instead, with the core gameplay. In a rather bold move made perhaps to evoke the classic feel of Metroid, Other M's control scheme is mapped entirely to a single sideways Wii remote. In some ways, it's a difficult decision to support- the 3D nature of the game is not suited for a D-Pad, the expanse arsenal of the bounty hunter is hard to capture on a severe lack of buttons, and that doesn't even begin to describe how the fundamental gameplay of a character action game would be jeopardized by such a small amount of inputs. Despite all of this, Other M does manage to pull it's control scheme off pretty well. In an odd sort of way, the game is more suited for left-handed players than the right-handed master race, as one of its key elements is a first person mode activated by switching the angle of the Wii remote. This is easier and more comfortable to do for a southpaw, as they hold the D-pad firmly under their thumb and swing the remote into place. The first person mode expands Samus' arsenal with missiles, also allowing her to see rooms in better detail and perform precision shots that, more often than not, expose enemy weak points. The trade off is that, because of the control scheme, Samus becomes immobile in first person view, exposing her to attacks.

While many believe the simplicity of control is a flaw of the game, I'm hesitant to agree. There's many other flaws in Other M but controls are not one of them. It's sleek, simple, and balanced, with high mobility and a wide range in third person and fixed, precise, high damage first person attacks. The way rooms are designed, with natural curves that automatically track Samus' forward movement, kind of negates the need for an eight point control system. Even enemy placement and overall architecture is done with this in mind.

Gameplay:
Other M is mostly a stage-based action game featuring light exploration and platforming elements. In terms of the exploration, while it's nowhere near as satisfying as the shortcuts and secrets of the original games, Other M does a fair job at keeping powerups hidden away in clever and fun ways. Several progression and powerup based platforming segments are quite well designed, though that isn't the main focus of the game. What's important to remember, at least in my mind, is that Team Ninja are not the sort of studio who would be best-suited to create a Metroid-style exploration game. That being said, they did a fine job replicating the feel of one- and to be honest, though the post-credits sequence has a bit of a strange, isolationist feel that separates it from the normal game, its an important aspect of the title in that it does open up the entirety of the game world for exploration and acquisition.

Combat takes high priority in Other M, and though older titles feature Samus as an unstoppable killing machine cutting through swaths of indigenous wildlife, this game pits her against creatures that can hold their own a bit better. While Samus' shots home in on enemies within a certain cone of vision, the key combat mechanic of the game comes from Sense Move, a boost dodge that can be triggered before an enemy strikes Samus. This ability becomes increasingly reliable as it also cues up an immediate power shot charge, making it an effective ability to counterattack foes. While it may feel unnatural to play defensively in Metroid, it's necessary in Other M. However, Sense Move gives the player invincibility frames, but doesn't allow them to perfectly dodge a move- many enemies have attack animations that take advantage of the vulnerable frames right at the end of a Sense Move animation, which is why proper directional input is important, as well.

Other mechanics like Overblast and Lethal Blow require precise positioning and certain requirements in order to execute, which results in a game that is very melee oriented and much faster than standard Metroid affair. However, there's just a few things lacking from Other M's arsenal that result in the game feeling like a linear Metroid title instead of a character action game. Combat ultimately lacks variation- abilities like Morph Ball and Grapple Beam feature in boss fights and platforming but rarely in basic combat. And, the game lacks any sort of score or time ranking for skirmishes, which detracts from it's replay and expertise potential.

As it stands, Other M may not be a bad entry to both Metroid and character action titles, more modern and accessible than prior iterations and less punishing and demanding than the genre it apes concepts from. However, there are aspects of the game that require exact knowledge of enemies, animations, and approach methods, like the title's hard mode, unlocked after beating the game 100% on a first runthrough. If it had been a little more committed to the genre staples, the story may have been forgiven.

Maybe.

Story:
Look, no matter which way you slice it, Other M's story is hard to swallow. From the authorization shenanigans to the more fragile look at Samus, things seem to be all over the place and contrast greatly from the bounty hunter we know and love. But Metroid Fusion set the foundation for this game in more than a few ways. We were all intrigued by Samus' relationship with Adam in that game, it made sense to expand on that thread. Now, I personally believe that Other M touches on a number of ideas that have been overlooked by many when they analyze the plot, such as the parallels between the characterization of Madeline and Samus herself, the idea and danger of conscience in military and survivalist situations, and more. That's a bit beside the point since there are some blatant symbolic cues the game doles out which are very eye roll-inducing, which makes one wonder if the subtle aspects are intentional or coincidental. There is one major plot point, however, that I believe is very often overlooked which I think hints at a much more intelligent narrative, though since the mystery is never really resolved there is little use in delving deeper into the subject.

Is Other M a good Metroid game? It's hard to say. The moments that are distinctly Metroid are very satisfying- Phantoon, the Queen, the Space Pirate sequence. Nightmare! Nightmare is great. Ridley is quite triumphant despite his evolution being... utterly bizarre. It's lonely and tense when it wants to be and high action and impact as well. It's not a perfect character action game either, but whether or not it wanted to do any of this is not certain. Blending Metroid and action was a risky choice, and I daresay that any other studio would have been up to the task- even Platinum would have needed some strict supervision if they were to incorporate their brand of action with Metroid's exploration. However, to call it terrible is a bit harsh. It's mediocre at times, but when it's successful, it evokes a feeling of an upgraded Metroid. In terms of difficulty, I would say that, on its hardest setting, Other M resembles Metroid Fusion in a lot of ways. Whether you see that as a good thing or a bad thing is your call. But, I do think this game deserves a second look, and maybe even a more analytical eye in terms of its subject material.
I am a toxic person engaging in toxic behavior.

Offline Evan_B

  • Formally known as Bevan Ee
  • Score: 5
    • View Profile
Re: Unbiased, Objectively Correct Reviews: THE BABY THE BABY THE BABY THE BABY
« Reply #30 on: January 23, 2016, 05:57:39 PM »
FIRE EMBLEM: AWAKENING-

Okay, enough of that.

While Other M at least pulls off classic elements of its franchise with dignity and fun, I have beef with Awakening. The funny thing is, when Intelligent Systems has a respected formula, they usually tend to mess it up. While Fire Emblem wasn't exactly the most successful franchise, it was at least a respectable strategy RPG. Awakening, however, is a Japanese RPG. And that, though more successful, is not worth the sacrifice of a solid formula.

Let's see what Fire Emblem did to make the franchise successful-
1) Made the difficulty level more accessible
2) Changed the art style
3) Drastically altered the style of localization
4) Simplified gameplay
5) Emphasized communication aspects

While hardly anyone can argue that opening the possibilities of a franchise is a bad thing, I think it's telling that Awakening, one of the less-complicated installments, received stellar reviews. This is also true compared to previous, more technical entries in the series. Of course, the biggest "game changing" mode is the inclusion of a "casual" difficulty, which is likely the cause if it's success and reception.

Let me tell you why that's bullshit.

Gameplay:
There's a term that is used for certain titles with permanence in which people exploit the game in order to overcome their inability to properly surmount it's difficulty. This term is "save scumming," a particularly venomous description. Fire Emblem fell victim to this mechanic often, where people would abuse the quicksave mechanic to rectify their strategic errors, as well as the basic save function. Many people argue that this does not necessarily promote the idea of strategy, but I disagree. In striving to protect units from their permanent death, the player experiments with different approaches and they learn the mechanics of the game more thoroughly. A casual mode does not encourage strategy, as it removes consequence. This is one way the game regresses into the form of an RPG rather than one based around strategic solutions and formations.

If Awakening possessed a great amount of depth to its fundamental gameplay, perhaps it would be justified in its lessened difficulty. However, Awakening has some of the least meat in the series, removing magical weaknesses and de-emphasizing individual choice and strategy with it's classing system, which limits few characters from rounding out their stats and obtaining ridiculous skills. Character builds are limited slightly by certain paths but not to the extent you would think. And of course, there's the lovely pair up mechanic, which goes hand in hand with the support system of the game and makes singular units effectively useless. With statistic, combat and movement boosts abound, it is the cornerstone of Awakening's gameplay, and makes the game even more exploitable. While I think it is an interesting mechanic that deserves to be included, it should have been gifted to certain types of units or classes in specific so that it's appearance was something to be valued.

"Just play the game on its hardcore setting," one might say, "on it's more intense difficulties." That would be fine, and I did do that. Those modes exist for the traditional player, but there's really been no improvement in those areas. In fact, the difficulty spike that occurs around midway in every difficulty level forces either death or grinding, which is pretty much the greatest offense in the game. It wasn't wise in Sacred Stones or any other strategy game, and it's not good here.

Story:
The drastic shift in artistic style and writing has crippled the tone of the franchise. The narrative relies on such stunning realizations like "war is bad" and "free choice is a thing," featuring one-dimensional characters that lack any sort of redeeming qualities and use archetypes as a crutch. What's worse, we are supposed to fall in love with these characters. All of them. And expect them to actually love each other, as their A- to S-rank conversations go from friendship and/or respect to full on adorable loveliness in the span of one battle. And then, meet their grown-up kids in knee-slapping moments! Not to mention, the game's plot is hilariously shallow. Pretty people unite and fight against crazy people, ugly bad guy looking people, and another country that nobody knew existed until halfway through the story. And friendship, along with some nostalgia, saves the day.

Other Fire Emblem games try to communicate the oppression of tyranny through dialogue and plot, weaving narratives that take certain parties in various directions, but Chrom and company always stick together, because if your mates didn't have their BFF to pair-up with you would miss out on the next exciting heart to heart. The tone shifts from a grounded and harrowing look at medieval and magic warfare to an overly personal and generic experience. You'll never guess who you end up killing at the end of the day.

At the end of Fire Emblem Awakening, I was playing with gods. They rarely took damage, never messed around, and covered insane ground. They were also insane people that prioritized books, candy, or a myriad of other bizarre traits over human emotion and the actual events of the world around them. No fear of losing something gives little exhilaration, and the battle animations, while engaging at first, drag on too long with team up opportunities and as your relationships deepen. And while Fire Emblem Awakening does it's best to appeal to everyone, it loses a whole lot character in the process. That's something that I find sad, as I've seen many of my own favorite series regress to unrecognizable forms. Seeing as the next installment in the series continues down the path of simplification in character and mechanics, I'll be skipping out on Fire Emblem until it finds a new personality.
I am a toxic person engaging in toxic behavior.

Offline Triforce Hermit

  • This title doesn't make sense.
  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
Re: Unbiased, Objectively Correct Reviews: Time to tip the scales!
« Reply #31 on: January 23, 2016, 10:55:32 PM »
Normal and Hard were easy modes to break, with or without classic mode. Insanity was sending Chrom and Frederick out and hoping it worked until you unlocked the Outer Realms and then spent hours grinding. Which was boring.

Play the older Fire Emblems on emulators. FE4 is hands down the best Fire Emblem they made. Great length, great story, sticking characters together has important meaning but isn't the predominant feature. And if you like it, then Thracia 776 is a follow up and it did have new things like unit dismount, escort/rescue objectives, etc.
Sometimes, you just want to play a video game.
NNiD: Triforcehermit09

Offline Wah

  • Social Worker who's hip with the kids
  • *
  • Score: -44
    • View Profile
    • My Youtube Channel
Re: Unbiased, Objectively Correct Reviews: Time to tip the scales!
« Reply #32 on: January 24, 2016, 02:17:57 AM »
Meh, screw the rules i have money.
Made you look ****.

Offline TOPHATANT123

  • Wear a hat that's foil lined in case an alien's inclined to probe your butt or read your mind
  • Score: 12
    • View Profile
Re: Unbiased, Objectively Correct Reviews: Time to tip the scales!
« Reply #33 on: January 24, 2016, 08:09:14 AM »
I agree somewhat with the points you make Evan, with some grinding you can create immortal Gods that don't take damage from grunts and kill everything in a single encounter, but for me my objective in the game wasn't to finish it and get to the credits as fast as possible like a typical strategy game. My fun came from creating as many Gods as possible, to what end I don't know, but I had fun using pre existing gods to whittle down enemy units then have the weak ass punks move in to the finish the job without having anyone die in the process. You could forge the most incredible weapons, the most overpowered unfair skills and pair ups that double or quadruple your damage output. The final boss was less of an obstacle to overcome and more a demonstration of what I had been building for the duration of the game. In this way yes the game is totally unbalanced, but I found it immensely satisfying all the same.

As for the story it is certainly wacky and super dumb, but personally I found this endearing and charming. Your opinion is valid but because I went in with a different mindset my experience was vastly different.

I don't think the story is appreciably better or worse than other entries in the series but as they are fairly similar there are diminishing returns for your enjoyment.


Offline Evan_B

  • Formally known as Bevan Ee
  • Score: 5
    • View Profile
Re: Unbiased, Objectively Correct Reviews: Time to tip the scales!
« Reply #34 on: January 24, 2016, 01:35:09 PM »
That is the exact opposite of what a strategy game should be, in my eyes. It should be about survival, first and foremost. The survival of all your units, even the most overpowered ones. I recall a mission during the latter half of the game where waves of enemies continued to crash down on me. I merely grouped six paired up units together and played turn after turn with no fear of death.  I understand your logic and the way you played the game, however I do think the story is much less serious and the characters contribute to this greatly. Their terrible dialogue and ridiculous character designs really took me out of the experience, and I would argue that Fire Emblem: Path of Radiance (even on its own) has such a vastly superior story and characters its almost hard to compare the two. Add Radiant Dawn to that and it becomes an epic. Whereas Fates, which is in many ways a spiritual successor to Awakening even with its characters, which I won't get into. However, the way they justify many similar designs is a bit insulting and lazy seems to rely heavily on archetypes and the same silliness the previous entry had.
I am a toxic person engaging in toxic behavior.

Offline pokepal148

  • Inquire within for reasonable rates.
  • *
  • Score: -9967
    • View Profile
Re: Unbiased, Objectively Correct Reviews: Time to tip the scales!
« Reply #35 on: January 27, 2016, 09:13:39 PM »
Awakening could be broken without even trying. I have a feeling Fates will at least try to be more balanced then that's.

Heck, your main character went from Literally being a demigod to being part mantake (don't have time to look up the spelling ATM) which I'm assuming means you have a lord who is weak to dragon slayer weapons.

Offline Triforce Hermit

  • This title doesn't make sense.
  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
Re: Unbiased, Objectively Correct Reviews: Time to tip the scales!
« Reply #36 on: January 28, 2016, 08:02:42 AM »
The new weapon triangle has broken mages. They can be one shot by spears now. I'm skeptical of it being more balanced.
Sometimes, you just want to play a video game.
NNiD: Triforcehermit09

Offline pokepal148

  • Inquire within for reasonable rates.
  • *
  • Score: -9967
    • View Profile
Re: Unbiased, Objectively Correct Reviews: Time to tip the scales!
« Reply #37 on: January 28, 2016, 12:55:57 PM »
Mages were already ridiculously OP in awakening though.

Offline Triforce Hermit

  • This title doesn't make sense.
  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
Re: Unbiased, Objectively Correct Reviews: Time to tip the scales!
« Reply #38 on: January 28, 2016, 01:09:20 PM »
Raising mages is a pain until they class up because they have awful Def and HP. They are usually dispatched in 2 shots by most enemies. Once they class up, then they are OP.
Sometimes, you just want to play a video game.
NNiD: Triforcehermit09

Offline Evan_B

  • Formally known as Bevan Ee
  • Score: 5
    • View Profile
Re: Unbiased, Objectively Correct Reviews: Time to tip the scales!
« Reply #39 on: February 03, 2016, 08:12:01 PM »
But teaming up negates the issue completely, since you can stick someone bulky in front and avoid any harm.
I am a toxic person engaging in toxic behavior.