Author Topic: Secret of Mana Remake  (Read 3544 times)

Michirin9801

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 589
Re: Secret of Mana Remake
« Reply #30 on: August 29, 2017, 07:32:04 PM »
And you really think I've never had an experience like that? Look, just because I'm young and I emulate a lot of stuff, doesn't mean I've never had to save money to buy the games that I wanted, nor does it mean that I could always emulate everything that I wanted (even to this day I can't)
sure, ...but you grew up in the era where emulating all of this 8/16 bit shit was a readily available option,

and in an era where finding out if a game blew a load of dicks was really easy to find out.   




The things you can't emulate are few and far between, and pointing something like that out to all of us is #firstworldproblems at this point.   What can't you emulate?   

Imagine having to trust magazines, commercials, or the back of the game box because you can't just bop onto YouTube and watch some gameplay videos.   and then you rent something awful and your weekend is f*cked.  Thank f*ck for FuncoLand back then.   They'd let you try stuff. 

You are lucky.   Don't try to explain your way out of it.  It's just a fact.  I would've killed for the ability to emulate all of this easily, or to be able to watch an endless supply of videos to see what games are like.    Even once we could emulate, you're rocking dialup on shit-tier ROM sites on an expensive ass computer that that you have to share with everyone because its 1998 and you're 10.

and it still doesn't emulate stuff right.

Flashcarts would've blown our minds back in the early/mid 90s.
Let me tell you something about me which you probably haven't noticed:

I AM POOR

I've used my trusty old Windows 98 until 2009 because I couldn't afford anything better, and that PC was built with Donated Parts, I was still using Dial-Up all the way up to 2007 because we just couldn't afford broadband before then, I had a PS1 in the early 2000s because that's what was cheap, and I still couldn't have even half of the games that I wanted to play (not even pirated), and then it stopped working, and we couldn't replace it... I got a GBA later, when the DS was already out, and I had EVEN LESS GAMES for the GBA, but I'm at least grateful to have played Super Mario World during school recess, that was like, the best thing ever... I could only much later experience the rest of the GBA's library because my new PC at the time could run GBA well...

I DIDN'T HAVE CABLE! All I could watch was either s***-tier TV or whatever my parents would let me rent on VHS or DVD (the latter of which we only got MUCH later)

As for emulation, do you think my Windows 98 could run anything better than ZSNES? Even THAT wouldn't run everything properly... At most I could get Pokemon on the GBA to run, but I've never been too big into Pokemon anyway, and the plethora of better GBA games just wouldn't run at a playable speed...

My current PC is still not very good, the most powerful thing I can emulate is PSP, anything better is a no-go... I can at least say I finally have decent PS1 emulation thanks to RetroArch and the Mednafen core, so I can't emulate PS2, PS3 or PS4, I can't emulate any Xbox system (as if I'd want to), I can emulate Saturn on SSF but that's not ideal so I mostly don't bother...

And I can only afford ONE game system and its games per generation, and not even all of the games that I want! The ONLY thing I have working at the moment are my Wii and my 3DS, that's ALL I HAVE! And I don't have even half of the 3DS games I want!

And you think I don't want to play Wii U, Switch, Vita, PS3 or PS4 games? I do, BUT I CAN'T!
I'm not NEARLY as lucky as you think I am, you just like to assume things about other people without knowing them...

Quote
but I just so happen to have different priorities from yours, and that's what you seem to fail to understand...
there's no failure to understand something that you haven't really articulated clearly.  Your priorities seem to be iterating which things are your current most favorite thing ever of all time while arguing about shit you haven't played yet, while then pointing out that you have to do school or something so you play handhelds alot.   What the hell do you think any of us were doing during college?   I dunno about you.  Gaming is gaming.   You find ways to do it during college.   My priorities on gaming haven't really changed.   

I think I articulate my thoughts clearly enough, you're just too lazy to pay attention to what you're reading...
I was referring priorities when it comes to gaming, and mine is "Having fun is the most important thing in any game" and I think reading dialogue is rarely fun...
Stories are a bottom-tier priority to me, it's not like I don't like story, but it's the last thing that is gonna make any impact on me in a game...
The presentation is also very important to me (I'm an artist after all) and I'll always notice the little details in the art, in the animation and in the music, but the top-priority is ALWAYS the gameplay, whether or not the game is fun to play, if it feels good to play, and I'll always take a game with good gameplay and bad story over a game with a good story and bad gameplay!

Also, I have less time now than ever not only because of college but because I'm working part-time as an animator, being paid close to jacks*** so that I can at least help pay for college, and MAYBE eat something on the way from work to college (which is 6 bus stops away but I go on foot so that I don't have to pay for an extra bus ride)
The only times I really have to play anything, are on the weekends when I'm not doing college work, on the bus rides or in college while I wait for the teachers to arrive, and in those situations I don't wanna play an RPG, or any big game, I wanna play something that I can pick up and play RIGHT NOW, and then put down at a moment's notice, (which is why I've been mostly playing Super Street Fighter IV and Hatsune Miku Project Mirai DX)

First: explain how Zelda 2 looks worse than 1.   Zelda 1 looks like shit.

You're running around a vanilla icecream sundae, beating up pieces of cereal basically. 

It's ugly.   

At least Zelda 2 has better proportions, and better looking terrain + sprites.    The gameplay is generally fine too outside of being a bit difficult.  What's wrong with it?   Before the internet told everyone so, Zelda II was regarded as a pretty fantastic game.    I have literally never heard someone say Zelda II looks worse than Zelda I.  Ever. 
I tell you what's the problem with Zelda 2's visuals: EVERYTHING IS A SQUARE!
At least Zelda 1 attempted to give its background objects rounded edges, unlike Zelda 2, the Overworld in Zelda 2 is particularly ugly, the side-scrolling sections are less bad, but repeating the same 4 x 8 pixels tile throughout an entire dungeon is just unforgivable...

The sprites in Zelda 2 are better than the BGs, but they're not great either, they're probably better than the ones in Zelda 1, I'll give you that, but 'proportions' aside, they're about on the same level...

And Zelda 2 isn't bad because it's hard, it's hard because it's bad! The main problem is the reach of Link's butter-knife, why couldn't they make it 16 pixels wide? (Because Flickering! Nintendo can't have any of that...) I mean, Ninja Gaiden gave you a 16 pixels wide sword slash, and that game feels fine to play! Heck, you probably have more reach with your bare fists in Batman and Shatterhand! I haven't counted the pixels, but those games sure FEEL better to play than Zelda 2, it feels like it's your fault when you get hit in those games, unlike in Zelda 2...

To be fair, Zelda 2 isn't "Bad" per se, but no game in the series needs a remake more badly than it does (the other two which needed to be remade have already been remade on the 3DS, and other than those, the first game also needs one, and no, BS Zelda doesn't count...)

Anyway, A lot of things need remade for different reasons.

Sometimes, it's to give it better visuals or use better technology to make the game not goony. 
Other times, it's just to revisit a game because it's been awhile. 

The concept of not aging well graphically never really clicks for me, anyways.   Shit looks and plays the same as it did.   I can play a doofy looking CRPG from 1984 and be A-OK even though I am aware that we've moved past 16 colors and stick-figures.

The jarring framerate difference between PS1 and PS4 goes away after maybe an hour of playing PS1 again.    I don't deny that it's there, but it's not like it's a horrible disaster.   Tenchu is still some 10/10 excitement.

Some of that PS1 stuff looks awful at times, but it's never been so awful that you can't play it, unless it was awful in the first place.   I can't think of a PS1 game that was f*cking amazing and now it sucks because bad-3D.

In some cases, like FF7, the visuals give the game character.   I am expecting that remake to not have the same atmosphere because those pre-rendered backgrounds will be gone.

and, yes, it'd be nice to see stuff that has moving mouths instead of parkinsons movement to simulate talking, but that doesn't really make me not play MGS1 anymore.   

... but in the case of 2D games, sometimes its just neat to see a 3D retelling of an old game.

Ys 3 vs Oath in Felghana for example. 



Remaking bad games is generally how you end up with shit like Night Trap.   

Remaking notoriously shit games only does well because of the cult fad mentality of buying a piece of shit to parade around and show everyone so you can all laugh and high five each other like idiots.

There are some less than good games that deserve a redo though, like Ultima II or Fade 2 Black.

There you go, you've successfully pointed out a reason why they should remake Secret of Mana! Making it 3D... Personally I think 2D will always look best, but I like 3D stuff too, although I can better appreciate it when they have enough polygons to make stuff look nice (Read: 6th gen level graphics or above)
Also "Should" and "Need" are two very different words... Should they remake it? Yes. Does the game NEED to be remade? No...

As for the rest of your point, it's not very different from mine! I never said a game gets worse over time, they really don't, but sometimes better things come out and make you wish that these older things were more like this newer better thing, and THAT's when a game "doesn't age well"
Take the camera and frame-rate in SO MANY early 3D games, just fixing those would already make them exponentially better! Give'em better character and background models and voila! You've got a better version of something! (If only it was that easy)

Also, I said "Remake Bad Games so that you can make them good", can you really not pay attention to what you're reading? It doesn't even have to be a straight-up remake, you can take for example, a bad game which had a good idea, and focus on that idea while doing something new but with the same name and IP...
Which reminds me, I must be the only person who actually likes Sword of Mana! *runs for the hills*
I can appreciate what it was trying to be, and it sure looks great! But damn was it boring...

no you cant.  you never played the original game very far, by your own admission.

So, you really can't properly appreciate what it was attempting...

Yes I can... I've played it far enough to not want to keep on playing, and it was trying to be a better version of a game which I thought could have been better... It was not better...
« Last Edit: August 29, 2017, 07:43:32 PM by Michirin9801 »

Arkhan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14142
  • Fuck Elmer.
    • Incessant Negativity Software
Re: Secret of Mana Remake
« Reply #31 on: August 29, 2017, 08:08:43 PM »
Let me tell you something about me which you probably haven't noticed:

I AM POOR
We know.  You say it and point it out often.  Yet you're also often rambling about how you emulate all kinds of shit, and how the Wii is an awesome emulation machine and whatever, so, ....

Quote
As for emulation, do you think my Windows 98 could run anything better than ZSNES? Even THAT wouldn't run everything properly... At most I could get Pokemon on the GBA to run, but I've never been too big into Pokemon anyway, and the plethora of better GBA games just wouldn't run at a playable speed...
When we're talking 8/16 bit stuff, this is fine.  I was emulating on a PII 233mhz Windows 98 machine from 1997 and had to tweak for days to get SNES games to not chug out when audio was playing.  I was also doing it on a 90mhz Pentium 1.   and then that computer died in the middle of playing Pool of Radiance and I was basically computerless until I too frankensteined something together. 


Quote
And you think I don't want to play Wii U, Switch, Vita, PS3 or PS4 games? I do, BUT I CAN'T!
I'm not NEARLY as lucky as you think I am, you just like to assume things about other people without knowing them...
So, we're here talking about vintage games, and the point was how you don't really know what it was like during this time's hayday since you're emulating and getting it all after it's sloppy seconds/thirds.   

I'm not assuming anything in that regard.  You made it abundantly clear here and elsewhere that you have plenty of ways to emulate the relevant platforms for said discussion.  Your frame of reference for this era is skewed.  This is the era I am talking about.  I wasn't talking about current crap.  Sorry you thought I was.

as for assuming things...   try looking in the mirror.   I notice you predictably didn't address the "value of games" thing, because I hope you realize how f*cking stupid you sounded.


Quote
I think I articulate my thoughts clearly enough, you're just too lazy to pay attention to what you're reading...
No, you really don't articulate them clearly sometimes.  It's not about being lazy.  Sometimes it's just simple misunderstanding of context that is filled in by whatever else you say on this forum.   Saying "priorties" could mean alot of things when it's vague as shit with no qualifying bits. 


Quote
I was referring priorities when it comes to gaming, and mine is "Having fun is the most important thing in any game" and I think reading dialogue is rarely fun...
Stories are a bottom-tier priority to me, it's not like I don't like story, but it's the last thing that is gonna make any impact on me in a game...
Well, you might wanna steer clear of RPG centric discussions then, lol.


Quote
Also, I have less time now than ever not only because of college but because I'm working part-time as an animator, being paid close to jacks*** so that I can at least help pay for college, and MAYBE eat something on the way from work to college (which is 6 bus stops away but I go on foot so that I don't have to pay for an extra bus ride)
And?  You're talking to someone that worked and went to college, rode the bus daily, and then worked *full time* while going back for a masters.  I get it.  It sucks.  I found time to make games while still playing them, while still doing the above.  YMMV. 


Quote
I tell you what's the problem with Zelda 2's visuals: EVERYTHING IS A SQUARE!
lol.  It's an NES game.  *high five*

Quote
At least Zelda 1 attempted to give its background objects rounded edges, unlike Zelda 2, the Overworld in Zelda 2 is particularly ugly, the side-scrolling sections are less bad, but repeating the same 4 x 8 pixels tile throughout an entire dungeon is just unforgivable...
The overworld is ugly, but not any worse than any other RPG on NES.   also, uh, Zelda 1 uses the same goony ass looking tile set for every dungeon, palette swapped.  It's not like Zelda 1 really blew it out of the water with that shit, lol.   Those rounded edges you're on about aren't that great either especially next to the square ass forests... with + sign intersections.



Quote
The sprites in Zelda 2 are better than the BGs, but they're not great either, they're probably better than the ones in Zelda 1, I'll give you that, but 'proportions' aside, they're about on the same level...
and yet for an NES game, they were big, detailed, and had a great variety going on.   What NES games really have astronomically better sprites going on?


Quote
And Zelda 2 isn't bad because it's hard, it's hard because it's bad! The main problem is the reach of Link's butter-knife, why couldn't they make it 16 pixels wide? (Because Flickering! Nintendo can't have any of that...) I mean, Ninja Gaiden gave you a 16 pixels wide sword slash, and that game feels fine to play! Heck, you probably have more reach with your bare fists in Batman and Shatterhand! I haven't counted the pixels, but those games sure FEEL better to play than Zelda 2, it feels like it's your fault when you get hit in those games, unlike in Zelda 2...

To be fair, Zelda 2 isn't "Bad" per se, but no game in the series needs a remake more badly than it does (the other two which needed to be remade have already been remade on the 3DS, and other than those, the first game also needs one, and no, BS Zelda doesn't count...)
I am pretty sure they did that to add challenge to the game, and nothing else.   Having a bigger weapon would mean redesigning all the other enemies where they have reach over you. 

Once you get leveled a bit, and get moves/magic, it doesn't really matter.   That game was great.  The dungeons seemed huge.  There was a lot of exploring.  You got to go into towns and talk to people.  They had actual houses.  Not caves.   The dungeons had elevators.  YOU COULD JUMP. 

and you probably didn't play the game until after LTTP, so you're all jacked up on how great it really was. 

The games that need remade the most would be the CDi ones.  Wand of Gamelon was almost sort of OK but still f*cking sucked.

They should remake Zelda 1 way before bothering to remake Zelda 2. 


Quote
There you go, you've successfully pointed out a reason why they should remake Secret of Mana! Making it 3D...
I successfully pointed this out before this post.   Remember how you said *I* was too lazy to read things?    lol.


Quote
As for the rest of your point, it's not very different from mine! I never said a game gets worse over time, they really don't, but sometimes better things come out and make you wish that these older things were more like this newer better thing, and THAT's when a game "doesn't age well"
Take the camera and frame-rate in SO MANY early 3D games, just fixing those would already make them exponentially better! Give'em better character and background models and voila! You've got a better version of something! (If only it was that easy)
You didn't say it, but other people have and continue to.

Camera controls are the only thing from the PS1 era that really didn't age well, because you CANT CONTROL THEM AT ALL.    That shit sucked.   It sucked back at the time even, and you learned to live with it, and sometimes exploit it to see shit you shouldn't be able to see.   Granted, now you just... rotate it and do the same thing.

also, that's not when a game doesn't age well, really.  It doesn't age well when the new things come out and make it so you are basically unable to handle playing the old thing.

Like the Odyssey.   Putting plastic shit on your TV and playing pretend doesn't really work now that we have games that actually do stuff.

the old Ultima games look f*ckin doofy, and while anyone might wish they had a graphical facelift, mouse support, or anything like that... it doesn't mean they have not aged well.  In fact, Ultima IV was deemed so good by the creator and fans, that's its been made eternally a free-to-pass-around game. 


Quote
Also, I said "Remake Bad Games so that you can make them good", can you really not pay attention to what you're reading? It doesn't even have to be a straight-up remake, you can take for example, a bad game which had a good idea, and focus on that idea while doing something new but with the same name and IP...
I can pay attention just fine.  I'm just not addressing only you and your points here.   Much like how you go off on tangents, so can others.

Can you really not understand something that simple ?     If you're going to be condescending, you might want to be sure of what you're doing before you double down.  or maybe you're triplin' down at this point.  I don't know.



Quote
Yes I can... I've played it far enough to not want to keep on playing, and it was trying to be a better version of a game which I thought could have been better... It was not better...

I don't buy it.  Especially since you didn't seem to get how the variety of weapons mattered.  If you didn't go through the whole game and experience the story and presentation of the OG, you can't properly appreciate, followed by despise what Sword of Mana tried to do.

You just didn't like it the first time because it wasn't like Links Awakening, and hoped a GBA version with newer visuals and shit would make it the bestest ever.
[Fri 19:34]<nectarsis> been wanting to try that one for awhile now Ope
[Fri 19:33]<Opethian> l;ol huge dong

I'm a max level Forum Warrior.  I'm immortal.
If you're not ready to defend your claims, don't post em.

Michirin9801

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 589
Re: Secret of Mana Remake
« Reply #32 on: August 29, 2017, 09:16:28 PM »
So, we're here talking about vintage games, and the point was how you don't really know what it was like during this time's hayday since you're emulating and getting it all after it's sloppy seconds/thirds.   

I'm not assuming anything in that regard.  You made it abundantly clear here and elsewhere that you have plenty of ways to emulate the relevant platforms for said discussion.  Your frame of reference for this era is skewed.  This is the era I am talking about.  I wasn't talking about current crap.  Sorry you thought I was.

as for assuming things...   try looking in the mirror.   I notice you predictably didn't address the "value of games" thing, because I hope you realize how f*cking stupid you sounded.

You're talking about the old games when they were new, back when they were expensive and 'unemulatable', if you only try and see from a different perspective you'd see why bringing up newer games is relevant to this conversation...
You couldn't emulate old games back when they were new, I can't emulate new games because they're new... It's not too far apart!
Yes, I can emulate the older games, but that doesn't mean I don't value them as much as you do...
The thing that you seem to fail to understand is that I value different games than you do, and for different reasons!

Quote
I think I articulate my thoughts clearly enough, you're just too lazy to pay attention to what you're reading...
No, you really don't articulate them clearly sometimes.  It's not about being lazy.  Sometimes it's just simple misunderstanding of context that is filled in by whatever else you say on this forum.   Saying "priorties" could mean alot of things when it's vague as shit with no qualifying bits. 
The problem is that you take just one sentence of what I said, and then quote it out of context questioning it for something for which the answer is elsewhere in the same post, even if it's not obvious... If you just read it taking in consideration what you were saying in the previous quote you'd know what I was referring to... Or do I REALLY need to spell out EVERYTHING that I mean?

Quote
I was referring priorities when it comes to gaming, and mine is "Having fun is the most important thing in any game" and I think reading dialogue is rarely fun...
Stories are a bottom-tier priority to me, it's not like I don't like story, but it's the last thing that is gonna make any impact on me in a game...
Well, you might wanna steer clear of RPG centric discussions then, lol.
Why would I? I also enjoy RPGs, and I've played plenty when I had the time...
And even though "Story" and "Dialogue" isn't my thing, that's FAR from the only thing an RPG has to offer... I love the heck out of the Dragon Quest series, those games aren't about the story! Their stories are pretty basic... No, the DQ games are about having an adventure with a fun party of characters and getting to explore a world that's filled with towns, dungeons, treasure, monsters and what not! They have a really good presentation with great graphics and music!
I also enjoy the Mario RPGs because they've got a more interesting battle system than most other RPGs with button commands which help you increase your damage output and decrease the damage taken...
I also like games like Summon Night Swordcraft Story 1 and 2, Etrian Odyssey series, the Ys series, the Mother series and so on, and even some games which are story-focused like Chrono Trigger and Mother 3, in games like those the story is just SO good that it actually DOES make an impact on me!
But what helps those games is that they've also got something interesting going on with the gameplay...

Quote
I tell you what's the problem with Zelda 2's visuals: EVERYTHING IS A SQUARE!
lol.  It's an NES game.  *high five*

Quote
At least Zelda 1 attempted to give its background objects rounded edges, unlike Zelda 2, the Overworld in Zelda 2 is particularly ugly, the side-scrolling sections are less bad, but repeating the same 4 x 8 pixels tile throughout an entire dungeon is just unforgivable...
The overworld is ugly, but not any worse than any other RPG on NES.   also, uh, Zelda 1 uses the same goony ass looking tile set for every dungeon, palette swapped.  It's not like Zelda 1 really blew it out of the water with that shit, lol.   Those rounded edges you're on about aren't that great either especially next to the square ass forests... with + sign intersections.
Personally, I think Zelda 2 has the ugliest-looking overworld in ANY NES game which I've played, it looks worse than the Japanese version of Dragon Quest 1...
It's better to have one fine tileset for all dungeons than plenty of crap tilesets, and at least the rounded mountain edges and round-looking bushes prevent every tile from looking like a square... It's not great, but Zelda 2 is much worse in my opinion...

Quote
The sprites in Zelda 2 are better than the BGs, but they're not great either, they're probably better than the ones in Zelda 1, I'll give you that, but 'proportions' aside, they're about on the same level...
and yet for an NES game, they were big, detailed, and had a great variety going on.   What NES games really have astronomically better sprites going on?
Pretty much everything by Hudson, Sunsoft, Natsume, Konami and Capcom...
Also, many of Nintendo's own other games, particularly the Mario games...

Quote
And Zelda 2 isn't bad because it's hard, it's hard because it's bad! The main problem is the reach of Link's butter-knife, why couldn't they make it 16 pixels wide? (Because Flickering! Nintendo can't have any of that...) I mean, Ninja Gaiden gave you a 16 pixels wide sword slash, and that game feels fine to play! Heck, you probably have more reach with your bare fists in Batman and Shatterhand! I haven't counted the pixels, but those games sure FEEL better to play than Zelda 2, it feels like it's your fault when you get hit in those games, unlike in Zelda 2...

To be fair, Zelda 2 isn't "Bad" per se, but no game in the series needs a remake more badly than it does (the other two which needed to be remade have already been remade on the 3DS, and other than those, the first game also needs one, and no, BS Zelda doesn't count...)
I am pretty sure they did that to add challenge to the game, and nothing else.   Having a bigger weapon would mean redesigning all the other enemies where they have reach over you. 
With how the game ended up, it pretty much NEEDED a redesign... It's got a backwards difficulty curve for f***'s sake!
No, they just did it because they didn't want their game to flicker, Nintendo was quite anal about their NES games flickering as little as possible, I mean, why else do you think you couldn't crouch and shoot in Metroid? How about starting you up with a weapon with 0 reach? And whenever you DO get more reach, you can't shoot as much... And how do they manage to give you a bigger shot? By making the one bullet sprite wave up and down, because making a bigger shot sprite would have made the sprites flicker...

Once you get leveled a bit, and get moves/magic, it doesn't really matter.
See what I meant with "Backwards difficulty curve"?

Quote
As for the rest of your point, it's not very different from mine! I never said a game gets worse over time, they really don't, but sometimes better things come out and make you wish that these older things were more like this newer better thing, and THAT's when a game "doesn't age well"
Take the camera and frame-rate in SO MANY early 3D games, just fixing those would already make them exponentially better! Give'em better character and background models and voila! You've got a better version of something! (If only it was that easy)
You didn't say it, but other people have and continue to.

Camera controls are the only thing from the PS1 era that really didn't age well, because you CANT CONTROL THEM AT ALL.    That shit sucked.   It sucked back at the time even, and you learned to live with it, and sometimes exploit it to see shit you shouldn't be able to see.   Granted, now you just... rotate it and do the same thing.

also, that's not when a game doesn't age well, really.  It doesn't age well when the new things come out and make it so you are basically unable to handle playing the old thing.

Like the Odyssey.   Putting plastic shit on your TV and playing pretend doesn't really work now that we have games that actually do stuff.

the old Ultima games look f*ckin doofy, and while anyone might wish they had a graphical facelift, mouse support, or anything like that... it doesn't mean they have not aged well.  In fact, Ultima IV was deemed so good by the creator and fans, that's its been made eternally a free-to-pass-around game. 
"Not aging well" isn't black and white, there's a gradient of things that have aged pretty well (16 bit stuff) somewhat well (8 bit stuff and 6th gen 3D) and not very well (pre-NES stuff and Early 3D games)
And what does and doesn't age well goes from person to person, the aforementioned examples are just what I think have in general aged well or not well...

Quote
Yes I can... I've played it far enough to not want to keep on playing, and it was trying to be a better version of a game which I thought could have been better... It was not better...

I don't buy it.  Especially since you didn't seem to get how the variety of weapons mattered.  If you didn't go through the whole game and experience the story and presentation of the OG, you can't properly appreciate, followed by despise what Sword of Mana tried to do.

You just didn't like it the first time because it wasn't like Links Awakening, and hoped a GBA version with newer visuals and shit would make it the bestest ever.
I've explained well enough with my Castlevania comparison... "More Weapons" doesn't automatically make the combat "Better", it's how the game uses said weapons which do!
Link's Awakening doesn't need more weapons because the way it uses its items already gives the game more variety, not only in its combat, but also in its exploration and puzzle-solving elements...

And I don't need to continue to play a game which I'm not enjoying to know that I'm not enjoying what I'm playing...

Arkhan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14142
  • Fuck Elmer.
    • Incessant Negativity Software
Re: Secret of Mana Remake
« Reply #33 on: August 30, 2017, 06:18:20 AM »
You're talking about the old games when they were new, back when they were expensive and 'unemulatable', if you only try and see from a different perspective you'd see why bringing up newer games is relevant to this conversation...
You couldn't emulate old games back when they were new, I can't emulate new games because they're new... It's not too far apart!
Yes, I can emulate the older games, but that doesn't mean I don't value them as much as you do...
It's actually kinda far apart.  You just don't get it.

We are all living in an era where we can find out about games extremely easily before wasting money on them.   You aren't really forced to make judgement calls anymore, hoping you make the right choice.   All of that stuff we had to cross our fingers on fits on a USB stick now, for you to just sit and fiddle around with at your leisure.  Free.   

For new stuff, theres free demos, trailers, online reviews for days full of screenshots, youtube live plays out the ass. 

It's a different world.  That's why bringing up the new stuff isn't as relevant as you wish it was.  especially since we're all here.  You literally weren't there/coherent during the era being talked about.  By the time you were coherent, that world was fading away and turning into this.

We will never be in the dark ages again unless the internet suddenly blows up.   That might be a good thing, so all those dumbassed youtube unboxing and reaction videos can stop being a thing.

The fact that you can't get freebies of current games isn't relevant to the point I was making.   None of us can get freebies of current games, but we can basically watch youtubes to see if we even care to spend the money.  This is different.   I was talking about having to weigh pros and cons and making sure you didn't blow your money on garbage.  If you blow your money on garbage now, you must be f*cking blind/without internet/really impatient.

Which again, is why I am talking about the 8/16 bit era basically.     Also, you could emulate that stuff just a few years after it was made.  Chrono Trigger was emulatable in like 1999.

It's a whole different ball-game now.  It's not like it was at all.  You don't ride your bike to the store to find that the game is sold out anymore.   You can just Amazon that shit and it shows up. 

Quote
The thing that you seem to fail to understand is that I value different games than you do, and for different reasons!
First it was "more".  Now it's "different".  Just stop.   It's not me failing to understand anything.  It's you talking out of your ass and changing your words when you realize you sound like a dipshit.

Just admit that you're lucky you didn't have to experience trusting the peckerwoods in Gamefan on their game commentary when you go to buy something, and that you got to experience all of that shit without having to go buy/rent to play stuff, sometimes not even being able to find the game you want nearby.

Quote
The problem is that you take just one sentence of what I said, and then quote it out of context questioning it for something for which the answer is elsewhere in the same post, even if it's not obvious... If you just read it taking in consideration what you were saying in the previous quote you'd know what I was referring to... Or do I REALLY need to spell out EVERYTHING that I mean?
Yes, you should probably spell out what you mean instead of vague shit while also going off on tangents.  You go off on tangents.  You adverb the shit out of your sentences.   You clearly have the time to spell out what you mean so there's no guess work.  It's your own fault if you expect people to go piece your fever dream post together the way you specifically want it "even if it's not obvious.".  If it's not obvious, you can expect varied results.

Vague shit is vague shit.  Even if you try connecting it to other posts.  It's still vague.  It's up for debate and can be filled in however people want based off of their own perception of the author. 

Quote
Why would I?
Mainly because you're contributing to wall-o-text in a thread centered around games you've basically got no goddamn clue about because you didn't play the one, and barely played the other, while admitting you give f*ckall shits about story/dialogue in a game?

I mean, spend less time arguing goony points and use it playing Secret of Mana.

Quote
Personally, I think Zelda 2 has the ugliest-looking overworld in ANY NES game which I've played, it looks worse than the Japanese version of Dragon Quest 1...
It's better to have one fine tileset for all dungeons than plenty of crap tilesets, and at least the rounded mountain edges and round-looking bushes prevent every tile from looking like a square... It's not great, but Zelda 2 is much worse in my opinion...
Play Sted, lol.  It looks like if DQ1 forgot to get finished. The overworld in Zelda II isn't great by any means, but it's also not awful.  It's just middle of the road.  I wonder if there was a reason for it other than the art guy being lazy.  Maybe the blew their wad on the sidescrolling and sprites.  The overworld barely even matters in the game outside of the random encounters with puddingmen.

Quote
Pretty much everything by Hudson, Sunsoft, Natsume, Konami and Capcom...
Also, many of Nintendo's own other games, particularly the Mario games...
Can we get some side by sides?  Honestly curious, since no NES sprites have ever really blown my mind.   Contra's sprites are stupid looking.   MegaMans aren't exactly detailed.  .. Zelda IIs fit the cartoon/comicbook like manual art and shit for the game.

I think Samurai Pizza Cats is the best looking NES game, personally.

Quote
With how the game ended up, it pretty much NEEDED a redesign... It's got a backwards difficulty curve for f***'s sake!
No, they just did it because they didn't want their game to flicker, Nintendo was quite anal about their NES games flickering as little as possible, I mean, why else do you think you couldn't crouch and shoot in Metroid? How about starting you up with a weapon with 0 reach? And whenever you DO get more reach, you can't shoot as much... And how do they manage to give you a bigger shot? By making the one bullet sprite wave up and down, because making a bigger shot sprite would have made the sprites flicker...
Do you have actual citations on this?   You could in theory, crouch and shoot in Metroid, if they added it in.  When you fall, you are in a crouching position and can still shoot, IIRC.   Plus, the game flickers in Tourian regardless.  I am pretty sure you can crouch and shoot in Metroid 2, also.   On a gameboy. 

Some of that may be for flicker purposes along with careful enemy placement, but it's also because it was the first metroid and they were probably trying ideas out for challenge and difficulty?   The shot work in Super Metroid isn't exactly rapid fire either like something from Contra 3..

Making a bigger shot sprite would have also looked stupid.  Some of these things can really probably be chalked up to game/difficulty design.  The wavebeam is all jiggly, and passes through walls.  Fringe benefits to the thing right there.


Quote
See what I meant with "Backwards difficulty curve"?
No, because it progresses like an RPG.   Once you're grinded and armed to the teeth, you f*ck everything up because you aren't a walking pudding container.   Pretty normal.


Quote
I've explained well enough with my Castlevania comparison... "More Weapons" doesn't automatically make the combat "Better", it's how the game uses said weapons which do!
Link's Awakening doesn't need more weapons because the way it uses its items already gives the game more variety, not only in its combat, but also in its exploration and puzzle-solving elements...

And I don't need to continue to play a game which I'm not enjoying to know that I'm not enjoying what I'm playing...
I said it makes it more interesting.  Remember how you said that thing about "not paying attention to what you read"?

I think you need to play through FFA and experience all of the weaponry, followed by Secret of Mana, the next progression in the matter, variety before commenting further.   How far did you actually get in the game before the lack of it being Links Awakening made you run away screaming?
[Fri 19:34]<nectarsis> been wanting to try that one for awhile now Ope
[Fri 19:33]<Opethian> l;ol huge dong

I'm a max level Forum Warrior.  I'm immortal.
If you're not ready to defend your claims, don't post em.

Michirin9801

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 589
Re: Secret of Mana Remake
« Reply #34 on: August 30, 2017, 04:36:17 PM »
You're talking about the old games when they were new, back when they were expensive and 'unemulatable', if you only try and see from a different perspective you'd see why bringing up newer games is relevant to this conversation...
You couldn't emulate old games back when they were new, I can't emulate new games because they're new... It's not too far apart!
Yes, I can emulate the older games, but that doesn't mean I don't value them as much as you do...
It's actually kinda far apart.  You just don't get it.

We are all living in an era where we can find out about games extremely easily before wasting money on them.   You aren't really forced to make judgement calls anymore, hoping you make the right choice.   All of that stuff we had to cross our fingers on fits on a USB stick now, for you to just sit and fiddle around with at your leisure.  Free.   

For new stuff, theres free demos, trailers, online reviews for days full of screenshots, youtube live plays out the ass. 

It's a different world.  That's why bringing up the new stuff isn't as relevant as you wish it was.  especially since we're all here.  You literally weren't there/coherent during the era being talked about.  By the time you were coherent, that world was fading away and turning into this.

We will never be in the dark ages again unless the internet suddenly blows up.   That might be a good thing, so all those dumbassed youtube unboxing and reaction videos can stop being a thing.

The fact that you can't get freebies of current games isn't relevant to the point I was making.   None of us can get freebies of current games, but we can basically watch youtubes to see if we even care to spend the money.  This is different.   I was talking about having to weigh pros and cons and making sure you didn't blow your money on garbage.  If you blow your money on garbage now, you must be f*cking blind/without internet/really impatient.

Which again, is why I am talking about the 8/16 bit era basically.     Also, you could emulate that stuff just a few years after it was made.  Chrono Trigger was emulatable in like 1999.

It's a whole different ball-game now.  It's not like it was at all.  You don't ride your bike to the store to find that the game is sold out anymore.   You can just Amazon that shit and it shows up. 

The thing is that you're talking as if I had access to this stuff while growing up... I have today, I've had for quite a while, but not when I was growing up, Internet to me back then was a luxury, for the most part I couldn't see what games were like before I got them unless I had already played them elsewhere, even though these things you mention already existed, so yes, I DO know what it's like to take a chance on a game...

Also, just because my perspective of the 8 and 16 bit games is different from yours, doesn't mean it's any less valid, just like my feelings towards whatever games we're talking about... You bashing the games that I like and saying that the games that you like are better isn't gonna convince me that they're better...

Quote
The thing that you seem to fail to understand is that I value different games than you do, and for different reasons!
First it was "more".  Now it's "different".  Just stop.   It's not me failing to understand anything.  It's you talking out of your ass and changing your words when you realize you sound like a dipshit.
No, I said "Probably More", and that's not a definitive thing, because I didn't know how much you value your games, the same way you don't know how much I value mine...
I'm not changing what I said, I'm adding to what I said...
And I don't need to have a 'tragic backstory' with each of my games to have an attachment to them, whether I own them physically or not...

Quote
Why would I?
Mainly because you're contributing to wall-o-text in a thread centered around games you've basically got no goddamn clue about because you didn't play the one, and barely played the other, while admitting you give f*ckall shits about story/dialogue in a game?

I mean, spend less time arguing goony points and use it playing Secret of Mana.
As I said before, there's WAY more to RPGs than story/dialogue, and I enjoy playing them when I can, and I don't need to have played a game to know things about it, like for example, what it looks and sounds like, that it's a well-liked classic, and to be interested in playing it...
And you said "RPG-centric threads" which imply that I shouldn't talk about ANY RPGs because I don't care about stories as much...
You're the one who basically forces me to type out walls of text so that I can defend my points...

Also, I will when Nintendo stops updating the 3DS so that I can install a SNES emulator on it and play it in bed, on the bus and in college...

Quote
The problem is that you take just one sentence of what I said, and then quote it out of context questioning it for something for which the answer is elsewhere in the same post, even if it's not obvious... If you just read it taking in consideration what you were saying in the previous quote you'd know what I was referring to... Or do I REALLY need to spell out EVERYTHING that I mean?
Yes, you should probably spell out what you mean instead of vague shit while also going off on tangents.  You go off on tangents.  You adverb the shit out of your sentences.   You clearly have the time to spell out what you mean so there's no guess work.  It's your own fault if you expect people to go piece your fever dream post together the way you specifically want it "even if it's not obvious.".  If it's not obvious, you can expect varied results.

Vague shit is vague shit.  Even if you try connecting it to other posts.  It's still vague.  It's up for debate and can be filled in however people want based off of their own perception of the author. 
The "Tangents" I go in are in order to make comparisons which better illustrate the points that I'm trying to make... Connect the dots and "vague s***" is no longer gonna be vague...

Quote
Pretty much everything by Hudson, Sunsoft, Natsume, Konami and Capcom...
Also, many of Nintendo's own other games, particularly the Mario games...
Can we get some side by sides?  Honestly curious, since no NES sprites have ever really blown my mind.   Contra's sprites are stupid looking.   MegaMans aren't exactly detailed.  .. Zelda IIs fit the cartoon/comicbook like manual art and shit for the game.

I think Samurai Pizza Cats is the best looking NES game, personally.
I can't "show you" right now, but I can tell you some of the games which I think look quite a bit better than Zelda 2:
From Nintendo: Super Mario Bros. 2, Kirby's Adventure, Duck Hunt (yes) and... I don't really think there's much else from them on the NES which looks THAT much better than Zelda 2... And yes, that means I think Super Mario Bros. 2 looks better than Super Mario Bros. 3...

From Hudson: Jackie Chan's Action Kung Fu (some of the biggest and best-animated sprites on the NES) Bonk's Adventure (Looks almost as good as the TG-16 game sometimes), Xexyz...

From Natsume: Shadow of the Ninja and Shatterhand

From Konami: The Castlevania and Contra games of course

From Capcom: The Megaman games and the Disney games, although to be honest, I'm not too fond of Capcom's graphics and music on the NES like everyone else seems to be, but I definitely think that they have better graphics than Zelda 2, and the

From Sunsoft: Batman, Batman Return of the Joker (If any NES game is going to impress you with its graphics, this is the one, the music rules too! But it's Sunsoft, their music ALWAYS rules on the NES)
Journey to Silius and Gremlins 2

From Tecmo: The Ninja Gaiden games and Tecmo Bowl (haven't played this last one, but I've seen it, and yeah, the graphics are better than Zelda 2)

From Irem: Metal Storm, Spartan X2, Hammerin' Harry...

Again, these are NES games which I think look better than Zelda 2, not only in the backgrounds but also in the sprites, if you don't agree there's nothing I can do about it other than say "That's fine"
Also, I don't really expect any of these games to blow your mind with their graphics (Batman Return of the Joker is just the one I think is the most likely one, but it's probably not gonna) But they sure do impress me...

Quote
With how the game ended up, it pretty much NEEDED a redesign... It's got a backwards difficulty curve for f***'s sake!
No, they just did it because they didn't want their game to flicker, Nintendo was quite anal about their NES games flickering as little as possible, I mean, why else do you think you couldn't crouch and shoot in Metroid? How about starting you up with a weapon with 0 reach? And whenever you DO get more reach, you can't shoot as much... And how do they manage to give you a bigger shot? By making the one bullet sprite wave up and down, because making a bigger shot sprite would have made the sprites flicker...
Do you have actual citations on this?   You could in theory, crouch and shoot in Metroid, if they added it in.  When you fall, you are in a crouching position and can still shoot, IIRC.   Plus, the game flickers in Tourian regardless.  I am pretty sure you can crouch and shoot in Metroid 2, also.   On a gameboy. 

Some of that may be for flicker purposes along with careful enemy placement, but it's also because it was the first metroid and they were probably trying ideas out for challenge and difficulty?   The shot work in Super Metroid isn't exactly rapid fire either like something from Contra 3..

Making a bigger shot sprite would have also looked stupid.  Some of these things can really probably be chalked up to game/difficulty design.  The wavebeam is all jiggly, and passes through walls.  Fringe benefits to the thing right there.

Yes, you could crouch and shoot in Metroid 2, which is a different, MUCH better game than Metroid 1 in my opinion... Also, the Game Boy could display 160 pixels worth of sprites in a horizontal line without flickering (10 sprites which can be as wide as 16 pixels each) which btw, is the whole horizontal resolution of the Game Boy, whereas the NES could only display 64 pixels worth of sprites in a horizontal line without flickering (8 sprites which can be as wide as 8 pixels only) so basically you can only have a 16 pixel wide character and 3 16 pixel wide enemies on the same horizontal line at a time...
Samus's "crouching" sprite on the NES game was the first frame of her Jumping animation, when you're "crouching" after you get hit is because you're landing from your knock-back jump animation, so yeah, they could have recycled it in order to make a crouching sprite and allowed you to crouch and shoot to make the game less cheap, but of course they didn't...

and the only thing that "not making a bigger shot sprite" does is save up on a couple of tiles worth of memory, you say it would "look stupid" without even knowing what it could look like...
If they just drew an 8 x 24 sprite which looked like a wave and palette-swapped it, like they already palette-swap the wave beam, it would hardly cause any more flickering than a single 8 x 8 sprite waving around, and it would move faster and hit your enemies more consistently...

Quote
See what I meant with "Backwards difficulty curve"?
No, because it progresses like an RPG.   Once you're grinded and armed to the teeth, you f*ck everything up because you aren't a walking pudding container.   Pretty normal.
The problem is that they've put the hardest part of the game right at the beginning, and after you get past it, hardly anything is nearly as much of a challenge anymore, and you no longer being a "walking pudding container" certainly contributes to that...

Quote
I've explained well enough with my Castlevania comparison... "More Weapons" doesn't automatically make the combat "Better", it's how the game uses said weapons which do!
Link's Awakening doesn't need more weapons because the way it uses its items already gives the game more variety, not only in its combat, but also in its exploration and puzzle-solving elements...

And I don't need to continue to play a game which I'm not enjoying to know that I'm not enjoying what I'm playing...
I said it makes it more interesting.  Remember how you said that thing about "not paying attention to what you read"?

I think you need to play through FFA and experience all of the weaponry, followed by Secret of Mana, the next progression in the matter, variety before commenting further.   How far did you actually get in the game before the lack of it being Links Awakening made you run away screaming?

I don't remember, it's been really long... I'm open to giving it another shot, but that still doesn't change the fact that I didn't care much for it when I first played it...
Nor does it change the fact that I can appreciate that Sword of Mana was trying to be a better version of it, even though it wasn't... I can't appreciate the same way as you, but I can appreciate in my own different way, which again, isn't any less or more valid than yours...

Maybe your problem isn't that you "fail to understand" anything, perhaps I haven't worded myself the best in there, what I think your problem is either that you think in absolutes, or you think that I think in absolutes, that I see no exceptions, that everything that I say is set in stone... It's not, there's no black and white, everything is a gradient, exceptions exist, and not everything needs to be questioned, especially not when the answer is either unimportant, or hiding in plain sight...
« Last Edit: August 30, 2017, 04:42:21 PM by Michirin9801 »

Arkhan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14142
  • Fuck Elmer.
    • Incessant Negativity Software
Re: Secret of Mana Remake
« Reply #35 on: August 30, 2017, 05:28:25 PM »
The thing is that you're talking as if I had access to this stuff while growing up... I have today, I've had for quite a while, but not when I was growing up, Internet to me back then was a luxury, for the most part I couldn't see what games were like before I got them unless I had already played them elsewhere, even though these things you mention already existed, so yes, I DO know what it's like to take a chance on a game...

You're still lucky in that you've sort of grown up in an era where you could emulate/find this stuff free.    How old were you even when you got a functional computer to emulate crap?  the fact that you were poor kind of saved you anyways.  You basically didn't have to waste money buying and locating all of this crap and now you can drown in it, lol.

Quote
Also, just because my perspective of the 8 and 16 bit games is different from yours, doesn't mean it's any less valid, just like my feelings towards whatever games we're talking about... You bashing the games that I like and saying that the games that you like are better isn't gonna convince me that they're better...

You realize while I was bashing LA, that I also said it's a 10/10, right?   I am able to bash and make fun of a good game.   The Zelda formula is pretty moronic. After LTTP, they should have cut that shit out.

It's not so much the games that your perspective is wonky on.  Maybe a little since you seem to have played stuff backwards and missed the magic of watching stuff turn into stuff...  it's more that you just missed that era where relying on magazines was a thing.

The internet seemed so great for this stuff and now it's a f*cking disaster.  Bring back magazines please.


Quote
No, I said "Probably More", and that's not a definitive thing, because I didn't know how much you value your games, the same way you don't know how much I value mine...
I'm not changing what I said, I'm adding to what I said...
And I don't need to have a 'tragic backstory' with each of my games to have an attachment to them, whether I own them physically or not...

no, you don't need a sad thing tied to a game to have value tied to it.  It just drastically changes said value and generally supersedes money. 

My copy of LTTP is broken on the back and held back together with tape.   It just broke in half one day.  No idea why.  I don't replace it, and don't care that it's worth less now.  My grandma gave me it for my birthday.  That specific copy is now better than a brand new copy.

These kinds of values, I hope you don't really have to associate yet, because it blows ass.

I get that you value your stuff.  I hope everyone does.

Quote
You're the one who basically forces me to type out walls of text so that I can defend my points...

Welcome to PCEFX.    :dance:


Quote
The "Tangents" I go in are in order to make comparisons which better illustrate the points that I'm trying to make... Connect the dots and "vague s***" is no longer gonna be vague...

I don't feel like connecting the dots in your walls of text to figure out what you mean, because it still might not be what you mean.

Quote
*list of games*

A lot of the games you mentioned are not really that much better looking than Zelda 2, if at all.   You even named things I mentioned.   I think if you stick them side by side, you will find that they aren't really any better.


This game is awesome.

I also think Skate or Die 2's ramp level is some of the most impressive animation the NES has ever witnessed.   




Quote
Yes, you could crouch and shoot in Metroid 2, which is a different, MUCH better game than Metroid 1 in my opinion... Also, the Game Boy could display 160 pixels worth of sprites in a horizontal line without flickering (10 sprites which can be as wide as 16 pixels each) which btw, is the whole horizontal resolution of the Game Boy, whereas the NES could only display 64 pixels worth of sprites in a horizontal line without flickering (8 sprites which can be as wide as 8 pixels only) so basically you can only have a 16 pixel wide character and 3 16 pixel wide enemies on the same horizontal line at a time...
Samus's "crouching" sprite on the NES game was the first frame of her Jumping animation, when you're "crouching" after you get hit is because you're landing from your knock-back jump animation, so yeah, they could have recycled it in order to make a crouching sprite and allowed you to crouch and shoot to make the game less cheap, but of course they didn't...

I don't know why you can't crouch in Metroid.  It's not a flicker issue.  It's likely a "oh we didn't think of that" issue with the controls and transitioning to morphball.   Welcome to the formative years of the series' that made Nintendo famous.


Quote
and the only thing that "not making a bigger shot sprite" does is save up on a couple of tiles worth of memory, you say it would "look stupid" without even knowing what it could look like...
If they just drew an 8 x 24 sprite which looked like a wave and palette-swapped it, like they already palette-swap the wave beam, it would hardly cause any more flickering than a single 8 x 8 sprite waving around, and it would move faster and hit your enemies more consistently...

Now, if they drew a giant wavy sprite for Metroid.... you realize the wave beam would no longer work like it does, right?  The sine-wave pattern is part of using it.   You would lose the challenge of timing and aiming it and at that point they might as well just let you shoot some big retarded looking Turrican beam from in front of you.  gross

I know what a bigger sprite might look like for a shot.   Do you think it's hard to imagine a bigger sprite?   It's not.  It's proportionate to Samus.   

I highly doubt they made Samus start with a cripplecannon for flicker reasons.  They did it to make the initial game harder, and the progression more challenging.    Case in point:  Link shoots a goddamn projectile across the screen.

Kid Icarus has the same kind of thing with arrow range.  It makes the game what it is. 

Quote
The problem is that they've put the hardest part of the game right at the beginning, and after you get past it, hardly anything is nearly as much of a challenge anymore, and you no longer being a "walking pudding container" certainly contributes to that...

That's how a lot of old RPGs work.   Once you grind out a bit, you only tend to die when you do something stupid.


Quote
I don't remember, it's been really long... I'm open to giving it another shot, but that still doesn't change the fact that I didn't care much for it when I first played it...
Nor does it change the fact that I can appreciate that Sword of Mana was trying to be a better version of it, even though it wasn't... I can't appreciate the same way as you, but I can appreciate in my own different way, which again, isn't any less or more valid than yours...

I'd play it again.  Or try Adventures of Mana.  If you didn't get very far you kind of missed out.


Quote
Maybe your problem isn't that you "fail to understand" anything, perhaps I haven't worded myself the best in there, what I think your problem is either that you think in absolutes, or you think that I think in absolutes, that I see no exceptions, that everything that I say is set in stone... It's not, there's no black and white, everything is a gradient, exceptions exist, and not everything needs to be questioned, especially not when the answer is either unimportant, or hiding in plain sight...

You speak in adverb laden absolute-esque statements.   If you have a point, you should just get it out there instead of expecting people to fill in the dots.   Everyone is going to fill them in different.




Can you really not play emulated crap on your 3DS?

I have an AceKard and never had a problem.   Did that change?  I haven't done it in awhile.
[Fri 19:34]<nectarsis> been wanting to try that one for awhile now Ope
[Fri 19:33]<Opethian> l;ol huge dong

I'm a max level Forum Warrior.  I'm immortal.
If you're not ready to defend your claims, don't post em.

Michirin9801

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 589
Re: Secret of Mana Remake
« Reply #36 on: August 30, 2017, 07:02:52 PM »
Quote
*list of games*
A lot of the games you mentioned are not really that much better looking than Zelda 2, if at all.   You even named things I mentioned.   I think if you stick them side by side, you will find that they aren't really any better.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AxUqp9XIM0

This game is awesome.

I also think Skate or Die 2's ramp level is some of the most impressive animation the NES has ever witnessed.   

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMDMde6BNdc
Yeah, those games look really friggin' good...
Here, I put together an image with some sprites side-by-side with Link's sprite from Zelda 2:


Yeah, I do think all of those (and more which I haven't bothered to add) look better than Link's sprite, and most of the games they're a part of I think look much better than Zelda 2 in general...

Just showing the sprites in here makes it look like there isn't much of a difference, most of those sprites are just 3 colours anyway, but the thing about sprites on the NES is that you can't really make them THAT much better without tiling them just right so that you can use more than one palette, or superimposing tricks, which lead to flicker (but some of these games do use superimposing sprites to get more colour and detail)
Those tricks are more worth it on the Game Boy Color where you could fill more of the screen real estate with sprites...

My issue with Zelda 2's graphics has mostly to do with the backgrounds, Zelda 2's sprites aren't "bad", but on top of the backgrounds, which are pretty bad, well, let's just say that the 'badness' of the BGs rubs off on the sprites...

Most of these other games have really good BGs for the NES, particularly the Sunsoft ones, also major props to Shatterhand...

Quote
Yes, you could crouch and shoot in Metroid 2, which is a different, MUCH better game than Metroid 1 in my opinion... Also, the Game Boy could display 160 pixels worth of sprites in a horizontal line without flickering (10 sprites which can be as wide as 16 pixels each) which btw, is the whole horizontal resolution of the Game Boy, whereas the NES could only display 64 pixels worth of sprites in a horizontal line without flickering (8 sprites which can be as wide as 8 pixels only) so basically you can only have a 16 pixel wide character and 3 16 pixel wide enemies on the same horizontal line at a time...
Samus's "crouching" sprite on the NES game was the first frame of her Jumping animation, when you're "crouching" after you get hit is because you're landing from your knock-back jump animation, so yeah, they could have recycled it in order to make a crouching sprite and allowed you to crouch and shoot to make the game less cheap, but of course they didn't...
I don't know why you can't crouch in Metroid.  It's not a flicker issue.  It's likely a "oh we didn't think of that" issue with the controls and transitioning to morphball.   Welcome to the formative years of the series' that made Nintendo famous.


Quote
and the only thing that "not making a bigger shot sprite" does is save up on a couple of tiles worth of memory, you say it would "look stupid" without even knowing what it could look like...
If they just drew an 8 x 24 sprite which looked like a wave and palette-swapped it, like they already palette-swap the wave beam, it would hardly cause any more flickering than a single 8 x 8 sprite waving around, and it would move faster and hit your enemies more consistently...
Now, if they drew a giant wavy sprite for Metroid.... you realize the wave beam would no longer work like it does, right?  The sine-wave pattern is part of using it.   You would lose the challenge of timing and aiming it and at that point they might as well just let you shoot some big retarded looking Turrican beam from in front of you.  gross

I know what a bigger sprite might look like for a shot.   Do you think it's hard to imagine a bigger sprite?   It's not.  It's proportionate to Samus.   

I highly doubt they made Samus start with a cripplecannon for flicker reasons.  They did it to make the initial game harder, and the progression more challenging.    Case in point:  Link shoots a goddamn projectile across the screen.

Kid Icarus has the same kind of thing with arrow range.  It makes the game what it is. 

I feel obligated to respect Metroid for what it pretty much pioneered, but it's not a well-designed game, not even close...
You need to look no further than the likes of Castlevania, Ninja Gaiden, Contra, Batman and even the Mario games, to see what a good challenge feels like on the NES, one where you're not forced to grind for health pickups for half an hour before you can even bother to try again every single time because the game is too cheap to re-spawn you with more than 30 HP, where you can always consistently hit your enemies instead of the bullets missing half the time, or simply not reaching them, or having enemies which are too short for you to hit...
None of those games do that, all of them have their enemies in places where you can easily dispatch them if you're good enough, the challenge doesn't come from not being able to do basic things, it comes from trying to do them well while taking into account tricky enemy and platform placement...

Metroid 2 is like night and day in comparison, it fixed almost everything that was wrong with the original, you can not only duck and shoot, but also jump and shoot downwards! The map layouts are also MUCH more interesting than corridors and shafts which look the same, the only things Metroid 2 lacks to make it truly great are colour and a map system... I can see why some people take issue with the cramped screen too, but that wasn't an issue to me...

Quote
The problem is that they've put the hardest part of the game right at the beginning, and after you get past it, hardly anything is nearly as much of a challenge anymore, and you no longer being a "walking pudding container" certainly contributes to that...
That's how a lot of old RPGs work.   Once you grind out a bit, you only tend to die when you do something stupid.
Although many of the RPGs I like do require an early-game grind, they're never as aggravating as the beginning of Adventure of Link...

Quote
Maybe your problem isn't that you "fail to understand" anything, perhaps I haven't worded myself the best in there, what I think your problem is either that you think in absolutes, or you think that I think in absolutes, that I see no exceptions, that everything that I say is set in stone... It's not, there's no black and white, everything is a gradient, exceptions exist, and not everything needs to be questioned, especially not when the answer is either unimportant, or hiding in plain sight...
You speak in adverb laden absolute-esque statements.   If you have a point, you should just get it out there instead of expecting people to fill in the dots.   Everyone is going to fill them in different.

Even though I state time and time again that it's all my opinion and that I don't expect you (or anyone) to agree, and respect yours, as well as that there are exceptions...

Can you really not play emulated crap on your 3DS?

I have an AceKard and never had a problem.   Did that change?  I haven't done it in awhile.

I have a DStwo, it's a DS flashcart so it can't take advantage of the 3DS's hardware, so I can only emulate things which work fine on the original DS...
Game Boy/Colour, Game Gear and Master System work A-OK, NES and PCE work somewhat OK, except the DS's resolution is lower so it has to crush the image in order to fit it on the screen so it's not ideal, also, PCE has pretty awful sound emulation (only wavetables with only 4 volume levels and at 4 bit depth, no samples, and the CD ADPCM is too quiet) and there are some graphical issues like no line-interruption (some background detail is lost in games like Magical Chase and Power Drift)

The DStwo has a dedicated GBA emulator that only it can run, but it kinda sucks, it runs at 30fps, I can play Puyo Pop, Final Fight One and KoF EX2 okay, but it's just unusable for any serious play... I tried ALTTP and Final Fantasy IV at it, they worked fine, but it's just not worth it with such a gimped emulation, some sections of FF4 were running at like, 5fps? Unacceptable...

Anything else is a no-go, yes there are emulators for more systems for the DS, but I've tried them, and they're not worth it... I hear good things about Neo Geo emulation on the DS, which I haven't tried yet, but if the system can't even do SNES or MD justice, I don't see Neo Geo being any better...

There's also the issue of the SMS/GG and the PCE emulator not being able to be on the same SD card without corrupting it, I've had issues with that time and time again, so to have to pick between one of my favourite systems with poor emulation and 2 systems I barely care about with decent emulation, I'll pick the former, I mean, at least I can play New Adventure Island on-the-go at full speed, only missing a little bit of detail and the drums...

My plan is to use the Homebrew Launcher, which works just like the Homebrew Channel on the Wii, except on the 3DS, but only when Nintendo stops updating the 3DS, I don't wanna run the risk of bricking my system, I can't afford another one after all...
There's already SNES and GBA emulators for the 3DS, and even a version of RetroArch for it (which hopefully supports PC engine because I could really use a decent PCE emulation on-the-go)
Then, and only then, will I play the rest of the SNES RPGs which I'm still missing, I have a much better time with RPGs on handhelds after all...
« Last Edit: August 30, 2017, 07:14:02 PM by Michirin9801 »

Arkhan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14142
  • Fuck Elmer.
    • Incessant Negativity Software
Re: Secret of Mana Remake
« Reply #37 on: August 30, 2017, 07:41:54 PM »
Some of those sprites are about the same in terms of interestingness.    I think I would play Zelda II before I go playing Shatterhand, though.   or Bonk on NES.    Zelda's other sprites that you left out are pretty great.   Ninja Gaiden's best sprite is him and some of the bosses.   The in-game basic enemies in NG1 are pretty stupid looking, honestly.

The health thing in metroid is a bit stupid, and I don't know why they didn't refill you.

However, I don't know that I would call Metroid poorly designed.  "not even close" is a pretty weak move.

You're comparing it to games that came after it, from a completely different genre.   

It did a lot of things right.     It's rough around the edges with a few unforgiving issues from back in the day like the health, and enemies killing you as you transition to the next room, but bad design is not really where you want to head with those criticisms. 

You are comparing it to level-transitioning action games with no save/restart features really that are meant to be finished in a sitting.   Excluding Simon's Quest.   

The enemy behaviors and placements, and the fact you can't shoot some of them until you get bombs, or better guns is part of the design.   You don't like it, but that doesn't make it a bad design.

[Fri 19:34]<nectarsis> been wanting to try that one for awhile now Ope
[Fri 19:33]<Opethian> l;ol huge dong

I'm a max level Forum Warrior.  I'm immortal.
If you're not ready to defend your claims, don't post em.

crazydean

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1043
Re: Secret of Mana Remake
« Reply #38 on: August 30, 2017, 08:03:46 PM »
Did you guys know that early cars didn't have steering wheels? Also, they couldn't even go the current speed limit. Wow, what pieces of shit they were.
Arkhan: Im not butthurt by your enjoyment.  Im buttglad.

xelement5x

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3916
Re: Secret of Mana Remake
« Reply #39 on: August 31, 2017, 05:40:37 AM »
I was reading the responses in this thread for awhile but wow, I gave up a bit back.  I commend you both for the endurance to even write them. 
Gredler: spread her legs and push her down to make her more lively<br>***<br>majors: You used to be the great man, this icon we all looked up to and now your just a pico collecting 'tard...oh, how the mighty have fallen...<br>***<br>_joshuaTurbo: Sex, Lies, Rape and Arkhan. A TurboGrafx love story

MrBroadway

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2070
Re: Secret of Mana Remake
« Reply #40 on: August 31, 2017, 08:22:41 AM »
I was reading the responses in this thread for awhile but wow, I gave up a bit back.  I commend you both for the endurance to even write them.
I can't even figure out where it stopped even being about SoM...

Gredler

  • Guest
Re: Secret of Mana Remake
« Reply #41 on: August 31, 2017, 08:35:48 AM »
Yeah the wall of text here would take longer to read than playing through FFA FFS

seieienbu

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1979
Re: Secret of Mana Remake
« Reply #42 on: August 31, 2017, 10:57:23 AM »
I loved SoM back when it came out.  I have very fond memories of staying up all night playing it with a couple of my friends.  The Summer after 6th grade in particular, I remember after beating it we would start over again.  We played it through about 4 times that Summer.  One save we got to 99th level, ground all the spells to 8:99, and got the extra orbs so we had max weapons as well. 

I played through Secret of Mana again with my girlfriend about a year ago and it was kind of a slog to get through.  The fighting just doesn't work terribly well.  If you compare the combat from SoM to, say Oath in Felghana then SoM just feels boring.  I'm hoping that the new port makes the combat more entertaining and up to date. 

I like that the artwork is reminiscent of the original designs.  That said, it looks cheap and like a game that should've come out more than a decade ago.  I wouldn't exactly expect it to look like a multi million AAA title but I wish it didn't look so much like a game from two console generations ago.  I just hope they don't f*ck up with the new music.  From the little that you can hear in the trailer it seems that aspect sounds good so far. 

I also hope that I can turn spoken dialogue off and just read text :lol:
Current want list:  Bomberman 93

Arkhan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14142
  • Fuck Elmer.
    • Incessant Negativity Software
Re: Secret of Mana Remake
« Reply #43 on: August 31, 2017, 04:35:16 PM »
The music is what worries me the  most.

SOM has a f*cking amazing soundtrack.   It's probably the best Mana soundtrack.   The percussion, melodies, and ambient shit is all good.

SD3 had stupid music.   It had that reverbtunnel crap.   

[Fri 19:34]<nectarsis> been wanting to try that one for awhile now Ope
[Fri 19:33]<Opethian> l;ol huge dong

I'm a max level Forum Warrior.  I'm immortal.
If you're not ready to defend your claims, don't post em.

Gredler

  • Guest
Re: Secret of Mana Remake
« Reply #44 on: September 05, 2017, 11:09:10 AM »
Impressions of the Demo playable at PAX West are not great. "Cheap" is a word I am hearing a lot