Air Zombie Meat said:I think the difference is that one involves throwing yourself to your death
Or walking through thorny vines(yes I do realize that you can buy hints from cranky).
Air Zombie Meat said:I think the difference is that one involves throwing yourself to your death
Air Zombie Meat said:I think the difference is that one involves throwing yourself to your death (which is counter intuitive) and the other doesn't.
Soloist said:Or walking through thorny vines(yes I do realize that you can buy hints from cranky).
What a great thread this has been. :lolEmCeeGramr said:
The difference for me is that the secrets in the NES Mario games aren't required to be collected for 100% completion, so I can skip stuff I don't want to bother with without having that nagging feeling that I'm going to have to resort to a boring scavenger hunt later in order to truly clear the whole game. In Mario 3, the secrets themselves are the reward and make the experience inherently better, like some kind of rare power-up. In Mario World, stuff like lock & keys and secret goals don't add anything by themselves; they're just an unlock method for the real content, and you often have to retread some ground you've already traversed once to find them. I really don't care for that at all.GoutPatrol said:How is that any more random than hitting a random hidden block in Mario? You could play a level one hundred times before noticing it, and all it does it give you some coins.
This was an issue in DKC1, not 2. Any secret in DKC2 was hinted at in some way, including the bramble ones mentioned.goldenenergy said:Exactly, thank you. To find secrets in Mario, you are never required to take an action which can result in only a) finding the secret or b) dying.
Mr. Pointy said:DKC1 is not that great. There's hit detection problems, cheap bits, crap platforming crap animation, etc. I still like it, but it's not as good as it's cracked up to be.
DKC2 is fucking near perfect. It is part the holy trinity of SNES platforming (Yoshi's Island, Super Mario World and this). I'd say it's the Holy Ghost.
Fuzzy said:This thread has made me buy DKC2 on VC and I started playing it today for the first time ever.
Considering it's worldwide critical acclaim, no. Calling it "downright awful" when critics all over have scored it so great means something is wrong here. I chose my words carefully when I said that.jarosh said:i'm sure you wouldn't call it attention whoring if the op was a dkc love fest with twice as much text, am i right or am i right?
Okay, so your problems seem to lie with the level design here. This will be all about the game design and nothing else.i must have somehow blocked out how vile, repititive, arbitrary and amateurish the level design truly was...
there is not a semblance of logic or coherence to the level and world design; the stages all seem to consist of a basic template over which obstacles and enemies are randomly placed,
See the speedrunning comments that people above me made, they explain in probably the easiest way for most people on why they are hardly random. If you want to know about it in level designing terms, going from point A to B in places force you to make use of the obstacles and enemies (sometime even combining this with the speedrunning (see the first level where you have to be quick to get up the trees by jumping on the enemy before he walks down and eventually get the green balloon)over which obstacles and enemies are randomly placed,
Unless I misunderstand you here and you mean to say the changes in terrain during the world changes, to which I only have to reply that you only need to look at 80% of the other platformers. If you still dont like it fine, mega man is also guilty of this (yes, I know you admitted you are biased to this series but that does not give you a free pass).while the changes to the (boring) terrain remain superficial and mostly cosmetic.
I'm sure the rats can replace the flying enemies right?most of the enemies are seemingly interchangable dummies, designed, animated and rendered without potential use or location in mind:
Refer to my comment about the random placement of enemies and the kremlin that walks down the ledge. (again Im just using references of the first world as I am not going to go through the whole game just to give you more examples, one should suffice as your arguments pose that these things apply to EVERYTHING in the game).without potential use or location in mind:
Yeah, because that is how level designing goes. This argument is mostly about platformers (and to a lesser extent about video games) in general (especially of that time) and again mega man"let's have a bunch of snakes randomly fall from the ceiling here, over here we'll have a kremling without a jumping animation bounce around, next up are 20 bees moving along increasingly random paths at varying speeds. same for the next level. actually, those bees are getting boring, just replace them with spikey wheels, no one will notice."
that rigidness and the mechanical and unnatural placement and use of enemies and obstacles are at odds with and stand in stark contrast to the otherwise organic (if dated) looking visuals and the terrain
there is also rarely a real sense of progression as you run and jump through the various levels; not much thought was put into the actual pacing within the levels themselves. often there is no real build-up or change of pace, no increasing feel or sign of reaching the end of a level. many levels just kind of trickle away or end just like they started, instead of culminating in a climax or deliberately winding down.
and then there's the boring and creatively bankrupt bosses, two of which are recycled later on. a big barrel spitting out a bunch of enemies? that has to be the creative low-point in boss design in rare's development history. and that stupid bird head? twice! once with a palette swap! same with the beaver boss, which itself was already just a bigger render of the beaver level enemies.
Either you like your hyperbole or you don't know when to use adjectives. Either way, both ways don't really have a place in good discussion. Extremely imprecise collision would imply that the game would be barely playable, and consisting of all the opinions people have about the game I can safely say this is a flat out lie.most of the "challenge" in dkc derives from the extremely imprecise collision detection, the many "leaps of faith" you're forced to make thanks to the wonky, wobbly, dizziness-inducing camera with a mind of its own.
This is the part that gets me the most, and I would actually be willing to list literally everything that proves it so, so wrong. Really? How much did you play the game? (and again, the mega man comment, tho admittedly to a much lesser extent here)the designers also seemed to think that an increasing difficulty curve simply meant: same levels, more enemies. instead of making changes to the terrain and introducing more complex and interesting platforming challenges, later on you get the same basic layouts with a higher enemy count.
Trial and error gameplay designing is normal and gamers have accepted it as so.rare also apparently didn't understand the importance of properly introducing and explaining new game mechanics, obstacles or gimmicks. often you are expected to die or fail before you finally understand how certain things work and at what point enemies pop up or get in your way unexpectedly.
this is the complete opposite of the mario/nintendo/valve school of design, in which new gimmicks and important mechanics are introduced in a subtle, non-threatening manner that teaches the player how to respond to them or how they work without undeserved punishment.
Over this part I would actually like to have a different discussion with people but nonetheless I feel that you are wrong here with DKC.this leads to an experience that, despite not being overly difficult, still often feels frustrating. it's the kind of game that punishes you for not anticipating its nonsensical design quirks and its tendency to throw you into situations that require guesswork. i'd get annoyed frequently because i'd feel like my deaths were the game's fault and not my own.
Teetris said:I dont know if you are a level designer by trade (which would make your comments both more understandable (but your ability to actually explain them pretty damn bad)) but you are deliberately ruining the fun of playing video games for yourself. And it that truly is the case I feel very sorry for you (and everyone else that is like this).
Okay, no prob. That was a misjudge on my part, the talk at the time was about overanalazing which is why I assumed a bunch of things. But like the same quote says, he needed to word it a lot better in order for it to turn into a good discussionlevious said:I assumed he wasn't having fun, and then analyzed why.
even if 7 billion people loved the living shit out of donkey kong country, it still doesn't mean that one single person is not allowed to hate it and voice a dissenting opinion.Teetris said:Considering it's worldwide critical acclaim, no. Calling it "downright awful" when critics all over have scored it so great means something is wrong here. I chose my words carefully when I said that.
hyuck hyuckMaffis said:I can really see the OP playing DKC.
"Why are there spinning barrels here? In a jungle? And why are there bees spinning in a circle over here? WHAT THE HELL IS THIS SHIT IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE!"
Nairume said:Donkey Kong Land
:lol :lol :lol :lol :lol YES! At least someone else is still tormented by this. I seriously remember NOTHING of that game except that level. I have to look at that game, I don't even remember if I ever actually beat it.AzureJericho said:*Remembers getting this and being so hyped because at that time in his life, DK > Mario*
*Remembers how awesome the GB sound chip limitations made some songs have really cool renditions and nods*
*Remembers scrambling to find the KONG letters since for some fucked up reason, you could only save by collecting them and finishing the level and cringes*
*Remembers that one fucking level with the clouds on rails and all the fucking bees and convulse---- ASHIJ[IOMR0I5GJ';[PGM5[-0GNNG30';.M,L5P
Nairume said:This thread got me to go back and play all three games, as well as their Gameboy incarnations. I'll forever fondly remember the DKC I played as a kid, but I can't really afford that to the game I'm playing right now. As I've gone back and played the countless platformers that came before and after it (including its own sequel!), all the things wrong with it have become increasingly difficult to ignore. That said, it is still an enjoyable game.
Donkey Kong Land, on the other hand, is an amazing piece of shit and is probably the most deserving of the title's ire. It does everything you said that DKC does poorly and magnifies it to unbearable levels. It also doesn't help that the other two Land games were almost perfect recreations of their console counterparts, while this game feels like a cheap knock-off.
Meh, 2 and 3 were just remixes of their console counterparts, at least the first was its own game.Zaraki_Kenpachi said::lol :lol :lol :lol :lol YES! At least someone else is still tormented by this. I seriously remember NOTHING of that game except that level. I have to look at that game, I don't even remember if I ever actually beat it.
And what exactly was the point of only saving by collecting kong? Was it a limitation of the gameboy? I remember beating that level only to die without kong making it all pointless. Now that's a game with terrible design.
Pretty much, the DKL games were awesome except for the first one. I bought a gameboy just to play DKL2.
randomkid said:Haha, Segata and Aeana may be gone
ICallItFutile said:Sorry to derail, but what happened to Aeana? I know Segata got pissed and left.
You'd think that would have been the case, but then DKL2 and 3 just did the save points like the console versions did.Zaraki_Kenpachi said:And what exactly was the point of only saving by collecting kong? Was it a limitation of the gameboy?
To this day, DKL2 is probably one of my favorite GB games, edged out maybe by DK'94.Pretty much, the DKL games were awesome except for the first one. I bought a gameboy just to play DKL2.
I'd much rather have an amazingly solid portable conversion than a shitty attempt at an original game.flak57 said:Meh, 2 and 3 were just remixes of their console counterparts, at least the first was its own game.
Disappointment in 3....2.....1.......The Aussie ROFL COPTER said:. and i have yet to play dkc 3. OMG I CANT WAIT1111111111111
BreakyBoy said:From what I understand, she felt frustrated and alienated by the inability to have a discussion without fanwarz or accusations of trolling, and the rise in misogyny or something like that.
Can't say I blame her.