• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Lazy Game Design 101?: The boss montage before the final encounter.

I'm sure I'll be able to come up with more given time, but right now Actraiser springs to mind. Astro Boy on the GBA has one too. I assume explicit 'boss rush' modes, distinct from the game, don't count for this?

Oh, yes, I seem to recall the DMC1 bosses putting in a reappearance - er, other than their reappearances in their 'section' - in the finale of that game, too.

It feels kinda odd to say this, but I sort-of forgive Mega Man; partially because it was a fun idea at first, partially because it was wrapped in a nice concept (Dr W Teleport System?), and partly because they'd occasionally throw extra stuff in there (how about the ones where you
fight two of the bosses at once
? Or the ones where you'd unexpectedly
get a boss from one of the previous games
?)

I can't believe I'm spoilering *Mega Man*. Jeez.
 
Need For Speed: Carbon. First of all rediculous boss fights with the awful canyon races. Then you race them all again in their canyons with upgraded cars. THEN you race all of them at once. OVERKILL. Also total lack of achievements for defeating these bosses kills the want to finish the game.
 
The final dungeon in Link's Awakening has a bunch of minibosses from the other dungeons and no new ones. Come to think of it, the final boss is also a montage of the other bosses plus Aghanim.
 
Reilly said:
Does God Hand have a boss montage? I don't recall it having one.
Click to expand...
you do fight some of the bosses again in the last stage though
the gorilla for example only he now comes with a tiger mask
 
There IS a point to it (not that it's always the best idea, or always done well, but it does add something to the game).

It's a good mechanic to show how far the character has come and make players feel accomplished... All those bosses were so hard the first time, but now you can take on all of them in rapid succession easily. In theory. Some games the boss gauntlet is so challenging that players don't get that accomplished feeling at all.

I also look at it a bit like the curtain call. All the bosses come out for their final bow (and then you asplode them).
Click to expand...

it's also supposed to make the last stage feel more overwhelming, for basically the same reason (providing a reference point). I always thought it was cool, though I guess it could reasonably be called "lazy"...

Anyway, other examples include Final Fantasy (the 4 fiends in the temple) and Final Fantasy IV (the 4 fiends in the giant robot).
 
Attack You said:
I came in here just to shake my fist at Capcom as a whole for this. Now, if you want to start some shit, MAKE US FIGHT ALL PREVIOUS BOSSES AT THE SAME TIME.
Click to expand...

Tales of Rebirth makes you fight 4 of the main bosses at the same time.

And in the bonus dungeon, you fight all 4 of them, and a clone of each at the same time.
 
Teasel said:
you do fight some of the bosses again in the last stage though
the gorilla for example only he now comes with a tiger mask
Click to expand...


Oh, that's right. That wasn't that bad though.
 
Didn't you have to fight the Lich, Kary, Kraken, and Tiamat before fighting Chaos (who was actually also a previous boss- Garland) in Final Fantasy I and a similar setup in Final Fantasy IX (which was an homage to #1 anyway). That was the best reason to have a user of the EXIT spell ever.

edit: Doh! I watch a few minutes of the Simpsons and someone beats me to it. Kinda.
 
I don't mind a game that gives a "boss rush challenge" before the end. I think it's a nice cliché if well done and if it's a fun game.
 
Station42 said:
no answers, all i can think of are other questions to the discussion:
don't you think this could depends on the meaning of it's function? i mean, is the boss there because the game need some fresh air spaces to brake a repetitive gameplay? because it will give us different abilities after the fight to continue on the game? or because the gameplay need you to "boost lvl up"? maybe just because the storyline needs some really bad guy here and there? is a Metal Slug conceivable without end lvl bosses? a Metal Gear? a God of War? an RPG or the classic Zelda adventure?

are there cases of gameplay that deserve bosses? or is just, as sp0rsk sad, because "back then it was an original idea"? and now, we're still stuck on it?

a side from this, repetitive bosses just get me super, super bored, not talking when they become almost normal enemies in some games, right after the beaten lvl.
Click to expand...

Interesting argument.

I'd say that the "boss" is not simply there because it breaks up the gameplay. But rather it's a device to honor the player with two things. A sense of accomplishment and a moment of reflection. Obviously, the story has progressed like a book; New abilities, moves or powers have been introduced; and the break is required to allow the gamer enough time to absorb the game in segments. After all, it's easiest to put a book down after you finished a chapter. You may then reflect on the book as a whole or just the chapter you previously read. So, I guess it also promotes anticipation, speculation and an overall opinion on the game up to that point.

I'm going to have to think about this more. What do chapters and boss battles do to the end user throughout the gaming experience? Animal Crossing and Big Brain Academy request that the gamers play in small bursts. Could this be applied to a game like Viewtiful Joe? One level, one day. Would this even be accepted among gamers? I don't know. It's interesting though.
 
Boss fights are the worst part of any game, so a boss fight montage is obviously many times worse. Utterly inexcusable and should be punished by banishment from the industry.
 
I always liked the boss rush at the end of Megaman 2. By the time I got there it was a challenge to ration out my weapon energy. I can't wait for it to come out on VC. I'll have to play it again.
 
I find them acceptable if they're appropriate for the game. I prefer them to be hard as nails too a la VJ and not so much VJ2. God it felt good to finally tear apart Fire Leo.
 
Richelieu said:
Didn't you have to fight the Lich, Kary, Kraken, and Tiamat before fighting Chaos (who was actually also a previous boss- Garland) in Final Fantasy I and a similar setup in Final Fantasy IX (which was an homage to #1 anyway). That was the best reason to have a user of the EXIT spell ever.

edit: Doh! I watch a few minutes of the Simpsons and someone beats me to it. Kinda.
Click to expand...


The first time I played through FF1 on the NES, I got so fed up at the fact that by the time I fought the Kraken, the rest of my party would be dead that I focused on leveling up my fighter as much as possible. I had him on level 41 and the rest at 28. I beat Chaos and Tiamat with just him by himself.

To add to this, the Adventures of Batman and Robin has one of the most awful boss rushes in history. I absolutely HATE, HATE, HATE, HATE it in that game. **** all the developers who came up with that in the ass.
 
I really loved the dynamic in the X-Wing games where taking down something a capital ship would feel totally epic, taking up a whole campaign early on in the game, but by the last missions you'd be swatting them down like flies.
 
Scopebob Sniperpants said:
Interesting argument.

I'd say that the "boss" is not simply there because it breaks up the gameplay. But rather it's a device to honor the player with two things. A sense of accomplishment and a moment of reflection. Obviously, the story has progressed like a book; New abilities, moves or powers have been introduced; and the break is required to allow the gamer enough time to absorb the game in segments. After all, it's easiest to put a book down after you finished a chapter. You may then reflect on the book as a whole or just the chapter you previously read. So, I guess it also promotes anticipation, speculation and an overall opinion on the game up to that point.

I'm going to have to think about this more. What do chapters and boss battles do to the end user throughout the gaming experience? Animal Crossing and Big Brain Academy request that the gamers play in small bursts. Could this be applied to a game like Viewtiful Joe? One level, one day. Would this even be accepted among gamers? I don't know. It's interesting though.
Click to expand...

this is a good point, I think it's true, as you say, that chapters are important and bosses kind of rapresent the "closing" phase of each one...in this view they do play an important narrative role in the game, give a rhythm.

but sometimes, bosses also drive real sexual arausment...thinking of REZ bosses, well, an orgasmic esteticaudiodesign. :) bosses as hidden treasure of pure gaming.

(love REZ, any1 noticed? *__* )
 
pilonv1 said:
OMG YOU THIEF YOU STOLE THAT FROM ME!
And I stole it from someone I don't remember at another board. It's still awesome
Click to expand...
Actually, my fellow fiend, that's not the one I stole from you. The one I stole from you has the victim's screaming face, and rest assured, it will be used in due time. That gif is me old avatar, used approximately 57 times in the NiGHTS thread. :)
 
Scopebob Sniperpants said:
Interesting argument.

I'd say that the "boss" is not simply there because it breaks up the gameplay. But rather it's a device to honor the player with two things. A sense of accomplishment and a moment of reflection. Obviously, the story has progressed like a book; New abilities, moves or powers have been introduced; and the break is required to allow the gamer enough time to absorb the game in segments. After all, it's easiest to put a book down after you finished a chapter. You may then reflect on the book as a whole or just the chapter you previously read. So, I guess it also promotes anticipation, speculation and an overall opinion on the game up to that point.

I'm going to have to think about this more. What do chapters and boss battles do to the end user throughout the gaming experience? Animal Crossing and Big Brain Academy request that the gamers play in small bursts. Could this be applied to a game like Viewtiful Joe? One level, one day. Would this even be accepted among gamers? I don't know. It's interesting though.
Click to expand...

Nice discussion guys ;)
This touches game design right in, i love that!
While a game doesn't necessarily need a boss, those can greatly help the rhythm of the game. It's extremely important to have a nice rhythm while it's basically what keeps the player going.
Bosses are also interesting in the same manner chapters are as you say. I think it gives a sense of scale or global vision of where you are and what's left to do. (this bringing hype and also can reincourage the player late in the game). It's basically like when you're at beginning world 7 in Super Mario you can go "oh shiz, there's 2 worlds left".
Human thoughs are very organised and not many people would be able to live in a chaotic reality (at least regarding their thoughts). So those bosses and worlds and the levels -- it all translate into rhythm and it does ease our minds.
 
JzeroT1437 said:
The last boss fight in that game was completely luck-based. When I beat it, I think I had a single bar of health that you couldn't actually see due to crappy compression on my tiny tv. I remember throwing the controller down in angry joy.
Click to expand...
Err no, the last boss in Mega Man 2's pattern is extremely basic and easy to avoid. You sure you're not thinking of another game?
 
nincompoop said:
Err no, the last boss in Mega Man 2's pattern is extremely basic and easy to avoid. You sure you're not thinking of another game?
Click to expand...
Yeah, it was just a figure-eight pattern with shots fired at the upper and lower apex if I remember right. Easy peasy.
 
Video games should theoreticaly evolve into a more abstract form of storytelling. I hope this comment doesn't set a bunch of people off; but we are primarily playing childrens books right now (Please don't list a bunch of crazy games that have excellent storylines. There's clearly a difference between Battlestar Galactica and the Sopranos in terms of story/character complexity). As designers and writers become more proficient and experienced with this medium, will they be able to tell more compelling and deeply rich stories? Or will they be chained to this game mechanic due to gamers' depenence on the existing game formula?

[EDIT: And who am I talking to here? I think everyone jumped this thread. heh. Anyone feel free to msg me if they want to talk some about game design. I'm studying it at the moment for no particular reason.]
 
Boss montages are really helpful and good to have in some games.

Example: Devil May Cry 3. Having the choice of which boss to fight allows you to hone up your skills/strats on them so you can go back and SS-rank the earlier missions with said boss in it. I like that.

I think they should just have a "boss VS mode" like MGS3 has instead of making it a mission.
 
Super Mario RPG comes to mind...

I don't think there's anything inherently bad about boss gauntlets, but I have to echo the sentiment that Wind Waker's was weak. It certainly didn't help that it came right after the realization that
you wouldn't be able to explore the land of Hyrule
.
 
Scopebob Sniperpants said:
Video games should theoreticaly evolve into a more abstract form of storytelling. I hope this comment doesn't set a bunch of people off; but we are primarily playing childrens books right now (Please don't list a bunch of crazy games that have excellent storylines. There's clearly a difference between Battlestar Galactica and the Sopranos in terms of story/character complexity). As designers and writers become more proficient and experienced with this medium, will they be able to tell more compelling and deeply rich stories? Or will they be chained to this game mechanic due to gamers' depenence on the existing game formula?

[EDIT: And who am I talking to here? I think everyone jumped this thread. heh. Anyone feel free to msg me if they want to talk some about game design. I'm studying it at the moment for no particular reason.]
Click to expand...

Games aren't books and they aren't movies. As the medium evolves gamers and developers will outgrow the need to use stories, like a child learning to ride a bike outgrows the training wheels.
 
I usually like Boss Rushes before the end.

In most cases, I feel like it makes the build-up at the end more epic because you're reliving some of the more dramatic moments of the game that preceded. Also, usually the bosses are a lot easier because you're stronger in some way, and that feels pretty cool, I think, to handily defeat something that was challenging before.

There are definitely exceptions, though. Wind Waker stands out in my mind because being stronger really just means more health, so it doesn't do a great job of demonstrating how far you've come, etc.

Might be time for a new sort of boss rush, though. For example, a next-to-last boss that summons the other bosses and you have to fight both at the same time. I already really liked the dinotank boss in Bonk's Adventure, which had attacks that emulated all of the previous bosses...
 
BobJustBob said:
Games aren't books and they aren't movies. As the medium evolves gamers and developers will outgrow the need to use stories, like a child learning to ride a bike outgrows the training wheels.
Click to expand...

Early video games resembled boardgames more than movies or books. However, it absolutely has evolved from that point. Right now, video games tell a story as they progress, meaning they have a pre-determined path to take (although some devs play with this concept. There is almost entirely a "begining" and an "end".) The only way to depart from a book-like setup is to create an MMO or a sandbox-like game that has no overlaying story archs or goals for the gamer to accomplish. I'm sure that games are structured simililarly to books (and movies are structured like books.). I think your argument is saying that eventually games will be completely user driven in terms of content? Like Second Life? If that's what you mean, I'm not sure I can agree with that either.

Games are slowly evolving into a movie-like experience. The camera movements, video edits, production elements, voice-acting, plot-lines and ect ARE getting more complicated. Games are becoming movies. It's just a question of, are developers forced to write stories that fit this game formula [minion, minion, sub-boss, minion, minion, boss ] or take chances with storytelling and develop a new gameplay style that makes playing the STORY more compelling. Rather than making the gameplay first and throwing a mediocre story in to make sense of it.

Some games can accomplish both! God of War is pretty good, but it's realisticaly on par with any Vin Diesel movie (if you think about it.) However, Shadow of the Collosus is brilliantly done!; and I consider that game to be one of the first real signs of a game < movie progression. You can tell that Shadow of the Collosus started with a great story, and it evolved into a great game. And it shows. But does the evolution end there?
 
Attack You said:
I came in here just to shake my fist at Capcom as a whole for this. Now, if you want to start some shit, MAKE US FIGHT ALL PREVIOUS BOSSES AT THE SAME TIME.
Click to expand...

Devil May Cry 2 did it. That fight ****ing sucked, though.
 
I don't actually think it is too bad, UNLESS they repower all of them to match the progress you have made. I like to see the progress I have made in games, and being able to kill a long row of bosses in record time is just fun. I didn't mind it in Okami for this reason.
 
I like how they did it in twilight princess actually, you didn't actually fight the boss again, but went through a bunch of boss themes.
 
Brobzoid said:
mister op, I have never played the gauntlet the game, I never suggested it as part of your query - my credibility is dying D:
Click to expand...

Yeah, Gauntlet definitely should not be on that list... none of the Gauntlet games do this.

Hmm... did you have to re-fight all the bosses in the last stage of Kirby's Dream Land 1? I remember that it had four ministages in it, one for each of the first four levels, before you got to DeDeDe, and I think you had to refight the bosses, but it's been so long...
 
X-Men the 6 player arcade game with 3 screens... except the one in my arcade was 4 players max. I actually liked it at the time since comics were the thing back then, but it was obviously a method to suck more quarters from you. I'd just lay low and let all the dumb little kids use up their mutant powers while I landed a quick jab or two.
 
WTF Link's Awakening doesn't count! You don't actually fight the same bosses you fought throughout the game again it's a boss with 6 different forms, it's just that two of them happen to be references to ALTTP and the other 4 are distinct (Though 4 Swords GBA's last boss is eerily similar to the final boss's final form in LA!)

That being said, i like the way that ALTTP does it. Some of the bosses are reused and feel almost like normal enemies since you're so much stronger now, it makes you feel unstoppable when you decimate them in seconds! :D The "Mega Man Model" of boss montages however is now cliche, overused and, more often then not, feels like a chore.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Why are developers so lazy with dungeon design in RPGs these days?
Opinion  2
56
655
Hudo replied
What Game has the BEST BOSS FIGHTS this gen?
2
53
791
Seyken replied
  • Locked
DSP gets to the first boss in crimson desert and rage quits because apparently 'the game sucks'.
Drama  2
54
505
spons replied
Cities: Skylines 2 boss says they 'completely overestimated' the Unity engine's capabilities
Opinion Game Dev Platform 
4
232
ContrarianAsshole replied
Game Pass adds Disco Elysium: The Final Cut, Resident Evil 7: Biohazard, Final Fantasy IV,
News 
5
189
Darsxx82 replied
Top Bottom