How hard do you like games to be?
- Thread starter edd_jedi
- Start date
- Replies 39
- Views 730
@Nobby_UK
I cannot agree with you.
I believe that the option to save wherever you like (actually to keep pressing the quicksave button after a jump or a kill) somehow spoils the gaming experience for me.
Checkpoints are the best approach.
Older games needed to be replayed so as to master them.
ok, beast 1 & 2 where a torture.
But Agony or Beast 3 or Leander were very pleasant to replay them.
I cannot agree with you.
I believe that the option to save wherever you like (actually to keep pressing the quicksave button after a jump or a kill) somehow spoils the gaming experience for me.
Checkpoints are the best approach.
Older games needed to be replayed so as to master them.
ok, beast 1 & 2 where a torture.
But Agony or Beast 3 or Leander were very pleasant to replay them.
I remember my mate who played Shadow of the beast on Atari STE and it took him 2 years to finished it(because he got stuck some levels) and all he got was Crap Ending 
I remember my mate who played Shadow of the beast on Atari STE and it took him 2 years to finished it(because he got stuck some levels) and all he got was Crap Ending
That ending was SOOOO lame:double
if you think shadow of the beast is hard,try walker
I have never played Walker to be honest.It is even more difficult than beast?:nuts:
if you think shadow of the beast is hard,try walker
I have never played Walker to be honest.It is even more difficult than beast?:nuts:
ive beat the game,it is very hard.
Bad endings after a really long game are so disappointing. In a way I don't mind when it goes to rolling credits as it feels like you have finished a film, but when it just says congratulations you have finished the game and returns to the options menu that really is disappointing.
Regarding save points vs quick save, I think it depends on the game. However, it is really annoying if you have limited time and need to stop playing but can't because you can't save the game where you currently are.
I liked the original Tomb Raider approach where you collected save gems and could use them at any point, but it limited the number of times you could save.
Regarding save points vs quick save, I think it depends on the game. However, it is really annoying if you have limited time and need to stop playing but can't because you can't save the game where you currently are.
I liked the original Tomb Raider approach where you collected save gems and could use them at any point, but it limited the number of times you could save.
I was just thinking of this specific game. I remember they have changed it in the sequels, but not to the better.
On the other hand, where's the fun in a game where you have to spend ages mashing the joypad with exactly the right timing to achieve a goal? If freesaving spoils your game, maybe it was a bad game in the first place.
It may be so, i dont disagree.
Therefore, something in between "free save everywhere" and "no save at all" is the definite best approach.
edd_jedi
Active member
There are definitely some games I wouldn't have played all the way through without the ability to "save anywhere" that emulators offer. Super Empire Strikes Back on the SNES is one of them. Mainly because there is one single level where you have the opportunity to pick up power-ups that you need to complete the game (Dagobah) and if you miss them, you're basically screwed and have to start again. Infuriating.
Mrs Fitz get's pretty angry when she's playing a point and click Game, after getting 3/4 through the game get's stuck only to realise that she needed to do something earlier in the game that wasn't done and now she's stuck and can't go back thus having to restart the whole game!
edd_jedi
Active member
Yeah that's similar to ESB I mention above, IMO that's a really bad way to make a game.
SpiritDave
New member
I'm stuck on the train....
It does depend on the game though. Quake 2, Half-Life 2 and similar FPSers works well with a free save system, but for others it reduces the point of level design.
I do like it when a game saves just before a difficult section, or an imminent encounter. The Final Fantasy games are good at this, and the fact you reach a save point heightens the tension as you know something is about to happen.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD
I do like it when a game saves just before a difficult section, or an imminent encounter. The Final Fantasy games are good at this, and the fact you reach a save point heightens the tension as you know something is about to happen.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD
I agree wholeheartedly with this. Some games work better with it, others not. Can you imagine something like saving mid race on F1 or having it on something like Ninja Gaiden? Save points at the right spots heightens the experience. Other games it works for, like Elder Scrolls... Can you imagine having to track down a save point in that before you could stop playing every time? lol.
Final Fantasy, the earlier ones at least, are good in that they do let you save anywhere, but only while you're on world map. If you're in a town or mid mission, you have to wait for a save point.
All part of good game design.
The Hardest games?
Thunderforce 4
Magician Lord Neo Geo AES
I cant think of anymore
Thunderforce 4
Magician Lord Neo Geo AES
I cant think of anymore
protek
"Takai desu ne." -"Jinsei da."
Hate to admit but the easiest setting usually. Although I enjoy playing video games, I've never been very good at them. There's not many games that I've actually completed in my lifetime.
I really like the rewind feature in the latest Forza Motorsport games. You don't have to start the whole race from the start, when you screw up. Instead, you can instantly correct your mistake and learn from it.
I really like the rewind feature in the latest Forza Motorsport games. You don't have to start the whole race from the start, when you screw up. Instead, you can instantly correct your mistake and learn from it.
Similar threads
