Google+

91 comments

  • BladedFalcon - May 1, 2012 7:08 p.m.

    Weird, I had the impression that here at GR you guys hated most beat them ups from back then? I could even swear Turtles in time was featured in such an article in which they called beat them ups overrated. Anyway, cool list, made me smile that you had Infamous 2 in there. It might not feature any comic superhero, but Cole's story and romp definitely fits the tone, and it's quite fitting to be here.
  • Redeater - May 1, 2012 7:43 p.m.

    I get the feeling that they are unnecessarily cynical about a lot of things. I actually watched them live stream the Simpsons arcade game and I wasn't even sure that they said one positive thing about it. Kind of ironic since they had damned near a whole podcast where they talked about the Southpark where everything turns to shit for Stan because he got older.
  • BladedFalcon - May 1, 2012 7:57 p.m.

    Didn't watch the stream of them playing that simpsons game, but they talked about it in the podcast after it. And a good portion of them actually enjoyed it, it seems. Though they claimed it was mostly for nostalgic reasons *shrugs* Well, whatever, I guess I shouldn't complain since TMNT: Turtles in Time is in this list after all. Hypocrisy or not, it's getting the credit it deserves.
  • GR HollanderCooper - May 1, 2012 8:19 p.m.

    They are often remembered with a level of nostalgia that's unfair, but that doesn't mean they're bad - just that many of them are ;)
  • BladedFalcon - May 1, 2012 8:33 p.m.

    Fair enough. I mean, I can understand that a lot of those beat them ups were lazy and didn't really put effort into mixing things up or actually requiring skill. But again, I am sure there was an article here in which they but all the 2D beat them up of old in a single entry, saying they were nowhere as good as we thought they were. Which again, it's an unfair generalization if at least a couple of them were. Also, I'd like to point out that I played such a game not too long ago: Streets of rage 2. I had never touched the game or the series before, so i wasn't blinded by nostalgia, and yet I thought it was pretty top notch. (Music, presentation, how every character plays pretty damn differently.) I know I've already made my point clear, but I just wanted to put in a solid example XD
  • gilgamesh310 - May 2, 2012 11:23 a.m.

    You know games like God of War and Devil May Cry aren't all that different to the like of Streets of Rage and Golden Axe. I was playing Golden Axe the other night and I realised that all God of War really is is this game with much better graphics and a slightly better story. There has been very little evolution in the genre at all.
  • BladedFalcon - May 2, 2012 11:56 a.m.

    Er... Yeah, and I'm guessing the entire combo system, weapon and move variety and dodging doesn't count at all to make GoW and DMC any different from 2D beat them ups *rolls eyes* Even if you argue that the different moves and weapon variety aren't that much of a difference. There is a simple element that makes the gameplay and feel be so much different: Space management. Due to the normally slow movement of 2D beat them ups, space accommodation is less important than it is to simply hit first before your opponent. The entire basis for combat in games like GoW and DMC revolves about always keeping good space between your enemies and yourself via dodging and aerial maneuvers. Not to mention that in these games, enemy patterns and variety differ far more greatly.
  • gilgamesh310 - May 3, 2012 10:20 a.m.

    Most combos in God of War go redundant. Most of the time is spent mashing the attack button, just like in Golden Axe. You use the odd magic spell now and again and intersperse light attacks with the odd heavy attack in both games. DMC has more depth but it isn't all that much different really. You are right about the space management but you do still need to manouever around enemies a lot in Streets of Rage and especially Golden Axe. There are dragons and a range of different enemies in Golden Axe that require you to be in the relevant spaces at the right time. The spaces are smaller, that's all but the gameplay is fundamentally the same. Im not saying these games are better than God of War or DMC, just that there hasn't been much actual evolution since then. What I would like to see is games of their type where the AI of the enemies is much better than it is now and for the challenge to actually lie in studying their movements before carefully timing your strikes. The enemies would take less hits to kill and there would be less of them, the challenge would be in actually stricking them in the first place. Not just whittling down their health bars for ages by mashing the attack button.
  • BladedFalcon - May 3, 2012 11:09 a.m.

    I can agree in that sense. But I'd like to mention that the genius of DmC's combat system, is that it encourages you to actively switch up your combos and attacks in order to raise your combat gauge high enough, which IS important to get more points for abilities. Bayonetta also has a such similar system, though it didn't slow the bar down if you repeated combos. I still think the entire feel of the movement and combat in games like GoW and DMC is pretty different even if it's the basic principle of beat the shit out of an enemy while keeping the others at bay. it feels more fast paced, and even if not necesary, these games DO allow you to make far flashier, baddass string of combos that just simply weren't possible to pull off in games like Golden Axe. Your idea of how the combat could improve is a good one. Though I also think that another good approach could be an evolution of the combo system in DmC: Make the game so to forces you to constantly switch your attacks and tactics if you want to defeat enemies, not just rack up points. Punish players that spam the single same combo over and over again. Make it so enemies can break away and evade or counter an attack chain if a redundant pattern appears. The problem with both yours and my idea though, it's that it probably will never happen. Since both things would ratchet up the difficulty significantly... And as it is people and reviewers alike already bitch that games like DMC and bayonetta are "Too hard". Bunch of pussies, I know, but what are you gonna do. *shrugs*
  • gilgamesh310 - May 3, 2012 1:21 p.m.

    I like the combat in DMC and Bayonetta but I do think they get a little rote as the game goes on. I think minimalism is the best route to take. Rather than having a game that features loads and loads of combos you shouldn't have much moves besides light attack and heavy attack, and perhaps counter. I would want the weapons my character carries to feel like proper tools of death, where each swipe of it decimates an enemy. I hated how in Dante's Inferno he carried a sythe with a blade bigger than some of the enemies he fought, yet each time it connected with the enemy, only a small fraction of their health gets depleted and no visible damage is present. I want enemies to be torn apart when this happens. Most people wouldn't accept a shooter where each enemy takes 50 bullets to kill, so why accept equally silly carry on in a beat em up? Dark Souls and The Witcher 2 probably have the most interesting combat aound lately. It's very slow paced in Dark Souls but I like how you have to actually block as much as you attack and neither you or most of your enemies take that many actual hits to beat. There is no combos present but there is no need. It works fine without them. I love the fluidity of The Witcher 2's combat and I like how you can't button bash either. You need to time your strikes carefully as to hit them, as well as using secondary weapons. The combat is far from perfect in that though. The lock on is hopeless and there is a lag in your movement sometimes, but it is a step in the right direction. If a game could combine the type of gameplay in those games while making each weapon do significant damage to the enemy and feature enemies with better AI, we could be on to a winner. You are right though that the retard demographic mightn't appreciate these games, as they would pose too much 'challenge'. Maybe the devs should just pump out more games like Ninja Gaiden 3 instead ;)
  • BladedFalcon - May 3, 2012 5:57 p.m.

    I never played Witcher 2, but I played Demon and Dark Souls, and I really agree with what you mean there. I mean, yes, it's kind slow paced, but it SHOULD be so you can think what your next attack is going to be. Note how this is a game in which people harp about it being sadistically hard yet... Really, once you get accustomed to the combat, it becomes an always challenging, but far more satisfying game, since enemies DO vary in their attack patterns and the way you approach them. I'd say there's still quite a big appeal of a game that lets you make outrageous combos and strong chains of hits and killed enemies, which in my opinion makes the combat feel stylish and pretty fast paced. And the way to keep it fresh even in later levels, is just to give you better enemy variety, and incentives to be even more creative in your combos. I'll always find an appeal there, and that's why I'm so much looking forward to Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance. It's all outrageous, awesome looking, over the top stylistic combat, and being made by the same guys that created Bayonetta, i have high hopes that it will up the ante in the genre, or at the very least keep the quality of Bayonneta and combining the awesome set pieces from Vanquish. Still, I get what you're suggesting, and frankly, i wouldn't mind at all if we got more action games that adopted the combat style of Dark Souls, or something that encourages less hits, but that makes each one of them count. Also, if you ask me, the combat featured in batman: Arhkam City, is another very different style, that it's still incredibly deep and fun, though that one relies on mob fighting, otherwise, one on one encounters aren't very challenging.
  • gilgamesh310 - May 3, 2012 7:56 p.m.

    Im looking forward to MGR:R a lot too. The story will more than likely be complete shut but the action should be fairly great nonetheless. I like the combat in the Batman games but it isn't very deep and not particularly challenging either. One on one encounterd couldn't really work with it. It's perfectly fgine being in the Batman games, as it does make you feel like him but there isn't much need for it to feature in other games.The same applies to the stealth. It makes you feel like a predator but is too easy at the same time. I hate how the new Hitman game will feature the eagle vision nonsense.
  • BladedFalcon - May 3, 2012 9:03 p.m.

    Yeah, one shouldn't really expect anything from MGR:R's story. Specially because,frankly, that's the one aspect Platinum constantly fails at. But the gameplay and over the top awesomeness should definitely deliver. As for the combat in the batman games, I'd just like to recommend to you, if you can, to play the challenge rooms in Arkham City. I agree that in the main game (Specially playing the first time and in normal.) The combat doesn't feel particularly deep or challenging. But the challenge rooms made me realize how it's actually a pretty nuanced, deep system once the game demands more from you, and requires you to chain 30X combos in order to effectively complete them. Simply beating enemies in the campaign isn't very hard, yes, but learning and feeling motivated to try and avoid getting hit, not Spam the evade button, and actually keep the flow of the combo is one of the most seamless, gratifying experiences I've had in a combat system. (And for me, the depth of the combat comes when the challenge rooms pits you against a mob that has all the different weapons the enemies can use: In order to create a good combo, you NEED to set priorities, and plan ahead of time which enemies are a greater threat, with the ones using riot shield and electric batons being the highest threats, and the ones whose weapons should be broken instead of using instant take-downs on them, and you always have to keep an eye on enemies using blades, because the parrying is different, and if you try to evade normally, you're gonna get boned.) So, once again, to me, the combat system in Arkham city is like the one in DMC. If you focus on playing it as the dev clearly intended and encourages you to use it, it can be immensely satisfying. the only problem is that due to lowered standards, they have to make the core combat manageable for those too wimpy to actually try and master the combat and not just button mash.
  • gilgamesh310 - May 6, 2012 11:20 a.m.

    I have spent a bit of time with the challenges in Arkham City alright. The combat really gets a chance to shine their alright. It would be nice to see a full game with that kind of combat. The later Assassin's Creed game have the same type of combat. It's not as fluid though. Uncharted 3 borrowed the same ttype of combat too. It was easily the best thing about that game, regardless of what some reviewers say.
  • BladedFalcon - May 6, 2012 9:50 p.m.

    Yeah, thought to me, neither in AC nor in U3 gets even clsoe to the fluidity and complexity that it reaches in Arkham City's challenge rooms. I definitely would like to see a game that fleshed this kind of combat system even more, and made it vital to master it in order to get the most out of the game. The upcoming Sleeping Dogs seems to take the formula, and add some cool novelties like environmental kills and actually stealing and using weapons. But the game being a mash-up of a lot of gameplay types, I'm sure it will be a jack of all trades, but master of none. Hopefully it will still be fun, even if it doesn't push the envelope.
  • gilgamesh310 - May 7, 2012 6:06 a.m.

    The animus challenges in AC Brotherhood allowed the combat to show its true depth, but during the actual game itself you rarely ever get the chance to fully utilise it. I can't say Im interested in Sleeping Dogs. Like you said, it will almost definitely be a jack of all trades, master of none.
  • GR_HenryGilbert - May 1, 2012 9:24 p.m.

    I think it's more the opposite. Some of my best memories of games as a kid involve arcade beat em ups. I try to be fair and not let nostalgia take over when judging those games as an adult. Just by their nature those games are a little shallow. They were made to eat quarters, so they don't often stand the test of time. I'll forever remember TMNT, X-Men, Spider-Man, all that. But that doesn't mean they're always objectively great.
  • andrewt0904 - May 1, 2012 6:50 p.m.

    The Death and Return of Superman for SNES was a great superhero game before free roam became a standard and it is the only good superman game
  • PBC13 - May 1, 2012 6:22 p.m.

    I think X-Men Origins Wolverine deserves a mention. I had a lot of fun playing that game.
  • GR HollanderCooper - May 1, 2012 8:16 p.m.

    It was close, but it didn't make the cut because the second half of the game stunk.
  • GR_HenryGilbert - May 1, 2012 9:27 p.m.

    I pushed hard for it, but cooler heads prevailed
  • GR HollanderCooper - May 2, 2012 4:08 p.m.

    You're a cool head.

Showing 61-80 of 91 comments

Join the Discussion
Add a comment (HTML tags are not allowed.)
Characters remaining: 5000

OR…

Connect with Facebook

Log in using Facebook to share comments, games, status update and other activity easily with your Facebook feed.