I play retro games cause they're fun, not because I want to be kooky or weird.

Hell, anyone on a forum dedicated to a 17 year old shoot 'em saying retro style games need to die is being a little weird ;) 

Except not at all. 

Except with modern engines / textures / effects / mapping quality Quake looks about 12 years old and those fucking 240 x 160 resolution side-scrolling bollox look about 32 years old. 

and boring. but that's just me not liking platformers. because they're boring. 

That's just like you're opinion man!! 

 

I couldn't care less about retro-for-retro's sake but it looks like a solid classic platformer. 

The saving system sucks nuns' ass.
The unavoidable scripted scenes rape your scrotum like an underage bitch.

But damn, I loved it.


And Shambler's right. All the way. 

I know right? Totally shaves your big toe like a randomized butter bean. 

And those boss fights! Talk about etching poetry on the side of a plaintive accusation! 

??????

Am I missing something? 

Maybe. I was pointing out, in my own way, how little sense shit like this makes:

"The saving system sucks nuns' ass.

The unavoidable scripted scenes rape your scrotum like an underage bitch. " 

...but I see things along those lines all the time on english speaking forums. So I thought I'd give it a spin.

I'm sure you got what I meant, though... 

I think we're in agreement. Let's table this for now and move to the next action item on the agenda... 

Batman: Arkham Asylum: great, 9/10. I guess everyones already played this anyway.

Star Wars: The Force Unleashed II: 6.5/10. Combat can be fun, everything else is dog shit. Lucasarts should be ashamed.

Metro 2033: 8.5/10. Most dark-atmospheric game I've played, great.

Castlevania: Lords of Shadow: 7.5/10. Great looking levels, good combat, but some real annoying shit like fixed cameras, invisible walls, platforming/puzzles and terrible movement/keboard lag. Probably would have been 8.5/10 without that stuff. Might be 8/10 on consoles since that's really what it's designed for.

Looks like Tron Evolution is next on my list, which is really gonna suck, then Bioshock 2. 

As best as I remember, Batman pretty much sucked due to its stupid control scheme. It was probably fine for those playing on consoles or with a controller, but terrible for mouse and keyboard. I only paid like $4 for it, so I didn't feel that bad about deleting it.

I thought Metro 2033 was very good. Some parts (like the ending) were a bit weak, but overall it was fun to play.

I was watching a play through of the new Wolfenstein on youtube and I doubt those people will be getting much of my money. Maybe when it's under $10 on Steam. At least it's not a 3rd person game. 

Yes, use a controller for Batman.

And yes, the Batman games are fucking EXCELLENT. 

I thought the controls played just fine once you got used to them.

And yes, the Batman games are fucking EXCELLENT. 

The problem was that many "moves" required pressing a button in addition to a direction and couldn't be remapped to a single key press.

This is probably fine on a controller where you have a bunch of buttons in a small area which are easily found by feel. It didn't work so well for me on a regular keyboard when I also had to use one hand to aim with the mouse.

I gave it a fair try, but eventually just gave up since, some "boss" fights were nearly impossible. Without the "boss" fights it would have been doable, but then without them there's not much there.

"Boss" fights are a game mechanic that should have been left in the 90s anyway. Unfortunately it seems that "cut scenes" are becoming the new thing. 

Reading [Kona]'s review of Castlevania made me think of what frustrated me so much in Prince of Persia - Sands of Time. I don't understand why character movement has to be relative to camera position. It would make more sense that character movement is referenced to the player model's torso (right, left, forward, back, etc.) That way you can maintain precise movement which is so important in these movement focused games and even if the camera is whipping around, you still know that the prince will move to his left and not the camera's left when you hit the move-left key. Simple eh? Mathematically, it should be easy to program this.

Just my beef. Without the camera fighting the player as they attempt a tricky move to avoid instant death, these types of games would become a lot more fun and fun sells. 

["Boss" fights are a game mechanic that should have been left in the 90s]

dafuq? 

I played this game a while back called "Dishonored". I thought it was pretty good. I think it may have won a couple of awards. I don't recall any "boss" fights. So it appears it can be done.

There is also Deus Ex: Human Revolution, while it did have a few "boss" fights, it had this awesome "boss" fight ender weapon called the Typhoon. Two or three shots and the annoying "boss" fight was over and done with and you could get on with playing the game. 

Yeah Batman wasn't too bad, but Prince of Persia and Castlevania - those are two games whose controls did not translate to PC at all well. POP just has too many keys for the left hand to press at once, which is okay on a controller with much smaller buttons. 

I have played all the PoP games and the 2 of the Batman ones on PC, number of times I got frustrated with controls wasnt too bad. Number of times I got frustrated with crappy camera was much more. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDtjOV4hFWk

http://www.gog.com/

It's a Portalike.