Ned Flanders
Banned
Well, do it.
Fucker.
Fucker.
Compare Maximo: Ghosts to Glory with Maximo vs Army of Zin..
- Thread starter Ned Flanders
- Start date
Mega Man's Electric Sheep
Member
UM...
GTG is more of a platformer.
AOZ is easier.
That's it really. I like them both, but they are hardly the type of games that inspire detailed conversation. They're just both good games.
GTG is more of a platformer.
AOZ is easier.
That's it really. I like them both, but they are hardly the type of games that inspire detailed conversation. They're just both good games.
Ned Flanders
Banned
Thanks. And I didn't mean it when I called you a fucker.
Honestly.
Honestly.
Mega Man's Electric Sheep
Member
That's ok. 
To go into more detail: AOZ places more emphasis on combat, with combos and such, whereas fighting enemies in GTG is more like fighting enemies in a platformer.
GTG is closer to a reimagining of Ghouls and Ghosts, and AOZ is more like a beat em up/platformer hybrid.
That's pretty much all I've got. Played and enjoyed both of these, and liked them just as much as Sony's big platform guns.
To go into more detail: AOZ places more emphasis on combat, with combos and such, whereas fighting enemies in GTG is more like fighting enemies in a platformer.
GTG is closer to a reimagining of Ghouls and Ghosts, and AOZ is more like a beat em up/platformer hybrid.
That's pretty much all I've got. Played and enjoyed both of these, and liked them just as much as Sony's big platform guns.
TheUnknownForce
Member
I think the best change in AOZ was the save feature. You can now save in the game map and don't need any money to buy a save. Still not as bad as the RE Ink Ribbons, but it was pretty close.
AoZ also has tighter level scripting, -much- improved boss fights, greater variety in enemy design, and no lamebrain hub worlds. The combat has been beefed up to allow juggling and multi-slash opportunities.
AoZ also loses the GtG belt ring power-up system in favor of more 'permanent' combat upgrade solutions(even underwear types offer unique abilities), the challenge is less rigid due to an overhauled save structure, and it certainly isn't the longest game out there.
Nevertheless 9 times out of 10 I'd wholeheartedly recommend AoZ ahead of it's predecessor.
AoZ also loses the GtG belt ring power-up system in favor of more 'permanent' combat upgrade solutions(even underwear types offer unique abilities), the challenge is less rigid due to an overhauled save structure, and it certainly isn't the longest game out there.
Nevertheless 9 times out of 10 I'd wholeheartedly recommend AoZ ahead of it's predecessor.
It's definetely worth it. But the first one is hard like Army of Zin on hard mode.
And you have to manage everything more and mostly your money because you BUY your saves. But the game is extremely well balanced and the levels are even more diverse than Army of Zin.
You also lose the power-ups you collected when you die. You have to "lock" the one you want to keep if you die but you never can lock everything. That's another thing you had to manage.
Personnally, i prefered the style of the first for all that "managing". The game was a little harder and was rewarding good players. Everygame should be made like that but gamers are wussies and wish for unlimited/anytime saving and they also wish to lose nothing when they actually lose so they scrapped a part of the gameplay in order to give gamers that in Army of Zin.
Army of Zin had the chance to end up being an incredible game and thanks for the hard mode!! Mastering this game was great fun
And you have to manage everything more and mostly your money because you BUY your saves. But the game is extremely well balanced and the levels are even more diverse than Army of Zin.
You also lose the power-ups you collected when you die. You have to "lock" the one you want to keep if you die but you never can lock everything. That's another thing you had to manage.
Personnally, i prefered the style of the first for all that "managing". The game was a little harder and was rewarding good players. Everygame should be made like that but gamers are wussies and wish for unlimited/anytime saving and they also wish to lose nothing when they actually lose so they scrapped a part of the gameplay in order to give gamers that in Army of Zin.
Army of Zin had the chance to end up being an incredible game and thanks for the hard mode!! Mastering this game was great fun
AoZ is the most friendly and polished game, so most prefear it.
Still GtG was a more intense experience for me.
GtG combat is more "technical", you can't just use Generic_Attack_Move_025 to fight, but must carefully pick the correct one and proper timing for each enemy.
The sword bounces of walls pulling you off balance, gets stuck in trees; to use the shield you must precisely face the attacking enemy.
AoZ gets rid of those rules, becoming more friendly but also more generic.
Let's button smashing pass more easily. Someone will like the greater feeling of being kicking butt, but to me feels at times a little less rewarding than the more precise attacks required in GtG.
Powerups are also more satisfing in GtG, in part cause are harder to attain, and due combat being more challenging, making every trickle of power you gain more determinant.
On the other hand AoZ introduced the cool combo system, secondary characters you occasionally have to fight along or protect.
Level design is remarkable in both games for adhering to the old school of thought: A Challenge Every Step.
Doesn't attempt to create a world, which would often results in lots of backtracking and dull areas, but a well disguised and packed obstacle course to maximize the fun.
Challenge was toned down a bit too much in AoZ.
Especially at the end, the most powerful earthquake skills can clear waves of enemyes in one or two hits, while the energy regenerating boxers will let you abuse the move, maybe alternating it with Death summons - similiarly cheap once their duration is maxed. Death was more fun when it only offered a couple seconds of invincibility, than when clears areas for you.
GtG went overboard in the opposite direction with the nightmarish save system though, thankfully removed in the sequel.
Still GtG was a more intense experience for me.
GtG combat is more "technical", you can't just use Generic_Attack_Move_025 to fight, but must carefully pick the correct one and proper timing for each enemy.
The sword bounces of walls pulling you off balance, gets stuck in trees; to use the shield you must precisely face the attacking enemy.
AoZ gets rid of those rules, becoming more friendly but also more generic.
Let's button smashing pass more easily. Someone will like the greater feeling of being kicking butt, but to me feels at times a little less rewarding than the more precise attacks required in GtG.
Powerups are also more satisfing in GtG, in part cause are harder to attain, and due combat being more challenging, making every trickle of power you gain more determinant.
On the other hand AoZ introduced the cool combo system, secondary characters you occasionally have to fight along or protect.
Level design is remarkable in both games for adhering to the old school of thought: A Challenge Every Step.
Doesn't attempt to create a world, which would often results in lots of backtracking and dull areas, but a well disguised and packed obstacle course to maximize the fun.
Challenge was toned down a bit too much in AoZ.
Especially at the end, the most powerful earthquake skills can clear waves of enemyes in one or two hits, while the energy regenerating boxers will let you abuse the move, maybe alternating it with Death summons - similiarly cheap once their duration is maxed. Death was more fun when it only offered a couple seconds of invincibility, than when clears areas for you.
GtG went overboard in the opposite direction with the nightmarish save system though, thankfully removed in the sequel.
Similar threads
- Poll