Support NeoGAF

[Crayon]

I've been watching these videos for the last few months. I caught just a couple at first, but after he tipped me off on Wanted: Dead (obsessed with it), I started digging into more of his videos.

Trying to describe it, I would say it's like having someone to deeply converse with about games. A conversation that goes deeper and down rabbit holes. This someone is pretty stubborn about action games being the end-all. Even up his ass about it. But it's an earnest, enriching conversation.

Videos are on the longer side. Usually 30 minutes or more. Visuals are often relevant but you can get by without them.

Check it out.

 

[NeverYouMind]

I've been watching these videos for the last few months. I caught just a couple at first, but after he tipped me off on Wanted: Dead (obsessed with it), I started digging into more of his videos.

Trying to describe it, I would say it's like having someone to have a long conversation with about games that goes deeper and even down some rabbit holes. This someone is pretty stubborn about action games being the end-all. Even up his ass about it. But it's an earnest, enriching conversation.

Videos are on the longer side. Usually 30 minutes or more. Visuals are often relevant but you can get by without them.

Check it out.

He succinctly outlines some issues I have found with modern game designs in ongoing franchises. At the same time his tastes do not align with mine a lot of the time and his praises for or issues with certain releases fall on deaf ears.

 

[SupaComputa]

Really like this channel, the concept of gameplay density is something I feel more and more, I just turn games off when it's just fluff. With a few exceptions, I've been into more arcade game genre like shmups, fighters and (none-low progression) roguelites.

 

[TintoConCasera]

Very interesting stuff, thanks OP.

 

[Danjin44]

I also enjoy video game design videos....my favourite is from Design Doc.

 

[linko9]

Love his videos, especially as a big shmup fan. Lots of people get hung up on his narrow views of what kind of games he likes, but if you don't listen to critics purely to validate your own opinions and tastes, that's not a problem.

There are plenty of times I have a different take from his, but more often he'll be the only person with a dissenting opinion on a game where I'm in total agreement with him. Stellar Blade is a recent one. It's just not a very good game, and he clearly walks through the reasons why in a way that I didn't see anyone else discussing.

 

[RedC]

He's one of the best game reviewers.

 

[Crayon]

Love his videos, especially as a big shmup fan. Lots of people get hung up on his narrow views of what kind of games he likes, but if you don't listen to critics purely to validate your own opinions and tastes, that's not a problem.

There are plenty of times I have a different take from his, but more often he'll be the only person with a dissenting opinion on a game where I'm in total agreement with him. Stellar Blade is a recent one. It's just not a very good game, and he clearly walks through the reasons why in a way that I didn't see anyone else discussing.

I fully understand his arguments about stellar but it's a case where he's got a blind spot. The problem he cites with the combat is intentional and not because it's better in some way. I've got the sense that shift up knows their limits and hinges the gameplay around something shallower, manageable for them. It wouldn't carry a pure action game but stellar is far from a pure action game. Its far better than most western stuff anyway. Its like he's reviewing a steak but only cares about the bone.

Regardless, fucking great video as usual with some prying into the combat and does show why it would not carry a pure action game or even a soulslike.

 

[Hypereides]

Someone should send the first vid to AAA devs, such as Druckmann, and tell them to watch it to completion. It would probably melt their minds. It breaks everything people like them believe in and strive for. For the record, I enjoyed TLOU and its worldbuilding for what it was, but it didn't have some profoundly deep game design.

I hope somewhere deep down inside, all this focus on engagement numbers and "smart game design" as such is just to make it sound more appealing to the people in suits.

 

[Sunraku]

Mark is one of the greats. His channel single handed made me rethink the way i play and start to appreciate games on a deeper level

 

[John Bilbo]

He has opened a new perspective to game design for me. I love his takes as he takes his time to walk me through the thought process.

Also he introduced me to the genre of shmups and one of the best - or maybe The Best - from the genre, Zero Ranger.

 

[SkylineRKR]

This guy is fairly good. He also broke down Stellar Blade from a combat mechanics standpoint and he really wasn't wrong about that part. The game is all flash, with almost no damage being done by regular combos. Like FFXVI you're bound to using and waiting for meters to actually hit.

Shadow of the Ninja was one of the best games I played last year. You need to commit to its moves, and animations need to be finished. Its a bit like Revenge of Shinobi. At first it feels sluggish but its a masterful game that simply requires your execution and spacing to be on point.

 

[Crayon]

New one. I strongly agree with the idea that action games need their options constrained. (Lol and he just said "constrained" while I was typing.) That's what it is, though. Developers don't have the balls to put limits on you.

Anyway, this is exactly what I was afraid of with this game when I saw the trailer.

 

[Forth]

Great videos and very insightful.

 

[John Bilbo]

New one. I strongly agree with the idea that action games need need their options constrained. Lol and he just said "constrained" while I was typing. That's what it is, though. Developers don't have the balls to put limits on you.

Anyway, this is exactly what I was afraid of with this game when I saw the trailer.

There's several interesting ideas he has there. Makes me want to play the original nes trilogy and also the new shadow of the ninja

 

[ungalo]

I also really like his content, it has become so rare to actually listen to something that gives you food for thought. Everything in the video game space is just mindless.

 

[Giallo Corsa]

Once again, the guy makes some good points but I just find him to be insufferable due to the preaching and "I know better" shit.

No one likes being lectured and he he comes off as a hipster®
I mean, OF COURSE he had to criticize something like Ragebound, and no, the 2D Ninja Gaidens of yore are not "good" by today's standards, the knockback from enemies it was frustrating then and it's even more frustrating now, there's no good design involved there - be it from "restrictions" or game making know-how, most games back in the day were in fact, bad.
Bad controls, terrible knockback mechanics, hitboxes existing exclusively on the X axis and other shit weren't and are still not "good game design", we just didn't know nor have anything better back in the day - just like when people say "I used to play ocarina of time at 18fps and I was happy" when talking about framerate in today's games.

 

[Crayon]

Once again, the guy makes some good points but I just find him to be insufferable due to the preaching and "I know better" shit.

No one likes being lectured and he he comes off as a hipster®
I mean, OF COURSE he had to criticize something like Ragebound, and no, the 2D Ninja Gaidens of yore are not "good" by today's standards, the knockback from enemies it was frustrating then and it's even more frustrating now, there's no good design involved there - be it from "restrictions" or game making know-how, most games back in the day were in fact, bad.
Bad controls, terrible knockback mechanics, hitboxes existing exclusively on the X axis and other shit weren't and are still not "good game design", we just didn't know nor have anything better back in the day - just like when people say "I used to play ocarina of time at 18fps and I was happy" when talking about framerate in today's games.

Why do you think he of course had to criticize something like rage bound? Because it's newer or more inviting?

----

Anyone have thoughts on the new Shinobi? I had the same bad feeling about it. Less from any gameplay impression I could get from trailers and more from the smell of memberberries. I ain't tryna play a game about how we liked Shinobi. :/ 90% cynicism triggered by dusting off these old brands. Maybe it's actually good though?

 

[Madonis]

New one. I strongly agree with the idea that action games need need their options constrained. Lol and he just said "constrained" while I was typing. That's what it is, though. Developers don't have the balls to put limits on you.

Anyway, this is exactly what I was afraid of with this game when I saw the trailer.

I hadn't seen such a nonsensical use of the word "compulsive" in many years. Nobody is forcing you to play the game, nor are they forcing you to choose how to play it.

Man, I don't think giving players more movement options and freedom to pick the specific level of challenge is a bad thing. Different gamers want different things. Also...I'm sorry, but dying a dozen times to an infinitely re-spawning bird isn't great design. For me, that was one of the flaws in the original games, not a virtue. Furthermore, I also don't have infinite free time for perfect memorization. I can admire speedrunners and other folks who memorize every last detail and exploit every single obscure glitch, but that isn't me.

If I want to challenge myself and the game allows me to do so, then great. I can aim for a better rank and increase the difficulty from time to time. But what if I don't want to do that during every single run? Give me a break. I'm old enough to have played the original NES games as a kid. That doesn't make me dislike Ninja Gaiden Ragebound for not being a rehash.

Quite the opposite. I think the developers accomplished their actual goal here. There's a difference between making a new modern 2D sequel to Ninja Gaiden, which is precisely what NG Ragebound aimed for, and making something as equally difficult as the NES games or with exactly the same limitations. Personally, I'm glad that a new game released in the year 2025 isn't pretending that game design has seen no evolution in decades. Unless you just want to create a NES Ninja Gaiden clone with a different coat of paint, there has to be a lot of room for including decisions that go beyond the original scope of the NES trilogy.

I can agree that limitations are useful in terms of encouraging skill improvement, but I disagree with the idea that NES-era design should always be mandatory or that rote memorization is the best way to accomplish this. No, there are alternatives. Why shouldn't the developers of Ragebound let players choose how much or how little to engage with the systems? This isn't supposed to be school work nor (at least not for 90% of players) a profession. It's a hobby.

For that matter, we should know the real history of the series. The original Japanese version of NES Ninja Gaiden 3 was significantly easier than than 1 and 2. They made the U.S. release artificially harder back in the day, purely for the sake of extending rentals. In other words, the implication that sequels can or should only get harder is incredibly misleading. Castlevania: Symphony of the Night is, in the end, not a very difficult game and yet most people would still agree that it's a great one, not hating it because Castlevania III was much harder.

I'll give Electric Underground credit for a good presentation of his arguments. I just don't think they're all that convincing in this case. Maybe I'll watch his other videos, maybe I won't.

 

[ungalo]

Once again, the guy makes some good points but I just find him to be insufferable due to the preaching and "I know better" shit.

No one likes being lectured and he he comes off as a hipster®
I mean, OF COURSE he had to criticize something like Ragebound, and no, the 2D Ninja Gaidens of yore are not "good" by today's standards, the knockback from enemies it was frustrating then and it's even more frustrating now, there's no good design involved there - be it from "restrictions" or game making know-how, most games back in the day were in fact, bad.
Bad controls, terrible knockback mechanics, hitboxes existing exclusively on the X axis and other shit weren't and are still not "good game design", we just didn't know nor have anything better back in the day - just like when people say "I used to play ocarina of time at 18fps and I was happy" when talking about framerate in today's games.

Depends if the today's standards are frustrating = bad, satisfying on first try = good. If the equation of game-design is as deep as a puddle yes it's probably been solved already. Not talking about the second part of your post here, because i think it's straying from the topic.

Honestly it's not so much about pure intelligence or raw talent on the part of the devs but more about the global philosophy. Nobody's pretending the devs of the first Ninja Gaiden were some genius with 200 IQ and the new ones are incapable. I personally respect more (and that doesn't just apply to games in a way) things that don't cater to the general crowd too much because i think it's usually the lowest standards, i do think that's why our medium has become stale (which is something more and more people are getting aligned with, but they don't seem to grasp the real cause).

 

[Arsic]

New one. I strongly agree with the idea that action games need need their options constrained. Lol and he just said "constrained" while I was typing. That's what it is, though. Developers don't have the balls to put limits on you.

Anyway, this is exactly what I was afraid of with this game when I saw the trailer.

I bailed out on the game at chapter 4. It's all style no substance.

I knew he'd hate it too lol.

At least The Messenger knows what it wants to be and does it well. This studio peaked IMO with Blasphemous 1.

This isn't necessarily a "bad" game, but it isn't one id recommend.

 

[Angry_Megalodon]

Many of the things of the old era were NOT design choices but hardware limitations. That's why it's dumb to compare the two. If given the choice, many devs would have gone in a different direction.

 

[Crayon]

Depends if the today's standards are frustrating = bad, satisfying on first try = good. If the equation of game-design is as deep as a puddle yes it's probably been solved already. Not talking about the second part of your post here, because i think it's straying from the topic.

Honestly it's not so much about pure intelligence or raw talent on the part of the devs but more about the global philosophy. Nobody's pretending the devs of the first Ninja Gaiden were some genius with 200 IQ and the new ones are incapable. I personally respect more (and that doesn't just apply to games in a way) things that don't cater to the general crowd too much because i think it's usually the lowest standards, i do think that's why our medium has become stale (which is something more and more people are getting aligned with, but they don't seem to grasp the real cause).

Instant gratification is more instant than ever. Seems a lot of people want even a good game to be over so they can get to the next good game. It sort of makes sense, because there are more good games than ever. But it makes a disdain for some qualities. Mark on the channel mentions "progress" and that's a perfect example: a game that is wiling to roll back progress is widely considered a flat-out Bad Thing. Maybe it really is a global philosophy like you say.

I also wonder if the proliferation of multiplayer games has selected away the people who are willing to deal with frustration, memorization, repetition. Maybe appreciation of that migrated over the the mp side and that leaves relatively few sp gamers who want those things.

 

[Arsic]

Many of the things of the old era were NOT design choices but hardware limitations. That's why it's dumb to compare the two. If given the choice, many devs would have gone in a different direction.

The thing is you sometimes capture lightning in a bottle. Then you have to be able to look at that product/game and go"what was it people liked? How do we give them that again? How can we onboard more people to the franchise?"

It doesn't matter if the hardware is how you lucked out into a winning formula. It matters you can keep that formula and make it better or at least as good.

The issue is when people go too deep into the "how can we onboard more people" mindset and lose sight of what made it special.

Elden Ring is a perfect example of how to do this. It's the most advanced Dark Souls game, and retained its difficulty while elevating the formula. It also added magic summons etc to help worse players come into the genre and enjoy it without ruining it for the formula that was winning for OGs. All without having to make an "easy mode."

That's not what happened here unfortunately.

 

[John Bilbo]

I think back the day of NES developers and gamers both had the arcade gaming mentality.

Nowadays almost no developer has arcade mentality and even fewer gamers have that mentality.

It is rare for a gamer nowadays to understand how it is different for the player to develop skills playing a game as opposed to the character they are playing to gain levels.

 

[Madonis]

The thing is you sometimes capture lightning in a bottle. Then you have to be able to look at that product/game and go"what was it people liked? How do we give them that again? How can we onboard more people to the franchise?"

It doesn't matter if the hardware is how you lucked out into a winning formula. It matters you can keep that formula and make it better or at least as good.

The issue is when people go too deep into the "how can we onboard more people" mindset and lose sight of what made it special.

Elden Ring is a perfect example of how to do this. It's the most advanced Dark Souls game, and retained its difficulty while elevating the formula. It also added magic summons etc to help worse players come into the genre and enjoy it without ruining it for the formula that was winning for OGs. All without having to make an "easy mode."

That's not what happened here unfortunately.

Except that there is no such thing as universal critical (or popular) agreement about what is the "winning" formula when it comes to creating modern sequels to retro games...especially since, as a matter of historical fact, retro game sequels have themselves not been consistently devoted to their originals in terms of their own progression of systems and gameplay.

Naturally, Dark Souls isn't a retro game, so the development process is more about replicating that gameplay model because it's already been commercial successful in this era. They're still very much derivatives or clones of Dark Souls, except with more bells and whistles in a way, but I digress.

It's a totally different approach when you have to analyze a much older game series and then discuss what aspects you wish to preserve and what you wish to change, many decades later, in a global market with a vastly larger audience in mind. Hell, you could argue that had already started to happen to various properties when games made the jump from NES to SNES and Genesis back in the day, or from either of those platforms to the PlayStation and Saturn as well. It's never been a case of exclusively iterating on the same idea over and over. Not to mention that the NES itself had a bunch of weirdly experimental sequels, such as Zelda 2, Mario 2 and Simon's Quest, among others.

Even Shinobi: Act of Vengeance is extremely different from the Sega Genesis titles in its gameplay, rather than trying to copy that sort of experience down to the last pixel.

In a few words...I'm pretty happy with Ragebound being essentially Super Ninja Gaiden or Neo Ninja Gaiden, rather than Ninja Gaiden 1.5 or Ninja Gaiden 2.5.

 

[Crayon]

Many of the things of the old era were NOT design choices but hardware limitations. That's why it's dumb to compare the two. If given the choice, many devs would have gone in a different direction.

They were design choices based around hardware limitations. But foremost they were design choices because the limitations were widely known. We're actually really lucky for the lessons and examples of those times. Those games wouldn't have been made the same way without those limitations, but it would also be pretty hard for demons souls to have been made had someone not understood those lessons from the past.

Same goes for quarter-eating design. It's interesting that those design principles were made around the need to kill a player just enough to get them to pay again. But that's academic. Even without the need to farm quarters, those principles still have value and are at least worth examining if not heeding.

 

[Arsic]

Except that there is no such thing as universal critical (or popular) agreement about what is the "winning" formula when it comes to creating modern sequels to retro games...especially since, as a matter of historical fact, retro game sequels have themselves not been consistently devoted to their originals in terms of their own progression of systems and gameplay.

Naturally, Dark Souls clearly isn't a retro game, so the process is more about replicating that gameplay model because it's already been commercial successful in this era.

It's a totally different approach when you have to analyze a much older game series and then discuss what aspects you wish to preserve and what you wish to change, many decades later, in a different market with a vastly different audience in mind. Hell, you could argue that had already started to happen to various properties when games made the jump from NES to SNES and Genesis back in the day, or from either of those to the PlayStation and Saturn as well. It's rarely been a case of simply iterating on the same idea over and over.

Even Shinobi: Act of Vengeance is extremely different from the Sega Genesis titles, rather than trying to copy that sort of experience down to the last pixel.

Ultimately it goes back to another one of his videos talking about friction in games.

There isn't much or any friction in Ragebound. The original games had it. You can upgrade the jump recovery or slash while running, but does this game still on its base run through create any friction for the player to feel rewarded? From what I played? No. You can argue for the bosses maybe but they are piss easy in the grand scheme of things.

Spacing and movement made sense in OG ninja gaiden and it remained that way in the first 3D NG as well. Here it isn't because you're just whacking attack non stop while moving.

You can do the air recovery to simply not have as much knock back or only allow the player to fall a little left or right so if they are near an edge to save themselves. There's a compromise for the player experience but retaining some level of difficulty from a decision a player made. Jumping like a mindless fuck slashing, getting hit and not caring because you have jump recovery tools and air juggling yourself, just means you're never taking a risk.

 

[Madonis]

Ultimately it goes back to another one of his videos talking about friction in games.

There isn't much or any friction in Ragebound. The original games had it. You can upgrade the jump recovery or slash while running, but does this game still on its base run through create any friction for the player to feel rewarded? From what I played? No. You can argue for the bosses maybe but they are piss easy in the grand scheme of things.

Spacing and movement made sense in OG ninja gaiden and it remained that way in the first 3D NG as well. Here it isn't because you're just whacking attack non stop while moving.

You can do the air recovery to simply not have as much knock back or only allow the player to fall a little left or right so if they are near an edge to save themselves. There's a compromise for the player experience but retaining some level of difficulty from a decision a player made. Jumping like a mindless fuck slashing, getting hit and not caring because you have jump recovery tools and air juggling yourself, just means you're never taking a risk.

a) I've still experienced plenty of friction in Ragebound just as it is, upon dying to the bosses as well as occasionally failing elsewhere in the levels. I know some folks will die a lot less because they're simply better at games, which is wonderful, but I don't think all new releases should be made exclusively for that select, higher skilled audience.

b) I can choose to increase the degree of friction by equipping talismans or picking Hard Mode, or aiming to beat all the challenges during a given run. If I don't feel like it, then I will not do any of that, but the game has given me a choice in the matter, which I can appreciate. Apparently that option means "taking it away" from hardcore players, which is kind of silly.

Going by the logic presented in this video...he'd automatically like the game better if Hard Mode were the standard, all the difficulty increasing talismans were on by default, and if they had either removed the guillotine boost or nerfed the jumping. Which, at that point, means he'd rather design a significantly different game in the first place. Fair, but ultimately pointless.

Despite my negativity towards this review, I wouldn't mind if they tweaked enemy patterns and added new modes in patches. I just don't think it's a remotely bad game right now.

 

[Crayon]

You guys are going to make me buy the game just to get in on this lol. If only it were that easy. I'd have to play it a bunch too. And I have to work this weekend...

 

[Arsic]

a) I've still experienced plenty of friction in Ragebound just as it is, upon dying to the bosses as well as occasionally failing elsewhere in the levels. I know some folks will die a lot less because they're simply better at games, which is wonderful, but I don't think all new releases should be made exclusively for that select, higher skilled audience.

b) I can choose to increase the degree of friction by equipping talismans or picking Hard Mode, or aiming to beat all the challenges during a given run. If I don't feel like it, then I will not do any of that, but the game has given me a choice in the matter, which I can appreciate. Apparently that option means "taking it away" from hardcore players, which is kind of silly.

Going by the logic presented in this video...he'd automatically like the game better if Hard Mode were the standard, all the difficulty increasing talismans were on by default, and if they had either removed the guillotine boost or nerfed the jumping. Which, at that point, means he'd rather design a significantly different game in the first place. Fair, but ultimately pointless.

Despite my negativity towards this review, I wouldn't mind if they tweaked enemy patterns and added new modes in patches. I just don't think it's a remotely bad game right now.

Point B is the crux of whats worth discussing.

Myself and other autistic fucks are fine with the base experience being hard, but then offering easier options. This game does the inverse, and for some reason my brain cannot compute. Me having to add the layers of difficulty for whatever reason makes me think the game developer is requiring me to do their job for them.

It's one of my key issues with doom the dark ages, and even its new update. It's all in the players hands to use sliders to design the game to fit what they want for slowmo, parry timing, etc. I'm over here of the mind "no fuck you. Do YOUR job as the dev to make the game right not give me tools to fix your shit for you."

It's not to the degree dark ages does it here, but same slippery slope. Adding easy modes, more lives, etc = fine and I've been conditioned this is the way. But making a game easy mode from the jump then tell me to tweak it just irks me.

I am a retard.

 

[John Bilbo]

Point B is the crux of whats worth discussing.

Myself and other autistic fucks are fine with the base experience being hard, but then offering easier options. This game does the inverse, and for some reason my brain cannot compute. Me having to add the layers of difficulty for whatever reason makes me think the game developer is requiring me to do their job for them.

It's one of my key issues with doom the dark ages, and even its new update. It's all in the players hands to use sliders to design the game to fit what they want for slowmo, parry timing, etc. I'm over here of the mind "no fuck you. Do YOUR job as the dev to make the game right not give me tools to fix your shit for you."

It's not to the degree dark ages does it here, but same slippery slope. Adding easy modes, more lives, etc = fine and I've been conditioned this is the way. But making a game easy mode from the jump then tell me to tweak it just irks me.

I am a retard.

If all the sliders and amulets and stuff all resulted in a higher score it would give the player the incentive to play on a high as possible difficulty.

 

[Crayon]

I don't think the approach to difficulty here sounds so bad at all. That's a reasonable approach. One of the points in the video about players naturally wanting to negate difficulty does apply but I don't think the effect has to be catastrophic. He even points out things that would have made the same system better like more consequential differences in the harder runs.

But in general, letting the player use items to up the difficulty with a good way for the game to respond to that sounds like a decent idea to me.

Might not have been a great choice for this game, though. As soon as you go and revive an ip like this, I'm going to be pretty critical. Skeptical, even.

 

[Arsic]

It's in the OP, but if you want to see an argument for "well if you don't like ragebound, then what is a good game?"

 

[Madonis]

If all the sliders and amulets and stuff all resulted in a higher score it would give the player the incentive to play on a high as possible difficulty.

Which is more or less what already happens here. You get better grades, even beyond the nominal S rank, for succeeding under those conditions.

 

[Crayon]

need help

So I made this thread to share this channel with you and also help it get view and show the world that this type of content is valued.

But I made an incredible boring thread title. I didn't put too much thought into it and it's not fun or interesting at all. I'd like to think I'm more clever than that but here we are.

Now that I've found more viewers here, what do you guys think would be a good OT title if this was renamed as an OT? I'd rather all your ideas should be fielded.

 

[bender]

need help

So I made this thread to share this channel with you and also help it get view and show the world that this type of content is valued.

But I made an incredible boring thread title. I didn't put too much thought into it and it's not fun or interesting at all. I'd like to think I'm more clever than that but here we are.

Now that I've found more viewers here, what do you guys think would be a good OT title if this was renamed as an OT? I'd rather all your ideas should be fielded.

Electric Underground on Youtube: Stellar Blade Fans Am Cry

 

[Crayon]

Electric Underground on Youtube: Stellar Blade Fans Am Cry

I was thinking something about glorifying gatekeeping.

C'mon, you're funny. Do it for me.

 

[RedC]

need help

So I made this thread to share this channel with you and also help it get view and show the world that this type of content is valued.

But I made an incredible boring thread title. I didn't put too much thought into it and it's not fun or interesting at all. I'd like to think I'm more clever than that but here we are.

Now that I've found more viewers here, what do you guys think would be a good OT title if this was renamed as an OT? I'd rather all your ideas should be fielded.

Deep-Dive Design: Electric Underground's Action & Arcade Philosophy

Electric Underground | Constrained Options, Unconstrained Opinions

 

[Omnipunctual Godot]

Really surprised he hasn't done a review of Earthion yet.

 

[bender]

Really surprised he hasn't done a review of Earthion yet.

He only uploads once a week. I'm sure it is coming.

 

[Danny Dudekisser]

Once again, the guy makes some good points but I just find him to be insufferable due to the preaching and "I know better" shit.

No one likes being lectured and he he comes off as a hipster®
I mean, OF COURSE he had to criticize something like Ragebound, and no, the 2D Ninja Gaidens of yore are not "good" by today's standards, the knockback from enemies it was frustrating then and it's even more frustrating now, there's no good design involved there - be it from "restrictions" or game making know-how, most games back in the day were in fact, bad.
Bad controls, terrible knockback mechanics, hitboxes existing exclusively on the X axis and other shit weren't and are still not "good game design", we just didn't know nor have anything better back in the day - just like when people say "I used to play ocarina of time at 18fps and I was happy" when talking about framerate in today's games.

Pretty much. He has a stubborn refusal to consider a game on its own merits. He doesn't want to talk about what Ragebound is, he wants to talk about what Ragebound isn't even attempting to be, and then dunk on it for daring to do something different. His whole shtick is hyper-analyzing a single mechanic and its implications on game design... which is interesting at some level, but ignores that there's more than one way to make a game satisfying. In the context of a review, it's an utterly laughable way to evaluate a game.

 

[Crayon]

Electric Underground on YT |OT|

- You can learn a lot from a snob.
- Gatekeepers Anonymous
- Obsessive Pondering on the virtues of Pure Action
- Deep as the Ocean, Narrow and a Teacup <---- actually I like this a lot. Now your idea has to overcome my bias. edit: oh I guess that would be "wide as a teacup"? Overthinking it now, which is the natural way of things.

John Bilbo I really like the importance of spacing a thought part.

 

[John Bilbo]

Brainwave Density - The Importance of Spacing a Thought

 

[Danny Dudekisser]

Electric Underground on YT |OT|

- You can learn a lot from a snob.
- Gatekeepers Anonymous
- Obsessive Pondering on the virtues of Pure Action
- Deep as the Ocean, Narrow and a Teacup <---- actually I like this a lot. Now your idea has to overcome my bias. edit: oh I guess that would be "wide as a teacup"? Overthinking it now, which is the natural way of things.

John Bilbo I really like the importance of spacing a thought part.

- I can smell my own farts and they're great!

 

[Crayon]

- I can smell my own farts and they're great!

No, you have to try to coin a term for why the farts are great.

 

[John Bilbo]

Which is more or less what already happens here. You get better grades, even beyond the nominal S rank, for succeeding under those conditions.

Well you are partially correct but not precise enough. Grading system can be adjacent to a scoring system but it is not the same thing.

A well designed scoring system has more calculations going on and I would argue a well designed scoring system allows the player to know enough about those calculations so the player can improve their score. A highscore list makes it easier for the player to keep tab on their current highest score.

A grading system such as in Ragebound has a limit to which different players can rise and once you've risen to the challenge there is no higher grade which try to attain.

 

[Madonis]

Well you are partially correct but not precise enough. Grading system can be adjacent to a scoring system but it is not the same thing.

A well designed scoring system has more calculations going on and I would argue a well designed scoring system allows the player to know enough about those calculations so the player can improve their score. A highscore list makes it easier for the player to keep tab on their current highest score.

A grading system such as in Ragebound has a limit to which different players can rise and once you've risen to the challenge there is no higher grade which try to attain.

Fair enough. I agree it's more about grading than scoring, and while it does provide a degree of transparency it's certainly not open-ended in the manner you've described.

Yes, you could assign numeric values to different mini-goals (number of enemies killed, combo counts, etc.) and that would encourage going further than just achieving the highest rank.

 

[SupaComputa]

Once again, the guy makes some good points but I just find him to be insufferable due to the preaching and "I know better" shit.

No one likes being lectured and he he comes off as a hipster®
I mean, OF COURSE he had to criticize something like Ragebound, and no, the 2D Ninja Gaidens of yore are not "good" by today's standards, the knockback from enemies it was frustrating then and it's even more frustrating now, there's no good design involved there - be it from "restrictions" or game making know-how, most games back in the day were in fact, bad.
Bad controls, terrible knockback mechanics, hitboxes existing exclusively on the X axis and other shit weren't and are still not "good game design", we just didn't know nor have anything better back in the day - just like when people say "I used to play ocarina of time at 18fps and I was happy" when talking about framerate in today's games.

This is a fair critique and I feel the same. I had a nostalgia retro phase in my early 20's playing stuff from my childhood nes-snes mostly and had a lot of fun. Late 30's now and I think I can have a more honest and realistic view of the limitations of those games. There are legitimate things that were better in the past, immediacy, focus of design, more variety in gameplay/music/controls/ideas.
At some point you also have to concede some things have improved as well.

 

[John Bilbo]

Fair enough. I agree it's more about grading than scoring, and while it does provide a degree of transparency it's certainly not open-ended in the manner you've described.

Yes, you could assign numeric values to different mini-goals (number of enemies killed, combo counts, etc.) and that would encourage going further than just achieving the highest rank.

I haven't finished Ragebound yet but I was psyched when I discovered the S++ rank on my own.

I think they should have let the player go crazy and just let you use all the talismans at the same time to get S+++++ rank or something.

There's lots of stuff they could have done besides the current grade system. And maybe they still might. Maybe they'll add an arcade mode which has also a highscore.

Edit: And I mean of course the "negative talismans" not the ones that buff the player.