-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Super Meat Boy |OT|
- Thread starter Salsa
- Start date
Nope. Still sucks. Gonna need more than just fixing. Gonna need a complete rewrite.
LoftyTheMetroid
Member
The difference, I think, is that SMB treats execution as the end, rather than the means. I'm not quite sure how to communicate this accurately, but it's like every facet of SMB seems designed to facilitate skill and performance challenge as the ultimate goal.
You mention platformers like Mario, but I think the difference is that those games treat execution as a means to enjoying and exploring the underlying designs and ideas rather than an end in itself. Difficulty is utilized only insomuch as it allows the player to better appreciate the design, as opposed to a core feature and reason for playing. It's the difference in design approach between, say, Super Mario Bros. 2 (Japan) and Super Mario Bros. 3.
Perhaps to better illustrate my point, consider the following: Would Super Meat Boy be as well-regarded if it was easy? As opposed to other highly-rated platformers, Super Meat Boy is synonymous with its challenge and difficulty and would lose a lot without it. The high skill threshold is intrinsic to the game's design and philosophy. Meanwhile, I doubt the difficulty of Galaxy factored into people's high opinion of it since its beauty lies in other aspects of its design. Both games have impeccable "design", and yet it seems like that one word shouldn't be used to describe such completely different concepts.
I really hope these aren't directed at me. Do I need to quote my own posts to demonstrate how these directly contradict what I've said?
Ken Masters
Banned
What's wrong with Mac version?
Togglesworlh
Banned
You said the focus was not on design (and mechanics and ideas) as much as it was on skills and execution, which is not even remotely true. It's one of the most well-designed games to come out in recent history. In fact, that's its greatest strength.
I don't know who you are. Have we met?
What's not wrong with the Mac version? It's laggy, slow, has broken features that were just ripped out instead of being fixed, needs to be run at a low resolution and image quality just to be playable even on an i5. It's terrible. A disappointment after a year of waiting.
Last time i tried, pad support was fucked, couldn't change resolution or go into fullscreen, and crashed on multiple points.
Haven't tried it that much (as i also have the PC version) but it's a shame. :\
LoftyTheMetroid
Member
First, you said:
Togglesworlh said:
There's a huge difference between claiming something is not well-designed and saying a certain part of the design was not the focus. So already you've misrepresented me.
Second, to quote myself:
In other words, I would argue that SMB does focus on design in areas that pertain to difficulty or challenge setup, which is what I've been saying this whole time. To emphasize this further, I'll quote myself from before:
LoftyTheMetroid said:
I don't think what I've said is unreasonable. Again, I don't claim and have not claimed SMB isn't skillfully designed in a certain sense, it's just different. It does what it sets out to do, and it does it extremely well. It's approach is certainly desirable and highly valued by certain players, I'm just not one of them.
(I always hate being so wordy and having to add qualifiers to everything I say, but I guess I have to for people like you...)
EDIT:
Jasoco said:
So it was just a general "you"? Comment out of the blue?
Okay, I guess...? (It's hard for me to read people over the internet...)
Togglesworlh
Banned
My original statement in response to your statement that the focus was not on design (which I thought was obvious). My original statement is still sound in that context. As I keep saying, the game is one of the best-designed in recent history. To say the focus was not on design, even relative to the other aspects, is a bit ridiculous. They clearly put a lot of effort into designing the game, both in terms of mechanics AND levels (remember, design isn't exclusive to levels). I would argue, in fact, that the excellent game design found in Super Meat Boy is its greatest strength.
...
"People like me" huh? If, in fact, I misunderstood you, your original statement (and entire post) was pretty unclear to me. They don't focus on designing levels to be fun to "explore the full range of the gameplay frontier"? What does that even mean? It's like you're contradicting yourself in a single sentence. There's an insane amount of depth to be explored in simply navigating the level as quickly as possible (since it is naturally a speedrun kind of game), by your own admission. How is depth not about exploring that range?
Is it because they don't add random gravity-flipping switches (or any other mechanic of your choice) that suddenly change the way you play the game?
Simply quoting and repeating yourself isn't going to clear anything up here. I need further explanation, because there's clearly some gap between whatever it is you're saying and what I'm getting out of it.
As an aside, your quote-heavy, bold-heavy posts are unpleasant to read.
...
"People like me" huh? If, in fact, I misunderstood you, your original statement (and entire post) was pretty unclear to me. They don't focus on designing levels to be fun to "explore the full range of the gameplay frontier"? What does that even mean? It's like you're contradicting yourself in a single sentence. There's an insane amount of depth to be explored in simply navigating the level as quickly as possible (since it is naturally a speedrun kind of game), by your own admission. How is depth not about exploring that range?
Is it because they don't add random gravity-flipping switches (or any other mechanic of your choice) that suddenly change the way you play the game?
Simply quoting and repeating yourself isn't going to clear anything up here. I need further explanation, because there's clearly some gap between whatever it is you're saying and what I'm getting out of it.
As an aside, your quote-heavy, bold-heavy posts are unpleasant to read.
TheExplodingHead
Banned
To anyone arguing about design and controls here, let these be the determining factor. And two of my fav speedrunners on Steam.
Breakdown's assorted Meat Boy speedruns:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NuSQDW_SJc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VgBEge0Voek
73L's Naija speedruns:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=leraqEcE5OI
The level design is beyond immaculate, nevertheless providing extreme depth and challenge to ALL the characters. And without the near perfect controls none of this stuff would be possible. And yes, you do have to put in the time to fully appreciate it, but that's a common thread all great games have.
Breakdown's assorted Meat Boy speedruns:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NuSQDW_SJc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VgBEge0Voek
73L's Naija speedruns:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=leraqEcE5OI
The level design is beyond immaculate, nevertheless providing extreme depth and challenge to ALL the characters. And without the near perfect controls none of this stuff would be possible. And yes, you do have to put in the time to fully appreciate it, but that's a common thread all great games have.
Am I the only one who can't beat the last boss in the Mac version ?? Dr Foetus just doesn't follow me to the end of the level, so I can't make him fall and beat the game ... That's weird...
charlequin
Banned
I think you're off on Meat Boy (in that I think the game encourages you to engage with and enjoy the design of the levels pretty significantly), but more importantly, I think you're way off on Mario. Difficulty and challenge is universally a prerequisite for respect and praise of new Mario platformers (witness the complaints about the easy front half in SM3DL or the broad dismissal of the overly simplistic NSMBDS) and games like SMB3 and SMG certainly engage in precisely the same type of difficulty buildup to force the player to execute the skills they've previously developed.
I mean, Super Meat Boy is definitely harder, but it's also a game designed for people who have already hoovered up the great platformers in history and set out looking for more challenges. (And it certainly has elements that are pure challenge without the same kind of design focus, like the Kid warp zone, but these are segregated away from the main game pretty thoroughly.)
Chuckpebble
Member
So I was pretty salty about the game originally because of the crummy port, but I'm warming to it. I was originally using a wiimote to play, but the input lag from the bluetooth was an issue for me. Thats apparent to me now that I've played with a USB game pad. I did have to use ControllerMate to configure my controller though, as the cfg file does not work at all.
I may try and finish it after all, but now I'm reading about the final boss not working.
Also, Lofty, I think you asked, 720p seems to be the ideal resolution to run the game at. I'm doing it windowed with the ultralow setting and its running fine.
I may try and finish it after all, but now I'm reading about the final boss not working.
Also, Lofty, I think you asked, 720p seems to be the ideal resolution to run the game at. I'm doing it windowed with the ultralow setting and its running fine.
I'm hoping when I get around to buying a large enough Flash Drive, I can install Windows onto my Air and maybe get better performance from being booted directly into Windows. I just need to find a drive that doesn't look ugly as hell. I just want a simple fucking USB Flash Drive. (BTW, anyone whose installed Windows from a USB stick, what's the smallest, or largest you should use?)
Rickenslacker
Banned
Today was a good day.
Today was a good day.
DAYUM. Congrats man.
TheExplodingHead
Banned
Congrats on Golden God, always remember the feeling.
Anyone have a favorite Super Meat World chapter? Mine is Starlight, insane challenge with great platforming and amazing visual design. Some of the trickiest jumps too.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVnXzbCzxtY
Anyone have a favorite Super Meat World chapter? Mine is Starlight, insane challenge with great platforming and amazing visual design. Some of the trickiest jumps too.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVnXzbCzxtY
AcceptableGhost
Member
SMB3 is literally 100% all about difficulty in the last half of the game. Also the main difference between post SMB3 and above Mario games and Meat Boy is that Super Mario games became about making a glut of mechanics. Even in Super Mario Brothers 3 there were several levels where there were objects/mechanics that would only present itself in one or two levels (practically one-offs). They decided to focus on variety over focusing and getting all they could out of a single mechanic. Super Meat Boy is more like the original Super Mario Brothers where there is a small set of mechanics taken as far as possible. Except Super Meat Boy's jump / physics have a ton of precision, control, and depth which allows for the designers to ratchet up what they are able to introduce to the player.
Gareth Bale
Member
I still don't understand the jump/sliding/control physics in this game. I feel like there's some tricks that no one has told me with respect to making big jumps and timing jumps properly, especially after I jumped into a portal and it didn't tell me the new character could dash in the air.
TheExplodingHead
Banned
Unfortunately there's not a lot we can do to "explain" the nuances of the controls, it just takes lots and lots and lots of practice to get good at it and master each character. For the most part the levels will teach you a good grasp of the physics, but I always recommend speedrunning them to really get a handle on the timings of Meat Boy's controls.
Edit: Also be sure you're not playing with a keyboard!
LoftyTheMetroid
Member
As are your needlessly antagonistic replies. If you'd actually read what I've said, we wouldn't need to have this conversation (hence the quotes). It's like you're trying to fabricate an argument for the sake of arguing with me.
...Now I have to add more quotes and bolded statements, just for you. X3
You're grasping at straws trying to pick a fight with me. I said that SMB was effective in its approach, i.e. it set out to achieve a particular design, and it succeeded particularly well in that design. In that sense, it had a good design.
Two authors can be good writers despite one emphasizing plot and character development and the other language and prose. They can both have good writing, and suggesting that each author focuses or emphasizes a particular aspect of writing does not imply they are bad at writing.
As a heavily mechanics-based, proof-of-skill, competitive challenge and execution of talent platformer, SMB is near flawless. No doubt about that. But I would submit that this is not the only scale of a good platformer, and as a further personal opinion, I would say that it is not the best approach to a platformer.
LoftyTheMetroid said:
I was trying to reference and separate both mechanics and level design here (which I thought was obvious), but there's not really a need to bring that up since I didn't claim they were the same nor did I claim either were poor.
To further reiterate and emphasize that quote, I'm suggesting that there is an emphasis on mechanics and design as they pertain to providing a robust challenge and display of skill and execution.
And I would also agree that the game design in SMB is objectively its greatest strength, even if I didn't dislike the art style or found the majority of the music average (opinion, remember).
LoftyTheMetroid said:
Again, I don't know where you're pulling these points. You'd find we're largely in agreement if you weren't determined to disagree with me.
Now, I hope you can lay this discussion to rest.
Hopefully you've read the above and realized that, at least from me, there is no argument about bad design or controls. However, I'd like to make a couple points on the subject:
First, I would not personally use speed runs as examples to demonstrate depth, at least not as definitive end-all proof. In fact, it could be argued that speed runs are a sort of antithesis to depth, seeing as how speed running inevitably leads to a single, optimal "answer" to "What is the fastest way to complete this level?", whereas depth implies multiple layers/options/choices. The very nature of a speed run is designed to avoid as much of a level's design and mechanics as possible, so a speed run only demonstrates a single dimension of depth. To the audience that enjoys Super Meat Boy, this might be the only dimension you find meaningful as an ultimate display of skill and execution, but from the perspective of valuing other design aspects it doesn't provide a complete answer. For example, take NSMBW: While speed runs such as this certainly display a level of depth, exhibitions such as this demonstrate that there are layers to the platformer's level design beyond what one might expect.
Second, if you're implying that time investment is, or should be, a requirement of great gameplay, or that great gameplay can't be appreciated prior to a time investment, then I vehemently disagree.
I would agree that time and exploration of a game's mechanics may lead to a deeper appreciation as one begins to realize the depth of a particular gameplay. However, that doesn't mean that a player shouldn't be able to appreciate a game's beauty prior to a lengthy time commitment, or that a title's gameplay is less meaningful because it could be easily appreciated without much investment. Without wanting this to turn into a huge tangent, I'll leave my thoughts at that.
I think we're just going to have to have a fundamental disagreement on the difficulty of the Mario games, and the role difficulty has in its gameplay.
In terms of raw difficulty, I completely disagree. Children can beat Mario games, including Super Mario Bros. 3 (which is probably the hardest traditional mainline Mario aside from SMB2J). And if we ignore SMB3, then you are absolutely incorrect. Galaxy is not a hard game by any means. (Christ, my sister has beaten it without any trouble...) Super Meat Boy is on a completely different level.
And, again, I just simply disagree on a fundamental level that difficulty is the reason the Mario games are appreciated. All of my experiences, all of the opinions I've read, all anecdotal evidence I've had with friends and family suggests that you're just plain incorrect. In fact, for many it's the exact opposite (such as my sister, who appreciated Galaxy because she could beat it). When people talk about Galaxy, they refer to the gravity mechanics, the barrage of unique level designs and endless entertaining gameplay elements; that's what makes the game remarkable, not the difficulty.
Again, I think the mistake is confusing difficulty as a means for difficulty as an end. Even with the existence of difficulty in a game like SMB3, that doesn't imply that difficulty is the sole, or even main, reason behind the game's quality. Difficulty is only useful insomuch as it contextualizes the game's mechanics, makes them relevant and meaningful to the player. For the majority of game designs, it is tool to compliment gameplay, not a substitute, and the value of a game certainly does not directly scale with it. (That would almost imply games with low execution are always bad games...)
You say "one-offs" as if Super Meat Boy didn't have its fair share of portals, repulsions orbs, air vents, etc.
Coincidentally, my favorite levels in SMB were those that didn't just simply include a particular mechanic, but implemented it in a clever or novel manner. I would point to the lasers in levels 13 and 14 as examples.
In general, though, I would say the thrust of SMB is its challenge. Every design decision, including its mechanics, were for the purpose of answering the question, "How can we make this level challenging with plenty of depth to reward those with the most skill and investment in our game?" I wouldn't even say its goal was "to take its small set of mechanics as far as possible" as much as it was "to take the challenge and skill requirement afforded by these mechanics as far as possible".
----------
I'm going to cut this short now because I know you don't like reading long posts and I don't like spending the time to write them and I especially don't look forward to the idea of having to provide rebuttals to another series of replies. I was going to include a lot of little one-off comments (such as "NSMB is an average game not because of its difficulty but as a result of its bland design, and no the two are not one and the same") in addition to a more thorough description/analysis of both Difficulty and Design as they relate to me and the discussion at hand, but that's waaay beyond the scope of this post...
TheExplodingHead
Banned
So I'm just interested after reading through that, and I certainly respect and understand where you're coming from, but what would be your ideal/fav platformer based on difficulty, design and controls?
Togglesworlh
Banned
Littlegator
Banned
was going for golden gift, game crashes when it tries to load the animation for rescuing bandage girl on the 5th level
fuck this shit
fuck this shit
Rickenslacker
Banned
Fucking brutal. I quit when that happened to me on the 2nd level.
TheExplodingHead
Banned
Happened to me a bunch of times on the Kid's warpzone, I'll be trying for Golden Gift soon so hopefully this won't happen.
Chuckpebble
Member
Are you using the standalone version? It did that to me when I tested it in XP. Apparently it also does it in the OS X version, but I didn't run into that issue. I think the reason is that I copied my UserData folder out of the steam version and into the standalone version.
Anyway, it freezes because its trying to contact an SQL server, maybe the Steam leaderboards? Give it a couple minutes and the game will progress after an error message.
I just realized, I may have that issue in XP because of a work firewall. Shh, don't tell my boss.
charlequin
Banned
Children can beat Super Meat Boy too. The final Light World levels are challenging but hardly soul-crushing.
Galaxy 2 isn't "hard" throughout most of its levels, but this is still a game that features a set of secret, ultra-difficult final challenges unlocked through a perfectionist run on the game's stars -- challenges that are intended entirely for expert players and not even intended for more casual or lower-skilled players to even attempt. The only difference here is that Super Meat Boy has more of these levels.
You have this black-and-white view and it's forcing you to categorize these two games (which ultimately are much more similar than different) into entirely opposed categories. Nobody's saying that people are like "oh man, Mario, that's the game that's awesome because it's hard!" Rather, challenge (and the overcoming of challenge) is one element of the Mario formula, along with a whole stew of other factors that combine together to make the game enjoyable. Sumibo is not actually particularly different here except inasmuch as the balance is shifted: a bit less exploration (but not none); a bit more focus on execution; a bit less novelty; a bit more iteration; a default challenge tuned to an existing platformer audience rather than intended to serve as an entry point for a new audience.
This is a meaningless distinction, especially because literally no one has said that the main or sole reason for Meat Boy's quality is that it's hard.
Kinky John
Member
Happened to me just now on the 4th. Bullshits!!!
LoftyTheMetroid
Member
Controls
For controls, I'll quickly detail another philosophy of mine. I see controls as being intrinsically tied to the design and direction of the game if a character moves a particular way, the game is (ideally) designed around that so that the controls are relevant within the context of that game. If a character has slow speed, hefty weight, and slides around, you can bet that it was on purpose to give a particular level contextual meaning, a level that might otherwise be trivialized with a character that could run fast and jump high.
So when people talk about bad "controls", it's mostly meaningless to me. If you say Sonic moves too fast, that's a function of the game's design and gameplay, not the controls. If I don't like fast characters, it really means I have a problem with fast gameplay and doesn't necessarily mean Sonic has "bad" controls, just "different" controls, and to express a preference is merely to express a preference that has no implication on the quality of the game. I've played all manner of characters, and I only "dislike" the controls when the conflict with the game design.
For reference, I think SMB has perfect controls. They are perfectly suited for and harmonious with its gameplay and design.
(If you ever see me talk about bad controls, I'm usually talking about the physical disconnect between the player and game. For example, pressing Right Arrow to move Left, or five-second delay between input and action.)
Difficulty
As for difficulty, that also is a game-by-game thing. Some game designs benefit from a purposefully low or high difficulty, but for most games it should be used as a means to contextualize gameplay for that particular player. I share/derive a lot of my feelings on this subject from this Rev Rant topic. For example, a novice player in, say, Half-Life is likely to play in a suboptimal manner and use/consume a great deal more resources than a skilled player. That skilled player playing at a higher difficulty, however, might end up consuming resources at a similar rate, resulting in a comparable experience across two skill levels. Ideally, the most elegant game design will include a single difficulty that remains relevant for players of all skill levels by virtue of its compelling gameplay mechanics, but it's certainly not a problem if a game takes advantage of difficulty scaling. (I'd point to The World Ends With You as having a particularly clever and well-implemented difficulty scaling mechanic.)
So, basically my cop-out answer is "Whatever difficulty will benefit the game design most and contextualize the game's mechanics for the player best." It does not directly matter to me if it is "easy" or "hard". The only other thing I'll say on the subject is that I think it's unwise for a game to be purposefully designed to be difficult simply for the sake of difficulty.
Design
And design... I'm already making you read too much, so I'll just give another cop-out by saying I don't have an ideal platformer, that I like a variety of different approaches that cannot all be simultaneously realized within a single title, and that I try to appreciate each platformer for its individual strengths where applicable. I will say, though, that I don't place much emphasis on display or recognition of skill/achievement for its own sake, and that I care more for ideas, styles, originality, novelty. In other words, I'm not as concerned with asking, "Did this experience require a large amount of skill and dedication?" as I am, "Was this experience meaningful and worthwhile?"
To maybe give you a better idea of some of the platformers I've enjoyed recently, here's a short list: Rayman Origins, VVVVVV, Super Mario Galaxy (1+2), New Super Mario Bros. Wii, Blocks that Matter, Donkey Kong Country Returns.
TheExplodingHead
Banned
We have similar tastes then, Rayman, DKCR, VVVVVV, and SMG1+2 are all among my fav games of those years. DKCR being my GOTY 2010, closely followed by Meat Boy. Haven't played Blocks That Matter though, need to get on that.
LoftyTheMetroid
Member
Again, if you don't see Super Meat Boy as being on a completely different level of difficulty, we're just going to have to agree to disagree on this point. Babysitting my nephews this afternoon and talking with my sister again just reinforces my belief.
There is just no way these kids could get anywhere near the last half of the game, let alone beat it. And, from my own experience, I'd say even the most difficult level in SMG2 (I guess we're talking about 2 instead of 1 now...?) is easier than the last levels of Super Meat Boy. And that's comparing an "extra" level to a "mandatory" level.
I will retract the statement that anyone claimed difficulty is the central element of the Mario games. You're right, no one is saying that.
However, I'm not trying to force these games into two separate categories like you're suggesting. As I've said before, I think both games have different approaches to their gameplay and emphasize different elements. There are certainly appreciable differences in their designs and focuses, and I think saying otherwise is overgeneralization. I think I can recognize this without being painted as someone with a flat-out binary approach to the material.
And while no one is saying that the sole reason for Meat Boy's quality is its difficulty, I think very few would argue that one of its largest assets is its higher difficulty. Everyone cites it, everyone comments on it, it's a pretty well recognized aspect of the game. I think that's fair to say. And what I am saying is that achieving a high level of difficulty and a high skill threshold is what directed a majority of the game's design and design choices. This isn't necessarily objective, but it's just my view from my gameplay experience and observations.
Kinky John
Member
They better dish out a golden ticket for this! *massages left hand*
Professor Beef
Banned
I just got this game the other day, and lordy is it glorious. Also frustrating at times, but man does it feel good to get past a level that's been kicking you in the ass. I 100%'d the first two worlds already, and I'll probably dive right back in later today.
charlequin
Banned
And that's what I disagree with. All the core design philosophies behind the levels in Sumibo are ultimately drawing on the same philosophy as something like Mario: creating entertaining, flowing landscapes that you use a jumping character to interact with.
There are platformer games that are designed primarily around difficulty -- they look like I Wanna Be The Guy (and how different the The Kid's warpzone in Super Meat Boy is from the rest of the game is a good demonstration of the difference, IMO.)
TheExplodingHead
Banned
Yeah, games like I Wanna Be The Guy and Jumper and even Trials HD to an extent are platformers designed around difficulty as a core concept. Meat Boy I would agree with him is certainly more based on skill-based play as a central concept, but not difficult play. The difference is Meat Boy strikes a good balance between the fun, engaging and creative level design of Mario, and the skill-based play of IWBTG.
LoftyTheMetroid
Member
I don't know what else to say, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. I just don't see a shared design philosophy between the two.
To expand, when I did The Kid's warpzone (which, by the way, I got fed up with after reaching and dying in the third level for the first time; the only way this type of design works is having infinite lives, the warpzones were just plain frustrating for artificial reasons IMO), I was not aware of I Wanna Be The Guy. I thought it was just another regular independent game. Without knowing IWBTG was supposed to evoke a sense of "ridiculous challenge", I didn't initially notice any difference in design philosophy, just the usual difficulty ramp-up associated with the warp zones (see: Skyscraper, which I had just done prior to The Kid's warpzone).
Obviously there is a different scaling of difficulty between the two, but the philosophy/approach/design between the two just seems very similar to me, certainly moreso than that between Meat Boy and Mario. (Apparently I'm not the only one, Giant Bomb also throws both games into the same category, although to be fair they also liken the difficulty of Meat Boy's later levels to the last levels of the harder Mario games.)
I see that you don't think the same, so while I respect your opinion, I'm just going to have to disagree.
(If it's any consolation, I do think my opinion of Super Meat Boy has risen as a result of the discussions in this topic, although I'd say its positioning relative to other games has stayed about the same in my head.)
This seems like a semantics issue, which is all the more confusing since you specifically identify Meat Boy as skill-based and not difficulty-based like IWBTG, but then later refer to IWBTG as skill-based. Regardless, the distinction seems nigh trivial to me, as I see difficulty as being a scale of "required skill" and "margin of error".
Since the wording doesn't matter to me, I can use whatever terms you'd like. I can use "skill-based" if you'd like, or "challenging" in lieu of "difficulty-based".
TheExplodingHead
Banned
This seems like a semantics issue, which is all the more confusing since you specifically identify Meat Boy as skill-based and not difficulty-based like IWBTG, but then later refer to IWBTG as skill-based. Regardless, the distinction seems nigh trivial to me, as I see difficulty as being a scale of "required skill" and "margin of error".
Since the wording doesn't matter to me, I can use whatever terms you'd like. I can use "skill-based" if you'd like, or "challenging" in lieu of "difficulty-based".
Yeah, maybe I'm just mincing words here.
I think I meant the difficulty-based play of IWBTG, but I was on Ambien so kind of difficult to remember!
Truth be told though, IWBTG IS skill-based, it's just using difficulty to reinforce that idea, whereas Meat Boy relies much less on soul crushing difficulty and instead reinforces/rewards skill and fun execution rather than just difficulty. Kind of weird to explain though.But all I was saying is I think Meat Boy has a good balance of Mario-style play (where the mechanics, level design, creativity and fun are center stage), along with the skill-based play of IWBTG...without the divisive soul crushing difficulty. Now, if you are a serious speedrunner I'd argue that Meat Boy can be just as or more difficult than IWBTG at the highest level of play. But that just shows you how good the overall balance was, rewarding and giving all skill levels a fair shake.
I beat all the light and dark world main game levels using a keyboard. Then I bought a 360 USB controller. I haven't played it much since, but I can tell there is at least one issue I had with the keyboard that the controller eliminates. Namely, using an stick because of the deadzone and the fact that you have to move the same input device across it to move in the opposite direction means there will be at least one frame of timing where you are no longer holding the original direction. In this frame Meat Boy utterly stops preserving no momentum. Then you can almost instantly start moving at high speeds in the opposite direction. Using multiple fingers on the directional arrows allows you to never create that gap of deadspace and transfer directly from (what the game thinks of) as full speed movement left to full speed movement right (or visa versa). Because Meat Boy never stops, turning around abruptly on a keyboard causes Meat Boy to slide before changing direction. This took me a while to understand.
After flying through the air or running along the ground, remember... if you want to stop instantly make sure you're not holding any direction. It's not like Mario where holding back causes you to skid as the quickest way to reverse your momentum.
Also, you should know that for Meat Boy, a wall jump with the RUN button held versus NO RUN button is a different angle. You'll need to train yourself to see the difference to understand what's expected of you.
The RUN button is your friend, but it does change your air control speed, iirc. Keep that in mind.
Also, the more vertical you get for a big jump, the better. It'll help you see where you're falling and make adjustments. Pro tip: if you quickly tap in the opposite direction as you fall Meat Boy will also fall straight down. So instead of worrying about momentum or sliding off of landings when you touch the ground, you can fall and stick making the timing challenge much easier. So feel free to gun it (air control + RUN) to your target and get comfortable stopping instantly.
On a side note, the distinction between if a game is made for difficulty or challenge or anything else is pointless. It really begins to tread on the same mistakes that others do when trying to argue using authorial intent. It's better to focus on what the game does and is without such considerations. If you need the language, terms, or the systems to break down level design or concepts like skill, just say the word. I've got all of that taken care of.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
Having just beaten Limbo for the first time, Super Meat Boy is in no way trial and error.
Kinky John
Member
So, Super Meat World's been wrecked. Read: http://forums.somethingawful.com/sh...threadid=2803713&pagenumber=258#post398884189
TheExplodingHead
Banned
Comments on the Super Meat World hack from Edmund (from the Meat Boy forums):
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
funny how that response doesn't include a mea culpa for the initial security hole or the flippant dismissal thereof when he was approached about it.
TheExplodingHead
Banned
^To be honest I'm not really surprised that's how Team Meat reacted, considering their reaction to a host of other things concerning fans and the game itself stability-wise.
AcceptableGhost
Member
From how they talk I think the real answer is that they just don't want to work on this game anymore.