default header

Games

Videogame Art

Moderator: JC Denton

Videogame Art

Unread postby icycalm » 12 Dec 2008 00:31

The idea for this thread is to discuss the classification system (genres and genre-naming conventions) of the Videogame Art section, as well as the suitability of our choices. Note that in-depth comments on each game should still be posted in dedicated threads. This thread's purpose is only to debate current choices and propose new ones. Whatever you do, however, be sure to post detailed reasons for every objection or proposal -- one-liners and lists will be deleted.

I know it's kind of hard to debate anything when each category has only one or two games. When we start reaching the limit (which for most genres will be 10 to 20 games) things will get more interesting, since new challengers will have to kick out established choices. Note that games that get replaced will still remain in the Videogame Art section, but will be relegated to "classic" status. They will not, in other words, be "current" recommendations.

Does that make sense to you? I hope so. This is how videogames work, after all. It is an iterative process. (And not only that: we also occasionally discover old games which after close scrutiny end up being better than our current choices.)

Note that, in all probability, currently-listed genres may be joined, split, renamed and re-arranged. The max. number of allowed titles per genre (indicated by the number next to each genre's name) is also up for discussion, and may also be adjusted as time goes by, to reflect the growth of each genre.

A last note: please do not post in this thread if you are not an extremely experienced gamer. And even then, do not comment on genres which you are not an expert in. If you are not sure whether you are an expert or not then, trust me on this, you are not. In that case just play, read and learn.

-------------------

Vs. Shooting -- N/A
Spacewar! (1962)

Shooting -- 25
R-Type (1987) / R-Type II (1989)
Ketsui ~Kizuna Jigokutachi~ (2003)
Espgaluda (2003) / Espgaluda II (2005)

Action Shooting (Side View) -- 10
Contra: The Hard Corps (1994)
Night Slave (1996)
Metal Slug (1996)

Puzzle -- 15
Kuru Kuru Kururin (2001) / Kururin Paradise (2002)
Kororinpa (2006)

Action (3D) -- 15
Gun Valkyrie (2002)
Tekki (2002) / Tekki Taisen (2004)

First-Person Shooting -- 10
Half-Life (1998)
Deus Ex (2000)

Strategy (Real-Time) -- 10
Herzog Zwei (1989)

Fighting (2D) -- 10
Arcana Heart (2006) / Arcana Heart Full! (2007) / Arcana Heart 2 (2008) / Suggoi! Arcana Heart 2 (2008)
User avatar
icycalm
Hyperborean
 
Joined: 28 Mar 2006 00:08
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands

Unread postby zinger » 12 Dec 2008 01:27

So, this is an attempt to canonize games rather than to list the best ones by the current standards?
User avatar
zinger
 
Joined: 22 Oct 2007 16:32
Location: Sweden

Unread postby icycalm » 12 Dec 2008 01:45

It will be an ongoing attempt to do both at the same time. All games that make it on the list become canonized, and the ones that manage to stay in the genre categories (i.e. those that do not get relegated to "classic" status) will be considered the best by contemporary standards.

Note that we still don't have any "classic" games. To get some we'll first need to start hitting the maximum limit of titles in specific genres.
Last edited by icycalm on 12 Dec 2008 01:48, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
icycalm
Hyperborean
 
Joined: 28 Mar 2006 00:08
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands

Unread postby icycalm » 12 Dec 2008 01:46

By the way, I just went over the review archive and added some more titles to the list: Espgaluda, Espgaluda II, Rastan Saga, Kuru Kuru Kururin and Kororinpa. Two things must be noted. Firstly, these are quite older reviews, and since then my reviewing standards have gone up. This means that I am not quite happy with them, and will therefore rework them slightly at some point in the future. Second: Espgaluda and Espgaluda II are both counted as one game, for the purpose of max. number of shooting games allowed. Does anyone need me to explain why I am doing this? I will do the same with all versions of SFII (minus perhaps HD Remix), and with most Fire Emblems (most of which are expansion packs more than anything else), etc. etc. If anyone requires further explanation on this point let me know, though I also plan to discuss it at length in a future article. In the meantime, part of the explanation can be found here.

As regards older reviews, the following games are also under consideration:

Advance Wars (not adding it yet because I'd like to take the series from the beginning)
Dangun Feveron (Cave game, so not to sure how many of these I want to have in there)
Pink Sweets ~Ibara Sore Kara~ (this should probably go in, but I want to study Yagawa's work more thoroughly before I make a decision: still, it will probably go in, since it's one of his most innovative and enjoyable ones)
Test Drive Unlimited (reviewer raves about it but I need to play it to make sure)
Touhou Bunkachou ~ Shoot the Bullet. (ditto)
Winning Eleven: Play Maker 2008 (ditto)
User avatar
icycalm
Hyperborean
 
Joined: 28 Mar 2006 00:08
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands

Unread postby EightEyes » 12 Dec 2008 03:37

In the puzzle genre, I couldn't be much happier with the two choices that are there already, but I'd also like to see a title in the Puyo Puyo series make the list.

It's one of only a very few puzzle games that have held my interest over a long period of time, because it accommodates a number of different styles of play, and requires that you adapt your play based on your opponent's actions more so than most. It plays more like a good fighting game in some respects. It's not the case that there's an optimal play style, even given the same sequence of puyos; there are instead ways in which you can represent one strategy, then change pace and catch your opponent wrong-footed. "Strategy" is probably too strong a word, but it's a game that at least requires you to have a plan of sorts, and then to adapt it on the fly. The game has remained fresh and interesting to me for years as a result.

As for Test Drive Unlimited, I'm not so sure - I think there are worthier inclusions in the driving/racing genre. TDU was an ambitious and largely well-implemented title, but it's unfocussed and even misguided in places, in terms of where it directs the player's attention. What's more, the core of the game (driving), isn't particularly deep or satisfying.

A title from the Outrun 2 family would be right at the top of my list of driving games. There really hasn't been another driving game that captures that sense of responsiveness and finesse in the control of a vehicle to the same almost supernatural degree. Aesthetically, it still stands alone, for what that's worth.

Incidentally, are you planning a single "driving" genre, or splitting it up somewhat? Would Wipeout, Burnout, Ridge Racer, Mario Kart, PGR and Gran Turismo all be in the same genre, for example? (Not saying these ought to be on the list, incidentally!) I'd usually argue that one genre would cover them all, but it seems you've broken up what I'd consider the "shooter" genre (which I'm *much* less familiar with) into several more specific categories. Is "genre" here defined by player activity, control conventions, camera position and/or some other factors?

Great to see Advance Wars under consideration, also. I'm not a genre-expert in turn-based strategy, either, but I'm a great admirer of the series.
User avatar
EightEyes
 
Joined: 25 Sep 2008 06:31

Unread postby icycalm » 12 Dec 2008 03:57

Puyo Puyo and OutRun 2, along with many of their revisions, are a given.

A title from the Outrun 2 family would be right at the top of my list of driving games.


There's no top here -- this is important to note. Every game on each list is equal to all others. If you try to go beyond that you end up trying to split hairs so fine you can't even see them. Not to mention that the order of your list would then depend on mood swings, day of the week, what you had for breakfast, etc.

There really hasn't been another driving game that captures that sense of responsiveness and finesse in the control of a vehicle to the same almost supernatural degree.


It's a great game, but this is just fanboy nonsense-speak. (I could give you a couple dozen more responsive racers with more finely-balanced controls, starting with the original Ridge Racer. And what does "sense of responsiveness" even mean? It's a pleonasm.)

Aesthetically, it still stands alone, for what that's worth.


It looks great, but, again, this is an exaggeration.

Incidentally, are you planning a single "driving" genre, or splitting it up somewhat?


Yeah, a single one, and it will be called "racing". (It will include stuff like Wave Race and F-Zero.)

I'd usually argue that one genre would cover them all, but it seems you've broken up what I'd consider the "shooter" genre (which I'm *much* less familiar with) into several more specific categories.


I did not break the shooting genre up. There's only one. I thought about breaking it up into horizontal and vertical, but the thing is that there are vertical games that play like horizontal ones and horizontal ones that play like verticals. So it would be a spurious distinction.

Is "genre" here defined by player activity, control conventions, camera position and/or some other factors?


This is not such a complicated subject as people make it out to be. Let's keep it simple then. Games are said to belong to the same genre when they play similarly. We all know what that means. Half-Life does not play similarly to Gradius, even though you shoot stuff in both of them. Kororinpa and Kuru Kuru Kururin play similarly even though the control schemes, graphical representation techniques and pretty much everything else have nothing in common.

Great to see Advance Wars under consideration, also. I'm not a genre-expert in turn-based strategy, either, but I'm a great admirer of the series.


Like I said, it's not really under consideration: it's a given. I am just holding back on introducing it because I want to take the series from the beginning (Famicom Wars) and decide which should be the first installment to be inducted.
User avatar
icycalm
Hyperborean
 
Joined: 28 Mar 2006 00:08
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands

Unread postby EightEyes » 12 Dec 2008 05:43

icycalm wrote:I did not break the shooting genre up. There's only one. I thought about breaking it up into horizontal and vertical, but the thing is that there are vertical games that play like horizontal ones and horizontal ones that play like verticals. So it would be a spurious distinction.


Thanks for the clarification. As a bit of an outsider to shooters, generally, I probably would have lumped "Vs. Shooting", "Shooting" and "Action Shooting (Side View)" in together, whereas the distinctions between them are probably blindingly apparent to many others on this forum.

icycalm wrote:Like I said, it's not really under consideration: it's a given. I am just holding back on introducing it because I want to take the series from the beginning (Famicom Wars) and decide which should be the first installment to be inducted.


So how on earth do you do that? :)

Should a groundbreaking game in a series take preference over a later, similar, but more polished or balanced entry? Is it the game that made an impact in its time that makes the list, or the one you'd recommend someone play today? In some series that distinction is obvious, and it's sometimes even the same game within a series. I don't know which "Wars" title I'd include.
User avatar
EightEyes
 
Joined: 25 Sep 2008 06:31

Unread postby taub » 12 Dec 2008 05:50

You have to add Quake 1. The first real 3D FPS, just look what it has done to the genre from a technical viewpoint. Then there is the very good singleplayer, ballbreaking hard. Then there is multiplayer (Quakeworld) the best online FPS with incredible depth, people are still playing it after 12 years, and it brought to life many Mods, like Team Fortress.
taub
 
Joined: 12 Dec 2008 05:42

Unread postby icycalm » 12 Dec 2008 06:04

Thanks for the clarification. As a bit of an outsider to shooters, generally, I probably would have lumped "Vs. Shooting", "Shooting" and "Action Shooting (Side View)" in together, whereas the distinctions between them are probably blindingly apparent to many others on this forum.


You would have lumped Spacewar together with Metal Slug? What are you, stupid? For God's sake don't answer.

icycalm wrote:Like I said, it's not really under consideration: it's a given. I am just holding back on introducing it because I want to take the series from the beginning (Famicom Wars) and decide which should be the first installment to be inducted.

EightEyes wrote:So how on earth do you do that? :)

Should a groundbreaking game in a series take preference over a later, similar, but more polished or balanced entry? Is it the game that made an impact in its time that makes the list, or the one you'd recommend someone play today? In some series that distinction is obvious, and it's sometimes even the same game within a series.


A game is a game. "Later, similar, but more polished balanced entries" are not new games, they are revisions. When a game goes in so do all of its decent revisions. It's really very simple. All you have to do is be able to distinguish between original games and revisions.

EightEyes wrote:I don't know which "Wars" title I'd include.


Of course you don't. Because you probably haven't even played half of them.

But you are not getting what I am saying. It would not be A SINGLE Wars game that would go in the list. It would be MOST if not ALL of them. The point is to pick the first one which established the main features of the series, and review it at length. This could be Famicom Wars, or it could be one of the latter ones. I won't know until I go through them. And once the first game is established, the rest which do a decent job of updating it automatically all go in.
User avatar
icycalm
Hyperborean
 
Joined: 28 Mar 2006 00:08
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands

Unread postby icycalm » 12 Dec 2008 06:08

taub wrote:the best online FPS


Claims like this (by a new and unknown user no less!) without extensive justification showing that you are an expert on the subject, will get you banned in nanoseconds. Think very very carefully before posting again. Indeed, my advice right now would be not to.
User avatar
icycalm
Hyperborean
 
Joined: 28 Mar 2006 00:08
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands

Unread postby JoshF » 12 Dec 2008 09:18

Reviewing SF2 series would be a good place to clear up the "super hyper champion edition lolololololo" fallacy that scrubs like to make. The best way to do this would be to compare it to the revisions of MK1, which went through 5 with little more than a couple bug fixes. In fact the balance worsened, as Sonya gained an infinite.

I would also like to nominate Strider Hiryuu 2, and I promise to explain why, but right now I'm in the beginning stages of 6 Hour Energy, so I'm convulsing like a madman. Look forward to that.
User avatar
JoshF
 
Joined: 14 Oct 2007 14:56

Unread postby Macaw » 12 Dec 2008 11:42

JoshF wrote:I would also like to nominate Strider Hiryuu 2, and I promise to explain why


Oh man, you better! :wink:
User avatar
Macaw
 
Joined: 28 Oct 2006 05:00
Location: Australia

Unread postby taub » 12 Dec 2008 15:46

icycalm wrote:
taub wrote:the best online FPS


Claims like this (by a new and unknown user no less!) without extensive justification showing that you are an expert on the subject, will get you banned in nanoseconds. Think very very carefully before posting again. Indeed, my advice right now would be not to.


Ask any Quake player what he likes about Quake 1, he will probably say the speed, smoothness and high skill.
The major points why this game is deeper (by your definition) than any other online FPS:
No weaponswitch delay. Usually you have one button for each weapon. Increases overall gamespeed and need for good reflexes.
The Movement speed is higher than in any other game, also bunnyhopping and trickjumping are a whole skillset on their own, some people simply play the game for jumping around.
Learning and mastering the major weapons, from the simple 'point and click' weapon like the Lasergun, to the projectile weapons like grenade/rocket launcher and of course the nailguns.
Tactics. Quakeworld is usually all about spawnkills. Establising your domination on the map and then sucking the frags out of your opponent, meaning that the main game is fighting over who gets to kick the other dude in the nuts for the next minutes or so.

Also this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5kT_WGrL3Fs
taub
 
Joined: 12 Dec 2008 05:42

Unread postby Bradford » 12 Dec 2008 17:31

First, isn't taub way OT? Is this thread to debate (among other things) which games of all time belong in each categories, or only which games for which there is a five-star review on this site?

I thought it was the latter, in which case my only comment is that, once there are games to fill each category, that "FPS" could be split into "Tactical FPS" and "Arcade FPS."
Bradford
 
Joined: 18 Jun 2008 18:11
Location: Orlando, Florida, USA

Unread postby icycalm » 12 Dec 2008 18:07

taub wrote:Ask any Quake player what he likes about Quake 1, he will probably say the speed, smoothness and high skill.


I'd buy speed, but "smoothness" and "high skill" do not mean anything by themselves. What is smoothness? More frames per second? What does that matter in a PC game? If Counterstrike runs at a lower rate on your PC just buy a better graphics card. And "high skill", lol. What are you, an aspie?

The major points why this game is deeper (by your definition) than any other online FPS:


Leave my definition alone, dude. It is clear you don't have the faintest understanding of it.

No weaponswitch delay. Usually you have one button for each weapon. Increases overall gamespeed and need for good reflexes.


So you are claiming that this is the only FPS in which you can assign weapons to specific buttons. Fucking retard.

The Movement speed is higher than in any other game,


This would be a valid point if true. Given the inanity of all your other points though, I'm betting you just made it up.

also bunnyhopping and trickjumping are a whole skillset on their own, some people simply play the game for jumping around.


Sounds awesome dude!

Learning and mastering the major weapons, from the simple 'point and click' weapon like the Lasergun, to the projectile weapons like grenade/rocket launcher and of course the nailguns.


Yes, because "learning and mastering the major weapons" is something exclusive to Quake.

Tactics. Quakeworld is usually all about spawnkills. Establising your domination on the map and then sucking the frags out of your opponent, meaning that the main game is fighting over who gets to kick the other dude in the nuts for the next minutes or so.


"For the next minutes or so"? What the fuck does that even mean? And your "spawnkills" explanation in no way accounts for putting this game above all others in terms of "tactics". Indeed, I'd say it does the exact opposite.



And yeah, when all else fails just point them to a youtube video. Criticism at its best.

taub, do not ever post in this thread again. You have zero critical ability, and even if you did know one or two things about FPSes you wouldn't be able to communicate them.

On another note: read this and make sure you adhere to it.
User avatar
icycalm
Hyperborean
 
Joined: 28 Mar 2006 00:08
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands

Unread postby icycalm » 12 Dec 2008 18:32

Bradford wrote:First, isn't taub way OT? Is this thread to debate (among other things) which games of all time belong in each categories, or only which games for which there is a five-star review on this site?


Look. I have, of course, a ton of games in my mind which will be going in this list. Currently about sixty in fact. The only reason I am not revealing them is to sustain a little bit of suspense among regular readers. So I don't really need people coming in, like EightEyes, for example, and telling me about games like Puyo Puyo or OutRun 2 or Tetris or Halo or whatever, all of which are obviously going in. If someone does mention an obvious choice it's okay, but I would be far more interested in lesser-known games, or more controversial choices -- like Strider 2, for example.

On the other hand, the main focus should indeed be to contest mine and the rest of the staff's CURRENT choices. Not that there's much chance of convincing me to make any changes: I have thought so long and so hard about these choices, that you'd probably need to bring up a game completely unknown to me, then review it like a master critic; and then I'd still have to play it myself to make sure you were not some phony jackass who is really good at making shit up -- like Tim Rogers, for example. The only exception to this would be genres which I don't really play, of which there exist only two: rhythm and sports games. In those two categories I guess my wish is that some experts would come in, people whose expertise would eventually become apparent, and battle it out among themselves on which games to include. At any rate, those are the two least important genres, so even if this doesn't pan out it won't matter much. If all else fails I can always go to some bemani forum or other and pick out the one or two real experts. And as for sports games: I do know what's up until the PlayStation era. After that, well, we'll see. We already have the Wii version of WE2008, so there's one.

Does all that make sense? Really, my hope for this thread is to eventually attract three-four experts in each genre from the farthest corners of the internet, who will help me make these lists the best ones ever, and contribute to keeping them that way. Eventually, I plan to publish a collection of books titled "Videogame Art: Volume 1, Volume 2, etc." with our reviews laid out in the style of Japanese previews for Japanese games and Edge magazine editorials for Western games. The books will be hardcover, with wide pages and expensive paper and all that jazz. That's really what this is all about.

Bradford wrote:I thought it was the latter, in which case my only comment is that, once there are games to fill each category, that "FPS" could be split into "Tactical FPS" and "Arcade FPS."


I do not understand this distinction. You'll have to explain it to me. Either way, there's no chance I am using the terms "arcade" and "FPS" in the same genre. The only arcade FPSes that exist, as far as I know, are the Counterstrike and Half-Life 2 conversions by Taito, and neither of them belong anywhere near this thread.

Edit: Actually, on second thought, they do belong in this thread. As revisions of Counterstrike and Half-Life 2, respectively.
User avatar
icycalm
Hyperborean
 
Joined: 28 Mar 2006 00:08
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands

Unread postby Bradford » 12 Dec 2008 19:45

Thanks for the explanation and the background information. That clears up what you're looking for quite a bit.

I would define an "arcade FPS" as one where differences in player success correlate most closely with the player's reflexes and physical precision in manipulating the game's controls. It is obvious why you wouldn't want to use the term 'arcade' in this context, but I can't think of a substitute at the moment. People do also refer to these types of FPSs as "twitch-shooters," but I think that would be an even worse term for your purposes.

A "tactical FPS" is one where differences in player success correlate most closely with the player's strategic choices with respect to maneuvering, utilization of non-weapon tools, and coordination with teammates.

Again, I don't know at all if this distinction is useful to you, but it is one that a lot of people seem to make, so I figured I'd throw it into the ring for discussion.

One controversial choice as a "videogame art" candidate would be Shadowrun (2007), and incidentally would belong in the latter category above, but I'm nowhere near expert enough to make a full case for it in the manner you suggested.

...and with that I think I've exhausted my usefulness in this thread unless you ask some follow up questions. It looks to be an interesting discussion though, and I would definitely buy the books you propose, so I'll certainly be here following along.
Bradford
 
Joined: 18 Jun 2008 18:11
Location: Orlando, Florida, USA

Unread postby taub » 12 Dec 2008 19:56

icycalm wrote:So you are claiming that this is the only FPS in which you can assign weapons to specific buttons. Fucking retard.

No, the game has no delay. So lets say you have the lasergun on your right mouse button, and rocketlauncher on the left, then you can instantly shoot each weapon, without having to wait untill the weapon has been switched. [Click RMB]->SHOOT, instead of [Select Weapon]--wait--[Fire Key]->SHOOT

I'm sorry for writing so shitty, I'll shut up now, since I've already broken your warnings twice anyway, just had to clear that one thing up.
taub
 
Joined: 12 Dec 2008 05:42

Unread postby Bigode » 12 Dec 2008 20:05

icycalm wrote:I'd buy speed, but "smoothness" and "high skill" do not mean anything by themselves. What is smoothness? More frames per second? What does that matter in a PC game? If Counterstrike runs at a lower rate on your PC just buy a better graphics card. And "high skill", lol. What are you, an aspie?

Quake is probably the hardest FPS to get into. In Counter Strike, a team of 5 or 6 fairly experienced players will have a fair chance against a good player, if he´s alone. Even in a duel, an inexperienced player may kill a good player once in a blue moon or something like that.
In Quake, a good player will totally rape twenty fairly experienced players. In a duel, he will control the entire map, getting all the powerups, and will spawnrape the other player multiple times.
Bigode
 
Joined: 29 Mar 2008 14:02

Unread postby icycalm » 12 Dec 2008 20:35

That sounds interesting! This is more like the kind of post I am looking for.

On the topic of multiplayer FPS, it doesn't look like I'll be able to do much about it myself. My experience is very limited, and I have no desire to acquire more. I am, however, an expert on single-player ones.

Bradford wrote:I would define an "arcade FPS" as one where differences in player success correlate most closely with the player's reflexes and physical precision in manipulating the game's controls. It is obvious why you wouldn't want to use the term 'arcade' in this context, but I can't think of a substitute at the moment. People do also refer to these types of FPSs as "twitch-shooters," but I think that would be an even worse term for your purposes.

A "tactical FPS" is one where differences in player success correlate most closely with the player's strategic choices with respect to maneuvering, utilization of non-weapon tools, and coordination with teammates.


If I divided FPSes according to the above distinction, then I'd be obliged to divide STGs into memorizers, swarmers, puzzle-like (Ikaruga, Triggerheart Exelica), etc., or racing games into pure racers and goal-based ones (e.g. Burnout, Metropolis Street Racer, et al). All you are describing is different flavors of a single genre.

One controversial choice as a "videogame art" candidate would be Shadowrun (2007)


I've watched videos of this and it seemed not just bad but terrible. But again, I don't know much about this kind of game. Their use of the Shadowrun name is however inexcusable. Shadowrun is an iconic RPG -- what the fuck is that name doing on an FPS?
User avatar
icycalm
Hyperborean
 
Joined: 28 Mar 2006 00:08
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands

Unread postby Tain » 13 Dec 2008 00:49

Bigode wrote:In Quake, a good player will totally rape twenty fairly experienced players. In a duel, he will control the entire map, getting all the powerups, and will spawnrape the other player multiple times.


Yeah. I once played a Quake 3 match against a friend of mine who was on a team that placed third at QuakeCon one year. Despite the hours I've put into the game, the final score was 70 to 1. His mastery of the weapons, the game's movement techniques, and the map were just overwhelming.

icycalm wrote:The only exception to this would be genres which I don't really play, of which there exist only two: rhythm and sports games.


I think that even someone with little experience in the genre might be able to pick out beatmania IIDX from some surface-level glancing. Am I right in guessing that the rhythm genre is one of the least important because of its simplicity?

The entire genre is based on testing the player's timing, forcing the player to read and process note patterns, and making the player hit potentially unfamiliar input combinations. I haven't seen any other rhythm game with tighter timing windows (though they've been loosening slightly in the latest iterations), better pattern-reading options, and songs that accompany such a wide range of skill. The seven keys and turntable allow the developers choice in forcing players to tackle patterns either single-handed or double-handed, and I haven't seen another rhythm game with inputs that allow for anything like that.
User avatar
Tain
 
Joined: 15 Jul 2007 05:28

Unread postby mees » 13 Dec 2008 01:02

I'm wondering if a roguelike will make it on the list since Tekki did.

On the one hand, they share the same key feature. On the other hand, one is an RPG, and one an action-based game. And, at the very least, they seem like some of the most complex RPGs to me in all other aspects as well, although I can't say I'm really an expert in any genre.
mees
 
Joined: 30 Sep 2008 02:51

Unread postby icycalm » 13 Dec 2008 01:02

Tain wrote:I think that even someone with little experience in the genre might be able to pick out beatmania IIDX from some surface-level glancing.


Is beatmania IIDX to beatmania what Super Street Fighter II Turbo is to Sreet Fighter II? If so, the game that would go in the list, and which would be reviewed at length, would be beatmania. The revisions would also go on the list, but they wouldn't be extensively reviewed.

Tain wrote:Am I right in guessing that the rhythm genre is one of the least important because of its simplicity?


Partly yes, but it goes much deeper than that.

To explain to you why rhythm games are among the least important, I'd have to explain to you the goal, the purpose, of videogames. But I am saving this for another day. In the meantime here's a hint, if you feel like trying to work it out for yourself. The reason rhythm games are not very important is the same as the reason why motion-based games (Wii, etc.) are not very important. Motion-based games pretty much defeat the purpose of videogames. Now what could that purpose possibly be?
User avatar
icycalm
Hyperborean
 
Joined: 28 Mar 2006 00:08
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands

Unread postby Tain » 13 Dec 2008 01:11

icycalm wrote:Is beatmania IIDX to beatmania what Super Street Fighter II Turbo is to Sreet Fighter II? If so, the game that would go in the list, and which would be reviewed at length, would be beatmania. The revisions would also go on the list, but they wouldn't be extensively reviewed.


Both beatmania and beatmania IIDX have their own separate iterations, but all of the games are definitely mechanically similar enough for you to be right. The biggest differences between beatmania IIDX and beatmania are simply a different turntable position and four more keys.

icycalm wrote:To explain to you why rhythm games are among the least important, I'd have to explain to you the goal, the purpose, of videogames. But I am saving this for another day.


I look forward to it.
User avatar
Tain
 
Joined: 15 Jul 2007 05:28

Unread postby icycalm » 13 Dec 2008 01:25

mees wrote:I'm wondering if a roguelike will make it on the list since Tekki did.


This occurred to me too (as well as another objection to the Tekki review -- but I should start a Tekki thread and talk about them there). In any case, either Rogue itself or one of its predecessors will be on the list. And several of its follow-ups. There will actually be a "Dungeon Crawling" category, maxing out at 5 or 10 games. I will also write an article on dungeon crawlers at some point, explaining pretty much everything about them.

mees wrote:On the one hand, they share the same key feature. On the other hand, one is an RPG, and one an action-based game. And, at the very least, they seem like some of the most complex RPGs to me in all other aspects as well, although I can't say I'm really an expert in any genre.


Roguelikes and dungeon crawlers are not RPGs. Read this and keep that in mind when posting here.
User avatar
icycalm
Hyperborean
 
Joined: 28 Mar 2006 00:08
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands

Next

Return to Games