next »

[ஒழுக்கின்மை]

they also both have in common that they are videogames. one can say that one is a better 'videogame' than the other.

[ஒழுக்கின்மை]

of course, that's stating the obvious -- everything we think regarding what games are better than what other games is opinion. it's also an opinion that you can't compare them, and that neither is better than the other.

[Toom]

Actually, I can think of a reasonably successful precedent for this - Dead Rising: Case Zero. If the MML3 demo's more like that - a cheap, short, standalone title that showcases gameplay elements of the finished product - rather than a traditional, first-level-or-so-style demo that they're expecting suckers fans to pay actual money for, I'm down.

Why should it be free? Devs are working on the project. They need to get paid, they need to feed their families, pay for rent, just like you or me. The fact that they still have the wiggle room to release 'something as niche as God Hand, Okami, or Killer7' (and at least one of those games is a critical darling, warranting a cheaper spin-off/sequel even thought it wasn't a blockbuster seller) should elicit some respect. Here's a company that seems to be doing what few other big publishers are willing/daring to do, experiment and put out something that isn't your typical AAA fare, in between their big releases, and you're lambasting them for trying to offset the cost.

Well, I think we can safely assume that the devs are salaried, not feverishly working on projects they hope will turn a profit so they can eat, and financing MML3 is unlikely to bankrupt them when they've got the bottomless billions from Street Fighter and Resident Evil still pouring in. An enormocompany like Capcom selling demos is distasteful because you're asking customers to pay for something that's categorically unfinished; again, if the suckers fans dammit who choose to do this get recompensed - say, in the form of bonus content for the finished game, or even a discount of some kind (like how Capcom are currently vending the extra material in SSFIV:AE to extant SSFIV owners as DLC) - then fine! I mean, this still leaves a bunch of people out of pocket for an incomplete game if it doesn't get made, but. To continue your Kickstarter analogy, contributors to startups typically aren't donors; they're investors, they expect a return on their input (and no, "getting the game made" doesn't count - customers care about that, investors want something back on the extra money they've put in).

Small devs, like perennial example Notch, can totally get away with this, because they often cannot realistically expect to fund their projects without that sort of input; and besides, aren't Minecraft alpha and beta customers getting some sort of balls-rad bonus content? (I'm too poor to uh buy games at the moment.) Capcom don't need the money. I do respect their willingness to go out on a limb with stuff like God Hand, Okami, Killer7 et al, but those experimental ventures are financed by a very solid base of reliable, popular, high-selling franchises like RE.

[SirNiko]

of course, that's stating the obvious -- everything we think regarding what games are better than what other games is opinion. it's also an opinion that you can't compare them, and that neither is better than the other.

You should provide the metric by which you've come up with your opinion. Why is MML better than the 'actual' series? This would provide more fodder for discussion and perhaps turn on a few people who have never played a MML game by indicating why they should care, since presumably you are not the only person who will like whatever features you indicate.

I enjoyed the collectables you find in the dungeon, and how the seemingly useless items become fun sub weapons. The game provides great incentives to search every nook and cranny, and since your job is to be a treasure hunter it fits the theme of the game.

The various special events where you have to chase down villains for keys, battle a giant tank, or defend a fortress while Roll fixes the cannon were enjoyable. The banter between the heroes and villains while you battle really helps set the stage and provide the cinematic feeling that Gilbert pointed out.

[Gimym JIMBERT]

megaman + zelda + Dungeon crawler = MML

Also first truly successful cel shading before jet set radio

[Toom]

MML didn't actually use cel shading, though; the texture approach Capcom took with it resembles cel shading to an extent, but really is just that - highly stylised textures. It looks cool as all hell though.

[ஒழுக்கின்மை]

You should provide the metric by which you've come up with your opinion. Why is MML better than the 'actual' series? This would provide more fodder for discussion and perhaps turn on a few people who have never played a MML game by indicating why they should care, since presumably you are not the only person who will like whatever features you indicate.

i did. i said it's better as a videogame. it's really that simple. it's not about features or genre. videogames exist for a variety of purposes, but the primary one is entertainment. i found the legends series to be more entertaining than the sidescrollers. so in the metric of 'entertainment' i found the legends games to provide more of that to me than the main mega man series did.

now you could look into what exactly *caused* that, but i don't know, and i'd largely be making stuff up if i tried to explain why i found one more entertaining than the other. simplifying it into 'oh, one has feature x, which i like, and the other has feature y, which i don't like' does a disservice to the wholeness of entities, and to how things are more than the sum of their parts.

[Gimym JIMBERT]

It's a better video games or you like it better?
I still prefer my megaman 3 with good pacing and exciting situation other MML which is great but largely sloppy.

[ஒழுக்கின்மை]

but a better videogame *is* what i like better. that's what better videogame means: something people prefer. they're the same thing. there's no better videogame apart from the interaction between videogames and people.

of course there are other issues, such as craftsmanship. one can say that one game has better craftsmanship than another game even though it's not the better game. but that's not the same thing as 'better', because the purpose of videogames is to be experienced, so the better videogame (of a set of them) is the one that people liked to experience the most of that set.

[DavidCaruso]

of course there are other issues, such as craftsmanship. one can say that one game has better craftsmanship than another game even though it's not the better game. but that's not the same thing as 'better', because the purpose of videogames is to be experienced, so the better videogame (of a set of them) is the one that people liked to experience the most of that set.

How can you say one game has "better craftsmanship than" another if the former game is worse? I mean, the craftsmanship of a videogame basically depends on its entertainment value (or, in other words, the quality of the experience it gives you).

[C.A. Silbereisen]

Nah not really. A game can be perfectly polished but still boring (ex: Uncharted).

[Gimym JIMBERT]

There is different kind of craftmanship, The experience can be top notch but the technology behind, while the technology and the tightness of mechanics can be good but the experience bland (brown shooter)

[SirNiko]

i did. i said it's better as a videogame.

but i don't know, and i'd largely be making stuff up if i tried to explain why

C'mon, Paul. Stop playing philosopher and talk about reality. What part of MML did you like best? Name one thing so we can just discuss it.

[C.A. Silbereisen]

@Gilbert: I usually use "craftsmanship" to refer to the "technical" side of things, or more broadly, a skill learned according to a certain tradition or set of rules. I.e. the "techology and tightness of mechanics" part of your post would fall under craftsmanship and the "experience" part would fall under artistry/creativity.

There are specific rules you can follow to make a well-crafted (i.e. highly polished in every aspect) game but there's no perfect recipe to make a game that's actually good, not least because quality is subjective to a certain extent.

[Gimym JIMBERT]

Paul tend to like game with wandering when they have the MML format, zelda 1 is his favored zelda after all. I would like to have is apreciation of sonic 3 and K.

[C.A. Silbereisen]

Yeah, from what I've read of Paul's posts he likes RPG-type games and open exploration games. MML is both. It's pretty simple really.

[ஒழுக்கின்மை]

How can you say one game has "better craftsmanship than" another if the former game is worse? I mean, the craftsmanship of a videogame basically depends on its entertainment value (or, in other words, the quality of the experience it gives you).

this is something you have to experience. but perhaps analogy with other media might help: there are novels which are very well written, very well crafted, but which are not as engrossing as, say, books like harry potter, which have a lower standard of writing but which are nonetheless entertaining.

C'mon, Paul. Stop playing philosopher and talk about reality. What part of MML did you like best? Name one thing so we can just discuss it.

i don't know what you mean. i gave my answer. to talk of 'parts' makes no sense to me. i liked the whole experience, not individual parts. games are whole experiences, not a collection of parts to examine in isolation; if you want to call that "philosophy" feel free, but it's somewhat insulting to a really great game to ask what was the best "part", because what was the best part was that all the parts fit so well together and made a great total experience.

[Gimym JIMBERT]

The part Paul like is the SUM

[Ben_Hurr]

How can you say one game has "better craftsmanship than" another if the former game is worse? I mean, the craftsmanship of a videogame basically depends on its entertainment value (or, in other words, the quality of the experience it gives you).

this is something you have to experience. but perhaps analogy with other media might help: there are novels which are very well written, very well crafted, but which are not as engrossing as, say, books like harry potter, which have a lower standard of writing but which are nonetheless entertaining.

C'mon, Paul. Stop playing philosopher and talk about reality. What part of MML did you like best? Name one thing so we can just discuss it.

i don't know what you mean. i gave my answer. to talk of 'parts' makes no sense to me. i liked the whole experience, not individual parts. games are whole experiences, not a collection of parts to examine in isolation; if you want to call that "philosophy" feel free, but it's somewhat insulting to a really great game to ask what was the best "part", because what was the best part was that all the parts fit so well together and made a great total experience.

Oh that's easy to do.  For instance, I liked the entirety of Megaman Legends 2 except for the parts with the slow as molassas water level and the gravity changing in Elysium.

I would find it more strange to say absolutely everything about a game is good, or it isn't.

[ஒழுக்கின்மை]

there were certainly parts that were better than others, i just meant that the game isn't good *because* of its good parts, and a game isn't bad *because* of its bad parts. that's reductionist.

but yeah, there are bad parts of MML and good parts, just as with any game. for instance, i didn't like the voice acting on some of the characters. and, as someone mentioned, i liked that the dungeons were all part of one big interconnected dungeon, rather than separate distinct dungeons with no connections to each other like in the zelda games. but i don't like it or dislike it (or any other game) because of individual parts, i like games or dislike games because of how all the parts in those games work together or fail to work together

so when i say that i think mml2 is better than mm2, i mean that all the parts of mml2 work together better than all the parts of mm2 do, not that mml2 has more 'good parts' and fewer 'bad parts' than mm2 has. the exact understanding of how those parts work together better in one game than another game to create a user experience can't really be expressed here, though, because for one i don't know how it works (at least consciously), since i haven't made a detailed study of how the games achieve the effects they achieve, and for two even if i *did* know it it's more complicated than can be contained in forum posts, even long ones