Flack's Top 15 Games

Post a reply


This question is a means of preventing automated form submissions by spambots.
Smilies
:smile: :sad: :eek: :shock: :cool: :-x :razz: :oops: :evil: :twisted: :wink: :idea: :arrow: :neutral: :mrgreen:

BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[url] is ON
Smilies are ON

Topic review
   

Expand view Topic review: Flack's Top 15 Games

by Flack » Wed Nov 24, 2010 11:22 am

Is it anything like Spectre 3D?

Spectre 3D is kind of like multiplayer Battlezone. It is both the first game I ever played on a Macintosh computer, and the first multiplayer LAN game I ever played (this would have been pre-Doom -- say, 1993/94).

Essentially, the game involves running around a virtual grid, collecting flags and shooting things without getting shot. In single-player mode it's you against a bunch of AI tanks, but in multiplayer it becomes a race as to who can collect the most flags (and avoid getting blowed up real good). In the mid-90s I got a copy of the game for the PC and not only did it support local LAN play, but dial-up head-to-head battles as well, which worked great. The vector-like graphics leg to very little lag due to graphics.

by pinback » Wed Oct 27, 2010 9:26 am

Ice Cream Jonsey wrote:What was that game that was like Colored Line Fight and Battlezone that you wanted me to play for 22 minutes?
Flywrench

by Flack » Wed Oct 27, 2010 6:32 am

I'm not hating on puppygames in general -- I'm hating on the fact that they made an homage to one of my favorite games and took out my favorite part.

If puppygames starts releasing porn without the nudity, I will hate on it too.

by Ice Cream Jonsey » Tue Oct 26, 2010 11:24 pm

What was that game that was like Colored Line Fight and Battlezone that you wanted me to play for 22 minutes?

by pinback » Tue Oct 26, 2010 9:53 pm

Ice Cream Jonsey wrote:I'm a little late to the thread, but willing to hate. What are we hating? An iPhone app? Fucking Jobs!
No, we're hating a puppygames homage to Paradroid, which makes me sad, because puppygames games are really... they're charming, is what they are.

Are they Apocalypse Now Blu-Ray on your high-def entertainment center? No. But they're goddamn Planes, Trains, and Automobiles in a hotel room at 2 AM when you really need it.

by Ice Cream Jonsey » Tue Oct 26, 2010 9:08 pm

I'm a little late to the thread, but willing to hate. What are we hating? An iPhone app? Fucking Jobs!

by pinback » Tue Oct 26, 2010 5:11 pm

Flack wrote:I will hate that.
=(

by Flack » Tue Oct 26, 2010 3:15 pm

I will hate that.

by pinback » Tue Oct 26, 2010 9:52 am

Flack wrote:
pinback wrote:FLACK WHAT ABOUT THIS??????????????
I'll check it out, for sure. There are a couple of versions of Paradroid out for the iPhone right now, too.
The primary difference, based on your description above, is that transferring happens in a second or two if you right-click on the enemy, providing you have enough "transfer points" to zap into the other droid. There is no circuit-board minigame. You earn transfer points by racking up points and collecting powerups.

If the minigame was your favorite part OH MAN WILL YOU HATE THIS.

by Flack » Tue Oct 26, 2010 5:43 am

pinback wrote:FLACK WHAT ABOUT THIS??????????????
I'll check it out, for sure. There are a couple of versions of Paradroid out for the iPhone right now, too.

by Tdarcos » Mon Oct 25, 2010 9:24 am

Flack wrote:
Ice Cream Jonsey wrote:Flack gave up the Internet for a week. I hope you're all happy. I blame the terrible thi- ah fuckit


FLAAAAAAAAAAAAACK
What she doesn't know won't hurt her. Someday I will explain to her how VNC works.
Tell her it's like the bird in the camera in The Flintstones who chips out a picture of what he sees.

by Tdarcos » Mon Oct 25, 2010 9:15 am

Flack wrote:In the text adventure genre, there is nothing more frustrating to a gamer than confusing a game's parser with seemingly reasonable requests. Most programmers are smart enough to accommodate logical requests -- say, eating an apple ("You consume the apple. It tastes delicious.") -- but think outside the box just a little and the computer will quickly let you know in its own cold way that you are off track. [DELETED]
For two decades this remained a problem; in fact, it happens in first-person shooters all the time. Why is it that Navy Seals cannot seem to climb over small fences?
TV Tropes has a whole page about the typical video game problem of the Insurmountable waist-high fence. The whole idea of simple obstacles you can't get through is lampshaded in episode #172 of Concerned: The Half-Life and Death of Gordon Frohman:

Gordon: Locked Door, we have to go around!
Medic: Oh, uh, why doesn't he just shoot the lock off? He's got a shotgun, a rocket launcher and heck, he's got a foot!
Gordon: Shhh! You can't shoot through doors or kick them down!
Medic: What is it, a super door? We've watched him smash open how many crates with a crowbar? Sixty jillion? And yet a door is impossible to pry open?

by pinback » Mon Oct 25, 2010 8:22 am

Flack wrote:#06. Paradroid

Image

Image

While many modern games have staffs in the hundreds and budgets in the millions (I'm looking at you, Jonsey), in the 1980s it was not uncommon to see games, particularly computer games, written by one or two people. Because games could be designed, programmed, and sometimes even duplicated in someone's home, you ended up with a lot of weird and quirky and odd games being released. A lot of times those games turned out to be crap (games written by a single person don't tend to have a lot of quality control built in -- I'm looking at you, Jonsey), but occasionally, one of them would simply click. Paradroid is one of those games that simply clicked.

In Paradroid, you control a robot that looks a lot like a helmet. Your goal is to clear an entire spaceship of all evil enemy robots. Each robot is identified by a three digit number; the higher the number, the more powerful the robot is. Ultimately you will have to defeat the 999 robot. You, you floating helmet you, begin life as "001".

Enemy robots can be shot, but as a 001 you are no match for most other robots on the ship with your weak armor and firepower. Instead, you can opt to hijack you enemies by transferring to them. Transferring to another robot involves beating it in a mini-game where you must control more circuits than the robot you are battling. This takes place in a crazy electronic battle where you physically attempt to overpower your opponent by electronically attacking it in a fast-paced battle. If you lose and are controlling another robot, that robot will disappear and you will be demoted back to a 001. If you are still at 001, you will become unstable and explode in a few seconds. Such is life as a floating helmet.

The layout of each circuit is randomly generated, which means every battle is different. You as the player get to choose which side of the circuit you wish to play, so you never lose a battle because you were handed "the wrong side". Each circuit contains dead ends, voltage boosters, Y splitters and V splitters ... and you have about ten seconds to pick which side you wish to play. It's less complicated to play than it is to describe. Here'a a video to demonstrate how it works.

[youtube][/youtube]

It may sound simple, but the gameplay, especially with more advanced robots, gets very hectic very quickly. Nothing sucks more than losing to a higher robot and being instantly demoted back to a 001, leaving yourself quite vulnerable. Sometimes, the robot you are controlling with become unstable, at which point you will have mere seconds to find another robot to overtake, or risk exploding. Paradroid is a lot of things, but dull is not one of them.

Despite the game's simple and straight-forward goal, I don't remember ever beating it -- if I did, it's been many years ago. Like a few other great games, simply playing Paradroid is so much fun that winning takes a back seat to simply playing it. It's kind of like a futuristic version of Rogue, but with less potion quaffing and more lasers.

Paradroid was originally released on the Commodore 64, and that (in my opinion) is still the best version. It was also ported to the Amiga and Atari ST machines, but I haven't played either of those versions. Paradroid appeared on that all-in-one C64 Joystick thing released a few years back, so that's another place to get it. If you live in Europe, Paradroid was released for the Wii Virtual Console over there (but not in the states, because Mario hates you). There is also a fairly accurate free DOS version (http://paradroid.sourceforge.net) and a graphically updated version (http://paradroid.ovine.net).
FLACK WHAT ABOUT THIS??????????????

http://puppygames.net/droid-assault/

Puppygames's'es "homage to paradroid"!! And all puppygameses games are good.

by Flack » Sat Aug 21, 2010 3:17 pm

I guess I should have why it was an "honorable mention" and didn't make the top fifteen.

Although it's a good idea and a fun game, it's also a one trick pony. If you've played one of these games, you've played them all. The only difference between them (other than the background animations) are the music tracks.

Also, while I think the plastic instruments are neat, after a while they just end up taking up space around the house.

Although I've yet to be able to see it in person, I'd love to check out this port of Guitar Hero for the Commodore 64.

[youtube][/youtube]

by AArdvark » Fri Aug 20, 2010 2:45 pm

The only thing I ever liked about GH is that, with the proper adapter I was able to play several other games with the controller. Ever play Boulderdash with the GH guitar? I tried that and a few other games, Nothing spectacular but it was kinda fun.



THE
WINDMILL
GAME OVER
AARDVARK

by Flack » Fri Aug 20, 2010 2:30 pm

HONORABLE MENTION
Guitar Hero/Rock Band

As everybody knows, tennis rackets are the "gateway instrument" between air guitars and real guitars. Tennis rackets are roughly shaped like guitars, and the tactile sensation of flicking your fingers across a racket's strings is more enjoyable than plain old mid-air strumming. As a kid, before I owned a tennis racket my pretend guitar-du-jour was a baseball bat. I played the pretend electric bat for a few months before finally acquiring a tennis racket at a garage sale (for the sole purpose of using it as a pretend guitar -- I had zero interest in tennis). By third grade I had graduated to a real (cheap) acoustic guitar, and before long my worthless uncle gifted me an old broke electric guitar. It didn't work (it didn't even have any strings), but was a hell of a lot more fun to play "rock star" with than any goofy acoustic guitar, tennis racket, or baseball bat (especially after a few coats of black spray paint.)

E chords are one of the easiest guitar chords to learn. You can master it in 30 seconds; learning it is just a matter of pressing a couple of fingers in the right frets. There's nothing particularly difficult or sexy about the technical execution of it, but when played on an electric guitar with proper amounts of of distortion and volume it's like having sex, winning the Super Bowl, and punching everyone who has ever been mean to you in the face all at once.

So do Guitar Hero and Rock Band give you that same feeling? In a way, I suppose, in the same way karaoke gives people their three minutes of cheers (or jeers). I mean, you're performing in front of other people, and that's kind of a rush, even if "other people" simply equates to all your other nerdy friends who also grew up playing the electric tennis racket.

There were several rhythm-based games around before the dawn of Guitar Hero. Most people instantly think of Dance Dance Revolution (DDR), but you also had Konami's Guitar Freaks and Drum Mania, which were definitely Rock Band predecessors. Because they were arcade games you got the thrill of performing in front of other people, but that also meant learning how to play those games in front of other people, and that can be intimidating. A few of those games made it to the home market, but none of them were terribly successful there. There were multiple DDR games (both licensed and knock-offs) with plastic dance pads that were greatly inferior to their arcade counterparts. Konami's Guitar Freaks actually made it to the home market, but in Japan. US gamers who went through the trouble of importing the game (and modifying their PlayStations in order to play it) found it full of Japanese pop music (makes sense).

But Guitar Hero got it right. Standing on the shoulders of Guitar Freaks, Harmonix and Activision took the thrill of being an American rock star and somehow bottled it into a video game. And people love it, or at least loved it. Put it this way; the first Guitar Hero game was released in November of 2005. That means Guitar Hero and Rock Band are both less than five years old, and yet if you know somebody who is into modern gaming of any kind, they probably have at least one plastic guitar stored away in their hall closet. We have several.

The first thing Guitar Hero did right was included a cool guitar. The original was a scaled down Gibson SC, but later you could get Gibson X-Plorers, Les Pauls, and Fender Telecaster clones as well. We've officially graduated from tennis rackets, my friends.

The second thing Guitar Hero did right was include some classic guitar tracks. The first game alone contains track s from Audioslave, Bad Religion, Black Sabbath, Blue Oyster Cult, Cream, Deep Purple, Helmet, Jimi Hendrix, Joan Jett, Judas Priest, Megadeth, Motorhead, Ozzy, Pantera, Queen, Red Hot Chili Peppers, The Donnas, The Ramones, White Zombie, and ZZ Top. Sure they were cover versions, but they sounded pretty darn close to the originals. Later games licensed official tracks.

Rock Star raised by the bar by adding drums and vocals to the mix; Guitar Hero countered with Guitar World Hero. At this point, both series essentially interchangeable (in fact, most of the instruments on the market at this point work with both games). There are tons of spin off games as well, especially in the vocal/karaoke category. If you're a singer, you're in luck -- no longer are you limited to bellowing out tunes in the shower. Now you can bellow them into a plastic microphone.

Both programmers and bands saw the importance of getting real studio recordings into these games, a move that culminated in entire releases dedicated to single bands: Guitar Hero: Aerosmith, Guitar Hero: Van Halen, and Guitar Hero: Metallica gave players the ability to virtually jam along with their favorite bands. Rock Band countered with Rock Band: The Beatles and Rock Band: Green Day. The Who and Queen are rumored to be working on Rock Band releases as well.

But back to my original question. Does standing in your living room and prancing around with a guitar-shaped piece of plastic really make you feel like a rock star? And surprisingly the answer is yeah, it kinda does. When your hand starts cramping while you're mashing your way through those rapid fire machine gun triplets in Slayer'S Raining Blood, despite the fact that you're doing it in your living room on toy guitar, yeah, there's a small part of you that kind of feels like a bad ass.

In five years, Guitar Hero went from being a single game to not only a multi-million (probably billion) dollar franchise, but a genre as well. I mentioned Rock Band and SingStar, but there are dozens of others (I've got DJ Hero sitting on top of my entertainment center) and new contenders coming out all the time. Will there be an end? Probably. But for the thrill it gives you, even if it doesn't last forever, Guitar Hero and Rock Band make the honorable mention list.

by Flack » Sat Aug 14, 2010 6:14 am

I have four or five games that got cut from the list that I'll be posting as honorable mentions soon. Gauntlet is on the honorable mention list.

by Flack » Thu Aug 05, 2010 10:15 pm

#01. Super Mario Bros. 3

Image

The Nintendo Entertainment System (NES) arrived on US shores the fall of 1985 -- seventh grade, for me. Bundled with every system came a cute little platform game called Super Mario Bros. While it wasn't the first platform game, at the time of its release, it was probably the best.

On the surface Super Mario Bros. is a good -- no, great -- platform game. The level designs are creative and challenging, the enemies can be difficult to avoid, there are puzzles ... that's what made it a great game. What made it awesome was the game within the game. Super Mario Bros. is multidimensional. There's a treasure trove of hidden things in Super Mario Bros. There are bricks hidden within bricks, secret tunnels ... just all sorts of crazy things. When I was in mid-high, there were kids who were revered for their physical prowess on the football field, and there were kids that were worshiped for their Super Mario skills. Seriously. Many of my friends who had been written off as dorks suddenly became popular by knowing how to get the fireworks at the end of each level and how to use the turtle glitch on 1-2 to get "infinite" lives ...

A few years later Super Mario Bros. 2 came out and I (and many other kids at that time) walked around school with giant question marks above our heads wondering, "What just happened?" At that time we didn't know that Nintendo had just taken another game (bonus points awarded if you know it was "Yume Kojo Doki Doki Panic") and changed the graphics on it to make it appear to be a Mario game. And even though kids are stupid it never really made much sense that Mario and his friends might go around pulling vegetables out of the ground and opening magic doors for no apparent reason. It was different enough from the original that I'm sure many people the Mario boon was over.

If you think about it, Mario as a franchise at that point in time was pretty weak. You had Donkey Kong (before Mario was "Mario"), you had the original Mario Bros. (which most kids in my school didn't even know about), and you had Super Mario Bros. Super Mario Bros. and Mario himself became the spokesman for the NES, and with that alone came the lunchboxes and the cartoons and the cereal, but I don't know that at that time anybody knew there would be a Mario franchise for like, forever. And after seeing SMB2, a lot of people saw SMB1 as a great game and SMB2 as a crappy sequel, and thought that would be the end of that.

But then came Super Mario Bros. 3 (SMB3). And while the mechanics of SMB3 were similar to SMB1, the game had expanded in so many ways. There's a spot in 1-1 (the first world and level of SMB3) where, after obtaining a brown feather, Mario can fly for short periods of time. Take off in the right spot on level one and you'll reach the clouds; at the end of the clouds, there's a pipe. Inside the pipe players found a big number "3", written out in gold coins. With a single number, the game developers were able to show gamers some of the new features of SMB3, and welcome old players to this new world. Everything about SMB3 screamed "more" -- there were more levels, more enemies, more challenges, more bonus items ... and more fun.

There are parts of SMB3 that are frustratingly hard. Very, very few of the enemies you'll face are randomized, and most of the levels can be beat eventually through trial and error and memorization. SMB3 is also pretty loose with the extra lives, at least in the earlier levels.

I've played hundreds of platformers over the past three decades, and there's something wrong with almost all of them. Some of them have "more" wrong than others, of course. Some of them down right stink. Some are good and some are great, but none of them are perfect. Even the best of the best have "something" that could have been improved; perhaps an enemy could have been harder here, or a level could have been easier there. And that is where the beauty in Super Mario Bros. 3 lies: it's essentially perfect. It is the yin and the yang, the ultimate balance in gaming. It's neither too hard nor too easy. Every time you die you know why, and see a way to prevent it from happening the next time. Kids can play it, grown ups can play it ... anybody can play it.

It is, in my mind, the greatest game of all time.

by Flack » Sat Jul 31, 2010 7:10 pm

Saints Row is different from GTA in the fact that it's a bit more open in the order you can do stuff. Also, the weapons system is much better. They replaced auto-targeting with a manual aiming system, and you can shoot while you're driving, which is as fun as it sounds. It's much more gang-related stuff. I don't know, GTA is great, but in GTA4 I got tired of driving people's girlfriends around and doing stupid errands which is why I usually end up just stealing cop cars and driving around running over pedestrians.

GTA4 is better at saving than GTA3. In GTA4 you can save manually by going to your apartment or you can also autosave, which means you can usually revert back to right before you started a mission. That's a lot better than having to drive around for 10 minutes after restarting after getting killed for the 100th time.

The modern world of emulation save states pretty much killed how I feel about saving. With a save state you freeze a game at any time, save it, and can reload it at any time. That's how saving should work. Dealing with game saves shouldn't be a part of the game anymore, IMHO.

by Ice Cream Jonsey » Sat Jul 31, 2010 11:11 am

These threads are so fucking great.

OK, question. QUESTION. Is any Saints Row game better than any post-GTA2 GTA game? Like, is Saints Row 2 better than Vice City or something?

Also, Flack, what is your take on the way GTA games allow you to save? What is your taaaaaaaake?

Top