Blogging the experience of gameplayhttps://www.gamelog.cl/gamers/GamerPage.php?idgamer=301https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=1398The Kirby series has always been a unique style of platformer. While it maintains many of the conventions of the genre (side-scrolling movement, jumping, ect) it is in practice a very different core mechanic from the Mario series or similar games. The ability to float allows you to easily bypass most obstacles that would give other characters pause, such as high walls. In this way, the usual long jumps and careful hops are replaced with more complex ariel maneuvers, such as flying through tight corridors while buffeted by wind. That said, the real innovation in the Kirby series lies in the ability to absorb powers. Almost every enemy has a special power of some kind, and when Kirby devours them he gains the ability to use that power. This creates interesting puzzles where you use the surrounding enemies and environment to find your way past obstacles. Perhaps you cut through challenging foes by stealing an enemy's sword, or burn through a wall by breathing fire. This keeps the game interesting and the puzzles varied, since you are constantly discovering new challenges and solutions to problems. Unfortunately, there are times when the mechanics limit the game design too much. For example, Kirby is not able to do any serious damage to boss monsters without either acquiring a power or spitting enemies at them. Thus, boss monsters are largely about which power you enter with, and if you lose the power you're reduced to sucking in their shots occasionally and trying to deal a bit of damage over time. Ultimately, it slows the game down and weakens the boss structure - I would much rather see bosses built around specific powers that you would have available throughout the fight. There is one battle that gives you a specific power (a swordfight) and it's easily one of the most enjoyable segments of the game. Peace, -SquidgetFri, 23 Feb 2007 06:57:10 CSThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=1398&iddiary=2959https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=1022The flying system in this game is crotch-punchingly frustrating. Mario swoops up and down almost out of the player's control, and trying to actually get anywhere quickly is an exercise in futility. Banjo-Kazooie (released less than two years later) showed how 3D platformer flying needs to be done. I have no idea what they were trying to accomplish with Mario 64 flying, so I can only assume the designer in question was dropped on his head as a child. Repeatedly. The other two cap powerups are the Vanishing Cap (allows Mario to pass through some walls) and the Metal Cap (makes Mario metal and really heavy.) They each have their own uses in specific puzzles, but everything feels fairly obvious. Either you have the required cap unlocked and the puzzle is easy, or you don't and the puzzle is impossible. Unlocking the caps is difficult and fun, but the reward is a bunch of easy stars that don't really feel rewarding. Most levels feature some hidden locations which will teleport Mario if he stands still for a few seconds. Unfortunately, there is no marker for these locations, so unless you feel like wandering around the level you'll only find them randomly. The teleporters are never necessary for level completion, but they avoid a lot of pointless wandering and I often wish they were more obvious. Most later platformers included Warp Pads throughout the levels that allow you to cover ground easily, and that feature worked out much better. Apologies for the stream of consciousness writing on this one. Peace, -SquidgetWed, 31 Jan 2007 17:16:01 CSThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=1022&iddiary=2315https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=1022Describing Mario is always a difficult task, because everyone who would be reading this page is intimately familiar with Mario. You already know who Mario is and the elements of a Mario game if you have had any knowledge of games at all, so what is their left to say? Still, I'll do my best to describe what made this game a success when it launched (aside from being 50% of the N64's launch titles, competing with Pilot Wings.) The core gameplay concept of Mario is pretty standard for any recent platformer. You go through levels collecting items which can be used to access more levels later on - the same style was used to a degree in earlier Mario games, and in other platformers such as the Donkey Kong Country series. Despite being the first real 3-dimensional platformer, Mario remains true to its predecessors and allows platformer fans to find some familiarity in what must have been a wholly unfamiliar experience. The levels themselves are each structured around 6 stars. Stars you find within the levels allow you to open doors into other levels, and acquiring a star removes you from whatever level you are currently in. As the level opens you select which star you want to look for, and the level changes slightly so the star you selected is achievable. Since collecting a star removes you from the level, this forces the player to replay a level 6 times in order to find all the stars. While this is a great way to add hours onto the game, any gamer familiar with Donkey Kong 64 will tell you how much it sucks to repeatedly replay a slightly different level trying to acquire more of the same items you already have. Mario 64 makes up for this by making most of the stars fairly easy to acquire if you know where to look, but some levels (particularly the ones without teleporters) get really boring after the first few stars are found. On its release the biggest thing this game had going for it was pure 3D movement, and the developers did an excellent job making movement fun. Mario can do all kinds of jumps and flips, bounce off walls, and gives oddly satisfying shouts and screams when he falls into a pit of lava. Unfortunately, the fun of movement is weakened by the camera system, which is hideous by today's platformer standards. Navigate a narrow ledge is a perfectly reasonable platformer challenge, but trying to navigate a narrow ledge the camera is stuck in a wall or directly in front of Mario's nose is a new definition of torture. That kind of gameplay always sends me into a creative cursing spree of the kind I would usually reserve for accidently stabbing myself in the eye. Peace, -SquidgetWed, 31 Jan 2007 05:04:32 CSThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=1022&iddiary=2195https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=925It's very simple. Peace, -SquidgetSun, 28 Jan 2007 16:28:51 CSThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=925&iddiary=2038https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=908I have very mixed feelings about this game. On the one hand it has incredibly simplistic and repetitive gameplay that wouldn't interest me in other games. On the other hand, D2 has managed to keep me entertained off-and-on for years. I'm still working through how it succeeds where others of its kind fail, but there are several mechanics that I think are key. The core mechanics of Diablo II are very simple. You run around and use your abilities on monsters, while trying to dodge the abilities they use - it's fairly fast-paced, but on a 2D field there isn't a lot of room to play in so these mechanics wouldn't stand on their own. The way the abilities in Diablo II are set up is what has always struck me - basically, every class gets a set of abilities with a wide range of usefulness, and a few classes get abilities that are retardedly overpowered in the context of the game. For example, one of the most important mechanics of the game is hit points, and the toughest enemies in the game are almost all defined by their hit points. A chapter boss is different from a normal monster largely because he's harder to kill, plus a few special abilities and a bit of extra damage. However, the Sorceress class gets a spammable ability called Static Field which takes 1/3rd of the hitpoints from everything in the area (regardless of how many they have). This largely invalidates the hitpoint mechanic for that class, since you can drain massive amounts of HP chain-casting static field and then finish enemies off with...well... anything. And that's fine. It's a PvE game, and a lot of the fun of PvE games is ripping through hordes of enemies without a lot of trouble. For the first two 'levels' of the game ('Normal' and 'Nightmare') this is pretty much what happens no matter who you play. Every enemy type has some special abilities that differentiate it from others, but it really doesn't matter at all. Even if you do get into trouble, you can always open a portal to return to town instantly, escaping whatever monsters were chasing you. This encourages a lot of carelessness on the early difficulties. What kinds of spells does this next enemy cast? How are 'Stygian Bone Dolls' different from 'Oblivion Knights'? Who cares? I'm killing everything instantly with whirlwind attacks and ridiculous 10,000 damage assassin combos. I think I'm good at this game! When you get to the final difficulty level (aptly titled 'Hell'), the monsters get major damage buffs and a lot more abilities at their disposal, some of which absolutely destroy players. As an example - players in D2 tend to have low hit points and deal massive damage, while monsters tend to have high hitpoints and deal low damage. This is fine until you run across monsters with a curse called Iron Maiden that returns the damage you deal onto your own health total. This curse is famous for one-shotting players who use physical attacks, and as a melee character your only real option against Iron Maiden is to run in circles until it wears off, or just avoid the enemies that use it entirely. The monsters on hell difficulty have skills and immunities specifically designed such that they're almost impossible for certain classes to kill. Running into hordes of high-damage monsters that are immune to all of your attacks is commonplace towards the end of the game. This, in turn, creates a really weird situation. By the time you get to Hell, the core gameplay itself has grown pretty stale, but its kept interesting by these stupidly overpowered abilities that insta-kill you if you're not constantly on your toes. This manages to keep the gameplay itself interesting, combined with some other factors which I'll describe in another entry. It's an interesting lesson in game design. Imbalanced skills aren't necessarily bad for the game. If the overpowered skills were removed from Diablo II, I doubt nearly as many people would still be playing it or enjoying the gameplay. They really are what keeps it interesting. Peace, -Squidget (This entry has been edited3 times. It was last edited on Thu, 25 Jan 2007 22:21:58.)Thu, 25 Jan 2007 21:53:58 CSThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=908&iddiary=2007https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=873Having played through this game (completely) over the last few days, I felt it deserved some discussion. I've played a very large number of old school platformers and the Donkey Kong Country series stands out as the best of them. I can continue to replay these games long after I've grown bored with Mario, and in my mind they stand out as some of the best platformer design I've ever come across. Most more recent platformers (post-NES) aren't just about passing the levels or getting through the storyline - those are an important and integral part of the gameplay, but to truly complete a platformer you always have to find a multitude of secrets. These secrets are usually hidden off the beaten path and require a fair amount of exploration and puzzle-solving. While a weaker or more casual player might find the levels a challenge enough, a hardcore gamer can comb every level for hours trying to find that last item and get 100% completion. Donkey Kong Country 2 handles this duality perfectly, with levels that are challenging in their own right and secrets that are hidden just well enough to keep the gamer interested. First, the levels. Each level in DKC2 has its own 'gimmick' that subtly changes the way the game is played. On one level you might find the gravity has been lowered and your jumps will take you twice their usual distance. On another level you're stuck on a twisted roller coaster, jumping your car to grab bananas or dodge other cars while you move quickly up and down the various tracks. On yet another level, acid is constantly rising below you and you have to climb up instead of moving left to right. Creating so many gimmicks (DKC2 has dozens of levels) is a feat in its own right, and it makes each stage feel new enough that the player never gets bored. On to the secrets - secrets in DKC2 are structured such that each level has one 'big' secret (a large golden DK coin), two or three bonus rooms, and a multitude of small bananas and extra lives. Before you enter a level you are able to look at which secrets you found - since the levels themselves are fairly short, this makes each secret feel very achievable. You know that that taunting DK Coin is in somewhere in this relatively small area, but you don't know where. None of DKC2's secrets are without some clue as to where they might be hiding. Alarm bells start to go off when a player sees a certain feature. For example, the small bananas (identical in function to Mario's coins) are always indicating something about the secret. If a single small banana is placed against a wall, you know it's there for a reason and that you should check that wall. If the banana is over a deadly pit, you know that you can jump into the pit without fear - something will always be there to save you. At the same time, the rest of the level actively pushes you away from the secrets. Jumping from one vine to the next feels right and makes sense, while jumping to get a single banana in a pit feels like a stupid move. The player starts to question every action and every assumption, and a segment of gameplay that's really only a few minutes can be massively extended as they search every nook and cranny for the elusive secret. In this way, the player quickly learns that the path the gameplay provides isn't always the correct one. The first few levels of DKC2 have you moving left to right in the usual platform style - then suddenly, you come upon a DK coin hidden just to the left or just above the starting point. If the player finds this coin, they'll forever be questioning their left to right assumption. They'll try to move left or up at the start of every level, looking for another secret. They'll always be wondering if there isn't another way to go. The really amazing thing is how little effort it must have taken to create these secrets. The graphics and gameplay around them is really miniscule from a design standpoint. However, they add massively to the game's lifespan and replayability, since you can always find something new and you'll always be looking for some special item off the beaten path. A 2-minute level might take 10 minutes, all because of one or two well-placed secrets. I'd recommend this game to anyone designing a platformer. It really is one of the best. Peace, -SquidgetSun, 21 Jan 2007 21:54:58 CSThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=873&iddiary=1936https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=723Just for completeness sake, I decided to spend the second half of my logged time messing around in the Super Smash Brothers single player. In this version, the single player consists of a series of AI fights, culminating in a boss battle with the "Master Hand." After how much I've played this game I didn't expect to have fun slaughtering AI, but it turned out more interesting than I expected despite having gone through it so many times. One of the best features of single player in SSB is the award system. After each battle you are given a series of awards and titles that affect your point total - for example, if you completed the battle in under 30 seconds you receive a "Speedster" award and a bonus to your score. The sheer variety of these awards ensure that you will get at least a few every match, and they encourage the player to try some crazy things in order to see what new awards they can find. Winning a match using only a beam sword gets you an award. Finishing Giant Donkey Kong without any allies taking damage gets you a special award unique to that match. Even dying just before your enemy (within 5 seconds) gets you a special award for a suicidal kill. Since points in the game are meaningless you wouldn't expect so much out of the mechanic, but it really goes a long way towards making each game unique and interesting. The AI is reasonably well-built, but like most video game AI, the best way to win against it is finding holes in the programming rather than just playing the game as you normally would. On some levels you can force kills just by jumping around, since the AI will eventually fall into a pit trying to chase you around the map. The AI ignores motion sensor bombs, so you can simply evade until you find one and then throw it in the bot's path for an easy kill. In short, there are a multitude of ways to win without fighting that greatly reduce the challenge of the single player. If you do choose to fight the AI head on it is actually a decent opponent, using it moves well and countering your play over time. Overall, multiplayer is definitely the strong suit of SSB, but the single player is perfectly enjoyable in its own right. It serves as both a way to get used to the controls and, on the higher levels, a way to test your skill. Extemely well-designed overall. Peace, -Squidget (This entry has been edited1 time. It was last edited on Sun, 21 Jan 2007 22:23:07.)Fri, 19 Jan 2007 17:12:53 CSThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=723&iddiary=1845https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=723"Haha, owned!" "Dammit that move is cheap!" "Play to win." "You just say that because you're using Kirby!" That conversation should be familiar to anyone who plays Super Smash Brothers with frequency. The ability to start arguments and shouting matches among good friends is the mark of a great competitive game, and Super Smash Brothers is no exception. With an easy learning curve, strong casual and competitive play, and an easy to learn system of moves and combos, SSB is one of the strongest competitive games to be released on any console system. The structure of the game is such that any bad player can pick up a controller and probably do some damage. The movement is simple but fast-paced and rewards quick reflexes and agressiveness. At the same time, the control system seperates good players from bad ones, as bad players will stick almost entirely to their character's special moves (B-activated) without ever realizing how powerful the simple A-activated attacks really are. As a player learns the power of the A-attacks in combos with the special moves they improve and are able to compete against tougher opponents. At the same time, new players can beat on each other with the B attacks and have a great time doing it - they won't become frustrated or feel like they can't do anything, because the B attacks are relatively strong when used on their own. The health system in SSB is a nice innovation that really makes the game. As a character takes hits their 'percentage' rises higher and higher (I'm not sure why percentage is used since it can easily go beyond 100), and the higher their percentage the easier they are to knock around. A life is lost when a character is knocked off the stage, which can usually only be done at a relatively high percentage due to the large number of movement and jumping options available. This creates a situation where some moves are good at building percentages and others are good at smashing people around. Players have to use a variety of moves to consistently get kills, rather than relying on a single attack as is the case in some 2D fighting games. Unfortunately, this excellent framework is marred by weak balance. At the higher levels of the game there are only a few characters really worth running, and one in particular (Kirby) dominates mid-level play. On the plus side, all the characters are useful to new players and you can play your favorite character in casual games without feeling too handicapped by it. This is a game I've had a fair amount of experience with, and playing today was no different. I went in with my usual Kirby and won every match against various opponents on the floor. Later I switched to Luigi (a weak character, but one I enjoy playing) and started losing pretty consistently. While I've dropped most other Nintendo 64 games by the wayside long ago, this is one that I can always come back to and enjoy - the sign of a true classic. Peace, -Squidget (This entry has been edited1 time. It was last edited on Sun, 21 Jan 2007 22:23:19.)Thu, 18 Jan 2007 19:07:29 CSThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=723&iddiary=1622https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=638Playing this game through several missions has strengthened my opinion that the design needed more time before release. There are several mechanics in place that don't make sense or contradict themselves. For example, as they engage in battle, units level up and become stronger in the usual RPG style. Since your army is carried between missions, this encourages a defensive playstyle where you try to keep your units alive at any cost, since so much effort is invested in making them good. However, buildings also level up as they produce more units, and to access the best units you need your buildings to have leveled up several times. This creates a weird situation where you want your units to die so you can upgrade your buildings (see the aforementioned low command limit), but you also want your units to live so they can level up and become stronger. The outcome of this is that every battle turns into a bunch of complex micromanagement where you try to keep certain units alive while killing others so you can maximize the power of both your units and your buildings. In a game so focused on creating an atmosphere, having to constantly think about these game mechanics really harms this game's presentation. That said, one thing that did impress me while playing the game was the sound. Unlike most RTS games, giving a unit an order actually illicits an appropriate response - if you tell them to retreat they shout things like "Fall Back!" and "Reform the Lines!", while telling them to attack gives calls of battle or the sound of Rohan's Horns. It's a great touch that really adds to the game's presentation and makes you feel as if the battle is actually going on. Heroes are another place where EA did suprisingly well. Many of the hero abilities can be used to amazing effect when micromanaged, and allow for fun 'stunts.' One memorable moment involved Gimli catapulting off the wall of Helm's Deep into a group of orcish warriors, sending them flying in every direction and finishing the stragglers with a few swings of his axe. The sound, music, and mechanics come together beautifully in moments like that to make you feel as if you were playing the movie. Overall, it's an enjoyable game and if you're willing to overlook the mechanical flaws and just have fun with it. I intend to keep playing it, though whether I'll go through the Evil side of the campaign remains to be seen.Thu, 18 Jan 2007 18:38:10 CSThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=638&iddiary=1618https://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=638After the massive success of Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings films, EA released a slew of games based on the franchise with varying levels of success. In the past EA Games has shown their willingness to release subpar material in the name of a franchise, but LoTR: Battle for Middle Earth proved a refreshing exception. It is obvious from the first minute (once you get past the long and un-skippable opening logos) that presentation and immersion were at the top of EA's priority list for this game. The voiceovers, music, and sounds of battle as you play through the opening level (the infamous Mines of Moria) are all either taken directly from the movies or feel as if they were. The approach works suprisingly well - the real appeal of a Lord of the Rings game is playing the part of the characters within the world, and the team in charge of this game seemed to understand that well. Unfortunately, there are times when this focus on presentation seems to have made the gameplay suffer, and there are a few issues that probably would have been fixed if more attention was spent on the actual gameplay. The command limit (a mechanism that prevents you from building past a certain number of units) feels extremely restricting and often leaves you unable to mount a successful offense. In most RTS games, the command limit is in place to restrict your army from getting to ridiculous levels, but in TBfME, it seems to hit just as you start to get a reasonably sized force. Completing missions in the campaign can increase the command limit though, so this problem may become less of an issue later on. There are other more minor problems that still seem like something the QA department should have caught. For example, I can place archers into nearby ruined towers to better fortify my defenses, but there's no way for me to take the archers out again when I want to attack. They're stuck in the tower permanently with no warning. It seems strange that that kind of gameplay mechanic was able to get through when the presentation remains so polished and effective. There are also certain aspects of the gameplay that break the otherwise excellent atmosphere. Buildings level up as you create units out of them, forcing you to send existing units into pointless deaths if you want to be able to build the best upgrades while remaining within the command limit. Gandalf's fight with the Balrog should be an epic event, but it's actually just 5 minutes of clicking in a circle and hitting skills occasionally because of the RTS gameplay's weakness when it comes to 1v1 battles. Overall, the game remains enjoyable, but that enjoyment is largely attributable to atmosphere and association with the movies, rather than compelling gameplay. Strip away Ian Mckellen's voiceovers and the fancy music and you'd have a game that doesn't stand on its own. Still, it's good to see that EA isn't completely incapable of making something that is both a franchise and a reasonably enjoyable game. Peace, -SquidgetFri, 12 Jan 2007 20:26:34 CSThttps://www.gamelog.cl/logs/LogPage.php?Log_Id=638&iddiary=1469