Gaming News

Zero-Cool

Penn wrote: »

I'm starting to hate your recommendations. They make me feel bad and angry.

His recommendation pushed me over the edge, looking forward to getting stuck in. I heard it's the dark souls of 30's cartoons.

Penn

Zero-Cool wrote: »

His recommendation pushed me over the edge, looking forward to getting stuck in. I heard it's the dark souls of 30's cartoons.

Pretty sure I've died more so far in Cuphead than my entire Bloodborne playthrough.

I have some concerns about how sometimes it seems arbitrary how many shots it takes to kill certain enemies, and how inconsistent the rules can be, but other than that, its a lot of fun. Tough, but fun.

Potential-Monke

Zero-Cool wrote: »

I heard it's the dark souls of 30's cartoons.

Aaaaaand i'm out. Unsurprisingly, does not sound like a game I will enjoy. I was waiting for someone to say this because that seems to be the main theme when checking online about it. Didn't want to be the one to say it.

Temptamperu

It never looked attractive to me. It just looked like a pain in the hole.

johnny_ultimate

Dark Souls is a clunky and IMO inaccurate comparison for Cuphead TBH. It’s far more akin to classic 2D platformers and shooters, especially from the SNES / MegaDrive era. A little bit of Parodius, a generous dash of Contra, a dollop of Mickey Mania, a heaping of Treasure’s back catalogue, and even a little sprinkle of Super Mario World. Obviously a few little modern flourishes and a stunning art style separate it from the pack.

The game is a serious challenge, no doubt about that - don’t come expecting a breezy time. But it’s old school difficult. Not every game that’s difficult is ‘like Dark Souls’

Zero-Cool

Wow this game is definitely old school, simple yet brilliant and tough as nails. I'd say there's some incredible speedruns for this.

Mr.Fantastic

I got cuphead around a year ago or so for the switch got to the second last boss and, couldn't for the life of me beat him .

J. Marston

It's frustrating but a fun kind of frustrating.

CastorTroy

Zero-Cool wrote: »

Wow this game is definitely old school, simple yet brilliant and tough as nails. I'd say there's some incredible speedruns for this.

Yep and ign even did a devs react to a 23 min speedrun

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6FfD4Ims198

And if you're interested there are more devs react videos here for the likes of Half Life 2 and Doom Eternal

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLraFbwCoisJA6eO7VSWtUqLaIFBQq4PCv

nix

"Dark souls like" sure does get thrown around way too much, nobody uses the word "challenging" anymore

I haven't got around to cuphead yet myself, but ive played so many games like it and can confirm its no where near the levels of rage inducing that Dark souls causes..

Its far far worse :pac:

Mr Crispy

Mr Crispy wrote: »

Phantom Doctrine is getting a sequel.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0XBjbbP3AM

So I didn't realsie this from the trailer, but the sequel is going to be a third person action shooter/stealth game, rather than the TBS tactics of the original. Pity. The first wasn't brilliant, but it had potential.

Penn

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

The game is a serious challenge, no doubt about that - don’t come expecting a breezy time. But it’s old school difficult. Not every game that’s difficult is ‘like Dark Souls’

And at least when you die, you don't have to trapse back to where you died to get your souls/echoes back or having to try stealthily kill the same enemies over and over again, not even knowing if you're going the right way. The levels are fairly short, relatively simple (so far anyway) and really don't take that long. As difficult as the game is, I haven't felt the same frustration with dying most of the time that I did with Bloodborne or Sekiro. It's much easier to dust yourself off and just go at it again.

As per my previous post though I do have some issues regarding inconsistency. Like in one level I was going up the inside of a tree, fell off a platform and landed on a platform below the bottom of the screen. That was fine. Little bit higher up, I fell off another platform and even though there was another platform just under me again it counted it as a death. And some enemies can seem to die in one hit, but then sometimes you're shooting and they walk right into you and kill you.

I don't think it's an issue, just needs a bit of figuring out sometimes.

Retr0gamer

Didn't find any inconsistency in the rules really. If I died it was always my fault.

Also some weapons will make your life a lot easier, with the boomerang type weapon being very powerful early on when you realise the return shots are more powerful, and the charge shot is very powerful for the late game.

Levels and bosses are tough but they never take more than 3 minutes and you can jump right back in once you die so it's more the Super Meat Boy of Contra games than having anything to do with Dark Souls. Dark Souls comparisons are just stupid. It's just a tough game but then again these games were always tough. The games greatest strength is that it absolutely nails the excellent design and variety of the very best 16 bit games of it's kind and stands toe to toe or even surpasses them.

Zero-Cool

CastorTroy wrote: »

Yep and ign even did a devs react to a 23 min speedrun

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6FfD4Ims198

And if you're interested there are more devs react videos here for the likes of Half Life 2 and Doom Eternal

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLraFbwCoisJA6eO7VSWtUqLaIFBQq4PCv

Bonkers haha

pixelburp

Man, that games art style is still so utterly gorgeous and authentic. Shame it's a ball buster, might actually have played it lol

Retr0gamer

Again don't let the difficulty put you off. It's tough but fair and you have instant retries. If a boss annoys you, you can always try another. I'd say most people will have the game polished off in 8 hours.

It's no where near the hardest game at all time.... take that from someone struggling to 100% Bangai-O Missile Fury. Anyone bitching about Souls games and Cuphead, Bangai-O is real contender for toughest game ever.

Parsnips

Zero-Cool wrote: »

I saw a few stories lately that would fit nicely into a 'news' thread that you want to share but not make a new thread for it. Like this story.. :eek:



http://www.computerandvideogames.com/331733/mass-suicide-threat-at-foxconn-xbox-360-manufacturing-plant/

The "Red ring of death" will do this to a person in fairness. :mad:

Retr0gamer

Moved the hardest game ever discussion to its own thread.

EoinMcLovin

HyperScape releasing on PS4, Xbox One and PC on August 11th
https://twitter.com/HyperScapeGame/status/1288867171293179904?s=20

awec

Cuphead really does look gorgeous, but I am the sort of person who gets fed up if I've to try the same thing 4 or 5 times, so I found that I very quickly gave up on it.

Markitron

awec wrote: »

Cuphead really does look gorgeous, but I am the sort of person who gets fed up if I've to try the same thing 4 or 5 times, so I found that I very quickly gave up on it.

I used to love difficult games when I was younger but I don't have the patience for them anymore. Would have loved to have been able to finish Sekiro but I just couldn't.

Parsnips

EoinMcLovin wrote: »

HyperScape releasing on PS4, Xbox One and PC on August 11th
https://twitter.com/HyperScapeGame/status/1288867171293179904?s=20

Nice.
Thanks for the headsup

Penn

awec wrote: »

Cuphead really does look gorgeous, but I am the sort of person who gets fed up if I've to try the same thing 4 or 5 times, so I found that I very quickly gave up on it.

Last night I made it to World 2 in Cuphead. Found a face in a pond so interacted with it. It told me I'd died 115 times so far.

There's only about 7 or 8 levels in World 1....

But that said, again unlike Sekiro or the Soulsborne games, death isn't as much of an annoyance. There's no backtracking, losing progress losing items etc. Levels and boss fights are still short enough that it doesn't feel like you've lost any progress.

quokula

Markitron wrote: »

I used to love difficult games when I was younger but I don't have the patience for them anymore. Would have loved to have been able to finish Sekiro but I just couldn't.

Yeah I pretty much avoid games that use high difficulty as a selling point these days. I've got limited enough time for gaming as it is, I don't want to carve out a bunch of time and then get to the end of it without making any progress.

Cuphead does look stunning though. I wish more games went down that hand drawn path for 2D games rather than the usual pixel art that's so pervasive. I'll probably pick it up when it goes on sale at some point, play the first few levels, and quit it.

Zero-Cool

This looks class! Film about the the Tony Hawks Pro Skater games, out 18th August.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-QPNqp6D9OA

Markitron

quokula wrote: »

Yeah I pretty much avoid games that use high difficulty as a selling point these days. I've got limited enough time for gaming as it is, I don't want to carve out a bunch of time and then get to the end of it without making any progress.

Cuphead does look stunning though. I wish more games went down that hand drawn path for 2D games rather than the usual pixel art that's so pervasive. I'll probably pick it up when it goes on sale at some point, play the first few levels, and quit it.

I know this is a can of worms but why the **** do these games not have a difficulty option? I was really enjoying Sekiro but eventually it just started to punish me for not having the time to replay sections of it multiple times.

johnny_ultimate

Markitron wrote: »

I know this is a can of worms but why the **** do these games not have a difficulty option? I was really enjoying Sekiro but eventually it just started to punish me for not having the time to replay sections of it multiple times.

It’s a debate with no correct answer.

There’s a strong argument to be made that many games are designed in a very purposeful and specific way, and to start tweaking difficulty will undermine the creator’s intent.

There’s an equally strong argument to be made that you immediately lose a large proportion of players who’d otherwise like the game. Punishing difficulties can also adversely impact people with physical disabilities and cause a plethora other accessibility issues.

TBH the designers of Pathologic 2 probably got it right. Make a punishingly difficultly game, but also offer plenty of customisable difficult options with the clear disclaimer that tweaking it is not as they originally intended it to be played.

Penn

Markitron wrote: »

I know this is a can of worms but why the **** do these games not have a difficulty option? I was really enjoying Sekiro but eventually it just started to punish me for not having the time to replay sections of it multiple times.

Honestly, while I loved Sekiro and liked Bloodborne, my biggest bugbear with both is just one-hit-kills. So many bosses or gameplay mechanics (Terror in Sekiro, Frenzy in Bloodborne) can just destroy you instantly.

Difficulty is one thing, but things like that can just be infuriating.

quokula

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

It’s a debate with no correct answer.

There’s a strong argument to be made that many games are designed in a very purposeful and specific way, and to start tweaking difficulty will undermine the creator’s intent.

There’s an equally strong argument to be made that you immediately lose a large proportion of players who’d otherwise like the game. Punishing difficulties can also adversely impact people with physical disabilities and cause a plethora other accessibility issues.

TBH the designers of Pathologic 2 probably got it right. Make a punishingly difficultly game, but also offer plenty of customisable difficult options with the clear disclaimer that tweaking it is not as they originally intended it to be played.

I like Dara O'Briain's sketch about this. How it is the only form of media that punishes you by denying access to the content you've paid for if you don't prove yourself worthy.

I do think games these days really should offer difficulty levels, for the reasons you mentioned. Adding difficulty levels doesn't remove the core "as intended" experience for those who choose to partake in it. And in fairness, the majority of games do have that option.

I would prefer if the difficulty was more "tuneable" in different areas too. E.g. in Death Stranding I turned the difficulty down because the combat annoyed me, but that also made the core traversal and balancing gameplay trivial and kind of ruined it.

Kojima games can be annoying for that actually, I remember back on MGS2 I loved the hardest difficulty level when playing the main game, it really ramped up tension when trying to stealthily pick off regular grunts and get by undetected. The same difficulty level also made the boss battles impossibly frustrating though, and you couldn't switch between them.

Retr0gamer

I'm on the side that bad balancing in games turns more people away than difficulty. Developers should be free to make the games they want and make them as difficult as they want. It people can't handle the game or are too narrow minded to try it then their loss. I see it as the same as people being turned off by subtitles.

Developers should accommodate as many players as they can but there comes a point when you reduce difficulty of a purely mechanics based game that you end up with something inferior or betrays the vision of the game.

I thought Doom 2016 wasnt great until I recognised it was too easy and started again on ultra violence. I might as well have been playing a different game with how much that changed how the game played.

People moaning about how they just want to experience the story are just whingers. If it was a good story based game the developer would help you through it. What these games are are pure mechanics based games and if you don't want or have the time to put into mastering the mechanics then the game isn't for you anyway. There's plenty of other games that cater to your tastes.