Metro
Arcane
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2009
- Messages
- 27,792
Last edited by a moderator:
-
Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.
"This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.
Cube World: Voxel Based Indie ARPG
- Thread starter Metro
- Start date
hoopy
Savant
It already looks more promising than Minecraft.
Metro
Arcane
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2009
- Messages
- 27,792
Yep, that video pretty much confirms TripJack's suspicion.
Looks like shit, sorry to say.
Looks like shit, sorry to say.
Multi-headed Cow
Guest
I'd be decently pleased if it's in the upcoming alpha fund bundle and I can get it and like 3 other alpha indies for $4. Might be alright eventually.
I thopught Voxel GFX allowed for smooth landscapes like in Comanche, and not this lego-style.
Forgotten Friend
Educated
Under heavy development, as TheDeveloperDude would say.
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2005
- Messages
- 24,793
Indies need to stop attempting "retro style" because whenever they do, they screw up before they even started.
Super Meat Boy? You get to save after every level, no lives, no continues. All challenge rendered meaningless. No satisfaction.
VVVVVV? Save point every couple rooms. Did Castlevania have save points?
They always make games that look old (because this is the easiest style that takes the least effort) and introduce all the modern gameplay mechanics that they are spoiled by and crave (infinite lives, save points everywhere, health, regenerating health, and so on)
Super Meat Boy? You get to save after every level, no lives, no continues. All challenge rendered meaningless. No satisfaction.
VVVVVV? Save point every couple rooms. Did Castlevania have save points?
They always make games that look old (because this is the easiest style that takes the least effort) and introduce all the modern gameplay mechanics that they are spoiled by and crave (infinite lives, save points everywhere, health, regenerating health, and so on)
Damned Registrations
Furry Weeaboo Nazi Nihilist
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2007
- Messages
- 15,010
LOL, I suppose you've ironmanned Super Meat Boy and got the achievment then? Cause that's totally easy.
Just because you beat the game by spamming continues doesn't mean there isn't any challenge to be had, they just let you cheat so people that suck wouldn't be stuck on the same world for 50 years. It's like bitching that Contra is too easy after you put in the 30 lives code. If you want a challenge... ACCEPT THE FUCKING CHALLENGES.
Just because you beat the game by spamming continues doesn't mean there isn't any challenge to be had, they just let you cheat so people that suck wouldn't be stuck on the same world for 50 years. It's like bitching that Contra is too easy after you put in the 30 lives code. If you want a challenge... ACCEPT THE FUCKING CHALLENGES.
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2005
- Messages
- 24,793
You don't understand the difference. An achievement is meaningless, it's just something they tacked on in addition. Super Meat Boy was first and foremost intended to be beaten using the continues- doing it normally is just something for the dedicated. There's no different ending or tangible difference. Most importantly, there is no score for doing it.
In Contra, beating it on one continue means you get the real ending (if I remember right) and you get a much higher score than if you had continued. All Arcade games really are designed to be beaten on one continue. Heck, quite a few Japanese players quit the game rather than using a continue, and only allow themselves to progress once they can get there legitimately.
In one example, the difficulty is planned part of the design, in the other it's just an optional extra challenge that gives you a meaningless trophy, rather than an actual different ending. A rather easy challenge, even, seeing as how you can practice each stage as often as you like, unlike a shoot 'em game, where you have to get to the stage in question every time just to practice it, consuming far more time and taking a toll on your concentration.
Individual stage practice leads to far quicker progress than having to be forced into doing them all at once, and having no chance of practicing a stage out of order whatsoever.
Edit: How about this: you say "acccept the fucking challenges" - well, I say, why does Super Meat Boy give me infinite lives then? Instead, it should only give you, say, 3 lives. Once you lose them all you game over and have to start the world from the beginning. That would make the game a lot more appealing. But if I have to self-impose this rule rather than the game imposing it on me by force then it really can't be called a difficult game.
It's like saying "Well, if you think Super Mario is so easy, why aren't you playing it blindfolded?" - a game isn't hard just because if I impose self-imposed challenges on myself it becomes hard. It's only hard and engaging if it was made that way from the start, and enforces these standards.
Good examples of what I mean:
Ketsui
Dodonpachi
Devil May Cry 3 (my balls is that hard)
God Hand (because it actually REWARDS you for your self-imposed challenge, and not with a trophy, but actual in-game things - and because the game clearly seems like it was designed to be this way - also more money = higher score)
In Contra, beating it on one continue means you get the real ending (if I remember right) and you get a much higher score than if you had continued. All Arcade games really are designed to be beaten on one continue. Heck, quite a few Japanese players quit the game rather than using a continue, and only allow themselves to progress once they can get there legitimately.
In one example, the difficulty is planned part of the design, in the other it's just an optional extra challenge that gives you a meaningless trophy, rather than an actual different ending. A rather easy challenge, even, seeing as how you can practice each stage as often as you like, unlike a shoot 'em game, where you have to get to the stage in question every time just to practice it, consuming far more time and taking a toll on your concentration.
Individual stage practice leads to far quicker progress than having to be forced into doing them all at once, and having no chance of practicing a stage out of order whatsoever.
Edit: How about this: you say "acccept the fucking challenges" - well, I say, why does Super Meat Boy give me infinite lives then? Instead, it should only give you, say, 3 lives. Once you lose them all you game over and have to start the world from the beginning. That would make the game a lot more appealing. But if I have to self-impose this rule rather than the game imposing it on me by force then it really can't be called a difficult game.
It's like saying "Well, if you think Super Mario is so easy, why aren't you playing it blindfolded?" - a game isn't hard just because if I impose self-imposed challenges on myself it becomes hard. It's only hard and engaging if it was made that way from the start, and enforces these standards.
Good examples of what I mean:
Ketsui
Dodonpachi
Devil May Cry 3 (my balls is that hard)
God Hand (because it actually REWARDS you for your self-imposed challenge, and not with a trophy, but actual in-game things - and because the game clearly seems like it was designed to be this way - also more money = higher score)
Forgotten Friend
Educated
I hate that shit. This game may as well have mario brothers in a FPS.
Forgotten Friend
Educated
Don't make me come over there I will dive into your distended naval and then explode outward in a shower of blood and entrails. After eating some of your cereal to prove who's the boss.
Not to be a smartass, but you could save anywhere in Wolfenstein 3D (1991). There are a lot of games with save-anywhere options, and the older I get the less tolerance I have for menial repetition of some game section that was a spike on a poorly balanced difficulty curve.
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2005
- Messages
- 24,793
It's hard to say.
There's a few schools: the PC save everywhere school, which has a lot of merit, especially in an RPG, and even more so if it comes with an iron-man option. The console school of checkpoints and save points and passwords. And the arcade school of continues/lives. A lot of indie games try to recreate that visual style of old console games which usually shared the arcade school of design but don't follow through with it because the gameplay is watered down and modernized to be appealing to the modern gamer.
I'm trying to say it's okay if you can save everywhere in Doom because it's always been that way; it's not okay to save everywhere in a game that wants to be Super Mario Bros or Castlevania, because it wasn't that way.
There's a few schools: the PC save everywhere school, which has a lot of merit, especially in an RPG, and even more so if it comes with an iron-man option. The console school of checkpoints and save points and passwords. And the arcade school of continues/lives. A lot of indie games try to recreate that visual style of old console games which usually shared the arcade school of design but don't follow through with it because the gameplay is watered down and modernized to be appealing to the modern gamer.
I'm trying to say it's okay if you can save everywhere in Doom because it's always been that way; it's not okay to save everywhere in a game that wants to be Super Mario Bros or Castlevania, because it wasn't that way.
Achievements vs different ending. Which is more meaningful and why?
Luzur
Good Sir
i would rather have seen turn-based combat, since this looks chaotic and hard if you are not handy with a controller...
everything is just all over the screen.
everything is just all over the screen.
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2005
- Messages
- 24,793
It'd make sense to you if you were me. o_O
I like challenge if it is actually good. Whether I get an achievement, a special ending, a higher score or just the satisfaction that I did it is the same.
Ion Prothon II
Liturgist
Just got a little butthurt.
What voxel usage meant 15 years ago:
What it means now:
I know it's an indie, but it looks like something between graphical roguelike and Minecraft. And they aren't even trying.
I'm still waiting for innovative indie or small studio game with highly interactive voxel environment. Am i naive?
What voxel usage meant 15 years ago:
What it means now:
I know it's an indie, but it looks like something between graphical roguelike and Minecraft. And they aren't even trying.
I'm still waiting for innovative indie or small studio game with highly interactive voxel environment. Am i naive?
As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.