Incline Post-decline gems

[Ash]

You have probably already played them. I would say the Jak/Sly/Ratchet series which I have been slurping this entire thread. However, original Spyro trilogy is on this level. Crash Bandicoot is not, though it's still good. What are some PS action-platforming games? I never really considered that kind of platforming to be on-par with a dedicated platformer game. Is there platforming in Syphon Filter?...Can't remember...

Best platforming on PS1:

Tomb Raider
Tomb Raider 2
Spyro 1
Castlvania: SoTN
Brahma Force
Duke Nukem Time To Kill
Duke Nukem Land of the Babes
Tony Hawks Pro Skater games (no arguments. This is good, heavy platforming)

Lesser platforming focus:

Medievil
Silent Bomber
Tenchu 1
Tenchu 2
Blade (a little underrated)
Vagrant Story
Nightmare Creatures

While Crash Bandicoot is a very competent game, I don't consider it enjoyable and interesting enough to belong in my list. Tomb Raider 3 is a great game but marred by some BS. Some Disney games were pretty good - The Emperor's New Groove was an interesting 3D platformer. To show you the caliber of some games I am unfortunately excluding here.

Then there's all stuff that nobody considers platformers at all yet actually have a fair amount of platforming, like Bloodlines, Hogs of War & Worms World Party, or even vehicular combat games (e.g Twisted Metal has a jump button and the level design demands it). And lets not forget the PC ports like Duke Nukem 3D and Quake 2.

Syphon Filter has a little bit of platforming, but it is too infrequent and contextual to be notable.

 

[Spike]

I agree Medievil's gameplay could be better, but it is for sure decent and it nails everything else (music, aesthetics, variety etc).

Sounds like I may need to give Maximo another go, but while being a massive gameplayfag I do value greatly all other aspects of design which Maximo is definitely lacking in by old school standards.

What are your top three PS2 3D platformers? Spike If I haven't played them, I may try them now.

Just know they will be going up against Tomb Raider 1 & 2, Spyro 1 and Castlevania SOTN (not 3D but still) in my evaluation, as well as to a lesser extent all the platforming in other PS action-platforming games.

You have probably already played them. I would say the Jak/Sly/Ratchet series which I have been slurping this entire thread. However, original Spyro trilogy is on this level. Crash Bandicoot is not, though it's still good. What are some PS action-platforming games? I never really considered that kind of platforming to be on-par with a dedicated platformer game. Is there platforming in Syphon Filter?...Can't remember...

I have to be fair and admit that Jak 1*, Sly, and Ratchet series are just good games in general. I'd say that Sly and Ratchet are stealth and TPS, respectively, first and foremost, not platformers in a strict sense, although there is that too. Hella polished, responsive, light hearted, fun. And their central mechanics are better than collecting bananas or mini-game shit.

Edit: Maximo punishes you for failure, which is something the fruit collectors and freeroamers don't do.

*Jak 2 isn't mechanically bad, but the edge is cringe. Jak 3 is a good action game.

Good points. I want to make an amendment. Top 3 PS2 platformers...Shoot, maybe Maximo 1 is one of them. Or 2. Interchangeable, although 1 is much harder. I would say Sly is still platforming because you jump, swing, and slide a lot. It's like platformer-stealth. Best is 2. And yes, agreed on Jak 2 and 3. Ratchet has a lot of jumping too with cool gadgets. Some sections in levels are outright devoted to platforming.Top 3 would probably be impossible for me, though. Maximo 1, Sly 2...Jak 1? Or 2? The only reason Jak 1 would be better is because it is pure platforming for the whole game, though I think the platforming sections in 2 are better than in 1. And more challenging. Also have to include Ratchet 2...Can I pick 4 instead? And yes Sands of Time is an excellent choice as well. Fantastic platforming.

Ash, I would say that the platforming is so strong in Sands of Time that the weaker combat really doesn't matter. Because the main thing you do is platform. Also, some fan-made Hat in Time levels have some really great timing-and-precision-based platforming.

To contribute to the thread directly of post-2005 incline gems: A Hat In Time. Look into the user-created stuff. Arguably better than the actual game's levels.

 

[Ash]

Can I pick 4 instead?

No. I want top quality only. Because a top quality game overall by PS2 standards is equal to good quality by PS1 standards, generally.

Ash, I would say that the platforming is so strong in Sands of Time that the weaker combat really doesn't matter. Because the main thing you do is platform. Also, some fan-made Hat in Time levels have some really great timing-and-precision-based platforming.

It matters. The platforming is indeed very strong but I judge the overall experience and the combat drags it down. As does the other elements like extreme linearity, bland soundtrack, and kind of dull (or just not very varied) artstyle/visuals.

 

[Spike]

Can I pick 4 instead?

No. I want top quality only. Because a top quality game overall by PS2 standards is equal to good quality by PS1 standards, generally.

Ash, I would say that the platforming is so strong in Sands of Time that the weaker combat really doesn't matter. Because the main thing you do is platform. Also, some fan-made Hat in Time levels have some really great timing-and-precision-based platforming.

It matters. The platforming is indeed very strong but I judge the overall experience and the combat drags it down. As does the other elements like extreme linearity, bland soundtrack, and kind of dull (or just not very varied) artstyle/visuals.

The only thing I have contention with is extreme linearity. Linearity is fine if the game is a finely-crafted, purposeful experience, which it is.

 

[Ash]

Sure it's "fine", but such extreme linearity simply prevents deeper gameplay. Much like Crash bandicoot.

Non-linearity adds multiple layers to gameplay:

1. Navigation becomes a factor, an often overlooked component of gameplay (and challenge).
2. Choice. From what angle to tackle this obstacle?
3. Replayability. A byproduct of deeper gameplay and choice.
4. Joy and wonder of exploration.
5. The potential to miss side locations, which can factor into challenge.

I appreciate linearity for pacing and razor-focused challenges, but not to the point of extremes. No truly great game is 100% linear. It's so fucking linear and it just didn't need to be. It could have been 80% linear for example and been a vastly better game for it.

 

[DJOGamer PT]

FUCK Assassin's Creed ... Batman

they're just pretending to be platformers but going by old standards they dont qualify

Those games aren't platformers
On Batman's case, platforming is not a focus, it's just there as a complement to the other movement mechanics (plus the fact it's a game about Batman)
And on classic AC case, the platforming has different workings and intentions to the platformers you're comparing to

So by stubbornly insisting on applying "standards" those games aren't even trying to meet, you fail to make an objective analisys of what those games are trying to be, what they are and ultimately their quality

Platforming is integral to action gaming.

Not if the gameplay isn't suited to accommodate it and/or the game would loses focus from what it's actually good at

Also Onimusha is decline for not featuring it, is what keeps the series from DMC and NG status.

A series which became better when they decreased the amount of platforming
Even NG, at least from just a purely mechanical standpoint, became more refined in the entry that dropped the focus on platforming
As it allowed devs to focus on what made those game truly good

The ending is pretty cool but that's storyfag and doesn't count

Just because gameplay is king, doesn't mean its other elements can be overlooked or disregarded you dolt
Specially in games whose identity and appeal are also heavily tied to their narrative and aesthetics

bland soundtrack, and kind of dull (or just not very varied) artstyle/visuals.

 

[Ash]

Not this dumb zoomer cunt again. If it has platforming, especially in moderate frequency like Ass Creed and Batman, it is to be judged. Not "oh that's not the focus of the game so it doesn't matter".

Yes it matters. It is 30% of the gameplay, and also factors in to combat. Even more in Ass Creed's case.

As for story, of course it counts, but gameplay comes first before anything if you're not a dumb fag. If that's not quite there, like in PoP's case, then I don't give a fuck if you have a cool ending, I am moving on to better games. If gameplay doesn't generally come first for you or whoever, then read a goddamn book or watch a movie, as gameplay makes up the majority of a game's playtime. Your priorities are fucked and retarded (not necessarily you. I know you claim to be gameplayfag).

Too bad you grew up playing Ass Creed and Batman. I had high hopes for you in the beginning bud. No monocle for you!

 

[DJOGamer PT]

If it has platforming

Fucking Skyrim has platforming
Are you going to judge it the same way you judge Mario games?

Not "oh that's not the focus of the game so it doesn't matter".

Aren't you English?
How are you falling at reading comprehension, in your own mother tongue?

I'll make it simpler then
So you have game A and game B
Game A, has X mechanic, which works X way, because it has X intentions for the game's experience - which by the way, places alot of focus in X mechanic
Game B also has X mechanic, however it works Y way, because it has Y intentions for the game's experience - which also appears not only to be disinterested in X mechanic, but in fact seems to be trying to achieve a radically distinct gaming experience from game A

Which approach do you think makes more logical sense, which will produce the more objective assessment?
To analyse game B with X standards, or Y standards?

but gameplay comes first

And then the rest either elevates it, or pulls it down.
So it is not something you can just brush aside and say:

doesn't count

Because the truth is, it does.

And in SoT case, the narrative, atmosphere and art elevates it alot.

If that's not quite there, like in PoP's case

It is
The platforming is great, the campagaing is super enjoyable and well crafted and the combat, though not good, is also not bad - and mostly importantly the team knew when they should throw in a fight (a big reason why the campgain's pacing is so good), as such the combat doesn't bog down the overall experience and it's flaws don't manifest themselves as strongly

I know you claim to be gameplayfag

Says the guy that unironically thinks DMC4 combat is better than 5 - and also thinks Sekiro's combat is good

You're the poser here

 

[luj1]

and also thinks Sekiro's combat is good

Why isnt it?

 

[DJOGamer PT]

and also thinks Sekiro's combat is good

Why isnt it?

Because it's a rythm game

 

[Beans00]

Syphon filter on ps1 sucked ass.
Duke nukem time to kill sucked even more ass.

I get the feeling ash didn't play any of these games as they came out he's just looking for random games on ps1 with familiar IP's he can brag about and look oldschool. This is a guy who played doom for the first time in 2007 afterall.

 

[Ash]

Fucking Skyrim has platforming
Are you going to judge it the same way you judge Mario games?

Absolutely, especially in level of automation/retardation.

Skyrim you can't jump while sprinting for no reason, you can't attack in the air for no reason, the level design never has actual designed platforming challenges, it's more just casual freeform stuff, BUT at least it is all player control and precision. It's shit, but at least it isn't automated garbage like Ass Creed, a game where you don't have to jump from a roof and precisely land in a bale of hay, you press the awesome button and it does it for you. Much of the gameplay is straight automation, and you're defending it.

Aren't you English?
How are you falling at reading comprehension, in your own mother tongue?

I'll make it simpler then
So you have game A and game B
Game A, has X mechanic, which works X way, because it has X intentions for the game's experience - which by the way, places alot of focus in X mechanic
Game B also has X mechanic, however it works Y way, because it has Y intentions for the game's experience - which also appears not only to be disinterested in X mechanic, but in fact seems to be trying to achieve a radically distinct gaming experience from game A

Which approach do you think makes more logical sense, which will produce the more objective assessment?
To analyse game B with X standards, or Y standards?

You can't convince me that there is merit in Ass Creed's automated gameplay, sorry bud.

but gameplay comes first
And then the rest either elevates it, or pulls it down.
So it is not something you can just brush aside and say:
doesn't count
Because the truth is, it does.

And in SoT case, the narrative, atmosphere and art elevates it alot.

I was being handwavey, yes. but no, it doesn't elevate PoP to legend status.

It is
The platforming is great, the campagaing is super enjoyable and well crafted and the combat, though not good, is also not bad - and mostly importantly the team knew when they should throw in a fight (a big reason why the campgain's pacing is so good), as such the combat doesn't bog down the overall experience and it's flaws don't manifest themselves as strongly

It's just a good/decent old game. 7.5-8/10. Worthy, but nothing special. No monocle. Like I said before, I grew up with 90s everything, so we're simply on a different plane of standards.

Says the guy that unironically thinks DMC4 combat is better than 5 - and also thinks Sekiro's combat is good

You're the poser here

Huh? I don't even like DMC4. It's OK at best. I only have great respect for the original DMC. Level design, music, art, atmosphere, overall tone, originality, platforming and puzzle elements. A decent package. DMC5 has deeper combat potential but is otherwise really quite gay.

I get the feeling ash didn't play any of these games as they came out he's just looking for random games on ps1 with familiar IP's he can brag about and look oldschool. This is a guy who played doom for the first time in 2007 afterall.

You are SO WIERD.

 

[Beans00]

Ash You're the one writing essays about nonsense, your entire life is getting into autistic arguments with people and writing paragraphs lol. I was skimming through this thread earlier today 40% of this thread is you sperging out.


Some random codexer who doesn't like you told me the doom for the first time in 2007 thing. I can't remember who but it makes sense. People late to the party always try and overcompensate.

 

[Vic]

I bet it was Crispy

 

[Beans00]

Even youtube doofus civvie 11 knows duke nukem time to kill sucked ass



My family got our ps1 christmas 1999 y2k. We got 4 games with it.
Gran turismo
mdk
either rogue trip or vigilante 8(my dad loved carmageddon) we got both I can't remember which we got first
duke nukem time to kill (again dad liked duke 3d and so did my brother and I)


I refuse to believe anyone who played duke time to kill back in the day liked it. That game was the biggest pile of shit we had for the ps1 and we had probably 2 dozen shitty bargain bin games in total. This wasn't an uncommon opinion either, everyone loved duke 3d so tons of kids got this game and hated it. This guy is definitely a zoomer posing as a millennial.

 

[Ash]

Ash You're the one writing essays about nonsense, your entire life is getting into autistic arguments with people and writing paragraphs lol. I was skimming through this thread earlier today 40% of this thread is you sperging out.

I have been more active than usual lately. And? You do know there is an ignore feature right?

Some random codexer who doesn't like you told me the doom for the first time in 2007 thing. I can't remember who but it makes sense. People late to the party always try and overcompensate.

Well it's not true so please stop repeating it. Feel free to join the list of little wierdo losers on the internet that don't like me, I don't give a fuck.

I refuse to believe anyone who played duke time to kill back in the day liked it. That game was the biggest pile of shit we had for the ps1 and we had probably 2 dozen shitty bargain bin games in total. This wasn't an uncommon opinion either, everyone loved duke 3d so tons of kids got this game and hated it. This guy is definitely a zoomer posing as a millennial.

It's a decent game. First of all it is a Tomb Raider clone with superior combat to Tomb Raider. Since you got your hands on a PS in 99 not 96 like me (you fucking poser), I figure you don't have familiarity with TR 1 & 2. If you weren't a fucking retard, you would look at it like a TR game more so than a Duke Nukem game, because that's how it plays.

So, how about you explain, in detail, what makes it bad?

As for popular consensus and your dumb little friend group:

1998 Game journos aggregate is 75% (that's pretty fair)
Also see here: https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/ps/197177-duke-nukem-time-to-kill/reviews

 

[Beans00]

It's a decent game. First of all it is a Tomb Raider clone with superior combat to Tomb Raider. Since you got your hands on a PS 99 not 96 like me (you fucking poser), I figure you don't have familiarity with TR 1 & 2. If you weren't a fucking retard, you would look at it like a TR game more so than a Duke Nukem game, because that's how it plays.

So, how about you explain, in detail, what makes it bad?

I have never played any tomb raider games. My family owned several of them I can't remember which(1,2 and chronicles for sure). My brother and sister liked them.

Also if you only played doom for the first time in 2007 that's really weird you got a ps1 in 1996? Also not sure how that makes me a poser?

 

[Ash]

I have never played any tomb raider games

Well there you go. As usual I actually know my stuff, others dont, then get butthurt and cry when schooled. Story of my internet life. Dealing with fragile posers.

"It wasn't exactly like Duke Nukem 3D" is not a valid takedown of a game (in your words, it's shit), even if it has Duke Nukem in the title. Not too bright are you?

Also if you only played doom for the first time in 2007

You're being weird again. I first played Doom in 1996. It was my first FPS. I've asked you to stop. Here, I'll do us both a favor and put you on ignore.

 

[Beans00]

I have never played any tomb raider games

Well there you go. As usual I actually know my stuff, others dont, then get butthurt and cry when schooled. Story of my internet life.

Also if you only played doom for the first time in 2007

You're being weird again. I first played Doom in 1996. It was my first FPS. I've asked you to stop. Here, I'll do us both a favor and put you on ignore.

I never claimed to play tomb raider lol. I'll keep quoting you regardless of you ignoring me so it doesn't matter to me, and I'll just assume you're scared of me .

 

[DJOGamer PT]

Absolutely

"I am going to judge an open world Action RPG, by the same lenses as pure platformer"

You can't convince me that there is merit in Ass Creed's automated gameplay, sorry bud.

And you can't convince me you're capable of looking at gameplay design in an unbiased and objective manner, sorry pal.

it doesn't elevate PoP to legend status.

Except it did
So cope

original DMC.

Level design

mediocre

art

3 is just as good

atmosphere

an artifact of it's days as RE sequel and it doesn't mesh well with the fact the main character is essentially a super saiyan

platforming

sucks

puzzle elements

what puzzles?

A decent package.

I like how your commendation completely ignores the main focus and activity of the game

DMC5 has deeper combat potential but is otherwise really quite gay.

>gameplay is king!!!!
>SoT is not great because it sacrifices level design non-lineary in favor of storyfaggotry and has bland combat
>...
>DMC5 is gay because it's non-gameplay elements suck
>DMC1 is better because I like the elements outside it's gameplay focus

 

[Beans00]

Edit- also to DJOGamer PT keep in mind you're arguing with a poser who only played these games in like 2010-2015, thats why he spergs out so hard to overcompensate. Some of these games he might not have even played just watched youtube reviews.


The only DMC game I ever had was DMC 1 for the ps2.

I never played it either.

 

[Ash]

I mentioned level design, puzzle elements and platforming for reasons why I prefer DMC1, not just art/music.

"I am going to judge an open world Action RPG, by the same lenses as pure platformer"

Yes, their platforming gets measured by platforming standards. It's really quite simple, jfc.

Sorry dude, I'm kind of done for the day with people that don't know their games yet love to argue. It gets very annoying

 

[Beans00]

I mentioned level design, puzzle elements and platforming for reasons why I prefer DMC1, not just art/music.

Sorry dude, I'm kind of done for the day with people that don't know their games yet love to argue

Dude there's only so many hours in a day. Not everyone had time to play every single release ever lol. We aren't all so dedicated to pretending we were born in the 90's we play 20 years worth of games in 2010-2015.

 

[Cat Headed Eagle]

I mentioned level design, puzzle elements and platforming for reasons why I prefer DMC1, not just art/music.

Sorry dude, I'm kind of done for the day with people that don't know their games yet love to argue

Dude there's only so many hours in a day. Not everyone had time to play every single release ever lol. We aren't all so dedicated to pretending we were born in the 90's we play 20 years worth of games in 2010-2015.

this kills the neet

 

[Spike]

I mentioned level design, puzzle elements and platforming for reasons why I prefer DMC1, not just art/music.

"I am going to judge an open world Action RPG, by the same lenses as pure platformer"

Yes, their platforming gets measured by platforming standards. It's really quite simple, jfc.

Sorry dude, I'm kind of done for the day with people that don't know their games yet love to argue. It gets very annoying

"...their platforming gets measured by platforming standards." No, it absolutely does not lol. It can be a little serviceable part of the experience, something to boost immersion or add a little extra minor mechanic. You judge a game based on what it sets to do. That's like judging a horror film on its fight choreography if it has a sword fight or something compared to a Jackie Chan film. You are utterly wrong there, sir. The jumping in Skyrim has a 100% different purpose than the jumping in a Mario/Sly/etc. Priorities and intentions of game feel change, purpose of the mechanic, etc. No, just absolutely not. Also I was confused. That Brahma Force game is a mech game...??? That is not a platformer game. Different genre, widely agreed upon.