Nathan vs His Game Collection: Day 13 - Taking Command

Smooth McGroove is back, this time with a Chrono Trigger beat that's pretty dang kickin! This guy is too cool for school.
Oh, right. Also some reviews. I guess we'll do those now.

Defender of the Crown

A little background

 Defender of the Crown was ported by Ultra (aka Konami) to the NES in July 1989. It was made by Cinemaware, who went on to make a bunch of games I've never heard of so I won't list them here. 

Defender of the Crown is cool because not only is it a medieval simulator, it also incorporates a lot of medieval tournaments, warfare, and more into one big strategy/negotiations game. It's like Crusader Kings II, only, you know, old. It also reminds me of Lords of the Realm II, aka the most awesome old PC game ever, except also really old. 

First impressions last forever

This NES port doesn't look all that great. The map screen is dull, the sprites in battle are muddy, and the overall color palette they chose is dull. I also have no idea at all what I'm doing, which leads to me getting in a fight and swiftly losing. "In the Game of Thrones, you win or you die..."

I'm like the Eddard Stark of this game. 

But as I played further...

 There's a pretty cool idea here, buried under all the extremely difficult and obscure gameplay. Basically, you want to pick Wilfred, because he's the most balanced, and get an army ASAP. Of course, you have to get money to get an army (as this is a strategy game) so you go on raids or do tournaments and stuff and probably lose. 

The computers are ruthless to the point of unfair, and nine time out of ten you'll probably end up just failing completely and becoming the court jester or losing your head. I'd imagine the Amiga version, with a keyboard and mouse, probably played a lot better, because this NES version isn't great. 

So what's the conclusion? 

I really want to like Defender of the Crown, because it has everything I like in one game. Medieval warfare and tactics, deep strategy, and cool fighting. Unfortunately, in the end I can't recommend it. It's just not a very good port. I wanted to be a Lannister, instead I was Sansa Stark. And that's enough Game of Thrones references for this review.
Copies are around $5-10.

Deja Vu

A little background

 Deja Vu is part of a trio of adventure games that made it from the Macintosh (part of the "MacVenture" series) over to the NES. The other two are the hard to find Uninvited and the ever-classic Shadowgate. These games are considered extremely classic, with some great writing and interesting stories overall. While the Macintosh versions are obviously the best (if only because you can use a mouse), they did pretty dang good with these NES ports as well.

They also made a sequel to Deja Vu called Deja Vu 2: Lost in Las Vegas (which sounds more like a movie about lost pets or a Home Alone spinoff than a game about a hard-boiled detective) but that never got ported over. Which is too bad.

First impressions last forever

 The writing and graphics in this game are great. While Shadowgate's menu interface had a medieval vibe, this one goes all-out in the "detective notebook" thing. The text is interesting, the music is good enough background noise, and the controls are a decent mouse substitute. 

But as I played further...

This game is classic noire. You thought L.A. Noire was noire? Well, these guys did it a billion years before those jerks even existed! The characters are memorable and the game actually delves into some pretty dark themes (much like Shadowgate, which has some grisly descriptions of textual death), but the adventure is solid and a lot of fun. 

I love adventure games, and it's always great to find a good one I haven't played. I found it hard to put Deja Vu down after getting thoroughly engrossed in its story. 

So what's the conclusion? 

While the NES controller isn't a great keyboard and mouse substitute, it doesn't hurt Deja Vu one bit (minus maybe slow cursor speed). What's sad is how well remembered Shadowgate is, while Deja Vu (and Uninvited) are pretty much forgotten. If you got even the slightest bit of enjoyment out of Shadowgate, you owe it to yourself to give Deja Vu a chance. It's a cop-with-nothing-to-lose action as good as it gets, with a fun story, monologuing, and pretty much anything fans of old detective movies will love.
Copies are a bit tricky to find but never are too expensive, usually around $3-5.

Demon Sword

A little background

 Oh Taito, what weird games you made before Square Enix bought you. 

Demon Sword (which has the phrase "RELEASE THE POWER" above the title, which is pretty great) was a sequel to the arcade port of Legend of Kage. Kage came out in August of 1987, while Demon Sword was January of 1990. A bit of Legend of Kage background is required to understand the review: that game was basically just Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon on the NES, only not as cool as I just made it out to be. You climbed trees, jumped a billion feet into the air, threw ninja-stars (or deflected them with your sword) and murdered other ninjas. You did it over three stages with limited lives, and the game cycled. That was the whole game. You can tell it was an arcade port. 

Demon Sword intended to use a similar formula but flesh out the game, making it better. Did it? Eh. 

Also, the guy on the cover looks like Conan mixed with Stannis Barathian (aw crap, another Game of Thrones reference slipped in) when in the game it's very obvious he's a samurai and it's set in medieval Japan. Not even close, localization team. Not. Even. Close. 

Lastly, the Japanese version had six more stages and bosses that were cut for no reason from the US version. Again, way to crap it up for the states. 

First impressions last forever

 This game sure looks better than Legend of Kage, which looked like total garbage. It plays similar, with space jumps, dudes spawning from nowhere, and a general sense of non-direction. Though hey, power-ups!

But as I played further...

 The weirdest thing is, I kind of like Legend of Kage, and I don't like Demon Sword. The further I got, the more frustrated I became. I'm glad I have life this time (vs one hit deaths of Kage), but attacks are so near impossible to deflect death is inevitable. The game also makes it out as if there's somewhere I should go, but never offers any direction towards it. I get upgrades (which is cool), but because of the totally inability to not get hit all the time, I don't feel empowered. The game's a mess. 

So what's the conclusion? 

Demon Sword is a weird sequel where you'd think everything was improved over the previous game, but they still somehow screwed it up. On paper, everything in Demon Sword is better: a life bar, better weapon upgrades, better graphics, a story/point, etc. But in execution the game is sloppy, and trying to give it a point falls flat. Weirdly enough, the arcade-style frustrations of Kage are much more enjoyable than the controller-snapping unfairness of Demon Sword. It's like they didn't even playtest it. Kage you can actually get better at, and use that skill to advance further. Demon Sword is a huge crapshoot.
I guess I might be being a little harsh, but seeing as there's roughly eighty quad-billion NES platformers, you can probably skip this one. Copies are very cheap, usually $3 or less.

Desert Commander

A little background

 Not to be confused with "Dessert Commander," Desert Commander is another game by the dudes who brought us Deja Vu...or their publisher, rather. Kemco published both, is what I'm trying to say. Because it's weird I have two of the same...you know what? Let's start over.

Have you every played Advance Wars? You know, the game with little kids as commanders over this brutal war on the GBA, and it had that absurdly catchy song? The game was basically a mix between Fire Emblem and...I dunno, Command and Conquer? Only tuned down a notch.

Well guess what? This game is Advance War's grandaddy! Released in June of 1989 as an NES exclusive, Desert Commander was quite ahead of it's time for a console platformer.

First impressions last forever

 Geez, this game looks a lot like Advance Wars (or I guess it should be the other way around). And they got the "desert" thing right: sand everywhere. That's cool, I'm cool with that. I like sand. I also like tanks and shooting stuff, so this game seems alright from the get-go.

But as I played further...

 Desert Commander is good fun, with a few minor problems. The first (and biggest) is your units' movement speed is set to "slow" and can't really be sped up. The second is the CPU can be pretty tough.

That's it. Other than that, game's solid. Seriously, it's fun. It has the same "battle" cutscenes as Advance Wars when units engage (except in NES style), and the strategy is very solid. The lack of a tutorial is a bit annoying, but it's the NES days so it comes with the territory. 

So what's the conclusion? 

While I want to fully recommend this game, it pains me to have to admit that Advance Wars is better. But if you're playing NES games anyway, you don't care about modern games and their improvements, right? Yes? Maybe?
Point being: Desert Commander is a solid, modern (as of 1988) war game with great turn-based strategy and excellent controls and visuals. If you like that sort of thing, than grab yourself a copy!
They're usually between $5-10.

Looking to fund working on OpenGameArt.org full-time.

Hey folks!

Just a quick note.  I'm looking to fund work on OpenGameArt.org full time (probably via Kickstarter or similar) once my current work project is done, and I'm interested in hearing what people would like me to work on.  If you have any thoughts, please join the discussion on OGA:

http://opengameart.org/content/if-i-could-work-on-oga-full-time-what-would-people-want-me-to-code-or-do
...or on reddit:

http://www.reddit.com/r/gamedev/comments/1d11ir/i_run_opengameartorg_and_im_looking_at_options_to/

Thanks!

Bart

Nathan vs His Game Collection: Day 12 - Shirts are for Sissies

This is the first post as of yet from my gaming rig! It's been having ongoing issues since I built it, but I've decided to risk bringing it back into mainstream use for this blog post. Especially handy since it's in the same room as all them games.
Today's youtube song is one of my favorite Persona 4 remixes. Piano-ing anything makes it better.
Enough jibber-jabber, it's review time!

Contra

A little background

 Man, Konami was on fire back in the day. Pumpin' out classic games and franchises like nobody's business. The only other third party that I think could even keep up was Capcom, and even they didn't push as many new IPs that lasted like Konami did. 

What was I talking about? Oh, right, Contra.

Contra is actually (and I don't know how many people know this) an arcade port! Yes, really. Despite the NES version (which came out in February of 1988) being probably the most well remembered version, it was also a very popular arcade game. So, that's a fact I guess. Another fact: this game's arcade title Gryzor in Europe, while the NES version was Probotector. Whaaaaaaaaaaaat.

What else can I say about Contra? It inspired a slew of imitators, basically inventing the run-n-gun 2D platform which would be perfected (in this reviewer's opinion) by SNK's Metal Slug series a while later. It's Manly Men shooting Aliens 101, and it's pretty great. Take Rambo, mix him with Aliens, and you get Contra. Sold. 

First impressions last forever

 This game still looks and plays great, even for an early NES game. The first thing you notice is how intense the action is (and how crazy the spin-jump looks!) and how fluid the game controls. Seriously, games were trying to mimic how well Contra controlled for years after it came out. The music is also rockin, and with two-players it's a blast-happy attack. Also, surprisingly low slowdown and sprite flicker for the number of projectiles on screen. 

But as I played further...

 Contra is a classic for a reason: it's a really solid game. The graphics, music, and gameplay are all tight and fun. Blasting aliens (and dudes) is always great, and even if every power-up sucks next to the Spread Gun, I guess it's good they're there? Also, the 3D levels are cool!

Contra's main hang-up (even for me today) is that the game is stupid hard. This is the game that made the Konami code famous (even though Gradius was the first instance of the code's existence), because trying to beat this game with three lives and one-hit deaths is literally impossible. Impossible. IMPOSSIBLE.

So what's the conclusion? 

Contra is another game I'd put next to a lot of modern games and say "Hey! Retro games can still be solid experiences!" It's fast, extremely difficult, but still a blast to play. With the Konami code the game is a lot more tolerable (and less stressful), but there is still something about playing it with limited lives that keeps you on edge and gets the blood pressure up. The only downside is collectors seem to want it too, which has pushed the price up. But hey, it's still less than most modern new games! (I keep telling myself that when I drop $60 on Lufia 2). 

Copies are usually $20-30. 

Crystalis

A little background

Crystalis (or known by its infinitely more badass Japanese name, God Slayer) was a late-NES SNK joint that came out in July of 1990 and was later ported to the Game Boy Color. From what I know, the game didn't sell very well because it came out right when the SNES was becoming a big deal. Which is a damned shame.

As an aside, I write for a site called ARPGamer (which is currently under new management and undergoing changes), and I actually already did a write-up of Crystalis on there. So if you want more detail than what I'm about to cover, go read that instead. 

First impressions last forever

 Crystalis has an amazing opening, that might remind more than a few people of the Fallout franchise. Mankind is devastated by nuclear war, so they seal up a bunch of people in containment pods to be opened after the world is safe. Pods huh. Like VAULTS?!

The game looks incredible, even if the main character is purple. Despite the box-art, I always imagined the hero as a girl for some reason. He/She certainly looks like it could go either way (it's just a bunch of pixels anyway).

Another thing of note is full pixel movement. Yes, it's a top-down action game like Zelda, but isn't confined to four-way directions. Fantastic! 

But as I played further...

 Crystalis is a really fun action RPG, and fans of the 2D Zelda games or games like Secret of Mana should absolutely pick it up. It's very combat-heavy but with a few bits of puzzle-solving, with the ability to equip and "charge" different elemental swords to both release elemental attacks as well as open secret doors and solve puzzles.

The quest is fairly simple: start in village, explore dungeons, solve problems, go to next village, lather, rinse, repeat. But, then again, you could argue every Zelda game is kind of like that, so maybe it isn't fair to boil it down to something so simple.

The real fun in Crystalis is the leveling up, interesting environments, buying and using new gear, and lightning-fast combat. For a top-down RPG on the NES, Crystalis was way ahead of its time, which makes it sad nobody bought it. 

So what's the conclusion? 

Get Crystalis. Seriously, it's phenomenal. While it does fall into a level-grinding trap near the end (and expect to do a fair amount throughout), the graphics are gorgeous, the controls are solid, and the world is interesting (and the text is even translated decently, which never happens on NES games). It's one of my favorite action RPGs ever, and I might even like it better than Secret of Mana. Oh snap, he didn't go there!

Copies are a little tricky to find, and usually roll around $10-15. 

Days of Thunder

A little background

 Um, so I know nothing about Days of Thunder. Like, at all. A friend donated his collection to my cause a few months back, and this game was in it, and I actually don't even remember testing the game to see if it worked before putting it on my shelf. That's a good sign, right?

From what I gather, it's based on a movie (probably made by Paramount, based on the logo at the bottom there) but I sure haven't seen it. It came out in October of 1990 (the game. I'll be damned if I look up when this movie came out) and was made by Beam Software, who also made the awful Back to the Future game. 

Oh. Good. 

I also assumed it was about racing, because there were cars. Probably NASCAR? Great, a "drive left for five hours" simulator. 

First impressions last forever

 The opening graphics are actually kind of impressive. It has that "glowy text fade in/out" thing that usually was reserved for every SNES game ever's intro/brand logos. So there's that.

The graphics also look ok, if filled with solid colors, but it's a bad sign if there's no actual start screen and the game just tosses you into a "qualifying race." Looking forward to doing that every single time I load up the game!

But as I played further...

 It is based on NASCAR, and guess what? It's just as boring. And you turn left a lot. Yay!

The graphics are actually ok. It's sort of Rad Racer esque only without any of the little environmental things that gave Rad Racer that awesome sense of speed. You just drive around the track, sometimes turning left. Hooray.

The controls also threw me for a loop. From what I can see, holding "A" just applies the gas, but if you release it you'll kind of cruise-control unless you bump something. The problem is that, since the actual races are absurdly long, if you hold A the whole time you'll run out of gas after like the seventh lap. Yes, there's more than seven laps around the same boring course, over and over. Charmed. 

Running out of gas restarts the whole game (at the "qualifying race," with no other cars) so that's also a totally great game design. Did they even playtest this? It doesn't help the races are so hard you'll never win without massive amounts of skill and luck, and every time you fail it's back to qualifying. Ugh. 

So what's the conclusion? 

Yeah ok, this game is a great cure for insomnia, but beyond that it sucks. I don't even think it's worth me saying more about it.

I'll be damned if I'm going to look it up on eBay for a price average, but since it's a licensed NES game I'd assume no more than $5. 

Nathan vs His Game Collection: Day 11 - Caveman Commando

I went to the game store today and picked up some crap. I have a cart at a certain chain that makes the majority of retro games $3, and it's hard to say no to $3 games! Also, this is why I have like 300 games on Steam.
Also, don't worry: I didn't get any NES games that come before "C." Because retroactively reviewing retro games seems redundant.
Whatever, on with the show!

Caveman Games

A little background

Apparently "Jim" owned this game before me. 

Caveman Games is another....*sigh*...Data East experience. It was originally made for Commodore 64 and DOS by Dynamix, who would later be acquired by Sierra and make the phenomenal Incredible Machine games as well as the famous Tribes. 

The NES port was released in October of 1990, without the subtitle "Ugh-lympics." Yeah, You'll be saying "ugh" after you play this game, ha ha ha!

That was a sick burn, by the way. It's why they pay me the big bucks to do this every day. 

First impressions last forever

So there's a lot of events, and man this game looks rotten on the NES. I seem to remember seeing the Commodore 64 version and it looking better, but it might just be because I was a wee lad back then. This game also bears a striking resemblance to Konami's Track and Field games, except with cavemen. Hey, I can get behind that. 

But as I played further...

You have six events, all caveman and dinosaur themed, and all of them aren't really that great. They're the usual dexterous controller style games of the era, like early Mario Party games designed to destroy controllers so Nintendo could sell more. 

Saber Race is a button-mashy racing game similar to the one in Track and Field, except you aren't just outrunning the other guy: you're outrunning a sabre tooth tiger. Shouldn't it be "Sabre Run" then?

Mate Toss is my favorite one. It's like hammer throw, except you throw your "mate" (basically spouse). Not sexist here, because as the girl olympian you throw a boy! So that makes it ok. The concept of this one amuses me for some reason, even if the animation is atrocious.

Firemaking is a pure button masher where you race to make fire. Next. 

Clubbing is not what you think it is, as no alcohol or good times are involved. Instead, it's an American Gladiator style fighting game at the top of a large rock, where you try to bonk the other person off. Again, other games have done fighting better.

Dino Race is weirdly similar to Saber Race, except you are on the dinosaurs trying to dodge obstacles. 

And Dino Vault is a pole vaulting competition, except you are vaulting over a T-Rex's mouth. 

Out of all of them, I like Mate Toss and Dino Vault, because they're funny. But all in all, even with two players it isn't really much better than Track and Field. And the graphics are way worse. 

So what's the conclusion? 

My wife's family has some nostalgia for this game, which is fair, but I can't say I'm a huge fan. It's basically, again, Track and Field with a Caveman theme. Which would be more interesting than Track and Field, if the game was comparable. It's ugly, doesn't sound great, and only plays decently. I really can't recommend it, despite thinking the idea is funny.

Codename: Viper

A little background

Hey, another Capcom game!

Code Name: Viper (the space is there in cover art!) was released in March of 1990, and is pretty much a big fat ripoff of Namco's 1986 arcade game (turned Tengen NES port), Rolling Thunder. Like, a total ripoff. Same looking sprites, same two-levels, one-shot deaths, hide in doorways...all of it. Total ripoff.

But if a ripoff does it better, then that's ok, right? Is Codename: Viper a good action platformer?

First impressions last forever

This is a really good looking game, with awesome music too. The premise is simple: you are sent to South America to bust up some drug cartels. With guns. The dialogue boxes look a bit like Bionic Commando, and when you shoot guys they literally disintegrate into dust. 

You also die really easily. Two hits (or touches of an enemy) or a single bullet, and you're done. 

But as I played further...

I really like Rolling Thunder, but I have to admit I like Codename: Viper better. The game feels a lot less picky than Rolling Thunder: you can actually shoot and jump in Viper, as well as change your jump trajectory mid-leap rather than having to completely commit. The game also looks way better, with the backgrounds being varied jungles and villages rather than the inside of some bunker. 

I will say they could have tried to be less shameless about it. Everything here is the same. You have the two-levels of play (not unlike Bad Dudes) where pressing up and jump switches floors (or down and jump pops you back down). You die very easily and have to both conserve ammo and be very smart lest you'll kick the bucket. You can hide in doorways (in this game it's spinning, weird holes in the sides of rocks) and rescue people, or find more bullets for your weapons. Even the sprites are extra tall and skinny, just like Rolling Thunder. Namco should sue. 

So what's the conclusion? 

This is a fun, arcade-style NES game! I will admit it can be very frustrating if you keep dying, or think you are ducking under a bullet and it turns out you get shot right in the head. But the game has this good mix of twitch reaction combined with careful planning and plodding (as well as hiding from enemies) that keeps it challenging but also very engaging. You'll keep coming back for more, even as the game keeps kicking you back to checkpoints. Every enemies is a potential death, and you treat it as such.
Plus it's fast, the controls are extremely responsive, and the game looks phenomenal. I just wish you had more than three continues. Even on "Easy," this game can crush you.
Copies are usually around $3-5, and I'd suggest picking it up if you find it!

Commando

A little background

Oh, Commando, Capcom's arcade classic. And back before they modernized their label style and had that awesome, vector-laser grid in the backdrop that doesn't at all look dated. Fantastic. 

Commando (or Wolf of the Battlefield in Japan, which sounds way more badass) is a well-remembered arcade game that hit the NES in May 1985. The game was a pretty faithful representation of the arcade experience (as good as the NES can be in that regard, anyway), complete with two-player and a large number of action-packed stages. This was the great grand-daddy of dual-stick shooters, back when you only had one stick and you had to move in a direction in order to shoot that way. Ah, old controls. 

First impressions last forever

This game is still a lot of fun, even from the start, though it does suffer from a whole mess of slowdown and sprite flicker. While the game plays OK on the D-Pad, it's arcade games like these that make me bust out the ol' NES Advantage and play it like god intended: on an arcade stick. Plays a lot better, trust me. 

But as I played further...

Commando is still a solid NES experience, even if it isn't as good as the arcade game. It's challenging, with bullets everywhere, and trying to stop and kill every enemy is actually not the best strategy. The game only has four levels before it cycles and you go through again, but it's fine because the second round is considerably harder. 

As stated, the shooting feels solid, grenades are powerful and plentiful, and if you like modern dual-stick shooters, you'd probably enjoy this predecessor. 

So what's the conclusion? 

I like Commando, though I honestly usually play Jackel instead for my Capcom single-stick top-down shooter needs. And remember when I told you this was a prequel to Bionic Commando? Yep, it still is. Craaaaaaaaazy. 

The slowdown and sprite flicker does get pretty bad, especially on the second round when there's a truckload of enemies and bullets, but I didn't think it was enough to ruin the experience. Commando is a lot of fun, especially with two people, and is probably an essential piece of history for any NES collector.

Copies are usually cheap as well, around $3-5. 

WTactics Summer of Cards

WTactics is a beautiful, freely licensed card game which pleasantly surprises for example by having it's amazing assets under free licenses, not shying away from employing same-sex love themes and now, by inviting game designers to share an apartment in lovely Sweden on WTactics development during July 2013.

People all over the world are hereby welcomed to participate in Summer of Cards 2013 – the first ever real life gathering of the dev. team and all those of you that want to get aboard and contribute to the worlds first truly pro libre customizable card game, our dear WTactics. 1:st to 28:th of July 2013 is when this is going down in Malmö, Sweden, so do some reading in here and scribble us a mail already so we can start planning for wicked goodness. You come and stay as you may.

"A couchsurfing style gamejam" was approved as a possible description of the event.

Invitation to summer of cards 2013

Your host says hi!

Once this returns positive results, I will be hoping for the first free, open source monastery being found by 2015... :)

Nathan vs His Game Collection: Day 10 - Dracula's Feng Shui

Today is all about one of my favorite game series: Castlevania.
CASTLEVANIA.
Aka "Suck it, Dracula, why won't you stay dead?"
I like Castlevania so much I even made a video of my Top 10 Castlevania songs. I guess that's the free youtube link of the day, even if Smooth McGroove's Bloody Tears acapella is pretty much the best ever.
Enough of my self-plugging of my defunct youtube channel (which I'll get back to after I learn Adobe Premiere...), let's hit up them reviews.

Castlevania

A little background

Castlevania, the first of Konami's blockbuster series (which has since taken some interesting turns), was released in the US in May 1987. It was meant to be a homage to all those old monster movies; you know, with bosses like the Mummy, Medusa, Frankenstein, and others. The movie motif was also evidenced by the film-reels that were on the sides of the title screen, an inclusion in every NES Castlevania title (this was later eliminated by the next gen games on the Genesis and SNES). 

Something that has always impressed me about this first game (and later Bloodlines on the Genesis) was how much incredible work was put into every single step of the game. This was an era where game developers made grids and calculated exact jump distances, where every enemy's placement wasn't just there because they had an empty spot, but was placed in that specific location for a reason. Every single level, every single step in every single level was planned. These days, the only games that even come close to that level of meticulous design are perhaps the Dark/Demon Souls games, and even then I still imagine Castlevania was gone over more times than even those. It's Mario 3 levels of gameplay perfection, an art lost over the ages. This is gaming at it's perfect blend of art and geometry, every encounter calculated and played out exactly the way a developer wanted it. It's as much as argument for linear design as Call of Duty is an argument against.

Point? Castlevania is a crowning jewel of the NES. Few games of its time can reach its level, and even fewer games since. It's a bona fide masterpiece.

And I just did the conclusion before the review even started. Whoops. 

First impressions last forever

This game's production values are extraordinary, especially the graphics and music. From the first scene as you approach the castle, I always just was marveling at how darned beautiful the freaking bricks on the outside of the castle were. Seriously, the bricks! They look so good! And the music, holy crap the music. Immortally remembered tunes. Man, this game's soundtrack. 

But as I played further...

Ok, gotta actually do impressions here. As stated by people more charismatic than I, there is a delay while you attack, which is annoying at first but quickly becomes a skill you develop. It requires you to think carefully when attacking, as there is both a delay before and after (and you can't attack while moving) which makes even the dumbest enemies a challenge. Remember when Bioshock came out and they made as if every splicer was some big battle, but eventually you just became Captain Lightning Hands and slaughtered 'em by the dozens? Ain't like that in Castlevania; game actually gets harder, and you don't get better (as a character. As a player, you actually learn skills to master the game).

Jumping is a major pain, but again; the game is designed around your awful, unalterable jumping arch. While technically it's "realistic" (since I can't change my direction mid-jump), it means every jump is a weird, floaty moon-jump. Which, again, takes some getting used to.

Also, this game is hard. While it is designed to give you the right powerups for areas, mastering those powerups (as well as whipping and jumping) is up to you. Again, with no actual character upgrades, this game relies completely on skill. And you'd better get skilled, or you'll never beat that hallway before Death (aka "The hardest part of the whole game.")

So what's the conclusion? 

I recently read an article on GamesRadar where the writer was stating that retro games are starting to feel their age, and they aren't really comparable to modern games. To which I say "False, good sir! For one gander at Castlevania (or Mario 3. Or Shatterhand.) and you will find game design that matches even the best of modern attempts!"
Except I wouldn't actually say that because that would be weird and he can't hear me through the internet, but you get my point.
While many old games have sort of lost their edge as modern improvements make games more enjoyable, streamlined, and incentivized, games like Castlevania are still just as relevant as when they were released. Strong level design, controls, and windows dressing (graphics and music) hold up even to this day, and dare I say even outclass many modern games.
I'm just trying to say I really, really like Castlevania. Is that ok? Is that so wrong? Even if I ramble just a little bit, and use a few superlatives? I dunno, maybe you just saw the blocks of text and skipped to the end. That's ok too.
If you own an NES, you should own Castlevania. Copies are going up in price (they're around $15-20 now), so grab 'em while the grabbing is good.

Castlevania II: Simon's Quest

A little background

Oh, poor Simon's Quest. This game just gets hated on by everybody. Released in December of 1988, it attempted to take the original Castlevania formula and ramp it up with a bigger world, more items and enemies, and a longer adventure that incorporated exploration and puzzle elements. Even a bit of RPGness was tossed in there, for good measure. 

This game is often considered amongst games like Adventures of Link and Mario 2 as one of the "weird experimental sequels" of the NES era. Long before game developers were too scared to go completely crazy when making sequels to successful games, these three popular games all tried something unique with sequels to their blockbusters. And, while most people can at least agree that Adventures of Link and Mario 2 are ok (Mario 2 is awesome and I'll kill anyone who says otherwise), everybody universally hates Simon's Quest.

But is this hate really justified? Is the game that bad? 

First impressions last forever

The game has a much darker color pallet than Castlevania, which makes everything look a bit muddy but also bleaker, which I kind of like. While going around town talking to people feels useless (and I fell in the river. Oops), it's still kind of a cool concept. And the music is still quite good, if not as good as the original.

I'd also like to go on a tangent here. The first time you step out of the town into the forest, and see the 8-bit trees leading off into dense thickets, the wolves and skeletons coming for you, and that killer Bloody Tears kicks in, I'm always overcome with a sense of...something. Like I'm going off into this amazing new world, full of adventure and mystery. 

See, that's something I feel is lost in modern games. Advances in technology let us render every single leaf on every single tree, making the game more real than ever before. But something about seeing everything ruins a bit of the magic, and takes away the mystery. Stepping out into Castlevania 2's world for the first time evokes a sense of starting on a grand adventure, like Bilbo when he left the Shire for the first time in The Hobbit. We don't know what's out there, where Castlevania 2 is going to take us, but man are we excited for it!

But as I played further...

Too bad that excitement is ill-founded.

Castlevania 2's biggest problem is lack of direction, not just on the player end, but on the design side as well. Playing through, whippin' dudes is fun for the first bit, until you realize you have no idea what you are doing. You don't know what your goal is, where you should be going, and what you should spend your  hearts on. Eventually you go too far for your current gear and get killed by some overpowered enemies, losing all your hearts and starting over. This is standard for a first-time playthrough without a guide, and unlike in Castlevania where deaths were your own fault, this is unfair and the fault of the game's design.

So you start off again, staying within the carefully restricted playground Castlevania 2 allows you to wander with your current toolsets. You become scared to explore this world, because death's penalty (losing all your hearts) is extremely harsh. You stop being excited to see the world, and instead feel like you're being kept in a playpen while the rest of the world is out having fun. It's maddening. 

And then, once you farm enough hearts to get the gear needed for the next area, you don't feel accomplished. You moved from one prison to another, farming more hearts for the next area. Great. 

I don't think the ideas here are bad. Hell, they recycle them (in different form) for Symphony of the Night and all the GBA/DS games, and people love those (myself included). The problem is you can see through the game's flashy exterior and straight to the design flaws, which the Metroidvania sequels masked through better pacing and a faster sense of character progression (through experience points and lenient death penalties). Castlevania 2 isn't smart enough to do this, and because of that you get a game where you not only feel trapped, you feel like you have no idea how to escape your prison. Villagers are useless, hints are non-existant, and you'd better have either your Nintendo Power or Gamefaqs near if you ever plan on beating this game. 

So what's the conclusion? 

Simon's Quest is misguided, but not offensive. I still think it's worth experiencing, and if you have a guide (and a lot of patience), you could still technically have a decent time with it. But what was lost - the meticulously designed stages, bosses, and skill-based progression - is a devastating blow to the series. Konami would later perfect this sort of design after experimenting a bit with branching paths in Castlevania 3 when inventing their own fusion-genre with Symphony of the Night, but before Symphony of the Night could exist, there had to be a Simon's Quest. It's unfortunate, but it had to happen.
Is this game worth owning? Well, it's cheaper than all the other Castlevania games (usually $10 or less), which is a good selling point. The music and graphics are still good, and there's a few cool castles, though not one of them can compare to even a single level of Castlevania 1. All-in-all, it's still a necessary part of a collection, but certainly one of the worst of all the Castlevania games.
That being said, I'd still play it before Castlevania: Judgement, so it has that going for it.

Castlevania III: Dracula's Curse

A little background

After Simon's Quest revealed that the fans did not want more of those types of Castlevania games (yet), Konami went back to basics with Castlevania III: Dracula's Curse in September of 1990. Castlevania 3 was a prequel to the first two games, playing as Simon's ancestor, Trevor, and starting the whole "there will always be a Dracula, a Belmont, and a Castle" triforce of rules that Bioshock Infinite clearly ripped off. Ok, maybe not, but the Belmont genealogical tree at least makes sense, unlike Zelda's chronology. 

Anyway, Castlevania 3 brought back your regular, linear-style of whipping, though in this game you had a few branching paths as well as alternat characters. Grant could stab with knives and climb on walls and ceilings, Sylva was a magician nuker lady (though it says "he" joined your party after you get her. Lazy!), and Alucard's first appearance in the series was paired with the super-cheaty "bat transform," which could get you through most levels. This was the first time in the series you could switch between multiple characters in a single game, a feature abandoned all the way up until the DS's Portrait of Ruin. 

First impressions last forever

This is another great looking, great sounding Castlevania game. From the badass opening scene where Trevor is praying before the cross before tossing his cloak behind him, ready to kick undead butt; this game feels awesome. The color pallet also feels like a fusion between Castlevania and Simon's Quest, with enough bright colors to make necessary things pop, but still having a dark underbelly. And the stained glass in the second screen is phenomenally gorgeous. 

But as I played further...

This game is super hard, one of the hardest on the NES. And yeah, Castlevania wasn't exactly easy or anything, but it felt fair. Castlevania 3 is like Castlevania's sadistic brother, constantly torturing you with levels you know are possible, but why are they so hard? The staircase with the shooting skull heads that you can't even kill is probably the absolute worst, though there's still plenty more (jumping on moving pendulums with his awful jumping mechanic? Gee, thanks Konami). 

This game also, while still feeling much tighter designed than Simon's Quest, still isn't quite as refined as Castlevania. There's a few weird screens and stages where stuff doesn't really feel like it's been put there intentionally, and whoever designed the exploding-jellyfish enemies should be punched in the face. Maybe it's the difficulty that exacerbates this feeling of somewhat tossed-together levels, but in either case it doesn't feel quite as fun or polished as Castlevania, though to be fair it does feel more polished than 99% of all other NES games. 

So what's the conclusion? 

Castlevania 3 is a sequel that played it safe, but also incorporated enough new stuff to be unique (the multiple characters and splitting paths). I would have considered this to be the best Castlevania game on the NES, if only they'd done a better job balancing the game and pacing its difficulty better. Instead, you get an uneven game that can be fun one minute, challenging the next, and hair-pullingly difficult the next. Now take those three and mix them up into a completely random order, and you have Castlevania III.
It's still a very fun game (though a Game Genie with unlimited lives helps), and you can get better at the game and memorize it's levels to eventually beat it. But the difficulty is so high it isn't nearly as satisfying as mastering the first game, which is a shame. Castlevania 3 is still essential to an NES collector's collection, but you'll probably play Castlevania 1 more.
Copies are getting pricy as well, usually around $15-30, depending on the quality of the label.

Nathan vs His Game Collection: Day 9 - Bugs Bunny's Burgertime

Day 9, and still going. I picked up Super Return of the Jedi today at the game store, finally rounding off my Super Star Wars SNES collection in memory of LucasArts. Pity that company kind of fell of the deep end...then fell off completely.

Today's batch is a mixed bunch of interesting NES games, though I may change your mind about one of them. Also, I've started playing Sleeping Dogs on the PC after Vinny on GiantBomb wouldn't shut up about it...and it's pretty good! Based on the few hours I've sunk, I'd recommend it fo' sho.'

Here's a big band arrangement of the best Zelda song for ya, and on with the reviews.

Bugs Bunny's Birthday Blowout

A little background

The Bugs Bunny Birthday Blowout (yeah, I put it wrong in the header graphic, sue me) was released in September of 1990 to celebrate the 50th anniversary of Bugs Bunny. It was created by Kemco, who actually released a fair number of quality games like Shadowgate, Desert Commander, and others, though to be honest 90% of what they put out was licensed junk. Bugs Bunny's Birthday Blowout (I'm going to call it that even though it's wrong) is a spin-off sequel to The Bugs Bunny Crazy Castle, which is total crap and somehow the series survived all the way to the GBA days.

This game is probably most famous for being panned by a certain gaming nerd who tends to have a temper issue, but is the game really all that bad? 

First impressions last forever

I bought this game solely because, as I watched AVGN play it, I thought it looked fun. Really! And guess what? The game is pretty fun! The graphics remind me a lot of the Tiny Tunes game (that's a compliment), and even though they're not the best ever, the game still looks good. Bugs jumps like he's on the moon (which I guess makes sense since he's a rabbit) and can bash enemies with a short range hammer. 

What I really noticed was whenever you picked up the carrots (essentially Mario's coins), they turn into little WB logos. Shameless. 

But as I played further...

Bugs Bunny's Birthday Blowout really sucked me in. It has a few cool mechanics, too. Those WBs left behind after picking up carrots? They double as platforms, meaning some areas you have to collect carrots first, then go back and use them as platforms to continue. Skilled players can also get a carrot and still land on the platform, saving time and getting to secret areas. It's a neat gimmick. 

The enemies are weird and don't variate much, the most common being these hammer guys that leap into the air and lunge down at you. The weird thing is none of the enemies (except the ghosts later) do any damage if you are standing on top of them, Mario 2 style. Only if you hit them from the side (or get caught in an attack animation) do you take damage.

The biggest annoyance is that when you do take damage, you can't use your weapon for a while when you're invincible. That's less annoying during the game, where you can use the opportunity and the long "stun" time to just run past all the enemies, but on the bosses it can screw you over.

The bosses are also all total jokes. The only one remotely difficult is Yosemite Sam, because he has a projectile. The rest are very simple patterns or deflecting projectiles with the hammer's generous hit box. Daffy's "boss fights" aren't even boss fights; you can't kill him, you just have to jump to the big carrot. One of them I just jumped straight up and bam, boss beaten. Didn't even have to move. 

So what's the conclusion? 

I'm going to very heartily disagree with AVGN here: The Bugs Bunny Birthday Blowout is an excellent game. Ok, "excellent" might be a bit generous, but it's still a solid platformer with some cool new ideas. It's only real weakness is that it's really easy and really short. Because of a minigame at the end of the level (where you gamble your carrots to get lives), you can horde absurd amounts of 1ups. By the end of the game, I had 87, and that was with me dying quite a bit on the more obnoxious levels. The other big annoyance in that regard is no mid-level checkpoints, but that only really gets on your nerves for the last three or four levels. This isn't Ghouls and Goblins by any means.

All in all, BBBB is fun, has good graphics and control, feels unique (actually feels a bit like Super Mario Land on the Game Boy for some reason. That's a compliment.) and is a good way to burn an hour or so it takes to beat it. If you see it at the game store, give it a shot! It's certainly one of the more "playable" NES platformers out there.

Copies are cheap, usually around $3. 

Watch me play it here!

Burgertime

A little background

Burgertime is a port of an arcade game of the same name, published by Data East (not them again...) in May of 1987, five years after the arcade game debuted. The game has a Donkey Kong-esque arcade feel to it (or more of a hybrid between DK1 and Jr.) with punishing difficulty mixed with lots of vertical and horizontal enemy dodging. It also stars a dude called "Peter Pepper," who should totally hang out with Master Higgens in the "great old-school character names" club. 

First impressions last forever

This game is hella hard. I think I like it (I really enjoy old arcade pointy games like Pac-Man, Galaga, and the Donkey Kong games, but for some reason I'm just awful at Burgertime. 

That being said, this is a pretty faithful arcade port (from what little of the arcade version I've played). It looks like an old NES game, but doesn't fall into that usual Data East trap of porting games over and making them way worse. Maybe because Data East also made the arcade version of this one. Who knows. 

But as I played further...

I still suck at it, but it's still a fun, challenging arcade game. The goal is simple: stomp on all the ingredients (in order, if possible) of the burgers to drop them below, and once you finish four burgers you go to the next stage. The issues is that you have to climb up and down all these ladders, and these jerk foods all want you dead. Eggs, milk, hot-dogs: all murderers. Calamity! 

You have a limited stun attack for emergencies, but the real way to kill them is to smash-em-up into the sandwich by dropping the ingredients on them (somebody's getting a little "extra" with their burger. Hope they like egg!). It's kind of Donkey Kong Jr. in that way, except I'm actually good at Donkey Kong Jr. I suck at Burgertime, if you missed that memo. 

So what's the conclusion? 

I'd say play the arcade game (or an emulated copy) a bit and decide if it's your cup of arcade tea, and if so snatch it up. If not, then don't. I'm not saying if this game is good or bad, and as a port it's solidly made and accurate to the arcade experience. 

I just suck at it. 

That's the thing about these old arcade games: they're really hit-or-miss. I think that's why Pac-Man took off so well: it's probably the most accessible and playable of the arcade games of that era. The others had such a high bar of entry, people didn't want to put more coins in. Like Burgertime. Which I suck at.

Woah, tangent.

Anyway, if you like arcade games, Burgertime is 'aight. If you don't, then don't bother.

It's usually around $5-10 for a cart. 

Captain Skyhawk

A little background

In June of 1991, Rare punched out yet another game for the NES, this time bringing us Captain Skyhawk. This game is another one that seems to plague my local gaming stores (it and Silent Scope): there's like twenty trillion copies and I don't know why. Usually when that happens, I assume the game is bad. Is this game bad? Well, that's what I'm here for. 

Also, fun fact: this game's music was composed by David Wise, who also did all the Donkey Kong Country music. Except now that I think about it, I don't remember much music in this game, just a lot of shooting and jet engine sounds. Maybe he wrote that, too, who knows. 

First impressions last forever

Holy balls this game looks like Zaxxon, and that's a good thing (Zaxxon is boss hog!). You fly a plane over an 3D esque landscape, being able to determine your height from the ground. The difference between this and Zaxxon is Zaxxon was on an isometric style, while this one you just fly straight up. Which isn't as cool, because Zaxxon had areas that required precise height/depth levels to continue, while Captain Starhawk you can just fly at maximum height 99% of the time and be ok. I'm fine with this.

After beating the first level oh hey a 3D, tail-end fighting stage ala Afterburner? Did they just rip off a bunch of Sega games to make this?

But as I played further...

They did rip off a bunch of Sega games to make this, but you know what? I'm OK with it, because Captain Starhawk is ok in my book.

The "another damn NES shmup" stages are my favorite, because they control best and have the best looking graphics, as well as are a fun challenge. The first stage is just survival, while the second requires you to bomb two locations (and will cycle until you do). Not to bad, honestly. 

The 3D stages kind of suck, Top Gun style. I mean, they're ok, and mostly just seem there as bonus stages, but the graphics look bad and the controls are dodgy at best. 

I do like that this game has an upgrade system, though you should just use a turbo controller and only upgrade your regular cannon, because then you'll destroy everything. I don't like that you have to "dock with the space station"(?! Why is a jet in space?) in order to proceed at that point, which is annoying until you figure out the exact timing. 

Also: don't be fooled by the "Continue?" button without a number; you only get five and then it's a game over. 

So what's the conclusion? 

I think this game's ok. I was a huge fan of Zaxxon back when my parents first bought a Commodore 64 (I was like three or something), and this game has that Zaxxon feel to it. I also like Afterburner, which this game doesn't ape quite as well. I still have to give it to Rare, though: those guys sure dabbled in just about every genre before becoming Microsoft's Kinect bitch. And while I still think they're firmly set as gaming's "Jack of all trades, master of none," Captain Starhawk is still a fun and solid NES game. 

If you like shooters, NES jet sound effects, and all those bad crazy NES "special graphics," Captain Skyhawk's got it all here and in spades for ya. Also in space. Why is the jet in space?

Copies are like $3. 

Casino Kid

A little background

Ah, Casino Kid. An attempt to fuse the JRPG sprites and elements from Dragon Quest into a game about playing blackjack and poker. SOFEL (whose only other game of note was Wall Street Kid) pumped this game out in October of 1989. There's a truckload of gambling games on the NES, but people seem to remember this one because it looks like a JRPG, with a big-headed sprite wandering around and participating in activities. Hey, that sounds like another game that ended up sucking, Adventures in the Magic Kingdom! Uh oh. 

Also, I didn't pay $3 for it, despite what that suggests. Our local game store has 3 for $1 sports and casino games (and I have a 10% off card), so I got it for 30 cents. Score?

First impressions last forever

The game does look like a JRPG! But in a casino! How could this go bad? 

But as I played further...

Man, this game sucks.

So the first thing you'll notice is you walk super slow. That's great. 

Then you notice that you can't actually play with anybody; you have to play with specific people, in order. The first person is (obviously) the farthest possible distance from you in this maze-like casino, so good luck finding them and getting to actual gameplay.

The "casino" part is also very underwhelming. While it does have poker and blackjack, the game isn't really all that...fun? I don't mind casino games for the most part, but something about Casino Kid is boring.

The worst part is in order to progress, you have to completely clean out the person. Then you'll have to find the other random person who will now play with you, beat them, and continue. Do that enough times and you win the game. Joy. 

So what's the conclusion? 

Casino Kid is a pitiful casino game. While it maybe had some good ideas hidden under there (Sword & Poker on iOS combined poker and JRPGs in the most awesome way possible), they must have all been swept under the rug before this game actually came out. Not to spoil future reviews, but the only gambling game you need on the NES (if that's your thing) is Vegas Dreams, which puts this game to complete shame. Bad gambling, boring slow gameplay, and having to walk to arbitrary spots are just huge speed bumps on a road that only leads to playing freaking blackjack anyway.

Avoid. Unless you are collector, and then you can justify the 30 cents. Sort of.