Poll: Who the hell does Super Meat Boy appeal to?
- Thread starter Internet Kraken
- Start date
Recommended Videos
It's a hard game. Period. I have rage quit multiple times for fear of destroying my new mouse. I still love it though. When I fail at it it's my fault, and only my fault. No luck to it.
They have improved the formula. Any game that doesn't solicit itself as being ridiculously hard is a game that's improved on that formula. Super Meat Boy and the like are for people that miss the old formula. There are current platformers that aren't unforgivingly hard to choose from. If you didn't want a throw back then why did you pay for a game that sold itself as one?
It's a retro-styled platformer with an emphasis on speed and precision. Such things are meant to be hard, which is part of the thrill. Recent games tend to hold the player's hand and get them to breeze through the game without many problems, but older games expected the player to work for their victory.
I guess that's who Super Meat Boy is targeted at: retro-gamers.
That game gets ridiculously difficult, but I enjoy it. Frustrating as it may be at times, it's not as bad losing and having to restart a 60-100 second level as it is to lose and have to restart a 1-2 hour game. Maybe the tolerance comes as a matter of perspective.
I got it as a gift though, and even then it was $3.50, so price of admission isn't a factor for me. Although I would happily have paid it myself.
I guess that's who Super Meat Boy is targeted at: retro-gamers.
That game gets ridiculously difficult, but I enjoy it. Frustrating as it may be at times, it's not as bad losing and having to restart a 60-100 second level as it is to lose and have to restart a 1-2 hour game. Maybe the tolerance comes as a matter of perspective.
I got it as a gift though, and even then it was $3.50, so price of admission isn't a factor for me. Although I would happily have paid it myself.
"Super Meat Boy brings the old school difficulty of classic NES titles like Mega Man 2, Ghost and Goblins and Super Mario Bros. 2 (The Japanese one) and stream lines them down to the essential no BS straight forward twitch reflex platforming."sevenrings said:
Emphasis on the keyword there. I do enjoy hard platformers, when they are not filled with bullshit. I heard positive things about Super Meat Boy, so I bought it. And I enjoyed it at first. But towards the end I felt that it started to fail on the "no bs" claim. It was filled with bullshit, hence why I could no longer enjoy it.
I didn't play it but plan to do so. AS far as i can gauge form your comment it doesn't seem like Bullshit par se. No, bullshit difficulty is spawning grenades right behind you inside of a bunker with one door forcing you to run out only to be insta-killed by some enemy with a pistol 5 miles away (aka, most CoDs in Veteran)
That's its learning curve, dude. When it says it streamlined the experience, I'm sure they were talking about cutting the bullshit stuff like lives, glitches and poor control layout that made old games hard. Too many obstacles is not one of the things you have to consider fixing when you're trying to make an improved throwback to nostalgic hard games. Too many obstacles is part of what they were trying to bring to the public with this game.
It just sounds like your mad that you got what you payed for, man.
It just sounds like your mad that you got what you payed for, man.
The PC version of Super Meat Boy has Ogmo as a playable character.tsb247 said:
And I haven't finished SMB, but it's quite long and I wouldn't call it bad. While I do get frustrated very easily, SMB only made me frustrated twice. While I was hunting for a bandage in a dark world (the harder version of normal levels).
And I've seen my brother play IWbtG, and that did not seem very appetizing. Also, The Guy is in Super Meat Boy. After you beat his painstakingly hard level [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2FwcOP3dI3o], of course.
Or, if you wan't to see all of them and not the frustration, this [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bTPT2kv6PXw&feature=related].
I have tried for like two hours in total and haven't managed to pull it off.
I love it. I don't think the levels are poorly designed. It's true that the ridiculous amount of obstacles means it takes a whole ton of tries to finish a level... That's kind of the point. And the levels don't just randomly throw something at you or any cheap bullshit. I found the level design to be pretty good.
Exactly because it's difficult. Oh, and that means less than 1 and 20 people beat it, not that you will not beat it.Internet Kraken said:
I haven't played it, but its one of those game I really, really want. I heard it's hard as hell and I'm up for a challenge. It also looks utterly ridiculous, and I like that.
You played "I Wanna Be The Guy", didn't you?
Is it really worse than Battletoads, Counterstrike, Street Fighter 4 or have you been spoiled by Dwarf Fortress and Minecraft?
It's hideously frustrating, but fun as well. Have you played VVVVV yet?
Is it really worse than Battletoads, Counterstrike, Street Fighter 4 or have you been spoiled by Dwarf Fortress and Minecraft?
It's hideously frustrating, but fun as well. Have you played VVVVV yet?
Sounds like somebody is a little butthurt over a game making him work for his rewards. Endurance is as legitimate a measure of skill as muscle memory or reaction time. Move along, nothing to see here.
??????
I don't quite understand what you're talking about - the levels are all short. None last more than 2 minutes if you know how to get around them. In fact, I think the majority last less than a minute.
It's a very hard game. The level design isn't "trial and error" - you can ALWAYS see where you need to jump, you are always informed about what hazards are there, and you are always given time at the start to get your bearings and plan a route (except in the boss battles, which do, unfortunately, contain trial and error in some cases).
It's only "bad" level design if you don't know what to do, or the traps or obstacles are hidden or you can't judge the jumps. In SMB, you can always judge the distances you have to jump, you can ALWAYS see where you need to go, the obstacles and traps are in plain sight and there are no tricks - you just avoid the sawblades, don't get hit by the lazer, don't fall off the screen, avoid the enemies, avoid the missiles, all of that is very possible. Trial and error is when you have no choice but to take random chances to see the correct path - but in SMB, the correct path is plain as day, so what part involves trial and error? Trial and Error does NOT MEAN "you die a lot". If that was the case, hell, almost any moderately difficult game could be accused of having "trial and error".
Here's what REAL trial and error is: Say for example you have two doors - one kills you, the other doesn't and you have no idea of knowing which one does which. THAT is trial and error - you have to undertake a random TRIAL and obtain information from the ERROR. Simple, no? In SMB, there is no random element. There is no hidden information. There are no hidden traps. You do not need to glean information about how to beat the level from your mistakes - if you just look at the level design, you already know how to beat the levels. So if you can't do it, that's not "trial and error", that's just difficulty.
And the controls WORK. They work really well. I've seen speed runs of SMB - I can't do them myself, but that's purely MY fault. If you and I have trouble, that's only because the game demands you to be really good. The game gives you infinite lives, an almost instant respawn and a character that can jump vast distances.
Sure, you might not like a game like Super Meat Boy. Loads of people don't like games like SMB, and that's absolutely fine. It can be frustrating. It is very hard. It can be draining and hurt your fingers, and the reward for your efforts isn't exactly worth it. I like SMB a lot, but I'd take a game like Uncharted 2 or Mass Effect 2 over it any day. Sorry, I need me my story-time and epic adventures.
But the level design is certainly not "bullshit" from a design perspective. The levels are fair, from the viewpoint that it gives you everything you need to beat them and plays no real tricks on you.
To say that the SMB level design is "bullshit" just because it has a lot of obstacles, is like saying that Chess is a bad game because it has too many pieces. Or like saying that Super Mario Brothers is bad because of those flying turtle guys that drop the hammers. It's part of the game. It's perfectly fine if you don't like it, but realize that the game was aiming for a different audience than you. It's not badly designed - it's DIFFERENTLY designed.
I don't quite understand what you're talking about - the levels are all short. None last more than 2 minutes if you know how to get around them. In fact, I think the majority last less than a minute.
It's a very hard game. The level design isn't "trial and error" - you can ALWAYS see where you need to jump, you are always informed about what hazards are there, and you are always given time at the start to get your bearings and plan a route (except in the boss battles, which do, unfortunately, contain trial and error in some cases).
It's only "bad" level design if you don't know what to do, or the traps or obstacles are hidden or you can't judge the jumps. In SMB, you can always judge the distances you have to jump, you can ALWAYS see where you need to go, the obstacles and traps are in plain sight and there are no tricks - you just avoid the sawblades, don't get hit by the lazer, don't fall off the screen, avoid the enemies, avoid the missiles, all of that is very possible. Trial and error is when you have no choice but to take random chances to see the correct path - but in SMB, the correct path is plain as day, so what part involves trial and error? Trial and Error does NOT MEAN "you die a lot". If that was the case, hell, almost any moderately difficult game could be accused of having "trial and error".
Here's what REAL trial and error is: Say for example you have two doors - one kills you, the other doesn't and you have no idea of knowing which one does which. THAT is trial and error - you have to undertake a random TRIAL and obtain information from the ERROR. Simple, no? In SMB, there is no random element. There is no hidden information. There are no hidden traps. You do not need to glean information about how to beat the level from your mistakes - if you just look at the level design, you already know how to beat the levels. So if you can't do it, that's not "trial and error", that's just difficulty.
And the controls WORK. They work really well. I've seen speed runs of SMB - I can't do them myself, but that's purely MY fault. If you and I have trouble, that's only because the game demands you to be really good. The game gives you infinite lives, an almost instant respawn and a character that can jump vast distances.
Sure, you might not like a game like Super Meat Boy. Loads of people don't like games like SMB, and that's absolutely fine. It can be frustrating. It is very hard. It can be draining and hurt your fingers, and the reward for your efforts isn't exactly worth it. I like SMB a lot, but I'd take a game like Uncharted 2 or Mass Effect 2 over it any day. Sorry, I need me my story-time and epic adventures.
But the level design is certainly not "bullshit" from a design perspective. The levels are fair, from the viewpoint that it gives you everything you need to beat them and plays no real tricks on you.
To say that the SMB level design is "bullshit" just because it has a lot of obstacles, is like saying that Chess is a bad game because it has too many pieces. Or like saying that Super Mario Brothers is bad because of those flying turtle guys that drop the hammers. It's part of the game. It's perfectly fine if you don't like it, but realize that the game was aiming for a different audience than you. It's not badly designed - it's DIFFERENTLY designed.
I have to say the level design is fine and the game play and controls are also good. The issue is more upon your reaction time and ability to adjust and think ahead. Do you sit down for a bit before starting the level after they show you whats on screen. I mean the game is also very fast paced so it doesn't even take long to do it and again trial and error. I didn't have any problems.
Plus for the price your paying your getting a damn good plateformer and a full game. Surprised it was so cheap
Plus for the price your paying your getting a damn good plateformer and a full game. Surprised it was so cheap
Personally I think if everyone had played the original flash games they would know whether or not they wanted the game. Meat Boy and the Meat Boy Map Packs were awesome games in my opinion and I probably put several hours into each, even going so far as to get all of the band-aids in the first. However the difficulty is way up there. You really have to be determined to push through the levels, and while some may have been controller throwingly frustrating, they were well worth the time I played them.
I haven't bought Super Meat Boy yet. I'm waiting for either the Mac or Wii versions.
I haven't bought Super Meat Boy yet. I'm waiting for either the Mac or Wii versions.
SMB is superb. The quick pace and stiff challenge allow me to slip quickly into zen gaming mode. I've lost count of the times I've done something absolutely amazing, literally threading the needle through saw blades, and only realized it when the end level screen comes up. At it's best (and hardest) the game is more of a rhythm game than anything else.
I didn't get to the end, but I didn't find it very hard. As someone who has spent hours with I wanna be the guy, it was a nice to actually beat a level in under an hour.
Also, I don't like that people abbreviate it SMB. SMB is an acronym for Super Mario Brothers.
Also, I don't like that people abbreviate it SMB. SMB is an acronym for Super Mario Brothers.