What are the best 2D platformers of all time (excluding Mario and Sonic titles)?

[Neurotic Void Melody]

It's not a small number of castlevania titles - there are loads of them, it's just that Symphony of the Night helped popularise the style that became metroidvania, but it's not necessarily what they are most famous for if you are in any way familiar with the series, so castlevania is not in this argument.

But back to your original point about about whether metroidvania should be considered platformers - as far as I'm concerned, you jump around on platforms all the time. Ergo, it's a type of platformer. I've heard them described as 'explorable platformers' before. OK they aren't your classic style of platformers, but they still fall under the same rough bracket for me. It sounds like in your mind you need it to be a 'if you fall off the screen and you die' type of game for it to be considered a platformer to you. It's just two different types of platform games in my opinion.

These terms are nebulous tbh.

Platforming is also very much a regular requirement to achieve any sort of progress in those titles. Failure to platform efficiently will lead to far quicker death. Therefore they are within platform genre

OT: Rayman Legends is the good shit. It contains content from Rayman Origins too, so I'd say it is the definitive option out of the two. Can't say if it's the best platformer evar, but it is indeed peak quality regardless of moderninity

 

[Baffle]

Fantasy World Dizzy.

 

[CaitSeith]

regardless platforming still isn't what the series is best known for.

So what?

He wants 2D platforming, and those games have lots of 2D platforming. If he ends up enjoying the games thanks to the 2D platforming, that's a good thing.

 

[dscross]

Anyway. off the top of my head:

*Another World (though as a cinematic platformer, this is very much an acquired taste)

*Bonanza Bros

*Castlevania: Bloodlines (only Castlevania game I've played, so can't comment on the others)

*Donkey Kong (not the arcade, the Gameboy one)

*Donkey Kong Country 1 & 2 (3 is okay, I guess)

*Micky Mouse: Castle of Illusion

*The Lost Vikings

*Toy Story (SNES/Genesis)

I've never even heard of Another World or The Lost Vikings. Could you go into a little detail about why you like them?

Does Ori and the Bling Forest count? 'cause if so, Ori and the Bling Forest...

I just googled this - it looks interesting. Is it a metroidvania type thing?

 

[Hawki]

Come to think of it, I can add Jurassic Park (Genesis) to the list.

Anyway:

I've never even heard of Another World or The Lost Vikings.

You uncultured swine!

Could you go into a little detail about why you like them?

Alright:

-Another World: Like I said, this is an acquired taste, and I do have gripes with this game. I can say that I "like" it, if not "love" it. Basically, the game is good at showing you...um, "another world," and letting you piece together what's going on with this world. I could tell you more, but almost the entirety of its worldbuilding is based on inference. I mean, I can give you my interpretation, but that would just be mine. Basically, y'know how people say stuff like Half-Life 2 conveys its worldbuilding through the environment, such as showing how the seas have receded? Same principle here.

On the other hand, I feel the worldbuilding is too vague for its own good. Also, the game is highly dependent on trial and error. The respawn points are generous, but for instance, there's a section where your character is dropped into a shaft, where you can barely see anything. Basically, if you roll left, you get to the next level, and you can keep rolling. Roll right, and you'll drop to your death. There's no way of knowing which path is correct ahead of time. This isn't good game design, it's trial and error with a lot of trial, and a lot of error. And it's frustrating as hell. Also doesn't help that I never beat the game myself, as I hit a roadblock later on - game's extremely hard as well.

-Lost Vikings: Similarly, I never made it past the first world, and after watching YouTube, it's embarassing that I didn't. But, of what I played, I liked it. It's a puzzle platformer, where you get three Vikings, each with their own skillset, and you've got to use your skills and theirs to make it through the level, alternating control of them. So, gameplay is fun. Also helps that at the start and/or end of each stage the Vikings exchange in banter, and it's fairly entertaining. For instance:

Erik: If I bash one more wall right now, my head will explode!
Olaf: I got dibs on his helmet.
Baleog: Okay, but I get his boots.
Erik: It's great to have such good friends.

Or if you fail a level over and over:

Baleog: I'm so familiar with the beginning of this level, I could do my part blindfolded.
Erik: Yeah, it's too bad the player keeps trying to prove the same thing.

Or medium awareness:

Olaf: If Tomator is so evil, then why does he leave these... Bombs and machines for us to use?
Baleog: No one else in videogames wonders about that stuff.

So, TLV is fun. Granted, it's been ages since I played it, and I had to look up TV Tropes to remind me of the quotes, but I enjoyed it back in the day.

 

[sXeth]

It's not a small number of castlevania titles - there are loads of them, it's just that Symphony of the Night helped popularise the style that became metroidvania, but it's not necessarily what they are most famous for if you are in any way familiar with the series, so castlevania is not in this argument.

But back to your original point about about whether metroidvania should be considered platformers - as far as I'm concerned, you jump around on platforms all the time. Ergo, it's a type of platformer. I've heard them described as 'explorable platformers' before. OK they aren't your classic style of platformers, but they still fall under the same rough bracket for me. It sounds like in your mind you need it to be a 'if you fall off the screen and you die' type of game for it to be considered a platformer to you. It's just two different types of platform games in my opinion.

These terms are nebulous tbh.

"Metroidvania" as referring to level design based around acquiring mobility upgrades or other items that unlock new parts of previous areas isn't in any way exclusive to platformers (and really, was probably most popularized by Zelda then either of the contributing namesakes.)

Prettymuch all the 2d Castlevanias and Metroids are heavy platforming though. Whereas something like Salt and Sanctuary takes the Castlevania route but is almost entirely combat (except one or two highly optional spots of platforming segments).

 

[Yoshi178]

Prettymuch all the 2d Castlevanias and Metroids are heavy platforming though.

Metroid has always had platforming elements in its gameplay. but platforming has NEVER been the main focus of that series.

exploration and action have always come first in that series. calling Metroid a platformer is like calling Zelda an RPG.

 

[dscross]

.

"Metroidvania" as referring to level design based around acquiring mobility upgrades or other items that unlock new parts of previous areas isn't in any way exclusive to platformers (and really, was probably most popularized by Zelda then either of the contributing namesakes.)

Prettymuch all the 2d Castlevanias and Metroids are heavy platforming though. Whereas something like Salt and Sanctuary takes the Castlevania route but is almost entirely combat (except one or two highly optional spots of platforming segments).

That's fair. I was more talking about actual Metroid and castlevania games in the discussion with Yoshi.

Prettymuch all the 2d Castlevanias and Metroids are heavy platforming though.

Metroid has always had platforming elements in its gameplay. but platforming has NEVER been the main focus of that series.

exploration and action have always come first in that series. calling Metroid a platformer is like calling Zelda an RPG.

Are you completely ignoring what I said above and just saying the same thing over and over agin?

 

[Yoshi178]

.

"Metroidvania" as referring to level design based around acquiring mobility upgrades or other items that unlock new parts of previous areas isn't in any way exclusive to platformers (and really, was probably most popularized by Zelda then either of the contributing namesakes.)

Prettymuch all the 2d Castlevanias and Metroids are heavy platforming though. Whereas something like Salt and Sanctuary takes the Castlevania route but is almost entirely combat (except one or two highly optional spots of platforming segments).

That's fair. I was more talking about actual Metroid and castlevania games in the discussion with Yoshi.

Prettymuch all the 2d Castlevanias and Metroids are heavy platforming though.

Metroid has always had platforming elements in its gameplay. but platforming has NEVER been the main focus of that series.

exploration and action have always come first in that series. calling Metroid a platformer is like calling Zelda an RPG.

Are you completely ignoring what I said above and just saying the same thing over and over agin?

Sorry what did you say?

 

[dscross]

Sorry what did you say?

I was asking if you were ignoring the points I made above about what elements need to be present for something to be considered a 'type' of platformer and just keep saying 'platforming has never been the main focus of metroid' even though, as part of the games, you are constantly jumping on platforms.

Calling Metroid a platformer doesn't mean it's exclusively a platformer. Metroid is a platformer. It is not best described as 'just a platformer' to someone expecting a Super Mario clone - but for the purposes of this thread it's fine.

Also, I get the appeal of the term Metroidvania - if you're familiar with the genre, it's very descriptive. But, hypothetically, if someone doesn't know anything about Metroid or Castlevania, then the term is meaningless. And calling it an 'Explorative Platformer' or a 'Platform Adventure Game' is a much better description than calling it an 'Action Adventure Game' which could literally mean dozens of things.

 

[Yoshi178]

Sorry what did you say?

I was asking if you were ignoring the points I made above about what elements need to be present for something to be considered a 'type' of platformer and just keep saying 'platforming has never been the main focus of metroid' even though, as part of the games, you are constantly jumping on platforms.

Calling Metroid a platformer doesn't mean it's exclusively a platformer. Metroid is a platformer. It is not best described as 'just a platformer' to someone expecting a Super Mario clone - but for the purposes of this thread it's fine.

Also, I get the appeal of the term Metroidvania - if you're familiar with the genre, it's very descriptive. But, hypothetically, if someone doesn't know anything about Metroid or Castlevania, then the term is meaningless. And calling it an 'Explorative Platformer' or a 'Platform Adventure Game' is a much better description than calling it an 'Action Adventure Game' which could literally mean dozens of things.

you'll have to speak up a bit. i still can't hear you.

 

[dscross]

Sorry what did you say?

I was asking if you were ignoring the points I made above about what elements need to be present for something to be considered a 'type' of platformer and just keep saying 'platforming has never been the main focus of metroid' even though, as part of the games, you are constantly jumping on platforms.

Calling Metroid a platformer doesn't mean it's exclusively a platformer. Metroid is a platformer. It is not best described as 'just a platformer' to someone expecting a Super Mario clone - but for the purposes of this thread it's fine.

Also, I get the appeal of the term Metroidvania - if you're familiar with the genre, it's very descriptive. But, hypothetically, if someone doesn't know anything about Metroid or Castlevania, then the term is meaningless. And calling it an 'Explorative Platformer' or a 'Platform Adventure Game' is a much better description than calling it an 'Action Adventure Game' which could literally mean dozens of things.

you'll have to speak up a bit. i still can't hear you.

Ah, you know I'm right and that you were splitting hairs now because you are resorting to this. K.

 

[Poetic Nova]

Shantae, They Bleed Pixels, and Donkey Kong Land are the few platformers I can enjoy and would recommend.

 

[Yoshi178]

Ah, you know I'm right

you can believe that if it makes you feel better.

 

[Zeraki]

Mega Man X is my personal all time favorite game so I'll go with that as my answer.

24 years later and I still regularly play it.

 

[American Tanker]

Am I really going to be the first person to mention the Fancy Pants games? Platformers have never really been my thing, but I actually found them pretty fun.

 

[The Almighty Aardvark]

Let's see if my choice got any mentions...

Hollow knight sucks. The rooms respawn after you've left them and if you die you have to go back to a way earlier checkpoint losing potentially hours of progress. Avoid at all costs.

I can get why this can be frustrating, but that's a little dramatic of a response to one aspect of the game. I'm also pretty sure you can't lose hours of work from one death. You almost always gain something. If you spend an hour exploring an area, when you pop back to the checkpoint you still get your map updated, so you now know the quicker way to get to where you want.

It's essentially the "Dark Souls/Metroid/Ori and the Blind Forest/Almost any slightly older game with checkpoints" system of saving progress. I found it occasionally frustrating but there's a fantastic game behind it if this sort of thing doesn't bug you or isn't a deal breaker.

It's also worth noting that geo (The in game currency) isn't that big deal if you lose it. I've lost several hundred to a thousand or so geo and it didn't really set me back much at all.

 

[Hawki]

Another one - Earthworm Jim.

And we should all be ashamed for not having mentioned it sooner.

 

[Blood Brain Barrier]

Let's see if my choice got any mentions...

Hollow knight sucks. The rooms respawn after you've left them and if you die you have to go back to a way earlier checkpoint losing potentially hours of progress. Avoid at all costs.

I can get why this can be frustrating, but that's a little dramatic of a response to one aspect of the game. I'm also pretty sure you can't lose hours of work from one death. You almost always gain something. If you spend an hour exploring an area, when you pop back to the checkpoint you still get your map updated, so you now know the quicker way to get to where you want.

It's essentially the "Dark Souls/Metroid/Ori and the Blind Forest/Almost any slightly older game with checkpoints" system of saving progress. I found it occasionally frustrating but there's a fantastic game behind it if this sort of thing doesn't bug you or isn't a deal breaker.

It's also worth noting that geo (The in game currency) isn't that big deal if you lose it. I've lost several hundred to a thousand or so geo and it didn't really set me back much at all.

I got through Ori fine. And I don't get why people keep mentioning Dark Souls - not only is it not a platformer, I don't like it. So the comparison is hardly going to endear me to Hollow Knight.

 

[The Almighty Aardvark]

I got through Ori fine. And I don't get why people keep mentioning Dark Souls - not only is it not a platformer, I don't like it. So the comparison is hardly going to endear me to Hollow Knight.

Sorry, I'm not trying to specifically sell you on the game, except partially with the statement that losing geo doesn't have much impact. You just made a pretty strong carte blanche statement against the game, and I didn't want to people to be turned off of it if they didn't have an issue with that sort of checkpoint system.

There's not much point in trying to make someone like a game they don't. To be fair, Ori's checkpoint system was a fair bit more forgiving than typical for the genre