Yuku free message boards

Had this been a 2D sidescrolling or overhead shooter, I doubt it would have received half the praise it did.

Now, usually when arguments like this are presented, they ask things that completely make no sense whatsoever, like people who ask me if I'd like Star Fox as much if it was a 2D shooter. Well, great shittin' Sherlock, it's not a 2D shooter and it wasn't designed to be one. That's changing the entire game. You may as well ask me if I would have liked The Legend of Zelda as much if it was a football game.

I was ultimately proved right by the superb StarFox 64.

Crawl and 1OOO wrote:

---

On a side note, why does it seem like I'm the only person in the world who feels Mario Kart 64 is slower than Super Mario Kart?

I don't know why you think you're the only person who feels that.

That opinion was popular at both the old N-Sider and the Game Pond.

In the case of Panzer Dragoon, my belief is that it's a combination of

one or more of these factors:

1. It's an "underdog" game.

2. It has "features" such as lock-on targeting and an automatic camera that swivels around to show things from different angles as you're flying along. Things like this are usually seen as "improvements", no matter if they really benefit the gameplay or not.

3. It's "epic", because it features a Final Fantasy-style hybrid steampunk/medieval world with orchestral music and a guy riding on a dragon. But again, whether or not these things are appropriate or make sense usually isn't considered. Why are you flying on a dragon, creatures known for breathing fire and destruction, yet shooting a gun?

This makes about as much sense as piloting a fighter jet but instead of using the jet's rockets and guns, you hang out the cockpit window while shooting a .44. Thank goodness they fixed this in Panzer Dragoon Saga (you still have the gun, but the dragon has attacks, too.)

As for ZAMN, whenever I see people talking about it, no one ever really pinpoints an exact reason for liking it, only that it's "creative" (which is a term that could be applied to almost every game) or they just talk about how far they got. So I think it's a combination of being unwilling to admit that software giants with good track records like Lucasarts and Konami could put their heads together and create a total dud, and a similar situation to how I felt about the VIC20's Radar Rat Race when I was a kid: It's a game that you can pick up and play for awhile, and who knows, you might get farther than you did the last time through some stroke of luck, or you might not. It doesn't ultimately matter because no one really cares.

I imagine that what you're probably supposed to do in ZAMN is rescue only certain people in the level so that when they show up again in the next level, they'll be easy to get to. Save the wrong people and when they show up in the next level, it's impossible to get to them. And I do mean impossible. The last time I played the game, I got to a point where I had only one person to rescue and it was impossible to run from the start of the stage to where he was before the enemies got to him. The problem is that this would require a lot of starting over and trial and error to figure out who you should be rescuing, and those large sprawling stages are not fun to navigate.