[General Discussion] Titles you just can't get into

I've always wanted to enjoy Xenogears more than I do. It just never happens. Each time I get involved in the game, another tedious dungeon or overly melodramatic/convoluted plot element throws me off. Not to mention the poor load times and sloppy presentation. I find myself thinking that maybe it could actually be one of the best RPGs ever made if Square would redo the game proper. As it is however, it's flawed and one of the most overrated RPGs ever made thanks to the numerous zealots who worship the game. So many things need to be touched up.

I also feel similarly about FFIX. I'd like to enjoy it more for the obvious fairy tale quality of the game, but there are too many shortcomings all over the place, from the sluggish combat system to the filler-plagued soundtrack.

Finally, I've never been a big Suikoden person. Beyond the 108 character gimmick and the soundtrack of the first game, they're some of the most generic and uninspired RPGs out there. More involved and progressive gameplay as well as better art direction might make them worthy of the praise they get.

Oh, I almost forgot. I also find many of Treasure's games to be a tad overrated. Namely Gunstar Heroes and Dynamite Headdy. Their games tend to focus on a central gimmick as well as constant boss fights. I prefer more deliberate and polished games. Games that feel complete and more deeply satisfying like DKC2 and SMB3. When I see Sega fans talking about how DKC is overrated because it borrows from Mario, I definitely feel that they're missing the point. I like for stages to be more than just intervals between boss fights. I like to be able to truly immerse myself in a game world. And at that, Treasure tends to be subpar. Give me Contra III or Metal Slug 2 over Gunstar Heroes any day.

Castlevania Symphony of the Night is another. I actually did get into it, and I even think that it's a good game, but by the end I took note of quite a few problems, from the artificial extension of gametime that is the inverted/rehash castle to the lack of practical applications for Alucard's various transformations. Not forgetting the shallow RPG elements and lack of traditional Castlevania platforming. SOTN is a jack of all trades and master of none. When it comes to Castlevania done right, Dracula's Curse is the better choice. And when it comes to Metroid done right, Super Metroid is clearly superior. Point is, SOTN is far from being "the best 2D sidecroller ever made".

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by SonicPanda

Ironically, the Konami members responsible for Contra III are Treasure, for the most part. But I will agree that Treasure's output is wildly uneven.

I've heard that as well. There was a site (I don't think it's working anymore) which specificied which members of the development team would later become part of Treasure. I think it was maybe three at the most. (nothing is certain when it comes to what games ex-Konami Treasure staff might've worked on; it's all rather irrelvant anyways since I'm only talking about official Treasure games or known Treasure-developed games) Anyways, I generally like Treasure. I had fun with McDonald's Treasureland Adventure and Mischief Makers. Gradius V was also pretty cool. Alien Soldier doesn't pretend to have good level designs and instead focuses on Treasure's affinity for boss fights to great success. I just don't see Treasure as the end all and be all when it comes to sidescrollers. It's tough to have that view while everyone else is ready to proclaim Treasure's almost mythical status. And to make things worse, Treasure is perceived as underrated and overlooked by the casual gamer, which only strengthens the resolve of its fans as they strive to support their righteous cause.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

They didn't really do any games as a team before leaving Konami as much as a number of games just happened to have one or two future Treasure guys involved somewhere. Treasure fans would like to say that the influence of Treasure is obvious enough with some of those games, but I would probably only rarely agree. For example, Castlevania IV hardly has anything in common with most Treasure games. Treasure games tend to be on the manic side. Castlevania IV is a more deliberately paced and dare I say well-crafted experience. A Treasure fan might say that it lacks innovation (a very common criticism held against the original Donkey Kong Country), but are any of Treasure's gimmicks so innovative and richly rewarding so as to justify the lack of memorable areas and lack of an immersive atmosphere some of their games feature? DKC may be a deliberate kind of platformer in the vein of Mario, and it may not offer much that is particularly new in platform genre, but it created an entirely new and immersive world that made Donkey Kong a popular icon again. The barrels, kremlings, animal rides, and bonus games all became something uniquely Donkey Kong and uniquely memorable. I think that's important. Contra III has larger than life bosses a la Treasure, but the stages themselves are a bit longer and more involved than you'd find in Gunstar Heroes. And Metal Slug 2 (or 3 if you prefer that one; it recycles a lot of stuff from 2 anyways) is actually better than both when it comes to the various animations, obstacles, and area details.

2D Mario over Treasure's offerings? I agree. No Treasure game (out of those that I've played anyways) is as satisfying on the whole the likes of SMB3 and SMW 1/2.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.