The Worst platform game

[EmuChicken]

lol, fool

loads more games deserve lower than both kg and rd.... what about sooty and sweep and them 8bit conversions?

[StarEye]

Hehe, yeah, I am only joking. Neither Kid Gloves or Rick Dangerous deserves to be on the list of worst platformers.

[dlfrsilver]

loool you lack of personality Stareye

[Zetr0]

for the record for however times now....

GODS deserves to be at the lowest !

its a dire port combined with poor graphics and gameplay... the only redeeming quality is the intro music!

[BippyM]

I think Gods has excellent gfx and sound, my only complaint is the speed!

[zenox98]

Deliverance is far worse than Gods, and even that is quite good.

[Zetr0]

meh!

gods is a dire platform game!

[zenox98]

Jeez, Zetr0, you got the hate Gods blues bad, aint yer

[jotd]

Originally Posted by Zetr0

for the record for however times now....

GODS deserves to be at the lowest !

its a dire port combined with poor graphics and gameplay... the only redeeming quality is the intro music!

Ok, Gods is my favourite platformer, allegedly overrated because there are so many secret passages that cannot be seen at the first, or second, or 10th game. If you start finding the puzzles, then you're addicted. If you don't, you just don't get the game feeling and it's an average game (even if I think that everything is so polished, bonus & hostiles appearing, sfx, graphics ...)

OK, let's respect your point of view. But Gods is NOT the worst platformer anyway, it's your hatred of the game that makes you react this way, and to counter everybody who says it's excellent.
The problem is the contrast between the overall praise and your feeling.

Deliverance, Leander, also suck in terms of playability but have nice gfx, so I cannot tell they're the worst platformers.

But take "Fatman: the caped consumer", not overrated, just crap. Don't tell me this is worse than Gods! Another example: Prehistoric.

I think there are tons of examples of games you don't know which are simply terrible. The difference between console & computer games is that console games playability is much better than computer game (let's not even talk about PC games!!!)



And Gods is NOT a port. It has been originally designed for the Amiga:

http://hol.abime.net/2754

[Hungry Horace]

for the record, i've never got hooked on Gods, never played it for hours on end....

however, in spite of this, its far from the worst out there, in fact, i still rate it as an excellent game.

Looks great, sounds great, plays rather nicely, and i know from others it has hours and hours of game-time within it due to all the secret bits.

i think Zetr0 has been playing something else all these years! (or not-playing, as the case my be)

then again, he does think Captive is better than Bloodwych, so its best not to take his views to heart too much!

Originally Posted by jotd

The difference between console & computer games is that console games playability is much better than computer game (let's not even talk about PC games!!!)

in spite of your wisdom jotd, i actually disagree with that (the console part) - i find the playability on most console games to be worse than their respective home-computer counterparts, as i think they generally dumb-downed the games (even in gameplay) for a younger more typical console audience.

however, i agree about the PC games!


actually, this is part of the reason i still say; Great Giana Sisters

it plays like a piss-poor console clone... becasue it is! and is also hideous ugly.


its looking at games like GGS, that make me find it a joke that anyone could try and argue that Zool is unplayable and looks bad, and is an rubbish as an attempted "sonic beater" - for a start, its very nice looking, doesnt actually play like any of the console games of that type, and is.. well.. not a bad game. Not one of the best, but still good, and (like Gods) doesnt deserve mention in this thread.

[Retro-Nerd]

Originally Posted by Hungry Horace

actually, this is part of the reason i still say; Great Giana Sisters

it plays like a piss-poor console clone... becasue it is! and is also hideous ugly.


its looking at games like GGS, that make me find it a joke that anyone could try and argue that Zool is unplayable and looks bad, and is an rubbish as an attempted "sonic beater" - for a start, its very nice looking, doesnt actually play like any of the console games of that type, and is.. well.. not a bad game. Not one of the best, but still good, and (like Gods) doesnt deserve mention in this thread.

Once again, i think differently.

I played/still play Great Giana Sisters in the C-64 & Amiga versions. Yep, it is a Mario Bros. clone, but a very good one.

A true classic, the controls & scrolling are decent enough, the music is better as for most other platformer from it's time.

Zool? Played it seriously ages ago, this game has nothing appealing for me.

But both games aren't the worst amiga platformer. Once again:

Yolanda!!!

Unbeatable crap, that's for sure.

I think there are tons of examples of games you don't know which are simply terrible. The difference between console & computer games is that console games playability is much better than computer game (let's not even talk about PC games!!!)

Sad but true.

[Dizzy]

it had a nice cover

http://hol.abime.net/1651/boxscan


I never liked Sink Or Swim

[jimbob005]

1.putty
2.silly putty
3.super putty

[Hungry Horace]

Originally Posted by Retro-Nerd

I played/still play Great Giana Sisters in the C-64 & Amiga versions. Yep, it is a Mario Bros. clone, but a very good one.

A true classic, the controls & scrolling are decent enough, the music is better as for most other platformer from it's time.

no prizes for guessing that i think Mario is massively overrated crap too then?


music is a very imporant thing for me (i live for it as a sound-engineer) and even the Mario music is terribly generic, and i cant remember GGS's music being any better.... now the cracktro tune... that WAS good!

[Retro-Nerd]

You grown up with a spectrum, Horace. I assume, your pain barrier is pretty high.

Mario Bros. is crap? Mmh, i prefer the gameplay, if were are talking about platformer. And the Mario Bros. series has plenty of it.

[Hungry Horace]

it epitimises what i described before as "dumbing down gameplay for console gamers" imho.

thus my distaste for it. gimmie Bubble Bobble over that crap anyday. hehe


not to mentioned the "type" of gamer it has spawned. grrr...

[Retro-Nerd]

But we are talking about REALLY bad platformer, unplayble crap. Any serious favorites, Horace?

[StarEye]

Uhm, Mario is a much more advanced game than Bubble Bobble, so that "dumbing down" argument doesn't hold much water.

Also, what type of gamer has it spawned? The type that likes platform games?

[Hungry Horace]

Originally Posted by StarEye

Uhm, Mario is a much more advanced game than Bubble Bobble, so that "dumbing down" argument doesn't hold much water.

sorry, but i dont think so.... i wouldnt say it if i didnt think so with good reason. There is a lot of just "rolling along bashing stuff" in Mario, its the gameplay i'm talking about here, not the number of levels or anything. I think BB requires much more of a delicate and precise touch, and encourages the player to get a bit creative - especially later on in the game, whilst mario very much allows for the player to "find a route" and stick to it rigidly (there are videos of people completing the game without even looking, to prove my point here) - Rainbow Islands is probably a better example than BB tbh, as the whole diamond-order thing can really mix the game up play-after-play.... but hey, it's said now.

Also, what type of gamer has it spawned? The type that likes platform games?

no, the sickening nintendo fanboy generation, whom believe anything graced with "Mario (TM)" is pure genius. Check out a few console forums if you'd like to meet a few. Most of them are pretty young, and will cite the SNES as "teh best0r machine 3va!!" - oh and they wont have heard of the Amiga.


i should have guessed any negative stance about Mario might cause some unrest, even if my opinions are considered (i've tried on several occasions to find the appeal of the game, but it just aint right for me) - so i'll jump ship on the point from here. you know what i think on it now... i wouldnt want anyone to take my dislike for the game personally.

[StarEye]

Originally Posted by Hungry Horace

sorry, but i dont think so.... i wouldnt say it if i didnt think so with good reason. There is a lot of just "rolling along bashing stuff" in Mario, its the gameplay i'm talking about here, not the number of levels or anything. I think BB requires much more of a delicate and precise touch, and encourages the player to get a bit creative - especially later on in the game, whilst mario very much allows for the player to "find a route" and stick to it rigidly (there are videos of people completing the game without even looking, to prove my point here) - Rainbow Islands is probably a better example than BB tbh, as the whole diamond-order thing can really mix the game up play-after-play.... but hey, it's said now.



no, the sickening nintendo fanboy generation, whom believe anything graced with "Mario (TM)" is pure genius. Check out a few console forums if you'd like to meet a few. Most of them are pretty young, and will cite the SNES as "teh best0r machine 3va!!" - oh and they wont have heard of the Amiga.


i should have guessed any negative stance about Mario might cause some unrest, even if my opinions are considered (i've tried on several occasions to find the appeal of the game, but it just aint right for me) - so i'll jump ship on the point from here. you know what i think on it now... i wouldnt want anyone to take my dislike for the game personally.

Some people make it a hobby to play through a game as quick as possible, and some times even without your eyes open - which is obviously quite sick. It's not because it's so easy (sure SMB1 is easy, but the sequels not as much), but what do you expect when you complete the game fanatically hundreds of time?

Fanboys have always existed, and you can't blame Super Mario and Nintendo for that - that's just ignoring the incredibly fanatic amiga fanboys, sega fanboys, PC fanboys, Atari fanboys, Sony fanboys etc etc. Nintendo fanboys are no worse. Also, for many, Super Nintendo was the ultimate games console 'cause that's what they grew up with. And looking at the games, I can understand their love for the machine. I'm a big fan of games like Final Fantasy and Super Mario myself, but it also usually carries the best Street Fighter conversions. I prefer the Amiga for nostalgic reasons, but there's no doubt that the SNES holds an incredible amount of quality games, just like the Amiga - and in many many cases, better versions than the Amiga conversions of the same game.

And yes, Super Mario IS pure genius. You may not like it, but that's just how it is. He basically re-invented the platforming genre. Without Mario, we probably wouldn't have Superfrog, for example. I'm a bigger Amiga fan than Nintendo fan, heck I'm even a bigger Playstation fan than Nintendo fan. But I don't deny them the credit, 'cause they so obviously deserves it.