What are the highest quality games
Ive aquired a few incredible NES & SNES games over the past 20 - 30 years and the overall quality has been hit or miss. Aside from the obvious choices being Nintendo, Capcom, Konami who do you think produced the highest quality games? When I'm ranking a game I look for graphics & sound, play control, is it fun & how well has it held up. Now, in these piles of games I have are quite a few stinkers that I'm still unsure how I wound up with but what I call a stinker might be in your Hall of Fame. In your opinion what gives a game the qualities that allow it to be remembered fondly 2-3 decades after its initial release and if you would give examples.
Comments
For me what qualities are important are obviously less or no game-breaking bugs, aethetically pleasing to look at and listen to, and lastly plain old fashioned fun factor.
The soundtracks were incredible for most games. The graphics were always beautifully done and had a unique flare to them. And the gameplay was outstanding. Chrono Trigger and FF6 are easily 2 of the best games ever made. And that is just 2 of many many more incredible games including Mario RPG, which just oozes charm.
For me any of the Squaresoft / Square games released on the NES/SNES are top quality and meet the other criteria you mentioned. I'd also like to include TAITO, their games tend to be pretty good quality.
For me what qualities are important are obviously less or no game-breaking bugs, aethetically pleasing to look at and listen to, and lastly plain old fashioned fun factor.
Taito had a few misses comin out in '86 & '87 but even the bad ones are classics. Elevator Action was nicely ported. I guess my favorite Taito game is Flintstones Sierra Madrock
For me any of the Squaresoft / Square games released on the NES/SNES are top quality and meet the other criteria you mentioned. I'd also like to include TAITO, their games tend to be pretty good quality.
For me what qualities are important are obviously less or no game-breaking bugs, aethetically pleasing to look at and listen to, and lastly plain old fashioned fun factor.
Square isnt perfect they made kings knight
Sunsoft/Synapse
Didn't we already have this exact same thread--like recently? Or am I crazy?
Maybe....? Probably. Don't know you well enough to answer the other question
For me any of the Squaresoft / Square games released on the NES/SNES are top quality and meet the other criteria you mentioned. I'd also like to include TAITO, their games tend to be pretty good quality.
For me what qualities are important are obviously less or no game-breaking bugs, aethetically pleasing to look at and listen to, and lastly plain old fashioned fun factor.
I, of course, would never argue against Square(soft).
However, for the sake of the truth, FF games are quite buggy.
If such bugs are game breaking it is of course a debatable matter; however, talking, for instance, about FFVI bugs (over 100 documented IIRC, plus things like vanish/doom which are in the limbo between bug and feature): inverting two stats so that one of them covers for both physical and magical attacks, while the other does nothing, it is a bug that, if the game wasn't so good, would be very blamed; and the reason for the sketch bug not being so bad is likely that no one likes that special attack anyways [citation needed], but still, using sketch in some scenarios can break the game.
These games are so great that they still great no matter all their bugs!
As far as new(er) gen, most Rockstar games are really well done. GTA, Red dead, bully all really great games.
Square isnt perfect they made kings knight
You're not supposed to talk about that
In particular Batman for the NES. Presentation, level design, sound design, difficulty curve, all of it. At work so can't look but that was Sunsoft right? I really think that game holds up as well as any of the SNES legends, even if it isn't as groundbreaking of a game. It's just solid.
I love Batman. The only real technical flaw that I've noticed is that the music kind of freaks out sometimes and makes ugly sounds. That's unfortunate because the game has great music otherwise. Maybe it's too good for the NES to handle.
Square isnt perfect they made kings knight
You're not supposed to talk about that
I actually enjoy King's Knight.
Square isnt perfect they made kings knight
You're not supposed to talk about that
I actually enjoy King's Knight.
but this
Square isnt perfect they made kings knight
You're not supposed to talk about that
I actually enjoy King's Knight.
but this
Hah, yeah.
Then again, it's the only game where there is a protagonist named Rayjack. More games needed that.
Originally posted by: MrWunderful
For packaging, working designs.
As far as new(er) gen, most Rockstar games are really well done. GTA, Red dead, bully all really great games.
GTA V is technically the best game ever made imo. Rockstar just knows what they're doing. I don't think any other developer has the following that they do. When they release a game, there is no question of whether it's good but a question of how good it is.
For me any of the Squaresoft / Square games released on the NES/SNES are top quality and meet the other criteria you mentioned. I'd also like to include TAITO, their games tend to be pretty good quality.
For me what qualities are important are obviously less or no game-breaking bugs, aethetically pleasing to look at and listen to, and lastly plain old fashioned fun factor.
I, of course, would never argue against Square(soft).
However, for the sake of the truth, FF games are quite buggy.
If such bugs are game breaking it is of course a debatable matter; however, talking, for instance, about FFVI bugs (over 100 documented IIRC, plus things like vanish/doom which are in the limbo between bug and feature): inverting two stats so that one of them covers for both physical and magical attacks, while the other does nothing, it is a bug that, if the game wasn't so good, would be very blamed; and the reason for the sketch bug not being so bad is likely that no one likes that special attack anyways [citation needed], but still, using sketch in some scenarios can break the game.
These games are so great that they still great no matter all their bugs!
I'm an experienced ROM hacker, especially in the Squaresoft space, so I understand bugs. However, there are not that many gamebreaking bugs in these Squaresoft games. All games have bugs so I only judge the gamebreaking bug as a barometer of quality. So things like inverting stats, random sprite graphic fluctuations, and or odd actor behaviors don't really count as gamebreaking in my eyes. FF6 only has a long list of reported bugs BECAUSE it was a great and popular game. You'll find that there are a ton of games who's bugs aren't documented online so it isn't exclusive to that game.
And for the record, my first complete FF3us hack in 2000 removed Vanish+Doom/X-Zone. lol
For me any of the Squaresoft / Square games released on the NES/SNES are top quality and meet the other criteria you mentioned. I'd also like to include TAITO, their games tend to be pretty good quality.
For me what qualities are important are obviously less or no game-breaking bugs, aethetically pleasing to look at and listen to, and lastly plain old fashioned fun factor.
I, of course, would never argue against Square(soft).
However, for the sake of the truth, FF games are quite buggy.
If such bugs are game breaking it is of course a debatable matter; however, talking, for instance, about FFVI bugs (over 100 documented IIRC, plus things like vanish/doom which are in the limbo between bug and feature): inverting two stats so that one of them covers for both physical and magical attacks, while the other does nothing, it is a bug that, if the game wasn't so good, would be very blamed; and the reason for the sketch bug not being so bad is likely that no one likes that special attack anyways [citation needed], but still, using sketch in some scenarios can break the game.
These games are so great that they still great no matter all their bugs!
I'm an experienced ROM hacker, especially in the Squaresoft space, so I understand bugs. However, there are not that many gamebreaking bugs in these Squaresoft games. All games have bugs so I only judge the gamebreaking bug as a barometer of quality. So things like inverting stats, random sprite graphic fluctuations, and or odd actor behaviors don't really count as gamebreaking in my eyes. FF6 only has a long list of reported bugs BECAUSE it was a great and popular game. You'll find that there are a ton of games who's bugs aren't documented online so it isn't exclusive to that game.
And for the record, my first complete FF3us hack in 2000 removed Vanish+Doom/X-Zone. lol
You have a very solid point here.
However, this does not deny my point:
No matter the bugs, it was a great and popular game!
And, for the records, vanish/doom isn't the big deal: AFAIK developers never said that this was a bug, and if a player does not want to exploit it, he just don't use it. The sketch bug instead is game breaking, and would be a bigger issue if sketch was a worthy attack to use. Inverting stats, with a stat becoming meaningless, is pretty irritating too.
All I wanted to say it is that what makes a game great, it is a complex chemistry: for instance, fewer bugs = better game, it holds true up to some extent, but then sometimes games pretty buggy still great games no matter that.