Gaming This game would be perfect if only

[severous84]

What game have you played (now or anytime, any platform) that would have been better or perfect if they?d have changed one thing? What change would have made it better?

[TheDarkOtaku]

Starfox Adventures. Without a doubt. It could've been alot better if they changed the battle system. WAY TOO EASY. Anyways, it's a pretty involved game though once you get into it. :)

[Desbreko]

[color=indigo]Super Smash Bros. Melee on the GCN--they made the CPU characters too dang cheap. Fox, on level 9, can do combos of about five moves, yet when I play on Fox, I can only do about a three move combo in the same amount of time, doing the same moves as the CPU. Because of this, Fox (and sometimes Falco) are the only CPU characters that have [i]any[/i] chance at beating me. (Though it's still pretty rare that I lose if I'm just playing CPU characters). It just pisses me off that the CPU characters can do things that human players can't.[/color]

[Guest Mr. Pfy Jkt Man]

I think that most games if they have a "flaw" like the ones you mentioned, have a purpose. What if last minute the makers of "Melee" thought: 'DANG, this game is just too easy for a serious gamer like me. I know, I'll give one of the characters the ability to unquestionably out-proform the humans. MAN, I am such a genious!' I mean what if?

Oh, desbroke is it? Um, did this happen right away? I mean, 'cause if you noticed it after a while then it could be a hidden easter egg. Maybe you being so damn good (as I'm sure are) unlocked a harder level.

I always try to find the best in a game, because it is someones life work.

[Solo Tremaine]

I use handicaps on Melee. Then it's a lot harder. But I still hate the way they'll use cheap shots to kill you, like standing at the edge and kicking you [I]just[/I] when you're about to get back up. Grr... They should program honour into these things.

The main problem I had with Melee was Dr. Mario. Luigi and Mario are virtually identical anyway. Why have a third? Ridley would have been so much better to have in his place. If only...

[severous84]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Mr. Pfy Jkt Man [/i]
[B]

I always try to find the best in a game, because it is someones life work. [/B][/QUOTE]

Well, I have to disagree with you for one reason. They charge a helluva lot for these games. 50.00+ on the new ones. They should be perfect. I appreciate that game makers go out of their way to make these games the best but usually when they do that, (i.e vc) they reap the rewards. You got my money. Gimme a good product. That's all I ask. I just finished the new Defender and clearly someone put a lot of work into it to change this game to 3D and it was perfect. I wish all games ran this smoothly.

[IMG]http://www.game-revolution.com/previews/screens/ps2/defender/defender2b.jpg[/IMG]

[Desbreko]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Mr. Pfy Jkt Man [/i]
[B]I think that most games if they have a "flaw" like the ones you mentioned, have a purpose. What if last minute the makers of "Melee" thought: 'DANG, this game is just too easy for a serious gamer like me. I know, I'll give one of the characters the ability to unquestionably out-proform the humans. MAN, I am such a genious!' I mean what if?

Oh, desbroke is it? Um, did this happen right away? I mean, 'cause if you noticed it after a while then it could be a hidden easter egg. Maybe you being so damn good (as I'm sure are) unlocked a harder level.

I always try to find the best in a game, because it is someones life work. [/B][/QUOTE]
[color=indigo]No, it was always like that... Although I don't doubt that, if there were something like that in the game, I would've unlocked it. :D

And I do see how the game could've been too easy, so they made the CPU players cheap to make it harder. Personally, though, I think that's just a cover for not having a good enough AI in the game. It seems to me like SSBM wouldn't be any harder than the original SSB, if not for the cheap CPU players.

And...Ridley? How would that work? I mean, you'd have a [i]huge[/i] advantage over the other characters, because you can fly. Pretty much, you'd never die from falling off the bottom of the screen, and you could just stay in the air the whole match it you wanted to. I guess if they could come up with a decent reason for him not being able to fly in the battles, it would've been cool, though.[/color]

[Solo Tremaine]

Well... he wouldn't have to fly. He could just hover for a bit like Peach. He'd be holding the Metroid thingy in his claw, which would stop him flying. That's how I'd do it. he could kind of float around like Mewtwo. And, coz he's got a thin frame, he could be flung far and damaged easily.

[James]

[color=royalblue]I don't ever expect a game to be perfect. Because no game [i]can[/i] be 100% perfect.

Ultimately, games are made for consumers. And so, consumers' requirements must be put first -- great play control, environment design, difficulty levels, game camera etc...

I feel that designers should always put in what they can. I mean, it's like with Eternal Darkness. This game has sold quite well worldwide, but it could have performed a lot better. When I went to buy it, I actually wanted to buy TimeSplitters 2 more. But I bought ED instead. Why? Because I wanted to reward the developers for their years of painstaking work and attention to detail. Sure, my single purchase won't do much...but these purchases add up and in the end, it makes me feel as though I've contributed.

So, this is one reason why I do not support illegal ROMs and emulation. It's also why I don't support pirated games. If you like the game enough to burn it -- save up your damn money and buy it. The developer deserves it. If you burn it, all you do is hurt the developer. And that isn't good for anyone.

Bleh, kinda went off on a tangent there...but I think you can see how it's tied in.[/color]

[Shy]

[size=1]Yeah, no game is perfect.. but every once in a while a game can come close.

Jet Set Radio (DC) was one of the most innovative games on the market, but there was very, very little replay value after beating it. Even a secret character (I wanted to be the DJ [i]so[/i] bad.) or a simple multiplayer mode would have kept me happy, but the X-Box version made some of those changes.

Super Mario Sunshine needed some more exciting level goals, more stuff like the roller coaster wuld have been great. Also, Yoshi should have played a more important role in the game, he is only useful in a handful of situations. It was a let down, considering that I have been waiting for a great Mario/Yoshi game since Super Mario World 2 came out. And all of the cinemas were terrible, maybe they could have had HAL studios help them out (SSBM opening cinemas *drool*).

Innovation is the most important thing to me when I play a game. I can't stand doing the same repetetive thing for very long, slight variations in gameplay are greatly appreciated ^_^

But of course, Duck Tales (NES) is perfect. 'Nuff said.

-Shy[/size]

[Solo Tremaine]

I think Super Mario World 2: Yoshi's Island (SNES) is about as near perfect a game as you can get. I loved it to pieces. I can't think of anything I'd like to change on that.

[Semjaza]

There are a lot of games I'd would change in some radical way... Doesn't mean they'd be perfect though. Playing Tomb Raider, I can't tell you how many times I got pissed off with the annoying controls.

I'd say the biggest complaint I have with a game that I love to death and is near perfect in my opinion... Is that I want it to never end. You beat it, and you think "Wouldn't it be better if there were a few more levels, a few more characters" and so on. I wind up doing that a lot, but I guess that's what sequels are for.

I'm kind of going through this with Metroid Prime. I'm not all that far percentage wise, but I feel like I've done so much already. It's pretty amazing in that aspect, and I kind of wish the game would never end lol.

This mostly happens to me with music games. I wish Frequency had another group of songs; I wish Gitaroo Man simply had MORE stages lol. Oh well.

[Desbreko]

[color=indigo]I can name off a couple of games that I really can't think of any way to improve them... Super Mario World, Super Metroid, and Zelda: A Link to the Past come to mind... I think those three are about as close as any game is going to get to a perfect game for me.

The problem, though, is that everyone has different tastes, so "perfect" to one person is not necessarily perfect to another person. So, like with the three games I listed above, I may think they're perfect, but other people may not like them as they are, and can think of lots of different things to improve them. Those "improvements," however, may make the game less enjoyable for me. So, as you can see, it's actually pretty much impossible for a game to truly be perfect, like James said.

As for the length of a game...well...all games have to end some time. For a game to never end, it'd have to be in development forever to keep in going longer and longer, and it would never be released. :whoops: As long as a game isn't [i]really[/i] short, I usually don't have a problem with wanting it to be longer.[/color]

[severous84]

Which is exactly what this topic was all about. I know there are a lot of great games but if you had designed it, would it have been better overall, or just for you. Hopefully designers check these boards sometimes and listen to what we want.

[Red]

[b]I would certainly change the CPU AI in Melee. As Desbreko said, characters such as Fox can pull off insane mid-air combos which I can't even come near, and they always manage to catch you out when you're slamming on the A button as fast as you can.

I wouldn't make it easier, just make it so it behaves more like a human, backing off a little and not having the knack to counter every one of my moves.[/b]

[Spikey]

[COLOR=green]I would change Star Wars, not that I don't like it. But there is this one where they put in a level, and it had no enemys in it. I would put enemys in it.[/color]

[Desbreko]

[color=indigo]Which Star Wars game are you talking about? There've been tons of them.[/color]

[Sniglefager]

I think they needed to make Sonic Adventure 2:Battle more adventurous. I mean, Sonic Adventure was an awesome game. And yes, I can proudly lift my head in the air and say I have a Sega Dreamcast. lol. Anyways, Sonic Adventure was definetly the best Dreamcast game(for me) because of 2 reasons: 1. It was the first good 3D Sonic game, and Adventure is a good way of describing it. 2. You got to pick any character you wanted(after you unlock them). Sonic Adventure 2:Battle, the port of Sonic Adventure 2, however, did both these things wrong. It wasn't at all adventurous. You play through each stage, see a cutscene, then play the next level. Sonic Team did try to make the game kind of adventury by hunting for chaos emeralds as Knuckles and Rouge. Sonic Team, I'm sorry, but that was really boring and pointless. Also, when you played the game, you never got to pick which charecter you wanted to be. One level, you're playing as Sonic running around. Next, you're Knuckles hunting for those darned emeralds. The next, tou're Tails, but get this: In a robotic machine. Come, ON! What kind of s*** is that. It was pretty cool that you got to play as either Good or Dark side though, but the only way to see the "true" ending is to beat both. This applies also to Sonic Adventure 1 on Dreamcast. All I really wanted was to play as Sonic through an entire 3D game. Why doesn't Sonic Team seem to get that?