Contra III: Alien Wars Vs. Contra: Hard Corps

[Thermoptic]

Hi! After I saw the results from the "What Is The Best Contra Game?" http://www.racketboy.com/retro/2010/02/ ... -game.html voting here at Racketboy and after reading many peoples comments I decided to make an review/article of what Contra game actually is the best one, Contra III: The Alien Wars for the SNES or Contra: Hard Corps. You will find the answer here:

http://thermoptic.posterous.com/contra- ... hard-corps

[RyaNtheSlayA]

I agree with your conclusion.

[timewarpgamer]

You make some very good points. I may be forced to revise my top 10 run 'n gun list, displacing Alien Wars with Hard Corps. Of course, I love these games so much that I could play them endlessly before reaching an objective—whatever that is—conclusion of which is truly superior.

[Mr.White555]

I disagree with your conclusion. Just because Hard Corps has more guns, bosses, and levels does not make it a better game. The quality of these features are questionable. Does there need to be 38 bosses in a game? Does there need to be 16 different weapons whose functionality is mediocre at best; like Fang's B weapon(melee attack that shoots an orb of energy) or Sheena's C weapon(laser)? While Contra III's smaller arsenal functionality is great. Each weapon serves its respective function precisely. Quality over quantity.

Now onto the matter of levels. Hard Corps' 14 levels cannot compare to Contra III's 4 levels. Hard Corps' levels are small bits of clumsy run'n'gun segments which are forwarded by perpetual boss fights. Hard Corps breaks away from convention of all the previous Contra games including Alien Wars. Normally a great Contra game has fluid run'n'gun segments that crescendo with a boss fight, something that Hard Corps completely throws out the window. Hard Corps has terrible passing. Contra III has great passing. Once again quality over quantity.

Very interesting and well written article though. I myself wrote a similar one, but obviously with a different conclusion.

http://www.racketboy.com/forum/viewtopi ... 32&t=19726

[Gamerforlife]

Yup Hard Corps kicks Contra III's ass. Four characters, branching story and levels. lots of weapon combinations and badass bosses galore. It's considered the harder game too. It lives up to its namesake. Contra III is excellent, but it's just another traditional Contra game. Hard Corps really shook things up and it's a better game for it. It's not quality versus quantity, it's same old, same old versus new and fresh.

I like Castlevania:Blood lines better than Super Castlevania as well. I feel Konami's entries on the Genesis for these two series had more of an edge to them and more variety in gameplay(having more than one playable character is a big part of that). Bloodlines also had a very interesting story, particularly the uncensored original version.

But it's all a matter of taste. They are all excellent games and Super Castlevania and Contra III are true masterpieces, but I feel they stuck to closely too established formulas. Bloodlines and Hard Corps really emphasize the things that people often said the Genesis had over the SNES. Edgier, more experimental games. It's why so many people were more excited over Sonic than same old, same old Mario in Super Mario World. I like when developers try new things

[Mr.White555]

It's considered the harder game too. It lives up to its namesake.

People who consider this haven't played the two games enough or haven't played on Hard mode.

[Thermoptic]

I disagree with your conclusion. Just because Hard Corps has more guns, bosses, and levels does not make it a better game. The quality of these features are questionable. Does there need to be 38 bosses in a game? Does there need to be 16 different weapons whose functionality is mediocre at best; like Fang's B weapon(melee attack that shoots an orb of energy) or Sheena's C weapon(laser)? While Contra III's smaller arsenal functionality is great. Each weapon serves its respective function precisely. Quality over quantity.

Now onto the matter of levels. Hard Corps' 14 levels cannot compare to Contra III's 4 levels. Hard Corps' levels are small bits of clumsy run'n'gun segments which are forwarded by perpetual boss fights. Hard Corps breaks away from convention of all the previous Contra games including Alien Wars. Normally a great Contra game has fluid run'n'gun segments that crescendo with a boss fight, something that Hard Corps completely throws out the window. Hard Corps has terrible passing. Contra III has great passing. Once again quality over quantity.

Very interesting and well written article though. I myself wrote a similar one, but obviously with a different conclusion.

http://www.racketboy.com/forum/viewtopi ... 32&t=19726

Hi Mr.White555! Thanks for the comment! And its great to see another review with the opposite conclusion I agree with you that quantity of levels, characters and guns dont matter when it comes to quality!

But I still think that the level structure and events of Hard Corps has far more variation and action than Alien Wars. Just check the first level of hard corps, its so extreme and fun with huge minibosses that tare up the city, wrecks houses etc and its fun! Compared to Alien Wars that I think have more static run'n'gun levels.

So in my conclusion Hard Corps has more enjoyable levels WITH the great variation of characters, guns and replayability with the choices of level paths.

Also I consider a tough/hard game as a flaw, games are not suppose to be hard and frustrating, they should be fun with a balanced level of challange!

[slowslow325]

I disagree with your conclusion. Just because Hard Corps has more guns, bosses, and levels does not make it a better game. The quality of these features are questionable. Does there need to be 38 bosses in a game? Does there need to be 16 different weapons whose functionality is mediocre at best; like Fang's B weapon(melee attack that shoots an orb of energy) or Sheena's C weapon(laser)? While Contra III's smaller arsenal functionality is great. Each weapon serves its respective function precisely. Quality over quantity.

Now onto the matter of levels. Hard Corps' 14 levels cannot compare to Contra III's 4 levels. Hard Corps' levels are small bits of clumsy run'n'gun segments which are forwarded by perpetual boss fights. Hard Corps breaks away from convention of all the previous Contra games including Alien Wars. Normally a great Contra game has fluid run'n'gun segments that crescendo with a boss fight, something that Hard Corps completely throws out the window. Hard Corps has terrible passing. Contra III has great passing. Once again quality over quantity.

Very interesting and well written article though. I myself wrote a similar one, but obviously with a different conclusion.

http://www.racketboy.com/forum/viewtopi ... 32&t=19726

I agree 100%.

Also, if you pop in the game for the first time and start playing it, I don't like moving forward 3 feet and dying 5 times. Hard Corps was like that for me. It may be harder in some senses, but it's less an "avoidable hard" and more a "memorize it hard".

[Gamerforlife]

Well, everyone is entitled to their opinion. It's interesting to note though, that Shattered Soldier was designed in a similar fashion to Hard Corps, and the new Contra game coming out is based on Hard Corps. Clearly, there is something about Hard Corps design that is appealing to people and moving forward, more interesting to developers than Contra III was

I like the methodical design of Hard Corps and Shattered Soldier. It encourages players to master each stage.

[Mr.White555]

Clearly, there is something about Hard Corps design that is appealing to people and moving forward, more interesting to developers than Contra III was

I disagree considering that Contra 4 and Contra Rebirth are basically continuations of Contra III rather than Hard Corps.