Summer Games Challenge 2014

[SpaceBooger]

Here is my tentative list so far starting with this month's TR:

1. The Lost Vikings - Gen
2. Double Dragon II - NES
3. Darkwing Duck - NES
4. The DIG - PC
5. Super Mario Land 2 - GB
6. LoZ: Wind Waker (HD Remake) - WiiU
7. Frogger 2: Swampy's Revenge - DC (thanks to you know who)
8. Streets of Rage 2 - Gen
9. The Death and Return of Superman - Gen

Maybe one of these since they will be time consumers:
10. Alundra - PS1
or
10. Earthbound - SNES (Wii U VC)

[Retrogamer0001]

Silent Hill 3 was my pick, and I most definitely consider it a classic in the series itself and the genre as a whole. The first three games are must-plays for the genre (after that, well, maybe not) and I think they stand up well in comparison to Resident Evil. Would there be any debate whether or not Resident Evil 4 is now considered a classic? It would be hard to make a case against it (unless you want to get into a big ideological argument about the definition of terms like "classic", "retro", etc.)

Anywho.

I'll be starting Mega Man 2 on Monday night and I'm really looking forward to some quality, classic side-scrolling, platforming action with one of the most memorable soundtracks in the series. Updates to come!

[dsheinem]

To answer some earlier questions, I'd absolutely say stuff like DoDonPachi would be a classic even if it is relatively obscure. I think the sentiment in the original thread and the one that I become a dick about every year is that the game should be "regarded as classics by most people". Generally, this translates to games that are unquestionably defining games for their generation, their consoles, their genre, their time, etc. (for those who would be familiar with those genres, systems, etc.).

I much prefer people pick classics outside of their comfort zones than play mediocre games in a series they like or second-tier "classics" on systems they know well. For example, it would be hard for me at this point to pick a "classic" shmup or FPS that I haven't already played, but I could certainly find a classic rogue-like, text adventure, mahjong, or military strategy game that fits that status. I am not very familiar with the defining games in something like the SSI Gold Box series, nor with those on the Apple II, nor with those on the Atari Lynx.

I see this thread as an opportunity for more education than mere backlog clearing and try to weigh in accordingly. The "Games Beaten" thread already provides ample opportunity for backlog clearing discussion, here I prefer to see what people have to say about games regarded as the best of the best.

[Violent By Design]

Played some of the French version of Castlevania at a friends, might add it to my list.

[Sload Soap]

Played some of the French version of Castlevania at a friends, might add it to my list.

Chateauxvania?

I made a start on Wonder Boy yesterday. Well, I made two starts as unfortunately the battery save on my Mega Drive version has conked out. Thankfully I have the wonderful Sega Vintage Collection: Monster World collection on the 360 which I can't recommend enough. Loads of options.

Got as far as the Dwarf Village, did some grinding for cash and am on my way to find a trident that will let me breathe under water. Makes sense. It's good stuff so far but god damn do you move slow until you can buy some decent boots. HG101 rather kindly describe it as leisurely but it is just slooow.

(I am aware chateaux is not a direct translation for castle).

[dunpeal2064]

I'll try to avoid argument since AJ asked for it, but I still find the discussion interesting so... too bad, I guess?

I much prefer people pick classics outside of their comfort zones than play mediocre games in a series they like or second-tier "classics" on systems they know well. For example, it would be hard for me at this point to pick a "classic" shmup or FPS that I haven't already played, but I could certainly find a classic rogue-like, text adventure, mahjong, or military strategy game that fits that status. I am not very familiar with the defining games in something like the SSI Gold Box series, nor with those on the Apple II, nor with those on the Atari Lynx.

So Majong counts. What about a classic TCG game? Sure, I can see the point being made that it isn't a genre at all, but I am not sure how else I would define Pokémon TCG, DBZ TCG, and the insane amount of YuGiOh TCG. I would imagine this is a field you are not well versed in, and understandably so, but why does that bar it from classic status? If you could find a majong game that fits the status, why not a TCG game? Especially since it was declined without anyone here having even played it.

Majong does not have one game regarded by most as a classic. You could find a game that fits the bill of classic TO YOU, but it would not change the fact that most people have not heard of it. Why, all of a sudden, is this Majong game okay to include? You have great taste in games, but does that make you the authority? If you find it worthy of the status, then the other criteria (which are hardly applicable in the first place) are moot?


Your point that it is regarded by most as a classic: I think its fair to state that "most" just don't know what they are talking about. Dodonpachi is regarded as a classic by most internet browsing retro enthusiasts... maybe? Certainly not by most retro gamers in general. In fact, most retro gamers (Not racketboys, but average retro gamers) probably don't even know who Cave is. I am a pretty big part of our local retro "scene" or whatever, and of the dozens and dozens of people I've met, none had heard of Cave.

Again on the point of God Hand: Most people haven't played it, some have heard of it, it didn't influence games to come after it, and its a terrible example of its genre (considering how completely different it is from any other beat em up), it IS buggy, and it even put the developing company out of business. What exactly makes this fit the bill?

It seems to me that, no matter where you draw the line, you are cutting off at least one truly classic game somewhere. Or, the criteria are just slowly molded until the games we consider classics all fit, but that still makes the criteria subjective to meet our needs.

Sorry to anyone who this bores, but I find the conversation quite interesting. Its an argument, but I don't think we are being uncivilized and ruining any kind of fun. Dsh is a teacher, and teachers love being asked questions, so perhaps I am bringing more fun to the table than I am driving away.

[Retrogamer0001]

Discourse is all well and good, but it all boils down to playing games one enjoys. I almost wish we could remove the "classic" designation from this thread just because it's such a divisive word (most people on this site can't even agree on the definition of the word, let alone its use in regard to video games). Would listing ten games you are committed and motivated to beat, regardless of generation/status, really ruin the Summer Game Challenge for anyone? I don't think so. In fact, I could care less about whether you guys are playing classic games, modern games, shitty games, etc, as long as you post your thoughts on each one.

On the whole "teachers love answering questions" comment, most of the teachers I know are egotistical, pretentious, and highly arrogant. Take that for whatever it's worth.

[Sload Soap]

In fact, I could care less about whether you guys are playing classic games, modern games, shitty games, etc, as long as you post your thoughts on each one.

There are threads for this already though, Games Beaten, Playing Now etc. I thought the idea here was to highlight that even among hardcore gamers, some of us will not have played some of the best the medium has to offer for whatever reason. It's just a gentle way to get people to think about their collections and play some stuff they shouldn't have been neglecting. I don't know why I paid £30 for Skies of Arcadia on release and then never played it beyond the intro. I guess now I get to find out.

[Retrogamer0001]

In fact, I could care less about whether you guys are playing classic games, modern games, shitty games, etc, as long as you post your thoughts on each one.

There are threads for this already though, Games Beaten, Playing Now etc. I thought the idea here was to highlight that even among hardcore gamers, some of us will not have played some of the best the medium has to offer for whatever reason. It's just a gentle way to get people to think about their collections and play some stuff they shouldn't have been neglecting. I don't know why I paid £30 for Skies of Arcadia on release and then never played it beyond the intro. I guess now I get to find out.

I see your point, and my own list adheres to that idea (this year...) but then you're back to arguing over the whole "classic" definition again. Someone mentioned The Last of Us earlier in the thread - is that a classic? If you ask me, it will be. Does that count, or do we have to wait ten years to find out? It just leads to so much silly arguing (the kind I'm doing now, actually). Anyway, I guess I'm saying that, to me, it doesn't matter.

[darsparx]

I think I'm going to revise my list a bit:

1. Dragon Warrior(NES)
2. Kingdom hearts (ps2)
3. The flintstones: the rescue of dino and hoppy (nes)
4. final fantasy adventure (gb)
5. Bugs birthday blowout (NES)
6. Crystalis(I have both so may make this a double feature and try to beat both)
7. Spyro the dragon(ps1 on vita)
8. SMB/Deluxe(gbc or nes)
9. Pokemon Yellow(gb on gba sp or gb player)
10. Quest for camelot (gbc on gba sp or gb player)
11. lost vikings(? going to try and download on parallels since it is free on pc...)

Decided to remove a few because I know good and well I probably won't beat some of the ones I listed and I just remembered I've never beat the original SMB.