If you had two runs recorded of Ninja Gaiden they would have their differences in technique and decisions of path. The thing about IWBTG though is that the pattern is so precise that it’s incredibly hard to duplicate it, thus why it is so hard. A lot of the NES games depended on patterns you jotted down on the notepad in the back of your head so you could easily go back and do it again. No, you don’t deserve a medal for beating Bald Bull. Yes, Battletoads and Super Mario Bros The Lost Levels are still ball busting games. The main reason people think that games are so much easier nowadays is mainly because they’re experienced and back in the days of the NES, they weren’t. Honestly, I can make it to level 5 on Ninja Gaiden without much trouble, I can beat Megaman 1 without a game over and Megaman 2 without losing a life, I can get to Soda Popinski on Punch Out without losing a fight up to that point, and probably later in the game once I bother to beat him and know his pattern. If you ever feel like gaming has lost its rewarding appeal, then this game will fill that appeal.Įdit: Did I really type “You have infinitely lives”?įunfact: NES games weren’t that friggin’ hard. You have an infinite amount of lives, and the challenge is to just clear a screen or two. What I’m trying to say is that the sanity-crushing difficulty is what gives the game its charm.
#I wanna by the guy gaiden series
The Zelda series has famously kept a carbon-copy system of adventuring that has progressively gotten easier. Games today have become easier and easier, and they’re designed so that the most inexperienced gamer can work through it.
#I wanna by the guy gaiden how to
But what did you accomplish? You learn how the Materia system works and you quickly learn how to break it. Sure, any idiot can beat Final Fantasy VII. But, there was a time when beating a game meant something. Games like Ninja Gaiden were famous for being so difficult that you would want to throw the cartridge through a wall. It’s because it is a nice reflection of how gaming used to be. Beat him a couple times, too, but kept dying at the following screen. I also got to Bowser/Wart/Wiley by taking the south route. I can understand being angry at the game, but when you grew up with the NES era games that would kill you with cheap deaths or glitches, but you still kept playing because that was the only game you had to play, you tend to enjoy this game, irregardless how many times you died. The game also provides many hilarious jabs at favorite games that most of us grew up with. The rewards for completing a screen are much the same as completing a level in the old NES games: you get to see the next obstacle and brag to your friends. It doesn’t try and degrade you for dying (like most games nowadays seem to) and the game actually tries to make you aware that you’re most likely going to die. Yes, you have to do it again, but it’s built in a way that you’re almost instantly back at where you were before. The way that it remedies the main point of the game, which other wise would be a negative element in a game, is to give you little to no penalty for dying. The ones where you were basically required to memorize the level to know of certain obstacles coming up. While unusually cheap deaths are generally a sign of a bad game, the main point of this game was centered around parodying the old “NES hard” kind of games. When you finally beat it you don’t feel good about yourself, you feel like a jackass because you just spent at least a week of your time doing the same thing over and over again until you finally lucked out and got it right.Īctually, from a game design standpoint, it is a good game. I don’t feel rewarded when I beat the room because there’s just 300 other rooms just like it. I don’t want to play a single room for an hour. Yeah, it’s intentionally bad, but that doesn’t really excuse it. I Wanna Be The Guy, fooling people into think games like this are good since 2007.īut honestly, it’s a bad game when you look at it.