You know how they show a single image from a video before you actually click it? I saw Megaman and I thought he would discuss Capcom and the huge dick move they pulled with MML3. Eh, well, it was still pretty good.
But I have to agree with a couple of people here. Either I missed the point of the episode or Jim did (Of course the blame goes to me, right?). I am one of those people who complain about SOME games being too easy. And here's why.
Yes, games back then were more challenging because you couldn't save your progress, you had no checkpoints and you had a limited amount of lives and no hopes of obtaining more. Also, very limited weapons. I'm thinking of Adventure Island, if anyone played that game. 8 worlds, few weapons, no checkpoints, good luck. Or if you want something simpler: Mario.
I'm not saying gamers back then were more "HXC BRO!" or anything. I'm just saying that I think that ever since games started reaching all sorts of people (Kids, parents, grandparents?), games have been divided into different categories. You have your easy games (Mario games, etc. I'll get there in a moment!), "hardcore" games (CoD and M rated games, I guess) and anything in between.
Back then, whenever you would buy a game, you didn't have to worry about how hard the game was or how family friendly it was. No, it was just a game. Think about that: a GAME. You didn't see people complaining about the content of the game and stuff. We didn't have GTA. It was just a game; a fantasy computer game with unrealistic plots and goals. Have fun with it. Battletoads could be just as equally challenging and family friendly as Ninja Gaiden.
But now that we've got kids and the Wii and games like...Brain Academy and...Wii Sports and stuff, things have been, for the lack of a better term, dumbed down a bit. No, I'm not saying those games suck. I'm just saying that games such as those are meant to hold your hand and guide you through the game, patiently patting your back and waiting for you to reach the end of the level. Yes, even a 5 year old could play with no effort at all. That is, undeniably, an easy game. So compared to NES games, where you'd be tossed into the game, no tutorials, no choosing difficulty and no mercy, you can see the difference clearly.
I'm not touching the Death penalty at all, if you notice. I agree; if death is missing from a game, it doesn't meant it's a 'wuss' game or whatever. A more simple example would be racing games like Gran Turismo. There's no death or explosions. And as a matter of fact, you can progress through the game without winning every single race. But there's that thing about winning every race! That's the challenge and the attraction.
On the other hand, give a 5 year old a copy of GT and they'll probably die of boredom. it's just too complicated/convoluted for a kid. Would a kid be able to play it and beat it, maybe? Yes, but I doubt it would be a game that you would want to give to a kid. Between giving an average kid a copy of GT or Donkey Kong, which one would you choose?
So personally, it does bother me that some games are usually toned down for everyone to understand. I don't expect to see fiery explosions, blood and gore all over the place. One of my favorite games ever is Kirby Super Star for the SNES. That game was challenging for many of the reasons Jim mentioned. But it seems the new gen. of games has the same qualities but they've made them easier to play. I don't want something all "HXC YO!" just because I'm selfish, but it would be nice if the new gen. of gamers can handle what we handled back then. You know, just for kicks. They're certainly more exposed to games than we were.
It just bothers me to see a kid show off by saying he finished Sonic Unleashed in one day and he's the 'best gamer in the world' when they don't really know/have encountered a real challenging game. Yeah, I've seen it happen. Tons of times too.
But I digress. So I'll stop now.
