The 10 Most Slaughter-Worthy Sacred Cows of Gaming
Posted at 5:00 AM Jul 07, 2008
By Todd Ciolek
There’s one reliable law of video games: no matter how popular, influential or enduring one of them is, there’s someone out there who can’t stand it. Devoted game geeks are a preposterously high-minded bunch, perpetually finding joy in pointing out how Halo, Super Mario Bros. 3, Vagrant Story, or any other game with more than three fans is terrible and overrated and probably carcinogenic.
Yet there are rare cases of games rising in fan esteem without drawing their due backlashes. You might mistake them for truly excellent titles, but the truth is that, most of the time, these purported classics are mediocrities that just haven’t been run through the proper gauntlet of hateful criticism. Good thing we specialize in that.
10. Splatterhouse (Arcade, TurboGrafx-16)
Namco’s Splatterhouse was so superficially fine-tuned to the tastes of 10-year-old American kids that it’s a wonder it didn’t land a movie, a syndicated cartoon, and a Hi-C flavor, all prominently featuring a hulked-out killing machine in a Jason Voorhees mask. And, just to keep things safe for parents, he’s the good guy.
The problem lies in Splatterhouse’s design, which pares down the furious pace of arcade action games to focus on dealing out gruesome death with slower, more dramatic flair. The game shows some variety in its challenges, even whipping out a Poltergeist tribute for a boss battle, but it’s really just short, simple and not worth revisiting since that fifth-grade sleepover.
Namco gave Splatterhouse two sequels and a cutesy, only-in-Japan 8-bit spin-off, but their enthusiasm fell with each release. By the third time Non-Jason was rescuing his girlfriend/wife and fighting numerous shambling tributes to horror movies, kids had moved on to Mortal Kombat and never looked back. Splatterhouse was recently revived for a modern remake, completely with a roided-out hero and rampant gore. It might well improve on the original, but that wouldn’t be too hard.
9. Q*Bert (Arcade, etc.)
Arcade hits of the Atari era are often protected from criticism by a thick, blubbery coat of fond memories. Just about every game idea was an innovation until 1984 or so, and there’s no shortage of older fans who’ll confuse historic relevance with quality. Still, sensible history may judge Q*bert as an also-ran, one of the first by-products of Pac-Man’s cuddly success. It was also the first time arcade goers had to guide an armless, huge-nosed orange Muppet around a pyramid of cubes.
It was easy for arcade goers to accept Q*bert’s awkward controls, which used diagonal directions and didn’t let Q*bert himself jump horizontally. And they even liked the overall uniformity of the game’s levels, in which only the enemies really change. Beneath it all, though, there’s a clumsy pace that can’t be fixed by the merchandisable characters or the way the arcade cabinet lets out an endearing thump whenever Q*bert falls to his death.
Q*bert was a hit more on the strength of its cast than anything. They showed up on Saturday morning TV, in toy stores, and across T-shirt fronts. The public liked Q*bert and his needless asterisk, and the giant walking nasal cavity is appealing even today. It’s the game that doesn’t hold up.
8. Castlevania (NES)
Konami’s Castlevania wasn’t the first side-scrolling action game on the NES. It was, however, the first one that dug into the vast Americanized history of monster lore and put Dracula, the Grim Reaper, Frankenstein’s folly, Medusa and a giant bat in the same game. Castlevania even helped established many new trends for its genre: life meters, special weapons, and, uh, breakable walks. But Castlevania isn’t a particularly good game, and perhaps it never was. Simon Belmont, the whip-cracking hero in furred shorts, walks slowly. He jumps slowly. And he dies over and over in situations that a reasonably nimble game character would easily survive. That’s perhaps why Castlevania’s levels are so frustrating and sluggishly paced, notable only for their sense of 8-bit gothic atmosphere.
This stiff, unintuitive approach dogged the series for years, afflicting GameBoy games, two NES sequels, and a Super NES remake of the original. It wasn’t until 1993 and the TurboDuo’s Dracula X: The Rondo of Blood that the series bothered improving itself. Granted, the Castlevania formula was patched up way back in 1989, when the Ninja Gaiden series stole it and made it faster, tighter and much more fun. Castlevania was just throwing that formula away, anyway.
The long-term Castlevania faithful try to excuse the dreadful structure and muddled controls by claiming that it’s supposed to be slow-paced, as though a boring game is excusable so long as it’s intentional. They also complain about the modern Metroid-like maze runs that make up much of Castlevania nowadays, as though things were better when the games were grueling, one-track pabulum.
7. Pac-Man (Arcade, everything else)
It’s impossible to hate Pac-Man as the smiling anthropomorphic sphere with old-fashioned Disney eyes, or as the armless blob who had to be renamed from “Puck-Man” for reasons obvious to anyone who’s ever vandalized an arcade, or even as the breakthrough icon that saved arcade games from an flood of dull monochrome shooters.
When it comes to Pac-Man the game, it’s a little harder to find that shared cultural joy. True, the combination of a maze, a pack of ghosts, and an endearing pellet-gobbling sound enraptured many arcade goers in the early ‘80s, but there’s no question that Pac-Man’s a little outdated, even by its own standards. It’s aged better than some other maze-driven games of its day, but there’s one problem: the maze never really changes. The ghosts get faster, the bonus-point fruit gets more elaborate, but the level’s really the same thing over and over.
In fact, Pac-Man was outdone by Ms. Pac-Man and its varying level designs, and further so by its 1994 sequel, the completely different and completely underrated Pac-Man 2: The New Adventures. Not that it matters, as Pac-Man remains a piece of modern culture, guaranteed a spot in game history and whatever arcades haven’t yet closed down. Go ahead and play. If you’re lucky, you’ll die before the game gets boring.
6. Gradius (Arcade, NES, etc.)
Since its 1986 arrival, Gradius has been the space-shooter cousin of Castlevania, revered more for being first than being enjoyable or impressively programmed. It deserves credit for setting some standards; without it, we wouldn’t have a world of interchangeable side-view shooters where a humble, triangular starfighter nabs power-ups and blasts some intergalactic alien force.
And, like Castlevania, Gradius is a crawling bore, primarily because of a lousy power-up system. The Vic Viper ship is a slow, under-armed death trap, reliant entirely on power-ups to speed it up or grant better weapons. The problem? Not only are power-ups infrequently doled out, but the Viper loses almost all of them when it’s destroyed, thus sending the player back to an earlier point in the level. With its inflexible design and refusal to improve, Gradius spawned a subculture of shooters where you’re completely screwed if you die once. This, in turn, spawned a subculture of shooter fans who actually force themselves to enjoy memorizing every inch of a dull game.
Gradius also shares Castlevania’s long-overdue upswing. Konami’s Lifeforce spin-off marginally improved on Gradius in the ’80s, but it wasn’t until 2004’s that an excellent game arrived in the form of Gradius V.
Comments
Awesome list, as per usual.
Have to disagree about the Dragon Quest series, though.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Also, Kid Icarus, for all it's flaws in simplicity and weirdo movement, is a classic and at the very least entertaining.
Posted 07/07/2008 at 08:13:40 AMAs a kid, I HATED Castlevania but always acted like I dug it whenever I played it at friends' houses. Thanks for helping me feel not so alone anymore.
Posted 07/07/2008 at 08:30:22 AMYah, I have to disagree about Dragon Quest too. Dragon Quest VIII has pretty much single-handedly revived my interest in gaming which is why I'm even reading this blog!
Posted 07/07/2008 at 09:03:14 AMI had the misfortune of receiving DQVIII and FFXII on the same holiday, and after a few hours of play, the only thing DQVIII was good for was curing insomnia.
Posted 07/07/2008 at 09:30:30 AMI disagree on the dragon quest series. im a fan of the genre and love TBRPGs
Posted 07/07/2008 at 09:54:10 AMGreat list!
I'll agree personally on Dragon Quest, it bored me quite a bit...good to see you didn't leave out Skies of Arcadia *shudders*
Posted 07/07/2008 at 11:08:32 AMKid Icarus was only repetitive if you never got out of the Underworld, the gameplay genre pretty much changes every three levels or so. The first three levels are upwards scrolling like Ice Climber, the next level is like a Zelda II dungeon, the next three stages are side scrolling like Mario, then another Zelda dungeon, then three more upwards scrolling stages, then the last stage is a force-scrolling shooter like Galaga. Not very repetitive. Also pretty much every single stage introduced some new game play mechanic.
The problem with Kid Icarus is that it's so freaking hard, and THAT is just because you initially don't have enough health to escape the Underworld, without leveling up. And leveling up is so complicated--each facet of Pit's character had a totally different mechanic for leveling up (invisible skill stat upgraded your arrows, EXP upgraded your health, finding and defeating optional miniboss fights gave you new sub weapons, then there was this whole economy meta game to get the barrels and bottles, etc).
Posted 07/07/2008 at 07:43:15 PMIt was just too complicated for it's time... Had GameFAQs been around when it was released, more people probably would've gotten past the Underworld parts.
DQ is outdated and overrated.
Stop whining, fanboys.
Posted 07/07/2008 at 07:46:43 PMIf you ever say anything bad about Pac-Man again
Posted 07/07/2008 at 08:17:08 PM***I*** ***WILL*** ***KILL*** ***YOU***
Good list, but I liked Kid Icarus, despite that horrid eggplant monster..
I also thought CastleVania II was golden -- I spent an entire week playing it while I had chicken pox.
Posted 07/07/2008 at 08:33:26 PMI wrote Q-Bert as a game entry in Commodore Magazine in the early 80s. Won the contest and look what they got! I still have the original print out of the basic program.
www.FireMe.To/udi
Posted 07/07/2008 at 08:35:59 PMSplatterhouse really was pretty awesome. Did you know the man who wrote the plot boards for the game went insane and killed his wife?
true story, there is a wikipedia article about it
http://wikipedia.com/Lachlan_Massacre
Posted 07/07/2008 at 08:36:51 PMJust because you suck at hard video games doesn't mean they deserve to be in this list. Q-Bert does have some lameness to it but the rest of these games were great. Still are.
Posted 07/07/2008 at 09:22:40 PMAlways surprised at the bashing Ghosts'n'Goblins/Ghouls'n'Ghosts gets - I still play it from time to time and love it.
Thanks for another great article -very nicely written critiques as usual
Posted 07/07/2008 at 10:02:17 PMHalf your reasons seem to be that these games are too hard. Maybe you just suck at games, eh Todd Ciolek?
Posted 07/08/2008 at 07:21:04 AMhey pixel...
shut your cockholster.
Liking a game doesn't make one a fanboy. If I dressed up like Erdrick, THEn I would be a fanboy. See the difference, retard?
Posted 07/08/2008 at 07:35:11 AMwhat about Kid Niki for turbograffix? hardest game ever.
Posted 07/08/2008 at 08:11:18 AM"Few RPGs escape stern a stern critical reception."
Couldn't have said it said myself.
Posted 07/08/2008 at 09:08:11 AMSome good points. I have to agree with Ultron on the difficulty issue. Castlevania, hard? (You think that's tough and has awkward play control, try the original Japanese arcade version of Akumajo Dracula. Your character is huge and awkward, and even minor enemies like bats and zombies take away huge chunks of health from the very outset.) I'm often surprised when reading forum posts (usually from those who didn't grow up with these titles) about how "impossible" games like the NES Ninja Gaidens, Top Gun, Mega Man, etc. were. Maybe Todd's just...young.
Posted 07/08/2008 at 12:29:57 PMBiggest sacred cow that needs to be slaughtered is Final Fantasy VII.
Posted 07/08/2008 at 12:53:20 PMSo what I learned here is that the author doesn't like hard games. I'm with you in spirit, though not in fact. Pre-16 bit games were often unreasonably hard, and that fact has NOT escaped notice. It's just really old news that stopped being interesting circa 1994. It was a fad of the era.
Most of these games were made in the days when games were necessarily short and "replay value" was a metaphor for challenge-induced frustration. Games were made stupid hard to keep kids playing past the 3 hours it would take if they didn't die every 15 seconds. I'm glad we have left those days, but most of the games you sited actually hold up pretty well for their age. I'm laughing a little since I played most of these games when they were new. They weren't my favorites, but (with the exception of Y1&2 which somehow escaped my unreasonably well loved TG16) none were that bad. It must mean I'm getting old!
If you wanted to trash-talk a TG16 RPG, how about Cosmic Fantasy 2. I loved that game to death, but it was probably too much because of the dubbed anime FMV and gratuitous shower scene, a real novelty in the day. I lost way too much time in random battles playing that game. I hate random encounters to this day because of it. It's a true 3-step RPG.
Posted 07/09/2008 at 01:39:14 AMQ*Bert sucked even back when it first came out ... I never understood why some people liked it.
Castlevania and Ghost & Goblins were both cool games, but I could never get that into them because they were too damn hard.
Posted 07/09/2008 at 11:16:55 AMI must say that most of the games on this list were/are outstanding games. Just because a game is *gasp* hard doesn't mean it is a bad game. I still go back and play these games (kid Icarus i play at my uncle's when we have get togethers). GnG was hard but i was able to beat it as a 12 year old, so just suck it up and GTFO
Posted 07/10/2008 at 08:35:01 PMI'm glad that you brought up Skies of Arcadia, I was one of those poor Dreamcast owning bastards that was clamoring for a new rpg (I love Phantasy Star Online and everything, but christ it gets old). When I heard about Arcadia I was all thumbs-up, bought it, played it and HATED IT. Why are they all so goddam cheery? It must be the high elevation that's cutting off air support and making these ungodly annoying characters live to just piss me off. Yeah, I got it you'll never give up, SHUT YOUR MOUTH. Grandia 3 was just like this. Why is it these main characters big dreams never involve a suicide pact?
Posted 07/16/2008 at 10:31:10 AMFtaghn, you said. I can't believe that game wasn't mentioned.
Posted 07/18/2008 at 02:51:06 AMSuper Castlevania IV is stiff and unintuitive? Some hasn't played a game they're ragging on...
Like the others said, this is just your "list of games I really suck at."
Posted 07/20/2008 at 12:36:58 PMTHANK YOU! Finally someone else echoes my exact feelings about the Ghosts N Goblins series. I've never understood why people hold it up as some kind of holy grail when it's just an abusively unbalanced exercise in frustration.
I'm all for games that are difficult, that require practice in order to complete (I really like the Contra and Metal Slug games, and games of the Run and Gun ilk. I'm willing to overlook their difficulties because, most of the time, it at least feels fair and it's actually fun anyway) but those red demons in Ghosts N Goblins are just cheating sons of bitches. It's tough to dodge or learn the pattern of an enemy that does whatever fucking pattern it feels like.
I admittedly enjoy the Parodius off-shoot games of the Gradius series, but mostly for their silly charm. It's still annoying as hell when you die once and you're reduced to your absolutely useless default weaponry. Konami shouldn't bother giving you extra lives at all if it's impossible to continue when just losing one.
Posted 08/12/2008 at 03:25:55 PM