The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Ah, the much hated topic, the one that makes people frown and wave their fists at the games industry. The one that causes more people to fail a part of a game, need to start again or destroy their computer/console in anger. Yes, I speak of bugs. The arch-nemesis of both developer and gamer these little creepy crawly programming faults are everywhere and could easily be said to be the biggest problem in the gaming industry today, including piracy. It is rare that you buy a game and find it to be 100% pope like infallible, problem free and perfect. So much is done to combat the bug, playtests all the way through the making, beta testing by the public and oh so many other tests but nothing seems to work, a bug always seems to dodge the system.
Have you ever played a game all the way to the big boss and suddenly you realise that a bug in the game means that he/she can't be defeated? Have you ever been happily playing away to find that your character dies for no reason and you have to begin again? Have you ever been merrily walking along when your character suddenly falls through the ground into an eerie abyss of oblivion? It is things like this that make people want to tear their controller, console, computer or friend apart in a fit of rage and is infact one of the largest causes of game system abuse. The mere mention of a bug makes people quiver in fear, as a dragon would have in their time. The only known solution to a bug is the mighty Patch Heroes that are occasionally dispatched by the order of developers to slay the bug. Or worse, should a bug appear in the world of consoles the only solution is to replace the game completely or suffer the presence of the bug for all time. Worse even than this bugs seem to have a tendency to breed and just when you think you have defeated the last one another Patch Knight is needed and all this serves to do is lower the morale of the games players. Bugs may well be an eternal problem that can never be solved.
So who do we blame for this sudden infestation? Hives of bugs spread into every new game their claims of being the best game ever shattered by even a single bug that slipped by unnoticed. Do we blame the developers for not being vigilant, should they have payed more attention when they were programming perhaps? Can we truly blame them, they could not be expected to anticipate every possibility. They recieve demands for more freedom in a game and yet are expected to be able to try every single possibility. This testing would take too long and they would be put down for taking more time than they could have but if they release a game that is found to have a bug in it then they will be damned for not finding it. If we blame the developers (and we so often do) then we are obviously being unfair and expecting too much from them, they suffer for failing something that no human being could be expected to do. So who else do we blame? The beta-testers? Members of the public like you and I who play the game and try as many things as possible in order to discover hidden bugs they also could not be blamed for missing some. Is there truly anyone we can blame for bugs and if not then what can be done to stop them?
No one can say that bugs do not bother them, they disrupt the flow of any game and it is hard not to be a little annoyed when you lose without doing anything wrong. So what can be done to stop this menace? More tests that lead to delays? More co-operation and co-ordination by the testing teams? Is there anything that can be done? Well that remains to be seen. What we do know is that bugs will annoy us for some time to come but we must remember not to be angry or complain too much at developers when a bug is found. For it is not always entirely their fault and many a time they have done all that could be reasonably expected from them. Let us look forward to a time when there are no bugs and be happy in the knowledge that steps are being taken to try to give us the most bug free gameplay we can get.
Have you ever played a game all the way to the big boss and suddenly you realise that a bug in the game means that he/she can't be defeated? Have you ever been happily playing away to find that your character dies for no reason and you have to begin again? Have you ever been merrily walking along when your character suddenly falls through the ground into an eerie abyss of oblivion? It is things like this that make people want to tear their controller, console, computer or friend apart in a fit of rage and is infact one of the largest causes of game system abuse. The mere mention of a bug makes people quiver in fear, as a dragon would have in their time. The only known solution to a bug is the mighty Patch Heroes that are occasionally dispatched by the order of developers to slay the bug. Or worse, should a bug appear in the world of consoles the only solution is to replace the game completely or suffer the presence of the bug for all time. Worse even than this bugs seem to have a tendency to breed and just when you think you have defeated the last one another Patch Knight is needed and all this serves to do is lower the morale of the games players. Bugs may well be an eternal problem that can never be solved.
So who do we blame for this sudden infestation? Hives of bugs spread into every new game their claims of being the best game ever shattered by even a single bug that slipped by unnoticed. Do we blame the developers for not being vigilant, should they have payed more attention when they were programming perhaps? Can we truly blame them, they could not be expected to anticipate every possibility. They recieve demands for more freedom in a game and yet are expected to be able to try every single possibility. This testing would take too long and they would be put down for taking more time than they could have but if they release a game that is found to have a bug in it then they will be damned for not finding it. If we blame the developers (and we so often do) then we are obviously being unfair and expecting too much from them, they suffer for failing something that no human being could be expected to do. So who else do we blame? The beta-testers? Members of the public like you and I who play the game and try as many things as possible in order to discover hidden bugs they also could not be blamed for missing some. Is there truly anyone we can blame for bugs and if not then what can be done to stop them?
No one can say that bugs do not bother them, they disrupt the flow of any game and it is hard not to be a little annoyed when you lose without doing anything wrong. So what can be done to stop this menace? More tests that lead to delays? More co-operation and co-ordination by the testing teams? Is there anything that can be done? Well that remains to be seen. What we do know is that bugs will annoy us for some time to come but we must remember not to be angry or complain too much at developers when a bug is found. For it is not always entirely their fault and many a time they have done all that could be reasonably expected from them. Let us look forward to a time when there are no bugs and be happy in the knowledge that steps are being taken to try to give us the most bug free gameplay we can get.
Page:
I think it's odd that you are complaining about your mother cooking you dinner and such. Did you go out and earn the money to buy your console and all your games? Probably not, housework doesn't count by the way. You must respect your parents who provide for you and such, realise that they make sacrifices for you. You may not know it but your parents really love you and you should love them for this alone. Parents sometimes get too badly treated by their children because kids tend not to realise what it is to be a parent. It's not easy, and even if they have plenty of money to burn chances are that they will still love you. Yes some parents are less loving and may even resent their kids or abandon them but even ones who abandon their children generally do it because they hope that their child will have a better life with a family more capable of looking after them, financially and safely. Your parents created you and though you owe them nothing for this you at least owe them thanks for bringing you up and letting you live. The best thing about parents is that they will usually accept thanks as enough, mostly they don't even ask for that. Sometimes they maybe get angry with you for not doing something or for doing something you shouldn't but they really do care and it's usually for your own good. Yes that includes tidying your room since an unhealthy living space can be, well unhealthy.
I assume that was a joke post anyway but this point is worth making. There is truth to it.
I assume that was a joke post anyway but this point is worth making. There is truth to it.
mums r like bugs eg when its dinner they came up stairs and turn ur console of and wipe what u just don and say "its dinner" and u just want to scream. has that ever happened to u. my mum does that all the time. so heres a piece of help in solving this "bug". BUY A LOCK !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! i can not stress that enougth so im going to say it again so listen (or read) carefully BUY A LOCK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
AND WITH THIS INFO U MY NEVER HAVE THE BUG CALLED "MUM" IN YOUR CONSOLE MAY U HAVE A GOOD GAMING PLEASURE GOOD BYE.
AND WITH THIS INFO U MY NEVER HAVE THE BUG CALLED "MUM" IN YOUR CONSOLE MAY U HAVE A GOOD GAMING PLEASURE GOOD BYE.
You're from the same school of thought as one of my friends I see. I'm not so sure about it though, since he says that if I knock him out of the ring (with a running attack or punch) and then go out to get him but get knocked down myself then it's okay for him to go in and taunt. He says it's the intention of throwing them out just to taunt that's the problem, but also says that if I accidentally knock him out and just wait in the ring and taunt then that's not acceptable. Some very twisted logic. Anyway, you get varying amounts of attitude from a taunt depending on your character (again) so it can be a very ineffective tactic. It's much better to take advantage of the increased stunned time of the outside and the increased damage you (seem) to do. It's also fun to put them through a table.
It's like real life I suppose. Lightweights fin it harder to take down heavy weights.
I think that the characters were not not exactly balanced but were like their real life counter parts.
What annoyed me was how some cheap players could get easy wins by throwing an opponent out side the ring (up C in tie up) and then get a huge advantage in attitude while cheering while they were out.
It pretty much took all the skill out of the game.
I too would like to see the end of having to grapple before pulling off moves. I think that a system like Smack Down might work quite well.
I think that the characters were not not exactly balanced but were like their real life counter parts.
What annoyed me was how some cheap players could get easy wins by throwing an opponent out side the ring (up C in tie up) and then get a huge advantage in attitude while cheering while they were out.
It pretty much took all the skill out of the game.
I too would like to see the end of having to grapple before pulling off moves. I think that a system like Smack Down might work quite well.
Well I didn't say it was impossible (or did I?) but the biggest problem with the imbalance in No Mercy is that the weaker character has to use all their skill and the bigger character just has to use their power advantage. The main problem is that skill practically doesn't exist because, as I said, if you do manage to avoid them they can quite often block a punch or grapple when stunned or stumbling which means that your evasion is worth nothing. The problem with A button moves is that they increase your enemy's attitude and this just makes things worse. The best way to win is by submission since they don't have to be weak enough to be pinned but it would be nice to be able to get a pin on more often. It's also a problem in that you aren't really testing the other player's skill when one of you is a powerful character and one is not since there are advantages to the powerful character. This means that unless you are the same character it's hard to tell who's better. Another thing this could do is to make you think you are better or worse at the game than you actually are just because you are rarely playing on level ground.
Simplicity in the game is a good thing and it is a game that's quite easy to get into but I think it's a little too simple in the way it decides reversals, attitude and so forth because it doesn't balance it out. It should be that big guys get attitude slower to counter their powerful moves and fast guys get attitude quicker to counter their weakness. If you remember WWF: Attitude, it was unpopular for some reason but it did have one thing over the new style of wrestling games. It's move system was similar to that of a fighting game, with moves being done by directions followed by a button in a combination. This meant that the person going for a quicker and weaker move was more likely to get it on but missed out on the big damage of a more powerful move that takes more buttons to do. Evasion and blocking also played a bigger part and timing had a much bigger effect than just for blocking punches and grapples when standing since you had to time your moves, blocks, grapples and dodges well. One of the other advantages was that you could do moves out of grapple, so they looked more fluent (Stone Cold Stunner without a grapple looks better than grappling first). Specials could only be done when your opponent was badly beaten, so Attitude did not suffer from an opponent getting on special very early in a match. There are a lot of good points in both games, and No Mercy is an improvement on Attitude (and Wrestlmania 2000 which came between) but both have certain elements lacking in each other that could have made for a better game. I do think that the move system in No Mercy is okay but the way reversals and things are so simple or difficult based only on your character is the biggest problem. Another thing Attitude had was points to spend on areas so that everyone had equal stats but with different strengths and weaknesses. It also had a limit on moves that could be chosen in the way of a percentage score for every move that could be chosen restricting the player to 100% worth of strength of moves. The percentage score thing might not be necessary, but some counter balance to having powerful moves would be good for the next WWF game, and spending points on a character might not be such a bad idea.
Simplicity in the game is a good thing and it is a game that's quite easy to get into but I think it's a little too simple in the way it decides reversals, attitude and so forth because it doesn't balance it out. It should be that big guys get attitude slower to counter their powerful moves and fast guys get attitude quicker to counter their weakness. If you remember WWF: Attitude, it was unpopular for some reason but it did have one thing over the new style of wrestling games. It's move system was similar to that of a fighting game, with moves being done by directions followed by a button in a combination. This meant that the person going for a quicker and weaker move was more likely to get it on but missed out on the big damage of a more powerful move that takes more buttons to do. Evasion and blocking also played a bigger part and timing had a much bigger effect than just for blocking punches and grapples when standing since you had to time your moves, blocks, grapples and dodges well. One of the other advantages was that you could do moves out of grapple, so they looked more fluent (Stone Cold Stunner without a grapple looks better than grappling first). Specials could only be done when your opponent was badly beaten, so Attitude did not suffer from an opponent getting on special very early in a match. There are a lot of good points in both games, and No Mercy is an improvement on Attitude (and Wrestlmania 2000 which came between) but both have certain elements lacking in each other that could have made for a better game. I do think that the move system in No Mercy is okay but the way reversals and things are so simple or difficult based only on your character is the biggest problem. Another thing Attitude had was points to spend on areas so that everyone had equal stats but with different strengths and weaknesses. It also had a limit on moves that could be chosen in the way of a percentage score for every move that could be chosen restricting the player to 100% worth of strength of moves. The percentage score thing might not be necessary, but some counter balance to having powerful moves would be good for the next WWF game, and spending points on a character might not be such a bad idea.
RastaBillySkank wrote:
> I got what I thought was a clean version complete with blood. One
> day though it bugged. It's only happened that once but it was so
> annoying considering I was saving up the money to buy Ho (I had
> $456,000 when it glitched) I had nearly every costume and I had all
> the secret characters and arena's. I was mightily weed off but there
> you go. I'm to lazy to get an un-bugged version so I uess I'll stick
> with it.
You should know never to BUY women - don't think of them as objects.
> I got what I thought was a clean version complete with blood. One
> day though it bugged. It's only happened that once but it was so
> annoying considering I was saving up the money to buy Ho (I had
> $456,000 when it glitched) I had nearly every costume and I had all
> the secret characters and arena's. I was mightily weed off but there
> you go. I'm to lazy to get an un-bugged version so I uess I'll stick
> with it.
You should know never to BUY women - don't think of them as objects.
ABout No Mercy unfairness.
If you're good enough then you can learn to reverse using skill and tactics and even beat the most invincible custom character using someone like Taka.
You have to vary your moves a bit, when doing tie ups, use a-moves at first (they can't be reversed)
If you reverse a punch or tie up, sometimes counter with a tie up, other times counter with a punch.
You'll soon weaken them down with weedy moves until you can do the heavier ones or make them submit.
Yes, they might suddenly do a heavy move on you easily at anytime with their big advantage in stats but that doesn't mean you can't beat them.
What I'd like to see is more wrestlers playing at once (up to eight including computer controlled players), a proper contact system so instead of No Mercy's system where you punch them but it doesn't work because they're picking someone up or in the middle of an animation, with a proper contact system it'll hurt them when it touches them and will hurt them depending on where they get hit.
Also, being able to get ladders from under the stage without having to play a ladder match would be nice...
If you're good enough then you can learn to reverse using skill and tactics and even beat the most invincible custom character using someone like Taka.
You have to vary your moves a bit, when doing tie ups, use a-moves at first (they can't be reversed)
If you reverse a punch or tie up, sometimes counter with a tie up, other times counter with a punch.
You'll soon weaken them down with weedy moves until you can do the heavier ones or make them submit.
Yes, they might suddenly do a heavy move on you easily at anytime with their big advantage in stats but that doesn't mean you can't beat them.
What I'd like to see is more wrestlers playing at once (up to eight including computer controlled players), a proper contact system so instead of No Mercy's system where you punch them but it doesn't work because they're picking someone up or in the middle of an animation, with a proper contact system it'll hurt them when it touches them and will hurt them depending on where they get hit.
Also, being able to get ladders from under the stage without having to play a ladder match would be nice...
You really should get something extra for buying and earning everything in the game. It's a shame you don't. Has anyone noticed that when Stone Cold gets the WWF championship it changes to have a skull on the belt? Does this do anything because it just seems to be for show. I wonder if there's anything else like this. There had better be a TLC match in the next game and hell in a cell. That would be fun to jump from the top of the cell onto your opponent on the table. They should also increase your toughness in both TLC and Hell in a Cell matches to make them more challenging and more like the ones on TV. Another thing I'd like to see in the next WWF game is a better system for balancing characters. I found that in WWF: No Mercy that a powerful character has no disadvantages, even when faced by a weaker one. Now I know this is realistic in a way but I would like to be able to face off fast guys against strong guys, rather than having to keep them in the same type. It's too easy to reverse, repeatedly pressing any button except the C ones and you will either reverse or you wont, there doesn't seem to be anything else to it. If you make a big guy with strong moves and high toughness and so forth he will also probably be good at reversals and get high spirit, if you make a fast guy with weaker moves and not so tough then he will be more likely to get less spirit and be reversed all the time by the bigger guy. There is absolutely no balance to make it like playing a game. There's pretty much no skill involved because if you block your opponent and evade and get them in a grapple they just reverse you, or when you make them stumble by blocking their grapple they can counter your grapple or punch without any effort and you wont be able to counter them back. It's pretty much down to characters, which is my biggest problem with the game. Playing against the computer is not so bad because it gives you opportunities and things so it seems that you really can fight back, but then it's just a matter of figuring out how to confuse it and you can win too easily. I prefer my faster characters, but the only way to beat a big powerful guy is to get beaten up so badly that you get super spirit and reversals (even this wont always work) or to make them submit, which is difficult if you don't have expert submissions since you will get very little opportunity with all the reversals being done by the bigger guy. I'll be really angry if they don't deal with this and put in some real gameplay which requires skill not just a tough character with strong moves.
I got what I thought was a clean version complete with blood. One day though it bugged. It's only happened that once but it was so annoying considering I was saving up the money to buy Ho (I had $456,000 when it glitched) I had nearly every costume and I had all the secret characters and arena's. I was mightily weed off but there you go. I'm to lazy to get an un-bugged version so I uess I'll stick with it.
Page: