dougeff wrote:
This review pisses me off a little bit.
https://www.reddit.com/r/snes/comments/ ... r_and_the/
"Graphics-The graphics themselves are nothing to write home about. Aside from a few extra colors and an animation of the "boss" skeleton dying, it looks like stuff that could be done on the NES."
"Level Design...a lot of recycled screens...lazy"
I think the graphics look fine, probably better than I can do. There are lighting effects and smooth moving lava, far better than the NES can do.
koitsu wrote:
This should give you some idea of what the current mindset is of people gaming today. Even folks "our" age (40s, or late 30s) who were around for the NES and SNES launches, and grew up with them, have trouble not comparing the quality of retro games (esp. homebrew) to "other stuff" out on the market.
I've played the game and from a players perspective, I'd have to say this is a harsh, yet honest review.
Around this place, we're acutely aware of the effort and knowledge required to get even the most basic of demos off the ground on these old systems, but I feel that because of that, we often get hung up on technical details and forget the most important thing:
That games are meant to played and that games should be a fun and interesting experience for the player.
The world has kept on spinning in the decades since our favorite systems have been released, with lots of game design lessons learned, lots of gameplay conventions cemented and lots of stellar commercial releases that upped the bar for what is considered a good game, plus players have a vastly increased amount of games available to them and a diminished timespan available for each individual game.
So yes, if you publically release a game in 2018, it will be compared to everything that came before it, be it the best on that system, current-gen games or retro-styled games on modern platforms.
And if you ignore what's happened since, release a buggy game, get sloppy with the level design or don't polish the gameplay, you will be called out for it.
Instead of lamenting this fact, I tried to embrace it with the latest released
SNES game I've worked on and distinguish it by focussing on the following:
-polished gameplay first, no compromises
-zero-bug policy
-no filler, cherish the players time (no repetitious, tedious or overly difficult level design to pad out playing time)
-improved replayability (collectable secrets, unlockable simultaneous multiplayer mode)
It has its fair share of blemishes (SNES-CD-version not working on real hardware, uses intellectual property of others, very short total playtime), but I'm still content with the result.
Regarding Sydney Hunter, I applaud the effort:
Creating a complete game, manufacturing cartridges and packaging are a monumental accomplishment in itself, and the sprite animations do look great.
Still, the lack of polish feels a bit like a missed opportunity to me.
tl;dr: Don't let seemingly unfair/uninformed critique put you off. Instead, consider which valid points it makes, know where your audience is coming from, know what you're up against and polish, polish, polish. Just my 2 cents.