Instalar o Steam
Iniciar sessão
|
Idioma
简体中文 (Chinês Simplificado)
繁體中文 (Chinês Tradicional)
日本語 (Japonês)
한국어 (Coreano)
ไทย (Tailandês)
Български (Búlgaro)
Čeština (Checo)
Dansk (Dinamarquês)
Deutsch (Alemão)
English (Inglês)
Español-España (Espanhol de Espanha)
Español-Latinoamérica (Espanhol da América Latina)
Ελληνικά (Grego)
Français (Francês)
Italiano (Italiano)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonésio)
Magyar (Húngaro)
Nederlands (Holandês)
Norsk (Norueguês)
Polski (Polaco)
Português (Brasil)
Română (Romeno)
Русский (Russo)
Suomi (Finlandês)
Svenska (Sueco)
Türkçe (Turco)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamita)
Українська (Ucraniano)
Relatar problema de tradução
on it.
is simply out of question.
Regras e Orientações das Discussões
Denunciar este post
(a) hyperfocus so you can react to any combination of enemies with a simultaneous combination of moving out of the way and attacking
(b) learn what spawns and where on every "screen"
Of course, a mix of A and B pretty much guarantees a quick-ish Cherry.
Oh and, if you learn the Sandwiches location and try to gather points often enough, you'll be racking 1 ups like no tomorrow.
I finished the 2nd loop with 7+ lives.
Also, note that you can drop through platforms by holding down and jumping.
None of the arcade games are meant to be beaten in a few tries. They take a lot of practice. Thankfully, most of them don't take longer than 10 minutes to win a run from start to finish. Velgress can be beaten in under 4 minutes.
The trick with UFO 50 is you can kinda tackle it however you like. If you're the type to hammer away at something until you beat it, you can do that. If you're not, you can take a break, play other games, and just come back once in a while until it clicks; don't burn yourself out, y'know?
Like you say, you've already gotten half way with only an hour of play (which, yeah, it's a short game, but an hour still isn't a lot of time to master the way it plays really). You know you can reach that far, so; make that your goal. You've had a few great tips from the other posters, so keep those in mind, and keep at it. You'll find you start being able to reach half way more reliably... and once you get to that point, then you can make the push for the end. Good luck!
Almost all the games in the Reflex Play category are quite easy for a player who's familiar with arcade and retro action style games like shmups. For me, they're the hardest.
I generally favour games having plenty of difficulty and accessibility options; I guess for UFO 50, that clashes with the constraints the team put on themselves (games of the era did normally take a "git gud" attitude to giving players options, yuck), but I would personally like to perhaps see them build on that down the line.
With that said... I wonder if, just as in real life for the era, cheat codes are meant to take the place of that? Perhaps we just haven't found the extra lives code for Ninpek yet...
It makes sense for the arcade games to have the "git gud" attitude, though. Their difficulty is part of their replay value. They aren't supposed to be cleared in a handful of attempts. There is also the fact that they tend to be more competitive, with leaderboards and such.
The "accessibility" of UFO 50 is that all games are unlocked from the start. If a game is too hard for you and you don't want to put in the effort to improve, forget it and move to the next game. You'll eventually find games that'll click with you.
I don't disagree to a point, but difficulty is relative. What is "a hard and fun challenge" for one player can be "completely infuriatingly impossible" to another, for all manner of reasons. So, yeah, having a game intended for the player to find it challenging to take on and eventually beat, great, thumbs up, no complaint. But have options so that a player can tune that to find the right sweet spot for them? I will always want that to be in place if it isn't.
This, I disagree with. Accessibility is not about whether a game "clicks" with you, nor about how much effort you "want" to put in, it's about whether it's possible for you to fully experience it. You can absolute enjoy a game in principle, and absolutely be willing to spend time on getting better at it, but still be locked out by stuff they you can't willpower your way through. (At a basic level, think games that colour-code important information, but apply colours that one or more types of colour-blind people can't distinguish.)
That's also why I disagree, from an accessibility standpoint, with "just play the next game". That some other game exists is completely beside the point; this game is the one they're trying to access, let's talk about how that can happen. (Umm, not this this game, I'm not saying anyone is specifically calling out Ninpek for being specifically inaccessible, just that in general terms, "play something else" is literally the antithesis of accessibility.)
...Fromsoft fans tend to hate me. ;)
There are obvious logistical, thematic, and design obstacles to all that for UFO 50 in specific, because we aren't talking about accessibility for a game, we're talking about it for a _ton_ of games that are trying to act like games from ~4 decades ago. That's why it's not really something I've brought up before, nor am particularly pushing on right now; it would feel pretty unrealistic and unfair to demand they stop the post-launch bug fixes and instead focus on adding per-game options to help people with fine motor controls, y'know?
This makes sense if we are talking about games like Velgress, which has no scoring system at all and the goal is to just beat it. In cases like Ninpek, though, it's a high score game. Your score determines how good you are at the game, and your ultimate goal is to climb the leaderboard (even if the leaderboard is all preset scores besides your own). The way I have seen other games accomplish this friction in design is to have a different scoreboard for each difficulty level. This isn't practical if you want extremely customizable fine tuned difficulty, though, just some preset ones.
I strongly believe that no game is for everyone. That's why we have lots of different options for games in the market, so that we can find what suits our interests. Sure, it's possible to widen the target demographic for a game with stuff like difficulty options, but you can only go so far. For example, I have a VERY strong dislike of JRPGs. What do I do? I just don't play them (although every once in a while I may give one a shot). No amount of settings will tailor the game to my interests, so why bother? I'd rather play something that suits my fancy. Same for a game that advertises itself has being extremely difficult or extremely easy, or is known for such reputations. I personally mostly ignore games that describe themselves as casual, for example, since most easy games are boring to me. At the same time, despite being extremely experienced in games I am mentally slow and struggle with anything super fast paced, so I tend to avoid games of that nature as well. Actually, this happened to me with Attactics. The game was too fast and chaotic for me, so I dropped it after I obtained the gift. That is completely okay, and doesn't mean that the game should have difficulty settings! It just wasn't for me. What did click for me was Bug Hunter, which is strictly turn-based so I could take my time with my decisions.
Also, "getting better at the game = experiencing more content" is a completely acceptable means of rewarding players for skill improvement. After all, it's only up to the player if they want to give up. Also, this kind of design is what the vast majority of games are built on.
These points are why I consider UFO 50's "every game is available from the start" to be an accessibility feature. It allows you to stick to games that suit your fancy, and ignore the games that you don't or wouldn't like. This is also why I think that the collection is only $25. At this price point, you only need to enjoy a handful of games for it to be worth the purchase. It's an honorable price from the developers.
EDIT: Another point I'd like to make is, sometimes your weaknesses may enhance your experience rather than harm them. I have absolutely no sense of rhythm, for example, yet I greatly enjoyed Rhythm Heaven because it challenged me in something I'm normally not good at, and forced me to improve in that area. This leads me to think of difficulty as not an accessibility issue, but just player preference.
EDIT 2: Another point is that, when I personally struggle too much in a game that has difficulty settings, I am more likely to drop the game than switch to easy mode. Why? Because playing on easy mode isn't the intended experience of the game and defeats the point of it in my eyes. I'd rather play something else that would suit me better, than play a subpar version of what I am currently trying to play.
As you note, that's not necessarily incompatible with a leaderboard. Different boards for different difficulties is one simple solution. Another would be, perhaps, difficulty which tunes the number of enemies; less enemies is easier, but the score cap is naturally lower, and vice versa. Also allows for players to bump the value right up to push the limit :D
(All theoretical though; again, not actually pushing for any changes in this case, just noting that generally I do.)
I'm cutting in quick because, I see this sentence a lot in these kinds of discussions, but it's conflating a couple of different ideas.
One is that you shouldn't try to make a game that everyone will enjoy. That, yeah, I agree, probably not, that's an impossible task; there are far too many kinds of games, with far too many players with mutually exclusive interests. 100% agree, trying to get people who just hate JRPGs to like JRPGs, by adding accessibility features, is silly. I don't think I've ever heard anyone suggest that, mind.
The other is that you shouldn't try to make a game that everyone can enjoy. That, uhh, no, I think you generally should. Sure, a person may not like your game for what that game is, absolutely, but that's very different from saying (to go back to my previous example) you're making a game with a lot of colours, and going to ignore colourblind people because "colourblind people don't like games with colours anyway, they can play something else". Better to think about ways to make it work for them, symbols rather than colours, that sort of thing. There are practical and technical limitations to what's possible, of course, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't do what we can.
Accessibility isn't about having a game that everyone wants to play, it's (in the ideal) having a game that everyone who wants to can play.
Absolutely, 100%, not arguing against that. However, we do also need to acknowledge that people can have different skill floors, ceilings, improvement rates, and available time, for all kinds of reasons, hence; difficulty and accessibility options.
'k. I don't think any part of either of our arguments hinges on what you, personally, do in that situation. I do wonder how many potentially hugely enjoyable games you've skipped out on because you were too proud to move that setting a notch, though.
Pause. Who says easy mode can't be the intended experience of a game? What if the intended experience is to play through on the easiest mode, then replay working your way up as far as you like? Who says a game can only have one single intended experience? Even if there a single intended experience for a given game, how do you know what that is? (Yes, some games will have difficulty descriptors that explicitly describe one as the intended way to play, but that's relatively rare across the history of gaming... and even then, who says what the writer wrote matches what the developer actually wanted?) Do you apply this same self-limitation to other aspects of the game, examining every mechanic for intent and deliberately avoiding or embracing them accordingly, regardless of whether you find them fun or useful... or does this notion of playing the intended experience end once you actually start playing?
I mean, I'd argue playing a chunk of the game at the beginning and then none of the rest is an ever subber-par version than the one where you play the whole thing with a bit more health or whatever... I also think your conflation of "easier" with "subpar" says more about your personal mindset than anything about general game design... but, hey, your opinion is your own. I'm still not clear on how your specific preferences are relevant, but, thanks for the personal info, I guess?
Anyway, we don't have to keep on about this, I am literally not asking for any accessibility options or changes at this time, this is all theoretical gubbins.
And, lol you damn right it is a skill issue and you aren't playing the game correctly. Now, go back to your room and do it right, mister.
Nah, I suck at Ninpek too. I wrote a longer piece about this, but I feel like very game requires about an hour of play before things click and at least another. And the route cause of most of the difficulty comes from how many games there are.
I think there's a couple streamers out there that show that a lot of the ufo games are actually easy, because they are forced to play the game for an hour or two for content. I doubt many of them wouldn't have gotten as far without forcing themselves to sit and play them.
I think this is why the game doesn't give you a lot of help. It forces you to either learn, or go out and figure out how to play them through other people talking about it. This is where accessibility mode comes in. YOU are both the player and the accessibility mode(for somebody else). You don't need the game to make an accessibility mode for you, you are typing in it right now.
But yeah, honestly, just keep on trucking. If you need a video for help, great! If not, great!
I beat Ninpek, and I don't think I'm particularly good at the more arcade reaction based games. It was hard, but only took a couple hours in total. You can do it... gold is pretty reasonable, cherry seems too hardcore to bother grinding for yet. As always I'd base how much effort you want to put in to your enjoyment of the game.
A note about "accessibility options"... I have some color blindness. Some of the games, Star Waspir in particular really messes with me in terms of some of the colors they chose vs backgrounds and other things. For that one I believe it's enemy bullet colors. Is it a skill issue to have a (albeit minor) disability? Would it mess with the "classic gaming" experience to have some accessibility options that address such things the way many modern games do? Dunno, but all I know is it makes me play those less.
It's funny, it seems like "skill issue" and "git gud" stuff came in the wake of the Dark Souls craze, and there's a seemingly limitless amount of ways you can adjust your experience and make it easier by using the tools those games provide. I don't really care about the "intended experience." We're here to have some fun
Finding sandwiches helps too but they are tile placements that you have to step on to make them appear.