I'll be as forthcoming as I can: I didn't finish, nor will I probably ever finish JUMP!, the first of several XBL Indie Game from Arkedo (the guys behind Big Bang Mini, if you're keeping track) planned over the next few months.
The basic premise of JUMP! is about as retro as retro gets; you're a little pixelated dude collecting pixelated bombs and coins, avoiding pixelated animals who can kill you with one hit. Also, if you lose all your lives, you have to restart the game.
Not the level. Not the last time you saved, or the last checkpoint you hit. The entire game. This is retro gaming at its most sadistic, gentlemen -- and frankly, I wasn't man enough to complete the thing (I died on level 29). I did, however, spend enough time with it to have a relatively good idea of its overall feel.
For that reason, I'll still be reviewing JUMP! after the page break, but without a numerical score.
Arkedo Series 01 - JUMP! (Xbox 360/XBL Indie Games)
Developed by: Arkedo
Published by: Arkedo
Released: October 2
MSRP: 240 Microsoft Points (roughly $3)
Just because a game is ball-bustingly difficult does not mean it can't be fun. Ikaruga is nothing if not an exercise in constant player death, but the polarity mechanic is so damned interesting that as you get better and better at the game by understanding more and more of what it has to offer, it ultimately becomes rewarding because of that difficulty. The Mega Man games will kill you over and over without mercy, but as you learn the level layouts and memorize boss patterns, a process that was once jaw-clenchingly infuriating becomes oddly poetic and satisfying. Just because a game is frustrating and difficult doesn't mean it can't be great despite, or because of that difficulty.
But that doesn't change the fact that JUMP! isn't very good.
You'll still spend a tremendous amount of time replaying the same mundane levels over again just because you died a few more times than you'd planned, but unlike Ikaruga or Mega Man, you don't really get anything out of such repetition.
You're forced to trudge through the same levels over and over again after every game over. Not necessarily because doing so adds anything to your understanding of the mechanics or challenges your reflexes in an interesting way, but simply because it's the "retro" thing to do -- because it's a greater punishment than what most modern games would dare inflict on the player.
Ostensibly, such high-consequence mechanics are meant to make the act of completing the game that much more satisfying, but I wouldn't really know; I got so sick of playing the mundane first dozen levels over and over that I lost any desire to continue. If you've got more patience than I do, perhaps you'll be able to wring more out of the game.
The gameplay itself isn't anything terribly special: the level design, at least for the first fifteen stages, meanders between boring the player with uninspired platforming and killing the player with unfair traps and enemy configurations that cannot possibly be conquered until you've died a few times in order to figure out exactly what needs to be done (I'm looking at you, pachinko boulder level).
A few of the later levels are actually quite interesting, however -- a level full of nothing but exploding bombs, all about fifteen seconds away from detonating is a definite highlight -- it's just a shame that I couldn't be see all of them because it meant I would have had to slog through a bunch of dullness numerous times. I've got nothing against killing the player a lot or implementing really steep consequences for death, but the punishment has to fit the crime; dying because of wonky level design or my own laziness doesn't necessarily mean I deserve to do the same boring thing over and over just so I can see the new content.
I didn't even get that small sense of satisfaction one can almost always wrench from even the most irredeemably unfair games: the kind you get from triumphing over difficult platforming sections, eventually learning, after enough repetition, to conquer them with the same ease you might a tutorial level. Quite simply, the first levels just aren't interesting enough for that. I died because of laziness, or aforementioned unfairness, but never because I felt like I was facing an honest, interesting platforming challenge along the lines of what countless other platformers offer. I had to be kinda-sorta careful about when and where to jump, and in which order to collect the level-ending time bombs, but with certain exceptions I felt very little satisfaction for doing so even once, much less a half-dozen times.
On the upside, JUMP! is quite pretty. I can confidently say, without reservation, that it's the single prettiest Xbox Indie Game I've ever seen. It's also got a remarkably good sense of humor: the level titles, death messages, and even HUD elements (instead of saying "___ coins," it says "____ in the pocket," which is somehow the most adorable thing ever) are all pretty damned cute.
All that said, I also played Demon's Souls before and after dicking around with JUMP! this weekend, and if you love one, you'll likely adore the other: they're both intensely hard and kinda charming, yet they prioritize time commitment and OCD-ness over actual skill or learning. If you've got a hard-on for huge challenges or retro sensibilities, JUMP! may be for you; if you're anyone else, you're better off playing Ninja Bros.
Score: n/a
Contest:
6:00 PM on 10.11.2009
| 
Was that a shot at Demon's Souls? You can quit the game at any time, and start back exactly where you left off, so technically, with a "save anywhere" feature, it's less of a time commitment than any other game.
Also, how about this for "OCD over skill?" On my third playthrough, I can do most of level 4 right after the first boss (very low level); if I get hit, I'll die, but with a grasp of dodge rolling, I can make it through, all in a skill based manner. Once you get good, it's not a matter of grinding; that's a fallacy that you'll get over after playing it for a few days.
Ah well, looks like the old grey tinder-box wont be tempting fate today.
I agree in terms of the death mechanic.
What people need to realize is that being alive is a powerup. Abandon all previous gaming conceptions you have on "death"; it'll help you understand the concept of the game more.
NEVER!
Where's my prize money?
You don't have to fight the Red Dragon. Actually you're supposed to go back and beat him at the end of the game, when you can kill him in 10-15 arrows total.
As for the Blue Dragon, free "one of the NPCs" (look it up, I won't spoil it); he'll help you fight it. Also, you don't have to fight it, either!
So basically your counter argument is "two optional bosses that aren't supposed to be beaten until end-game are really hard to beat in the beginning of the game". Old King Doran is another optional boss that's supposed to be beaten end-game, but you can ACCESS in the first half hour. Would you run into a level 55 dungeon in an MMO as a level 10, and wonder why you can't beat them? It's the exact same argument.
Next!
There's also a trick to getting all of the Red Dragon loot without actually shooting one arrow at him; and it's fairly easy to reason out.
SKILL BASED GAME IS SKILL BASED
Give it a shot. It's fun.
Wonderful! I now understand that gamers will accept any amount of bullshit, vague, runaround structuring so long as the game is sufficiently difficult and all the information you need to complete it in the "best" way can only be found in strategy guide and gamefaqs! I'll make millions with my new game, "Guess what number I'm thinking of and if you get it wrong I'll make you replay the last two hours."
Additionally, I consider killing the red dragon "optional" only if you're completely fine with, everytime you die at the 1-2 boss (which, for people who aren't super-duper-leet and didn't immediately learn NOT to target the person you're meleeing until the very last second because it arbitrarily restricts movement), having to do the exact same "wait for the dragon to finish breathing fire, runrunrun, wait, runrunrun, kill those two blue knights and risk being pushed back into the fire" pattern over and over and over. Me, I kind of figure my time is a little more valuable than that (which is ironic considering to mitigate that problem, I stood in one spot and fired 150 arrows from a position where I could not be harmed over the course of twenty minutes).
All of the things you felt were impossible, I figured out relatively easily, without a guide. Note how I said you can get all of the Dragon's loot in an "easy" manner.
Spoiler - you remember where he perches? Simply run out, let him fly off his perch, then run back to his roost and steal the loot. Done. Also, you're having trouble, it seems, on that runway. I think you're missing part of the point of Demon's Souls. You as a player have a particular issue with timing (you get hit by the Dragon's fire).
Go to level 2. Go to level 3. Try level 5, or 4. Your options are open. In fact, most gamers don't beat Tower Knight until near the end of the game. Did they figure that out by reading a guide? No. They just reasoned: "hey. This Tower Knight section is hard. Let's try something else. Whoa! It's much easier. I'll do this, then go BACK to Tower Knight!"
I don't get your core counter argument. You're saying a select boss can be exploited: I could argue that for just about any game ever made.
Hints: Watch where the Dragon breathes fire the third time. Simply walk towards the end, and kill the two dredglings, making sure you don't enter the threshold. Then, engage the Blue Knight in 1v1 combat with your back to the hallway. You shouldn't aggro the second Blue Knight. After beating the first Knight, beat the second one.
It sounds like you're just having fundamental issues playing the game, and need some help. That shouldn't be blamed on poor design.
Sure, that sounded like I was being a troll, but I honestly ju8st think Anthony just sucks at the game. Not once did I need to go to GameFAQs or consult a guide to defeat a boss.
Hurnh? I didn't have any problem with timing the dragon's breath (I just took issue with the fact that I had to keep-doing-it-over-and-over) or getting the shit from the dragon's lair (I just sprinted up, grabbed the purple flame shield and ran) -- really not sure where you got that from.
My problem is -- take a bad guy like the Penetrator, for instance (or whatever the name of the 1-3 boss is). You can either fight him on your own, as a melee guy, taking off about 40 points or less of health with every hit. You can memorize every single one of his swipes and where to be, and then spend about twenty minutes whittling away his health like trying to cut down a tree with a nail file.If you keep dying over and over as you learn his attacks, you'll have to keep fighting through the same dozen enemies that wait outside of his lair because the devs didn't think you deserved to have a checkpoint right before the boss. You need a fuckload of time and an OCD disposition to kill him this way.
Or, you can go back and free the jailed NPC to help you. But how do you know to go free the jailed NPC? You either get told by a strategy guide (which is lame), or you're supposed to have checked every single hidden-in-shadows door prior to that area, remembered the locations of every single locked one without the aid of a map, assume that the keys you have are for a door you've already encountered and not one you WILL encounter, and then backtrack and try your keys on every single door prior in the level until you just happen to come upon the soldier and free him. Which basically requires you to have, like the first method of taking out the boss, OCD (for map memorization) and a bunch of free time (for trying the keys on every door in the map). Or access to a Gamefaq. Either way, you spend hours doing silly bullshit.
It sounds like you'd be better suited as a ranged character, but you seemingly chose a melee oriented one (based on your Penetrator strategy described above)? Maybe you didn't put enough points into Vitality, Strength, or Endurance, so your character is a "spread thin" hybrid who isn't good at either ranged combat or melee, yet you want the best of both worlds (based on your description of killing the Dragon)?
I still don't get your main contentions. I beat the Penetrator on my first try as a ranged character, because I felt really comfortable with the bow system, and was able to dodge all of his attacks (it sounds like you haven't gotten dodge rolling down pat yet). I think you just need to find a groove/playstyle that suits your needs, and you won't have to worry about constantly dying.
As for freeing the jailed dude; I never did that actually, on my first playthrough. I actually took that design choice as a positive: frankly, it's nice to know that there's cryptic shit like that hidden in the game, so that on subsequent playthroughs there's extra stuff for you to experience. I know quite a few people who stumbled upon that randomly. Also, are you playing online? In my second playthrough, there was a blood note near the prison door that beckoned me towards it. If there wasn't; feel free to leave a note for someone else.
Regardless, your simple solution should have been "go to other levels; level up my shield/weapon skill; come back and own the Penetrator". If 4 other options (levels) were there, but I kept ramming my head into the wall going with the hardest option, that's solely my fault.
I think you're trying to make this game a Metroidvania "OCD memorization fest", when it really doesn't have to be at all; at least, that's not how I played it. If it was such a memorization fest, I wouldn't have beaten the last 8 bosses in the game with no deaths.
I've actually been putting nothing but points in Vitality, Strength, and Endurance (and Dexterity), and the Penetrator fight was still a pain (he could kill me in two hits). I only killed the red dragon the way I did because I checked the deluxe strategy guide after I got sick of waiting to run between his flame bursts everytime the tower shield knight dickstomped me.
If I was simply meant to fight the tower knight eight hours later, that's shitty level structure: every single enemy leading up to him was completely manageable given the level I was at, and I'm only on the second level of the first world -- everything pointed to the assumption that THIS was the dude I was supposed to take care of, and that the other worlds had to wait, or would be harder. If the game was truly about rising to challenges through sheer skill, to go to another world and getting stronger would be playing the game incorrectly.
I'm always online, but I didn't see any message near the jail cell. I'm honestly wondering if I'm connected to a shit server or something -- I've seen a grand total of one blue eye stone the 8+ hours I've been playing.
The strategy you suggest -- go to other levels, and level up until you're enough of a badass to take the guy down -- how is that not grinding? Surely a pure skill based, non-timesink game wouldn't all but mandate that to an average player?
Ckarasu:
Wow -- you had several other people helping you fight a boss with no ranged attacks? You're right -- I do suck, and you're incredibly good!
Unless, of course, the presence of so much as one other person makes most bosses markedly, hilariously easier because they can't focus one hundred percent of their attacks on you, and the fact that you practically had a fucking army backing you up (whereas I went after him alone) probably halved the amount of effort you put forward, giving you an unreasonably inflated ego about your own abilities...
...Nah, I'm sure that it's just that I suck. I can't even memorize entire maps that are half-shrouded in darkness!
The game does not require you to grind to beat a boss. It's just an easy way to do things. You can beat a boss at an extremely low level, if you know what you're doing. Magnalon seems to have done a poor job of explaining things. The Tower Knight can be beaten by either using cover, and firing arrows/spells at him, or just attacking his legs, backing off, and repeating until he falls. The penetrator and the boss at 4-1 were the only ones I used help on. The others have been manageable. You may not like the game, and that's fine. But, don't call it a game with a cheap difficulty as if you know what you're talking about. Ignorant statements like that are just asking for a lecture.
I personally would recommend that you put most of your points into Dex and Stamina. Screw Vitality and Strength - just don't get hit. Learn to dodge and block when you need to. Only pump enough points into Faith, Magic and Intelligence so that you can cast Enchant Weapon and Evacuate when you need to.
Thus far, I've taken out most of the bosses alone. I kinda had to, seeing as I spend most of my time in Phantom form and thus can't summon.
You want cheap difficulty? Try playing some of Prinny: CIRBTH's later levels. I would have went insane if I didn't take a few breaks. It was a fun game for me, though. The bosses were fun, and the other levels were pretty enjoyable.
"everything pointed to the assumption that THIS was the dude I was supposed to take care of, and that the other worlds had to wait, or would be harder."
Again, the game is open ended. I killed Tower Knight right off the bat as a magic user: others went to 3-1: some went to 5-1, and so on. It's not bad level design, because some fights, by nature, are going to be more geared towards certain weapons/abilities. While you are pitching a fit over Tower Knight/Penetrator, you're going to LOVE facing the Old Monk and the False King, whereas my ranged character had HEAPS of trouble in those particular encounters.
That's pretty much any game you come across: certain playstyles win out over others from time to time depending on the battle. Would you rather have it be like every other linear action game, where you have to constantly try and beat a boss until you win, with no option outside of failure (turning off your game) or success?
When you reviewed Castle Crashers, you gave it a 9.0. Now, while I'm not questioning your reason for doing so in the slightest, but I felt like that game was not only LESS open ended than Demon's Souls, but suffered from a heap of cheap difficulty, and actually encouraged simple grinding along with team play.
Demon's Souls gives you the option to fight whatever you want, whenever you want, without grinding, and to also engage in team play if you choose to do so, with a fair difficulty design.
"go to other levels, and level up until you're enough of a badass to take the guy down -- how is that not grinding? Surely a pure skill based, non-timesink game wouldn't all but mandate that to an average player? "
It's not grinding because you apparently can't take him down (Penetrator) with the skillset you have as a player. I'm merely suggesting that rather than bang your head against the wall repeatedly, you search for another option: because it's there. And all the while through those other levels, you wouldn't be grinding, just experiencing other levels you may have an easier time with.
I made it to the end of 4-1, solo as a level 1. Granted, that's after 22+ hours of playtime experience, but it's doable.
Basically this whittles down to "I don't want to adapt because I shouldn't have to". Honestly, I didn't really have that many problems with the game to relate with that statement. If a certain pet isn't working out in Castle Crashers, you go back to the Ark and get a new one. Apologies for the Castle Crashers analogies; it's the only "big" game I can think off that I would be able to relate to you.
Seriously guys, lay off Burch, not everyone will see Demon's Souls the same way we do, especially such a critical person as Anthony. It's his goal in life to nitpick shit, just leave him be. ;P
Haha, while I've agreed with the bulk of the last Rev Rants, I think his conclusion was way off the mark on this one, so I wanted to speak up.
Plus it's sparked some interesting debate by way of Anthony, and neither of us resorted to insults. It's refreshing, actually.
@Ckarasu
I didn't explain the Tower Knight fight options because Anthony seemingly already beat it, and I didn't want to spoil it for anyone.
I actually liked 3-1, but I'm also a fan of survival horror, so what can ya do.
@the7k: It was just a pretty confusing level for me. I wandered around for 20 minutes without any clue of what to do.
3-1 was hella fun, until I fell off that goddamned ledge.
There's a reason you get 1000 lives.
While I haven't played JUMP! and can't predict the future, I somehow doubt it'll be something that is fondly remembered even a few months from now. Demon's Souls, on the other hand, is by far my favorite PS3 game - and my collection is pretty much nothing but triple A titles.
So, yes, I felt an obligation to jump to its defense, especially considering it was just compared to a substandard platformer lacking any inspiration and requiring clairvoyance to complete.
The Rev Ranted that he wanted to see RPGs that don't force grinding. To me, that's exactly what Demon's Souls was - so, it vexed me to see him crap on it.
@everyone
If everybody who plays Demon's Souls finally beats it, will it be less worthwhile to play?
Anthony, you couldn't beat JUMP!? Really? I thought the game was quite liberal with the extra lives, especially to the point of leaving easy to find 1ups right before a harder section so it was almost an infinite lives section.
I cleared the game on my first attempt as well.
Loved the visuals, loved the simplicity, loved the old school feel and I LOVED that it was only $3 and worth every single penny.