Multiplayer writes:
"As new games get announced every week, most gamers rejoice when old school games from their youth are re-released on updated platforms so they can enjoy them all over again. However, there's one group that takes a deep breath as they read each and every game announcement, hoping not to see certain titles appear; classic games that they already own, and have invested in. This is the anxious life of a video game collector; a certain sect of gamers that value video games so much that they invest huge sums of money into amassing valuable games.
While their reasons may range from nostalgia to economical, one thing remains true; each time an old game gets re-released on a new, more readily available platform, the value of the original takes some kind of a hit. Below is a breakdown of some of the most famous games that have been re-released, and how..."
Everyone is trying the shared universe thing these days, but Marvel and Capcom were mashing up their most beloved characters decades ago. Perhaps their best crossover effort was Marvel vs. Capcom 2: New Age of Heroes, which was released on the PlayStation 2 & Xbox on Nov. 19, 2002, in North America. Previous releases took place in arcades and on Sega’s beloved but ill-fated Dreamcast console. Later releases came out on PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360’s digital storefronts.
Former employees of Backbone Entertainment have formed a new company called Digital Eclipse. On Twitter studio head Mike Mika confirmed they would love to help the fans. In addition to having ported MvC 2 before, the studio has worked with Disney on re-releases of the Disney Afternoon Collection, Aladdin and The Lion King. Legions of fans are waiting for Marvel vs. Capcom 2 to take them for one more ride.
Arcade1Up reveals how the company was able to bring back the retro fighting game, Marvel vs. Capcom 2, with brand-new arcade cabinets.
Whether on the Famicom or NES, Castlevania III is an 8-bit masterpiece.
I disagree.
Having beaten the first 3 Castlevania games I think part 3 is easily the worst. Part 1 isn't that hard and a good, fun challenge throughout, until you reach Death & Dracula. :D Castlevania II is a masterpiece and was far ahead of its time; in fact many action / adventure hybrids today follow Castlevania II's formula. Castlevania III is just Castlevania I with the difficulty increased to the point of being ridiculously cheap. Also, the graphics of Castlevania II, and I'm tempted to say the graphics of Castlevania I, are better than those of Castlevania III.
Totally disagree with your disagree. 3 is better than 2. I understand where you are coming from with the Metroidvania standpoint of it being used today. But 3 was just overall better. 2 wasn't even reviewed as well as 3 when it came out. Still doesn't today. 3 was sloppy in that you didn't know where to go, when to go and had to search every nick and cranny to find something. And when you found it, you had to figure out what to do with that item and at what time. Or ask someone else in the neighborhood who was also playing it too as there were no guides back then. It lacked direction even if it allowed you to walk around aimlessly. Games don't need hand holding. But it needed something as it was not like Metroid exploring. It was worse trying to copy that style. 3 led to a better game with 4 being a forward adventure. All areas were new. It's like saying Zelda 2 was better than 1 or 3. Nope. It was okay. But not better than those either.
3 was a forward adventure with different paths to increase replayability. Metroidvania games like 2 while okay, do a lot of back tracking over the same areas. Which allows the developer to get away with the same assets being reused but can lead to a game being boring seeing the same stuff. That's not always enjoyable. That's being cheap.
It's good developers fixed the Metroidvania confusion of games like Castlevania 2. Because although I beat it then, it was irritating to get through. It's not a masterpiece.
