Page 3 of 5

Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:00 am
by yethboth
Image


Image


Anyone played the above two games (Final Fight 2 and Final Fight 3/Tough) on the Super Nintendo? If so, are they any good?

Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:06 am
by ShadowMan
I own both, very nice games.

Final Fight 2 - Good game, not as good as the originals but still a fun game to play through. Carlos is a great new character (my fav), Maki is OK (so damn weak). The game isn't as groundbreaking and the 1st game, but fares better than the port of Final Fight (and you finally get to fight Rolento!). Its a standard beat em up game, if you love beating the crap out of dozens of goons then you'll probably like this game (and the japanese version can be had for £10!)

Final Fight Tough (3) - Much better than 1 and 2 for the Snes. Guy is back, each character gets there own special moves and super moves which broadens the gameplay out somewhat. The backgrounds are more interactive (at times you can smash wholes in walls for secret rooms/exits). Improves on Number 2 in every way possible so its a must have.
Only catch is the price, bad PAL and NTSC copies still go for £50+ and Japanese copies aren't any cheaper. If you can afford it or find a cheap version then by all means get it!

Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:08 am
by yethboth
The cover art above is really good since it is the original Japanese art front covers. :D

Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:24 am
by TMR
Kaede wrote:It's surprising that a forum for video game collectors could have such indifference for such an important part of the product they buy.
Who said this was exclusively a forum of video game collectors...? Some people here are, but i'm a game player and not a collector, so the cover art makes very little difference to me at all; yes, i appreciate it when it's done well but the box is just what arrived wrapped around the media, it's secondary in my case.

Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:50 am
by Kaede
Video gamers are collectors by nature. For most of us it is the playing of the games themselves that is the most important part and I agree with that 100%.

But pretty much everyone on this forum is going to have a whole stack of games and why should you have to put up with ugly, badly designed covers and manuals?

Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:57 am
by Elgin_McQueen
It would have to at least be argued though that when the special edition of a game is released they should perhaps try to make the boxart a bit special!!

Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 9:09 am
by gmintyfresh
yethboth wrote:Image


Image


Anyone played the above two games (Final Fight 2 and Final Fight 3/Tough) on the Super Nintendo? If so, are they any good?
Yep I've got a Jap version of FF2 and it's great everything the conversion of the arcade game should have been. It's not going to win any prizes for originality but it's lot's of fun (two player is great) for the FF fan craving a little bit more, I also got mine for around a tenner on import from Japan

Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 9:36 am
by Muteki
Kaede wrote:But pretty much everyone on this forum is going to have a whole stack of games and why should you have to put up with ugly, badly designed covers and manuals?
I think there might be a bit of a chicken-or-egg situation with this, in that if gamers are used to getting crappy cover art, they'll care less about any potential appreciation of game art anyway.

I think video games have presented a problem for artists from the outset - do you try to illustrate the actual in-game graphics (ie. those 'airbrushed screenshot' labels for 2600 games), or do you go down a more realistic route? Exactly how much artistic licence are you going to employ to turn those pixels into a fully-fledged illustration? And how are you going to convey the in-game energy and action?

I can see how most gamers can be apathetic about box art when it comes to making a purchasing decision (ie. if you've already read reviews about the game, you'll be making a buying decision based on other factors, or at the very least you'll go by the screenshots and description) - but this does seem to miss the point of game art. When was the last time you bought an album based on the sleeve art either? Probably never (unless you're a teenage onanist with a dubious penchant for female pop acts), yet album sleeve art is still revered as important and integral to the spirit of the album it represents.

Going back to crappy game art, as most people have pointed out, Japanese game manufacturers put much more impetus on the quality, relevance and conceptuality of their games' cover art. Unfortunately, in Western territories, many gamers are possibly still scarred from years of this sort of thing:

Some American games distribution HQ:
US marketing chump #1: Okay Chad, we gots to work out the game art for this kerazy Japanese something-em-up.
US marketing chump #2: Damn straight Buck, ya motherf***er - hey, what did the Japs use?
Chump #1: This. <holds up poster-size Japanese art>
Chump #2: Whoa, what the hell is that! The eyes are too freakin' big on those motherf***ers!
Chump #1: You said it Dog, we gots to get this s*** redrawn so we gots ourselves a couple of gay wrestlers in a warehouse!

Or something.

Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 1:48 pm
by R Type blood donor
Opa-Opa wrote:
Kaede wrote:I expect a bit more time to go into the package as whole than hideous crap like this:

Image

It's surprising that a forum for video game collectors could have such indifference for such an important part of the product they buy.
Whats wrong with this Boxart..? It has good pictures of three main controllable characters, it gives a good idea of what the game is about and that censored Ryu is on his on his ar5e again :)
Agreed. Whenever I saw that I always thought "It's no good sticking your leg out like that, you're about to get crushed against a wall!"

Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 4:22 pm
by Celebaglar
Kaede wrote:Video gamers are collectors by nature.
Big assumption, and quite wrong.

Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 5:56 pm
by Kaede
Celebaglar wrote:
Kaede wrote:Video gamers are collectors by nature.
Big assumption, and quite wrong.
How so?

Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 8:49 pm
by TMR
Kaede wrote:
Celebaglar wrote:
Kaede wrote:Video gamers are collectors by nature.
Big assumption, and quite wrong.
How so?
Not all gamers collect.

Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 4:04 am
by Dudley
Kaede wrote:
Celebaglar wrote:
Kaede wrote:Video gamers are collectors by nature.
Big assumption, and quite wrong.
How so?
Nothing, apart from video gamers not being collectors by nature.

Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 4:07 am
by The Master
Retro gamers, on the other hand...

Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 4:20 am
by Bub&Bob
Dudley wrote:
Kaede wrote:
Celebaglar wrote: Big assumption, and quite wrong.
How so?
Nothing, apart from video gamers not being collectors by nature.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: