/v/ - Video Games

<replayability means the game is better xd

When rayman went back to 2d, then it became a really great game that outright surpasses the original games

>Game sucks because it's hard and levels don't have infinite replay-ability

Seriously faggot?

>>14679008

>Rayman 2 Nintendo 64

>Rayman 2 PlayStation

>Rayman 2 PlayStation 2

>Rayman 2 PC

Which version? Every port is significantly different and all good in there own unique way.

>Rayman 1

a fun game but hard as balls

>Rayman Origins

>Rayman Legends

Two the best side-scrolling platformers ever made.

>>14679104

Dreamcast obviously.

>>14679008

Rayman 3 had the baller minigames and Rayman 1 had so much style.

>>14679104

OP here.

I played the PS2 version Rayman 2.

I haven't played Origins or Legends yet.

>>14679323

Do know that Legends contains majority of Origins' content anyway

>>14679423

I thought they were completely different games.

>no replayability once you complete a level

Oh you mean like in every fucking game with campaign? The fuck did you pull that one from retard

>>14679456

Legends is like an expansion pack for Origins; it uses same mechanics (mostly), but contains a lot of new levels and as you play, you also unlock "Origin" levels, which are levels from Origins (duh), but not all of them. Also no sexy fairies, sadly.

It's fun.

>Rayman 1

I keep hearing the Jaguar version is the best. Bullshit or what? Only got the Saturn port and it's pretty good.

>>14680159

Jaguar version has no loading times, a "hidden" minigame and some smaller levels cut down because of memory limitations.

The best version is either the PS1 or the Saturn one.

These are all real flaws from the games, but they're pretty fun platformers.

I'll pay Rayman 1, but 2 was a solid game, particularly for the time.

It had great music, a cool aesthetic at times and decent platforming with some memorable levels.

Rayman Origins and Legends are both great titles too, anon.

>>14679323

Origins is great, but can feel a little samey in the middle. I found it's best experienced with breaks in between long blocks of play to ensure that you don't get burnt out. It has excellent art, handles very tightly and has great music and general solid gameplay feel. Legends pretty much improves on everything Origins did and includes some of the best levels from Origins remastered, and I found it introduces enough gameplay diversity to solve the burn-out issue, with really novel themed stages, waifus and a couple of neat variations on the standard gameplay. I'd have preferred if they had literal alternate gameplay characters (like the cameo characters in Super Meat Boy) to really change the feel of play, but Legends at least is more than "run fast and don't suck".

I think a fair criticism of the two titles is that they can feel the same if you just sink consecutive hours into them, but this can be levelled at rhythm games and such as well. I think it's really partially on the player not to over-expose themselves.

>Why do people like this series again?

Because everything you said is subjective. This thread is bad and should be deleted.

>Graphics and textures make everything look like it's made out of paper.

You do realize this game isn't exactly new, right?

>Lots of filler moments with sliding/riding stuff instead of just focusing on platforming.

Sliding was still fun but alright, I can give you that, they are mostly there to break up the monotonny.

>Still no reason to replay the levels after you find everything.

A game doesn't have to be replayable to be good. Some games are great one-off experiences.

>Anti-climatic ending.

How the fuck is the ending anti-climatic?

Those flaws you pointed seem to be mostly nitpicks, and fade when you look at the good points of the game like the great atmosphere, worldbuilding, the actually fun platforming, the music and generally everything else that isn't the Ship section.

>Combat is all about dodging but areas are too small making it very difficult.

The combat is completely fine, git gud, I'm not even memeing, you're just shit at the game. You must be absolutely terrible at platformers if you find Rayman 3 out of all fucking games to be hard.

>Same paper like graphics and textures.

What the fuck are you talking about now? Do you even know what "cartoony style" means?

>Another shit ending.

Completely subjective, the ending is completely servicable.

>Yet again no reason to replay the levels after you find everything.

As I said in my previous post, not all games need to be replayable but this game is more replayable than Rayman 2 just because you can at least try to get higher scores and unlock new mini-games.

Your arguments are just nitpicks, which aren't even fully correct and again are just unimportant when you look at the pros of the game.

>>14679008

Just play the PS1 version of Rayman 2. It cuts out useless filler/colectathon autism bullshit. It's the best version anyway.

>>14681270

>that picture

Is that LEGO game still up? How can a game perfect the spooky-skeleton-vibe and then disappear off the face of the Earth?

>>14685123

I find R1's model much more appealing than "thicc", it's just not as comfy.

>>14679141

GCN Rayman 3 has probably one of the weirdest GBA to GCN multiplayer modes that could even be played 2 vs 2. Sadly there doesn't seem to be any non-emulator footage.

Please post more thick fairies please

>>14680410

>>Wasn't play-tested to balance the difficulty.

>Citation needed.

I'm quite certain that in an interview, one of the developers (or the lead developer even) for Rayman 1 was asked about the game's difficulty. The interviewer said "it's as if the game wasn't play-tested" to which the dev said something to the tune of "that's because it wasn't".

I'm absolutely certain I read that somewhere. Sorry for not looking for a source though, just thought I'd chime in.

>>14688198

That's pretty amazing. It's too bad gcn - gba multiplayer could be such a pain to set up.

Why do you want your games "play-tested for difficulty"? After that all you'd get is a watered down game for casuals that holds your hand all the way. Rayman 1's difficulty was just right, I 100%'d it without cheats a couple of times and had a great time doing it. Compared to 8 and 16 bit games it was very manageable. Rayman 2 on the other hand I finished it in 2 days and was left feeling like I had just wasted my money.

>>14691563

I too want games that are bullshit hard so I can jerk off online to other players.

>>14692134

>I want my game tested by retards that get lost for hours on any game that isn't linear

>>14692134

If a game isn't kicking you in the nuts until you man up and git gud it doesn't really respect you honestly.

>>14692139

>implying I said that

>>14692180

That's what play testing means.

Welcome to post 2000 game developing.

>>14688378

I second this. Shame we will never see them again.

>>14692190

Rayman was pre-2000, though.

All three are great games and have excellent soundtracks, OP is just a faggot as usual. Now I would like to direct your attention to a more pressing matter at hand by doing what this anon requested >>14688378

>>14692134

The point is that it was not bullshit hard, you are just making that up. Try some 8 bit computers platformers if you want to know what bullshit difficulty looks like. As someone who played the game when it was new I never got the impression that it was hard, just pretty long for what I was used to in the genre. It wasn't until some years ago that I discovered this meme about Rayman 1 being impossible, and I suspect it's mainly being propagated by people who only tried playing it in recent times, especially if they come from Origins/Legends.

>Rayman 1 has cool, unique worlds

>Rayman 2 is all swamp levels

At least Origins is varied.

>>14692610

I assume he's complaining that you can't replay levels to grind for exp or money or some such resource. Which obviously is stupid seeing as it's a platformer game.

I'm a sucker for difficult 2d platformers. How difficult are Rayman Origins and Legends?

>>14694951

>How difficult are Rayman Origins

Starts out moderately hard, ends up being actually hard, the extras challenges and levels are a slight step above that but due to how the game flows once you're into that flow things come more easily to you.

>and Legends?

Easy as fuck, the extra content which is the hardest part of the game doesn't even compare to the endgame of origins.

>>14694951

Origins isn't all that difficult, aside from a few specific levels, including the last one. The bosses are fairly trial-and-error, though. Legends is much easier, overall, but it has a bunch of Origin's levels in it.

>>14695337

> but it has a bunch of Origin's levels in it.

Nerfed to shit in terms of difficulty

>>14694951

Real talk, Origins and Legends are legit piss easy.

Most levels are on a single cycle of hazards meaning if you could simply dodge one hazard keeping up the pace will have you avoid all the hazards.

If you play the time trials by the second world it becomes super obvious and offers a new checkpoint every 10-20 seconds so you're never really stuck anywhere.

>>14694951

They might be challenging single player, but for 2 player coop the whole game isn't hard.

If you want a hard platformer, play N++.

>>14679008

>Why do people like this series again?

Anti-Nintendo hipsters.

>>14681276

>PS1 version

>cut levels

>shit music

Disregard this nigger

>>14704833

>cut levels

Cut bullshit QTE mash-X-to-win bonus """levels""" more like.

>shit music

Fuck RIGHT OFF