Driven to succeed or exceed?

[shawnbo42]

So I've been playing Tomb Raider Anniversary lately. (I know, this is the CLASSIC forum, but this DOES apply, please read.) As I have been playing, I wonder, is it enough to just get past the level? (Which is basically what the game is designed for, more or less), or are you one of the people that has to die ten million times just to flawlessly accomplish every possible thing? I guess more or less this a poll, then. I would say for me it depends on the game. If it's something I am really into, then I will go all the way. If it's mediocre, I can't justify staring at the screen just to say, "Yeah, it took me 42 more hours to get the extra bonus credits WITH backgtound art at the end of the game." I know this is playing right along with the achievements on Xbox Live, etc., but I am talking about older systems here, so I feel that the classic forum is where this belongs. If anyone has any stories about the extra 10,000 deaths to score something, I'd be interested to hear about that too.

[zdan80]

I'll play the game until I'm not having much fun with it any more...whether I ever finish it or unlock 100% depends on the game.

[Rob2600]

Normally, I play a game and just try to get through it and enjoy it, but every once in a while, a game comes out that I really get into.

Some semi-recent examples of games I felt compelled to master:

1080 Snowboarding (Nintendo 64)
The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time (Nintendo 64)
Mischief Makers (Nintendo 64)
StarFox 64 (Nintendo 64)
Super Mario 64 (Nintendo 64)
Yoshi's Story (Nintendo 64)


Some not-so-recent examples of games I felt compelled to master:

Asteroids (Atari 2600)
Beany Bopper (Atari 2600)
Centipede (Atari 2600)
The Challenge of Nexar (Atari 2600)
Missile Command (Atari 2600)
Pac-Man (Atari 2600)
Vanguard (Atari 2600)

Blades of Steel (NES)
Goal! (NES)
The Legend of Zelda (NES)
Legendary Wings (NES)
Mega Man II (NES)
Mike Tyson's Punch-Out!! (NES)
Super Mario Bros. (NES)
Super Mario Bros. 2 (NES)
Super Mario Bros. 3 (NES)
Track & Field (NES)
Track & Field II (NES)

Batman Returns (SNES)
Donkey Kong Country 2: Diddy's Kong Quest (SNES)
F-Zero (SNES)
Pilotwings (SNES)
Super Castlevania IV (SNES)
Super Mario World (SNES)
Super Mario World 2: Yoshi's Island (SNES)

[Blitzwing256]

I loved playing through suikoden tactics more then any game in recent time (since maybe katamari damacy 1) to the point I did everything then realized, shit I can't ever get the hero from suikoden 4 or snowe in this save, so I bought suikoden 4 JUST to unlock those two charecters in tactics, and I know on that save I'll just have to do everything all over again.

its rare you find a game that good.

[LAGO]

I used to lvoe to jsut play the game. Complete it or not I would just have a blast. Thebn there came along this thing that stated whether or not you completed every little obstacle in a game. For a while I felt I wasn't truly beating a game unless I did every. single. thing.

I finally sat down and looked at it logically. Am I having fun doing this? Most of the time the answer is no. Am i trying to impress anyone? No. Now I jsut play the games until i'm finished. They are a lot more fun that way.

[Promophile]

I sorta have OCD so I feel like I have to complete everything. What really pisses me off is games where you CAN'T complete everything, or where you can miss things easily. Another pet peeve is games where you can collect files, books, or whatever, and it just gets added to the bottom of the "file" list, and is not sortable or in any specific order.

[Rob2600]

What really pisses me off is games where you CAN'T complete everything...

There are games like that? I remember certain things in Bomberman 64 were *almost* impossible to get, but a few people were able to do it.


Another pet peeve is games where you can collect files, books, or whatever, and it just gets added to the bottom of the "file" list, and is not sortable or in any specific order.

Which games? I want to know what not to play. :)

[Belmont]

I suppose that for most people driven to succeed, older games which have no real ending are the most frustrating. Especially since the levels only get faster with no other feature to distinguish them as higher levels.

[Rob2600]

I suppose that for most people driven to succeed, older games which have no real ending are the most frustrating. Especially since the levels only get faster with no other feature to distinguish them as higher levels.

Oh yeah, I totally forgot about older games for a minute. Those weren't about collecting items though, they were all about achieving the high score. I used to think those types of games would always be popular, but now there are hardly any.

[Promophile]

Which games? I want to know what not to play. :)

One of the games that dissapointed me the most in file collecting was Fable. As for games where you can't complete everything (or it's really really hard), Free-Roaming games such as the Elder Scrolls series take the cake. JP games seem to be better in general about having "orderly" or sortable inventories. Oh, another pet peeve, limited inventory space.

[Promophile]

I suppose that for most people driven to succeed, older games which have no real ending are the most frustrating. Especially since the levels only get faster with no other feature to distinguish them as higher levels.

Older games with no endings don't bother me much, but I've been known to close MAME when I die in a beat-em-up. Luckily, It's gotten to the point where I can beat most of em with 1 or 2 lives.

[AMG]

Depends on the game. Sometimes I'll go all out and get everything possible. Other times I'll just play a game to complete it.