Work In Progress: "Bentley Bear: Crystal Quest"

[Koopa64]

Wow, this game might actually be a solid reason to dig out my 7800.

[Atarifever]

Wow, this game might actually be a solid reason to dig out my 7800.

I have a good reason: The Atari 7800. You should dig your Atari 7800 out so that you can play your Atari 7800. That's a very sound reason all the time.

[AtariBrian]

Wow, this game might actually be a solid reason to dig out my 7800.

you buried it?

[Metal Ghost]

Really enjoying the game so far. As usual, you're a 7800 virtuoso Bob! Had to skip Crazy Brix in order to cut down on my gaming expenditures, but can't wait to put this cart next to my Failsafe and Pac-Man Collection carts. I hope you're been thinking about a box Marc!!

[KevinMos3]

I might let frustration show in this post, so pardon me if I do...

Also, don't respond after reading just part of this post. I'm not looking for flames.

 

 

 

Let me preface this by saying I don't totally suck at video games. In fact, I was playtesting the Super Mario clone on the 2600 yesterday and I can play all the way through without a continue, so I'm no stranger to platformers.

 

I haven't spent time playing this in quite a while (about when the witch boss was first introduced) and I'd only really played on prosystem, which for some reason I could never get to work with save-states of this game. I used to make it to the witch boss at the end of the first world, but could never beat her. I played it quite a bit last night on the Xbox emulator (based on MESS) so I would have save-states and a comfortable controller that I'm very used to. All I wanted to do was cuss. I eventually put it down because I was just too frustrated. I found the warp in the 1st world which is the only way I've ever made it to the 2nd world (because of the witch boss).

 

I ended up using save-states CONSTANTLY in the 2nd world and eventually made it to the witch boss. I'd never beaten her before on prosystem, but always thought I'd have an easier time of it if using a gamepad. Man, was I wrong! I have a save-state right at the beginning of the encounter and still could not beat her. I ended up using a save-state after every time I would get a couple of hits in (and then die), and I ended up running out of time! After about 40 more tries of this (not kidding), I finally said "forget it." All I could think of to express how I felt was WTF?!? (and I don't even cuss, btw).

 

I really want to like this game. I've been anxiously looking forward to it since Bob showed his first screenshot. But, this is far harder than Scrapyard Dog. I was at least able to beat that one with just a few save-states. So let me ask... WTF?!? ...and follow up with D*MN! And some people actually wanted limited continues? They're insane. In terms of difficulty, this game is definitely no Super Mario and certainly no Wonder Boy, both series of which have respectable difficulty, but are still doable and fun. I realize I may get tomatoes thrown at me at this point, but might I kindly request: Bob, please tone down the difficulty?

 

At this point, it's one of those games that I'll only want to play with save-states and only if I'm in the mood for serious punishment. This is definitely not how I wanted to feel about this, and I'm sure it's not what Bob was going for... so what happened? Have some of the punishment gluttons steered Bob toward a game that is definitely out of reach for less-than-totally-hardcore gamers (which as I mentioned, I don't even consider myself to be a casual one)? Or, am I just totally missing something that makes this game much easier? I ask this with all seriousness, because I hope it's the latter. In fact, I would prefer if I feel totally embarrassed by this post in the near future because I just didn't realize something. Seriously. Maybe a gameplay video of someone totally owning this game would help?

[Jinks]

I played this on the wii and yeah the witch boss at least 40-50 tries and I can play mario almost anything through a complete world without dying.

Alot of the deaths in BB is due to the insane jumps you would only see in smb 2 on the last levels and the timings of jump/shooting/need of all powerups. That combined with the fast enemny movement makes BB pretty tough.

I also wonder if some people find this game easy for them and a playthru. Hell look at the guys on hsc that live on the 7800 with there scores looks like they can finish waterski. where 98% of the people can not make it past section one ever.

[DracIsBack]

But, this is far harder than Scrapyard Dog.

 

Wow - I'm a little afraid of what lies ahead. I too am finding it tough, but a lot of it is getting used to the controls. I didn't really like Wonderboy's controls either.

 

SCRAPYARD DOG had some really bitchy moments in spots vs. the game being overall hard. A couple of the jumps were literally down to the pixel and I hated that. And the ending. But generally I didn't find the game that hard.

[spiffyone]

That's actually exactly what I am trying to do here. If you saw the 'Wonderboy on the 7800' thread, Spiffyone (I gave him credit in the rolling credtis on the title screen) mentioned that Bentley could have been Atari's mascot like what you mentioned above. That was the partially the reason (along with me wanting to do a sidescroller) I even started this.

 

Wow...really?

 

That's awfully nice of you. Thanks.

 

I haven't been able to play the more recent updates (my primary laptop wigged out on me a bit, and I'm using a netbook right now , but I am dipping my feet back into Linux distros with the most recent Ubuntu and Joli OS, which I am really enjoying so far , but, regardless, this little thing's Atom isn't going to be my go-to for games). From what I have played of the previous versions of the game, however, I liked what I experienced.

 

That said, I do have to agree somewhat with the opinions pertaining to difficulty, but I am split as to whether it's a "bad" thing or a "good" thing (the difficulty being as high as it is, I mean). On the one hand, I like the fact that it's high because, hey, that's the Atari Way (it was all about getting as far as possible and high scores, after all), but on the other hand I wonder about accessibility being a sticking point for some players, and dampening the experience for them. I'm sure you've already had this internal debate with yourself, though.

 

All in all, though, I really liked what I saw/played. When I proposed the idea, I was thinking of it being a somewhat modified Wonder Boy clone (ala NES' Adventure Island), but it reminds me of a mix of that game with a small bit of NES action games like, say, Ninja Gaiden (with the high amount of enemy encounters, more constant combat action, etc.).

 

Speaking of which:

 

Ninja Golf Gaiden. Get on it ASAP after this one. Think Ninja Gaiden, but with the Ninja Golf ninja, and instead of swinging his sword, he swings his golf club. It's gold I tell ya...GOLD!

[spiffyone]

Wow - I'm a little afraid of what lies ahead. I too am finding it tough, but a lot of it is getting used to the controls. I didn't really like Wonderboy's controls either.

 

SCRAPYARD DOG had some really bitchy moments in spots vs. the game being overall hard. A couple of the jumps were literally down to the pixel and I hated that. And the ending. But generally I didn't find the game that hard.

 

My problem with Scrapyard Dog is that it could've been more than it was. I can't be the only one who played the game's second area and thought to myself that it would be really cool if some of those doors the player can knock on actually led to something (NPC conversations or even other areas). I really think Scrapyard Dog should've been the 7800's answer to side scrolling action/adventure games (or action/RPGs) like Wonder Boy III: The Dragon's Trap, Castlevania II (which was a good idea hampered by sucky design decisions), and the like. Maybe that was part of the developer's intentions (those doors really do feel like an idea that was going to go somewhere) but they couldn't implement all they hoped due to budgetary issues (like, say, not getting the go-ahead to have a much larger ROM capacity).

[KevinMos3]

Well, I'm glad to hear I'm not the only one who has a problem with the difficulty -- but at the same time, I kinda wish it was just me. Here's where I'm coming from on that: I'm almost certain it's not Bob's intent to make the game this difficult. After all, it is kinda the new 7800 mascot and flagship game at this time, so I wouldn't think the goal would be to make it so difficult that it turns off the average gamer.

 

Here's what I suspect has happened, (and I may be asking for more tomatoes here): The programmer is likely to be pretty good at his own game because of knowing where things are and all the playtesting. That happens with me when I work on a hack (mastery of Double Dragon is a good example). So, I think the programmer partially relies on the community to let him know if a game is too difficult, not difficult enough, just right, etc. However, it seems some of the more vocal people are those who are insane... such as the ones wanting limited lives in John's "Get Lost!" Are you kidding? John rightly pointed out that his best game cost him 109 lives!

 

Couple that with the fact that not many people want to criticize a homebrew game. I know I certainly don't want to say anything that might be received as critical by Bob or any other programmer. I just want to tell them how great their games are... because I and everyone else appreciates the work they do. It's a tremendous labor of love and when you see something like this come along -- something we've wanted to see for 25 years -- I know I certainly only want to say how much I love it... and that's almost the only thing you see in these threads. "You're game is awesome!"... and on and on.

 

I was extremely frustrated when I made the previous post, but I let myself post anyway partly because I knew if I let myself cool down, I would probably never say anything. Even if it were to start a flame war (which thankfully it didn't), I figured it was something that needed to be said. Especially, if there's a silent majority like there usually is. Bob has put WAY too much work into this game for it to be released and people be turned off by the difficulty. I really believe the current difficulty is something for an Advanced or Super Insane Expert mode and that it needs to be toned down considerably for the general public. I know I want to enjoy this game without having to surgically implant a 7800 into my body to get good enough at it. The game should be fun. I want to have fun when playing it. The other day I was having no fun at all. Other than appreciating the graphics, it was a tense and miserable time. Unfortunately, this will cause me to never play it as-is. It will just sit in my collection along with Fight Night. This game deserves better. Bob deserves better.

[Atarifever]

Wow...really?

 

That's awfully nice of you. Thanks.

 

I haven't been able to play the more recent updates (my primary laptop wigged out on me a bit, and I'm using a netbook right now , but I am dipping my feet back into Linux distros with the most recent Ubuntu and Joli OS,

 

Hey no way! A week or so ago I broke out the old netbook again and put Ubuntu 12.04 on here. I'm typing on it right this second. This 4 year old netbook has no business running it, but it does an ok job. Even stressed as it is, it's still more functional than our fairly new Dell running Windows 7. It's like "hey my Mom visited us and used it to check Facebook, now it has "Mywebsearch," "ask.com" and a virus." Way to go Windows. Man am I happy to have some Linux again. My wife can keep the freaking Windows thing all to herself from now on. Except maybe when I need to Team Fortress. Because even when Linux Steam is up, I doubt this thing will be up to it.

 

In the end, I think I'll put DSL or Kolibri on here before I send it out to pasture.

[108 Stars]

@KevinMos3

 

Well spoken.

I know I felt hard pressed to ensure Bob understands I like the game when I was critisizing it; it is difficult with homebrews, but constructive criticism is important.

 

I have downloaded an 7800 emulator for Xbox to try out the latest build (I hate playing on a PC), so I'm looking forward to see how I do with the game. Generally I agree, such a game that should be like Atari's mascot game must appeal to average gamers, not just pros.

[Trebor]

@KevinMos...Going by Bob's post here:

http://www.atariage....75#entry2575485

 

Unlimited continues will remain in the game. IMHO, if Bob were to allow an easier setting to this game, I believe the number of continues should be limited as well to go along with that easier setting.

 

Using the comparison of a game like Super Mario Bros. it did not allow unlimited continues. IMHO, I do not find the game to be a tense and miserable time, just challenging in some areas. However, I completely respect your and others opinion about the game. Heck, I know there is some games people love that I have little to no fun with playing.

 

My main point is what I said earlier:

 

Current Difficulty = Unlimited Continues.

Easier Setting = Limited Continues.

 

Hopefully, both settings can co-exist. Understanding the need to not want to turn off people due to frustration, but at the same time, making the game too easy or less challenging coupled with unlimited continues will diminish the playability and fun factor in the other direction. Sort of like the "Teddy Bear" setting in Ms. Pac-Man on the 2600.

 

Thinking about it again, perhaps three different settings:

 

'Easier' Difficulty with Limited Continues. [Normal setting]

'Current' Difficulty with Unlimited Continues. [Hard setting]

'Current' Difficulty with Limited Continues [Extreme setting]

 

Maybe the 'Easier' Difficulty just halves (quarters?) the speed of all the enemies and any moving platform from its current setting.

 

Edit...If possible and to perhaps really appeal "to all" if still a concern, then Bob may be able to add this too:

 

'Easier' Difficulty with Unlimited Continues [Easy setting]

Edited October 9, 2012 by Trebor

[+swlovinist]

I like the idea of having some options for difficulty in the game. That way skilled players can challenge themselves, and other gamers who just want to play the game can do so. Win Win.

[Atari2008]

This game looks super awesome!!! I didn't realize the 7800 has such power, makes me regret having sold mine.

[gorfcadet]

Mario had unlimited continues. Hold A button when pressing start. I don't think I ever used it after the age of 10, but it was there.

 

I think the difference in BB and SMB is the difference in reactionary gameplay and memorization intensive reactionary play. SMB isn't to intense that a good player can't compensate for new patterns and situations, BB does require a bit of memorization to compensate for mid jump situations and quick enemies. In that way it gives me a Ghouls and Ghosts like experience where I end up playing tiny segments repeatedly to perfect my approach to that area. Not a knock btw.. I love games like GnG. That was just my take to it... very much an Adventure Island style game with GnG undertones in terms of difficulty.

 

Very excited to play it on a cart on my actual tv!

[108 Stars]

Diffculty adjustment is a very problematic task I imagine.

 

Generally, the goal should be to have the player get into it relatively easy; let him win the first level or so at first try if he doesn't suck completely. The player should feel like he was good, so he has a positive experience at first.

 

Then you can slowly raise the difficulty level up to a truly challenging final level.

 

Peter Molyneux once said video games in the old days often made the mistake of giving the player a true challenge; but it is not the challenge most players seek, it is the feeling of being good at the game. I believe this is true; that said, the Atari crowd here is used to the challenging games, so it is relative depending on the audience.

 

Also I am guessing that most guys here are not visiting school anymore, have jobs and families and only limited time for gaming; if the game is too hard and requires too much practise there is a chance it will collect dust on a lot of shelves. When I work on a homebrew, I hate it when people buy my game but nobody ever seems to even see the later parts of it.

 

Maybe you should divide the game into three phases mentally; the first levels are for novices (fun that does not require much), the ones in the middle for intermediate players (good reflexes become important), and the last third gets challenging (parts that require most likely some memorization). As it is now it just starts off too difficult, and if you immediately punish players in the first levels they will give up quickly I think. Give them some endorphines before kicking them in the face.

[CPUWIZ]

Someone should make a coin-box for joystick port 2, that can not be opened by anyone but Bob. There are your continues.

[Atarifever]

Peter Molyneux once said video games in the old days often made the mistake of giving the player a true challenge; but it is not the challenge most players seek, it is the feeling of being good at the game.

Hey, that's a popular idea in education right now too. Kids don't want to be challenged; they want to feel good. I work in a College. I once had a student who didn't know the difference between the words "had" and "ad." In their local dialect, they drop the beginning "h" on most words. They hadn't read enough to figure it out. They were in post secondary. I used to TA in University. I had one student write a word then put in brackets something like "I think thats' how i'ts spellet LOL " I kid you not.

 

A friend of mine in Universtiy gave a student a zero. The student said "Miss. You gave me a zero on my assignment." She said "yes, because you didn't do your assignment." The student said "yeah I know Miss, but a zero!?"

 

There's a lot to be said for challenge. A feeling of achievement built on nothing leads to nothing. That's probably why most forums for modern games aren't worth visiting, and Atariage is the beautiful place it is.

 

I'm not saying in this case the game isn't too challenging. Just that I think Mr. Molyneux and his kind are producing a generation of videogame wussies.

[KevinMos3]

@Atarifever: I wholeheartedly agree with you about the nerfing of our culture; but to be fair, academia, work, etc. really can't/shouldn't be compared to gaming. After all, I game to relax and have fun after those.

 

edit: ...just TMI... I don't shy away from challenges. But for me, gaming should be fun... and there can be hard modes for those who like extra challenge. Everybody's happy.

Edited October 10, 2012 by KevinMos3

[Atarifever]

@Atarifever: I wholeheartedly agree with you about the nerfing of our culture; but to be fair, academia, work, etc. really can't/shouldn't be compared to gaming. After all, I game to relax and have fun after those.

 

edit: ...just TMI... I don't shy away from challenges. But for me, gaming should be fun... and there can be hard modes for those who like extra challenge. Everybody's happy.

I'm only half-heartedly making the comparison. It's mainly that Peter Molyneux said it that gets me worked up. The man has become the poster child for "too easy" games with his bread crumb trails and "can't lose" battle system. Which is aggravating, as his early (and famous) stuff was really, very hard. Heck, succeeding at Theme Park wasn't even easy. Now he's saying games back from his best days were too hard, and his modern efforts are better. I'd reverse that.

[108 Stars]

Okay, I have played as far as I could using about a dozen continues.^^

 

A few thoughts crossed my mind why this game is so damn hard (and it is):

 

The enemies come at you at a fast pace. You come from the left, and all enemies run from right to left till they leave the screen. You are under attack, you don't have time to think.

Possible Solution: Most jump' n runs have the majority of enemies patrolling a limited area. You can stand and watch them move, understand their patterns and then decide to move forward.

 

The puppets or skeletons or what they are are especially annoying; they are fast, they can jump over any obstacle or even out when you think they fell into a small pit. They don't really seem to jump sometimes, but rather float up. Enemies should have some flaw that you can exploit; like this one could need some time to power up for a high jump or so.

 

The rocks on the ground are a problem; they cost you time if you touch them. But they are rather big, so Bentley can't jump over them easily; at least in my case I always had to run and jump to make it. Sometimes there are several of those rocks AND enemies to take care of once you jumped the first rock or so. One time I remember there is a pit just a bit beside the last of a row of rocks, and since you have to run and jump there's a pretty good chance you may fall into the pit because you have too much momentum.

Maybe they could be placed in lesser numbers, or just made a bit smaller. Or just jumping on them is penalized, but not walking against them.

 

The "life" meter irritated me because the game features one-hit-deaths. Maybe you should rename it "Time" instead, because that's what it really is. Or, on that matter you could let Bentley take two or three hits before he dies.

 

When I continue my game, I must pick up my throwing rocks again. I'd suggest abandoning that completely, and just equip Bentley with his rocks to begin with. It really has little point, as you find the rock just where you start, but if you take the time to look where you are in some situations enemies are already coming at you, leaving you no time to retrieve the rocks. Or it's next to something you mustn't touch or so. It's just a gameplay element that adds nothing imo and can sometimes be annoying.

 

Enemies that take multiple hits: Make those a rare occasion in the first half of the game. The point where I gave up was where I jumped over a pit, and a swarm of bees would attack me from top (maybe it's no bees but a graphics bug with the old emulator, I mean the enemy that comes flying). Normally I run right to get some distance so the bees can get lower and I can have a good aim. In this case two Zombies were waiting to the right; each one taking 4 hits. So I could not just run right to be ready for the bees but would have to kill the Zombies first; didn't manage to do so. That was in the 7th stage or so.

 

 

These were just my thoughts; I am no pro in jump' n runs, but born in 1981 I am part of the generation that grew up when the jump' n run craze was big, so I played a lot of them, and Bentley right now is definitely way on the difficult side of the genre. The major gripe for me is the relentless enemy attacks I think, I really prefer having the enemies walk forth and back in patterns most of the time instead of having to defend yourself from enemy rushes.

 

Hope you can adjust the game so everyone's happy; I'm just trying to be constructive because this has potential, I don't even have a 7800 myself.

[Jetboot Jack]

I'm not saying in this case the game isn't too challenging. Just that I think Mr. Molyneux and his kind are producing a generation of videogame wussies.

 

Hahaha - I'll be sure to tell Peter that!

 

There was always a running joke at Lionhead that Peter's ideal game was just a screen with 2 buttons - "WIN and LOSE" and you clicked on the one you wanted!

 

But in all seriousness game balancing is EXTREMELY difficult, cannot be systematised easily, and if often a factor of perceived challenge vs actual challenge.

 

I favor the approach often cited by the likes of Raph Koster that a meaningful sense of challenge is derived from a learning curve that promotes learning, using and mastery of a mechanic in clean tests of skill before challenging the player combinatorialy and with complexity.

 

sTeVE

[Atarifever]

 

I favor the approach often cited by the likes of Raph Koster that a meaningful sense of challenge is derived from a learning curve that promotes learning, using and mastery of a mechanic in clean tests of skill before challenging the player combinatorialy and with complexity.

 

sTeVE

 

I think I agree with all of that. I think the ideal 2 "modern" games that demonstrate a perfect understanding of difficulty are Portal and TF2. In Portal everything builds in such a gradual fashion that your increasing skill both fits the story and leads to actual feelings of accomplishment. And importantly, the difficulty is never cheap. In TF2 the balancing on servers, the number of types of goals, the differences in play styles between the classes, and the number of maps allows anyone to find a combination that allows them to be challenged as they get better, without ever playing in ways that aren't fun.

 

I think examples of perfect difficulty in classic games are easy to come by. These games were often designed to be played for quarters, which meant they had to start off slow enough to bring you in, build quickly enough to end your games to increase revenue, but be fair enough to reward more skill with more play. The business model itself required a good difficulty curve for almost any successful game (barring spectacle games like the Laser Disk games that kept you playing just to look at them).

[108 Stars]

they had to start off slow enough to bring you in, build quickly enough to end your games to increase revenue, but be fair enough to reward more skill with more play.

 

That's it basically.

I would generally make the difficulty rise a little slower than in many arcade games though, because with Bentley Bob does not require players to die to do good business, and the players here at AA will have less time and dedication to practice than the kids back in the day; but overall the easy enough beginning and gradually growing challenge is what is essential for motivation. Both too hard and too easy can be demotivating.