>Walking around the (presumably) intro area
>Doing alright, even though enemies are tough to kill and hit like a ton of bricks I learned dodging was better
>Get hit by a ball, -65% health
>Oh fuck I need health
>luckily there's a weak enemy a little walk to the right
>Go to pick up the health I desperately need
>Warp to pic related
>Didn't even get the health
I mean there could have been a trapdoor sprite or something. To fuck you with a dungeon that hard so early in the game is crazy.
>>3105626
Deadly Towers doesn't fuck around, if the manual is any indication.
>dungeon entrances are invisible
>so are entrances to a trapdoor parallel dimension
>so are the exits from that trapdoor parallel dimension
>dungeons consist of 200-something rooms
It's fucking insane, I love Zelda 1 but I don't know if I'm anywhere near hardcore enough to beat this game.
>>3105642
This game frequently shows up on "worst NES games" or "worst video games of all time" lists. For good reason, in my opinion. Though it's statements like that which only makes /vr/'s contrarianism shine, so have it guys. Convince me that Deadly Towers is fine and I'm just a pleb.
>>3105665
>For good reason, in my opinion
expand on that, please?
>>3105665
>>3105673
I mean its combat and general overworld layout is alright but it's the combination of enemies being bullet sponges that kill in 2 hits and the random dungeons that also just so happen to be the only places where you can shop for anything decent that bog it down. Especially since the dungeons way too damn big. I'm pretty sure all the zelda dungeons combined aren't as big as dungeon 1.
>>3105674
how or why is that considered extremely bad?
>>3105674
>Especially since the dungeons way too damn big
Do you map with pen and paper? On any game, I mean
>>3105693
I mean in terms of like enemy difficulty
If the rooms weren't jam packed with enemies that can sometimes hit you before you can even make any inputs then it wouldn't be nearly as bad.
>>3105708
>I mean in terms of like enemy difficulty
High, possibly even unfair difficulty makes a game bad?
>>3105713
Yes. Imagine if the early enemies in the legend of zelda took 15 hits before going down, and also did 2.5 hearts of damage. I doubt many people would consider it a masterpiece, even if the actual mechanics of the game have no issues. The balancing of statistics in a game is just as important as everything else in evaluating a game's worth, especially considering how much it can gimp a game if it's done wrong.
>>3105729
>Yes
You're certainly in the realm of opinion then, as that conclusion makes a lot of assumptions about what a game should be like.
>>3105739
A game should be fun, and like it or not, all of DT's problems suck of the fun right out of it for most people.
>>3105739
>>3105745
I mean it takes a lot for the game to enter the realm of bad
If it's not fun it's not necessarily a problem, because it then becomes about honing your skills to become better
It's when the game is so hard that it makes most players, even experienced ones, lose all motivation to play after pouring 10 hours into it while making seemingly no progress that it's fair to call it bad.
>>3105767
>argumentum ad populum
No, in this case my argument is valid because Deadly Towers is considered a shity and unfun game by literally most people. You clear on that? The consensus is in, and no amount of fancy terms that you learned in your college Logic class will change that.
>>3105775
>by literally most people
and it still means fuckall.
You explained though why you considered it bad. I don't agree with your reasoning, but I can follow it. So I suppose we're done.
how did lenar go from making so many mediocre games to making gunman's proof? that game kicks ass.
>>3105789
I'm curious. Do you genuinely like Deadly Towers? Like is it a game you'll pop into your system from time to time and just have a grand night to yourself? Or were you just playing devil's advocate?
>>3105802
haven't played it yet, but I consider the thread a recommendation. I like the idea that this game is going meta, not only requiring from the player the skills of a hero (as emulated through player character stats), but also the luck of a hero. Sure, many will fail, but when you do get through, you know you really did the impossible. It's not a game that's made to be played through, it seems. It's not a game to be "beat". It's a game that seemingly takes delight in crushing the player unless they have perfect luck on their side. Definitely not something for everyone, but certainly interesting.
>>3105810
You know we didn't even mention the low health bar and the crappy hit-detection. I don't say this with any malice, but seriously, drop what you're doing and go download a ROM of it and play it for a long as you can tolerate it. I'm 95% certain you'll be eating the words of any argument you were trying to make in this thread. The game just sucks, bro.
>>3105826
>low health bar
explain? Sounds like that'd be part of the luck deal.
>crappy hit-detection
That's indefensible. A game can be as hair or unfair as it wants to be, but violating its own ruleset is right out.
>>3105676
My favorite account of Deadly Towers comes from having read the Wikipedia page, which quotes a guy who I don't remember the name of. He simply put that Deadly Towers isn't necessarily a bad game, but it is a frustrating game, that it might be one of the most frustrating games on the system.
>>3106538
Good games don't frustrate you, at least not consistently.
>>3105626
This along with Micky Mousecapade were the first games we owned for the NES. A double dose of some of the hardest gaming that the NES had to offer. It's not a bad gake by any means and if you have infinite kid hours and paper to map dungeons, it's not so bad. You learn where the secret entrances are and which ones to avoid. (because they are too long or don't have exits or whatever)
Just remember the quest is to find the bells and burn them and know that you don't have to waste too much time in the dungeons and you'll be fine.
>>3105676
The problem is that everything is extremely samey, which when combined with the seemingly arbitrary invisible teleports and wraparound points makes mapping incredibly difficult. You will spend more time than anything wandering aimlessly looking for where to go.
The enemies are slow, but kill in two hits and take forever to kill, meaning you will spend lots and lots of time shooting stationary enemies over and over in order to grind out ludder to buy items which you desperately need.
Deadly towers is more about being lost and mindless grinding than actual gameplay or true exploration.
>>3105713
>High, possibly even unfair difficulty makes a game bad?
Yes. In fact that's precisely when hitherto good games get too big for their boots and piss all over everything.
Odd, I have always loved this game.
The first play thru was a chore but I learned then every time after the first I got faster and faster at it.
The only hang up is the first dungeon after that it gets so much easier.
