I used to think it was such an awesome game when I was little because of how hard it was but it's terrible playing it now. It's totally too hard for anyone to play, nevermind a child. The ending also sucks so hard. You fight a game that's so damn hard to not even have a worthwhile last boss fight.
Ironsword: W&W2 is the worst game EVER
- Thread starter davo1224
- Start date
ing earthly idea what to do in it. All of a sudden I'm a theif, then I'm wizard.
Strider Turbulence
Banned
I hated and loved the third one and was eventually able to finish the game on one life (and if I did lose it was on those stupid Wizard challenges). I only rented the second one a couple of times. It really helped to destroy my self confidence at the time.
MorbidAngel4Life
CAGiversary!
I'm in the minority here, I still enjoy the W&W games. Ironsword would be my favorite.
Survivor Charlie
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 1 (100%)
I actually didn't like Ironsword or W&W III at all.
But they still don't hold a candle to "StarTropics 2: Zoda's Revenge" in the horrible NES sequels department.
But they still don't hold a candle to "StarTropics 2: Zoda's Revenge" in the horrible NES sequels department.
DigitalSpace
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 2 (100%)
This was bad, but The Karate Kid was worse. And I didn't just watch The Angry Video Game Nerd's video on the game before saying that - I actually spent a buck on the cart and spent some time trying to play it. So far, I have yet to play a worse licensed game on the NES.
Survivor Charlie
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 1 (100%)
I think I'm pretty much the only person that doesn't think the Angry Nerd is funny. I must be missing something. Just watching him play the games, he sucks ass. Some of the stuff is just him doing the same mistake over and over again like a retard trying to figure his way out of a chinese finger trap then bitching about it.
Screw him. Yeah, picking on stuff like Back to the Future is one thing, but I still insist that the first TMNT on the NES was not THAT bad. Going after Castlevania 2 because it's too hard? What a newb. Simon's Quest totally holds up today.
Screw him. Yeah, picking on stuff like Back to the Future is one thing, but I still insist that the first TMNT on the NES was not THAT bad. Going after Castlevania 2 because it's too hard? What a newb. Simon's Quest totally holds up today.
I had it as a kid as well, and it was always pretty embarassing explaining how that Fabio game was the reason I had tooth marks in my controller.
edit: I totally agree that the Angry Nintendo Nerd was a little overly harsh about Castlevania 2. It wasn't that bad at all aside from annoying day/night transitions (just the slow text popup, really) and the occasionally nonsensical translation.
edit: I totally agree that the Angry Nintendo Nerd was a little overly harsh about Castlevania 2. It wasn't that bad at all aside from annoying day/night transitions (just the slow text popup, really) and the occasionally nonsensical translation.
Survivor Charlie
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 1 (100%)
Well, he was harsh on Castlevania but the thing that erked me was that he bitched about games being too hard. The TMNT review where he bitched that it was too hard to make certain jumps. He tried the same jump over and over and over again trying to get to a wedge of pizza. He kept jumping from the same spot and bitching that he couldn't do it. Instead of moving back and jumping from a different spot and trying to angle it right, he just kept making the same mistake.
I have no respect for him. It's people like him that are the reason games are so dumbed down today. [crotchy old man] In my days, games were challenging. They didn't have strategy guides and in a platform game you were punished for not being able to make a jump. In his review of Castlevania, he got upset that you fly backwards when you get hit by a badguy. Instead of killing the badguy before jumping to a platform. Well congrads Angry Video Game Nerd, these days Castlevania games are so simple my five year old nephew can tear through them in two days. Beating a video game used to be a badge of honor. Now, it's just an excuse to trade in the game at Gamespot for $45 less then what you paid for it. Stick with the modern stuff nerd, because you're too stupid to play the classics. [/crotchy old man]
I have no respect for him. It's people like him that are the reason games are so dumbed down today. [crotchy old man] In my days, games were challenging. They didn't have strategy guides and in a platform game you were punished for not being able to make a jump. In his review of Castlevania, he got upset that you fly backwards when you get hit by a badguy. Instead of killing the badguy before jumping to a platform. Well congrads Angry Video Game Nerd, these days Castlevania games are so simple my five year old nephew can tear through them in two days. Beating a video game used to be a badge of honor. Now, it's just an excuse to trade in the game at Gamespot for $45 less then what you paid for it. Stick with the modern stuff nerd, because you're too stupid to play the classics. [/crotchy old man]
Ironsword sucked in comparison to the first one, but I don't think it was THAT bad. Especially compared to some of the complete crap that got churned out on the NES back in the day (especially licensed games from movies and such).
I actually played through a lot of it again about a year ago, but I got stuck at the end of the fire board without enough magic so I just quit.
I actually played through a lot of it again about a year ago, but I got stuck at the end of the fire board without enough magic so I just quit.
[quote name='Survivor Charlie']Well, he was harsh on Castlevania but the thing that erked me was that he bitched about games being too hard. The TMNT review where he bitched that it was too hard to make certain jumps. He tried the same jump over and over and over again trying to get to a wedge of pizza. He kept jumping from the same spot and bitching that he couldn't do it. Instead of moving back and jumping from a different spot and trying to angle it right, he just kept making the same mistake.
I have no respect for him. It's people like him that are the reason games are so dumbed down today. [crotchy old man] In my days, games were challenging. They didn't have strategy guides and in a platform game you were punished for not being able to make a jump. In his review of Castlevania, he got upset that you fly backwards when you get hit by a badguy. Instead of killing the badguy before jumping to a platform. Well congrads Angry Video Game Nerd, these days Castlevania games are so simple my five year old nephew can tear through them in two days. Beating a video game used to be a badge of honor. Now, it's just an excuse to trade in the game at Gamespot for $45 less then what you paid for it. Stick with the modern stuff nerd, because you're too stupid to play the classics. [/crotchy old man][/quote]
Wait a sec. On his defence Castlevania 2 was too cryptic. He was right on that respect and the fact that the day to night transitions were horrid, and the lack of bosses in certain mansions, although it was still a really good game. But one thing i can't agree on is how he tore A nightmare on Elm Street, and Friday the 13th. He seemed to have misled the gamers saying that the game was so bad without giving a really valid reason. I mean, the gameplay itself [on Friday the 13] wasnt the best, but it was still pretty good. The collsion detection was nice, and it required you to use some strategy in placing your counselors to the areas that would be more effective for them. It was not a bad game at all, despite it's flaws.
And as for Nightmare on elm street, sure it was slightly cryptic, in the respect of you couldn't figure out what you had to do at first, but it wasnt in the level of Castlevania 2, where basically nothing was given (except maybe one or two clues where you had to literally buy a strategy guide in order to know where to go). It was a decent [at best] platformer, not really original, but it's not like it takes away from the gameplay.
Anyway, back on topic. I rather liked Ironsword: W&W2. Had alot of challenge that was abundant on the NES. Sure the sword was puny, and there were alot of enemies who bombard you with attack after attack, but what great NES game didn't have that element at the time? People seemed to defend the original TMNT despite the fact it had alot of similarities to the W&W games. Heck, the final Stretch in TMNT (in the Technodrome, right before you fought the ridiculously easy Shredder), was torture when it came to the respawning enemies. They were not merciful, and you had to deal with having to take damage and using almost all your Turtles.
I have no respect for him. It's people like him that are the reason games are so dumbed down today. [crotchy old man] In my days, games were challenging. They didn't have strategy guides and in a platform game you were punished for not being able to make a jump. In his review of Castlevania, he got upset that you fly backwards when you get hit by a badguy. Instead of killing the badguy before jumping to a platform. Well congrads Angry Video Game Nerd, these days Castlevania games are so simple my five year old nephew can tear through them in two days. Beating a video game used to be a badge of honor. Now, it's just an excuse to trade in the game at Gamespot for $45 less then what you paid for it. Stick with the modern stuff nerd, because you're too stupid to play the classics. [/crotchy old man][/quote]
Wait a sec. On his defence Castlevania 2 was too cryptic. He was right on that respect and the fact that the day to night transitions were horrid, and the lack of bosses in certain mansions, although it was still a really good game. But one thing i can't agree on is how he tore A nightmare on Elm Street, and Friday the 13th. He seemed to have misled the gamers saying that the game was so bad without giving a really valid reason. I mean, the gameplay itself [on Friday the 13] wasnt the best, but it was still pretty good. The collsion detection was nice, and it required you to use some strategy in placing your counselors to the areas that would be more effective for them. It was not a bad game at all, despite it's flaws.
And as for Nightmare on elm street, sure it was slightly cryptic, in the respect of you couldn't figure out what you had to do at first, but it wasnt in the level of Castlevania 2, where basically nothing was given (except maybe one or two clues where you had to literally buy a strategy guide in order to know where to go). It was a decent [at best] platformer, not really original, but it's not like it takes away from the gameplay.
Anyway, back on topic. I rather liked Ironsword: W&W2. Had alot of challenge that was abundant on the NES. Sure the sword was puny, and there were alot of enemies who bombard you with attack after attack, but what great NES game didn't have that element at the time? People seemed to defend the original TMNT despite the fact it had alot of similarities to the W&W games. Heck, the final Stretch in TMNT (in the Technodrome, right before you fought the ridiculously easy Shredder), was torture when it came to the respawning enemies. They were not merciful, and you had to deal with having to take damage and using almost all your Turtles.
Survivor Charlie
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 1 (100%)
What's wrong with Rambo? It wasn't that bad.
bread's done