Archived Discussion

This is discussion archived from a time before the current discussion method was installed.

Working Title: Kirby Type Game: From YKTTW

Tanto: Aside from being laughably subjective, this page needs a major rewrite so that it ceases to make my eyes bleed. I kind of like my eyes.

On second thought, I'm not certain there's anything of value here at all. What is this trope: "Some games have hard bosses and some don't"? That's not a trope; it's a happenstance, never mind that difficulty is highly variable depending on the player. I mean, Kirby bosses? Really?

On top of that, there's all sorts of variation between series and even games. Some Mega Man bosses are harder than their stage and some of them are easier than their stage. You can't say they go into one of the other.

Known Unknown: Glad to see you've retained your cheerful bedside manner, Tanto. Anyway, this is the kind of trope what would probably be hard to get unless you've experienced it, and it's hard to explain without examples.

Mario Type is what you can see in, say, Super Mario Galaxy. Mario has long had it's main difficulty come not from stomping on the enemy's head, but instead in complex platforming puzzles. The bosses, as a result, are usually seen a break from this: they usually are exceedingly simple compared to the rest of the game.

Kirby Type games are harder to explain, since Bosses are supposed to be hard by default. The difference is where a boss expects from you a level of skill far higher that the stages prepare you for. A good example would be certain fighting games. Fighting through the normal computer players usually takes an out-think approach, where they are straight fights, but then you're launched into an SNK Boss fight, where the boss is not just a normal character, but has specific advantages that it holds over you (such as Rugal having high range, high priority, and high damage, or Gill's suprisingly high speed and chip damage in addition to those traits). Compare, say, Abyss from the Marvel vs. Capcom fighting games, who, while powerful, has specific glaring weaknesses, or even Akuma, who is often merely an extremely smart computer opponent rather than a overpowered boss.

I hope I helped clear this up.

Tanto: It doesn't. I notice that you didn't actually answer any of my objections to this page (inherently subjective; loads of variation within series and individual games that makes such broad strokes unhelpful; I very much doubt that this, even if it exists, is anywhere close to being intentional).

You've rewritten the trope in different words, but it still has the same problems. It's too vague and too subjective.

Known Unknown: Well, ideally, it's not subjective at all, as for many of the more extreme examples, which make the trope, it's obvious that these effects exist (once again, bringing up Mario and SNK), which also transcends the nuances of specific series; regardless of what you play, it should be easy to see whether or not a boss you're fighting is much less of a challenge that the crazy stuff you had to do to get to him, or that a boss is unreasonably difficult given everything else the game gives you, though, again, the first is easier to gauge than the second.

Joshi: I'd argue that Kirby games really.. REALLY aren't "Kirby-type". The bosses are always exceptionally easy if you have the right ability, and that ability is almost always given to you in the level they're boss of, many times a mere room or two before the boss itself, and.. well, I'd say the Kirby games are either Mario-type or fairly well balanced, with bosses that are about as hard as their levels. Also, Paint Roller? Come on, he's a chump.