Deadly Towers by Dragondarch in  

I don't think it's really meant to reference anything, it's just more funny because of the absurdity of the trap of having all your cash taken away from killing one seemingly innocuous creature.

It was an amazing run of def-defying skyscrapers

It’s not as bad as its sequel, Badass Bungalows.

Avgn lol

But the horses' diet is entirely fiber.

Even just getting rid of the knockback would have done wonders. This could have actually been a decent game with a little bit of polishing.

My top "great in theory, not so great execution" NES games would be Die Hard and...Battletoads :(

i mean, it's the closest to dark souls in 1987

You vicious bastard!

I watch this for his commentary in particular

MrEntaroadun ty

don't worry, speedrunners say that shit compulsively constantly all the fucking time always. i hate GDQ humor.

Calamitous Cabins

@@CheapJabroni no this game is just horrible

Truly the Dark Souls of videogames.

Dark Souls. The modern Deadly Towers.

I remember that one. Have you found it yet? I remember being so mad when I overwrote it with the equipment that could have two separate shots on screen.

Shady B no

It's called Dark Souls

hondragrid alot of games arent bad as people say they are. Its just people dont have patience. And start nitpicking every dumb thing, and give up. Before you know it, its the worst game ever to them.

Hooded Man here comes someone to prove my point.

pryt86 A lot of those things aren't dumb nitpicks. Most of them are extremely sour game design decisions. Kinda proves your point wrong, really.

I owned the game back then, as a child, and still own it today. I actually enjoy Deadly towers more then I enjoyed Zelda or Metroid. Sure the sword sucks at first but just like any Zelda or Metroid there are upgrades. The sames goes with armor. There are more armors in the game besides the ones you find. Just as an example you can see them in the shop in this playthough. This game suffers from, 'The internet says its bad, so it must be true' mentality just like Duke Nukem Forever is a mediocre game that is just labeled by the internet as bad and everyone plays along.

Actually Metroid had more than a few "death pits". If you're playing through the game without maps, chances are you're not finding the Varia anytime soon (if ever, it was absolutely possible to go through the entire game without certain items purely because you couldnt find them) due to the seriously screwy location it's in. So falling in lava is really bad. You take incredible amounts of damage from it if you dont have the Varia, and your movement and jumping gets all screwed up, so you're probably dead (in some specific spots, you're probably dead even WITH the Varia). Even if you have a bunch of energy tanks. There's also the area near the ice beam in Brinstar, which is basically a trollish trap: break though the bridge on the left instead of the bridge on the right in the blue bubble passage, and you fall into a pit from which there is no escape. There's no platforms anywhere in it, it's very deep (like, three or four full screens), and full of monsters. Oh, you could maybe use bombs to boost yourself back out, but just ONE mistimed bomb jump would drop you all the way back, or you'd just crash into monsters on the way up. Not to mention all of the hidden walls throughout the entire game that you *must* find and break in order to get through the game, which have no visual indications that they are there. You're going to be shooting and bombing random blocks for a long, long time. There were also some sections with really, really questionable (bad) design in them. Like the nasty vertical section in Kraid's area. I've seen plenty of ragequits from that one section alone. Or even the fabled "fake Kraid", which made no sense whatsoever from a design standpoint. I think alot of people look back on NES games (particularly the early ones) with rose-tinted glasses, and they forget that LOTS of them were cryptic, weird, nonsensical, and had a general lack of hints, yet plenty of rather cheap moments. It was the norm back then. Alot of players also forget that when they went through something like Metroid the first time, chances are, they had a guide. I dont know *anyone* that played through Metroid back then without a map. And the original Zelda had it's own issues too. It wasnt as cryptic with important items, but it still had alot of problems (and it WAS still cryptic enough that many players got stuck for a long time in various areas). These older games are very, very subjective on how "good" or not they are. I still personally love them though. Even some games that many see as "bad", I often really like. But then, I'm used to them. Notice I'm also not using the "git gud" arguement here. Dont get me wrong, there was a higher level of skill required for most games back then than there is nowadays, but most players were totally used to that. It was just normal back then, so nobody really complained. The idea of "git gud" wasnt a very intimidating one like it is today and the average player's skill level was just outright higher (by alot) than it is nowadays. Taking time to practice in games back then wasnt something people shied away from.

I use that phrase regularly. Especially at work in retail. "We discontinued that item. It moved at the speed of smell. Quick to arrive, but then it lingered forever."

Milon's Secret Castle is not bad

Wish you made you own opinions instead of AVGN or Game Chumps huh? Lmao