King of The Dragons (1991 Arcade/1994 Super Nintendo):

King of The Dragons (1991 Arcade/1994 Super Nintendo):

“Set out on a great adventure in a fantastical world to defeat Gildiss, the mighty Red Dragon, and save the kingdom from darkness!” – Steam

King of The Dragons is a fantasy beat-em-up that came to Super Nintendo in 1994 (As I remember it!), ported from the 1991 arcade game. It was just like playing a good hack-and-slash DnD game. I still remember a lot of the bosses, characters, the level design, and the great music that made it all unique and part of my formative DnD experience, even though it wasn't directly related to the DnD games. I just want to talk about it.

You start off by selecting your character who's on a quest to slay a dragon. There's a fighter, a cleric, a wizard, a dwarf, and an elf. The elf has the best range. The dwarf has the least range. The cleric is okay, and the wizard is a gamble, since with every level his attack spell, and thus range, also changes. Your weapons level up after every boss fight, but for some reason...I guess for the added challenge, you can also not pick up new weapons and let them disappear.

The first boss fight is the Orc Chieftain. He's got two chain whips and you have to stay in the middle of him while taking out baddies in the forest. Then, the Minotaur who charges every so often after swinging a giant axe. Then, the wyvern, who you attack in the sky, so if you don't have good range, you're just doomed unless you're really good at jumping attacks, or have a lot of magic. The hydra is pretty sneaky with it's multiple heads shooting different things out. I could go on, but really, all of the bosses are are so good, and tough. I usually die right before the giant spider on my own.

Later on, there's a cyclops, a giant spider, a dragon knight, a dark wizard, and of course, King of The Dragons, Glidiss. Each boss has its own trick to beat, but it can still be pretty tricky, if you waste a lot of health getting to them. Heck, I still can't beat the game on my own. But, a lot of the enemy designs, and level designs like spooky giant spiders in the forest, the cyclops who throws rocks, or the shifty mermen still influence many DnD campaigns today.

The settings and music are phenomenal for the 16-bit era. I feel like, in any beat-em-up, since you'll be attacking and doing the same things a lot, the sound can make or break the experience, and boy, does King of The Dragons go all out from the first level onward. Even the character select screen music feels like an epic quest, the level up sound “Wooo!” let's you know you just became more powerful, the magic screen-clearing lightning attacks or frog orbs that turn all your enemies into frogs (BOOM, BOOM, BOOM!) or (RIBBIT, RIBBIT!) feel satisfying and strong.

There are a few minor things I don't like about the game, but they're not deal-breakers. I still like it. I hate the slime enemies that capture you and drain your health. I hate the freeze spell that freezes you until you click really fast to get out of it. I hate the mimic treasure chests that bite you and you have to click really fast to get them off. Basically, I can never click fast enough to avoid them, and that always dooms me during a solo run. I do better as player two!

Despite all the annoying little enemies, it's still a great game, and its music, settings, and characters keep me coming back to it again and again to try to slay Glidiss. Taken together, all the good parts of the game make it an unforgettable experience of an epic DnD quest! Just make sure you pick the elf, in my opinion. Unless he's taken, then just pick the next best-ranged character. Check it out, if you can!

Liberty or Death (1993 SNES):

It's an American Revolutionary War Strategy Game! Well, Calling Liberty or Death a strategy game is a bit generous. It's much more a resource management game with a historical framework. Every move you make takes a certain resource, whether its food, gunpowder, or troops. The battle system is really limited. You move one square at a time, and troops need to be right next to each other to attack. For this reason, it doesn't hold up. I always wanted to like this game more than I actually do.

It's quite literally just whoever has the most things wins. For a historical game, I understand this. It puts the pressure on the players to launch quick and smart attacks, but the one move at a time mechanic really limits your paths to victory. For the British, you want to use your Navy to quickly cut off America from Europe, and capture Philadelphia, or the American General. (Washington)

Now, if you're the Americans, you want to seize Boston to cut off the English Navy immediately, and send delegates to Europe to gain support and allies. Just like Washington did. You can also capture the English General. (Cornwallis.) If you can gain enough support/denial for American independence by running newspapers and delegates to states, they can switch sides from the British to the American army or vice versa.

The resource management and delegate processes can actually be pretty fun, and it's always satisfying to gain support from such-and-such new state. However, the battle system is just tedious and not fun, when it should be the focus of the game, because you'll be doing it a lot. Like I said, everything moves one square, and everything has to be close up to attack. Even the guns. Add to this that you need to manage each resource before battle (Troops run out of food and powder.) and it makes the gameplay very dull...you'll have to use bayonets if you run out of powder, or the battle just ends if you don't have enough food.

In spite of this, I just thought I'd write about this weird historical strategy game because it had so much promise. Some of the resource management is fun! It's always fun to get new troops or new support. But, the part that should be fun, battling, isn't. If you don't end the game before 1800, the game ends with British victory automatically, and Thomas Gage becomes Lord Governor of the 13 Colonies. It's a shame then, that America only has a small path to victory. It's historical, but that also means it's limited.

Surprisingly, I thought the strongest point of the game was also it's biggest weakness...the music. The same 1-minute battle ditty plays on loop for every battle, which gets annoying when you're moving square by square. Now, during the resource management phases you get rousing midis with flute noises and drums, and even “The Star-Spangled Banner". An upbeat continenntal theme which calls America “The Land of Liberty and Justice” plays in the event of an American Victory.

Overall, “Liberty or Death” is a nice educational resource management game. There's sort of an idea of a strategy game there, but it falls flat and the most exciting parts quickly become the most tedious. I'd say unless you really like historical tactics games, you're better off skipping this one. It has some cool ideas though, as sort of a historical “what if?”. Unfortunately, as much as I want to wonder “What if the Spanish had helped American independence instead of France?” I just keep wondering “What if this game were more exciting?”

GAME ACCESSIBILITY REVIEW: SUPER METROID (SNES):

  As I was growing up, there were often games I’d watch my able-bodied twin play and consider inaccessible for myself. 1994’s Super Metroid was one such game. The game seemed to require quick reflexes for shooting and jumping I just didn’t have. It was a shame because Metroid seemed like it involved a lot of exploring (rare for side-scrollers, back then.) and looked like an amazing world.  The map is huge!

  Because of these 3 things, (rapid button pushing, huge map, dexterity issues.) I sort of avoided playing this game back in its prime. Which is why I was pleasantly surprised at how accessible and fun it is! Full disclosure: I use a walk-thru for some parts, but because I want a semi-1994 experience, I only use it when I’m stuck. I’m frequently grateful that walk-thrus exist; at the same time, it’s fun to explore the planet.

   Most of the advantage of Super Metroid’s accessibility comes from the fact that it is a 2D side-scroller, as were previous Metroid titles. What I mean is you can only move left and right, but by the same token, your enemies have the same limits, and from what I’ve seen, they don’t always move too fast or fill up the screen (like in Castlevania.)

   There are a few relics from the 90s, such as in-game save points. Also, buttons are readily re-mappable in the game’s start-up screen, but not in-game. Despite the ease and pace of the game, it is a massive labyrinth. I would say that’s it’s major setback for accessibility, but that’s easily overcome with modern technology. Also, I just can’t resist the game’s foreboding futuristic atmosphere, which seems inspired by Alien. Only replace Sigourney Weaver with the bounty hunter Samus Aran. Not that it effects accessibility but for a 16-bit game, the soundtrack and graphics are, well, super.

   In the modern gaming world, it’s hard to imagine a game as well balanced for a side-scroller. Since a major emphasis of the game is on exploring, I think, you don’t get mobbed. Or perhaps this is a processor limitation or something about the 16-bit era in general. The flipside to that of course, is probably the only reason it’s inaccessible. If it were ’94 still, I’d undoubtedly be lost and have no idea what to do; but since it’s not much of the frustration is removed.

   Modern side-scrollers tend to fill up the screen with enemies or move at breakneck speeds. So far as I can tell, there’s only one timed part of the game; the lab escape in the beginning of the game, but as the game lets you retry as many times as you like, (and that’s the beginning, so yes, you start at the beginning. Save points come a little later after you learn to use missiles.) it’s easy. Overall, I feel the game gives you time to figure out it’s platform-jumping and other logic puzzles. This is something sorely lacking in modern gaming, and also adds to the feel of isolation in the game.

     I’m glad I picked up this gem from the past again, and was happy to discover it wasn’t as inaccessible as I thought back then! But, it is a game of its time. Without modern walk-thrus, I might have never played it again. But, I do like that it moves the game along at a predictable speed, rather than blasting the player through the story with tons enemies and quick draw reflexes. These are the sins of the modern side-scroller (You can actually trace it back to Metal Slug…even Contra.) So, it’s nice to have a game that lets you take time. However, it’s probably because you’d get lost in pre-walkthru times! Double-edged sword.

    In conclusion, while exploration in Super Metroid can be tiresome, it’s still a good game and is well-paced enough to make it plenty accessible for me. There’s a good balance of logic and action, and it actually avoids most the things I thought would make it inaccessible. My 9-year-old self probably wouldn’t have liked it, but now I’m able to appreciate the game’s maze, especially because I have walk-thrus. More importantly, it’s me playing this time. Some games are worth a second look, especially when it’s through your own “alien” eyes.

FINAL GRADE: B-

ACCESSIBILITY GRADE: B (Well-paced action and logic puzzles. Re-mappable buttons. Screen is almost never cluttered. Enemies have predictable patterns.)

FORGIVENESS FACTOR: C (Fairly old-school; you get save points. That‘s it. A game of its time.)

 CONTROL: B (There‘s pretty much a 1:1 action/response ratio; the rest depends on what you’ve configured. )