Shaq-Fu: unfairly attacked?

[Gabriel]

 

Everybody has a game they like but a lot of other people hate. For me, it's Bugs on the 2600 and Bubsy 3D.

 

Warpspeed. I need to get a new copy of that one.

[Gabriel]

Shaq-Fu is not that bad. I think most people attack it because of Shaq being in it.

 

It's a marketing/personality tie in as well as being tangentially sports related. Traditional gamer sorts do tend to get riled up about such things.

 

It's one of those things which strikes me as funny that trad-gamers get all pissed off about advertising and real world celebrities being inserted into games for "crass commercial purposes", but they have no problem with sports games made around Mario franchise characters where there's constant product placement of gameboys and not so subtle comments about how you should buy all Nintendo products.

 

Isn't there a Shaq-Fu RPG somewhere out there? I bet that thing is AWESOME!!!1111

[Gabriel]

Lately it seems that there's this weird movement to like video games that are universally labeled as bad, like E.T. (oh man, you can seriously injure some buttholes around here by badmouthing the allmighty E.T.).

 

It's hardly a recent thing. I've never thought E.T. or Pac-Man on the 2600 were bad. I think both are actually pretty fun to play. This isn't a recent decision I made. I had the same opinion when I first played them back in 1981/82.

 

Is ShaqFu that bad? If given a choice between Ballz and ShaqFu would you really choose Ballz? I don't personally know.

 

better than TMNT Tournament Fighters, or Samurai Shodown?

 

I used to like the SNES version of TMNT:TF. I haven't played it in ages. As for Samurai Showdown, I've owned the SNES version for years. I played it again here recently, and it was pretty naff. I'd play a lot of things before I'd play Samurai Showdown (any version) again.

[jboypacman]

All i remember is when i worked for Electronic Boutique years ago that we had a promotion running that if you bought any two Electronic Arts games you got a free copy of Shaq Fu.

 

After a while it was down to one Electronic Arts game and you got a free copy of Shaq Fu and then we were just given it away with purchase of any thing in the store or even if you came in the store to browse.

 

Guess what? We could give this game away to people! And am not kidding when i say this i had people throw this game back at us behind the store counter.

[Gabriel]

Weaponlord? I liked that game! It was brilliantly complex, and had actual REPLAY value. Man, I still recall trying to remember all the moves each character had. It was just a little ahead of it's time, really. It was also released on the Genny, so it still gets a comparison to Shaq-Fu, and WL takes a giant steamer all over S-Fu in that respect, as it's a FAR superior game.

 

I HATED Weaponlord. I got my Genesis copy of it when Blockbuster was clearing out 16bit games. They were having a deal where the games were $5 each and if you bought one you got another free. Even if I look at the cart as having been free, I still wasted my money.

 

It was one of the ugliest and most poorly animated games for the Genesis. Half the time it was impossible to tell what the jumble of two toned pixels were doing. I think each stage used something like 7 colors total (grey, purple, and red featuring heavily). The control was absolutely awful, and half the time didn't do anything.

 

I recall getting one of the overkill/fatalities/whatever to work once. I literally could not tell what was going on. There was some movement, some pixels swirling around, some red appearred, another pixelly blob flew up into the air and the other pixels on the ground bumped up against it. Then there were some more red pixels and that was it.

 

I assume the characters were humanoids. I really couldn't tell by their in-game representations.

 

Even as absolutely ugly, unplayable, and absolutely horrible as it was, Ballz was still about a million times worse.

[Gabriel]

This game's worst crime is that it killed Delphine Software dead. The development team was also responsible for Flashback, but do you think anyone remembers that game? No... it's all about Shaq Fu now.

 

Yep, this is one people should be talking about.. A timeless classic, for sure. It's sad how games like this are so easily forgotten.

 

That's interesting. I didn't know that.

 

My memory of Flashback (and Out of This World) was as games which were always heavily promoted but that no one gave a rat's ass about. I remember renting both and thinking they sucked ass. That was basically the standard reaction.

 

But the games were always being promoted as the NEXT BIG THING, even though no one was biting.

 

So, it doesn't surprise me to realize they were the ones behind Shaq Fu. It was marketed in exactly the same way. And just like Flashback, no one gave a damn. The difference is that the company producing the game actually thought it would sell NEXT BIG THING numbers.

[Gabriel]

Eternal Champions.

Ballz.

Rise of the Robots.

Double Dragon v.

World Heroes.

Time Killers.

JLA task force.

Brutal.

Primal Rage.

Pit Fighter.

 

I haven't understood the recent hate for JLA Task Force. That one started appearring on "worst of" lists about a year or two ago out of the blue.

 

Even though I'm not too fond of the Genesis version of Eternal Champions (I vastly prefer the CD version), it definitely doesn't belong in the company of Rise of the Robots or Ballz. I'd say it's an average fighting game, not good, not bad, just a relic of the era.

 

Pit Fighter is pretty hip to hate on. I remember people lined up to the door of the arcade to play that game. The Genesis version of the game was always rented out at the rental stores and always sold out at game dealers. It's stupid, but it was liked once upon a time.

[Gabriel]

True, and come to think of it I think I'd classify Pit-Fighter more so in the Beat 'em Up category.. I have to admit, I did give the Genny version a lot of play time, and it was much better than, well.. Any other home version in the '90s, lol.

 

Yeah. It seems odd today for people to be trying to say it was the same kind of game as Mortal Kombat. It definitely was more from the multiplayer coop game school of Gauntletish games or scrolling brawlers which was the norm of arcades at the time.

[2600Lives]

What I don't get is the vast amount of time and effort people will put into defending these shitfest games like S-Fu and try to PROVE to everyone that their opionions are the only ones that matter, popular opinion be damned! Add to that the amount of asshurt they seem to be in whenever someone disagrees with them, and it all just becomes this hugely ridiculous tantrum over the fact that their beloved games get saddled with the "sucks" monicker.

 

I either own or have played most of the "worst" games on the "worst of" lists. E.T., Pac-Man. I FUCKING HATE THOSE TWO GAMES. I own Shaq-Fu. I've played it. Numerous times, in fact, trying to just get the controls down, thinking I might have been doing something wrong. Nope. It's ASS through and through. EGM didn't have a damn thing to do with it's failure. Shaquille O'Neal's license whoring ass and ungodly clunky controls and design have to do with it's failure. It had some of the stupidest characters I've truly ever seen as well.

 

Weaponlord on the Genny is quite inferior to the SNES version, and again, it's extremely complex. You had to get the timing down on the moves, and once you did, you could pull them off at will. It's not a game for the casual fight fan, more for the guys like me who do things like read frame data and other fighting game nerdy things.

 

And honestly, just that stupid ass name, SHAQ-FU, makes me want to avoid it completely. O'Neal is a giant (literally) dumbass to begin with, and just stick Fu at the end of his nickname and call it a game? Sorry. Does not compute. Like his rap and film careers. DOES NOT COMPUTE. I hear he's now trying for an MMA career as well. Great. He can sully yet another great thing with his mere presence.

[Video]

The biggest flaw with Shaq-Fu was the controlls. They weren't all that precise and felt sloppy. Other wise, it was a pefectly good game. I mean, I'm no expert, I haven't played every version out there, though I have it for SNES and Genesis. But I have played far worse fighters out there. It's not the best of the best or anything. But it's certainly doesn't deserve that "worst game eveah" notoriety that it gets.

[+RevEng]

What I don't get is the vast amount of time and effort people will put into defending these shitfest games like S-Fu and try to PROVE to everyone that their opionions are the only ones that matter, popular opinion be damned!

Yup. If someone disagrees with the group-think they should just shut their gob!

 

I can't risk having my beliefs swayed from the popular opinion!

[DickNixonArisen]

Wait, weaponlord is on the Genny as well as the SNES? even better... although I did forget Fatal Fury 2, which is almost surely better though I haven't had a chance with the gen version yet, so adding Weaponlord wouldn't push Shaq-Fu into slightly above average status. Damn. Shaq-Fu is hardly my favorite game, as I noted 15 better fighters on the GEN alone. It's probably my 550th favorite game. I just want to set the record straight on the hate. I certainly don't care either way about the guy (never heard his rap, saw his movies, haven't seen him play). I would imagine he's got quite the ego based on his various products, sure. And I guess fighting masters actually belongs in the "Worse" category, according to some folks i've been talking to. So Shaq-Fu isn't even in the worst HALF of Gen games (although only by a hair.). It's strictly average. Sure, the premise and story are ridiculous. Like most fighting games. but the music is above average, the player and background graphics are above average, it's got a number of features/options, a bunch of cutscenes, an average roster number, and below average controls. It's got a map screen too, just for fun, and that looks fine too. The premise is the worst thing about the game, although you could appreciate it "ironically" as part of the whole "so bad it's good" trend, that's not really my bag. I suspect it's that bizarro element that's behind the game as a minor internet phenomenon - that's none of my concern. I either like something sincerely or dislike it sincerely. I'd just say the premise is bad. So it has two bad elements - controls (important) and premise/story (not important). These bad elements drag what would have been a good game down to average. It's that simple.

 

FIGHTING GAMES

--------------

I would say a game is a fighter if it is a one-on-one, typically with multiple-input special moves and an equal-sized life bar for each fighter, with all regular fighters (hypothetically) roughly equal in strength, though hopefully diverse in appearance and moveset. Z-axis movement is not Usually available. I don't think adding Z axis movement automatically places a game into the beat 'em up genre, though it goes a long way in that direction, so I understand what you're saying. The obvious: MK, SF2, Guilty Gear, etc.

 

BEAT 'EM UPS

------------

A beat 'em up would be a game with Z axis movement usually available, featuring a player character against a number of fodder enemies with 2 or more enemies on screen at a time. Typically a beat 'em up lacks multiple-input special moves (though this isn't that strict) Typically only bosses have life bars, or fodder enemies have shorter ones. Bosses appear at the end or middle of a stage. Usually beat 'em ups have a more linear, concrete story whereas fighters often have little in the way of story (it's uh, a tournament, and they fight in it) and opponents can be faced in different orders. Story obviously is not a great way to gauge what genre a game fits into as a general rule. Streets of Rage, double dragon, the mighty River City Ransom (RPG elements), Final fight, etc.

 

HYBRIDS?

--------

to my knowledge, Pit-Fighter, Cyborg Justice, Street Smart and KOTM 1&2 are not beat 'em ups, but fighters in every way except for the addition of Z-axis movement. I could agree to calling them hybrids. Fatal Fury has the very slight addition of the two-plane system, as well. I hardly ever use it. Anyway, including or excluding them won't significantly shift Shaq-Fu away from average, since KOTM's aren't great, but probably somewhat better than Shaq-Fu, Street smart is decidedly worse, pit-fighter is slightly worse, and Cyborg Justice is better (again, according to folks here - VGC gave it an F and it's listed as a 'game to avoid' in places). Another weird "hybrid" is X-men COTA for the SNES - it has fighting game style multiple-input moves, but is otherwise a platformer. I guess capcom was just working on habit.

 

 

Anyway, the whole argument is semantical, subjective, silly and pointless - anywhere except a forum dedicated to discussing and analyzing video games!

[mbd30]

They should have done a Shaq horror themed game. "Count Shaqula" has a nice ring to it.

[DickNixonArisen]

Hah!

 

 

simpsons quote: "next: blacula meets black dracula"

 

 

there's always aerosmith revolution x, the kiss game (s?) and journey escape. oh and blues brothers, I guess they're sort of a real band. For games based on musicians. Cause, you know, Shaq is obviously a real musician. hah

[Austin]

What I don't get is the vast amount of time and effort people will put into defending these shitfest games like S-Fu and try to PROVE to everyone that their opionions are the only ones that matter, popular opinion be damned!

 

The people that defend these games don't have to do much of it thanks to their objective and sensical perspectives on these topics. They know how to appreciate certain aspects even when they are covered in shit, and when there is absolutely no reason to appreciate something, they won't. At least they've tried through first-hand experience, not from a jaded or preached perspective. The people that spend even more time bashing these games, for the most part, seem to hardly follow this sort of rhetoric.. They follow the sheep without thinking much for themselves (or at least from an objective viewpoint).

 

Here's a situation I often find myself in when shopping for games at the local independent videogame store:

 

*a group of nerds walks in, and after browsing for a little bit, one catches something...*

"Like, OH MY GOD, look at this, look at THIS!!! They have SHAAAQ-FUUU.. This was the-*sniffle*-the worst game, EVAAR!! Hahahaha haaaaaarrrrr, this game is-*sniffle*-terrrriible. Hahaha, this game should have been burrrried with EEEEEE-TTTTTT!!! hahahaha"

 

*Retarded nerd's slightly more intelligent friend chimes in*

"Wow, really?? I've heard it's bad, but how was the gameplay?"

 

"I don't knoooow, I watched it on YouTuuube.. It was, like, oh my god, sooooooo baaaaaaaad!!!! SHAAAQ FUUUU!!! EEEE TTTTTT!!!! harharharharhar!!AASDasdfawsdjflakjsdf"

 

When I run into these situations, I always think to myself, "give me a ******* break you toolbags." ..And, yes, that was a slight exaggeration. I think you get the point, though.

Edited May 30, 2010 by Austin

[2600Lives]

Hey, I'll be the first one to tell you that I totally love some shitty things. Hudson Hawk is one of my all time favorite movies, as is Last Action Hero, and I've spent HOURS playing M.U.S.C.L.E., Total Recall and a bunch of other crappy titles. I NEVER listen to a critic until I see for myself. But, my point is, that most things that get the word "shitty" attached to them usually deserve it, period. I would have never once said E.T. sucked if I hadn't experienced it firsthand as a kid, WASTING almost 2 months of diligently cutting lawns one summer so I could buy the fucking thing, then getting so frustrated that I couldn't play it properly that I traded it for a copy of Raiders of the Lost Ark that had no instruction manual. Yeah, that worked out well. Hell, the Game Nerd makes fun of shitty games, but I've disagreed with several of his videos, particularly Metal Gear, Castlevania 2, Roger Rabbit, and his assessment of the Sega CD. Doesn't make me like him any less, though.

 

And you've never seen Shaq's movies? Man, you are missing OUT, dude. In Kazaam, he's a rapping, borderline child molesting genie, and in Steel, he's a stupid-looking doofus wearing a rubber suit that would make even old purple and green Lex Luthor cringe. His music? Does the phrase "Let's green egg and ham it!" make you want to listen to it? No? Good. Seriously, everything this guy's done outside of basketball is a total joke.

[DickNixonArisen]

Hey, I'll be the first one to tell you that I totally love some shitty things. Hudson Hawk is one of my all time favorite movies, as is Last Action Hero, and I've spent HOURS playing M.U.S.C.L.E., Total Recall...

 

...borderline child molesting genie...

 

...everything this guy's done outside of basketball is a total joke.

 

I can't say I've enjoyed ANY of those movies or games based on them, and I've played them all (except last action hero, that was made into a game, right?), but I do love Baroque (Wii/Saturn) and that is always rated incredibly low. I don't actually believe that it's bad, however, so I guess that doesn't count. There's music I like that I know is crap, but is just the kind of thing I'm into. Shitty Italian OI!, or some Japcore band, something I would never defend as good, but really like. I like Astyanax a LOT, that's not really a good game.

 

Child-molesting? Huh? I'd look it up, but I don't want "Child-Molesting-Genie" in my search history.

 

everything... except Shaq-Fu, an average, playable genesis title.

Edited May 30, 2010 by DickNixonArisen

[lushgirl_80]

Meh! I'd rather play Kasumi Ninja!!!!

[2600Lives]

You'd totally dig my Kasumi Ninja headband, then. It's magical, actually. When I put it on, it decreases my gameplaying skills SO much that I can actually manage to do some of the crazy things you need to do to pull off special moves in Kasumi Ninja.

 

You know, I actually found that thing as a sort of bookmark in an old Jag player's guide I picked up years ago. Was just pressed between the pages. Apparently someone didn't know about it's magical properties.

 

And I'm not joking about Shaq's character in Kazaam. Watch the Nostalgia Critic's review of the damn thing sometime. There's like 4 times he brings up the STRANGER DANGER alert...

[fiddlepaddle]

I hate all those kick and punch fighting games, but I can tell you this: there were a LOT of Shaq-Fu cartridges produced. If you see a bunch of games in a thrift store or on a shelf at a game store, this is one of them. And they're easy to find with box and instructions. If there is an organization dedicated to destroying all of these carts, they had better buy space in a dump in New Mexico.

Edited May 30, 2010 by fiddlepaddle

[+thegoldenband]

I would have never once said E.T. sucked if I hadn't experienced it firsthand as a kid, WASTING almost 2 months of diligently cutting lawns one summer so I could buy the fucking thing, then getting so frustrated that I couldn't play it properly that I traded it for a copy of Raiders of the Lost Ark that had no instruction manual.

This is a question that comes up a lot: when we evaluate a game, is it from the perspective of its original release, or from our current perspective? To put it differently, should we factor in disappointment, letdown, hype, and price, or not? Is a game "better" when it's $2 used, rather than $40 new?

 

I had E.T. back in the day too, but I didn't pay for it myself (I was only 6 or 7 when we got it), and wasn't really aware of any of the hype. I didn't have any trouble figuring out the basic gameplay, how not to fall in pits, etc. I knew the game had problems, but I liked the fact that it had a little bit of depth to it, and it was probably one of my more-frequently-played games. I certainly didn't think it was crap, especially when compared to a game like Sssnake (which I still think is one of the five worst Atari games I've ever played). I still don't; in fact, I think it's one of the VCS's better games.

 

To take a different example: I know that there's at least one forum member who loathes Bugs, for similar reasons, and was totally offended by how simplistic and one-dimensional it was. But I like Bugs, and enjoy it as an addictive "twitch" game. IIRC, he paid full price for it back in the day; I paid less than a buck for my loose cart, last year sometime. Which of us is right?

 

Another issue is that a lot of games tagged as "worst ever" are just weird, or quirky, or have controls that take time to learn. Sword of Sodan for Genesis takes a lot of crap, and it's certainly got some major issues and flaws. But I've gotten more enjoyment out of learning and mastering that game than I have from any of my attempts at Sonic the Hedgehog (a game I've never been able to get into).

 

Anyway, I haven't played Shaq-Fu yet, but I have a copy coming my way soon (thanks to a kind fellow at Sega-16), and genuinely look forward to checking it out. Based on everything I've heard, I suspect that it'll turn out to be exactly what many people are saying -- an average game with some strengths and some flaws, that would hardly be remembered if it weren't for the bizarre title and licensing.

[godslabrat]

I haven't understood the recent hate for JLA Task Force. That one started appearring on "worst of" lists about a year or two ago out of the blue.

 

I'm fascinated by the inertia of these things. Like you said, there's no reason for them, but it's like on the 6th of next month, every gaming site suddenly starts hating Ducktales 2, or Batman Returns, or Solaris. There's never a good reason, but within a few months it's internet gospel. WTF?

 

On a similar note, I'm always amazed at the wikipedia-like regurgitation of certain facts, even when they're irrelevant to the topic. For example, if I start a thread about character design in SMB2, within six posts someone will go off on a tangent about how it's "not a real Mario game" because it started out as DDP in Japan. Of course, on a board like AtariAge, that's something everyone already knows, but still that fact has to be thrown into every discussion of the game imaginable. Similar to how any discussion of the N64 eventually forces some genius to mention that it used carts, while the Playstation used CDs. Yes, we all noticed that, can we move on now?

[DickNixonArisen]

 

I'm fascinated by the inertia of these things. Like you said, there's no reason for them, but it's like on the 6th of next month, every gaming site suddenly starts hating Ducktales 2, or Batman Returns, or Solaris. There's never a good reason, but within a few months it's internet gospel. WTF?

 

 

That is EXACTLY what I was trying to say, and why I am so bent on defending this average game. It's part of the whole internet phenomenon culture, like pirates vs. ninjas oh so long ago now. It's why I know kids who have never played an Atari or even seen one but "know" that E.T. is the worst game of all time.

 

Incidentally, we've all heard lemmings used as a metaphor for conformity - I've recently read that Lemmings do not in fact commit suicide or jump off dangerous cliffs for any other reason - the photographer that did the first story on that COERCED them into doing that and the myth stuck. They might jump off little cliffs just to be little badasses, I don't know. In the same article I read that Thomas Crapper did not invent the toilet, although he did have some patents out involving plumbing. The author of the book alleging crapper to be the inventor wrote a second book titled "Bust Up: the uplifting tale of Otto Titzling" - supposedly the inventor of the brassiere. I notice it's on Snopes as I read this. Anyway, I was totally taken in by the Lemmings lie. Quite ironic! I haven't played Lemmings in years. Don't really enjoy it without a mouse.

 

And yeah, we have to compare games against others on the same system, or at least from the same era, or at very very least from the same genre. If you're talking Neo-Geo, then a fighter really has to step up to be noticed since it's packed with great fighting titles. You've got KOF's vs. Last blade Vs. SS. If you're on the NES, it's basically Urban Champion or TMNT tournament, and that's not a close match. Some games hold up very well even against more modern versions of themselves, like Soul Calibur 2, SMB 3 and plenty more - that's the mark of a great title. One generation past Genesis (or one and a half since it had the jump on the SNES) and Shaq-Fu gets ground into paste.

[godslabrat]

 

I'm fascinated by the inertia of these things. Like you said, there's no reason for them, but it's like on the 6th of next month, every gaming site suddenly starts hating Ducktales 2, or Batman Returns, or Solaris. There's never a good reason, but within a few months it's internet gospel. WTF?

 

 

That is EXACTLY what I was trying to say, and why I am so bent on defending this average game. It's part of the whole internet phenomenon culture, like pirates vs. ninjas oh so long ago now. It's why I know kids who have never played an Atari or even seen one but "know" that E.T. is the worst game of all time.

 

Yeah, it's gotten to where I always ask someone making such a claim if they've actually PLAYED the game they're bashing. If they have, fine. Have whatever opinion you see fit. If not, I'm no longer interested in what they have to say. Judging a game by a YouTube review is as dumb as judging it by two screenshots in a comic book ad.

 

 

Incidentally, we've all heard lemmings used as a metaphor for conformity - I've recently read that Lemmings do not in fact commit suicide or jump off dangerous cliffs for any other reason

 

It was my understanding that the critters did not willingly jump off the cliff. Rather, they would crowd around said cliff and eventually force a certain number (quite against their will) off. Maybe that's true, maybe not.

 

My personal favorite example is in claiming someone who jumps onto a bandwagon is "drinking the Kool-Aid", as a reference to the people who died at Jonestown after consuming poison. There are two major problems with this expression:

 

1) The majority of people who consumed poison at Jonestown did so at gunpoint, not willingly.

 

2) The beverage that was used to distribute the poison was Flav-r-Aid, the generic stuff.

[DickNixonArisen]

Well, sometimes what seems like a minor point can be incredibly important, so it's always better to be a stickler for facts when it matters. Anyone who tried to make a point based on the famed Kool-Aid incident would still have the same point with a different brand, but might not have a point at all if he were to learn the first fact.

 

Here's another one I read recently - A therapist who worked with child sexual abuse victims (the author of the book I was reading) was talking about a local group that were trying to get a law passed that would mandate the execution of child molesters. Sounds pretty palatable, even if you're not a fan of capital punishment, they're not popular folks. It probably sounds reasonable to a lot of people. The therapist pointed out a fact to this group that actually changed the opinion of more than a few of them - since children are much more likely to be abused by a family member or other close associate than they are by a stranger, passing of the law would result in fewer cases being reported - because the victim, being a little kid, could hardly deal with the responsibility of causing their parent or teacher to be killed, they would be much less likely to report it if they knew it would lead to that. Sure, it's plausible that a kid would be better off with a dead parent/no parent than one that was abusing them, but the kid doesn't know that or agree with it. Without that fact, the group thought they were doing something good - with it, some of them understood their goal would have worsened the problem.

 

 

Now: back on topic:

 

Pac-man is a game for the Atari 2600!