This week, Adam sits down with a topic we're all familiar with; bosses. Not the guy who wears short sleeved shirts and scolds you for spelling errors. No, we're talking about the larger than life characters you fight at the end of a level, or to be more specific, the huge guy at the very end of the game. The Sess has a bone to pick with final bosses, because they always seem to be a bit removed from the rest of the game, requiring simple memorization or trial and error to defeat them, rather than usage of the skills you've acquired throughout the entire game.
This is where you guys come in. Leave a comment below outlining how you think game developers could improve final boss battles. Just try to be civil, expressive, and creative. But first, press play and find out what Adam has to say on the subject.
Subscribe to G4's Sessler's Soapbox Podcast by clicking your preferred service:
Comments are Closed
Comments
Displaying 141–160 of 260
712345678910…12139
hogey
Listening to Adam talk about Boss battles reminded me of trying to defeat Shao Kahn in Mortal Kombat 2. I was never the best at this game but I was able to make it to Kahn several times before I could finally defeat him and even when I did I wasn't very happy about it. I finally beat him and said "About flippin' time!" Then I turned the game off and was still mad that it had taken so long to beat him. If I was old enough to drink I probably would have had a whiskey on the rocks.
My point is that if you make a boss too difficult not everybody going to get that satisfaction when finishing the game. A good question is who are game developers making games for? The expert gamers, who may be in the minority but would love a challenge of slaying that difficult dragon, or the intermediate or beginner gamer, who doesn't want to spend hours and hours just trying to defeat the final boss.
A couple good examples of endings that I have liked would be (what Adam mentioned) Call of Duty or Hitman Blood Money, where the whole last mission was more difficult than the rest of the game. For me, if the game is good and the last mission concludes the story, is more difficult than the beginning and can be passed, then I am a happy guy.
Curare
I think boss battles could be eliminated from many games. Usually the boss battles are the least memorable and least fun you can have with a game.
Larington
My biggest problem with boss fights is that they tend to feel really artificial, as in, often times some barrier will magically fall in behind you and then theres a specific prescribed set of actions you have to do to take down the boss or some specific weakpoint that you use (Worst recent offender I can think of is Crysis).
My personal favourite use of boss battles would actually be Deus Ex (The original) where on several occasions you'll be able to fight other augmented characters, the actual fights themselves stay within the framework of the existing gameplay and most significantly of all, you can often walk/run/sneak away from the fight without eliminating that boss. It just means they'll come at you again later at a different point in the game.
And the final boss you can't exactly beat in the traditional sense, the way you defeat him involves working around/defeating his plans and unless you go for the blow the end-game facility up you don't even kill the boss - defeating his plan is a big enough win without the need to go on that final killing spree. As such, I found the 3 endings of Deus Ex more satisfying than the single ending of a lot of other games that have relied on seemingly arbitrary boss fights.
So, basically, I like my boss fights to FEEL as if they aren't boss fights. It sounds wierd, but thats the way it is.
OgreSamanosuke
Amusingly, a good example of a good boss fight is about to happen right behind Adam. The finale of Portal against GlaDOS was a great boss fight. Not because it was super different from the rest of the game, it was the same thing. It was what was going on during the fight that made it interesting. As you melted GlaDOS's memory cores and her attitude swung violently from one spectrum to another made it so rewarding.
But yes, I have to agree. The way so many games work now, it's hard to come up with a way for a boss to be any good without ending up at one of the two false outcomes: The Achilles Heel, or The War of Attrition.
hawkeye113
I always thought the best way to end the game is with an awesome cinematic or a lead in to a sequel so you know you have something to look for ward to
I also know the worst way to end a game and that is the way Ninja Gaiden 2 ended their game.
3 boss fights in a row with no chance to regain health or get supplies which is overkill with crazy combos that take away half your life and are unblockable had to start the game over from the beginning just to beat the last boss
QUIK_LA_420
wow all you guys wrote alot of things down.. i just love boss battles period
BigKevSexyMan
The final boss battle is probably the most difficult thing to due. If you have ever written a short story, then more often than not you know it is much more difficult to end a story well, than it is to start a story. The same is definitely true for gameplay.
One thing that I have noticed is the more complicated the gameplay is, then the more you are able to put into the final boss. Games that are very straight forward(like many FPS and RPGs) can't usually create a truly exciting final boss, because they mostly can only rely on ramped up difficulty. However games with a complex set of gameplay elements can be brought together with that higher difficulty.
If you have a platformer, then your final boss better test your platforming skills to the fullest.
If you have more of a platformer/FPS, then you boss test your platforming while testing your shooting to the fullest(metroid prime trilogy did a great job at this BTW, and those were great satisfying boss fights)
This is also why FPS games don't often have those satisfying epic boss battles. So many are just shoot->strafe-shoot->str afe, and it just doesn't make for interesting on a 1v1 scale.
There's one thing that often assures a final boss fight to it's doom, predictable gameplay elements. This is what you see in Zelda games(twilight princess boss fights were so disappointing). You know exactly what you have to do to kill the boss, so there's no challenge at all. Sadly, this also cripples many bosses that suddenly have puzzle elements thrown into them. Once you figure out the puzzle and the pattern, the rest of the boss fight becomes nothing more than a predictable gameplay element.
But in the end, no matter what they decide to go with, as long as they seriously challenge us then the majority of us will be satisfied.
Also, you should consider how long you've been playing video games. Maybe you're skill level is just too high that you dwarf the average gamer in handling challenging gameplay. You have to remember that developers can't make a game so hard that only the best gamers can win.
JokerFisch
I think that the boss that your having a problem with is one that in the 3rd person game. The bosses that are good from the platformers.Sess, you referred to a good war game which i would refer to as a FPS. What's left? turn based RPGs are fine when it comes to bosses. The only lack luster boss I can think of was uncharted: drake's fortune. The game was great but wasn't as epic as others. I guess my question is as i'm drunk commenting is, What games were brought to mind when you phrased that question?
Juicelee
I didnt read most of the comments on here but I just want to say that as far as boss battles go I want to say the most creative I've ever seen was in shenmue 2 I know that game gets swept under a rug and forgotten alot but think about this:
every boss fight in that game prepared you for every attack the final boss would have. so if you could master the strategies of the other bosses, the final boss was a piece of cake and that Is something I've never seen again in a game and shenmue is a little over 10 years old now
just sayin
mInDsHiFtEr
Ok, I think I understand what you like and don't about games today. U like the decision-making ability, but dislike the narrowly focused boss battle... Well, why not combine the interactivity abilities that are a part of the story throughout the game into the boss as well? U control the hero and the villian...kind of like playing yourself at chess?
mexpex22
oh yeah and one more thing. why is it that optional bosses tend to be stronger than the end of the game boss? isn't it always the case that guy A is killing the world and ruling the universe, yet you beat him quickly where as guy B, whom you may or may not fight, can kick your booty up and down the street five times over before you figure out a way to beat him? lame, buuuut i do very much so encourage optional bosses, anything side missiony is amazing in a game.
mexpex22
it's so true. so many end game boss battles are so lame and easy. i want a game that offers roughly about 10 hours of straight through story gaming, than another five six hours of trying to beat the end game boss lol. i want something that will be so challenging to defeat that the only thing that could ever be compared with it is sephiroth at the end of FF7. i want to be pushed around, brutally beaten and defeated a few times by an end video game boss so i don't just simply go to the boss, beat it, than watch the end cinematic. come on game designers! put a little more umph in it!
NeroIV
Your absolutely right Sess boss battels have been going down in quality for a while. As far as how to fix them, it ultimately depends on what kind of game it is. But i would like to point out some of the best implementing of bosses in the game, IMO, that did make the boss battles worth while and made you feel accomplished. And do feel free to tell me if you think I am wrong or if you have one that was better. (In no particular order)
1. If you have played Baldur's Gate 2: Shadow of Amn, then you will know what I'm talking about. The end game is thoroughly involved through the whole game and you do feel that when you make it to the end it was worth the effort and hours spent, which is hard to find in many RTSRPGs.
2. Chrono Cross. This is on here mainly because part way through the game the story line shifts over so that you play a good portion of the game as the bad guy. Its just one of those things that when it came time to fight the boss it was almost hard to do because you better began to understand why the bad guys were bad.
3. Portal. Now i agree the final 'thing' with GLaDoS was a bit disappointing as far as difficulty, but the build up to it was just a mind blowing experience. Even during the credits when "Still Alive" is playing it actually starts the build up of another future boss conflict, or at least makes you excited about finding out what the cryptic-nes of it all means and makes you want beg for the next game to come out. Few games can do that. Which leads me to my final pick.
4. Batman Arkham Asylum. The build up to some of the bosses, Poison Ivy being one and the Joker the other, just makes you want to pull you hair out. Especially the Joker with the his never ending taunting and mockery. When I made reference to Batman in the Portal mention i was drawing the parallel to the endings. I wont spoil it for those who have not played or beat it yet, but for those who have you'll know what I mean. If you didn't skip the credits you get an extra little scene which, like portal, just makes you beg for the next game to come out.
Like I said before if you have any arguments with what I said, fine. Just don't flame or troll, its the internet. You win nothing. You Lose. Good day sir.
mawfu
All games build the character up with abilities throughout the game so, why not take them away? Start the game all powerful and after each little boss battle you have to pick which power you'll lose.
punkerdante182
First off like adam said you have to look at what IS a boss battle. It's many things to many people but personally I think it should satisfy two conditions
1) Should reveal the antgonist to the story or give it some closure from a narrative perpective
and 2) Should be THE most challenging guy in the game for obvious reasons.
Some games do this simply by making him hit harder or just have more life than GOD.
Others like wow need a strategy. Now I bring up wow because whether your for or against it you have to admit that some of the bosses (especially end game) were a puzzle that you had to figure out. This is a VERY special case for the obvious reason that wow's game mechanics lets an average player take on many different roles and in a end game boss battle you have 25 DIFFERENT players playing up tooooo i think 7? DIFFERENT classes AND not to mention there are sub-classes (builds or talent specializations) to each class. In another games such as fps's I feel that the end boss should be that boss you just look up at and go "holy crappin balls" which i think in turn gives you the satisfaction of beating said boss. If you think back part of the reason we liked killing bowser was cause he was a BIG F'IN DINOSAUR. If he'd been like a chihuahua we might not hold him in such regard as we do now. That being said though I think game developers should approach the end boss battle with the above mentioned conditions in mind "does it give closure to the narrative? and is it the hardest boss in the game?"
Armill
i have to say for me, i have been pretty disappointed in the final battles in rpg's and such. the style or feel i really look for when i get to the battle is something like from either game final fantasy 4 or grandia 2. you get involved with the characters and the final boss and have that epic feel where you care what happens. unlike say in fable 2, which i loved playing, and then all you do is hear the man talk and the put a bullet in him, or worse just wait till the other guy does it, and thats it, nothing else, just kinda left a bad taste in my mouth.
BlackPrince42
I think the problem with most boss fights is that more and more, developers are removing interactivity in order to make the fights more cinematic. Take R2 for example. The leviathan fight looked awesome, but the amount of actual fighting was minimal and therefore not as engaging as it should have been.
In my opinion a good boss fight has to be interactive and dynamic, not formulaic or staged. The best example of a dynamic fight I can think of was the fight with Kessler at the end of inFamous. There was
some formula to it, but wherever you went Kessler followed and engaged you with a variety of attacks that you had to anticipate and counter with a variety of your own moves.
Variety is important, there must be multiple ways for you to bring a boss down
Resistance 1 actually did this well in some places. During your first encounter with a stalker there were several ways to bring it down. You could blast it till it exploded, shoot the core directly, or shoot at the core using the Auger (which if you aimed it right will go through any matter including the stalker).
A great way to shape a final boss fight is in how you shape the fights that come before it. Each boss fight could represent mastery of a certain skill (e.g. sniping, CQC, stealth, mid-range combat, strategic planning, etc.) with the final boss fight representing a mastery of all the skills you've perfected throughout the game.
magozel
im my opinion, a game just need that feeling of fun, sathisfaction
and a good history, to enjoy and play it many times....
and viva mexico!!!!!!! hahaha
_ShadowFox
In my experience bosses in RPGs and action RPGs always seem unsatisfieng if you do enough level grinding. Maybe the boss should increase in level as much as the player has to keep it challenging. And also, instead of havein a limited range of actions and abilities were u just have to memorize and get the timeing down, the boss actualy changes tactics based on how the player fights and the type of character they built. Like if you focused on speed, the boss decreases your speed with a spell or focuses on offence rather than deffence. Or if u focused on strength the boss saps hp or speeds himself up or increases his defence. if you start to heal too much the boss will sence this and press the attack. if your agresive the boss tends to retreat and through mageck or somthing.
ABCgum64
This is a very interesting topic indeed. From my experience with many types of games, from mmo's, to shooters, to action games, to arcade, and even to rpg's, it depends if there 'needs' to be a boss battle. If the game does need a boss battle to satisfy the story line or even game play, then from my experience those games that had the most enjoyable, satisfying and memorable boss battles were those where you were able to use every ounce of skill and ability you were granted in the game to take down a boss. An example of this is WoW, EQ or other mmorpgs, where you and your friends raided on end bosses, using your experience with a class you enjoyed, to take down a boss together, while also using very vital abilities specific to your class and even spec. Another example is Mass Effect, (depending on the difficulty) where you and your squad half to use your skills and abilities in order to take down Saren. Of course there are PLENTY of other games that I cannot name right now.
This idea is similar to what Adam was talking about when explaining about trying to find "Achille's Heal" in order to kill that boss. Some games do well at that (ex. Shadow of the Coleuses did it well) but for the most part, those type of boss battles make the player feel as if all the gained abilities had no use at the end. With that said, that is just my perspective on boss battles, and I prefer them to utilize all of the skills and abilities that the player gains while playing through the whole game until the end. Hope this helps! :) chaching
Displaying 141–160 of 260
712345678910…12139