Capcom vs. SNK 2: The Groove system is one of the coolest dynamics to tailor the game to your playstyle. Is it balanced? Hell no, but I love this game casually.
The King of Fighters 2002: KOF fans will tell you either 98 or 02 were the absolute pinnacle. I side with 02 because it has Kula in it. Also note that 98 and 02 both have updated rereleases with an extended roster and rebalancing, but those are Windows-only.
Puzzle Bobble 1/3: You've probably played some flash game clone of this. IMO I think 1 was best for its simplicity, I'm not as fond of the garbage patterns introduced in later titles in an effort to give characters some asymmetry. But PB1 does not have AI opponents, singleplayer is only the stage clear mode, so if you don't have a human to play with try PB3 for the next best thing.
Soldam: The singleplayer modes are nothing to write home about, but it has one of the most unique versus modes I've seen in a puzzler. Shared piece queues are normally horrifying, but Soldam makes it work by giving P1 the objective to match red while P2 matches blue. So if you want to snipe pieces that are desirable to your opponent, that means taking pieces undesirable to yourself. Garbage is also based on how you clear lines, so crafting maximally disruptive garbage gets interesting. The catch, unfortunately, is that there is no AI. But if you can play this game with a human, do check it out.
Tetris: The Grand Master 1/2/3: The only good Tetris, do not @ me. Start with TGM2's Novice Mode, then once you can clear that go back to TGM1.
Twinkle Star Sprites: A versus shmup with a very unique format. Chaining enemies on your screen sends attacks to your opponent's screen. Hard to really explain, just give this a spin and feel it out for yourself. There are a lot of moving parts, screenwatching is vital, and feels like I've barely scratched the surface of the game's depth.
Vampire Savior: Aka Darkstalkers 3. This game is fast as hell and it's a blast. Like with any classic fighter, good luck keeping up with FightCade folks who really know what they're doing, but I love it casually.
Waku Waku 7: This game's mechanics are honestly borderline kusoge, you can't even cancel normals into specials. But I love the design and atmosphere so much. Tesse is really fun to play even in spite of the system mechanics.
NES:
Fire 'n Ice: A very rad little puzzle game.
Mike Tyson's Punch-Out!!: Just an absolute blast. I won't bother listing them seperately but also check out Super and Wii. Super's kinda the black sheep of the series, but it's still a good game, just not as good. Wii is an absolutely top-notch successor and I'm sad it didn't get any more sequels after that. The two arcade predecessors are honestly forgettable.
SNES:
Chrono Trigger: I am hesitant to recommend most JRPGs from this era if you did not grow up on them, because many of them haven't aged so gracefully. Chrono Trigger is the exception, this game is a fine wine. You may want to check out one of the rereleases though, or at least a retranslation patch, because the original translation was made on a rushed deadline and bound by heavy technical limitations.
Earthbound: A bit more of a slow burn in comparison to CT, but this game is carried by incredible writing. It's also required reading before playing Mother 3 next.
Kirby Super Star: Definitely the peak of the series, giving every copy power an entire moveset is a blast. Has an updated rerelease on DS with added extras, I do highly recommend this version, but DS can be awkward to emulate so SNES is fine.
Wario's Woods: The NES version is more well known since it was the system's last first-party title, and for whatever reason it's the only version Nintendo ever rereleases. But the SNES version is a notable upgrade, biggest thing it has is AI to play versus mode against. Versus mode is wild as hell, so if you've never seen it please check out the SNES version.
N64:
Dr. Mario 64: Best version, but can be notoriously difficult to emulate. If you have issues with it, SNES is a good alternative. Don't play NES.
Mario Party 2: Still the best in the series.
Paper Mario: Pure perfection. Many fans will say TTYD was better, and it's certainly a good game too, but I think 64 was peak simply because the pacing is so much better.
Super Mario 64: It's Super Mario 64. You do not need me to tell you that this game is good.
F-Zero GX: It's been over 20 years since the GOAT dropped and all we've had to show for it is that damn 99 game. Go play this and weep that we'll never see another like it.
Nintendo Puzzle Collection: The best version of Panel de Pon, but SNES is a close second if you wanna play on a device that can't run Dolphin. GBC is also kinda noteworthy for having a unique singleplayer to work around platform limitations - opponents have a lifebar rather than a board. Just don't bother with 64.
Tales of Symphonia: This game got a PS2 rerelease with some extra content, and the HD remasters are based on that version. But the catch is that they were downgraded to 30fps, and yes that includes the so-called remaster. So I still recommend playing the Gamecube original at 60.
Wii:
Puyo Puyo 20th Anniversary: The absolute pinnacle of the series (by which I mean it's all downhill from here, I will never forgive Sega for what came next ), crammed with a whopping 20 game modes. I really love the challenges where you have to chain under bizarre restrictions. I prefer the Wii version for its 480p assets, and it's the easiest to emulate, but if you care about story mode the translation patch only exists for DS.
GBC:
Game & Watch Gallery 2: Holds a special place in my heart as the first game I ever owned. Has the best lineup out of all the collections, with 3 and 4 you can kinda tell they had used up all the heavy hitters.
Mario Tennis: An incredible tennis RPG. And Mario doesn't even show up until the postgame as a bonus boss, which I find hilarious. Has connectivity with the N64 version if you can get that running, lets you transfer your RPG mode character and unlock more content on both titles.
GBA:
Boktai series: These games were so near and dear to my childhood, especially 2. Really though you want the Solar Sensor hardware for the full experience, but I love these games too much not to plug them anyway. Emulating them is worth it over not playing them at all. And for the third game, you'd have to pick between original hardware or the translation patch anyway.
Golden Sun 1/2: These games were way ahead of their time for how they designed a combat system that encourages you to use all of your tools and not just click basic Attack as if you gotta hoard your MP for a rainy day. Fantastic puzzles too.
Mother 3: Surely you have already heard of this game and do not need me to tell you to go play it. Have you not played it by now? Why not? Well, okay, if you haven't played Earthbound first, go do so, then play this.
Rhythm Tengoku: A wonderful game about pressing the A button. Sometimes you press the d-pad too. Translation patch.
Summon Night: Swordcraft Story 1/2: If you've ever played the classic 2D Tales games, these are excellent spiritual successors to those. There's a third game that's JP-only, translation patch is being worked on but it's been stuck in development hell for years...
Romhacks:
Celeste Mario's Zap & Dash (NES): SMB1 turned into a Metroidvania with Celeste mechanics ported in. I think what impresses me the most is that they got 4-directional scrolling into this engine.
Super Metroid and A Link to the Past Crossover Randomizer (SNES): It's an absolutely incredible technical feat that this even works. SM and ALttP smashed together into a single ROM, with a few doors that take you from one game to the other, then the item pools are shuffled together so you have to go back and forth to find one game's items in the other. Unfortunately because ALttP is a much bigger game with a lot more items it kinda overshadows SM, you may not find this to be as replayable as the standalone randos. But I recommend trying it once because it's just so cool the first time.
I’m a little ways in to Celeste Mario’s Zap & Dash and its just as good as I had hoped. It makes me wish we got a metroidvania Celeste game from exok (maybe Earthblade will fill that niche)
@missingno I have finished the “main” game content of zap n dash with (I think) all moons, but DAMN this post-game content is HARD. Definitely b-sides/c-sides/farewell vibes
Holy recommendations batman! Definitely glad to see a lot of the same games recommended here, makes me feel like they’re on the right track. Fire 'n Ice seems interesting, and I hadn’t heard of it before. Also added a new word to my vocabulary in the form of “kusoge”. Thank you!
Slick arcade-style twin-stick shooter with a pumpin’ soundtrack. Lots of characters with unique playstyles. Local co-op.
Crypt of the NecroDancer
Bring rhythm to the classic roguelike. There’s local and online co-op and lots of mods.
Just Shapes and Beats
Rhythm bullet hell with a large EDM soundtrack. Local and online co-op.
Keep Talking and Nobody Explodes
This is a stretch of the “couch” part of couch co-op. One player must defuse a bomb. The other players have a bomb defusal manual and must help the first player without being able to see the screen.
Moving Out 2
Work together to drag and throw furniture into a truck. Chaotic co-op with physics, local and online.
Gauntlet: Slayer Edition
2014 revival of an 80s arcade classic. Co-op dungeon crawling action. Warrior needs food. Badly! Local and online co-op.
Pizza Possum
Very soft stealth game about stealing and eating lots of food. Local co-op.
There are a lot of solid answers, but it’s good to remember that the US definition of a liberal, seems to be very different from the international definition. So, remember to keep context in mind, and whether it’s coming from an American or not.
As a non-American with political science training, I think this is key to why I have found this particularly baffling.
It's like if you were having a casual conversation about pretty much anything and some overgrown child suddenly jumps in and starts screaming you're a filthy deontologist. Like, uhm, sure, but I'm not sure how that's relevant, and I also somehow doubt you know what that word means.
I’m not really into this stuff, but from what I can tell, liberal became an insult purely because conservatives wanted to label liberals as inferior. That’s about it. Some leftists also use liberal as an insult, though to a lesser extreme.
How conservatives use it, liberal means someone that is too sensitive, accommodating, weak, and evil (especially in Christian terms).
How leftists use it, liberal means uneducated, hypocritical, insufficient, and turncoat/traitor.
So when self-proclaimed leftists use as a slur it's not even in relation to support for private property rights?
I guess, if you're a proper communist, you could use liberal as a category of leftists who don't want to abolish property rights. As for the far right crowd, it could be a slur for anyone who doesn't want to abolish all other rights.
in your experience, do managers recognize and pay this 20%? This being nursing, I don’t believe it’s gonna be the case: this is a job nobody wants to do, reason why slackers get away not doing much.
It’s never been my experience in any job. A company doesn’t exist for your benefit, they exist to extract as much labor out of you for the least money.
The lesson to be learned here is don’t over exert yourself for your job without clear reward—do the amount of work they pay you for. Unless you are in a leadership position, your primary responsibility as an employee is to yourself.
There are whole departments who are there to look after the company’s interest, but it is up to you to look after your own.
The managers might recognize them but payroll decides pay and everyone’s job code is the same to them. When I was a manager I could argue to try and get pay raises for my top performers but it usually didn’t do much good. Firing the shitty ones also didn’t help because it took months to get approval to hire a replacement.
Now actually use it for a couple of years. Then you’ll see whats special about it.
For me personally, Ubuntu was breaking on every dist upgrade, the software was always out of date or not available in the repos. Been running arch for 5 years, same install, even transplanted it over to newer computers without issues. When some package is missing, I can throw together a PKGBUILD with chatgpt and put it on the AUR for others to use. It fucking rocks and is extremely sturdy while allowing me to do with it whatever I want.
But yeah, besides that, it’s just a linux. The individual things it does well are not even exclusive to arch. Ideally, you should not think about your OS at all and it should be out of your way, while you do something on it.
Any major Linux distribution has a system for building packages, it’s not something special to Arch. In fact, Arch’s great advantage of the aur repository actually becomes a disadvantage by introducing instability and insecurity into your system when you add programs from that repository. It’s amazing that people criticize Windows security with .exe’s and then install packages from external repositories with the security of “trust in the repository”. How can you trust code with root access to the system just because it’s in the aur repository? That’s the main question I would ask Arch users.
It’s a choice. We know that it’s riskier to use stuff from AUR. Which is why it’s highly recommended to read the PKGBUILD before installing the package. The basic Arch install doesn’t even include an AUR helper. That said, AUR is typically very reliable for packages with a decent userbase. It’s mostly due to the community aspect. Bad actors are caught relatively easily as the PKGBUILD is available to look at.
Any major Linux distribution has a system for building packages
I have built packages for all the major ones. Non arch packages are a pain to build and I never want to do it again. In contrast arch PKGBUILDs are quite simple and straight forward.
How can you trust code with root access to the system just because it’s in the aur repository?
Because you can view the source that builds the packages before building them. A quick check to not see any weird commands in the builds script and that it is going to an upstream repo is normally good enough. Though I bet most people work on the if others trust it then so do I mentality. Overall due to its relative popularity it is not a big target for threats when compared to things like NPM - which loads of people trust blindly as well and typically on vastly more important machines and servers.
It's amazing that people criticize Windows security with .exe's and then install packages from external repositories with the security of "trust in the repository".
As with almost every case of these sorts of comparisons, these are likely separate groups of people holding separate groups of opinions.
I don't use Arch anymore, but when I did I found that the AUR was really useful to quickly install niche applications that would take ages to be approved on to an official repository. Often those would be made by the application developers themselves or members of the community. I would personally vet the packaging script myself, but I'm sure many wouldn't - and that's fine. As with most software, there's some trust involved and often you assume that if you're installing from a reputable repository it's going to be fine. If people aren't vetting the installation scripts and are installing from random repositories, that's really their problem. I'm glad the possibility existed and it's the one thing I've missed in distros I've used since then.
Not sure if sarcasm or actual disinformation. You’re not supposed to trust the aur, that’s kinda the whole point of it. The build scripts are transparent enough to allow users to manage their own risk, and at no point does building a package require root access.
Well there is far less malware on Linux tbf so comparison is not completely accurate. But same caution applies, try to vet and understand what you install. That part is also easier with the AUR as it’s transparent in the packagebuild what it does unlike random exes with closed source. It’s also a large community with many eyes on the code so unless it’s a package with few users then it’s gonna get caught pretty quickly.
That is, you admit that most aur users delegate that function to other eyes instead of auditing the external code they are installing. A user repository outside of the official distribution repository is not a secure means of installing packages on the system, which may have root access to the system and the source code may change with each package update. Do you think that every time there is an update to a package that is not widely used, others will audit the source code for you? For that reason I stopped using Aur and by extension Arch, as their software catalog outside of aur is small.
Your comparison was with random exes on the most targeted, malware infested operating system out there.
Many eyes are always better than no eyes. I’m not saying you shouldn’t vet the code stop misinterpreting but no one knows or catches everything by themselves. That’s why security needs transparency. If it’s as insecure as you’re saying we would have way bigger problems but we don’t. AUR is not as safe as the Arch repository sure, but definitely safer than installing random exes on Windows. It’s a flawed comparison you’re making.
If you’re paranoid you should be on an immutable distro cause xz backdoor was in some official repos. Repo maintainers do not catch everything either it was just a mere coincidence someone caught it(again thanks to transparency & many eyes on code) before mass deployment. Installing anything with root access is a risk. Going online is a risk. But there are ways to mitigate risk. Some security you’re always gonna have to trade for convenience.
I think you’re missing the context. We’re not talking servers here but desktops. Arch is typically used on desktop systems. The threats that face desktops and servers are not the same. Same goes for risk and potential damage. Also please provide a source if you’re trying to debunk “common misconception”.
Makes sense. Do you find that by having the same install for so long (including transplanting it) that you have accumulated a lot of bloat? One of the things I really enjoyed about a fresh install was that I knew there wasn’t a build-up of digital junk files, but with Arch fresh installing every once in a while just seems impractical.
Not in any bothersome way. But if you really want to reinstall often that is valid as well. You can very easily script the arch install process to get you back to the same state far easier than other distros as well. Or you can just mass install everything except base and some core packages and reinstall the things you care about again which almost gives you a fresh install minus any unmanaged files (which are mostly in home and likely want to keep anyway).
I’ve been using Arch for about 15 years or so, and yes, I build up cruft… in my home directory ;-). The system itself is remarkably good at keeping tidy. The one spot to keep an eye on is /var/cache/pacman, as that’s where it stores every package you download before installation and it won’t delete it without you asking it to.
Any new config file will be saved with a .pacsave extension, so you’ll want to keep an eye out for those, but that’s basically it
Most of the junk accumulates in /home and I did a cleaning once, where I got rid of a couple hundred GB there, from stuff that was either already uninstalled or still installed but unused for years.
In the other root directories, I didn’t find much tbh. My / (excluding home) takes up 40GB and I don’t think it was significantly lower years ago as the bulk of it comes from necessary program files.
The main trash you accumulate are config files in you home directory because they stay after the package is uninstalled. And they just sit there not hurting anybody.
Ubuntu installs upgrade well in my experience, unless you add weird and outdated software from external sources. A bit like manually installing pkgbuild files you found on Github. Stuff will break in the same way when dependencies don’t get upgraded.
That said, Arch installs will break when a random library decides to update, and Ubuntu will break years later when you decide to upgrade.
Except for maybe Gentoo, Arch is the most “gets in your way” OS I’ve seriously used. You need to be conscious of stuff like your bootloader configuration, the network manager you use, and sometimes the kind of Bluetooth daemon you’re running, or software may not work or break your boot. It’s pretty easy to use if you install Arch by picking the exact same software you can also find in other distros (i.e. the Ubuntu style grub+systemd+NetworkManager+Gnome set, or the Fedora systemd-boot+dracut+NetworkManager+Gnome set). Following the Arch guide without copying a preexisting software set will make your life very difficult, as I’ve found out.
Yup, Arch is by far the distro I have had the fewest amounts of technical issues with. Yes, you need to know what you are doing or be willing to read docs, but there’s no magical bullshit, maintainer capriciousness and lack of planning happening like I have unfortunately witnessed all too often while using other distros.
a quick and dirty way to find out if your hardware is supported is to try out a live usb distributions that runs entirely off of a usb stick and never makes any permanent changes to your system.
it will run MUCH slower than a regular installation; but if you see all of your hardware and drivers enumerated in lspci; you’ll know that it works out of the box.
you should know that this limits you to the distros that have live usb images only; but if you go with mainstream debian, fedora, arch, etc. you’ll instantly know that downstream distro’s are capable of supporting with that hardware with that version of the mainstream distribution that they’re forked from (eg ubuntu from debian; manjaro from arch; suse from redhat; etc.)
i used this method extensively when i was new to linux and distro hopped a lot; it taught me a lot when i first started out.
the live distro’s come included with a lot of preloaded driver/firmware that is not included with a regular installation for a myriad of reasons; but you can use lspci and lsmod from the live environment to identify the proper software you need to add to your regular installation to get that hardware working.
Sometimes it’s an ideological issue. Some distributions don’t ship nonfree drivers, some do, but require you to manually install them, and some have trouble making up their mind. This last is where you get live cds that automatically load the drivers needed for your hardware, but when you actually install, things aren’t working anymore.
That’s useful info, I didn’t know about this. Could you be so kind to share some link, or say something more, about lspci and lsmod and how to proceed from them to identifying which drivers one should install? Cheers!
now i know all of the module names and i can either google them to learn how to install them or i can continue further with the package manager on the installation to further backwards engineer it. (googling is faster).
as i mentioned earlier there are caveats: downstream distros tend to use a slightly older version of their base distros so you also need to make sure that you’re using the same version of the driver and kernel and adjust accordingly if it doesn’t start working right away.
Fantastic, this is extremely helpful, thank you! 🥇 I wanted to test a couple of distros for my Thinkpad, and I’ll make sure to check and save this kind of information from live USBs.
kbin.life
Active