Welcome to the official discussion thread for Mega Man X2 on the SNES!
To start, please add this game to your log, add it to your collection (if applicable), and (when you are ready) rate it using the link above!
You know, at the time, I always thought of this as a rather odd sequel. It felt darker, and just plain... weirder? I still loved it though, and I think I love it even more now.
Anyway, back when Capcom brought back Mega Man 9 as a "classic" Mega Man game, there was a lot of talk about doing it with the X series as well, going back to SNES style gameplay / graphics. Would you guys want to see that? Or is SNES X not quite classic enough?
@Jargon Hmm, I'd say the Zero games are even more different. For one, they work more on a "mission" structure and there isn't the whole 8 bosses with different powers to use on each other thing. And then graphics, music, etc. just feels different too. Probably other differences that I'm not thinking of at the moment.
Check out the ZX games someday too. I actually liked them more than the Zero games I think, in part because they... sort of... went back to feeling a bit more X-ish. With some Metroidvania mixed in. Although the utterly horrendous map dulls the Metroidvania a bit, but it's still cool.
@Jargon Even more different than the X games. The Zero games tend to encourage you to use Zero's sword, which does a lot of damage but obviously puts you in danger of colliding with enemies much more often. You do get a gun (and two or three other unique weapons in each game), and it functions a lot like the X Buster, but it's more of a sidearm.
The MMZ games also have a weird ranking system that grades you after each mission on several categories (speed, enemies killed, damage taken) and it affects what weapons and bonuses you earn. In fact, I seem to remember either the first or second game denying you some nice upgrades if you got a bad grade through the level. Maybe I'm remembering that wrong, but I definitely recall something backwards about it.
You also don't get Robot Master / Maverick style weapons at all, you just get two or three elements to equip to your weapons (and bosses are weak to certain elements) and a few other minor upgrades. The weapons you do get are a bit more versatile, but they have to be leveled-up through repeated use.
Finally, I remember the game being a lot more punishing than the X games. Instant death spikes are pretty common, even during some boss encounters. And that doesn't combine well with the smaller screen space.
If you can get the feel of the game, it's a lot of fun to zip around and slice enemies up with Zero. But while it feels vaguely similar to the X games, it's a fairly big adjustment.
EDIT: I agree with Zero, the ZX duo have the feel of the Zero games without some of their worse frustrations. The Metroidvania-style map is pretty bad, but it's worth putting up with.
@Jargon You really don't miss out on that much by not getting all of Zero's parts. Personally I think the story is slightly more effective if you don't get all of Zero's parts, though the changes when you do get all of his parts are kinda badass.
@Zero Well, you'd get the boss fight against Zero, but you'd miss out on boss fights against one or multiple X-Hunters, so it's really a trade-off either way.
Yeah I was gonna say, the story is probably better if you don't get all the parts. But I think it's also pretty gratifying if you do. It's a tough call. I can't remember how difficult the one fight is going to be of you don't get all the parts.
I feel like the first two games kinda go together but that the third game felt like an outlier. Part of it is the story but I think most of it, for me, is the music. Most of it feels really detached from the first two IMO.
The first X is a better introduction to the series and I feel that it's a better game overall. If you play either of these games and like it, I suggest checking out the rest of the SNES trilogy. It's more of the same, with some minor additions to spice things up a bit. You can't do wrong with any of them.