So, what you playing at the mo? Retro Edition

o1s1n

Inviere wrote: »

I enjoyed it, and the open world is an achievement in itself (they really did create a living place)....but strictly as a Zelda game....I dunno, the lack of dungeons kinda killed it for me

.

If you reskinned Link I really don't think you'd even notice it was a Zelda game. (aside from the cut scene elements of course)

Not putting in traditional Zelda sounds and music killed the connection for me. It is indeed an amazing game, but something as simple as a few musical scores that you are expecting would have gone a long way to give it that 'feel'.

Maybe that's just me being an old man yelling at clouds!

Retr0gamer

Honestly, after skyward sword being such a slog i felt zelda really needed to reinvent itself to avoid it becoming stale. Botw was the game that the zelda franchise really needed.

I actually think it's really counter productive when fans give out about a series straying too far from its roots as that just leads to the series becoming stale. I'd much rather see developers being allowed to innovate and take series in new directions.

I see some resident evil fans give out that resident evil 4 wasn't a real resi or resi 7 buy that series needed a radical change up before they got stale.

I think a lot of the fear stems from the times developers were forced to follow market trends, adding loot mechanics of making something open world just because those things sell. But genuine change to refresh a series and give it a new leash of life like botw or resident evil 4 I'm all for.

Really don't want to see zelda remake ocarina of time yet again. I much prefer the choice and free that link between worlds and botw brought to the series.

johnny_ultimate

Breath of the Wild is the best case study for why sequels for long-running series need to throw out the rule book sometimes and demolish the long-established formula.

Easily the best, most significant sequel made in the last 20 years.

o1s1n

There can definitely be a happy medium though between reinventing a series and still making the game feel like it's part of the series.

Look at the transition from Super Metroid to Metroid Prime - from side scrolling platforming to FPS. But Metroid prime still feels 100% like a Metroid game as it retains many of the core elements in the franchise.

BOTW left a few too many things behind which you'd traditionally associate with a Zelda game IMO. A lot of them for me anyway are sound/music based.

Still loved it, I'd just love to play a mod with more of the original scores and sounds reintroduced.

Retr0gamer

BotW was a very happy medium for me. No need to stifle creativity and the game was chock full of references, I mean all the towns and villages and enemies from the first zelda game were there.

As for Metroid Prime, you'd be surprised how many people don't consider it a true Metroid either. Even nintendo tried to write it out of canon.

What fans complaining about changes to games don't realise is that the developers probably thought about what you want, tried it and found better solutions. The lack of musical stings in BotW? More than likely because it negatively impacted the atmosphere they were going for and therefore went for a sparser arrangement so they could use the lack of music to heighten moments when it actually played. Lack of dungeons? Eh... probably lack of development time so hopefully that will change with the sequel.

o1s1n

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Easily the best, most significant sequel made in the last 20 years.

Mr Freeman would like to have a word with you...

Retr0gamer wrote: »

BotW was a very happy medium for me. No need to stifle creativity and the game was chock full of references, I mean all the towns and villages and enemies from the first zelda game were there.

As for Metroid Prime, you'd be surprised how many people don't consider it a true Metroid either. Even nintendo tried to write it out of canon.

What fans complaining about changes to games don't realise is that the developers probably thought about what you want, tried it and found better solutions. The lack of musical stings in BotW? More than likely because it negatively impacted the atmosphere they were going for and therefore went for a sparser arrangement so they could use the lack of music to heighten moments when it actually played. Lack of dungeons? Eh... probably lack of development time so hopefully that will change with the sequel.

Ah look, maybe in a few years down the line when we're up to BOTW 4 and there's a bit more familiarity with the the world it'll feel more 'Zelda-y', but for now it just feels like an excellent open world game with a Zelda skin thrown on top.

I'll have to give it another go, haven't played through it since way back in the WiiU days!

Inviere

Retr0gamer wrote: »

No need to stifle creativity

We're not saying it had to be an Ocarina of Time remake....there's huge scope for creativity. I'm all for pushing forward, and evolving the foundations of what makes a franchise what it is. The game is excellent, but for me, it's just a bit meh as a Zelda game....and that comes down to what makes a Zelda game, a Zelda game.

The music in BotW was fitting, and served its purpose well. It didn't really become a character of its own though, if you get me? Remember entering Hyrule Castle for the first time in Zelda 3? The muted rain bashing down on the roof, the regal orchestral theme then kicking in.....I can still play it back in my head right now. Remember the dawn breaking in Ocarina of Time? The twinkle, the bells, the slow fall towards a march then....again, timeless music. There's huge amounts of examples of it, through many different Zelda games....whether the player is aware or not, the music is a hidden character, with you all the time, providing an identity to every place you go. BotW didn't do any of that for me, I can't recount a single note from the games score. Not saying the music in it wasn't good, it was, it just didn't step forward as a central element.

The dungeons, the things that for me, makes or breaks a Zelda game. That feeling when you start a new dungeon where you feel unequipped, un-prepared, almost nervous as you set about down a dark corridor, not knowing if you've taken the right way....only for a while later, for the whole thing to tie together in a masterclass of level design...you fight your way to the master key, the final boss, you beat it, & you take a huge breath of relief....you conquered it, you've made a huge step in unravelling the mysteries of the game..... BotW had flashes of this (the Divine Beasts)....but four of them, for a game of this size....for me this is where it could have been SO much better.

They simply recycled those shrines, same walls, same sounds, nothing really to distinguish one from another. If I could take that open world design they came up with (a technical marvel btw), even shrink it down a tad (I'm not into wandering aimlessly if I don't have to), and tie the story around more dungeons, it'd have been massively better for me.

I know the open world concept isn't a snug fit with traditional dungeon design in Zelda (you've to largely take them in an ordered fashion)....but they could have married them together. I mean, you can technically waltz up to the last boss of the game the minute you start it, the approach to dungeons could have ben the same. We got open plains, snowy hills, and windy deserts instead of truly characterised dungeons though, for me, who's not really into open world games, that was what killed it.

So you say don't stifle growth, & I completely agree. But hey, don't stray so far that you could reskin the character, change a few names around, & rename the game "Fantasy Adventure - The Forgotten Realm"....and nobody would know. That's growth, but growth at a cost. I know I'm in a serious minority with this opinion, but hey, we've all got 'em

Inviere

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Breath of the Wild is the best case study for why sequels for long-running series need to throw out the rule book sometimes and demolish the long-established formula.

Easily the best, most significant sequel made in the last 20 years.

Don't rule out 'classics' such as Zelda 2, Super Mario Bros. 2, Starfox Adventures, and Sonic 06. Throwing out the rule book is a clear strategy for success....:o

Or should we consider other sequels, which didn't entirely throw out the rule book, but did reinterpret it to great acclaim...

Metroid Prime, Half Life 2, Zelda 3, Super Mario Bros. 3/World, Doom (2016), Resident Evil 4 & beyond, Super Mario Galaxy/Odyssey, Wolfenstein Reboot, I could go on and on.

I completely disagree that the rule book should be thrown out (it CAN work, but it's not a given), but I am definitely a fan of that book being expanded!

Retr0gamer

That's the first time I've heard starfox adventures considered a success by anyone that isn't a furry and has a hard on for crystal.

Inviere

Retr0gamer wrote: »

That's the first time I've heard starfox adventures considered a success by anyone that isn't a furry and has a hard on for crystal.

I mentioned it in the same sentence as Sonic 06...that should be a clue...

johnny_ultimate

I don't think *every* sequel needs to toss out the formula: there are lots of expanded or refined sequels I love. But there comes a point when something fresh is just what's needed. Half-Life 2 is a brilliant sequel, but it's only a first sequel - it's hardly like we were in a stage of diminishing Half-Life returns (well, some of the expansion packs were only OK :P). Metroid Prime was the first jump to 3D for a series - and I'd argue that's a good example of a series having run out of steam somewhat by the time MP3 rolled around. With Zelda, we've had dozens of games, and at least a half dozen full 3D sequels (more if you count the DS hybrid ones). Something fresh was very welcome after all that time, even if I'd no doubt have enjoyed another more straightforward sequel like I always do.

Besides, I wouldn't agree BotW is an unrecognisable Zelda game anyway - a lot of the imagery, world-building, mechanics, characters are there. Sometimes those elements are remixed, sometimes they're a straight burst of straight-faced nostalgia! I think the relative lack of the familiar music cues packs a punch when you hear familiar notes drifting out at a particularly key moment. And in many ways getting out in that glorious open world - and let me stress, I hate most open world games - with a toolset of immensely capable mechanics and playthings was as revelatory for me as first stepping out to Hyrule Field in 3D. Ultimately, it captures a sense of discovery and adventure present in that very first NES game in a way none of the other sequels - tremendous as they often are - did. It's utterly true to the spirit of the series, and while it has its imperfections and rough edges (unsurprising for one of the most ambitious video games I've ever played) its successes far outweigh them IMO.

I'd also argue Resident Evil 4 is as radical a sequel as BotW in many ways, but I'll leave it at that

Retr0gamer

I'd agree with you on resi 4

Inviere

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

I don't think *every* sequel needs to toss out the formula: there are lots of expanded or refined sequels I love. But there comes a point when something fresh is just what's needed. Half-Life 2 is a brilliant sequel, but it's only a first sequel - it's hardly like we were in a stage of diminishing Half-Life returns (well, some of the expansion packs were only OK :P). Metroid Prime was the first jump to 3D for a series - and I'd argue that's a good example of a series having run out of steam somewhat by the time MP3 rolled around. With Zelda, we've had dozens of games, and at least a half dozen full 3D sequels (more if you count the DS hybrid ones). Something fresh was very welcome after all that time, even if I'd no doubt have enjoyed another more straightforward sequel like I always do.

I'd largely agree, franchises do need to grow....but that growth can go one of two ways. For me, BotW was a great game, there's no denying it....technically and artistically. The near total lack of dungeons though, replaced with recycled shrines, more or less took a huge chunk of the fun out of it for me. The game really shone for me during the Divine Beasts.....but after every one of them, I was left with the feeling of "ugh, back to wandering again." It'd have been damn near perfect with a reworked shrine system, actual dungeons to compliment the divine beasts, & a score that had a bit more flair to it, & wasn't so timid. None of that means creativity had to be stifled, I feel they simply omitted a lot of makes Zelda games great....replacing it with something I subjectively don't particularly enjoy.

CiDeRmAn

I really missed the dungeons too, with the Divine Beasts kind of the closest gameplay replacement.
Those shrines were just all so similar.
The dungeons of LoZ were so integral, while it was great to see so many other elements of the franchise receiving an update or joined by new things, ditching dungeons was like Mario Kart 8 on the WiiU not having balloon battle arenas, I mean it was still Mario Kart but it was missing something many felt was the essence of the franchise, the things that made many of their favourite memories of playing MK over the decades.

Retr0gamer

So what you are all saying is that the zelda cdi games are better than botw as they stick closer to the zelda format?

CiDeRmAn

Retr0gamer wrote: »

So what you are all saying is that the zelda cdi games are better than botw as they stick closer to the zelda format?

No...
Ain't going to happen...
Shut up...

megaten

Going to be honest, in the Zelda games I first played like the abc ones I always preferred going around the overworld to the dungeons which more than half the time is just a slog unless they're super short like links awakening. There's also usually too many of them per game.

The only thing I'd say was really lacking was it really needed multiple area's like hurdle castle. There's some area's like the fort in Akkala where it felt like this was planned for. The overground/underground aspect of hurdle castle with multiple entry points made it a joy to explore.

Inviere

Retr0gamer wrote: »

So what you are all saying is that the zelda cdi games are better than botw as they stick closer to the zelda format?

I've a simple moto...if Link, Mario*, or Sonic actually speak in games, they're shite, pure shite

*not including the usual "lets'a go" etc etc.

I get that Miyamoto wanted to recreate the sense of exploration from the first game, and from that famous story of his about the forest from his childhood....that achieved it all, showing the world how to actually make an engaging open world....it's a damn shame they sacrificed the dungeons, an integral Zelda component, to do so.

Retr0gamer

I don't think they sacrificed them. I think they were a casualty of the development process. I mean there are 5 dungeons in the game, about the same as Majora's Mask. I would have liked more and I think the developer's would have liked to have had more. It's just time and budget constraints that cut them down.

o1s1n

Retr0gamer wrote: »

So what you are all saying is that the zelda cdi games are better than botw as they stick closer to the zelda format?

I think it's your inner hipster coming out. Familiarity breeding contempt, needing something new, unexpected and hopefully obscure.

I'd say you'd be delighted if Metroid Prime 4 ended up being an RTS. :pac:

CiDeRmAn

o1s1n wrote: »

I think it's your inner hipster coming out. Familiarity breeding contempt, needing something new, unexpected and hopefully obscure.

I'd say you'd be delighted if Metroid Prime 4 ended up being an RTS. :pac:

No, to be happy all the characters would be breeds of pigeon/llama and the whole game presented in a visual novel style.
You would have signifcant portions of Metroid Prime 4 then concerned with dress-up and dating advice.
There may, or may not, be a series of quick-time event sequences in which Samus-Pigeon and Metroid-Llama get in a dance-off...

CiDeRmAn

Actually, I might buy that myself...

o1s1n

Apparently Samus was rased by the Chozo, so your Samus-Pigeon might not be too far from reality!

Inviere

Started some practice runs of Sonic & Knuckles (Sonic), first two stages beaten easily enough as you'd expect being early on. The second stage, Flying Battery, reminds me in places of Scrap Brain Zone in Sonic 1....just a bit more complex though. The game feels tight, music excellent so far too. I quit at the start of the third stage, Sandolpolis, & will use the level select to continue tomorrow maybe.

o1s1n

Still playing about with Sonic 3 myself. Been trying to do a stage a night.

Yesterday night was meant to be Ice Cap Zone - Got game over at the end of act 2, couldn't believe it! The length of the levels meant there was no way I was going to go back and try again, so left it there.

Carnival Night Zone act 2 was indeed utterly bizarre, I don't remember playing that before. Only died the once and yes, because I ran out of time! Hit 10 minutes with about 20 seconds left to go.

I'm actually really enjoying going back to do a stage each night though. Quite a novelty having a Sonic game with saves.

Inviere

I'm the same with the long levels, after a ten min slog followed by death/game over, its a hard sell to want to do it again. The more you play though the better you get.

I'm doing a stage a night here too for practicing, it's a nice little pace to keep...not too short to be wasteful, but not long enough that you get sick of it. Interestingly Sonic & Knuckles has no save system, presumably the lock on tech combined with a battery would have been too expensive to manufacture?

o1s1n

Interesting, I didn't know that about the no saves. I suppose Sega viewed Sonic and Knuckles to be an add on for Sonic 3, so you can save it that way.

In reality, most kids probably had one game or the other, you'd want to have been one posh little fecker to have both

Finished Ice Cap this evening and decided to move on to Launch Base Zone - I actually stumbled across a glitch in Act 2 which meant I had to give up.

Sped up a ramp and Sonic ran in behind a wall, though it was the usual secret area kind of a thing but it didn't transition into a room and just ended up with Sonic stuck, unable to see him and unable to get out.

I think it was the games way of telling me to leave that stage till tomorrow...

Retr0gamer

I had sonic and knuckles. A friend had sonic 3. Had no issues beating the game back in the day but then being a school kid I had no adulting to deal with

Inviere

Retr0gamer wrote: »

I had sonic and knuckles. A friend had sonic 3. Had no issues beating the game back in the day but then being a school kid I had no adulting to deal with

It's amazing how different our gamer minds were back then. I remember beating Hyper SF2 on the Snes (or was it normal SF2?), on the hardest difficulty, without losing a round...to get the special ending.

A special ending you ask? Yes....a very special one....you hear Chun Li's cheer at the end of the credits iirc You couldn't pay me to try do that today on the Snes, not that I'd even be able to!

o1s1n

Inviere wrote: »

It's amazing how different our gamer minds were back then. I remember beating Hyper SF2 on the Snes (or was it normal SF2?), on the hardest difficulty, without losing a round...to get the special ending.

A special ending you ask? Yes....a very special one....you hear Chun Li's cheer at the end of the credits iirc You couldn't pay me to try do that today on the Snes, not that I'd even be able to!

That's some feat as a kid, you really must have played the hell out of the game. All done with a D pad too I take it on the Snes?

It's amazing how different my thumbs were back then, I can't play fighting games at all anymore with a D pad, left thumb starts to get sore and creaky after about 5 minutes!