Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

Sequelitis reviews ALttP & OoT

12 posts in this topic

Posted

So I don't know if you guys knew this or saw this, but there's a half hour long Sequelitis review of the zelda series. It starts by looking at the original Zelda game, then comparing it to A Link to the Past after it, and then spends the rest of the video centering around comparing ALttP and Ocarina of Time. Of course it does occasionally mention skyward sword, and at the end, takes a brief look at A Link Between Worlds.



I actually think he has some really good and interesting arguments. The one thing I don't agree with is his criticism of the treasure chest opening sequences, but I definitely like what he has to say about z-targeting and combat, and how it works for the zelda games in general. What do you guys think, assuming you have time to watch a thirty minute harsh critique of Ocarina of Time?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The main point I agree with him about is that Ocarina of Time has a lot of unnecessary waiting and pointless caves. Z-targeting is like, the foundation of most third person action games and I think the problem with it was more the choices of where enemies were placed.

 

His main issue is kind of fallacious; that the Zelda series is supposed to entirely be about exploration. Under that argument, sure, his criticisms are warranted, otherwise he's complaining as a purist. Exploration hasn't quite been the lifeblood of Zelda so much as say, speed has been to Sonic. He even complained about the limiting factors on exploration in Link to the Past... the third Zelda game. That was way early in its history. I feel he's also altogether too harsh on Skyward Sword, which was a good game. :S But again, under the pretense that exploration is key, sure, Skyward Sword is probably one of the worst of the Zeldas... TP would still be worse for pointless collectibles and lack of fulfilling exploration though. FSA would be the absolute worst probably, but he doesn't mention it at all.

 

I'm not really feeling it for a conversation about this video right at this moment, but that's my two cents for now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Pretty much what saha said. His arguments are sound, assuming that Zelda games are supposed to be about exploration.

 

And the waiting thing with enemies was a pretty big problem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I have very find memories of TP, actually. Jux saying.

Go on

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

i do too dawg

 

but they're not fond enough...

PrimaGaga likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Zelda really is about exploration though, Shaq. You want to explore the world and find Heart Pieces or new items because that's cool and stuff. It's the same with Metroid, they're just different genres. Well, maybe not as much as in Metroid, actually. Exploring is definitely a big part of Zelda still. That's why everyone complained about Skyward Sword because of Fi or the game pointing so many things out to the player at all times. The player should just be left alone and allowed to see where to go. If they really wanted to include help like that, it should be optional, not mandatory.

 

Anyway, Egoraptor brings up some good points. Most are good, the one about the treasure chest was silly, but whatever. His point about knowing that every dungeon will have an item that will be used on the boss to stun it and then hit it was good. Not knowing what's going to happen or be found in a dungeon is the whole point. The player wants to be surprised.

 

Regardless of all the criticism, I still think A Link to the Past, Ocarina of Time, and even Skyward Sword are solid additions to the franchise. I hope Zelda Wii U is more like the original, Wind Waker, or A Link Between Worlds. Although, Wind Waker was still a little hand-holdy, it had a sense of adventure when you weren't progressing the story, even if a lot of islands were barren.

 

 

Also, Pheonix, have you even played half the games Egoraptor mentioned in his video? HEH.

なべ likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

[[[[[[[he hasn't]]]]]]]]]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Yeah he is pretty much the lamest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I can't talk about this without getting angry.

 

Most of the criticisms he throws against OoT can also apply to ALTTP. 

 

His argument against Z targeting is utterly ridiculous. 

 

OoT was the FIRST 3d Zelda game. And one of the FIRST 3d games EVER. And it was GOOD. Better than good, really. It was amazing. I've played games all my life. I played and owned ALTTP long before I played OoT. I still consider OoT the superior game. It was the first game that made me a believer in the magic of video gaming. I don't know if I'd be playing games today if it wasn't for OoT. 

 

Anyone who plays it today wouldn't understand why it had such an impact. The graphics don't hold up. The story is somewhat minimal. Hyrule field is empty. It's somewhat small and linear. But back then, it was unprecedented. Hyrule field was HUGE. The graphics were cutting edge at the time. Much better than Mario 64 at least. It was an adventure. 

 

Arin sucks at video games anyway. Ever since I've watched him in Game Grumps, he's lost all credibility to me when it comes to game design. He'll complain about games holding his hand, then skip tutorials, then blame the game for not telling him what to do. It is asinine. 

pheonix561 and Sahaqiel like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Yeah...

Its a bummer too. I think sometimes they do that kind of thing to be more entertaining, but it gets on my nerves. As for OOT, maybe he played it later in life. I've tried to play it several times, and each time I get bored and quit. But that isn't really his complaint exactly. He's a bit of a video game elitist. He's got these purist ideas about what a video game is, and what they should be, and its pretty limited. I get the feeling he hasn't really played all that many newer games, and admitedly videi games are in a sort of waning period right now, but hey, the industry goes up and down a lot. I almost wish Game Grumps wasn't a thing so I could retain my image of that cool guy Egoraptor that makes cartoons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

the only thing he was right about was most everything he said about Skyward Sword.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Zelda really is about exploration though, Shaq. You want to explore the world and find Heart Pieces or new items because that's cool and stuff. That's why everyone complained about Skyward Sword because of Fi or the game pointing so many things out to the player at all times. The player should just be left alone and allowed to see where to go. If they really wanted to include help like that, it should be optional, not mandatory.

 

Anyway, Egoraptor brings up some good points. Most are good, the one about the treasure chest was silly, but whatever. His point about knowing that every dungeon will have an item that will be used on the boss to stun it and then hit it was good. Not knowing what's going to happen or be found in a dungeon is the whole point. The player wants to be surprised.

 

See, I don't think collectibles automatically means the game is about exploration. Sure, Link to the Past was designed for exploration, and Ocarina of Time was more linear but was less about exploration, but still very much encouraged it. The roots of the series are in exploration. But even then, a game series doesn't really have to be about anything. There's a specific kind of expectation you have when you see a mainline installment to a franchise, like that Madden will have football or that Sonic will have speedy segments, but those don't even have to be the case. I disagree that there really is a heart to a franchise, and that it's set in stone.

 

Like, I complained about how slow and paralyzed Sonic '06 was compared to all the other Sonic games, saying that it should be about going fast, but it wasn't necessarily because I totally believe that that is the heart of the series. If they designed the game differently, the game can be whatever it wants. The problem is that Sonic '06 retained almost all of the elements that lend to the idea that the game is supposed to be fast-paced. It has all the speeding segments, loop-de-loops, enemy placement that should help progress through different areas, and yet the game was still mind-numbingly slow because they made several design mistakes and had crippling limitations. The render distance was horrible and I guess they didn't utilize their assets very efficiently, and the controls were unpolished and clunky, so Sonic couldn't move very fast. Plus, they gave the enemies life bars and really long cooldown times on your homing attack, and you were required to destroy them before moving on, which breaks any kind of flow there could have been. It was an inconsistently built mess that should have been a fast-paced, somewhat enjoyable game. It's like a door with a turn handle that you have to push in. Sure, it functions, but the design implies that you're supposed to pull, and yet it pushes.

 

Zelda's currently making a transition from an at-your-own-pace explorationy adventure game to a fast-paced low-exploration action game (Hyrule Warriors) and I'm not saying that that flies in the face of what makes a Zelda game. Arguing that there is an objective heart of a series is being a purist, and I feel that that limits what a game is capable of. There's a reason that when we see Warriors, we don't immediately get pissed that it's clearly not about exploration, and that's because it's designed to be a totally different kind of game, same with any other spinoff. But then there' Four Swords Adventures, which was not very much at all about exploration, really. There were parts that had interesting exploration, like a couple of the town levels, but it was all-in-all a linear quest that was still interesting and fun.

 

Skyward Sword's major fault, yeah, was probably Fi's redundant explanations and gratuitous hand-holding, even though Miyamoto had already literally patented an in-game device that gave you hints if you were truly stuck on something. That move right there should have eliminated all the handholding. But it didn't, so the game has a weakness. However, other parts of the game were really designed around the mechanics and designed around the limitations of the player. I think the game was cleverly built and strongly designed (with a little exception to the combat) but particularly in their implementation of sprinting and puzzle design. It didn't have a huge ton of exploration, but so what? It was still there. There were still big sprawling maps for each location you were in, and many of the areas weren't so linear that you couldn't explore on your own at all. The dowsing was supposed to be a supplement for who I can only imagine as impatient people who would end up looking at a guide online anyway, like me. You still technically used a guide, but it was just provided by the game itself so it doesn't feel like cheating. If you used it and hated that it made things easier, that was your choice. You aren't required to dowse for the exploration-related collectibles.

 

 

 

 

I agree that his argument against Z-targeting is totally ridiculous, and that it doesn't sound like he's played similar modern third-person games that utilize it. And I think the mechanics themselves have aged well enough. It's still a well-made game with an extremely iconic world and a lasting impact on video games made even today. Like I said, I really only strongly agree with the ridiculous portion of the game dedicated to waiting for something to happen. I wish the random caves were more interesting. Some things were superfluous and didn't really contribute to any tension or whatever, like the Fire Temple's bridge jump. I feel like he was amplifying his criticisms because Ocarina of Time is so critically hailed. he also exaggerated the designs of previous Zeldas. Zelda I's difficulty was crazy-whack insane, and it was because of a somewhat poorly used enemy placement. He praised LoZ Darknuts for some reason, even though they were literally not designed in a way that let you know you couldn't attack them from the front.

 

I also agree that Egoraptor sucks at video games, particularly modern ones. The tutorial thing kind of goes against his mantra that you shouldn't even have tutorials in the first place, that the game should teach you by having you play it. And while I do think the best tutorials are ones you don't notice, that doesn't necessarily have to apply to all the games. If you want to play a game and enjoy it based on its merits, and it has a tutorial system you disagree with, you should still listen to it so you don't just expect the game to do something you know is uncommon. Most games have these somewhat boring, ineffective tutorials, but they're still required for you to play the game. It's like, you don't just pick up a musical instrument and expect its design to cater to those who have never played one. There's nothing about a trumpet that can easily relate to you which keys correspond to which notes, or what you have to do with your lips to change octaves, or how you're even supposed to blow into the thing. Some things just require a little research and a little boring tutorial, and you just have to deal with it. I've definitely watched a lot of Game Grumps videos where the grumps are having a hard time with something because they didn't pay attention to some mechanic they should have learned early on. The tutorial is there BECAUSE the game doesn't teach you through gameplay, so you should expect that you need its information.

 

But anyway, pheo, you should play those earlier Zelda games, at the very least to be a little more cultured about it so you have an opinion and input, and at the very most to play an iconic game that is a well-received example of game, and to a certain extent, game-story design.

SilverAlchemic, PrimaGaga and Chase like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.