Social Anxiety Support Forum banner

1 - 8 of 8 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,602 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
After a long wait a new sequelitis video has been released and it compared TLoZ: ALttP to TLoZ: OoT.

What do you think?, is his analysis correct?, are all of his criticism of OoT valid?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,015 Posts
I used to think Arin really knew his ****...until I started watching Game Grumps.

All he does it nitpick and dress it up as some intellectual analysis of game design. If he posted these thoughts on some forum it'd probably be laughed at and turned into a copypasta.
 

·
Watching you from afar...
Joined
·
207 Posts
I used to think Arin really knew his ****...until I started watching Game Grumps.

All he does it nitpick and dress it up as some intellectual analysis of game design. If he posted these thoughts on some forum it'd probably be laughed at and turned into a copypasta.
Whatever you think of the person, his points are no more or less valid.

With that being said, in 1998 gaming in 3D was still in it's infancy. It's hard to compare two entirely different games from two entirely different time periods of gaming. Is it fair to compare a game from 91' with over a decade's worth of polish, with something like OOT which was pioneering an entire dimension?

That's what he (egoraptor) does here. Most of his criticisms stem from the fact that OOT was a change. One that made it feel less adventurous then its counterparts. This is true, if you look at the game with the advantage of retrospection. Sometimes the illusion of freedom is all a game needs to have to immerse the player. OOT, perhaps like a classic point and click adventure, uses this to enhance the scope.

I can agree with most of what he's saying, but I can't agree with his conclusion. There need to be more people doing Essayesque videos like these critically analyzing games. If there's something that I don't like about gaming culture, it's that the general consensus on a game is too easily reached.
 

·
Maybe?
Joined
·
2,598 Posts
I can see where he's coming from, but think a lot of it is down to preference. Case in point: too much waiting or holes in bridges requiring you to jump over them not being "challenging".

I don't think it was ever intended to enter the picture as something challenging, but as something that made the world itself a little more interesting to interact with. Bridges that are in ruin are about atmosphere. The slim chance of falling through is just what follows naturally.

Having to play songs on the ocarina (even multiple times) was probably supposed to be like ritual that also served to further involve players. In addition to a sense of exploration, transitioning to 3D was done to make the world more engaging on a level that wasn't meant to be challenging in and of itself. I always saw that as a driving force behind OoT. The reaction to it (boredom or goofing off) largely depends on how you approach games and exploration in the first place.

Never played Skyward Sword, so no comments on his hateboner for it.
 

·
Gone, Never Coming Back
Joined
·
4,863 Posts
I haven't seen the video and probably won't because it's too long, but from what I've heard from others who summarized his points, supposedly it's just him contradicting himself a lot and reaching pretty far just to rant about Ocarina of Time. I also heard he streamed a playthrough of the latter game and was really horrible at it, so that kind of makes me wonder if he just can't adapt to change very well.

Ocarina of Time is a pretty dated game, but I think back then they wanted to change their focus and create a new type of game. Kind of like how Mario 64 was completely different from the other games and Metroid Prime was different from the other Metroids. It obviously worked considering the fact that so many well-known franchises were inspired by the game.

Someone mentioned that he claimed the z-targeting makes the combat overly complicated, which isn't a point I understand since most enemies can be beaten by just slashing at them. Something about it being a waiting game, but it's not something I ever had a problem with.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,261 Posts
They're "valid" sure. Do I agree with every single criticism? Not really.

Ocarina of Time is my favorite game of all time. Still.
I've played a bit of Link to the Past, and I thought it was a little too basic for my tastes, it had no atmosphere, nothing memorable. I don't think visuals make games, but they definitely can break them. Atmosphere and the "feel" of the game is largely dependent on visuals (graphics and the environment) and music. The 2D aspect of it DOES make it unappealing in a way, to me. The "3D doesn't work" criticism can literally just be reversed, I feel the exact same way about the 2D Zelda games as he does the 3D. Plus the whole "Z targeting sucks" criticism is kinda bull****, Z targeting isn't hard, and it's always worked beautifully for me. I've never had a problem with it at all. I've always felt like a hero fighting for his life in 3d Zelda games, in the older games, it's kinda like "slash slash stab stab, yay I'm killing things...." you don't get any feedback, you don't feel accomplishment. And the "story" was basic, almost unoriginal.

I'm a fan of story, and I don't mind reading.
There's nothing wrong with immersion and investing yourself into characters and story. In fact, that's kinda what I play games for. Games aren't just for simple fun, ya know? There are many reasons why people play them.

I've never played much of A Link to the Past, only because I see no reason to.
It's old, and unappealing to me, in lots of ways. Me playing it would seem redundant, like experiencing a ****tier version of something I've already played.

OOT is my childhood.
 
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
Top