Yeah, better armor helps. But the game includes a lot of other alternative systems — from your ghost buddies to hearts and status-effect meals and potions — to help you out. So you don't necessarily have to grind for high-level gear like in other games. Like you, I'm near the end of the game (completed the four or, um, "five" dungeons, and now just have to face Ganondorf) and haven't really felt the need to grind for anything. (I did do one round of armor upgrades, tho, but I already had all the necessary items.) Even rupees: if you naturally explore caves you'll get plenty of gems to sell.
It's just that grind loops and systems are there, definitely, and you can get sucked into them. I think that's where the complaints are coming from.
It's grindy if you want to max out your gear and actively hunt down certain enemies. Of course, this is a game where you really don't need to max anything out. But the grindy systems and collectibles are still embedded into the experience, so you can easily fall into the grind loop if you're not careful. I'm not a completionist at all but even so, due to how the game is designed, I'm compelled to do little minor acts of grinding (from Korok seeds I'm not interested in to Hudson signs I may not be in the mood for) just because they're right there so I might as well do them. Thankfully, the game has so many different loops and vibes that you can move in and out of — from surprisingly involved sidequests that can take hours (currently in the eye-quest under the Great Plateau) to exploring the Depths, doing shrines (all of which feel way more bespoke than the Breath ones), or just following the critical path (which is far more engaging this time around) — that you can always snap out of the grind loop if you're stuck in it. But the grind loop is definitely there, dragging you down like swamp water.
Metroid Prime Remastered is so good, though. So that's in second place.
But Tears edges it out. I liked the Fire Temple myself, but navigating it can be a pain. Still, it's certainly more interesting than the four-shrines-stitched-together mid-ness of the Water Temple, I must say.
Wind and Lightning Temple are awesome, though. As long as you're not expecting them to be traditional Zelda dungeons and accept their relatively short length, they're a lot of fun and very immersive.
Plus the lead-up to all the dungeons is always incredible.
When I first started them out, Banjo was a 9 and Mario 64 was a 6. I played them for the first time in the past few years.
After about 20 hours with each, though, Banjo was still a 9 but Mario was a 10. They're both excellent games and Banjo is clearly more polished, with camera controls that at least resemble modern standards. Mario feels janky by comparison.
Thing is, eventually you get good (or at least, i got good) at Mario 64 and then that game just blows up. The sheer amount of creativity you can unleash on those levels is one of my biggest gaming highs. No other 3D Mario come close to the jazzy freedom and experimentation you can have in that game, not even Odyssey.
I'm sold. I'll get it after I'm done with Tears. Which will surely be someday. I don't mind the black bars. As a film purist, I get that aspect ratios gotta ratio. Some art is just made with certain frame dimensions in mind and you can't just widen the image without significantly redrawing it.
Agreed, but it's so ingrained in the discourse I just despair. And it's not just graphics, it's everything.
There are only two values systems, two poles: nostalgia or accepting modern market trends.
We could do the hard work of analyzing games and figuring out what they mean and what kind of experience they provide, whether it's through graphics or gameplay. But no, let's point out the obvious and note that a 20-year-old game is 20 years old. That's what consumers want, surely. And that's where the conversation is stuck right now.
I appreciate the access to a game I've never played. Metroid Prime Remastered was a way for the developer to test their Prime 4 engine. It's not a bar to measure other ports against. It's unique.
Sounds good. It'd be nice to rescue MGS 4 from its PS3 isolation. At least MGS V is available on more platforms, including PC.
I do think MGS 4 is kind of a mess, structurally. And the cinematic-to-gameplay balance is totally broken in the final third. As for MGS V, it's got great controls, mechanics, and feel, but the sandbox open world is mostly wasted and the whole thing was clearly rushed and incomplete. I think it's mostly interesting as a stepping stone towards Death Stranding, where the open world approach finally bloomed into something compelling and Kojima actually told his bombastic story the way he's used to doing it, through big interactive story moments and cinematics, and not through drama-deflating optional audio logs. I know some people liked the audio logs because it meant fewer cinematics, but frankly, I'm not sure what you're doing playing Kojima games if you're not into the profound cheese of his storytelling.
Which is why MGS 2 is clearly the best one, of course.
I skipped out on all the New Super Mario Bros games because they looked incredibly sterile, but Wonder has got me back on board.
I also haven't really played Mario RPG, so I'm both stoked and not stoked for the remake. It looks good and there's a lot of effort put into it, but I have to admit the of-its-era SNES graphics look more unique from a 2023 perspective, and I have a bone to pick with the homogenization of videogame aesthetics in general. I like new graphics just fine, but I also like the specific texture and color of games past. It's not about nostalgia for me, but simply retaining that variety of looks and vibes. But I understand the prerendered 90s look isn't commercially viable nowadays, of course. And Nintendo isn't Nightdive. They play to a different market.
Everything else was a notch below that, but still great. Metal Gear Solid, I have on PS3, but I don't like dusting off that console so I'll probably double-dip on Switch.
I played the Remake first. I went with DX, as that's the one I'm playing now on NSO. The Remake looks cute and has more buttons. But I find the movement weirdly slow. I don't know if it's the frame rate, the animation, or what. I prefer how DX moves, even with all the menu-fiddling and lethargic dialogue boxes (which is the biggest bummer, in my opinion).
Top-tier Zelda whichever version you play, though.
Breath is the better first game for a newcomer. It's got a smoother overall flow, from opening to conclusion. It's also more focused and pure. The free exploration of open terrain is unobstructed by clutter or complicated mechanics.
Tears assumes you've played Breath. Much of the emotional sweep of it depends on you remembering how Hyrule used to look before the Upheaval. The opening tutorial section is also harder and requires trickier navigation. The whole game, really, is just more difficult. And the mechanics take more getting used to. I still prefer Tears, though. I like the building, the creativity involved, the fusing to make new weapons. I like the more involved sidequests and the weirder and moodier vibe, especially in the caves and the Depths. I like that the combat shrines, this time around, are all different from each other.
In all, I love both Zeldas. My only issues are more conceptual, the fact that you have so many repeated structures in both games, over and over again, from towers to lightroots, shrines, Korok seed puzzles, Hudson sign puzzles, and so on, all with often identical or similar cinematics and mechanics. It makes the experience feel a bit repetitive and less special. It's one thing to have, say, collectibles strewn about, like Skultullas. But the above are full-fledged gameplay moments, that you do a lot of, and repeat constantly, and always convey a similar emotion or vibe, no matter where you are in the world. I miss the more bespoke, room-by-room variety of earlier Zeldas, for sure. You might get "less game," but those were still 40 to 50 hour adventures for a completionist run. Not exactly short, either.
The only thing is that, as much as I appreciate the Link's Awakening or Ocarina style of Zelda (with Majora's Mask remaining my personal favorite), I don't know if it would sell as much. Which, I don't care about. But Nintendo does. The open sandbox-y approach is definitely more streamable and sharable on social media, because of all the wild stuff high-level players manage to do. Which, you know, there's something to that. It's hard to make a game that gives you so much freedom. There's a reason I love these games anyway. But I don't know that I want another one in this style. It's gonna take me all year just to get through Tears.
Like everyone says, it's not Majora's Mask. Or Kakariko Village in Ocarina. But it's worth noting that both games get a lot of mileage out of the inherent weirdness of N64-era graphics, with its polygonal character models and unrealistic lighting. I can't imagine the Cursed Rich Man in the House of Skultulla or Dead Hand being quite so horrible with a "smoother," more modern art style.
That being said, Tears is definitely creepy. It's much creepier than Breath, for sure. Breath had the Guardians, but Tears is more consistent, not only because of the enemies mentioned in this article but also because the Depths and the Gloom are always there, below you. And the Depths themselves are also beautifully realized and strangely alien.
I mean, you're correct on all counts, but the label really caught on at some point and it's probably too late already to turn back the tide. I've just embraced it.
The historically-accurate term would, I guess, be Doom clone.
I didn't dislike the weapon degradation in Breath of the Wild, but did eventually settle into that common routine of long-time BotW players: avoiding low-level battles and saving my best weapons for difficult enemies, which eventually leads to senseless hoarding. I still do that in Tears of the Kingdom, but far less, because the fusing possibilities mean that I can make new powerful weapons on the fly with the right materials. So I'm getting into more battles, willingly, just to expand my combinatorial possibilities.
As for rupees, I do think they're fairly important in the early game, since you have to buy a lot of armor sets for environmental hazards and combat. I ]agree Zelda games have struggled to give rupees purpose in the past, outside of the very first game, where buying items and health potions is worth doing (and where rupees essentially play the role of experience points). In later games, they're relevant early on and then eventually become useless, since you have no long-term, late-game purchase goals (and the games are easier, so you don't need to buy health potions as much).
Back in the 90s, they let you fully remap Super Metroid's controls. Then they stopped giving you that option, for some reason. Even newer Metroid games don't always let you do that.
Probably how I played BOTW, which means actively avoiding the ending and ignoring every character trying to convince me there are urgent matters afoot, until somewhere around hour 257 I decide it's time for some closure.
True, this is an issue with game review scales in general. A 7 — which, in film criticism, is a pretty good score, and what I'd give most films I watch and enjoy — can cost game developers a bonus if it affects the Metacritic score. It's very weird and a flawed system.
I don't understand why so many commenters are getting bent out of shape about this movie getting a 6 out of 10 when the gist of their argument is, "I'm fine with this film being 6 out of 10."
No one said you and your little one weren't going to enjoy a 6 out of 10 movie. But from the sounds of it, this isn't exactly up there with the best from Pixar or something like The Iron Giant. That's what gets 10s or 9s.
I haven't watched this movie and it could well be that I'd rate it higher, but I understand where the reviewer's coming from. I love commenters replying, "Well, I wasn't expecting some profound plot from Mario!" As if there were no in-between options, no way for this sort of film to hit deeper without also being fun for all ages. It's either "mindless fan service" or "deep ruminations on the loss of cultural and ethnic history following the devastating wars of the 20th century" with these folk.
Also, the people humblebragging about "making their own opinions" don't understand the point of film criticism, which is to share and discuss ideas and viewpoints, not submit to brain washing.
Talk to everyone. Population density in towns is low, so nearly every NPC gives you some kind of quest-related clue. Also, NPCs don't usually lie. If the guy who runs the fishing minigame tells you that you can't take the fish with you out into the world, he means it. It's not a puzzle. He's not tricking you. Take nearly everyone at their word.
Spend time in the intro area to get used to the camera and controls. They definitely work in the context of the game, but they're also definitely not modern. So you have to adapt to the game's internal logic and what it's going to ask you to do within its constraints.
This game has a high degree of information density. It's not like a modern game that'll just have fancy assets lying around because there's memory to spare. If there's a dude standing in a corner, he probably has something to say. If a wall looks weird, you can probably bomb it. Nearly everything serves a purpose.
The game will never ask you to do anything too annoying. If you find yourself trying out stuff that's too tricky or convoluted, you're probably doing it wrong. Go back to the room you got stuck in, look at what items you have, and try to figure it out. You may need a new item to progress, Metroid-style. But often you already have it.
Also, when the Great Fairy tells you to go visit her friend in Hyrule Castle, she's not kidding. It's not an optional sidequest. It seems like it until, a million years later, it's not.
Original hardware is obviously better, in theory, but if we're talking about "these days," then I can't deny the convenience of NSO. In fact, since I was a little too young for the original SMB and only dabbled in it when I was a kid, I never actually beat the game until last year, precisely on NSO.
I'm excited and definitely getting it. I still have a lot of questions, though.
I don't really have a lot of hope for traditional Zelda gameplay making a comeback. That gameplay is based on restrictions: you can only use certain items to get to certain places. This sets the pacing of the game.
You can see the Water Temple entrance as soon as you enter Lake Hylia, but you can't get to it until later in the game. It's an enigma that lives with you for a few dozen hours.
But Breath of the Wild's whole thing is that now you can solve whatever mystery you run into immediately. Just climb up to it. It's a different vibe, with its pros and cons.
Same with the puzzles. It's one thing to walk into a dangerous temple where you need to solve this precise clockwork mechanism or fail, as in traditional Zelda. It's another if, like in Breath of the Wild, you run into a sandbox where you can try stuff out and see if it works. One is intimidating and immersive. The other is playful and creative.
Two vastly different approaches. I like both. But if you try to fit traditional Zelda restrictions into Breath of the Wild's open mechanics, you get a weird fit. That's kind of the issue with some of the shrines and divine beasts. They feel like they're neither one thing nor the other, just an uneasy middleground.
If we get dungeons in Tears of the Kingdom, and they're done well, I'm assuming they'll follow the template of Hyrule Castle in Breath of the Wild, which is the only dungeon-like space in that game that both feels like a real, top-tier dungeon but is also adapted to Breath's gameplay.
I haven't played much of Elden Ring, but from what I have played, I really don't get the comparisons either. Elden Ring is a combat-focused experience. You have none of the interesting traversal or physics systems that are in Breath of the Wild. Moving around feels floaty and weightless, by design, so you can focus on moving around enemies and not micromanaging your steps (as in Breath of the Wild or Death Stranding). Conversely, Breath of the Wild isn't really about combat. It actually does quite a few things to discourage combat in favor of stealth or outright avoidance. Sure, both games have big worlds you can explore as you wish, but that's where the comparisons end.
Yeah, it's a good area. It's not the best, but it never feels like it's supposed to be. What I mean by that is that, for example, and conversely, it's pretty obvious that City of Tears is built to be the "best" area in the game: from the way it's set up and foreshadowed through lore to the visual sumputuousness of it all, that's the role it plays in the overall world design. Deepnest, on the other hand, plays a different role. It's dark, weird, and unsettling. It's tough to navigate. It's not a place you want to be in for very long. But that's fine, because it's not like the entire game is like that, just this one specific area that's called DEEPnest. It certainly lives up to the name.
I'd love the option to buy favorites, along with the subscription. But one thing I like about the subscription model is that it encourages just trying games out I otherwise wouldn't pay for and which then become all-time favorites that, in retrospect, I'd pay for thrice over. (Alien Soldier being an example for me. Beyond Oasis, too.)
Depends on what games they play. Switch is great for portability and Nintendo stuff, and it pairs well with a gaming PC. Most PS5 exclusives will eventually come to PC, but you're not going to get that with Nintendo's first-party games, unless you emulate. I bought the Switch for Breath of the Wild. That was my gateway. Since then I've loved countless games on the Switch, but it all started with that.
Great timing! I'm close to finishing Metroid 2, which is surprisingly awesome. I'd heard so many bad things about it over the years, I thought it'd be a slog. But it's genuinely very, very good. I recommend playing with the GBC colors, by the way.
Kind of equally. I mean, realistically, N64, then SNES. But I've logged tons of time into the NES and Genesis apps, and there's tons I want to play on the GBA and GB already.
I don't know, it's weird. I think they were going for maximum surprise: announce it off-hand during a highlights reel and then shadow drop it. I can't say the tactic didn't work: it's being praised across the board and everyone — at least, in the Western gaming web — seems to be talking about it.
Although maybe it's just Nintendo underestimating the importance of Metroid. It wouldn't be the first time.
But... on the other hand, I mean, they gave the Metroid franchise its own bespoke landing page, went hard on promoting Dread last year, are clearly investing on Prime 4 (going so far as to restart development to meet quality standards), and the money is clearly there in Remastered's production values.
So who knows at this point. Metroid is in this weird place in gaming history, where it's one of the most supremely important franchises in the industry, created its own genre, houses at least two GOAT contenders, but has never been a massive seller.
Yeah, definitely. I loved Dread as well, but that one's more focused on action and constant progression. You're often railroaded into the critical path. (Which is fine for what Dread is trying to do.) Prime is closer to Super in terms of emphasizing exploration, attention to detail, and backtracking. Which is an acquired taste, but it's certainly mine.
First time I played a Zelda game, I gave him my name. That ultimately felt kind of weird, though, especially since he's so iconically known as and talked about as Link. So now I just give him his canon name. Same with all RPGs that let you change the name.
@AtlanteanMan I thought it'd be annoying too when I did it for Goldeneye, but since you can save the remapping as a preset, switching back and forth only takes a few seconds. It's still something that should be in-game, but if you're already playing and just want it to feel more natural, it's worth it.
Given how hard Retro went on this remaster, I almost feel like making this may have been a kind of warmup session. Like, "Alright, how did these Prime games work again? And how can we make one for the Switch?" Would be interesting to learn more about the development, because real care was put into it. This is best-in-class.
Beyond the timing, I think there's a strategic layer of: "Trust us, Prime 4 is in good hands."
Not a bad point, but: there's a Casual difficulty level and a hint system, which carry over from previous iterations. So some concessions were made along the way to make the game more accessible.
Just played the opening hours. It looks and runs amazing. I never finished this one back in the day. I wasn't a very good gamer and I only had a Gamecube for a few months. Time to catch up and make my avatar proud.
I agree, and I'm playing the NSO version. After remapping the controls, it's a perfectly fine emulation job. I've already binged it loads over the weekend. I'm sure there are better fan versions out there and I'm interested in trying them out, but to be entirely honest, the fact that I can now actually tell what's going on during the Jungle level — a level that taught me what framerate issues were back in the day — feels like science fiction to me. Between the stable framerate, upped resolution, and widescreen support, it's been a delightful experience. I can't find it in me to complain.
@gloom Try the control remapping that NL suggests on their YouTube channel. Yeah, it's system level, but you can save it as a preset and just switch it on whenever you want to play Goldeneye. It makes the game control more or less like a modern shooter and it takes less than a minute to set up. Made a huge difference for me, personally, and allowed me to just sit back and blow through Agent and Secret Agent. (00 Agent is probably beyond me, but we'll see.)
I have played them. I've played Odyssey, Galaxy, Sunshine, and 64. I just didn't play them (to completion, anyway) in the order they came out. 64 was one of the last ones I played, Odyssey was the first. (I'm missing Galaxy 2, yeah. Blame the All-Stars collection.)
I get what you're saying about improvements to the controls and camera, but I also care about stuff like structure, progression, overall atmosphere, fundamental game design, compactness, etc. I appreciate Odyssey improves, say, controls and camera. That's hard to argue against. But I abhor the way the game is put together, the challenges, the level design philosophy, etc. I prefer all of that in 64. I can get used to jank, but I can't get used to "the way the game is put together," because that's always going to be there, no matter how good I become at the game.
Can't be said enough. My only disagreement is with the strafing: I basically moved in diagonals all the time in both Goldeneye and Perfect Dark. But the point is that you don't have to worry that much about aiming on the Y axis. The game isn't built for that. I essentially played it like Doom. Not that I knew that at the time, because I first played Doom in 2020 (and it's still one of the best games of all time). But that's what I did: mostly movement on the horizontal plane, constant strafing or diagonals, relying on autoaim like it's part of the game (because it is, just like Doom), and sporadic adjustments on the Y axis. I always thought the controls were fluid, on an N64 pad. Not sure how it'll play on the Switch pad, to be honest. I assume I'll have to be holding the right trigger all the time to use the face buttons like the C buttons. Which sounds kind of like a drag, but that's how I play Zelda on NSO and it's fine.
Yes, 100%. I find it so annoying that so many randos on the internet are trying to "educate" the rest of us about what has or hasn't aged well. They all adopt this godly, objective voice, like they're the only ones seeing reason and are looping us all in on the truth. Get a grip.
Other than Tim Rogers' 3-hour video, I haven't watched or read any conspiracy theories. I didn't need to. I just don't see any other way to interpret the ending to FF7R. It's not clutching at straws, it's what explicitly happens at the end: the story goes off rails because the characters — and spoiler warning here — literally defeat the physical manifestations or protectors of fate, who were keeping the plot aligned with the original game. This is a major plot point that's called out in the dialogue, not my interpretation. We can argue semantics about whether the above makes Remake a "stealth sequel" or not, but, frankly, if the second part doesn't go off into unexplored territory, I'd consider that a major letdown. It's not about marketing, it's about narrative logic and coherence. Even the naming — Rebirth — points in this direction. They'll probably revisit many of the same locations, though, for the vibes. They might even find a way to echo the original's narrative structure. But with everything they set up, I do expect major shifts. Anything else would be a copout, in my opinion.
How were you trying to play it? I always found Goldeneye and PD smooth to control — but I'm not playing it like Halo or later console FPS games. I'm just relying on autoaim and strafing nonstop, like original DOOM, with an occasional vertical adjustment every now and then.
I wouldn't say it's nostalgia alone, though. I've played many 90s classics decades after their release for the first time and I still loved them. It just kind of depends on how much you care about "datedness." (I don't care much at all.) I mean, I liked playing a modern game like Death Stranding in 4K as much as the next person, but I'm not expecting that graphical fidelity and modern accoutrements out of, say, Banjo Kazooie. That game is over 20 years old. The camera's gonna be a little funky and the textures are gonna be blurry. That's just the way it is. I enjoyed both to about the same degree last year.
I'm really interested in going through the campaign again. Goldeneye was my first FPS game, so I had no context for it. Now that I've actually played Doom, Quake, Half-Life, Turok 2, and most of the other big 90s shooters, I feel like I'll understand it in a different way than I did back then.
Yeah, I always preferred Perfect Dark. It's the one I actually played with my friends. I also thought it was more exciting visually, since it came near the end of the N64's lifespan.
If it's widescreen (which was an option back in the day but I never used it) and the framerate isn't horrible, then I'm looking forward to this.
I don't really understand how rose tinted glasses are supposed to work, though. I remember the game pretty well. I know what it does well and what it doesn't.
Comments 753
Re: Zelda: Tears Of The Kingdom Update Now Live (Version 1.2.0), Here Are The Full Patch Notes
@Purgatorium
Yeah, better armor helps. But the game includes a lot of other alternative systems — from your ghost buddies to hearts and status-effect meals and potions — to help you out. So you don't necessarily have to grind for high-level gear like in other games. Like you, I'm near the end of the game (completed the four or, um, "five" dungeons, and now just have to face Ganondorf) and haven't really felt the need to grind for anything. (I did do one round of armor upgrades, tho, but I already had all the necessary items.) Even rupees: if you naturally explore caves you'll get plenty of gems to sell.
It's just that grind loops and systems are there, definitely, and you can get sucked into them. I think that's where the complaints are coming from.
Re: Zelda: Tears Of The Kingdom Update Now Live (Version 1.2.0), Here Are The Full Patch Notes
@Purgatorium
It's grindy if you want to max out your gear and actively hunt down certain enemies. Of course, this is a game where you really don't need to max anything out. But the grindy systems and collectibles are still embedded into the experience, so you can easily fall into the grind loop if you're not careful. I'm not a completionist at all but even so, due to how the game is designed, I'm compelled to do little minor acts of grinding (from Korok seeds I'm not interested in to Hudson signs I may not be in the mood for) just because they're right there so I might as well do them. Thankfully, the game has so many different loops and vibes that you can move in and out of — from surprisingly involved sidequests that can take hours (currently in the eye-quest under the Great Plateau) to exploring the Depths, doing shrines (all of which feel way more bespoke than the Breath ones), or just following the critical path (which is far more engaging this time around) — that you can always snap out of the grind loop if you're stuck in it. But the grind loop is definitely there, dragging you down like swamp water.
Re: Poll: What's Your Game Of The Year Of 2023 So Far?
Tears, easily.
Metroid Prime Remastered is so good, though. So that's in second place.
But Tears edges it out. I liked the Fire Temple myself, but navigating it can be a pain. Still, it's certainly more interesting than the four-shrines-stitched-together mid-ness of the Water Temple, I must say.
Wind and Lightning Temple are awesome, though. As long as you're not expecting them to be traditional Zelda dungeons and accept their relatively short length, they're a lot of fun and very immersive.
Plus the lead-up to all the dungeons is always incredible.
Re: Best Nintendo 64 Platformers - Every N64 3D Platformer, Ranked By You
When I first started them out, Banjo was a 9 and Mario 64 was a 6. I played them for the first time in the past few years.
After about 20 hours with each, though, Banjo was still a 9 but Mario was a 10. They're both excellent games and Banjo is clearly more polished, with camera controls that at least resemble modern standards. Mario feels janky by comparison.
Thing is, eventually you get good (or at least, i got good) at Mario 64 and then that game just blows up. The sheer amount of creativity you can unleash on those levels is one of my biggest gaming highs. No other 3D Mario come close to the jazzy freedom and experimentation you can have in that game, not even Odyssey.
Steep learning curve, though.
Re: Review: Ghost Trick: Phantom Detective - A DS All-Timer Returns In Stunning Form
I'm sold. I'll get it after I'm done with Tears. Which will surely be someday. I don't mind the black bars. As a film purist, I get that aspect ratios gotta ratio. Some art is just made with certain frame dimensions in mind and you can't just widen the image without significantly redrawing it.
Re: Review: Fire Emblem - The Blazing Blade Is Still As Sharp As Ever
@-wc-
Agreed, but it's so ingrained in the discourse I just despair. And it's not just graphics, it's everything.
There are only two values systems, two poles: nostalgia or accepting modern market trends.
We could do the hard work of analyzing games and figuring out what they mean and what kind of experience they provide, whether it's through graphics or gameplay. But no, let's point out the obvious and note that a 20-year-old game is 20 years old. That's what consumers want, surely. And that's where the conversation is stuck right now.
Re: Review: Pikmin 1 - A Bare-Bones Port, But A Joyous Adventure
I appreciate the access to a game I've never played. Metroid Prime Remastered was a way for the developer to test their Prime 4 engine. It's not a bar to measure other ports against. It's unique.
Re: Rumour: Metal Gear Solid 4, 5, and Peace Walker May Be Included In Vol. 2 Collection
Sounds good. It'd be nice to rescue MGS 4 from its PS3 isolation. At least MGS V is available on more platforms, including PC.
I do think MGS 4 is kind of a mess, structurally. And the cinematic-to-gameplay balance is totally broken in the final third. As for MGS V, it's got great controls, mechanics, and feel, but the sandbox open world is mostly wasted and the whole thing was clearly rushed and incomplete. I think it's mostly interesting as a stepping stone towards Death Stranding, where the open world approach finally bloomed into something compelling and Kojima actually told his bombastic story the way he's used to doing it, through big interactive story moments and cinematics, and not through drama-deflating optional audio logs. I know some people liked the audio logs because it meant fewer cinematics, but frankly, I'm not sure what you're doing playing Kojima games if you're not into the profound cheese of his storytelling.
Which is why MGS 2 is clearly the best one, of course.
Re: Poll: What Did You Think Of Today's Nintendo Direct?
It was pretty good.
I skipped out on all the New Super Mario Bros games because they looked incredibly sterile, but Wonder has got me back on board.
I also haven't really played Mario RPG, so I'm both stoked and not stoked for the remake. It looks good and there's a lot of effort put into it, but I have to admit the of-its-era SNES graphics look more unique from a 2023 perspective, and I have a bone to pick with the homogenization of videogame aesthetics in general. I like new graphics just fine, but I also like the specific texture and color of games past. It's not about nostalgia for me, but simply retaining that variety of looks and vibes. But I understand the prerendered 90s look isn't commercially viable nowadays, of course. And Nintendo isn't Nightdive. They play to a different market.
Everything else was a notch below that, but still great. Metal Gear Solid, I have on PS3, but I don't like dusting off that console so I'll probably double-dip on Switch.
Re: Talking Point: Which Version Of Zelda: Link's Awakening Is Your Favourite?
I played the Remake first. I went with DX, as that's the one I'm playing now on NSO. The Remake looks cute and has more buttons. But I find the movement weirdly slow. I don't know if it's the frame rate, the animation, or what. I prefer how DX moves, even with all the menu-fiddling and lethargic dialogue boxes (which is the biggest bummer, in my opinion).
Top-tier Zelda whichever version you play, though.
Re: Soapbox: Zelda: Tears Of The Kingdom's Busier Hyrule Is Making Me Miss BOTW
Breath is the better first game for a newcomer. It's got a smoother overall flow, from opening to conclusion. It's also more focused and pure. The free exploration of open terrain is unobstructed by clutter or complicated mechanics.
Tears assumes you've played Breath. Much of the emotional sweep of it depends on you remembering how Hyrule used to look before the Upheaval. The opening tutorial section is also harder and requires trickier navigation. The whole game, really, is just more difficult. And the mechanics take more getting used to. I still prefer Tears, though. I like the building, the creativity involved, the fusing to make new weapons. I like the more involved sidequests and the weirder and moodier vibe, especially in the caves and the Depths. I like that the combat shrines, this time around, are all different from each other.
In all, I love both Zeldas. My only issues are more conceptual, the fact that you have so many repeated structures in both games, over and over again, from towers to lightroots, shrines, Korok seed puzzles, Hudson sign puzzles, and so on, all with often identical or similar cinematics and mechanics. It makes the experience feel a bit repetitive and less special. It's one thing to have, say, collectibles strewn about, like Skultullas. But the above are full-fledged gameplay moments, that you do a lot of, and repeat constantly, and always convey a similar emotion or vibe, no matter where you are in the world. I miss the more bespoke, room-by-room variety of earlier Zeldas, for sure. You might get "less game," but those were still 40 to 50 hour adventures for a completionist run. Not exactly short, either.
The only thing is that, as much as I appreciate the Link's Awakening or Ocarina style of Zelda (with Majora's Mask remaining my personal favorite), I don't know if it would sell as much. Which, I don't care about. But Nintendo does. The open sandbox-y approach is definitely more streamable and sharable on social media, because of all the wild stuff high-level players manage to do. Which, you know, there's something to that. It's hard to make a game that gives you so much freedom. There's a reason I love these games anyway. But I don't know that I want another one in this style. It's gonna take me all year just to get through Tears.
Re: Talking Point: Is Tears Of The Kingdom The Scariest Zelda Game Ever?
Like everyone says, it's not Majora's Mask. Or Kakariko Village in Ocarina. But it's worth noting that both games get a lot of mileage out of the inherent weirdness of N64-era graphics, with its polygonal character models and unrealistic lighting. I can't imagine the Cursed Rich Man in the House of Skultulla or Dead Hand being quite so horrible with a "smoother," more modern art style.
That being said, Tears is definitely creepy. It's much creepier than Breath, for sure. Breath had the Guardians, but Tears is more consistent, not only because of the enemies mentioned in this article but also because the Depths and the Gloom are always there, below you. And the Depths themselves are also beautifully realized and strangely alien.
Re: Review: Warhammer 40,000: Boltgun - Bold, Bleak, And Bewildering Boomer Ballistics
@NeonPizza
I mean, you're correct on all counts, but the label really caught on at some point and it's probably too late already to turn back the tide. I've just embraced it.
The historically-accurate term would, I guess, be Doom clone.
Re: Soapbox: How Zelda's Bad Economy Made Weapon Degradation Great Again
I didn't dislike the weapon degradation in Breath of the Wild, but did eventually settle into that common routine of long-time BotW players: avoiding low-level battles and saving my best weapons for difficult enemies, which eventually leads to senseless hoarding. I still do that in Tears of the Kingdom, but far less, because the fusing possibilities mean that I can make new powerful weapons on the fly with the right materials. So I'm getting into more battles, willingly, just to expand my combinatorial possibilities.
As for rupees, I do think they're fairly important in the early game, since you have to buy a lot of armor sets for environmental hazards and combat. I ]agree Zelda games have struggled to give rupees purpose in the past, outside of the very first game, where buying items and health potions is worth doing (and where rupees essentially play the role of experience points). In later games, they're relevant early on and then eventually become useless, since you have no long-term, late-game purchase goals (and the games are easier, so you don't need to buy health potions as much).
Re: Soapbox: Zelda: Tears Of The Kingdom Straight Up Fails In Just One Respect: Accessibility
Back in the 90s, they let you fully remap Super Metroid's controls. Then they stopped giving you that option, for some reason. Even newer Metroid games don't always let you do that.
Re: Poll: What's Your Game Plan For Zelda: Tears Of The Kingdom?
Probably how I played BOTW, which means actively avoiding the ending and ignoring every character trying to convince me there are urgent matters afoot, until somewhere around hour 257 I decide it's time for some closure.
Re: Movie Review: The Super Mario Bros. Movie - A Fun Ride That Substitutes Story For Spectacle
@MarioBrickLayer
True, this is an issue with game review scales in general. A 7 — which, in film criticism, is a pretty good score, and what I'd give most films I watch and enjoy — can cost game developers a bonus if it affects the Metacritic score. It's very weird and a flawed system.
Re: Movie Review: The Super Mario Bros. Movie - A Fun Ride That Substitutes Story For Spectacle
I don't understand why so many commenters are getting bent out of shape about this movie getting a 6 out of 10 when the gist of their argument is, "I'm fine with this film being 6 out of 10."
No one said you and your little one weren't going to enjoy a 6 out of 10 movie. But from the sounds of it, this isn't exactly up there with the best from Pixar or something like The Iron Giant. That's what gets 10s or 9s.
I haven't watched this movie and it could well be that I'd rate it higher, but I understand where the reviewer's coming from. I love commenters replying, "Well, I wasn't expecting some profound plot from Mario!" As if there were no in-between options, no way for this sort of film to hit deeper without also being fun for all ages. It's either "mindless fan service" or "deep ruminations on the loss of cultural and ethnic history following the devastating wars of the 20th century" with these folk.
Also, the people humblebragging about "making their own opinions" don't understand the point of film criticism, which is to share and discuss ideas and viewpoints, not submit to brain washing.
Re: Video: We're Playing Zelda: Ocarina Of Time In Our New YouTube Series 'First Bytes'
@sunny63
Talk to everyone. Population density in towns is low, so nearly every NPC gives you some kind of quest-related clue. Also, NPCs don't usually lie. If the guy who runs the fishing minigame tells you that you can't take the fish with you out into the world, he means it. It's not a puzzle. He's not tricking you. Take nearly everyone at their word.
Spend time in the intro area to get used to the camera and controls. They definitely work in the context of the game, but they're also definitely not modern. So you have to adapt to the game's internal logic and what it's going to ask you to do within its constraints.
This game has a high degree of information density. It's not like a modern game that'll just have fancy assets lying around because there's memory to spare. If there's a dude standing in a corner, he probably has something to say. If a wall looks weird, you can probably bomb it. Nearly everything serves a purpose.
The game will never ask you to do anything too annoying. If you find yourself trying out stuff that's too tricky or convoluted, you're probably doing it wrong. Go back to the room you got stuck in, look at what items you have, and try to figure it out. You may need a new item to progress, Metroid-style. But often you already have it.
Also, when the Great Fairy tells you to go visit her friend in Hyrule Castle, she's not kidding. It's not an optional sidequest. It seems like it until, a million years later, it's not.
Re: Feature: What's The Best Way To Play Super Mario Bros. In 2023?
Original hardware is obviously better, in theory, but if we're talking about "these days," then I can't deny the convenience of NSO. In fact, since I was a little too young for the original SMB and only dabbled in it when I was a kid, I never actually beat the game until last year, precisely on NSO.
Re: Zelda: Tears Of The Kingdom Trailer Gets Creative With Vehicle Building, Fused Weapons
I'm excited and definitely getting it. I still have a lot of questions, though.
I don't really have a lot of hope for traditional Zelda gameplay making a comeback. That gameplay is based on restrictions: you can only use certain items to get to certain places. This sets the pacing of the game.
You can see the Water Temple entrance as soon as you enter Lake Hylia, but you can't get to it until later in the game. It's an enigma that lives with you for a few dozen hours.
But Breath of the Wild's whole thing is that now you can solve whatever mystery you run into immediately. Just climb up to it. It's a different vibe, with its pros and cons.
Same with the puzzles. It's one thing to walk into a dangerous temple where you need to solve this precise clockwork mechanism or fail, as in traditional Zelda. It's another if, like in Breath of the Wild, you run into a sandbox where you can try stuff out and see if it works. One is intimidating and immersive. The other is playful and creative.
Two vastly different approaches. I like both. But if you try to fit traditional Zelda restrictions into Breath of the Wild's open mechanics, you get a weird fit. That's kind of the issue with some of the shrines and divine beasts. They feel like they're neither one thing nor the other, just an uneasy middleground.
If we get dungeons in Tears of the Kingdom, and they're done well, I'm assuming they'll follow the template of Hyrule Castle in Breath of the Wild, which is the only dungeon-like space in that game that both feels like a real, top-tier dungeon but is also adapted to Breath's gameplay.
Re: Zelda: Tears Of The Kingdom Gameplay Trailer Drops Tomorrow, 28th March 2023
@Varkster
I haven't played much of Elden Ring, but from what I have played, I really don't get the comparisons either. Elden Ring is a combat-focused experience. You have none of the interesting traversal or physics systems that are in Breath of the Wild. Moving around feels floaty and weightless, by design, so you can focus on moving around enemies and not micromanaging your steps (as in Breath of the Wild or Death Stranding). Conversely, Breath of the Wild isn't really about combat. It actually does quite a few things to discourage combat in favor of stealth or outright avoidance. Sure, both games have big worlds you can explore as you wish, but that's where the comparisons end.
Re: Soapbox: Why I Love Deepnest, Hollow Knight's Most Divisive Area
Yeah, it's a good area. It's not the best, but it never feels like it's supposed to be. What I mean by that is that, for example, and conversely, it's pretty obvious that City of Tears is built to be the "best" area in the game: from the way it's set up and foreshadowed through lore to the visual sumputuousness of it all, that's the role it plays in the overall world design. Deepnest, on the other hand, plays a different role. It's dark, weird, and unsettling. It's tough to navigate. It's not a place you want to be in for very long. But that's fine, because it's not like the entire game is like that, just this one specific area that's called DEEPnest. It certainly lives up to the name.
Re: Metroid: Zero Mission Screenshots Found On Nintendo Switch Online By Dataminer
@JohnnyMind
I'd love the option to buy favorites, along with the subscription. But one thing I like about the subscription model is that it encourages just trying games out I otherwise wouldn't pay for and which then become all-time favorites that, in retrospect, I'd pay for thrice over. (Alien Soldier being an example for me. Beyond Oasis, too.)
Re: Stealth Platformer The Library Of Babel Sneaks Onto Switch Next Month
@GreenNinja500
Depends on what games they play. Switch is great for portability and Nintendo stuff, and it pairs well with a gaming PC. Most PS5 exclusives will eventually come to PC, but you're not going to get that with Nintendo's first-party games, unless you emulate. I bought the Switch for Breath of the Wild. That was my gateway. Since then I've loved countless games on the Switch, but it all started with that.
Re: Nintendo Expands Its Switch Online Game Boy Advance Service March 9th
@MonkeyNinja506
They're doing this a lot for certain releases. A lot of their N64 trailers are fantastic.
Re: Nintendo Expands Its Switch Online Game Boy Advance Service March 9th
Great timing! I'm close to finishing Metroid 2, which is surprisingly awesome. I'd heard so many bad things about it over the years, I thought it'd be a slog. But it's genuinely very, very good. I recommend playing with the GBC colors, by the way.
Re: Poll: Which Nintendo Switch Online Console Do You Play The Most?
Kind of equally. I mean, realistically, N64, then SNES. But I've logged tons of time into the NES and Genesis apps, and there's tons I want to play on the GBA and GB already.
Re: Video: Digital Foundry's Technical Analysis Of Metroid Prime Remastered
@MikeJones
I don't know, it's weird. I think they were going for maximum surprise: announce it off-hand during a highlights reel and then shadow drop it. I can't say the tactic didn't work: it's being praised across the board and everyone — at least, in the Western gaming web — seems to be talking about it.
Although maybe it's just Nintendo underestimating the importance of Metroid. It wouldn't be the first time.
But... on the other hand, I mean, they gave the Metroid franchise its own bespoke landing page, went hard on promoting Dread last year, are clearly investing on Prime 4 (going so far as to restart development to meet quality standards), and the money is clearly there in Remastered's production values.
So who knows at this point. Metroid is in this weird place in gaming history, where it's one of the most supremely important franchises in the industry, created its own genre, houses at least two GOAT contenders, but has never been a massive seller.
Re: Poll: What Review Score Would You Give Metroid Prime Remastered?
@AndrasLOHF
Yeah, definitely. I loved Dread as well, but that one's more focused on action and constant progression. You're often railroaded into the critical path. (Which is fine for what Dread is trying to do.) Prime is closer to Super in terms of emphasizing exploration, attention to detail, and backtracking. Which is an acquired taste, but it's certainly mine.
Re: Poll: What Review Score Would You Give Metroid Prime Remastered?
I'm a fair bit into it. A 10 so far. Delicious game.
Re: Talking Point: What Do You Name Link When You're Playing A Zelda Game?
First time I played a Zelda game, I gave him my name. That ultimately felt kind of weird, though, especially since he's so iconically known as and talked about as Link. So now I just give him his canon name. Same with all RPGs that let you change the name.
Re: Review: Metroid Prime Remastered - A Long-Awaited And Stunning Return Of A Legend
@AtlanteanMan I thought it'd be annoying too when I did it for Goldeneye, but since you can save the remapping as a preset, switching back and forth only takes a few seconds. It's still something that should be in-game, but if you're already playing and just want it to feel more natural, it's worth it.
Re: Review: Metroid Prime Remastered - A Long-Awaited And Stunning Return Of A Legend
@AtlanteanMan
You can swap the sticks really easily at the system level and create a preset for Prime. I had to do that recently for Goldeneye.
Re: Review: Metroid Prime Remastered - A Long-Awaited And Stunning Return Of A Legend
@nocdaes
Given how hard Retro went on this remaster, I almost feel like making this may have been a kind of warmup session. Like, "Alright, how did these Prime games work again? And how can we make one for the Switch?" Would be interesting to learn more about the development, because real care was put into it. This is best-in-class.
Beyond the timing, I think there's a strategic layer of: "Trust us, Prime 4 is in good hands."
Re: Review: Metroid Prime Remastered - A Long-Awaited And Stunning Return Of A Legend
@gcunit
Not a bad point, but: there's a Casual difficulty level and a hint system, which carry over from previous iterations. So some concessions were made along the way to make the game more accessible.
Re: Video: Metroid Prime Remastered - Switch Vs. GameCube Comparison
Just played the opening hours. It looks and runs amazing. I never finished this one back in the day. I wasn't a very good gamer and I only had a Gamecube for a few months. Time to catch up and make my avatar proud.
Re: Random: GoldenEye 007 Composer Reckons "Old Team" Would Have Done A Better Job On Emulation
@Gamecuber
I agree, and I'm playing the NSO version. After remapping the controls, it's a perfectly fine emulation job. I've already binged it loads over the weekend. I'm sure there are better fan versions out there and I'm interested in trying them out, but to be entirely honest, the fact that I can now actually tell what's going on during the Jungle level — a level that taught me what framerate issues were back in the day — feels like science fiction to me. Between the stable framerate, upped resolution, and widescreen support, it's been a delightful experience. I can't find it in me to complain.
Re: Random: GoldenEye 007 Composer Reckons "Old Team" Would Have Done A Better Job On Emulation
@gloom Try the control remapping that NL suggests on their YouTube channel. Yeah, it's system level, but you can save it as a preset and just switch it on whenever you want to play Goldeneye. It makes the game control more or less like a modern shooter and it takes less than a minute to set up. Made a huge difference for me, personally, and allowed me to just sit back and blow through Agent and Secret Agent. (00 Agent is probably beyond me, but we'll see.)
Re: Review: GoldenEye 007 - Aged And Flawed, But Still A Masterpiece Of Game Design
@dkxcalibur
I have played them. I've played Odyssey, Galaxy, Sunshine, and 64. I just didn't play them (to completion, anyway) in the order they came out. 64 was one of the last ones I played, Odyssey was the first. (I'm missing Galaxy 2, yeah. Blame the All-Stars collection.)
I get what you're saying about improvements to the controls and camera, but I also care about stuff like structure, progression, overall atmosphere, fundamental game design, compactness, etc. I appreciate Odyssey improves, say, controls and camera. That's hard to argue against. But I abhor the way the game is put together, the challenges, the level design philosophy, etc. I prefer all of that in 64. I can get used to jank, but I can't get used to "the way the game is put together," because that's always going to be there, no matter how good I become at the game.
Re: Review: GoldenEye 007 - Aged And Flawed, But Still A Masterpiece Of Game Design
@dkxcalibur
I think Mario 64 is the best 3D Mario. It was the last one I played along with Galaxy. Not everyone cares about datedness as much as you do.
Re: Review: GoldenEye 007 - Aged And Flawed, But Still A Masterpiece Of Game Design
@demacho
Can't be said enough. My only disagreement is with the strafing: I basically moved in diagonals all the time in both Goldeneye and Perfect Dark. But the point is that you don't have to worry that much about aiming on the Y axis. The game isn't built for that. I essentially played it like Doom. Not that I knew that at the time, because I first played Doom in 2020 (and it's still one of the best games of all time). But that's what I did: mostly movement on the horizontal plane, constant strafing or diagonals, relying on autoaim like it's part of the game (because it is, just like Doom), and sporadic adjustments on the Y axis. I always thought the controls were fluid, on an N64 pad. Not sure how it'll play on the Switch pad, to be honest. I assume I'll have to be holding the right trigger all the time to use the face buttons like the C buttons. Which sounds kind of like a drag, but that's how I play Zelda on NSO and it's fine.
Re: Review: GoldenEye 007 - Aged And Flawed, But Still A Masterpiece Of Game Design
@KevinP
Yes, 100%. I find it so annoying that so many randos on the internet are trying to "educate" the rest of us about what has or hasn't aged well. They all adopt this godly, objective voice, like they're the only ones seeing reason and are looping us all in on the truth. Get a grip.
Re: Review: Crisis Core Final Fantasy VII Reunion - The Series' Goofiest Writing Returns In A Thrilling Remaster
@Rosona
Other than Tim Rogers' 3-hour video, I haven't watched or read any conspiracy theories. I didn't need to. I just don't see any other way to interpret the ending to FF7R. It's not clutching at straws, it's what explicitly happens at the end: the story goes off rails because the characters — and spoiler warning here — literally defeat the physical manifestations or protectors of fate, who were keeping the plot aligned with the original game. This is a major plot point that's called out in the dialogue, not my interpretation. We can argue semantics about whether the above makes Remake a "stealth sequel" or not, but, frankly, if the second part doesn't go off into unexplored territory, I'd consider that a major letdown. It's not about marketing, it's about narrative logic and coherence. Even the naming — Rebirth — points in this direction. They'll probably revisit many of the same locations, though, for the vibes. They might even find a way to echo the original's narrative structure. But with everything they set up, I do expect major shifts. Anything else would be a copout, in my opinion.
Re: GoldenEye 007 Shoots Its Way Onto Nintendo Switch Online This Week
@JakedaArbok
How were you trying to play it? I always found Goldeneye and PD smooth to control — but I'm not playing it like Halo or later console FPS games. I'm just relying on autoaim and strafing nonstop, like original DOOM, with an occasional vertical adjustment every now and then.
Re: GoldenEye 007 Shoots Its Way Onto Nintendo Switch Online This Week
@KevinP
I wouldn't say it's nostalgia alone, though. I've played many 90s classics decades after their release for the first time and I still loved them. It just kind of depends on how much you care about "datedness." (I don't care much at all.) I mean, I liked playing a modern game like Death Stranding in 4K as much as the next person, but I'm not expecting that graphical fidelity and modern accoutrements out of, say, Banjo Kazooie. That game is over 20 years old. The camera's gonna be a little funky and the textures are gonna be blurry. That's just the way it is. I enjoyed both to about the same degree last year.
Re: Goldeneye 007 Shoots Its Way Onto Nintendo Switch Online This Week
@Kidfunkadelic83
I'm really interested in going through the campaign again. Goldeneye was my first FPS game, so I had no context for it. Now that I've actually played Doom, Quake, Half-Life, Turok 2, and most of the other big 90s shooters, I feel like I'll understand it in a different way than I did back then.
Re: Goldeneye 007 Shoots Its Way Onto Nintendo Switch Online This Week
@Laserbeak1982
Yeah, I always preferred Perfect Dark. It's the one I actually played with my friends. I also thought it was more exciting visually, since it came near the end of the N64's lifespan.
Re: Goldeneye 007 Shoots Its Way Onto Nintendo Switch Online This Week
@stav1710
See, I don't get this. How did you remember it?
Re: Goldeneye 007 Shoots Its Way Onto Nintendo Switch Online This Week
If it's widescreen (which was an option back in the day but I never used it) and the framerate isn't horrible, then I'm looking forward to this.
I don't really understand how rose tinted glasses are supposed to work, though. I remember the game pretty well. I know what it does well and what it doesn't.