PDA

View Full Version : After playing the original LoZ on Gamecube the past few days


road doggy dogg
01-06-2004, 12:04 PM
It just kind of struck me how easy they've made the games over the years.

Like in the original NES game, they don't tell you jack shit about how to do anything. Like other than reading one of those Nintendo Power magazines or something similar, how the hell would you know to feed that goblin dude the food that you buy in the store? I mean, you'd figure it out eventually, but it wasn't just told to you how to do it.


Then in the N64 games and stuff, pretty much every aspect of the story you have to do is given to you via not-so-subtle hints and just outright telling you how to do it. Like you have your stupid little fairy, who's like, "Hey Link, I wonder if Saria is doing anything in the Forest Temple right now!?"

Like what the f</>uck is that? I don't recall anyone in the NES game telling me I need to burn down that stupid little bush to the south of Level 2 to open up Level 8. I mean, you get the red candle in Level 7, which is sort of a hint, but it doesn't flat out say, "Use this candle to burn this bush in section C6 (or whatever it actually is) to open the way to Level 8". Hell, to even get the Master Sword, the best hint you get is some guy in a cave saying, "Did you talk to the old man in the graveyard?"

It just seems that the older games were so much more difficult to figure out, in terms of where to go and what to do. It made the game have more of an adventure aspect, because you had to wander around and figure out what to do for yourself.

Am I the only one that feels this way? :'(

Arashi Kage
01-06-2004, 12:25 PM
I know what you mean, my brother and I have talked about this on a few occasions.

Another good example is Metroid. Metroid Fusion was completely spoiled because your computer always told you where you had to go. You didn't get to seach and figure out where to go as in the other Metroid games (even Prime could get you stumped a few times).

I'll add that along with the lack of challenge in modern games, in say 85%-90% of games you have to go through some "tutorial level" at the begining of the game where they tell you how to do everything. Can't you just read the instruction booklet, jump right into the game, or just figure out the controls without being "taught" in the game.

Kane Knight
01-06-2004, 05:23 PM
People don't read the instruction manuals, so the video game industry panders to them by including most of the instructional stuff in many of their games. I don't mind practice levels or whatnot, but the concept of playing through a 50 minute tutotial for a game I know how to play just to get into the real shit is kinda lame. On the upside, it's sometimes good on rental games (since those cockmonkeys at Blockbuster don't include the manuals).

Then there's just lameass stuff, like that whole thing with Psycho Mantis in MGS. Wow. If you plug your controller into port 2, he can't read your mind. There's totally no purpose to this little piece of metagaming.

It's all part of the shift to more linear gaming. Puzzels hard. Puzzles make think. Think bad.

People don't like to be stuck hopelessly. It's frustrating. When there are "X For dummy" guides built into the game, it makes it easy. To me, this takes out most of the fun and challenge, and insults what little intelligence gamers are supposed to have.

BTW, even Link's Awakening had some of those moments, which was cool.

Y2Ant
01-06-2004, 09:35 PM
Yeah I thought about that when I was playing Seiken Densetsu 3 (Secret of Mana 2) on ZSNES the other day, like you have to remember what info people tell you about which element is where, and have to figure out how to get to it yourself, rather than having the path laid out for you, it's pretty sweet.

Also, i'm halfway through the second half of the game now, going through the 8 bosses, which you can do in any order, you have to find them all though, which isn't very hard, but it's not some big sign pointing the way or anything, there is quite a bit of exploring in this game. :o

I was wandering around the forest to find the Dryad boss, and luckily I went the right way (about 10 screens, each one had 2-3 paths :o)

Stuff like that is pretty hot.

Another good example is from the previous SoM, where to find the Fire Elemental and dungeon that goes with it, you actually have to go to the Ice country, which you wouldn't necessarily think of right away. Granted that the only new place to go at the time is the Ice Country, it's still kinda cool.

The Destroyer
01-07-2004, 06:37 AM
It helps people like who suck at games and get hopelessly stuck sometimes, I suppose. :(

But yeah, getting led by the hand can be a bit annoying. Thankfully it's not really something you see in the dungeons of the newer Zelda games, which is often where the challenge lies. And I've still not played the two old ones... I can't get over the whole "God, these are old, old school factor". Maybe once I'm done with Majora's Mask...

Average Joe
01-13-2004, 12:12 PM
I think if video game designers were given the chance to put in-game instructions in older games when they came out, they would have. It's just easier for the user.

But as for that whole Zelda "highlight key words" thing, that's been a Zelda thing for a while... I forget if it started with Link to the Past or Ocarina of Time, but that's just part of the series now.

But, generally, I don't think games are any easier than before. If you know where to look, a good challenge can be found (FFX-2... that one fiend in the desert... holy sh</>it. 333,444 HP. Ridiculous.)

Kane Knight
01-13-2004, 12:54 PM
So there's like ONE guy in FFX-2 that's challenging?

In-Cart tutorials are fine--If they're not part of the game.

Zelda's idiot clues may not be brand new, but they're annoying to the 5 or 6 people out there who can still actually get the idea without cliff notes.

And yes, games in general are easier than they used to be.

Ninti the Mad
01-13-2004, 02:43 PM
The only reason why games are easier nowadays is because we have the ability to save more often. In older games, you died, ran out of continues, and you're ****ed.

Now we can just re-start the stage if we mess up or we get unlimited lives.

Average Joe
01-13-2004, 04:18 PM
So there's like ONE guy in FFX-2 that's challenging?

In-Cart tutorials are fine--If they're not part of the game.

Zelda's idiot clues may not be brand new, but they're annoying to the 5 or 6 people out there who can still actually get the idea without cliff notes.

And yes, games in general are easier than they used to be. Well, it's kinda a staple of FF games...

in FF7, there were the Weapons (Emerald and Ruby), in FFX there were the Monster Arena monsters. In FFX-2, there's Angra Mainyu (the desert fiend). It's just the extra challenge there for those skilled enough to unlock it. Certainly a game itself may be easy, but if there are extra (optional) challenges, it's all good for me.

Kane Knight
01-13-2004, 05:53 PM
The only reason why games are easier nowadays is because we have the ability to save more often. In older games, you died, ran out of continues, and you're ****ed.

Now we can just re-start the stage if we mess up or we get unlimited lives.

That's not the only reason. They've been dumbed down quite a bit.

Ninti the Mad
01-13-2004, 05:55 PM
I cant really think of any other reasons at the moment.

What are some that you can think of? I probably would agree.

Kane Knight
01-13-2004, 06:02 PM
Well, it's kinda a staple of FF games...

in FF7, there were the Weapons (Emerald and Ruby), in FFX there were the Monster Arena monsters. In FFX-2, there's Angra Mainyu (the desert fiend). It's just the extra challenge there for those skilled enough to unlock it. Certainly a game itself may be easy, but if there are extra (optional) challenges, it's all good for me.

So you're fighting a PErsian Devil in FFX2? :lol:

Yes, it's a staple of many of the FF games. I'm just not seeing how one critter with an ungodly HP score is sufficent enough to make a game really challenging. Or how there's some sort of challenge in "get strong enough and enough items" in order to successfully fight these bad guys. It's cool, but it's not exactly a big challenge, sufficient enough to suddenly make the game overall more worthy of a challenging rating, especially since it's totally optional.

FFX was so easy it wasn't even funny, and a couple bonus bad guys are gonna make me change my mind?

Kane Knight
01-13-2004, 06:04 PM
I cant really think of any other reasons at the moment.

What are some that you can think of? I probably would agree.

They've been dumbed down quite a bit.

It's the main reason behind the issue at hand. A lot of games have also become more linear, which may or may not be considered dumbing down.

Ninti the Mad
01-13-2004, 06:24 PM
Games have always been linear.

As a matter of fact, I think many newer games are less linear than older generation games. Games on PC like the Thief series always have you thinking. Also, you cant discount the fact that many of the online games are always random games you walk into. You cant always use the same strategy in an online game and expect to win.

Kane Knight
01-14-2004, 12:15 AM
Okay, point to me how many 80s video games were linear enough that they actually walked you through the game?

Online games are primarily "random" on the grounds that you're up against another user.

That's less the games and more the players.

Ninti the Mad
01-14-2004, 09:21 AM
It's still a game. No matter if it's against other users.

And take older RPG's for example. It wasnt hard to figure out that you go to a city or cave you havent gone too. Not hard at all. Platformers werent much of a big deal either.

Silent
01-14-2004, 11:21 AM
Go play Ultima or Ultima II, tell me that is a easy game.

Anyway, yeah, I kinda have to laugh at Zelda:OOT's not-so-discreet hints, but I still love that game, and everything about it.

CraigMcD
01-14-2004, 11:27 AM
Have any of you ever thought that you're just better at games than you used to be?

In any case, I would rather have a linear game which I can complete than some freeform thing which is impossible without wasting hundreds of time.

Kane Knight
01-14-2004, 01:03 PM
It's still a game. No matter if it's against other users.

And here I was, saying that it was now suddenly a 2-liter bottle of NyQuil.

Kane Knight
01-14-2004, 01:20 PM
Have any of you ever thought that you're just better at games than you used to be?

In any case, I would rather have a linear game which I can complete than some freeform thing which is impossible without wasting hundreds of time.

Yes, and I AM better at the video games of yesteryear.

But that's for the same reason as newer games being easier: I've learned by rote. The examples from the first post, the original Zelda, pretty much everyone knows...

There was an old computer game written at my school. Somehow, it became a huge craze (As huge as you can expect to get from around 700 elementary students tops). It was really challenging if you figured it out yourself. I became easy, though if you learned it by rote.

A lot of the more recent games take out the thinking factor and just skip directly to the rote.

Of course I'll beat SMB3 more reliably now. I know pretty much all the tricks. Zelda doesn't have any surprises for me anymore, because I figured it all out years ago. I don't need an intuitive sense for these games anymore, because I've done it already.

The last really challenging game (I played) was Myst, because there was still a level of thinking, and there was the possibility to actually LOSE (E.G. You missed something earlier, you CAN'T beat the game without going wayyyy the fuuuuck back). Do I expect every game to be like Myst? No, but I'd like more than a couple games from the last ten years to NOT spoonfeed everything to me

Ninti the Mad
01-14-2004, 02:06 PM
So whats the difference in a handful of hard games of that generation and a handful of hard games from this generation?

Games, for the most part, will always be linear. It's basically impossible with today's technology to allow true freedom in a videogame.

A game I am pumped up for though that promises a new level in video gaming bliss(in my opinion) is Fable for the X-Box. The limitless possibilities that that game has been promising. :drool:

Kane Knight
01-14-2004, 02:17 PM
You don't need "true freedom" to not be linear.

We're not talking about games where you get to do whatever you want here, any more than I really argued that multiplayer video games suddenly morphed into an oversized bottle of NyQuil.

Kane Knight
01-14-2004, 02:18 PM
BTW...

Games will always be linear because the technology of today is limited...

:lol:

Ninti the Mad
01-14-2004, 02:40 PM
Games were and still are linear.