This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

The most overrated game of all time.

#321TerotrousPosted 2/7/2013 8:28:58 PM
P00DGE posted...
Well there is no "list" of criteria of what is objectively good or not. Good level design, for example, could vary from person to person.

Good level design is hard to define explicitly but everyone can identify when level design is bad.

One example of bad level design is modern 2D Sonic games, like Sonic Advance and Sonic Rush. These games frequently have sections that encourage you to go fast (like long hills or straights), then put spikes or a pit at the end with no warning. This forces you to go slow even when you would like to be going fast because you know if you go fast, you'll just end up dying, and one of the main appeals of the Sonic series is lost.

By comparison, the Genesis games deal with this much more intelligently by designing the levels to slow you down before it's time to fight enemies or do platforming. Count how many times in the old Sonics you go down a huge ramp, only to be fed into a pipe or tossed off a lip, which brings you to a complete stop, allowing you to deal with whatever comes next.


For adventure games, the impact of level design is less obvious. It would be in things like "how often does the game force you to make use of the various abilities you've acquired throughout the game?" Okami is generally better at this than Zelda, which generally only requires the use of some basic moves + the current dungeon item and one or two other useful items (bow, hookshot, etc). Every time you get a new power in Okami, you keep using it for the rest of the game.


As far OoT goes, I could make some "objective" arguments as to why i think it is the best in its genre. I find the story and overall presentation be extremely efficient. There isn't any bloated plot lines, gimmicks or unnecessary time fillers. It is just simple, and yet at the same time feels grand. Future Zelda games tend to stray away from this, and the result feels congested and finicky.

I don't feel it's all that compelling. The early part of the game sure, but it definitely slows down at the temples and there's not a lot of motivation to keep you going as the plot does not advance until all of them are completed. If the characters were better, like in Twilight Princess, the interaction between them might work to keep the plot moving, but Link and Shiek aren't nearly as compelling a pair as Link and Midna are.

It seems even Nintendo has acknowledged this as a problem as all future Zeldas work to improve upon this aspect.


The level design and difficulty is at just the right place. It never becomes too hard like some of the earlier games, but also offers far more of a challenge in its dungeon puzzles than any of the dungeons in the future titles (all of which are too easy).

IMO, all 3D Zeldas have an issue where you don't take enough damage from being hit, but Okami and Mystical Ninja both also have this problem. Near the end of the game, if you have 20 hearts, you should be taking at least 2-3 hearts damage per hit, not half a heart as is often the case.
---
http://terosclassicgaming.blogspot.com/ - Watch me beat "GBA Summon Night Swordcraft Story"
http://www.backloggery.com/tero - My backloggery
#322Space_MonkyPosted 2/7/2013 8:32:26 PM
your favorite one.
---
The fiction will see the real.
#323NotoriousJEEBUSPosted 2/7/2013 8:44:23 PM
GTA IV...10/10? Not with that horrible driving and those nerds blowing up my phone 24/7.

Runner-up:
MGS 4...Good gameplay but points off for the ridiculous amount of cutscenes (yes, I know this is part of the series) and huge points off for having to watch Snake huff down a carton of cigs between levels.
#324Norken(Topic Creator)Posted 2/7/2013 8:44:44 PM
Space_Monky posted...
your favorite one.


For a lot of people? Yes.
---
If you believe in Jesus Christ and are 100% proud, put this in your sig.
Romans 14:8
#325GunzleaderPosted 2/7/2013 8:47:43 PM
sorry but any game that reminds me of shenmue is heartbreaking.. i see a qte pop up in a game i feel a sadness deep within my soul.. no shenmue III. RIP shenmue RIP.
---
im not a troll sorry if i offend you in anyway. RIP Everquest Online Adventures 2003-2012
#326Norken(Topic Creator)Posted 2/7/2013 9:19:05 PM
Gunzleader posted...
sorry but any game that reminds me of shenmue is heartbreaking.. i see a qte pop up in a game i feel a sadness deep within my soul.. no shenmue III. RIP shenmue RIP.


You are not alone friend. Shenmue is one of my favorite games 2nd only to Chrono Cross.
I just recently bought a dreamcast and shenmue 1 just to play it again.

Still praying for Shenmue 3
---
If you believe in Jesus Christ and are 100% proud, put this in your sig.
Romans 14:8
#327P00DGEPosted 2/7/2013 9:35:46 PM
Terotrous posted...
P00DGE posted...
Well there is no "list" of criteria of what is objectively good or not. Good level design, for example, could vary from person to person.

Good level design is hard to define explicitly but everyone can identify when level design is bad.

One example of bad level design is modern 2D Sonic games, like Sonic Advance and Sonic Rush. These games frequently have sections that encourage you to go fast (like long hills or straights), then put spikes or a pit at the end with no warning. This forces you to go slow even when you would like to be going fast because you know if you go fast, you'll just end up dying, and one of the main appeals of the Sonic series is lost.

By comparison, the Genesis games deal with this much more intelligently by designing the levels to slow you down before it's time to fight enemies or do platforming. Count how many times in the old Sonics you go down a huge ramp, only to be fed into a pipe or tossed off a lip, which brings you to a complete stop, allowing you to deal with whatever comes next.


For adventure games, the impact of level design is less obvious. It would be in things like "how often does the game force you to make use of the various abilities you've acquired throughout the game?" Okami is generally better at this than Zelda, which generally only requires the use of some basic moves + the current dungeon item and one or two other useful items (bow, hookshot, etc). Every time you get a new power in Okami, you keep using it for the rest of the game.


As far OoT goes, I could make some "objective" arguments as to why i think it is the best in its genre. I find the story and overall presentation be extremely efficient. There isn't any bloated plot lines, gimmicks or unnecessary time fillers. It is just simple, and yet at the same time feels grand. Future Zelda games tend to stray away from this, and the result feels congested and finicky.

I don't feel it's all that compelling. The early part of the game sure, but it definitely slows down at the temples and there's not a lot of motivation to keep you going as the plot does not advance until all of them are completed. If the characters were better, like in Twilight Princess, the interaction between them might work to keep the plot moving, but Link and Shiek aren't nearly as compelling a pair as Link and Midna are.

It seems even Nintendo has acknowledged this as a problem as all future Zeldas work to improve upon this aspect.


But again, that is all subjective. You can't a rating on that stuff. Hence my original point. I gave reasons beyond Nostalgia" and "it did it first" for why I thought the game did things better then the later games. Those things are my criteria for what makes a game objectively good. I like simple stories, they are more compelling to me than complex ones with alot going on. I found just about all the character in TP annoying. They looked like they had the mumps and acted like idiots. Especially the children, I hated every one of them. And all the character stuff that happened in Kakariko just felt like it dragged for me. I prefer the simple interactions of Sheik and Link to drawn out meetings and annoying deformed characters.

The point is, even what could be perceived as "objective criteria" is still subjective.
#328TerotrousPosted 2/8/2013 8:03:34 AM
P00DGE posted...
But again, that is all subjective. You can't a rating on that stuff. Hence my original point. I gave reasons beyond Nostalgia" and "it did it first" for why I thought the game did things better then the later games. Those things are my criteria for what makes a game objectively good. I like simple stories, they are more compelling to me than complex ones with alot going on. I found just about all the character in TP annoying. They looked like they had the mumps and acted like idiots. Especially the children, I hated every one of them. And all the character stuff that happened in Kakariko just felt like it dragged for me. I prefer the simple interactions of Sheik and Link to drawn out meetings and annoying deformed characters.

The point is, even what could be perceived as "objective criteria" is still subjective.

Even if the interpretation of the arguments is somewhat subjective, if you can at least express the difference between the games in a direct manner you're getting somewhere. At that point the question simply becomes which type of reasoning do people find convincing.

For example, I think the Adult Link portion of OoT is pretty indefensible. You can say "well, more story progression or variety would have just got in the way" but I don't think many people would believe that to be the case, particularly when games like Twilight Princess and Okami show that it generally doesn't.
---
http://terosclassicgaming.blogspot.com/ - Watch me beat "GBA Summon Night Swordcraft Story"
http://www.backloggery.com/tero - My backloggery
#329GloryChaosPosted 2/8/2013 8:14:29 AM
Your favorite video game.
---
Brawl FC - 1332 8069 6690
"Gravity Rush is 1458 Mb the 58 Mb should more then cover the missions/dialog/character models" - Demondog666
#330Artemicion82Posted 2/8/2013 8:21:10 AM
Dragon Age. One of the most mediocre rpgs I've ever played, in all aspects, and was for quite awhile considered some kind of second coming of Jesus. Thankfully DA2 was such garbage it seemed to break the spell of hypnotism dragon age had over these people.