Support NeoGAF

[Men_in_Boxes]

If this game released in 1991, would it have been bigger / better / more well liked the Zelda: A Link to the Past...



I ask because, in the indie space, for the past number of years, the top down Roguelite seems to be significantly more popular / successful / well liked genre than 2D Zelda inspired clones. If these games are more successful today, then it means they'd certainly be more successful in 1991 as well right?

 

[AV]

Well yeah, Undermine builds off of the three decades of video game design influence between the two. It'd be one of the greatest games of all time if it knew all that ahead of itself, but it's pretty moot.

 

[Three]

You mean if you took a game 30 years into the past would a game be more popular? Sure but this is like saying if you took a Huawei phone from today back to 1991 could they have become Apple. Nothing sets it apart today but it would have been revolutionary 30 years ago.

 

[Rentahamster]

If I brought furry step-sister pr0n back in time to the 90s, they would have had their minds blown.

 

[FingerBang]

Suicide Squad would have been a groundbreaking, 15/10 game if it released in 1991

 

[Tanus777]

Is it already Friday?

 

[efyu_lemonardo]

Releasing Undermine in 1991 would have had no effect on gaming because no hardware that existed at the time could run it. Perhaps a couple research supercomputers but that's it.

 

[Pejo]

 

[Bonfires Down]

I’m not entirely sure of that. After all, I often see people say they won’t play roguelikes, while I don’t see the opposite. And something like Hades seems to be popular because the roguelike elements are lighter. Roguelikes are also easier to make, so with greater numbers it makes sense that more of them would be breakout hits.

People played 2D Zelda because that was the best action adventure type game they could get at the time. Today those people play Witcher and BotW and Elden Ring, and those are more popular than roguelikes.

But if you ask me in general then I think today’s indies are better than 90s ’AAA’ games.

 

[uncleleeroy]

If i could take ANYTHING from 2019

and teleport it to 1991 then yes

yes it would be better than what was around then

might as well teleport yourself OP and buy some stocks/merch etc and make some coin

haha

 

[JohnnyTropics]

If i could take ANYTHING from 2019

and teleport it to 1991 then yes

yes it would be better than what was around then

But yet, if you took EVERYTHING from 2019

and teleported it to 1991

1991 would somehow be worse.

liberalism

 

[Guilty_AI]

if you took a game 3 decades ahead in game design knowledge and tech, and somehow made it run on 1991 machines as is, yes, it would've been a huge deal.

 

[drganon]

No. Roguelikes are trash no matter what year they came out.

 

[Lunarorbit]

Zelda was really hyped up back then too. Nintendo power magazine had a really popular link manga leading up to it. The Zelda cartoon was still on and cereal was out a few years before.

Even though no one understood or really liked Zelda 2 the gold carts were epic and the game was still popular.

Link to the past is still beautiful; one of the prettiest snes games. Music and sound effects were top notch too. Those lightening effects at the beginning during the storm? Awesome.

Undermine... I don't know. You'd have to have articles explaining what the hell it was back then. Final fantasy mystic quest was baby's first rpg in the west and people still didn't get it even though PCs had rpgs for a decade.

 

[FeralEcho]

Roguelikes are the gaas version of singleplayer games so lol no

It's basically taking a concept that instead of creating 10 levels of things to do you only make 1 level and reuse it 10 times with a slight reward at the end so the idiot player doesn't realise how much time he's wasting doing the same thing over and over.

It's the definition of insanity that Vaas was talking about!

 

[IAmRei]

No, it wont be and never will be, indie cannot and will not beat legend

 

[Spukc]

Undermine is a great game.
Zelda is timeless

 

[Three]

No. Roguelikes are trash no matter what year they came out.

The irony is that the original Rogue and games like it came out in the 1980s so I'm not sure what he's saying exactly about the genre possibly being more popular if it was teleported to an earlier time and not the tech/specific game.

 

[Danjin44]

No. Roguelikes are trash no matter what year they came out.

Roguelikes are the gaas version of singleplayer games so lol no

It's basically taking a concept that instead of creating 10 levels of things to do you only make 1 level and reuse it 10 times with a slight reward at the end so the idiot player doesn't realise how much time he's wasting doing the same thing over and over.

It's the definition of insanity that Vaas was talking about!

I 100% agree and indie devs just love to make them (I guess it’s cheaper to make)….but when I see Roguelikes immediately lose all interest.

For me they are opposite of fun.

 

[BlackTron]

I love when poll options include your reason for that vote as a free bonus

 

[Punished Miku]

We didn't really have roguelikes a ton back then, but virtually all games still functioned the same because they were extremely difficult. Most people didn't beat most of their games. Most people got excited about the Contra code. One of the biggest things about Zelda that made it instantly stand out was that you saved your progress and could actually stop and continue. Compared to every other ball busting arcade style game of the era, saving and continuing was extremely novel and unique.

 

[SmokedMeat]

Welp, Undermine went right on the wishlist. Might pick it up later today since it’s half off.

 

[Chuck Berry]

Never figured Men_in_Boxes for a day drinker but here we are

 

[Guilty_AI]

Roguelikes are the gaas version of singleplayer games so lol no

It's basically taking a concept that instead of creating 10 levels of things to do you only make 1 level and reuse it 10 times with a slight reward at the end so the idiot player doesn't realise how much time he's wasting doing the same thing over and over.

It's the definition of insanity that Vaas was talking about!

You really underestimate how much work goes into those games. Risk of Rain 2 for example has 15 levels + 8 hidden realms, you just won't see all of them them on a single run

 

[FeralEcho]

You really underestimate how much work goes into those games. Risk of Rain 2 for example has 15 levels + 8 hidden realms, you just won't see all of them them on a single run

I know there's lots of work put into some of them but I'd still rather take a regular singleplayer campaign over anything roguelike/roguelite any day of the week.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Roguelikes are the gaas version of singleplayer games so lol no

Can you imagine how popular Fortnite, Destiny 2, and Roblox would be in 1991?

Mother of God...

 

[Retrofluxed]

Can you imagine how popular Fortnite, Destiny 2, and Roblox would be in 1991?

Mother of God...

9600 baud/14.4k and a long distance call to play GaaS sounds like a good time.

 

[TintoConCasera]

Can you imagine how popular Fortnite, Destiny 2, and Roblox would be in 1991?

 

[Trilobit]

Based on the video that is nothing like Zelda. It reminds me more of Metal Slug.

 

[diffusionx]

what a stupid question

 

[ClanOfNone]

Roguelikes are the gaas version of singleplayer games so lol no

It's basically taking a concept that instead of creating 10 levels of things to do you only make 1 level and reuse it 10 times with a slight reward at the end so the idiot player doesn't realise how much time he's wasting doing the same thing over and over.

It's the definition of insanity that Vaas was talking about!

Comparing roguelikes to an entirely predatory business model is certainly a take.

And as long as we are being reductive, ALL video games are basically doing the same thing over and over again.

I’ve played many great roguelikes since Issac kindled the spark in me. I’ve yet to play a single decent gaas title.

 

[TintoConCasera]

I-it's called roguelites...

 

[Majukun]

of all the roguelike/lite that you could put against freaking zelda you chose one that looks very generic and by the book (which doesn't mean it's bad, just doesn't seem to offer anything new to the genre)

 

[blacktout]

I couldn't find up-to-date sales data on Undermine, but it had sold around 100k units in 2020, so it's probably optimistically in the ballpark of, what, 500k now? Meanwhile, Link's Awakening, the most recent 2D Zelda game (and a remake!) sold over 6 million copies. And, as others mentioned, the roguelike genre was already a decade old in 1991, so it's not some new innovation that would have shocked gamers back then. So, no, the 1991 equivalent of Undermine would have been (and was) slaughtered by A Link to the Past. There's zero ambiguity here.

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

No, because just from seeing three seconds of gameplay Undermine's game design could only exist if it was influenced by Link To The Past.

So guess which one would have to had release first? Exactly.

Also you have to understand cart logistics back in the day. The only platform Undermine could've had a shot at in 1991 to be bigger than LTTP is the SFC/SNES, and unless the game was published by a super-close major Japanese 3P (Square-Enix mainly, but also others like Capcom or Konami), Nintendo would not have afforded them a major amount of physical stock to sell. Not compared to their own LTTP, surely.

Which would have basically limited Undermine's sales potential anyway; carts were in finite supply, Nintendo could only produce so many per quarter and that had to be split between them and all the 3P publishers. Even major partners like Squaresoft eventually got tired of this and that's one of the reasons they decided to ditch Nintendo for the PS1.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

of all the roguelike/lite that you could put against freaking zelda you chose one that looks very generic and by the book (which doesn't mean it's bad, just doesn't seem to offer anything new to the genre)

Undermine is arguably the most Zelda inspired, high quality rogue lite out there.

 

[Griffon]

If this game released in 1991, would it have been bigger / better / more well liked the Zelda: A Link to the Past...

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

I couldn't find up-to-date sales data on Undermine, but it had sold around 100k units in 2020, so it's probably optimistically in the ballpark of, what, 500k now? Meanwhile, Link's Awakening, the most recent 2D Zelda game (and a remake!) sold over 6 million copies. And, as others mentioned, the roguelike genre was already a decade old in 1991, so it's not some new innovation that would have shocked gamers back then. So, no, the 1991 equivalent of Undermine would have been (and was) slaughtered by A Link to the Past. There's zero ambiguity here.

Now how much would it have sold it if was called "Star Searcher" instead of Nintendos big IP?

The roguelite genre really didn't get mainstream exposure until signifificantly later. It was stuck on PC at a time when consoles were the dominant form of gaming. The genre also didn't have the visual appeal back then that it does today.

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

Can you imagine how popular Fortnite, Destiny 2, and Roblox would be in 1991?

Mother of God...

Those games couldn't have existed in 1991. You are making a common mistake that a lot of people who look at retro gaming today do: they take the present for granted and apply the reality of today to that of the past.

Games like Fortnite, Destiny 2 and Roblox rely significantly on platform-agnostic online networks and communities. In 1991 the internet wasn't even a thing for the vast majority outside of universities and research centers. The few computer people "online" were using BBS. Consoles like Genesis and SNES didn't have online gaming services, and wouldn't until 2-3 years later (which would've still been very limited)

Even aside that, a game like Fortnite or Destiny 2 could've only done what they did thanks to earlier shooters like Halo, TitanFall, Half-Life, Quake, Killzone, etc. If they launched as-is in 1991, they would've sold very poorly. Either they'd have a lot of cool ideas but poor implementation (due to technical limitations), or they'd of been technically competent yet felt out-of-place in a market not ready for them. That's something which affected games like System Shock, which were way ahead of their time (and thus sold poorly when initially released).

 

[blacktout]

Now how much would it have sold it if was called "Star Searcher" instead of Nintendos big IP?

The roguelite genre really didn't get mainstream exposure until signifificantly later. It was stuck on PC at a time when consoles were the dominant form of gaming. The genre also didn't have the visual appeal back then that it does today.

If you want to make a thread about how roguelikes are more popular than zeldalikes in today's indie landscape, then make that thread instead of burying it under an absurd hypothetical.

The branding issue you mention would have been just as relevant, if not more relevant, in 1991. Nintendo's brands were established and hugely relevant then too. I really don't understand what point you think you're making with this comparison.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

If you want to make a thread about how roguelikes are more popular than zeldalikes in today's indie landscape, then make that thread instead of burying it under an absurd hypothetical.

 

[blacktout]

More confused than bitter, honestly. This is one of the most bewildering threads I've seen on GAF in months, and that's really saying something.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

More confused than bitter, honestly. This is one of the most bewildering threads I've seen on GAF in months, and that's really saying something.

The hypothetical makes it easy to consider how far game design has progressed over the last 30 years. A Link to the Past is often considered one of the best 2D games from that era, but looking back on it from 2024, I don't think it's aged as well as people like to believe. The roguelite design may be a more advanced version of that old formula.

 

[Hero_Select]

Some people really try to downplay the Zelda franchise huh?

 

[Holammer]

I think a lot of people miss the forest for the trees here.
Undermine is a relatively simple game with surface level similarities to Zelda and it could no doubt be demaked into a 16 bit game. If it got released in 1991, would it with 30 years of game design evolution be able to destroy Link to the Past? It probably would, compare it to contemporary roguelikes on consoles like Shiren or Fatal Labyrinth. It would be mindbogglingly revolutionary.

This is the equivalent of wondering how would you fare against Greek hoplites with a Buck Rogers ray gun. A hypothetical, not an attack on Zelda.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Some people really try to downplay the Zelda franchise huh?

This is more of a game design consideration thread than fanboying for a particular IP. I'm not interested in the Zelda name specifically.

 

[bender]

 

[JaksGhost]

 

[protonion]

Weird thread!

Undermine is incredible and you should play it in any case.

 

[Magic Carpet]

I played all the way through Undermine. Imagine if the game had released in 1991, We would have tons of sequels, spin-offs and an 'Excuuuuuse Me Peasant' Cartoon by now.