Zelda: Wind Waker vs Super Mario Sunshine
- Thread starter Shikamaru Ninja
- Start date
jarrod said:Eh, different strokes. Personally, I find the puzzle focused platforming in the GBA games to be far more engaing than the rather simple, straight forward platforming in the console games. Klonoa 2 had nice camera shifts tho.
They were not straight forward platforming games, though. There were plenty of puzzles, especially in the later levels of Klonoa 2. Are you certain that you've finished both of them? The level designs in the GBA games were all based on 90 degree angled tiles (like older NES/GB games) and were broken up into small rooms.
TekunoRobby
Tag of Excellence
I'm not going to partake in this discussion but I wanted to point out a fantastic opportunity that Nintendo hasn't jumped on.
What if they made a game that only consisted of those mini-levels from SMS. They could package in 100+ new stages and easily sell the game for $20. It would be similar to the VR Missions from MGS. This project could easily be handled by a small team (3 to 5) since all the coding/artwork/sound is done. Make a nice and simple front-end, have unlockable tophies (a-la Smash Brothers) and you have instant budget classic.
What if they made a game that only consisted of those mini-levels from SMS. They could package in 100+ new stages and easily sell the game for $20. It would be similar to the VR Missions from MGS. This project could easily be handled by a small team (3 to 5) since all the coding/artwork/sound is done. Make a nice and simple front-end, have unlockable tophies (a-la Smash Brothers) and you have instant budget classic.
One of the best things I liked about Klonoa 2 were the puzzles, and it's also the reason why I prefer it to Klonoa.
As for Zelda: WW, I sure hope it's better than SMS, because that game disappointed me big time after the splendor that was SM64, and I was thinking of picking up Zelda later.
As for Zelda: WW, I sure hope it's better than SMS, because that game disappointed me big time after the splendor that was SM64, and I was thinking of picking up Zelda later.
The only one I've never completed (or played actually) was Moonlight Museum WSC... I haven't finished all the EX stages in G2 either I guess.dark10x said:
Anyway, there's a pretty marked difference between the console and handheld Klonoa platformers in terms of design focus, and in terms of puzzles the console games are most definitely more straight forward and simplified. And honestly, I'm not sure how anyone could say any of them 'kind of suck', all the Klonoa platformers are among the best of their respective platforms... I've got to ask you if you've actually completed all the handheld games?
Hopefully we'll get Klonoa 3 and/or Klonoa G3 soon. I'd take Klonoa DS too.
You should really try making it to the EX levels... the first half of Empire of Dreams is pretty throwaway stuff but the last half is pretty good. And G2 just improves on everything dramatically, I'd rank it as the best Klonoa actually (while I'd rank EoD behind K1-2). Shame we never got G2 over here... seems to me though you're really not aware what the handheld games are 'capabale of' when you just sample a fraction of them.dark10x said:
The levels in the portable games are all very simple in design, at least superficially, but it's the puzzles, especially in the later levels, that take advantage of all of the skills, both inherent and those that come from the environment, that really show what the game's all about. I've finished Moonlight Museum, Empire of Dreams, and G2, and I feel the same about all three -- they start slow, as the first few worlds are really just tutorials for the different abilities, and then gameplay picks up later on when you're left to your own devices and have to use everything you've learned efficiently. The fact that there are often two or three ways to solve certain puzzles really opens things up, too. I've enjoyed them immensely.
Having said that, I think the console games are better, even if they are just straightforward platforming. I like the more expansive level design, and I think one of the signatures of the Klonoa series is its graphics, music, story, presentation, etc., things that the WS and GBA games haven't been able to recreate, for obvious reasons (though none of them are shabby in any of the above respects, for their respective platforms).
Having said that, I think the console games are better, even if they are just straightforward platforming. I like the more expansive level design, and I think one of the signatures of the Klonoa series is its graphics, music, story, presentation, etc., things that the WS and GBA games haven't been able to recreate, for obvious reasons (though none of them are shabby in any of the above respects, for their respective platforms).
TheGreenGiant
Banned
can i ask again.. WHAT'S THE FREAKING POINT OF HAVING THIS DEBATE? Its two rather good games from two different genres, FFS
vs?
why not just enjoy them?
vs?
why not just enjoy them?
I'm not sure what you mean exactly, but there's inclines in the Klonoa GBA levels which aren't at 90 degrees as well (though not often)... some later levels play with things by moving the entire level around also (so you go from running on the floor to running on the ceiling for example). The blocky nature of the level designs seems more a stylistic choice than anything, I'm just not seeing how it's limiting game deign? Could you explain it for me?dark10x said:
I'll reiterate, you really should play further...
Basically, it was something that seems to have returned from the old GB days...
Look at most Gameboy platformers and you'll find that there are almost never any inclines, curves, or anything else remotely complex. Everything is squared off. I've never liked the way that looked and felt and the levels just don't seem very interesting to me in this case.
I don't believe it is a stylistic choice.
Then, there is just everything else that was mentioned above in Soul4ger's post. I don't care for the level design and they lack almost everything else that made the experiences so memorable. They don't deliver the kind of game I want and I was VERY disappointed with them...
Look at most Gameboy platformers and you'll find that there are almost never any inclines, curves, or anything else remotely complex. Everything is squared off. I've never liked the way that looked and felt and the levels just don't seem very interesting to me in this case.
I don't believe it is a stylistic choice.
Then, there is just everything else that was mentioned above in Soul4ger's post. I don't care for the level design and they lack almost everything else that made the experiences so memorable. They don't deliver the kind of game I want and I was VERY disappointed with them...
Do The Mario
Unconfirmed Member
Super Mario sunshine for me, the legend of Zelda TWW was a bit of a tease imo the world was very large but the population sparse and unrealistic I think it needed a major metropolis maybe on the other side of a giant waterfall off the edge of the world? I also think it lacked a few dungeons.
Super Mario sunshine on the other hand was a perfect Mario game expect for the dam water pack! I just loved the sections were shadow Mario stole fludd off you because they were pure old school Mario! I also loved exploring every nook and cranny of each world in search of the controversial blue coins!!
Super Mario sunshine on the other hand was a perfect Mario game expect for the dam water pack! I just loved the sections were shadow Mario stole fludd off you because they were pure old school Mario! I also loved exploring every nook and cranny of each world in search of the controversial blue coins!!
That's not telling me how it's limiting anything besides your own aesthetic sensibilites.dark10x said:
And again, something tells me you haven't really made an effort to make it as far as anything interesting design wise in the G series. Keep playing.
So you're saying GBA & WSC are only capable of 90 degree level design? Klonoa Works had no choice in the matter?dark10x said:
TheGreenGiant
Banned
jarrod said:
haven't played the GB zeldas but IAWTP. Went back LTTP to it on the GBA and damn, rose coloured tint of nostalgia. OOT > LTTP. simple, unchallenging and overrated. Best played when 6-13
I can't stand the clumped overworld design and generally uninteresting NPCs in the GB Zelda titles from Capcom. I could barely get through 2 dungeons in Seasons and Ahes because nothing seemed interesting or fun to me.
ALTTP is the best Zelda title. It's not overly complex and it's not too simple.
ALTTP is the best Zelda title. It's not overly complex and it's not too simple.
Do The Mario
Unconfirmed Member
+1 alttp
TheGreenGiant
Banned
sp0rsk said:
I take it that this is laced with irony?
apple oranges lemons
olimario said:
Exactly.
Since OoT the Zelda series has become more of a tedious puzzle/dungeon crawler rather then a straightforward action RPG (which LTTP was).
The simplistic design of LttP is far better then the 'push the block, shoot the circle, move to next dull puzzle' gameplay of the 3d incarnations.
I tried to give it a solid effort, but I really did not enjoy it AT ALL. I didn't want to keep playing because I wasn't having fun.
I hate squared off level designs. Stems from the old days, I think, when I only own a GB (before I got anything else). I was always jealous of other games on other systems that were able to feature levels with something more complex. This was like a throwback for me ESPECIALLY when you look at the other two games in the series.
Basically, I like light puzzles. If I hate the type of levels presented, I don't want a pure focus on puzzles, and they lack all of the other trimmings that I like about the series...I don't see how much I could get into it.
Maybe I'll try it again sometime...
radioheadrule83
Banned
In response to the shocking LTTP criticism (how dare you have an opinion I don't like, please die 
)...
Fair enough. Sorry you feel that way.
But LTTP is bigger and better than Ocarina of Time IMO. Don't trivialise my adoration for this game by using the fucking rose-tinted cliché. Stuff that right up your ass. Ocarina of Time, although one of my favourite games EVER, is easily one of the most over-rated games ever too. It just edges Wind Waker in content, but Wind Waker is better in virtually every other way... I'm talking technically here. Majora's Mask is better too, if not a bit out there..... and every handheld Zelda is better too. In every single way, playing them is just more enjoyable for me. That's just how I feel. I find OoT fucking horrible to play now.
The only thing I think remains untouched by time is the soundtrack. But even then I think the LttP soundtrack is a LOT better. Link to the Past would be absolutely fucking awesome in 3d with the benefits of the leaps made in camera/combat in OoT thanks to the extra axis... if the exact same idea was realised in 3d in 1998, I'd be droning on about it being the best game ever, like no doubt Halo 2 fans will be for years to come. Thinking of it the other way around -- OoT, nothing added or removed, would be ultimate suckage in 2d. The world is a puny hub, the bestiery is significantly reduced, the world design and the gameplay dychotomy of 7 years past and future - is nothing compared to the genius displayed in the light world/dark world design of LttP. Hyrule Field is bland and lifeless compared to a proper Hyrule, as restricted by technology over 10 YEARS AGO. That's the reason why we can even compare them at all, even if you disagree with me. But if OoT was made from scratch in 2d - it probably would have had all the scope, size and originality of it's predecessors. Double edged sword this 2d/3d thing.
Point is: I don't feel Ocarina of Time has done anything for me but shrink down the experience I used to know and love -- and it has spawned style obsessed fans, content to relive the same puzzles over and over as long as Link looks like a brooding anime Legolas. Wind Waker and Four Sword Adventures were like the ultimate cock tease. Hopefully, Minish Cap gives me what I want so I can just ignore you all for a while
)...Fair enough. Sorry you feel that way.
But LTTP is bigger and better than Ocarina of Time IMO. Don't trivialise my adoration for this game by using the fucking rose-tinted cliché. Stuff that right up your ass. Ocarina of Time, although one of my favourite games EVER, is easily one of the most over-rated games ever too. It just edges Wind Waker in content, but Wind Waker is better in virtually every other way... I'm talking technically here. Majora's Mask is better too, if not a bit out there..... and every handheld Zelda is better too. In every single way, playing them is just more enjoyable for me. That's just how I feel. I find OoT fucking horrible to play now.
The only thing I think remains untouched by time is the soundtrack. But even then I think the LttP soundtrack is a LOT better. Link to the Past would be absolutely fucking awesome in 3d with the benefits of the leaps made in camera/combat in OoT thanks to the extra axis... if the exact same idea was realised in 3d in 1998, I'd be droning on about it being the best game ever, like no doubt Halo 2 fans will be for years to come. Thinking of it the other way around -- OoT, nothing added or removed, would be ultimate suckage in 2d. The world is a puny hub, the bestiery is significantly reduced, the world design and the gameplay dychotomy of 7 years past and future - is nothing compared to the genius displayed in the light world/dark world design of LttP. Hyrule Field is bland and lifeless compared to a proper Hyrule, as restricted by technology over 10 YEARS AGO. That's the reason why we can even compare them at all, even if you disagree with me. But if OoT was made from scratch in 2d - it probably would have had all the scope, size and originality of it's predecessors. Double edged sword this 2d/3d thing.
Point is: I don't feel Ocarina of Time has done anything for me but shrink down the experience I used to know and love -- and it has spawned style obsessed fans, content to relive the same puzzles over and over as long as Link looks like a brooding anime Legolas. Wind Waker and Four Sword Adventures were like the ultimate cock tease. Hopefully, Minish Cap gives me what I want so I can just ignore you all for a while
Go Go Ackman!
Banned
I don't know why people shit on SMS so much. I had the chance to play mario 64 not long ago, and SMS is a huge improvement in every regard. THe graphics are amazing, the environments are ingenius, and I enjoyed every second of all but one of the worlds.
Just what do people have against this game? Too difficult? Ninja Gaiden is frustratingly hard and people kiss it's ass constantly.
Just what do people have against this game? Too difficult? Ninja Gaiden is frustratingly hard and people kiss it's ass constantly.
I'm a huge Zelda fan, but the sailing killed it for me. So much wasted time on that boring boat in between levels. And that seemed to make the areas/dungeons way too small and short because once I started to have fun in them, they were over and I was back on the damn boat. Also wasn't a fan of how easy and simplistic the world was coming from Majora's Mask.
I liked Mario Sunshine a lot however. Yeah, the world was a little boring and uninspired, but the control was tight and the platforming was solid. At the end I wished they had about 50 of the floodless levels that truly were simply classic platforming and nothing else. The concept of peach's castle in Mario64 was superior, but I enjoyed Sunshine's gameplay a bit more.
I liked Mario Sunshine a lot however. Yeah, the world was a little boring and uninspired, but the control was tight and the platforming was solid. At the end I wished they had about 50 of the floodless levels that truly were simply classic platforming and nothing else. The concept of peach's castle in Mario64 was superior, but I enjoyed Sunshine's gameplay a bit more.
Go Go Ackman!
Banned
Boring and uninspired? Bitch you tripping? The environments were memorable as all hell. The amusement park, the cliff/deep sea, ghost casino, etc. Just because they were beach themed..
Go Go Ackman! said:
The lack of variety in level design compared to past mario games. In past marios, you'd have snlow levels, jungles, rivers, everything. Especially in Mario 64: there was a LOT of variety in the themes of the levels. in Super MArio Sunshine, it's just tropical. That's one reason why some people hate it.
Another reason is because of the blue coins. Now, you don't need to even TOUCH the blue coins, and you can beat the game. Some people are perfectionists who always feel compelled to get everything in a game, and they blame their frustrations with the blue coins on nintendo.
I, personally, did not put of the blue coin collecting as a separate objective, but I implemented it into the game; as I completed the various shine objectives, I also spent time searching for blue coins. The fact that I did it spread out, while a lot of people played the game so they first completed the shine objectives, and then collected the couple hundred blue coins, it became rather frustrating and repetitive, quickly. I found that my way of doing it, by getting the blue coins while simultaneously completing the shine objectives, removed much of the tediousness that people complain about in regards to the coins.
The way in which you unlocked the levels was completely linear, too. Unlike Super Mario 64, where you had a handfull of doors that openned depending on how many stars you had (and then you had the two keyed areas which were only unlockable via completing the bowser stages, of course), in Sunshine, you had to complete the seventh shine objective of each level in order to beat the game. You HAD to go through seven shines on each level, and you unlocked only one level at a time. The path in which you unlocked stages was rather linear in comparison to Mario 64.
Sunshine also failed to bring a sense of freshness to the table. Many people, after six years of waiting, were hoping for a fresh mario experience that was on par with Mario 64 in terms of how revolutionary it was. People were rather disappointed when they found out that Sunshine was Mario 64-2, which I fail to understand considering the media and previews of the game well before it's release pretty much confirmed that that is what Sunshine was.
Regarding the Shine objectives, a lot of people found them to be less clever than those found in Mario 64. Especially the red coin objectives. In Mario 64, the 8 coins were spread all over a level, but in Sunshine, they were confined to a specific area in each level. People wanted to have to search for the coins throughout the levels. I guess Nintendo made it this way because they already had blue coins spread throughout each level, so making the red coin shines the same way would seem a little repetitive.
Some people felt that the platforming elements were ruined because of the FLUDD device, in Sunshine.
In the end, I guess people were expecting more variety in the levels, less linearity, more classical platforming ideas such as powerups that affected the character, not his or her gadgetry. I think people forgot how revolutionary Mario 64 was, and they hoped for a similar revolution from Sunshine.