The Gamer's Quarter

[Ketch]

(One of my weird 'game designey' topics).

What do you think are the differences between the MetroidVania (CastleRoids haha) and Zelda formulas? Is there really any difference to speak of, or is it really just the same principle from a different perspective.

[grumbel]

While Metroid and Castlevania are similar, I would set them appart. Castlevania builds quite a bit more on RPG-like grinding to collect soles, buy better weapons and stuff., while in Metroid and Zelda killing dozens of enemies earns you nothing, a few gems in Zelda, but since you can't really buy new weapons with that, it doesn't help you much.

Another difference is that in Metroid you have a very limited amount of weapons, while in Zelda you have quite a bit more and you have to constantly switch around in the inventory.

There are also the dungeons which you have in Zelda, but don't have so much in Metroid or Castlevania. In both those games there is only one large world with some sections looking a little different then others, while in Zelda you have separate dungeons with their own reset points, puzzles and boss battles. In Zelda you also have the towns where there is no fighting, while in the Castlevania (2 being the only exception) and Metroid you are constantly fighting and much less talking.

But overall I would say they are pretty much the same, you walk around, kill this or that boss, earn a weapon that also acts as key for a new area, continue till you have defeated the last boss.

[Harveyjames]

Yes thats right Grumbel. But you missed a few things. In Metroid you have a gun where in Zelda you have a sword. Metroid is set in the Future while Zelda is set in the Fantasy world of Hyrule! Zelda has a hero called Link and Metroid's hero is called Samus. Link is a boy while Samus (Metroid) is a girl!! Also, Link is green while Samus is the colour orange.

Also In Zelda you don't pick up missles you pick up rupees! I suppose Samus might find a rupee one day but good luck trying to find somewhere to spend it Samus!!!!!!!!!

Hope this helps Ketch!

[Shapermc]

So, cross polination like the later Hana Barbara would result in Samus Collects the Rupies?
_________________
“The average man has a secret desire to be a swaggering, drunken, fighting, raping swashbuckler.”
-Robert E. Howard in a letter to a friend circa Decmber 1932

"There is no place in this enterprise for a rogue physicist!"

[Shapermc]

Ok, more seriously, the lock and key formula of the two is quite similar (you need a missle to open doors in Metroid, you need Dracula’s Rib in Castlevania, and you need the Hookshot in Zelda), but the main separation is their 2D games.

Obviously Zelda is overhead and involves a center point (usually Hyrule field) for which everything branches off from. Metroid games will usually have a stream of progression from points that may result in backtracking, but (baring Fusion) doesn’t result in a central return point. The Castlevania’s which have come to pass since Igarashi’s taken charge as caretaker for the series has been quite similar to the initial and returning Metroid formula. These are the ones referred to as Metroidvania’s (SotN and on). As stated above the lock/key of the three games is similar because many times they are more related to items being the key than literal keys.

In the 3D games of these three franchises you will get a much more similar feel to them. The main separation is their atmosphere and mechanics, but overall they have similar perspectives, progression, and lock/key systems.

This is all on a very basic scale though. Also, before SotN most people wouldn’t come close to attempting to talk about Castlevania with these other two games from a design perspective.
_________________
“The average man has a secret desire to be a swaggering, drunken, fighting, raping swashbuckler.”
-Robert E. Howard in a letter to a friend circa Decmber 1932

"There is no place in this enterprise for a rogue physicist!"

[Ericb]

[Persona-sama]

The thing I enjoyed about Metroid is how much the game expects you to understand just from watching the environment and from knowing what you can do. Giving the player just a handful of weapons makes the player really have to understand what Samus can do, and then tossing enemies where conventional ways of beating them doesn't work makes the player think on their feet.

Meanwhile, in Zelda or Castlevania, you can pretty much kill everyone the same way (swing sword/whip/bugnet/etc.). The only really interesting combat scenarios in Zelda end up being the bosses where you have to apply what you were taught in the dungeon to succeed.

I really appreciate Metroid because it requires a certain mastery of the game. Backtracking through the puzzle-like levels aren't a problem after the first few times because you effectively own that area and can run across it with ease. Likewise, there's this empowering feeling in Castlevania as you walk across rooms and hallways with enemies, using your preferred weapon combinations to kill enemies as fast as possible. Of course, in Castlevania there's not much skill involved once you grind a few levels and become totally overpowered.

But really, each of these games have their own distinct fundamental design basics going on behind all of them. Metroid is essentially a lonely game in an alien planet, Zelda is a dungeon explorer with a connecting overworld, and Castlevania is a castle-romper with pretty set pieces and a "What is a man?!" at the end. That they happen to be influenced off each other or ended up rubbing ideas is the result of being created in the same genre, 2d platformers, and having to deal with similar limitations*.

*Actually, Zelda is an overhead game, isn't it? It'd be interesting to specifically compare Zelda 2 with Castlevania and the other dungeon platformers of the NES era though.
_________________

[Harveyjames]

I'm sick of not having every tool I need to play the game from the start, in these sort of games. What's the fun of pondering over what you're meant to do with the mysterious artifacts you discover dotted around the landscape, when 90% of the time the answer is 'you're meant to use an item you haven't got yet'?

SotC breaks this tradition and is better for it :|

[Nana Komatsu]

Well SoTC also only gives you two tools (sword and bow). I think both the idea of getting some new item in each level, and the idea that you'll need 10 items to beat the game are contrary to what SoTC is trying to do.

[SuperWes]

[grumbel]

[Ketch]

[mslano]

[Nana Komatsu]

That's how Mega man games have been doing it for years.

I liked how in MGS3 you could get additional camos by defeating the Cobras by stamina, that seemed to make some sense (even if they all blew themselves up).

[Harveyjames]

[SuperWes]

[Harveyjames]

[player 2]

All SotC did was expound on the really simple to create something really extraordinary. Running, jumping, climbing, slashing, shooting arrows... they're all really simple things. That we do those simple things and destroy 16 colossi really puts things in perspective. It's not a matter of "do we add or do we subtract" it's a matter of having what's there be fucking awesome. Add as much content as you like, Nintendo, just make sure that advantage of what you already have.
_________________
Wii #: 8749 9109 9732 3653

"It is a peaceful way of understanding life, to play"
_Marcel Duchamp

[Ketch]

[Nana Komatsu]

[kirkjerk]

I think I'm not a smart enough gamer for SotC. Even on the first guy, I have too much trouble seeing the handholds for me to enjoy it (I'm not a very smart puzzley kind of thinker, alas. Actually, my new housemate is interesting, he has a very good gamer intuituion, but almost likes to spectate as much as play, so we might make a good team on stuff like that.)

As for the whole Zelda/Metrovania thing...

Maybe I'm justa big old heap of "not getting it"ness, but in a post GTA-world, the kind of blatnant "this microcosm was specifically designed for this character to be able to get around in" of these games bugs me more.

Which of all 3 series probably has the least of that? Has the best plausible 'living breathing" effect?

[SuperWes]

[dessgeega]

a boy and his blob isn't a game you should just fire up in an emulator without reading any documentation.
_________________

[internisus]

Maybe this is too obvious to be said, but Zelda has remained a highly structured game experience while Metroid becomes more fluid with each iteration. You don't really think of Metroid as being separated into stages or bosses, and lately games like Fusion have intentionally destroyed their own implied opening structures. Zelda mostly remains the same. Twilight Princess thrusts out from that truth a bit, but never seriously diverges from its obvious stage-by-stage structure.

[player 2]

I just noticed this:

[Ketch]

[Kipple]

[SuperWes]

[internisus]

[grumbel]

[kirkjerk]

[Ketch]

[helicopterp]

I have mostly stayed away from this discussion, but would like to add that Pikmin does a fine job with the inevitability aspect that Ketch just discussed. A fine job.
_________________
Like you thought you'd seen copter perverts before. They were nothing compared to this one.