• Welcome to ZD Forums! You must create an account and log in to see and participate in the Shoutbox chat on this main index page.

General Zelda Egoraptor's 'Sequelitis: A Link to the Past Vs. Ocarina of Time'

Linkanon

Professional Dork
Joined
Oct 22, 2010
Location
Gotham
Gender
Male
PART 1

Welcome to my thread on Arin 'Egoraptor' Hanson's newest episode of Sequelitis, a series where he compares two games in a series in many different ways, each episode is a bit different. In this episode, he compares A Link to the Past and Ocarina of Time, and to a lesser extent, the original Legend of Zelda. He also expresses his (sometimes a bit harsh, yet agreeable) opinion on Skyward Sword. I'm gonna go by each major point he brings up and express my opinions on them, and sometimes defend what he's saying, because a lot of people disagree with him. I'm also going to borrow some quotes and base some of my opinions on this article from GenGAME:

http://www.gengame.net/2014/07/a-re...-its-about-finding-the-balance-that-fits-you/

Here's the video if you haven't seen it yet:

WARNING! EXPLICIT CONTENT!
[video=youtube;XOC3vixnj_0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XOC3vixnj_0[/video]

What is Zelda?


"In Zelda, you were an adventurer and that much wasn’t even explained. You were just a green dude. Walk into a cave. Old dude goes “Hey, take this.” Okay, it’s a sword. You swing it at monsters that shoot rocks and **** at you and you have a great time killing them. You figure if there’s a cave I got a sword in, there must be other caves to get other **** in, right? Maybe other swords? I don’t know, this world’s neat. Well THAT’s Zelda."​
-Egoraptor​

I definitely agree with what he's saying, but, like the article on GenGAME says, that's really up to the player, to find their perfect balance of everything they want in a Zelda game. Maybe they prefer more puzzles? Maybe more of a story? Maybe they want both, with more combat? That's what makes Zelda what it is, this is just what Egoraptor likes in a Zelda game, and that's perfectly fine.

A Link to the Past


"And then, Adventure of Link came out, whateverIdon'tevencare...AND THEN! A Link to the Past! ...It was like the definitive Zelda, right? It felt like the first Zelda. But there was so much more. Bigger world, more things going on, it was NUTS! My eight-year-old mind couldn't take it. Was I eight? I don't remember.... But still! It changed a lot of things. This guy, Link, was given a name and a purpose. Rescue the princess, save Hyrule!...In Link to the Past, you start out in a house. You're forced to head up, sneak into a castle, fight some guards, rescue a princess, and bring her through an underground tunnel to some church or whatever, so you can finally go out, have your world to enjoy! Ok, cool. But ok, you want me to talk to some old lady? Ok. Then what? Oh, find some kid who knows about where some old dude is? Ok. So, ok. So here's the old dude. Ok. So go into this temple. Ok. Beat the temple. Ok. Listen? ...Not you're f*****' servant. Why do you give me this world to explore, and have a good time in, and they you tell me these super specific things? You don't throw a six-year-old into a sandbox and say, "Hey, you can only make poopy castles. You know when you take wet sand, and you just let it drip on top of a pile of sand? That's a poopy castle." I mean, exploration still exists in Link to the Past, and God knows it's required to beat it, but if a game is telling you to do specific things with marks on a map and a sequence of which things to do and specific instructions, you're not discovering the world. You're being taken on a tour. You're no longer a pioneer adventurer, you're a guest at Disneyland. "Here's your ticket, be sure to check out Space Mountain and Indiana Jones before you leave!" [more Disney jokes] The whole game feels a bit more processed, it feels a bit more planned. You have a mission, and the mission is laid out for you. And that kind of thing is fine. [Disney comparison] But Zelda, from its roots, it's not the kind of game that holds your hand. There's no explanation or even really like a goal. But there's adversity everywhere. And you can approach it any time you want. Whether you're prepared, or not. You run the real risk of facing off against something that will KILL YOU, in a f*****' second! IT'S F*****' AWESOME!!"
-Egoraptor​

That may have been long, but he brings up a lot of good points that I felt like I could just get through in one paragraph.

First, he's very right. It did feel like the first Zelda, just with so much more! And it did kind of take you on a tour, but that wasn't really a big problem, because there still was exploration in the game, and, like he said, you did need to explore to beat the game. He might have been a bit too harsh when he compared it to the sandbox, but, it is, in a way, a bit like that, and many people are fine with that. Zelda really wasn't a game that holds your hand, but that doesn't mean all of the games have to be that way. The way it's supposed to be is up to the individual.

Ocarina of Time

"The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time. It's a game considered by most to be a masterpiece. A 3D world with delicious sound andamazinggraphics (at the time...). Each dungeon and each town feels unique, and has its own energy to it. We were all f*****' floored! It was so epic! This is what felt like gaming was leading up to, it felt like a natural progression. It felt like... witnessing a fish grow legs. [...] So now, we have this 3D world. And it felt like that was what made the difference. -Egoraptor​

There really isn't anything else to say, this is what most gamers felt at the time. But, moving on to the next point, this is where Egoraptor and most people's opinions differ.

A Link to the Past Vs. Ocarina of Time

"But what exactly was different? Well, in order to examine that, we have to examine, THE DREADED TRANSITION FROM THE SECOND DIMENSION TO THE THIRD DIMENSION! If we've learned anything from Sanic the Hedgehorg over here, it's that turning a 2D game into a 3D game, it ain't easy! It ain't even f*****' quantifiable. How do you take the simplicity of form that 2D allows, give it a z-axis. Everything changes! And it seems to turn a really good game design, into a completely f*****' broken one! [...] I mean, but Zelda, that one's not too hard. It already technically has three dimensions. You've got the y-axis, the x-axis, but, you know, you can go up stairs, enemies could jump over you, all that stuff. But that's where the differences start. See, Link to the Past had a selective z-axis. For example, you couldn't be on the second floor and attack a dude on the first floor, but if the sand worm boss soared over your head and you weren't harmed by it, you could still swing at it, and it would register a hit. Bats fly through the air, but they're always conveniently at sword's-height. That s***'s asinine in 3D! Which ironically, in this situation, is a limitation of the medium. The more specific you get about situations analogous to reality, the more you have to stipulate on. You can't hit a bat from any z-axis position distance." -Egoraptor​

I... sort of agree with this? the z-axis on both games make sense. It's not selective, it just makes sense. You can't hit an enemy on a different floor in either game, because that just makes sense. Sure, it's not fully 3D, and the bat situation is a limitation, but the z-axis isn't as "selective" as he says it is.

(continued)
"Now, it's really clear where the bats are in 3D space, they're up, down, every-f*****'-where. -Egoraptor

He then goes on to explain something brand new to the Zelda series, something no one had seen before....

Z-Targeting


(continued)
"And aiming your sword would be f*****' ********. ...Hey! I see you there loomin'... [Skyward Sword:] Gee man, I'm sorry, I'm just curious." [Egoraptor:] So what do we gotta do to remedy this z-axis problem? Ladies and gents, I present you z-targeting! Pesky bats flying from every which a-way? Trying to circle around a Stalfos without losing track of where it is relative to you? Have I got a treat for you! Just press the z-button and you'll lock on to the nearest baddie and have a go with your mighty sword device! Check it out. 'Z-Targeting,' made combat... complicated. And that's not a bad thing. No more simple point and swing stuff here, folks. You gotta lock on, focus on the fight. This is a gigantic difference. And it makes combat complex. And I don't say this a lot, but let's see how this is a good thing. A new method of combat means new ways to go about designing enemies and combat situations. You used to just point and hit, hit and run. [...] But now, there's rolling, dodging, stabbing, swinging, leaping, holy S***! SO complex. SO many possibilities. It's so deep they can make an entire game based on the combat system but GUESS WHAT, THEY DIDN'T. HERE'S HOW THIS IS A POOPY BAD THING. Z-Targeting creates a strange disconnect form the world around you. It changes the camera angle from what you're used to exploring the world in, and that shifts your entire focus and outlook. It segments the game into two pieces. This is the combat piece, this is the world exploring piece, they don't mix! Put 'em in a room together, they get in an argument. [...] ...in the old Zelda games, those two pieces were linked. They were segments where you had to fight off enemies and explore the room simultaneously. It was much easier to manage it all, and now it's complicated and puts you in unfair situations [...] Z-Targeting also puts a damper on throw-away enemies like bats, who were fun to kill in previous Zelda's, but are now a pain in the god d*** a** since you have to individually focus on each one and precisely hit them. It'd be like if you wanted to kill a bunch of ants in your house by stompin' on 'em, but instead of doin' that, you pointed a slingshot at each one individually. -Egoraptor​

I honestly disagree with most of this. I love z-targeting, just because it makes it a bit easier on me, but that's just my opinion, because he seems to hate it because of the immersion factor... and bats (which I completely sympathize and agree with).

**************************************************************************************************************​

Alright, folks, we're barely 8 minutes in. I've spent a good hour on this, simply because of the quotes, and I'm d*** tired. So, I'm going to split this up into parts. Hopefully the next few won't be so quote-heavy. I'm very open to comments and suggestions, and I'll post the next one as a comment soon. :) I hope you enjoyed, and I promise it'll most likely get about ten times more opinionated as it goes on. ;)

~Linkanon
 

Iridescence

Emancipated Wind Fish
Joined
May 11, 2014
Location
United States
Like a million other people, I saw the video. I didn't like his tone or humor much, but I like how he critically analyzes A Link to the Past and Ocarina of Time and I agree with the majority of his points.

Especially the one about how Nintendo has focused so much on the things you find that they failed to focus on HOW you find them.
 

Linkanon

Professional Dork
Joined
Oct 22, 2010
Location
Gotham
Gender
Male
Like a million other people, I saw the video. I didn't like his tone or humor much, but I like how he critically analyzes A Link to the Past and Ocarina of Time and I agree with the majority of his points.

Especially the one about how Nintendo has focused so much on the things you find that they failed to focus on HOW you find them.
I totally agree, it's very brave to come out with something like this, considering how praised OoT is. Although he jokes about it, this is a very brave move and I applaud him for it.
 

Aku

Joined
Apr 3, 2014
I agree with his points too. In the oldest games you could just go into a place irregardless of whether you were prepared for it or not, but in the new games it looks like it's just a lot of waiting and 'a' button pressing, along with going in a highly specific order. I haven't played those games, but I can easily see what he means, and the sharp contrast.

I think I will skip over those games and just keep the 'old school' Zelda 1 & 2 along with ALBW.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Dec 14, 2008
Location
Louisiana, USA
I find myself concurring that most of his points are valid, although I can also say that what he prioritizes as a player of video games do align specifically against what modern 3D Zelda is all about.

Firstly, he seems to be fixated with the old gaming tradition of being all about the player who's actually holding the controller. This is seen in his Megaman sequelitis, where he continually praises the game for not affecting Megaman X the character, but affecting him as the player, mainly from a story and motivation standpoint. Ego seems to completely discount what many believe is an important aspect of gaming today, and that's the story that many great games bring forth. He thinks that he, the player, should eternally be the "link" that experiences the game, and that his "avatar" shouldn't be the one experiencing things for him. This is a fair concern, but I think that it's exactly that, discounting what many gamers think is an important aspect of story-telling in modern games. Megaman X's story isn't all that great, nor is it deep, but I'm sure that Arin would claim that it's far better that any other story in gaming, as it puts himself in the mix unlike anything else, with personal motivations and whatnot. I guess what I'm saying is that Arin has a notorious history of refusing to let games tell him anything, be it related to gameplay concepts or story plot points (this has been seen time and time again on Game Grumps; it's not a matter of him putting on a show, but a matter of him just not heeding anything the game tells him). So it makes sense that 3D Zelda doesn't appeal to him - he prefers the older style of gaming that's somewhat fallen out of favor.

I say all of that above, because Arin's entire point revolves around OoT being different from the original LoZ in the way that you can't do what you want when you want to. That's a fine opinion to hold, and if you think OoT should most definitely be that instead of starting the new modern style, that's fine. But nearly every 3D Zelda game follows what OoT started almost exactly, where it's less about emulating the experiences of the original NES LoZ, and more about a linear path that still presents classic elements such as puzzle solving and combat coupled with story elements that many find engaging or entertaining. Whether or not the 3D style is appealing or not is up to interpretation, but it might not be a completely fair comparison to say that it's inherently bad just because it didn't exactly follow the elements presented in the original LoZ.

I obviously can't cover everything in the video, as it's far too long, but that's the part that stuck out most to me. Like I said, I agree with many of his points, and I think it's an excellent video.

That being said, his SS rant at the end was the best part of the video, and I'll watch it multiple times for sure. In fact, I think ALttP vs SS would have been a much fairer comparison. Like it or not, OoT can always theoretically fall back on the "first 3D game of its time" argument, where it makes the excuse that it truly was the first of its kind, and mistakes were going to be made, especially when it comes to combat and over-world layout. SS has no such excuse, and it would have been great to see it pitted against ALttP. The height of 2D Zelda against the current height of 3D Zelda. I feel like the comparisons would be more valid, and they would actually be more relevant.
 

DarkestLink

Darkest of all Dark Links
Joined
Oct 28, 2012
I found the most ironic thing here is that he complains so much about wasting a few seconds of time, whereas he wastes...minutes in the video.
 

Salem

SICK
Joined
May 18, 2013
I think he should have made talked more about other Zelda games in the series, for example I don't think he talked about LoZ vs Alttp enough. also I'm curious to see OoT vs. MM vs. WW vs. TP etc.....
 

ihateghirahim

The Fierce Deity
Joined
Jan 16, 2013
Location
Inside the Moon
Wow, this is such hateful video. I feel like he's been blinded by an obsession with old ideas. Alttp actually restricts exploration early on to force you to go to the castle for story. Beyond that, he seems to criticize a lot of the 3D transition largely because its different, and not because of actual flaws. I feel like he's too focused on one memory to allow for series evolution. OoT had a lot of great gameplay elements and fun. Zelda had to outgrow the old ways, and become more developed in story and gameplay. That's why they added story (Though i want more) that made the adventure more meaningful and interesting, new puzzles built around exploring the 3D world, more cinematic experiences, and a combat style that featured 3D lock-on to assist in the new combat. I'm not saying OoT is perfect, but it is deserving of far better than this. It was a cool and revolutionary title that brought the franchise to new levels of glory where other 2D franchises died away. OoT is a great game that brought the series forward in time. Those who can't accept legitimate attempts at franchise evolution ought not to play new games at all.
 
Joined
Sep 21, 2014
Location
Michigan
He makes a good few points, but I feel that he's forgetting something. All his personal knowledge comes innately with more than a decade of retrospective 3D gaming experience. I'm sure if Nintendo could have time travelled into the future they'd have learned a lot from their own Twilight Princess, because played back to back in reverse chronological order you can find ways they greatly improved the game. Also, A Link to the Past game after they had tremendous experience with making 2D games. But Ocarina was almost like their Baby Steps. It's almost unfair to level some of those attacks against it. Additionally, I feel he's downright biased. If you watch or listen to a lot of his videos, you find that he actually just dislikes the idea of 3D Zelda titles in general. Many of the grievances he has are just hollow. I could go line by line and dismantle them, but really I'll just focus on the one that stuck in my mind the most (and that I can argue against the most vehemently).

Specifically, his beef with "waiting" and enemies. Did you know that almost every monster he talks about that has a time where "attacking it is useless" is just plain wrong? Yup. Stalfos, Wolfos, Lizalfos, Dinofos, and many other guarding enemies have weak points, even when protecting themselves. Talk to any martial artist or weaponmaster and they'll tell you there are two halves to a fight: finding a defense that can't be beaten, and finding an attack to beat any defense. What Egoraptor's opinion shows me is that he just wasn't good or hungry enough to find those elements. Personally, I found enormous reward in analyzing and ripping apart every enemy's weaknesses. Whether it was from discovering a technique (for instance, from the perfect range, a forward thrust will just connect underneath a Stalfos' shield, or above a Wolfos' paws), or thinking to use an item in an unconventional way, the combat system was much deeper than he seems to have discovered. Instead, he apparently just laid there and took it instead of delving into the system. If I had to venture a guess, it's likely because he was sitting there wining to himself about disliking the changes from 2D to 3D instead of enjoying them (though I could be wrong there, after watching his playthrough of Wind Waker HD I doubt it).
 
Joined
Sep 23, 2014
My problem with the video is that it reinforces what Egoraptor shows in his videos: he's unwilling to listen to the game when it tells him something, try different things if plan A doesn't work. The Z-targeting complaints (being hit by something that you do not see coming, but you know is there when you enter the room) really clash with what he says about the Darknut rooms in LoZ 1: you need to find vantage points, disengage when the enemies get close to one another and find workarounds to deal with them. The various encounters with multiple Darknuts in Twilight Princess was much like this: you need to lure them away from one another to create an opening for you to exploit and fight them.

But the biggest problem is that Ego misunderstands Link's motives: he's not being a hero for the sake of being a hero. Hell, what he describes as a hero is not a hero: it is what is known amongst tabletop RPG players as a "murderhobo".
 

Farrenhyte

Site Staff
Joined
Sep 23, 2014
Location
Oregon
I really liked it, honestly. His thoughts on both games were things I easily overlooked. I'm a big fan of Egoraptor, and that video really was an entertaining thing to watch!
 

DarkestLink

Darkest of all Dark Links
Joined
Oct 28, 2012
One of my biggest problems with Arin is that he comes across as one of those older gamers...y'know the ones that never moved one from the "Good ol days" and spend so much time bashing everything modern that you're convinced they just hate gaming and outgrew being a gamer long ago.
 

Salem

SICK
Joined
May 18, 2013
One of my biggest problems with Arin is that he comes across as one of those older gamers...y'know the ones that never moved one from the "Good ol days" and spend so much time bashing everything modern that you're convinced they just hate gaming and outgrew being a gamer long ago.
Have you watched Game Grumps? He doesn't really come across like that to me.
 

DarkestLink

Darkest of all Dark Links
Joined
Oct 28, 2012
Have you watched Game Grumps? He doesn't really come across like that to me.
Yeah...he does. He's always complaining about everything that requires some form of tutorial, has any story to it or is just Mario in general. Danny seems to be having fun though.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom