Settle It



  • @trugs26 Okay, man. You should read up what Oblique Projection is. You obviously don't know what it is.
    LTTP is definitely not drawing parallel lines according to the 3D axis. Oblique Projection also doesn't have a vanishing point in its style, whereas LTTP has vanishing point in the centre, actually, it has more than one vanishing points to compensate for all the different wall layouts. It's just some weird depth isometric.

    And there are no signs, ladders, levers on side walls, only top walls have them. Only anything that is a doorway, including bomb cracks, or wall decoration. There are many ways they could have represented doors on the sidewall without having to resort to a whack perspective.



  • Anyway, separate from all of Kyle's observations (It's Kyle: What did you expect?), my problem with A Link to the Past is that it flatly does not have the appeal of modern Zeldas. The dungeons are just a bunch of rooms stitched together. Puzzles are just switches and keys without a whole lot of reaction or complex interaction. IMO Zelda puzzles are at their best when they are elemental. My favorite dungeon from ALttP would have to be the water temple, because those water level puzzles were actually really cool. I'm just not down with many of the other rooms with portals and blocks and so on.

    And of course all of this is excused by the time at which it was released. However, "tech limitations of the time" and "the greatest game of all time" are inherently mutually exclusive views. ...If you ask me.



  • @Whoaness said in Settle It:

    @trugs26 Okay, man. You should read up what Oblique Projection is. You obviously don't know what it is.
    LTTP is definitely not drawing parallel lines according to the 3D axis. Oblique Projection also doesn't have a vanishing point in its style, whereas LTTP has vanishing point in the centre, actually, it has more than one vanishing points to compensate for all the different wall layouts. It's just some weird depth isometric.

    And there are no signs, ladders, levers on side walls, only top walls have them. Only anything that is a doorway, including bomb cracks, or wall decoration. There are many ways they could have represented doors on the sidewall without having to resort to a whack perspective.

    Looked into it. You're right. It looks like a hodgepodge of projections. So I can agree with you there.

    Regardless, It allows you to have ladders/stairs on bottom walls, and cliffs to jump off on side walls. Which this game does have. Maybe there aren't signs, but I was just throwing out examples of what is possible. An example of what IS in the game, are holes that enemies come out from on the south wall (e.g boulders shooting up). Generally, it allows for the player to see everything without occlusions.

    Bottom line is, you can only point all this out when you put on your "critical eye". But this is not really an issue in practice, it's only an issue if you go looking for it.



  • @trugs26 That's subjective then. Some people will notice it, some people won't care, but it's up to reviewers and critics to care about every detail.

    The "who cares" mentality that Damiani has is not what you would want in a critic.



  • I think Damiani is a fine reviewer... just maybe not for SNES games he played as a kid.



  • @Haru17 Nah, I think Damiani is purposefully trolling the whole time even though he gets what Bosman is talking about.



  • @Haru17 None of us who played SNES games as a kid are fair or balances in our views. It was the pinnacle of what we had. We fought for it against our friends with a Genesis. Bias runs deep.



  • @Sazime PC Engine master race! Bring it SNES/Genesis!



  • @Whoaness said in Settle It:

    @trugs26 That's subjective then. Some people will notice it, some people won't care, but it's up to reviewers and critics to care about every detail.

    The "who cares" mentality that Damiani has is not what you would want in a critic.

    Yup, it definitely is subjective. And the fact that this game is so critically acclaimed suggests that most people don't get hung up on the projection issues. But it's understandable for those who do. Again, I could imagine that it might be hard to "unsee" once it's pointed out to you. I'll be interested to do a quick study with non-gamer adults to look at the images and let me know what they think. It'll be interesting to get an unbiased view on this.

    Also, regarding the type of projection. I do wonder if it technically falls into oblique projection, even though it does have a vanishing point. Because it's clearly not perspective projection as it does have multiple vanishing points, but it also has some parallel lines which hit the projection plane at an angle (which is part of the oblique projection definition). I wonder if it's a special case of oblique projection. I'll have a look at the math tomorrow.



  • @trugs26
    The "who cares" mentality that Damiani has is not what you would want in a critic.

    I agree.
    It really frustrated me that Damiani just wasn't willing to have any kind of reasonable discussion about the game. Then again, it's probably not the best idea to try to have that kind of discussion about a game one person has in his top 3 of all time. I mean I get it, but it's still really annoying to see somebody who has been reviewing games for a living that long, be that unwilling to have a constructive conversation. Kyle can be a troll but he really tried to find common ground and Damiani wasn't having it.



  • @Whoaness said in Settle It:

    Anyway, I sent Bosman a tweet about seeing what he thinks about a Zelda clone that I have had early memories of, Neutopia on PC Engine. Just look at a few youtube videos, it is actually amazing how much better it looks compared to LTTP, and it came out 2 years before it.

    After watching the stream I agree with much of the stuff Kyle said about the sprites and the perspective in LttP. But still to my eye that PC Engine game looks worse than LttP. Some of the character sprites look good but the environments look terrible. The tile sets just look really plain and boring with no detail while in LttP they manage to make the world feel somewhat alive.



  • @Ivanhoe I think in Neutopia's environment sprites look better. Trees look like trees and rocks look like rocks.
    One of Bosman's complaints is that the rocks in LttP are hexagons, and the younger trees are just small size big trees, not actually what trees look like when they are growing to full size.

    There's a few more details in LttP like an uneven dirt path, those animated, fluttering flowers, and the level layout was not boxy, but remember that Neutopia was released in 1989 before the SNES was even out. It's was copying Zelda 1's level layout.



  • It can be difficult to compare the visuals and sprite work since there aren't a lot of similar games to ALttP in 1992 on the SNES.
    For example Axelay looks incredible but is a very different kind of game, while The Legend of the Mystical Ninja has a very different exaggerated cartoony/anime style.
    Though in 1993 it gets much easier with games like Jurassic Park, Goof Troop, Pocky & Rocky, Zombies Ate My Neighbors and Secret of Mana.

    So yeah, I wouldn't exactly call ALttP a good looking SNES game. But it's servicable.



  • @Whoaness said in Settle It:

    @Ivanhoe I think in Neutopia's environment sprites look better. Trees look like trees and rocks look like rocks.

    The environment sprites kind of look more realistic in Neutopia, but now that I think about it maybe the way the LttP sprites look kind of weird and unrealistic actually lends to the feel of the whole world. I get kind of warm feel from the LttP graphics as dumb as that might sound as description. Neutopia feels cold and barren like many other games of that time.



  • @Ivanhoe I don't really get what that means in an objective context.

    I would understand it if the artstyle of the entire game was consistently as bad as the rock hexagon with an 8 drawn on it, if you really find it charming, but some objects actually look decent, some characters actually have eyes and noses.

    To get a warm feeling from bad sprites means you don't get that feeling from the good sprites, and if you get it from both, well, that's just a conundrum, a conflict of what you actually think of the game.



  • I don't think there really is objective context here. I didn't mean that just certain bad sprites make the graphics better but as the style overall that is kind of unrealistic.



  • @Ivanhoe I guess what you're saying is some of these sprites in the game are purposefully not what Bosman thinks it should look like. For example, the thief dude with no eyes and nose is just like that as its character artstyle, in comparison, Zelda has some really off-kilter characters like Tingle that absolutely don't match anything else in the game.
    I guess I buy that.

    I still don't buy the look of some of the sprites, like the rocks, and I really believe in what Bosman says about the perspective being confusing.



  • The stream was a lot of Damiani gushing over things and Bosman saying it's not that extraordinary because (reason), to which Damiani either says "you're wrong" or "how can you not like that?"
    Points to Bossy for flipping it around and just saying "that's a bad sprite" after it became obvious Damiani wasn't listening to his reasoning behind the complaints that he has about the game.



  • @Whoaness I think that's it. Thing is I'm not completely sure my self about this or if I buy my own analysis. The perspective thing really does confuse when you start to pay attention to it.



  • I feel like people here are being unfair to Damiani. Sure he was very dismissive, but Bosman wasn't very insightful either (basically harped on the same issue for 90% of the thing: Bad sprites, we get it!). They both gave one off comments on why something was cool/bad while the other was dismissive. They weren't really there to negotiate (even though they said they would be), hence why there wasn't really anything "settled". So they were just as bad as each other, but I still think it was an enjoyable stream to watch. It was entertaining, not so much insightful.