I was actually looking at the Android remake. Sorry, I should've been clear about that.
Yes everything can be broken down into basic shapes, but the point I'm making is that ALttP sprites are made up of very few shapes to approximate the entire form (as well as toon shaded, making the art style quite simple). In ALttP, few shapes well approximate the sprite, for example a circle well approximates the tree top in ALttP, and maybe 8 circles would approximate all of the boundary detail, whereas a the tree in Secret of Mana (Android) would require something like 1-3 reuleaux triangles for the general shape, and many more polygons to approximate all of the boundary detail. This gives SoM a highly textured and realistic form, and ALttP a more toon form.
In terms of the SNES version of SoM, you'll notice that the one tree you're talking about would actually fit well in ALttP in terms of shape, but not texture. Furthermore, there are many other tree varieties in SoM which vary a lot more in shape, further illustrating my point. For example:
The same point applies throughout the environmental sprites (flowers, rocks, etc.). ALttP sprites have quite simple shapes as part of its art style. On top of that, as you've mentioned, it's cel shaded with few tones, which the rock matches as well.
Whoaness last edited by Whoaness
@trugs26 Ah I was just looking at the trees I made in my earlier screenshot. Didn't think about the other parts of the game. Secret of Mana has a lot more art variation where LTTP only has one tree and a shrunken down version of the same tree. I wouldn't say the lack of variation can be considered an art style, but it certainly doesn't help LTTP in the case of having good art sprites.
As for the textures, I did say it was a cel-shaded art. You can't have detailed, gradient textures in a cel-shaded game. The shading is what makes these two games different. Simply being cel-shaded doesn't excuse that rock though. The Neutopia rock is actually fairly cel-shaded as well and looks more realistic than LTTP's octagon rock with an 8. I mean, what the hell is that 8 supposed to be?
Just posting the trees I was talking about from the SNES in comparison to your Android version:
trugs26 last edited by
@Whoaness So it looks like we're agreeing. ALttP's art style is simple shapes + cel shaded. The rock is a simple shape + cel shading. So in terms of consistency, it's fine. But whether or it's a good sprite is the part of the discussion I want to avoid (too subjective at this point, which I don't really want to get into). As for the 8 on the rock? I don't know lol.
@trugs26 Whoa dude, I didn't say "basic shape" is the art style of LTTP. I said that the shape of rock is egregiously lacking so much in shape detail in comparison to the tree and a lot of other objects in the world. I pointed out a bunch of objects that actually have great detail and look realistic.
matt last edited by matt
So uh...hard to follow the conversation, but in regards to the new "show", I like it. But I do wish there was more effort in the discussion. Kyle does a good job pointing out his problems.
Like someone said before, it's like something you can't unsee. I could see how that could ruin the whole experience as that perspective is kept the entire time. Don't they do this in the original Legend of Zelda that Kyle loves?
I love LttP, but I would never argue its graphics as its appeal. I think the game designers had to make some decisions based on the levels and game they wanted to make. The end product, is a game I love dearly. To this day, I love its sense of scale, progression and length. The graphics got their point across, but there are certainly silly and confusing ones. I'm not an artist, so I've never judged sprite design. I usually just take it for what they are without a second thought.
To me, I feel this is Zelda game that is fully realized, not limited by technology.
@matt You're right in that the original Zelda (NES) does actually mix perspective as well. Specifically, the overworld map is done with the "correct" look, where everything is orthographic and the camera tilted lower, matching the character sprites. But dungeons actually do it in the same style as ALttP, where they mix the look with side on sprites but the walls are done in perspective. But since Zelda 1 is quite boxed (single screens), and since it's isolated to dungeon walls only, it's less egregious, so I'd imagine that's why it's overlooked by Kyle.
It's actually interesting that you bring that up. It seems Nintendo did this so they could have dungeons with multiple pathways (i.e doors or ladders on any of the 4 walls), allowing for the player to have an easier time to "see" all possibilities in the dungeon. It seems that they took this design idea and tried to expand it to the entire map of ALttP's world.
@matt Actually, looking into it further. ALttP, Link's Awakening, Oracle of Ages/Seasons, and Minish Cap all do this to the same extent it seems. Whereas Zelda 1 sticks with orthographic for the overworld and sprites, and perspective in dungeons. I think I might come to the conclusion that this really was a non-issue considering that basically all of the sprite based Zelda games did it. So while this negates some of Kyle's point, he's still right in that it seems like the other Zelda games are more consistent with their sprites look, whereas ALttP mixes orthographic and perspective with the sprites. I'd have to look into this further though, which I think at this point I'm kinda over this topic lol.
suplextrain last edited by
I think the thing people need to be aware of is that like the initial idea with the Settle It video this argument isn't about proving something, but understanding and accepting other's viewpoints.
Take the rocks for example, do you think that they look "fine"? Ok. Can you understand why people think that the rocks (and other parts of ALttP) looks a bit rough or ugly (and why arguments like Damiani's "Well it was an early game" doesn't hold up)?
Then you settled it and there's nothing more to say about that really, so move on to something else to settle.
It's not really about proving people wrong, but perspective.
@suplextrain I'd like to see a proper Settle It because it was definitely clear that Damiani was trolling the entire time while Bosman is pointing things out.
There needs to be a Knack Settle It soon.
CensorErik last edited by
@Whoaness I totally agree. Kyle was the only one of the two that was willing to compromise at all. There was no budging Damiani. In fact, Kyle had to bring up Zelda II and settle on things about that! Not exactly what the show was outlined to be from my perspective. I mean I understand being stubborn about an opinion, I can be extremely stubborn at times, but when someone holding an opposing view is open-inded enough to hear me out I ALWAYSS try to meet them halfway.
@suplextrain You're right. And before this video I never noticed the issues Kyle talks about. I understand where he's coming from now. In the past, I've either ignored or overlooked those issues with perspective and sprites.
His issues with context, I never even fathomed. One bed? Link never exploring Hyrule prior to these events? Moon pearl? Sadly, I feel he's just ruining the game for himself if he wants to get hung up on those details. I think you can pick apart any game's purpose or logic if you tried hard enough.
It's interesting to hear his POV on this game. I initially agreed with others here saying Damiani didn't contribute much to the discussion. But in regards to the Settle It theme, I feel Damiani did do a good job presenting his view of the game. He did try to point out to Kyle the game's technical achievements, RP, lore, scope, pacing/progression. Maybe we just feel like he didn't contribute much because he was saying things we already felt/knew/believed.
Ivanhoe last edited by
This show/stream might be better - concerning the discussions - if the game being settled on wasn't too important to either one. On the other hand that kind of takes away form the excitement of the premise, but if everything in the game is colored by your childhood memories or if you have some irrational hate towards a game it's hard to try to find the common ground.
I'm expecting the Huber/Ian Last of Us Settle It to go same way as this one did. Huber thinks the game is a masterpiece so he's not going to budge but in the smallest most obvious stuff much like Damiani. Ian will play the Kyle role. I hope I'm wrong, but either way it's going to be entertaining stream.
thisnameislame last edited by
I only played through LttP for the first time myself pretty recently, so I don't have any kind of super personal attachment, and I think Kyle's mostly right about the story/context issues, and right about a good amount of the art issues. I mostly disagree with him about the dungeon design. Sure, you could argue there's some padding, but there's also unique and interesting puzzles and a ton of layout variety. I think it's kind of hard to analyze the dungeons in that format with Damiani mostly just blitzing through them knowing where to go, but obviously they were pressed for time and couldn't really talk bout the layouts and paths in depth.
I agree with the sentiment that Damiani was pretty stubborn and closed-minded for the most part. What upset me the most is when he insisted there were more was you could affect the Dark World through your actions in the Light World than just the water at the beginning of the 2nd Dark World Dungeon. He did pretty much everything in the game except for like 2 heat pieces and there was no other instance of that. Either he was lying/trolling or severely misremembering.
@thisnameislame I think that's what I would argue with Kyle most about. I just finished the video and understand his problems with the dungeons. Knee high walls is funny observation. But to say they're just filler dungeons is ignorant. I would think his experience with Mario Maker would've given him a bit more understanding on game and level design.
To me, dungeons are a very integral part to a Zelda game. There's a large combination of so many elements to make even a functional Zelda dungeon. Aesthetic, progression, frustration/difficulty, puzzle elements, layout, etc. all need to be taken into consideration when creating any level or dungeon. I think it's easy to make a shitty dungeon; difficult to make a decent/mediocre dungeon; a miracle to make a memorable/classic dungeon.
I hate to argue, "If you don't like it, then let's see you make one better." because I don't believe that you need to be able to do something better in order to have a valid opinion. But really, the game designers laid out these dungeons. They had specific paths and rooms all figured out and how they wanted to control and direct the player through these dungeons. The work to implement sprites or obstacles to match the desired layout is very hard. The knee high walls, in context does sound ridiculous. But how else can you represent a thin barrier that prohibits your direct path and doesn't obstruct your view too much? There's not many other ways to do it.
Kyle's question "are you having FUN right now!?" is rather condescending. For me I would say, "Yes, I'm having fun playing Zelda". Zelda, and most great games, for me isn't great because of one singular thing but many things working together. I'll agree that they are not the best graphically or artful, but completing each dungeon was rewarding to me.
Since Damiani didn't settle it, I thought I'd throw in my Settle It. This is how I've come to terms with the game following Kyle's observations.
Graphics: Yes, it's passable. Nothing to brag about. Some funny/confusing sprite work. Could be better, but does not ruin the game for me.
Sound Effects: Yes, there are a lot of recycled sounds which is humorous. I would probably admit it's more lazy than a technical limitation. But most other sound effects are fine if not really good.
Sound track: Memorable and sets the tone pretty well. I wouldn't say they're all great, but certainly memorable. When I hear them outside of the game I love them because it reminds me of a great game I love.
Controls/Mechanics: Great. Not many problems doing what you intend to do. Game progresses nicely and you get a nice variety of new gear and mechanics throughout the game. Battles are basic, but there are a nice variety of enemy types to keep things interesting.
Map: Big! x2! Contextually may not make sense. Level design wise, the layout feels masterfully crafted and populated and admittedly caters more to gameplay and traversal than context.
Sorry for the long post. Thanks for reading :v_tone1:
@matt Yeah it is also my point of contention with Bosman. I don't think the Dungeons are that bad. I think Bosman is like that because it seems like he had issues getting through the dungeon when he first played it which frustrated him. There could be some design issues that could be improved, but I fail to see how it's that much different from Link's Awakening, which he likes. I would need to hear him play and comment about Link's Awakening dungeons in comparison.
In general, though, After OoT, I was pretty bored of Zelda's dungeon design. It's too expected to have the fire dungeon and the water dungeon. Getting the key, opening the chest that gets the equipment, then using that equipment to solve the dungeon's mechanic, getting the boss key to fight the boss. It's just a tired system and so expected.
About that part where Bosman said "Are you having fun right now?", Damiani wasn't having fun. I can't count how many times where a streamer is having the worst time with a game and says "Guys, I'm having so much fun." You can see frustration, and when Damiani screwed up the orb switch, he was not having fun.
@Whoaness I agree that the Zelda format has been guilty of being overused and predictable. That's why I feel some argue OoT is too similar to LttP.
I can't speak for Damiani, but watching him speed run something he's played to death does not look fun. For me, I've only played through the game a handful of times. So each dungeon takes time for me to explore, get my bearings, figure out what to do and where to go. That time spent on clearing a dungeon is rewarding and fun for me.
I felt Kyle was trying to make a point that the dungeons are bad and boring. To ask the question about having fun in the context of moving statues and flipping switches, of course those individual actions are not fun but that's all small parts of the bigger picture, which is light puzzle solving and progressing to the dungeon boss. You can pick apart any tiny aspect of any great game and make it sound not fun. But that doesn't mean the entire game experience can't be fun.
MGS: Are you having fun waiting in this steam room for your key to get hot?
OG Sonic: Are you having fun looking for air bubbles?
Mario Galaxy: Are you having fun using your pointer to pick up star bits?
@matt They use that formula in Wind Waker, Twilight Princess, and Skyward Sword. I'm going to laugh so hard when people faceplant when this same formula is in Breath of the Wild.
Sir Thuswindburn last edited by
Any word on a new episode?