Why exactly is Shadow of the Colossus held in such high regard?

[MrLumber]

So I never owned a PS2, and had always wanted to play SotC after hearing so many good things about it. Lo and behold they released an HD combo pack with this and ICO. A few days ago I made the purchase, and to my surprise I genuinely hated a good half of the fights. This isn't to say I thought the game was bad, just not nearly the 10/10 juggernaut that it had been made out to be (although my expectations weren't even that high). (Some spoilers btw)

Here are my main complaints:
The controls are TERRIBLE, not necessarily the button assignments, but how you navigate is sloppy and frequently wrenches control away from the player, especially on horseback.

Little to no satisfaction in actually bringing any, save a couple, colossi down. This game is easy, and by that I mean the majority of the colossi essentially have no chance of killing you, let alone even damaging you. Many don't even have a means to get you off them.

Scant story details, no character progression, and a lack of moral dilemma. One of the things I was expecting was a matter of guilt in bringing down each of the creatures, as this was something I had heard made the game so good. Shocked was I when I found out the story didn't even frame it like this, instead they are mere fragments of your manipulator. I was also pretty annoyed with the anticlimactic ending, but not as much.

And by far the greatest offense, colossi's greatest defense is their uncanny ability to waste large amounts of time. Waiting for a colossi to stop thrashing about like a retarded under assault by bees is possibly one of the dullest and most frustrating experiences I've had in gaming in ages. While watching wander get tossed around like a rag-doll is fun the first time around, it quickly grows weary some. The genuine tragedy of this is that a system where you can correct yourself against the colossi's movements would have turned my frown completely upside down. But as it is simply waiting a minute to get in a chip of damage does not constitute fun, and is truly what condemns the game in my eyes.

Anyways perhaps some incite from the Escapist user base will allow me to see what makes this game special.

On a side note, I'm really enjoying ICO.

 

[Imper1um]

You kind of missed the point.

It didn't need any audio, no text, no nothing to explain the story. It had amazing framing and cinematic progression, despite the lower technology of the day. Also, the game wasn't about you getting damaged or anything (actually, it was about you killing the monster).

The unfortunate part is, now a days, if there's not a cutscene explaining the session, reviews like this pop up.

 

[Kopikatsu]

You kind of missed the point.

It didn't need any audio, no text, no nothing to explain the story. It had amazing framing and cinematic progression, despite the lower technology of the day. Also, the game wasn't about you getting damaged or anything (actually, it was about you killing the monster).

The unfortunate part is, now a days, if there's not a cutscene explaining the session, reviews like this pop up.

Git out of here, grandpa!

Anyway, the guilt is supposed to be internal. Like you said, most of the Colossi don't even have a means of fighting back, but you're murdering them all in cold blood anyway. The game shouldn't have to tell you 'YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO FEEL BAD NOW'.

 

[scorptatious]

Why do I hold it in high regard? Well personally, I loved everything about the game. The colossi, the minimalist storytelling, the soundtrack, the fact that there's a bunch of replay value in it, there's so many things to talk about it I can't even explain them all.

Bottom line, to me it's a great game. Plain and simple. If you don't like it that's fine. I won't hold it against you.

I've also found that Agro moves by himself for the most part. So really all you need to do is point him towards a general direction and only move the control stick when you want him to turn.

Also that's kind of the point of the game not to delve too deep into details. It allows the player to piece things together him/herself. You'll probably notice this kind of thing in Ico as well.

Finally, there's also a little trick I've learned to prevent colossi from thrashing around so much. Instead of charging your sword strike all the way up, charge it halfway and stab, and then repeat. Most colossi won't have a chance to recover, and you can kill them pretty easily that way. Of course this won't work on all of them.

 

[GundamSentinel]

The story of Shadow of the Colossus is about letting go. The protagonist can't let go of his dead loved one and makes a mess of things (like unleashing an evil god), while carrying on would have been the wiser decision.

That aspect of (not) letting go of course comes back in the gameplay, where you keep hanging on for dear life while attacking beings that did you no harm. It culminates in the last portion of the game, where letting go (literally and metaphorically) is in fact the only option left.

I have never seen a game that so completely manages to convey its message just through gameplay. That's why I think it's an amazing game. Talking is not necessarily the best and most powerful way to convey a story and that's what this game shows.

 

[Disgruntled_peasant]

Well I guess it isnt for everyone, but I will argue against you on the plot point. it has a plot, and character development and a fantastic world with backstory- its just subtle.
It doesnt do what most modern games do and just shout in your face "YOU SHOULD FEEL X EMOTION NOW", "THIS CHARACTER IS Y" or "THIS LOCATIONS HISTORY IS BLABLABLA"

Also, what you describe as the controls being taken away from you whilst on the horse, is the horse being an actual creature of its own, it wont charge off a cliff or directly into a giant monster because you tell it to, it will have the sense to turn away. That is something that every single game with horseriding in does, it treats the horse like a car- you push a button and it does exactly what you tell it to do.
Shadow of the collosus is the only game I know of that does horseriding properly, you can only really guide the horse, you dont form a godamn telepathic link with it.


at the end of the day, I can understand why some people wont like it, its not really a game for people who want to 'game it', in that it isnt all that hard nor is it something you can show off your skills in. its a game for people who like to immerse themselves in a world and explore.

EDIT:
Its the hidden things that make it for me. the game explains very little explicitly, there is a hell of a lot of things that you just discover through play- you can hunt lizards to boost stanima, eat fruit for more health, theres a hell of a lot of cool locations to find that are off the main path and if you are up for the challenge you can climb the central temple to find out whats at the top.

 

[Sonicron]

The controls are TERRIBLE, not necessarily the button assignments, but how you navigate is sloppy and frequently wrenches control away from the player, especially on horseback.

No argument here. Especially in regard to the camera controls.

Little to no satisfaction in actually bringing any, save a couple, colossi down. This game is easy, and by that I mean the majority of the colossi essentially have no chance of killing you, let alone even damaging you. Many don't even have a means to get you off them.

Really? I found some of these guys to be quite bothersome, especially those with projectile attacks. For me, the real satisfaction was had in figuring out how to get near / onto certain colossi, and how best to navigate them; some of them gave me real trouble in that regard, such as Dirge and Basaran.

Scant story details, no character progression, and a lack of moral dilemma. One of the things I was expecting was a matter of guilt in bringing down each of the creatures, as this was something I had heard made the game so good. Shocked was I when I found out the story didn't even frame it like this, instead they are mere fragments of your manipulator. I was also pretty annoyed with the anticlimactic ending, but not as much.

Sorry to say, but you missed the point. This is a story that, for the most part, is not conveyed through words, but through emotion and a series of unique impressions. Also, you apparently didn't understand that you were... well, not necessarily the bad guy, but certainly not a paragon of virtue either, going around killing innocent beasties; they were not fragments of Dormin, it's just that part of Dormin's essence was sealed inside of them - a spark of life, but not a controlling consciousness with evil intent. (Heck, even the masterfully crafted soundtrack did its best to inform you of the moral iffyness of your deeds.) If you didn't feel a twinge of guilt at bringing down a majestic being like Phalanx, I feel a wee bit sorry for you. (No, I'm not trying to be snobby or sound like a dick, I really mean it the way I wrote it.)
As for Wander, did you stop to look at the guy every once in a while? He was looking like a dead man walking by the last quarter of the game, most likely in constant agony, and yet he kept pushing on to what he must have known would end as self-sacrifice so his girl could live. And the ending (at least as I understood it) was meant to draw a connection to "Ico" (with its horned demon children).

And by far the greatest offense, colossi's greatest defense is their uncanny ability to waste large amounts of time. Waiting for a colossi to stop thrashing about like a retarded under assault by bees is possibly one of the dullest and most frustrating experiences I've had in gaming in ages. While watching wander get tossed around like a rag-doll is fun the first time around, it quickly grows weary some. The genuine tragedy of this is that a system where you can correct yourself against the colossi's movements would have turned my frown completely upside down. But as it is simply waiting a minute to get in a chip of damage does not constitute fun, and is truly what condemns the game in my eyes.

Eh... I didn't think it was as bad as you describe in most cases, but at least the final two colossi are most definitely guilty of this. Both of them had me yelling at my TV at some point - and still they had the audacity to not stop moving!

As for what I thought made the game special (aside from what I already mentioned)... it's the fact that not only did it feature spectacular battle scenarios with strange creatures, but also that it was (and still is) a breath of fresh air in the modern gaming industry. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy many new games just as much as the next guy, but when was the last time you encountered a game that's basically a mix of assorted boss fights, puzzle games and one big sightseeing tour? (And nothing else?) Considering the pervasive industry trend of 'playing it safe', "Shadow of the Colossus" was doubly gratifying in that it was not only fun to play, but also a unique experience that really pushed the envelope; it was a decidedly ballsy move from the development team, and it paid off big time.

 

[Feylynn]

I'm going to echo some of the other thoughts here with my own in point form since constructing a coherent mass of them made a mess.
-You lose control of the horse because it is alive and can move on its own.
-There isn't counter-play to Colossi movement because they are so much infinitely more powerful than you it is a narrative punctuation that you are helpless and your only weapon is tenacity. Your weapon is your stubborn determination to bring her back no matter the cost.
-The Colossi rarely fight, and only in self defense really. They will often leave you alone if you just walk away after cutting them up a little bit. At first it doesn't really sink in that this is the case but for me it all came rushing at that final scene, the real sum of what I had actually done.
-The game is about loneliness there is no one there and no development because that IS the story.
Wander has taken this journey because he despairs, the girl is dead and he is alone and he can not let that go. The game underlines his feelings rather nicely by leaving you, for the entire duration of the game with no one to talk to but your horse and the natural beings you are there to murder in cold blood.
-The moral aspect comes partly in the spreading corruption you accumulate from releasing the dark god by killing the guardians, you don't think about it at first but by the end of the game you quickly realize what you have done is not only murder, but much worse.
-If your horse falling wasn't narrative impact to you then you're a monster. D=

So understandably not a game game. I had trouble getting in to it and it often tested my patience but I did it in one sitting and the ending was amazingly worth it.

 

[Aeshi]

Because it's yet another game that's worked out that being "Artsy" is basically a "Get Out of Bad Game Design/Laziness Free" card.

 

[DarkRyter]

Because people really like it.

Duh.

 

[Smertnik]

It's one of these threads, isn't it?

SotC is certainly sort of a niche game, you have to play it with the right mind set.
In the end, what difference does it make what people are liking it for? I can list all the reasons why SotC is my all-time favourite game but how would it aid you in any way? If you don't enjoy the game knowing why other people do isn't going to make you feel any different about it.

 

[MrLumber]

snip

This was the sort of reply I was kind of looking for, it actually did help me get a little bit of what the writers wanted to get across. I suppose I should mention I did find figuring out how to expose each bosses' weak points somewhat enjoyable, it was just too little of that actually figured in to beating most of the bosses in my eyes (compare the time getting on top, I had no trouble figuring out how, to time of just sitting on top of a weakpoint).

Unfortunately a lot of you bring up a point that I find really is the deciding factor on the game. Making bad gameplay for story purposes still makes your gameplay bad.

In terms of my reactions to downing colossi, I don't feel guilty is because I'm a staunch believer in survival of the fitest, and anything incapable of defending itself in even the most basic of behaviors gets no sympathy from me.

That somewhat brings up another point in my mind, that the gameplay is so torn between unrealistic gameplay (holding your sword still to build power [wtf]) and realistic (your horse autopilots a ton), that it really hurts the overall experience.

At people saying the story is about there being no story, that's pretty damn weak in my book. Ya you turn in to a zombie, but who cares? The fact is he /as a character/ does not develop in the slightest over the course of the game, his one and only trait is resolve, and terrible running capability.

Finally, addressing the whole 'rich subtle story' people, I think that's somewhat of an uphill battle for you guys. Having ruins implies people, having ruins miles away from each other implies a terrible city planner. Outside of this, there aren't really any other major details worth note, as there aren't any. None of the ruins seem to be utility buildings, odd no?

Anyways thanks for the replies, while certainly I can see why it is widely appreciated, I still feel it has managed so squirm away from scrutiny by simply being artsy fartsy.

 

[Dexiro]

no character progression, and a lack of moral dilemma.

Character progression and moral dilemma were the entire freaking game I think in the simplest terms the game is about watching a character drive himself into the ground with desperation. People like the way the narrative is told throughout, and the feeling of taking down huge monsters with an ickle sword is a good one ^^

That said, not everyone is going to enjoy every game. I don't think half the games out there get the score/reputation they deserve and the other half get more score/reputation than they deserve, but that just shows that you can't please everyone.

 

[grumbel]

...especially on horseback.

You are controlling the dude on the horse, not the horse itself. That among other things is what makes the game great. Shadow of the Colossus has managed it like almost no other game to actually build something that feels like a real world worthy to be explored, instead of just being a series of puzzles thrown together by a level designer. The game accomplishes this by a lot of little details, like the controls that actually force to do hold on to your button to have your character hold on to something, a seamless world, the great sense of scale, the fantastic graphics, almost HUD-less interface, etc. Where every other game would throw in a quick time event, Shadow of the Colossus manages to stay completely within game play.

That said, the game isn't perfect, I would have preferred it when the colossi wouldn't have been introduced by a cutscene and being teleported back to the temple automatically after each colossi also fractured the experience a bit. But the atmosphere that Shadow of the Colossus creates and the events it portraits are still something that most todays games completely fail to even get near.

 

[BishopofAges]

After reading your first post and your reply to Sonicron, I think I've gotten a better insight to your issue.

I know the qualifying phrase "For its time" means little in these arguements, but you have to understand what it ment to people who got it at its time of release. It broke what everyone thought about action adventure games and story-telling and reset the bones in such a way to be memorable. You asked why it's held in high regard, ask why people remember it if you believe there should be a lower opinion of it.

If it was too easy the first time around, play hard. A 10 foot fall WILL kill you, a brush-off from one of those monsters WILL kill you. It forced me to think of better, more subtle ways to take them down without dying 10-20 times first.

As for the story

Spoiler: For those who havn't played it yet.

You are super-normal man, with a desire to rez your one and only love through the power of that stolen sword and those behemoth creatures who only really know how to exist and not much else. That was enough storyline for me, but seeing how he carries himself, that subtle change everytime he kills one and that black mess gets absorbed into him, his character seems to change. By the 5th or so kill it seems like he's lost all purpose, like the only reason he keeps on is because that giant booming voice keeps telling him so. Even if I am making something from nothing, this is what "I" found in it to give me right to call it 'character development' and 'subtle storyline.'

I hope this explaination from my eyes helps somehow, also I never really had that much issue with the controls.

 

[MrLumber]

...especially on horseback.

You are controlling the dude on the horse, not the horse itself.

To you and all the other people saying this. I actually got the whole 'horse is separate from you' thing in the game, I'm more talking about when it freaks out and runs straight into a tree, or how much of a nightmare aiming your bow is. This is a specifically a problem at the sand serpent thing, where for whatever reason you won't start aiming your bow at the colossus even if your locked on to it.

 

[Electric Alpaca]

So I never owned a PS2, and had always wanted to play SotC after hearing so many good things about it. Lo and behold they released an HD combo pack with this and ICO. A few days ago I made the purchase, and to my surprise I genuinely hated a good half of the fights. This isn't to say I thought the game was bad, just not nearly the 10/10 juggernaut that it had been made out to be (although my expectations weren't even that high). (Some spoilers btw)

You have the unfortunate position of missing it during the first pass. Nothing is as good as it was at release when skipping back to experience it, without the orginal memories to accompany it.

Here are my main complaints:
The controls are TERRIBLE, not necessarily the button assignments, but how you navigate is sloppy and frequently wrenches control away from the player, especially on horseback.

The character is meant to feel clumsy, he isn't a hero. He's just a guy forced into a situation. Regarding the horse, you're still controlling Wanda. If you've ridden a horse you'd understand it and I personally welcomed the fact that my horse didn't handle like a top end car. It handled like an animal

Little to no satisfaction in actually bringing any, save a couple, colossi down. This game is easy, and by that I mean the majority of the colossi essentially have no chance of killing you, let alone even damaging you. Many don't even have a means to get you off them.

It isn't meant to be satisfying, more necessary. A means to an end. The fact that the colossi are minding their own business and someone disturbs them and mercilessly slaughters them is an amazing slant.

Imagine popping to 16 people's house and killing them in cold blood, just so you can wake up someone you care about.

Scant story details, no character progression, and a lack of moral dilemma. One of the things I was expecting was a matter of guilt in bringing down each of the creatures, as this was something I had heard made the game so good. Shocked was I when I found out the story didn't even frame it like this, instead they are mere fragments of your manipulator. I was also pretty annoyed with the anticlimactic ending, but not as much.

All the story detail we need is that some girl (sister, wide whatever) is ill/dead. We know Wanda cares signficantly enough to bring her to an alien, forbidden land and commit atrocities to bring her back.

The moral dilemma is that you are ending 16 lives for one. The 16 lives not belonging to criminals or those that could be argued 'had it coming', but completely innocent beings. In this game, you are the villain.

The guilt should come from within. You should feel bad about how evil these actions are for completely selfish reasons.

And by far the greatest offense, colossi's greatest defense is their uncanny ability to waste large amounts of time. Waiting for a colossi to stop thrashing about like a retarded under assault by bees is possibly one of the dullest and most frustrating experiences I've had in gaming in ages. While watching wander get tossed around like a rag-doll is fun the first time around, it quickly grows weary some. The genuine tragedy of this is that a system where you can correct yourself against the colossi's movements would have turned my frown completely upside down. But as it is simply waiting a minute to get in a chip of damage does not constitute fun, and is truly what condemns the game in my eyes.

I personally didn't have a problem with this, more felt it suitable considering what a human does if they feel an insect on them; thrash about and pat themselves down to get rid of it. Fitting with the defenceless motif - it would derail the angle if laser beams were fired from their eyes.

Anyways perhaps some incite from the Escapist user base will allow me to see what makes this game special.

On a side note, I'm really enjoying ICO.

Normally I don't follow the stream of love for something, but Shadow of the Colossus is unarguably one of the best games ever created. Personal taste can come in and mean you personally can't enjoy it, but like a Van Gogh painting; you won't necessarily see what the fuss is about but can acknowledge it's greatness.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Unfortunately a lot of you bring up a point that I find really is the deciding factor on the game. Making bad gameplay for story purposes still makes your gameplay bad.

That somewhat brings up another point in my mind, that the gameplay is so torn between unrealistic gameplay (holding your sword still to build power [wtf]) and realistic (your horse autopilots a ton), that it really hurts the overall experience.

At people saying the story is about there being no story, that's pretty damn weak in my book. Ya you turn in to a zombie, but who cares? The fact is he /as a character/ does not develop in the slightest over the course of the game, his one and only trait is resolve, and terrible running capability.

I had no problems with the controls when I played it on PS2 and I have no problem with the controls now since I bought the collection. The game is a puzzle/platformer, it's about figuring out how to get on the Colossi, then getting to their weak spots. The platforming is just fine. I realize the game doesn't have the greatest camera (the x and y axes actually have different sensitivities), the camera stays on the Colossi well enough without you even adjusting it, I don't think I even died or messed up because of the camera. Shooting the bow and arrow is a bit clunky, Wander aims in the direction he is facing instead of the where the camera is facing. It really only takes some time to get used to, but there should be an option to change that setting. The game is not an archery game and you don't need to be quick and accurate when shooting with the bow and arrow so I don't see how it hinders the game much. The game has quite of a few of the most memorable boss fights I've experienced, which is why I love it just from a gameplay perspective.

And, the sword building power thing is more about game balance than anything. Short quick stabs are faster and weaker, but yeah, for maximum damage you don't have to pull back that long. But the reason it's done like that is for balance like how shotguns in shooters have a much shorter range than in real life. If it took less time to build maximum power, then the colossi would be shaking even more then because realistically I'm sure creatures like that can shake longer than you could hold on.

Not every game, movie, or even book needs some grand plot. Movies and books can just be a character study about the main character without having much plot at all. The TV show House has really evolved from being basically CSI in a hospital to a character study on House the character, and it's just great. The game is kinda of like a character study on you in a way, and how you feel about killing 16 non-threatening monsters to save the person you love. Plus, the game builds quite an emotional bond between you and Argo, I was devastated when Argo fell on the way to the last Colossi. ICO builds a similar bond between ICO and Yorda, actions speak louder than words. Stories can be simple or complex with twists and turns and both can be great if executed well. A basic revenge story can be good if executed well and there's actually very little plot with them. I don't blindly love artsy games either, I think Braid's story is crap (it came off as being very pretentious to me) but I did love those puzzles.

 

[stickmangrit]

snip

from my perspective, the story is a deconstruction of the classic "save the princess" story that started with Super Mario Bros. and has been used in more games than i can count. almost nothing story-wise is given to you in game, most of the plot details are in the manual, much like every other game of the 8-bit era. the game is operating under the assumption that this is not the first game you've ever played and, much like the old 8-bit stories it's deconstructing, it presumes that you, as the player, need no further motivation than "here is what you must do to save the princess." it expects that you will follow your instincts as a gamer and go forth to meet whatever challenges it throws at you.

and then it turns that instinct against you. the first four Collosi act purely in self defense. your avatar starts looking like a zombie. the black tendrils happen. at every turn the game is telling you that what you are doing is at best morally questionable, and at worst evil. it's basically questioning the morality of every 8-bit genocide you've ever commited against the goombas and their ilk.

granted, i can't speak for the gameplay past the seventh Collosus, as that was when my copy was stolen and i've never gotten a chance to revisit it. however, i'm the kind of person who's willing to forgive less than perfect gameplay for ambitious storytelling(diehard Obsidian fan and Wind Waker is my favorite Zelda game).

 

[lord.jeff]

Same as any other classic, it was different from everything else out at the time and managed to still be good.