To quote directly from the article, "No, when I say lose everything, not everything-everything, you keep the tools and songs you've found, you just lose the consumables that can be easily refilled by running outside and mowing the lawn a few times."loa said:
Why the N64 Majora's Mask Could Not Be Made Today As a AAA Title
- Thread starter Yahtzee Croshaw
- Start date
I suppose my point is that Majora's Mask probably couldn't be made today because games are designed these days for the sake of maximum accessibility
Majora's mask is a game made for players who had already completed Ocarina of Time: players who would already be familiar with the lore and mechanics and therefore wouldn't drop the gamepad if put in weird situations: it aims at an audience which doesn't need maximum accessibility anymore.
It's actually a staple of Nintendo's school of design: in their main games, (say: Mario Galaxy, most home console Zelda, Pokemon games, etc...), the earlier segments are always easy and straightforward (and sometimes tutorial-ridden *coughTwilight-Princesscough*), with the level design getting progressively more creative and challenging as the game goes on: these games are clearly designed to be accessible to newcomers who never tried earlier episodes, which means that their first third or so are virtually always formulaic (and almost insultingly easy to people used to these type of game): this is why Twilight Princess becomes so much better after you get the Master Sword, or why an experimented player will finish Mario 3D World's first three world in one or two sitting, breezing through the levels and even completing the optional objectives with ease.
And then, there are the duologies: sometimes, Nintendo release a direct sequel to one of their games (say Thracia 776 after Seisen no Keifu, Echoes after Metroid Prime, Majora's Mask after Ocarina of Time, etc...): these games are built upon the postulate that they'll be played by experienced player, which means no drawn-out formulaic first act serving as newcomers' tutorial, much more challenging gameplay, and level design that gets much more experimental.
And I, for one, passionately love these games: I prefer Zelda II to the original, I prefer the ass-bustingly difficult Echoes to the first Metroid Prime, I find the vicious and apocalyptic Radiant Dawn superior in every ways to the predictable and safe Path of Radiance: these games are where Nintendo's (and its subsidiaries) impressive stable of talent are finally allowed to flex their muscle and display the unique melange of raw skills, experience and eccentricity which gave the company its legacy.
Basically, it's like going to a master jazzman's concert who, after playing the heard-a-thousand-times classics he's contractually obligated to perform tells his audience: "You know what? The night's still young, and I want to have fun! So now, I'll improvise": the music then played will probably be polarizing for neophytes, but for someone with a modicum of musical culture, oh booooooy: we're in for a treat.
Majora's mask is a game made for players who had already completed Ocarina of Time: players who would already be familiar with the lore and mechanics and therefore wouldn't drop the gamepad if put in weird situations: it aims at an audience which doesn't need maximum accessibility anymore.
It's actually a staple of Nintendo's school of design: in their main games, (say: Mario Galaxy, most home console Zelda, Pokemon games, etc...), the earlier segments are always easy and straightforward (and sometimes tutorial-ridden *coughTwilight-Princesscough*), with the level design getting progressively more creative and challenging as the game goes on: these games are clearly designed to be accessible to newcomers who never tried earlier episodes, which means that their first third or so are virtually always formulaic (and almost insultingly easy to people used to these type of game): this is why Twilight Princess becomes so much better after you get the Master Sword, or why an experimented player will finish Mario 3D World's first three world in one or two sitting, breezing through the levels and even completing the optional objectives with ease.
And then, there are the duologies: sometimes, Nintendo release a direct sequel to one of their games (say Thracia 776 after Seisen no Keifu, Echoes after Metroid Prime, Majora's Mask after Ocarina of Time, etc...): these games are built upon the postulate that they'll be played by experienced player, which means no drawn-out formulaic first act serving as newcomers' tutorial, much more challenging gameplay, and level design that gets much more experimental.
And I, for one, passionately love these games: I prefer Zelda II to the original, I prefer the ass-bustingly difficult Echoes to the first Metroid Prime, I find the vicious and apocalyptic Radiant Dawn superior in every ways to the predictable and safe Path of Radiance: these games are where Nintendo's (and its subsidiaries) impressive stable of talent are finally allowed to flex their muscle and display the unique melange of raw skills, experience and eccentricity which gave the company its legacy.
Basically, it's like going to a master jazzman's concert who, after playing the heard-a-thousand-times classics he's contractually obligated to perform tells his audience: "You know what? The night's still young, and I want to have fun! So now, I'll improvise": the music then played will probably be polarizing for neophytes, but for someone with a modicum of musical culture, oh booooooy: we're in for a treat.
That's true to some degree. Monster Hunter 4 was more welcoming than 3 and a lot moreso than Tri. That being said I learned Monster Hunter's core in Tri, improved in 3 Ultimate, and was good from the start in 4 Ultimate. So for me at least I had more knowledge to start in 4. Mostly 4 is quicker; streamlined. There is a bit less grinding to make armor and an expedited intro, but there's still tons of nuance that you need to learn on your own.aegix drakan said:
Learning the weapon combos, how you can dodge out of them, how you can combine them, and which moves move you where is all dictated by experience. The same goes for knowing which items to bring on a hunt. There's tiny obscure details like how you can wave to the dragonseer ballon to get the monster's location to show up on your map or that you can dodge into a climbable wall with your weapon drawn, press A, and you will instantly sheath your weapon and start climbing.
The entire main thrust of the game; learning how monsters move, attack, and how to dodge them, is learned exactly the same. And all of the games are great because that was always just as intuitive as it was in 4. You have to hunt to learn, essentially.
Always good to see Yahtzee eat his own words- no, not about his affection for Nintendo as a whole but his particularly jaded statement about nothing on the N64 standing the test of time. Majora's Mask is one of plenty of N64 games that still hold up just fine today. Even Super Mario 64 still works perfectly well under close scrutiny despite its simplicity.
All in all a pretty level headed review, this one. I never really had much affection for MM but he clearly put some thought into why the game was made the way it was, instead of taking an easier route.
Also if you want a game who's economy, politics and major characters all move around and interact perfectly well with each other if the player weren't there, look no further than the Mount and Blade games. You could get absolutely crushed underfoot in that game and the game world would carry on just fine with nary a glance back at you.
All in all a pretty level headed review, this one. I never really had much affection for MM but he clearly put some thought into why the game was made the way it was, instead of taking an easier route.
Also if you want a game who's economy, politics and major characters all move around and interact perfectly well with each other if the player weren't there, look no further than the Mount and Blade games. You could get absolutely crushed underfoot in that game and the game world would carry on just fine with nary a glance back at you.
Quite well written, I've always thought Majora's Mask was a fascinating expriment, and certainly the best Zelda, if not Nintendo's best game, period. I was also quite impressed with the aspect of a game world operating independently of the player's actions.
You want to know how modern game design principles would make Majora's Mask worse? 3 words:
Paid.
DLC.
Masks.
Paid.
DLC.
Masks.
Mostly true, but overall without the intervention of the player the Mount and Blade world doesn't really make much progress. The faction lords will fight each other, capture the other faction's lord, and maybe every once in a great while one faction will capture the another faction's castle or town, but for the most part things don't really change and none of the factions really get beaten without the player intervening.Squilookle said:
I'm not sure if anybody's mentioned this yet, but I think that the "strict time-limit" mechanic was also done pretty well in the Dead Rising series (until they chickened out, and only made it part of the "Nightmare Mode" in DR 3), and did a pretty good job of simulating how side-quests, and even main quests, were strict about only being active for a certain amount of time. I also like how, even though it is indeed possible for players to be able to accomplish all of the main and side quests, and be able to have enough time afterwards to blow off steam with sandbox shenanigans against the zombie horde, it would require extremely meticulous time management and planning to do so.
I will be forward: Majora's Mask is my favorite Zelda.
It deals with so many "adult" themes, but doesn't feel fit to shove any of them in your face.
Death, love, life, pain...the game uses masks both as a motif and a major gameplay mechanic and it's fucking BRILLIANT.
There was a unique sense of ambition to Majora's Mask that you don't see from most developers now, let alone AAA.
But only a finite number that will carry mass-appeal and keep management happy.
The problem with AAA is that they have no real ambition anymore beyond padding their bottom line and pleasing shareholders.
This is the same industry that heralded Destiny and Watch Dogs as the future of next-gen.
Two games, proclaimed as extremely ambitious in design, and yet, they turned out as the most intensely bland, factory-finished games I've ever seen. Always Online Halo with Grinding, and a shitty GTA clone with no personality.
They weren't "objectively" terrible games, nor were they commercial flops, but that's almost a worse fate because their acceptable degree of success ensures that this cycle of bland stagnation will continue.
It deals with so many "adult" themes, but doesn't feel fit to shove any of them in your face.
Death, love, life, pain...the game uses masks both as a motif and a major gameplay mechanic and it's fucking BRILLIANT.
There was a unique sense of ambition to Majora's Mask that you don't see from most developers now, let alone AAA.
There are an infinite number of ways to create and perform.iller3 said:
But only a finite number that will carry mass-appeal and keep management happy.
The problem with AAA is that they have no real ambition anymore beyond padding their bottom line and pleasing shareholders.
This is the same industry that heralded Destiny and Watch Dogs as the future of next-gen.
Two games, proclaimed as extremely ambitious in design, and yet, they turned out as the most intensely bland, factory-finished games I've ever seen. Always Online Halo with Grinding, and a shitty GTA clone with no personality.
They weren't "objectively" terrible games, nor were they commercial flops, but that's almost a worse fate because their acceptable degree of success ensures that this cycle of bland stagnation will continue.
To be honest the only real reason I see that something like "Majora's Mask" wouldn't be made today is that the nature of the game makes direct sequels impossible, since it becomes increasingly harder to justify placing the same recurring character into the same kind of time loop continually. Right now the industry does not seem big on stand alone products.
That said MM strikes me as being exactly the kind of thing the AAA industry is looking for because it has a grimdark atmosphere while still being cutesy enough not to offend anyone.... sort of like that whole "Soul Eater" anime which struck me as taking some of it's art design ideas from MM.
I'll also say that I've suspected that MM didn't get a sequel because of the various Creepypastas about it, some of which were passed off as real and apparently disturbed enough people to become famous before the whole schtick wound up becoming obvious. That said it is one of the pasta series that occasionally gets pointed towards by conspiracy theorists who point out that in today's world where everyone has a camera and access to global communications, the only way to hide anything supernatural or weird that the powers that be wanted to be unknown would be to create so much false information that nobody would believe the truth. All the found footage horror movies, some of the creepy pastas, etc... being a subtle part of the goal where if someone DID put up footage of alien abductions, hauntings, etc... nobody would believe it and think it's "fake" because of all the fakes and movies out there, and if I say got online and posted a warning about some supernatural horror I discovered nobody would take me seriously, assuming it was a creepypasta, especially if in either case I was trying to maintain some degree of anonymity due to the situation I was facing and concerns about the attention of third parties involved in a cover up. The point of this rambling is that I think MM was creepy enough and different enough for the company that the creepypastas generated a disturbing amount of PR for them. Also if your a believer in the strange to an extent I am not, the MM "Ben Drowned" pasta is supposed to be one of the few that might actually be true and holds up to certain examination when compared to similar events involving hauntings and cursed media going back centuries when considered by "experts" in the field.
That said MM strikes me as being exactly the kind of thing the AAA industry is looking for because it has a grimdark atmosphere while still being cutesy enough not to offend anyone.... sort of like that whole "Soul Eater" anime which struck me as taking some of it's art design ideas from MM.
I'll also say that I've suspected that MM didn't get a sequel because of the various Creepypastas about it, some of which were passed off as real and apparently disturbed enough people to become famous before the whole schtick wound up becoming obvious. That said it is one of the pasta series that occasionally gets pointed towards by conspiracy theorists who point out that in today's world where everyone has a camera and access to global communications, the only way to hide anything supernatural or weird that the powers that be wanted to be unknown would be to create so much false information that nobody would believe the truth. All the found footage horror movies, some of the creepy pastas, etc... being a subtle part of the goal where if someone DID put up footage of alien abductions, hauntings, etc... nobody would believe it and think it's "fake" because of all the fakes and movies out there, and if I say got online and posted a warning about some supernatural horror I discovered nobody would take me seriously, assuming it was a creepypasta, especially if in either case I was trying to maintain some degree of anonymity due to the situation I was facing and concerns about the attention of third parties involved in a cover up. The point of this rambling is that I think MM was creepy enough and different enough for the company that the creepypastas generated a disturbing amount of PR for them. Also if your a believer in the strange to an extent I am not, the MM "Ben Drowned" pasta is supposed to be one of the few that might actually be true and holds up to certain examination when compared to similar events involving hauntings and cursed media going back centuries when considered by "experts" in the field.
Even I was put off the game because of "loosing progress", I'm a maniac that loves to do _everything_ possible before the final boss.
Kinda tempted to try it now, but I've heard they've dumbed down the 3DS version (Sidequests are easier to find, Gyorg has gone from too hard to too easy allegedly).
Kinda tempted to try it now, but I've heard they've dumbed down the 3DS version (Sidequests are easier to find, Gyorg has gone from too hard to too easy allegedly).
The way you act and feel toward completion of goals is similar to a significant portion of the potential user base. Thousands if not millions of gamers have been trained to "max out" a game. The idea of getting to level 30 in an MMO without hitting every single optional side quest along the way is laughable. The few people that do it are subject to quizzical looks and mockery.ChaoGuy2006 said:
Now imagine you're some creative game designer and you want to make a new paradigm in gaming where 100%ing isn't possible or practical. You're not supposed to max things out. The discomfort for an investor to back such a project is palpable.
I think the "scrape the bones clean" gaming mentality is a disease. I used to be that way. I would sell every Diablo dropped item, save every health potion, quickload any health lost, side quests, peel away the whole map's FoW, etc. It wasn't fun it was compulsive. I also think it disrupts the atmosphere of a game to see the "edges." Here's an analogy I came up with: If you have a candle in the middle of a large room you can't make out the distance to the walls. The walls might be 10' away or miles. In your imagination the room can be much bigger than it actually is. This is playing "through the middle of the game" letting things go. Compare that to a bright flashlight so you can see clearly the distance to the walls. The room becomes smaller than your imagination because you see the extent of it. This is maxing out a game. You come to the edge of the Disneyland ride and the illusion is lost as you see the parking lot beyond.
It took and still takes a dedicated effort on my part to LET GO while playing. If I miss a side quest, oh well. If I do badly in a gun fight and escape with 10% health, oh well. I don't grind for the +1 sword, I make do with what I have. And games are so much more fun now. I feel like a recovered drug addict or something.
I'm jealous of that way of thinking. I think I might try it with Xenoblade Chronicles. I've heard the side-quests are poison anyway, so it's a good game to "condition" me into having that mind-set. I suppose that's the major point of it. If you see the edge of the wall and it if far, far away from you (enjoyable sidequests, rewards exploring, etc) then it's not so bad. If you're greeted with a grubby/dirty wall an inch from your face (bad side-quests, no point to exploring, etc) then turn the light off. Spend time with parts of the games you love. If you only like the main/very small part of it, here's hoping you didn't spend too much on it.Frederf said:
Still might "do everything" in games that reward me for it and are enjoyable, and I'll take my lumps with pride from a bad battle (As long as I don't lose a party member to perma-death in non-rougelike), but I'm gonna start ditching bad side-stuff in games. Been stuck on an achievement in Arkham Origins (Beat this boss with no damage) and I think I might just beat it normally and finish it off.
Cheers for the idea Frederf. You've made my gaming life a bit more enjoyable.