symphony of the night did nothing that Super Metroid didn’t already do.
back tracking? Super did that
hidden rooms? Super did that
hidden exploitable techniques? Super did that
upgrades? Super did that
Crazy bosses? Super did that
the only thing Symphony did was mesh turn based rpg elements and made an action platformer rpg. It didn’t evolve anything, all it did was exchange missile and health upgrades for a level up system. Don’t hype symphony as this evolution
wait what? Castlevania one was a linear level game, it wasn’t one singular map divided into subsections you could return to later, castlevania 2 was a whole year after metroid. Symphony came out 3 years after Super Metroid. Symphony of the night was the first of its kind
It was felt worse because the game was harder to navigate before the light suit, and you had to return long distances with anoying enemies that where a pain to kill. Where as in prime, you had to return, but you where so fucking OP with the plasma beam it didn’t really matter much. It also feels longer because you move slower in prime than you do in the 3d versions
I assume Gespenst is referring to Haunted Castle, which did come out the same year as Metroid and had a fully explorable castle.
However, I think we can all agree that Metroid is the series that codified and popularized the genre, despite what anyone dumb enough to refer to this genre as a “metroidvania” would have you believe.
Metroidvania is such a stupid, stupid, stupid term, and does nothing to explain what the genre actually entails versus terms like Role Playing Game, Platformer, and Beat-em-up do for theirs.
Did you…not read what I said at all? I didn’t say anything about Castlevania 1. I was talking about Vampire Killer, the MSX2 game released in October 1986, two months after Metroid 1. Which had exploratory, non-linear platforming.
Because the game mechanics where built around the Wii pointer, the level design was linear and small relative to the previous two entries. On my first day of playing i got to the space pirate, and on my second day I got to phazee.
There’s nothing about the wiimote controls which could cause the game structure to become more linear, and you’ve offered nothing more to support your claim than “it’s two things wot happened in one game.”
the game was built around the fucking pointer, that was the priority first and foremost, so most of the resources went into ensuring the game was designed around the pointer. It was so god damn linear it felt like I was playing a god damn rail shooter becasue there wasn’t any explorition. You had a map, and you went from room to room killing things
a lot of wii games where simplified to take advantage of this, this happened to zelda as well. So what is it that you are arguing here? There was practically no reason to explore other than return for a key item, that’s it
You are claimimg they are not, do you have any proof that its not?
You are doing the same shit im doing except you arent citing anything and using bill o’reily,
“You cant explain that!”
Argument. Retro could have kept the same exploratory aspects prime amd echoes, it did not. A lot more enemies required you to aim at specifics, the levels where linear, there was no meed to explore. Reteo deaigned the game with the wii pointer in mind amd that made the game more linear. How are you not understanding this?
And this isnt science, the rules of science seldomly apply to non science things where any variable cam affect your reaults. Occams razor is more than applicable here
I don’t understand what the wii mote had to do with the game being more linear especially considering that didn’t stop them from putting those controls on the previous 2 entries. Can you elaborate?
I fucking told you that I didn’t know vampire killer was castlevania
I told you that I thought that castlevania for NES was the first castlevania ever made, and then followed by simons quest. I stated that specifically, and then i asked you when this particular castlevania came out. maybe you should learn to read because I told you after your first response
I really don’t like repeating myself, so I’m just going to point you to the post where I very clearly answered that question, even including a Wikipedia link so you could look up more.
its linear because its built with the point and shoot mechanic in mind first and foremost. Of all three it was the most linear and straight forward prime game with a large emphasis on combat, and had more emphazis on targeted combat compared to puzzles and exploration