Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

 
Advanced search

1411276 Posts in 69323 Topics- by 58380 Members - Latest Member: bob1029

March 28, 2024, 11:03:21 AM

Need hosting? Check out Digital Ocean
(more details in this thread)
TIGSource ForumsDeveloperDesignLet's dissect Zelda II!! FOR SCIENCE.
Pages: [1]
Print
Author Topic: Let's dissect Zelda II!! FOR SCIENCE.  (Read 1127 times)
baconman
Level 10
*****


Design Guru


View Profile WWW
« on: January 21, 2015, 09:41:36 PM »

So, after that wicked cool AGDQ run of Zelda II, I got back into playing it a bit, and recently was thinking of how it could be remixed/rebalanced. Little things like rearranging the spells order, changing the full-life shot properties, maybe having Link jump up 3 tiles instead of 2-2.5, and changing the Jump spell from a high jump to a double-jump. I was also noticing about how the different ground heights on the screen factored into reaction time and differing experiences with different enemies, which were relatively simple in their design... finally, it needed some heart drops along with the magic jar and experience bag ones... and *maybe* rupees - but only 1x and 5x ones (based on minor/major class enemies), and only for the purpose of 100 = 1up (since that seems to be a good system for games that DO use extra lives).

So what can we take from Zelda II as a good experience, and what things would you fix with it?


In case you were wondering about the spell rearrangement:

Rauru = LIFE
Saria = REFLECT (for blocking purposes)
Nabooru = SHIELD (since that 50% damage reduction is more important in the second half, and face it - it's pussy mode)
Darunia = FIRE
Logged

valrus
Level 3
***


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: January 22, 2015, 12:19:16 AM »

That's an awesome run.

I think what's interesting about it, and about Zelda II in general, is that it illustrates a sort of "Soft Metroidvania" progression: there are upgrade-gates like the candle that there's at least the possibility of ignoring.  It feels a bit less artificial than an environment carefully crafted to prevent you from progressing until you do the exact thing the devs want you to do. 

If I were remixing Zelda II I'd amplify that.  Give some extra cues in the dark so that a candle-less run could potentially be done by a player without rote memorization, have reflect and thunder be very helpful, but not absolutely necessary, against the respective bosses, etc.  The interesting part of the speedrun, for me, is that it illustrated that a really skilled player has choices that I didn't even know were available, and I think it'd be very interesting if some of those were an aspect of normal play.
Logged
s0
o
Level 10
*****


eurovision winner 2014


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: January 22, 2015, 01:44:52 AM »

Quote
I think what's interesting about it, and about Zelda II in general, is that it illustrates a sort of "Soft Metroidvania" progression: there are upgrade-gates like the candle that there's at least the possibility of ignoring.  It feels a bit less artificial than an environment carefully crafted to prevent you from progressing until you do the exact thing the devs want you to do.

that's how all "metroidvanias" were before super metroid came out. la mulana (basically maze of galious on steroids) continues that legacy but it's more or less alone.

anyway, i haven't played zelda 2 that much, but 1 thing that struck me as kinda weak was the level design. there seemed to be a lot of rooms that were just straight corridors with enemies constantly spawning at you. also the random overworld encounters get repetitive as hell so i would probably remove those and maybe replace them with a fixed number of unique wandering enemies.
Logged
vinheim3
Level 5
*****



View Profile
« Reply #3 on: January 22, 2015, 03:55:44 AM »

I liked the random overworld enemies and their individual challenges, but yes they can be annoying when you don't want them. I think it would have been improved if they were non-moving on the overworld, that way you can take the risk for some exp/money when you want, but not when you don't feel like trudging through it when you don't need it
Logged
baconman
Level 10
*****


Design Guru


View Profile WWW
« Reply #4 on: January 22, 2015, 05:51:29 AM »

The linear corridor thing is a factor *because* Link has limited jumping. This basically makes all of the platforming in the game lateral - there's really no verticality to the platforming because Link can't consistently jump up a 3 tile gap; he's a consistently 2-tile high character (there is no "Little Link"), and even making him 1 tile tall removes the high/low fencing gameplay that makes the battles so engaging. Too much jump range, and he could just hurdle most of the enemies, too.


I see it less as "a Zelda game" and more as an experiment Nintendo tried; to merge SMB, Metroid, Final Fantasy, and Castlevania II into a cohesive experience; and while each were done to a certain degree (and still as a cohesive whole package), it also does so with a very straightforward mix of elements. Imagine, for example, what having moving platforms would've done for this game, alone.
Logged

s0
o
Level 10
*****


eurovision winner 2014


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: January 22, 2015, 07:36:03 AM »

Quote
I see it less as "a Zelda game" and more as an experiment Nintendo tried; to merge SMB, Metroid, Final Fantasy, and Castlevania II into a cohesive experience; and while each were done to a certain degree (and still as a cohesive whole package), it also does so with a very straightforward mix of elements. Imagine, for example, what having moving platforms would've done for this game, alone.

my guess is they were probably trying to streamline/expand on xanadu by falcom (not FAxanadu), the same way the original LoZ streamlined and expanded on xanadu's predecessor dragon slayer and its derivatives. ppl forget that zelda didn't come out of nowhere but was actually an extremely clever update on a nascent japanese "action rpg" (in loosest sense) genre. just look at how well zelda 1 and 2 have aged compared to dragon slayer and xanadu haha.








(a bit tangential to the topic but still worth talking about imo)
Logged
ThemsAllTook
Administrator
Level 10
******



View Profile WWW
« Reply #6 on: January 22, 2015, 10:49:28 AM »

One mechanic I find particularly interesting is the way the sword swing works. When standing, a sword swing has a wind-up time, but when ducking it's instant. A duck stab requires an extra input, so getting the instant stab is slightly more difficult than the delayed one. I've always wondered whether that was an intentional design on Nintendo's part, or a happy accident.

For rebalance, I'd probably put death mountain a little bit later in the game. More overworld between palaces 4 (maze) and 5 (ocean) would make sense, since right now you can go straight from one to the other with almost nothing in between. The valley of death is a worthy lead-up to the great palace, but I'd have preferred it to have fewer instant deathtraps along the way. The 4-wide jumps over lava (if you don't skip them) are particularly brutal, since they're so precise without casting the jump spell.

Most of the bosses are designed exceptionally well, but Carock (the palace 4 reflect spell boss) and Dark Link could use some work. Carock is a gimmick with very little strategy. He could be improved by teleporting more slowly so that you'd have a chance to get away if he was right on top of you, and stayed for longer to allow reflected shots to be aimed at him. An extra stage hazard (maybe something like Helmethead's flying/shooting heads) would help balance the encounter by forcing movement and giving you something extra to watch. I'm really not sure how to fix Dark Link though...
Logged

SirNiko
Level 10
*****



View Profile
« Reply #7 on: January 23, 2015, 03:02:54 PM »

I think Dark Link may have been improved by making him telegraph his moves better so you could identify the incoming attacks to block them and open him up for a counter, similar to how Viewtiful Joe handled high and low attacks to stagger enemies. The problems with Dark Link are the same problems the combat system has through the rest of the game, where blocking and attacking are essentially the same hectic action.

A system where you block high and low to stagger a foe, then attack high and low to pierce defenses of a staggered foe would make a better combat system. Vary the enemies by speed and complexity of their patterns, and add some foes that need to be stabbed to block attacks or require a quick block in between attacks while you're staggered and you can devise a pretty clever assortment of foes. If you use a consistent system of tells throughout then Dark Link becomes the ultimate test of your swordfighting instead of a test on how well you've learned to exploit the combat engine like he is now.

Also, Super Metroid had a lot of easy sequence breaks (see the AGDQ Super Metroid Race for examples of getting power bombs and super missiles obviously out of order). It was Fusion that showcased a very rigidly defined progression (one possible sequence break simply locks the player in an unwinnable scenario and another results in an easter egg conversation). Interestingly, Zero Mission was designed with intentional sequence breaks due to complaints that Fusion was too linear. A number of the powerups have obviously intentional secret passages nearby that allow you to skip them, and the game gives you a bonus ending splash screen for getting a sub-15% score, which requires you to go out of your way to skip most items (and offers the tantalizing choice of what to take for your six non-mandatory items, of which I chose speed boots and five super missiles).

I'd really like to see more games with both soft-progression mechanics and in-game challenges that encourage you to exploit them, like achievements for low-item runs or speedruns, like Ittle Dew does.
Logged
gimymblert
Level 10
*****


The archivest master, leader of all documents


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: January 23, 2015, 03:07:50 PM »

http://www.anatomyofgames.com/anatomy-of-a-game/
Logged

baconman
Level 10
*****


Design Guru


View Profile WWW
« Reply #9 on: January 24, 2015, 06:21:15 PM »

Quote
I see it less as "a Zelda game" and more as an experiment Nintendo tried; to merge SMB, Metroid, Final Fantasy, and Castlevania II into a cohesive experience; and while each were done to a certain degree (and still as a cohesive whole package), it also does so with a very straightforward mix of elements. Imagine, for example, what having moving platforms would've done for this game, alone.

my guess is they were probably trying to streamline/expand on xanadu by falcom (not FAxanadu), the same way the original LoZ streamlined and expanded on xanadu's predecessor dragon slayer and its derivatives. ppl forget that zelda didn't come out of nowhere but was actually an extremely clever update on a nascent japanese "action rpg" (in loosest sense) genre. just look at how well zelda 1 and 2 have aged compared to dragon slayer and xanadu haha.








(a bit tangential to the topic but still worth talking about imo)

You level up by entering brothels and paying male strippers? And here you say it hasn't aged well... lol
Logged

Pages: [1]
Print
Jump to:  

Theme orange-lt created by panic