recall the adage -
keep in hand: Moon Pearls; don't turn
into a bunny
Additional Comments:
Having grown up with the NES, it is interesting to say that I managed to skip over the early games in the Zelda franchise without even so much as a wink of desire to play them. I know that's a pretty rare statement, but as I said in my post for the original Legend of Zelda, they just never really piqued my interest, especially since I was such a fan of games revolving around side-scrolling action. Then came along A Link to the Past, and my opinion of the Zelda games was completely uprooted. First it was the commercials. The "wow factor" tactics that the commercials utilized were incredibly effectual, and the stunning visuals just grabbed me. I still remember seeing those LTTP-style Hylian trees for the first time - their beauty just made you want to weep.
However, as amazing as those commercials were, I sadly did not come to own or play this game for a number of years. I guess their tactics were just an inch shy of perfection. Actually, with the arrival of Nintendo's shitbox - the Nintendo 64 - I jumped the fence without hesitation and became an avid consumer of Sony's new toy on the block, the PS1. With my dismay over the N64, I sort of lost touch with Nintendo's games, only bothering to play those favorites of my youth, such as Super Mario Bros. 3 or F-Zero. It wasn't until sometime in the late 90s, after discussing video games with a friend and mentioning how I had never played a Zelda game, he let me borrow A Link to the Past. As soon as I got home, I popped the game into my console and never looked back. Holy crap, I can't even begin to describe my initial impressions of the game - how incredible it was, how much fun it was...how...how much I couldn't believe this is what I was missing out on all those years. I spent every waking moment for the next three or four days trying to figure out puzzles, fighting Ganon's hordes of swarthy creatures and just generally exploring the beautiful Hylian countryside. My one and only trip up during that initial playthrough was when I had to dig up the ocarina. Somehow, I either missed or ignored the text explaining where I should dig, and ended up spending a few hours digging holes across all of Hyrule. Boy, did I feel like an idiot when I finally found it. Otherwise, discounting that single hitch, I managed the game rather easily on my first try and enjoyed every single minute of it; vaguely remembering the last time I had that much fun on an initial playthough of any game prior. And still to this day I'm not sure - SMB3 and Mega Man 3 are probably the only games I can genuinely think of in those regards.
Since that time, I've played and beaten LTTP numerous times and still love the game just as much. Interestingly, despite its "puzzle" mechanics, the puzzles never grow dull or tiresome. Although the solution is readily apparent, after years of play, I still enjoy figuring each and every puzzle out. Somehow, this game managed to make the puzzles timeless, which is definitely no easy feat. I can't explain how or why that is, but it certainly lends to its overall enthralling nature.
As far as the series is concerned, and out of those titles that I've actually put a concerted effort into playing, A Link to the Past is my second favorite of the series - just barely squeezed off the top step by Wind Waker. I know Wind Waker's a controversial pick, but for me, everything in that game is just spot on while managing to take a step back from the typical Zelda setting. But my thoughts on Wind Waker are for another time. However, despite being toppled by Wind Waker, the one element that I think LTTP managed to execute with absolute perfection is the item usage versus the overworld's puzzle architecture. True, most every game that followed LTTP handled overworld puzzles with near equal finesse, they never felt as genuine. To me, it seemed like the designers crafted LTTP's overworld with every single item in mind - knowing full well when items became available as well as when certain areas would/should become available. As such, they were able to create a complex overworld, as far as incorporating unique item puzzles, while still retaining an overall natural progression and feel throughout. Subsequent games, however, always felt like they had their overworlds designed first without any inclination as far as what might be included in the game outside of the common items seen throughout the franchise, like bombs or the hookshot. Then, once the game came into focus regarding the overall mechanics, the designers returned to the overworld and either modified small, congested areas in which they could place an item puzzle, or just outright tacked on an unnecessary element, thus discarding any sort of natural cohesion between landscape and puzzle.
And speaking of franchise comparisons, I know Ocarina of Time is often tagged as the most revolutionary of the Zelda games. Personally, beyond turning the series into a faux first person design, I disagree. Ok, there's more to it than that, and I admit that OoT did wonders for the series, but in my opinion, it was A Link to the Past that really set the stage for the fundamental mechanics of how a Zelda game should operate. Sure there's elements in LTTP that can trace their roots to the original Legend of Zelda, such as the boomerang or heart containers or the Master Sword etc., but I don't feel like they had any sort of inherent weight or meaning until LTTP came along. It's sort of hard to explain in words I guess, and I know my argument sounds hollow. Hmm, to put it another way: I sort of envision LoZ was created out of a mesh of random, undefined elements - sort of like a giant pile of "things," ie your dungeons, enemies, items, currency and so on. Basically, a lot of stuff that they eventually molded into a world, although rather haphazardly like a puzzle that doesn't quite fit together. Then came along Zelda II where it seems like they tried to remove that feeling of improvised creation, except they roughened up the edges around the rest of the game as a result - the puzzle pieces now fit, but for what purpose. With the third installment, suddenly everything just made sense. Everything had a clearly defined role and was well represented no matter where it appeared in the game. This is the big breakthrough that I think defined the series - not the eventual 360° total world interaction that OoT eventually introduced. I know it sounds odd to call that an innovation, or as I think of it, the innovation, but to me, this is the game that laid the proper groundwork for everything that was to follow - not the original LoZ and not OoT. Oh, and before anyone bothers bringing it up, no, my opinions of OoT are NOT influenced by my obvious hatred of the N64. Ocarina of Time is a fantastic game - it's the system that's a total letdown. In fact, I first played OoT on the GameCube with the Legend of Zelda: Collector's Edition disc, so yea, the N64 never even had a chance to influence my impression of the game. Hell, I didn't even see the game until I bought the GameCube edition.
Anyways, enough quibbling over which is the best or which is the most revolutionary. It's all conjecture when you come down to the nitty gritty I suppose. But that doesn't stop me from stating my belief that A Link to the Past feels like a near perfect game, not just in the scope of the Zelda franchise or within the SNES library, but in the vast video gaming empire in general. From the ease and fluidity of the mechanics, to the beautifully drawn graphics, to the enchanting soundtrack and the intricate, yet solvable puzzle design, this game just nailed it.
And yea, as far as music, who wouldn't love the soundtrack? Whether it's the charming Kakariko Village, the ominous Cave, or the snooty Hyrule Castle, the music is finely crafted and an absolute joy to listen to. No matter the location, the soundtrack properly represents the involved emotion or intended atmosphere.
Nano...what?:
Chris Houlihan room what?
Rating: 5 bunnies out of 5
No comments:
Post a Comment