Killing GOATs

[marurun]

The latest Insert Credit podcast got me thinking about GOAT games: you know, Greatest Of All Time. When various sites and forums list the top x games of all time they're basically highlighting GOATs. But it's kind of hard for folks who've been playing games across multiple generations to separate themselves from their personal nostalgia AND the historical context of the game. It's hard, but it's not impossible. Which has me thinking about which retro GOATs still hold up so many years later. There are a lot of games which were revelatory at the time they were released (and whose media reviews reflect that) but have been bettered quite a bit since their release. So a GOAT from 25 years ago which has been riding the lists since then... Does it still deserve that spot? Would a modern game player trying to play that same game today, free of nostalgia and historical context, still find the game enjoyable to play and reflective of quality craftsmanship by contemporary standards? Which GOATs do you still enjoy going back to? And when you go back to them, do you find yourself being an apologist for certain characteristics or qualities, either to yourself or to others?

The most important guidance is: killing sacred GOATs is allowed, even encouraged, but do it critically and nicely. There should be no need for flames or asbestos suits.

I'll work up a couple to share shortly, but I want to get this intro post out.

[marurun]

Let start with Symphony of the Night. I love this game and I think it gets so many things right. It shows up on a lot of GOAT lists for many good reasons. The pixel art and animation are superb. The soundtrack is rich and varied. It hearkens back to two of the best ClassicVanias: CV3 and Rondo of Blood. In fact, the game re-uses some of the great sprite assets of Rondo. The game takes the classic platforming gameplay of Castlevania and takes a step backwards to Castlevania 2, replacing the staple Belmont with a supporting character from CV3, leaving players with a sprawling platforming game which encourages exploration and is replete with novel encounters and experiences. The levels all cohere thematically as an expansive castle complex, and as you progress in the game you are constantly adding abilities and equipment and gaining power through levels as well. It's equal parts action, adventure, and RPG, and it's quite a compelling combination.

However, it has a number of flaws that mean it's probably not actually the best example of the compound genre it's credited as having spawned: the Metroidvania. Firstly, the game has a challenge curve issue. If you don't spend any time grinding you may find the enemies in a new area simply do massive damage to you and end your life far too quickly. If you spend some minimal time grinding you may find that you can simply power through anything the game throws at you until the inverted castle. Which leads me to the inverted castle. Ostensibly "hidden" content, it's actually the entire latter half of the game and required for the good ending. And while it's a very cool idea, the design of the castle is such that moving through the inverted castle is, despite all the movement tech you'll have by then, a horrible pain in the neck. Every other ledge requires a double jump and far too many jumps are too high for the double jump and require the gravity boots or a brief switch to mist or bat. Additionally, Alucard's walking speed is fine at first, but once you need to really cover ground it's far too slow, and since all the transformations require MP, there's a constant issue of moving fast for a while, but then having to hoof it at far too low a speed until you have enough MP to hoof it again. It makes movement through the game feel very stop and start. Further, while the game has an incredibly number of interesting ideas in it, the sheer bevy of different mechanics don't always work well together, leaving the experience somewhat inconsistent. This applies to the content as well. Despite the good work repurposing existing areas as the inverted castle, the traversal issues and the fact that every area is at least partially re-used content leads to the latter half of the game being some spectacular moments combined with a lot of lackluster moments. The first half of the game is simply much more cohesive and consistent.

So is this game still a GOAT today? While I would definitely still sit down and play this in a heartbeat, I don't know I would call it a GOAT for anyone without nostalgia for it.

[Ack]

Hmm, admittedly it has been a long time since I last played, but as memory serves, your complaints regarding Symphony are valid. It's tough to criticize something that became a genre namesake, but it certainly has problems.

That said, does a GOAT have to be flawless? To compare it to sports, where I hear the term thrown about more often, many of the GOAT contenders did not have perfect careers throughout. In fact, many petered out or stayed far longer than their prime. We don't talk about Michael Jordan's post-Bulls basketball career, and Tom Brady's time with the Buccaneers started strong but hasn't stayed. Serena Williams hasn't contended the way she did years ago either. Is a GOAT undeserving for having issues, or is it ok to forget them in lieu of the bigger picture of impact?

[prfsnl_gmr]

EGM 100 (1997) and EGM 150 (2002) each contained a list of the greatest console video games of all time. A few games appeared in the top ten of both lists:

Final Fantasy III (VI)
Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past
Super Mario 64
Super Mario Bros. 3
Super Metroid
Tetris

KILL THESE GOATS!

[SamuraiMegas]

I'm pretty sure the sliding mechanic could be combined with jumps or something to move faster in SOTN, I don't remember the movement speed ever really feeling like it hindered me when I played it for the first time last year.

[marurun]

EGM 100 (1997) and EGM 150 (2002) each contained a list of the greatest console video games of all time. A few games appeared in the top ten of both lists:

Final Fantasy III (VI)
Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past
Super Mario 64
Super Mario Bros. 3
Super Metroid
Tetris

KILL THESE GOATS!

I could kill 1 of them and make a shot at another, but the other 4? Largely unimpeachable.

[RobertAugustdeMeijer]

I thought Tetris was old hat, but I've heard that Tetris 99 and Tetris Effect are still popular, so take I don't know much about killing GOATS...

However, I still believe these games have aged badly:
- GoldenEye 007.
Bad frame rate, horribly bad level design, too simple gameplay. In all ways, TimeSplitters 2 is better

- Metal Gear Solid 1
Stealth is only really interesting the first couple of areas. Second half of the game is all over the place, often annoying.

- Half-Life 2
Story is meh. Physics were more amazing back then. Same for graphics. Half-Life 1 is more exciting.

- Halo
Half the levels are in boring corridors. Too slow for such a simple shooter.

- Grand Theft Auto 3: San Andreas
I've never understood the appeal of the GTA games. Do people still get immersed in this game like they did in 2004?

- Metroid Prime
It still has atmosphere, but the lacklustre combat and extensive backtracking make it hard to go back to.

- Prince of Persia: Sands of Time
Extremely shallow


As for GOATs that have aged well?
- Deus Ex
- Super Metroid
- Super Mario 64 (thanks to speedrunning)
- Zelda 3 (thanks to randomizer)
- World of Warcraft Vanilla. When's the next reset, lol!

[Raging Justice]

There's no challenge curve issue in Symphony of the Night. You never need to grind for any reason. Success comes down to using the right weapons, equipment, and spells. The game gives you plenty of tools to work with at every point in the game, some of which are quite broken, especially once you realize that you can use spells early in the game if you know the controller combination that activates them.

I still consider SOTN to be the greatest "metroidvania" ever made. There's a simplicity to its design that makes me prefer it to many modern games in this subgenre, including other Castlevania games that came after it. A lot of modern games over complicate the formula or try to make the game irritatingly difficult (like Hollow Knight). SOTN is elegantly and perfectly designed. Everything works and nothing is frustrating. The controls are smooth as silk. There is lots of enemy variety (with cool monster designs). Alucard has tons of fun abilities, including really cool equipment combinations (like the shield + magic rod combo that lets you literally walk into enemies and kill them while absorbing their health). There isn't too much backtracking due to the teleporting rooms. The amount of care that went into the visuals and the music still puts it far above many other metroidvania games, and it still has one of the best opening acts of any game ever. So much so, that other games have paid homage to it like the beginning of Guacamelee 2.

The only legit criticism I've ever heard is the voice acting, but ironically some people LOVED how cheesy it was and hated when the PSP version redubbed it. Bad dubbing was just part of the growing process that was the PS1/N64 era. The only other nitpick is I suppose there are one or two parts of the game where it can be confusing what to do next...though it's not nearly as bad in that regard as Castlevania II. The second castle was an awesome idea at the time, it may not be quite as shocking and surprising now, but with it offering new enemies and platforming challenges, it successfully extended the game's playtime.

SOTN feels like a legit masterpiece to me. There's an amount of care and TLC from the people who made the game that shines through every time I play it. Most of marurun's comments just sound like nitpicking. Alucard walking too slow? Seriously? He then mentions some tricky jumps in the second castle as an issue. Well, it's a platform game, it SHOULD have some tricky jumps. When you have to resort to nitpicking to criticize a game (as I myself did in this post) that just PROVES that a game is a GOAT. It's hard to criticize legit classics without just finding small, inconsequential things to complain about.

My main thing when I look at old games is are they fun to play still? Do they control well? Do the graphics hold up? (though many old games are still fun despite that, like many games in the PS 1's library). Something like Ape Escape for example, which I tried playing recently, fails on ALL of those criteria. Nothing about that game holds up. The controls are unintuitive and frustrating which effectively makes it impossible to enjoy playing the game. It's ugly as sin too. Like I said, many PS 1 games can over come those early era ugly graphics by being fun to play, but in Ape Escape's case, it just becomes another thing to hate the game for. I've heard so much praise for Ape Escape, and to me, it's just an old, decrepit, aging, relic of a game that no modern platform game fan will be impressed with at all. It is not deserving of being called a GOAT.

[Raging Justice]

As for GOATs that have aged well?
- Deus Ex
- Super Metroid
- Super Mario 64 (thanks to speedrunning)
- Zelda 3 (thanks to randomizer)
- World of Warcraft Vanilla. When's the next reset, lol!

How are those legit criteria? Zelda 3's official release does not have a randomizer. And the speed running argument can apply to ANY game. Speed runners want to speed run everything. They're obsessed with it.

[prfsnl_gmr]

I need GOAT meat this morning:

Final Fantasy VI - I loved this game when I was a teenager. The spritework. The soundtrack. The mid-game event. The open-world. Loved it. Looking back, though, I realize that the base gameplay is only OK. The game is way too easy, and some characters are just way, way better than others. Accordingly, there’s little incentive to use many members of your party (until, perhaps, you need them for the final battle). The combat ends up being pretty dull, since attacking will win most battles. Thankfully, the game is pretty short; so, it never wears out its welcome entirely. Having played through many more RPGs since I first beat Final Fantasy VI, the game’s shortcomings are much more apparent, even when you compare it to previous games in the series. (Mechanically, Final Fantasy V is so much better.)

Super Mario Bros. 3 - This game does so much, so well, but it has held up only OK. The stages are too short, but the game is really too long for a single sitting. (Remember! The original had neither a password or save system.) Accordingly, you had to know the location of the warp whistle to really get through it. (Thanks, Nintendo Power!) Once you had two of those, you could warp to the end, skipping a lot of the game’s best, most creative content. This meant that most people spent a lot of time in the boring first two worlds getting warp whistles, or learning how to push through the eighth world, mostly skipping all the awesome content in the fourth, fifth, and sixth world. (Does anyone remember the seventh world?) The addition of a save feature to later releases helps a little, but the game wasn’t really designed for that either. (Since you naturally load up on extra lives and power ups, the end becomes too easy.). Finally, some of the game’s best secrets are too well-hidden, and the game offers no clues regarding how to find them. Super Mario World is better in every way (almost…the spin jump is worthless, and the cape isn’t as good as the tanuki tail).

A few other thoughts…

SOTN is great, but @marurun’s criticisms are valid. Still love it, though.

GTA: San Andreas is boring. It isn’t nearly as good as Vice City or, IMO, GTAIII.

Price of Persia: The Sands of Time was fun, but I don’t recall it unless someone else mentions it. Also, the soul-patched, nu-metal prince is cringeworthy.

The same goes for Kratos in the first few GoW games, who might be the most despicable, toxic protagonist in any game series. Also, and despite their spectacle, the combat in the early GoW games really isn’t that great. (Swing around chains to hit stuff and make numbers go up. Wheeeee!) DMC is so much better.