This. Not to mention that design patterns exist for a lot of common game mechanics. It's a fuck of a lot easier and cheaper to make something that already exists than to create something new.
I think that's because of the autistic obsession people have with lore these days. People can't handle things being vague and mysterious, everything needs to have an explanation and a background. Nothing can just be left to the imagination any more. Look how autists ruined the legend of Zelda because the idea of the games just being disconnected retellings of the same legend was impossible for autists to handle. They needed to have the blanks filled in for them and have them be connected to eachother with some kind of timeline.
You could still at least tell a unique story.
I disagree with this. Earthbound is a very linear game that lacks a world map. I couldn't stand Earthbound's gameplay whereas I enjoy most of the Dragon Quest games and I give very little shits about stories in games. The only similarities between Earthbound and Dragon Quest is that they're both jrpgs and they both use turn based battles from a first person perspective. Many of the dragon quest games have class systems, a few of them have monster catching, they have the casino and pachisi, party members that can be swapped out. Earthbound has none of those things. Even if you compare just the three snes dragon quest games to Earthbound they're pretty different. All three of those Dragon Quest games have far more in depth gameplay than Earthbound does.
Yeah there's like a million and one rpg maker games out there and tons of them have unique stories and they're still just shitty rpg maker games that are very obviously shitty rpg maker games.
So what you're saying is we need to kill all the neurodivergents? I can get behind that.
I think they ruined it by connecting zelda games with no real connections to each other, though a number of zelda games have their own sequels and direct continuations.
Almost all the games are connected, but the constant shuffling of timeline shit more and more by people that clearly don't make the actual games is a big problem. It's a similar case to what's happened with sonic games, but a completely different genre of game. Sonic games in general also tend to just do the mario thing of each game taking place sometime after the last one that came out which makes it especially fucky when you start getting "official timeline" shit. Like "loremaster ian flynn says sonic battle, a game where shadow has amnesia still, takes place after a game where he got his memory back".
No, they're not. Even as a kid you could see things not lining up across different game series.
The Mario thing is some vague passage of time because it does not matter in most of the games. The Sonic thing is a slightly more defined passage of time and even then it doesn't matter as much.
I literally pointed out how they were connected. It's either direct sequels or vague "earlier than" or "later than" shit. Loose connections are still connections, the main focus with zelda games are the individual games themselves rather than what games they're connected to.
Yes that's literally what I just said but worded differently. Sonic has some bits of plot that sometimes carry over between games but mario's stuff is like mostly defined by callbacks to prior games after a while. TECHNICALLY mario does the thing sonic does of more defined carry over events but only in the early arcade games mostly. Donkey kong's plot goes and has ties and elements that go into dk jr, and then mario bros leads into super mario bros because super mario bros. is what happens after they go "where the fuck are these pipe animals coming from what the fuck".
We could get into a pointless argument about this where they clearly didn't intend an ultimate timeline because they didn't want to constrained but I feel like you're not going to change your mind.
You didn't understand my post. In Mario, and Sonic to a much lesser extent, the games plotlines don't have to line up or even make sense chronologically because it's just there to carry over game mechanics.
Dude chill out I meant all the other ones except Zelda 2 and Majora's mask. Jesus Christ I figured it was obvious I meant except for the two direct sequels out of the 8 games made before windwaker.
What fucking part of "game says it takes place after other game and is still clearly it's own game" equals "ultimate timeline intention"? Are you even actually reading stuff? You're treating it like I'm somehow presenting some hyper constraining thing by just pointing out that the people that made the actual games had ideas of how stuff connected.
No, the game mechanics would carry over regardless of plot. The plot is more something that happens to frame what's going on in the gameplay and somewhat connect the game to the rest of the series. For some reason people don't seem to get this anymore and either completely disregard shit or try to over-complicate it in some way.
There's a lot more direct sequels than just zelda 2 and majora's mask lmao. Just found it funny because the way you worded shit sounded like one of those "THE SHOCKING TRUTH ABOUT[THING] THEY KEEP GETTING WRONG" kind of thing lmao. Even the other games arent the same story being telephone gamed, just the same or similarly named characters in a different story.
I'm just going by my impressions when I played them as a kid. When I played all those games, you got the manual and whatever was in the game for story and you just kind of made the rest up yourself. I really just don't care about whatever bullshit they came up with after the fact to try and tie everything together because when all those games came out nobody really gave a fuck how they were connected to the ones that came before. It was only after Wind Waker and Twilight Princess came out that people started to give a shit about how all the games were connected. If nobody made a big deal about the fact that they were both supposed to be sequels to Ocarina of Time, none of the autistic timeline shit would exist.
See, that's the type of shit I don't care about. I don't care which link went on the Link's Awakening/Oracle adventures. It really doesn't matter at all. It could have been a completely different link to any of the others and it would make zero difference to the games.
Yeah I know, but the thing is the games are pointed out as sequels to each other when they came out, the main part is the isolated game story but there's still connections and carry overs of characters between games. Also the sequel mention stuff was IN the manual too from what I remember? Anyways once again main point with zelda is the individual games' stories. the vague or direct links are literally just used for framing purposes.
I feel like we're both trying to argue the same point with different words.
I feel like you're over-complicating it. You seem to be using the word "connected" as in the games are connected because they all contain Link (or Sonic or Mario).
