Topic: video on 'Metroidvania needs to die'.

[X]

Saw this vid just now and it also harks back to my feelings on what the term 'should' and 'should not' be used for in describing certain games. Not everything in this vid I agree with, however the term 'metroidvania' shouldn't be used to describe games that have nothing to do with Castlevania as I feel it is incorrect.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jtzeTUqFkn0

[theplottwist]

Saw this vid just now and it also harks back to my feelings on what the term 'should' and 'should not' be used for in describing certain games. Not everything in this vid I agree with, however the term 'metroidvania' shouldn't be used to describe games that have nothing to do with Castlevania as I feel it is incorrect.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jtzeTUqFkn0

I agree in full with your conclusion: Unless your game has Castlevania and Metroid elements, it's not metroidvania. It's just "metroid-like" or not even that -- "exploration."

Yet, I disagree with the guy on that he thinks metroidvania shouldn't even have been coined at all. "Metroidvania" describes exactly why SotN is not Metroid. It's an obvious blend of Metroid's exploration/progression elements and Castlevania's combat elements. Metroid places emphasis on exploring and item-progression and Castlevania places enphasis on fighting enemies and getting stronger, and SotN blends these two perfectly.

The guy on the video points this out, yet it seems to fly over his head why "metroidvania" fits better than "igavania.""Igavania" can easily be mistaken as being something made by Igarashi, while "metroidvania" is very self-describing as a genre comprised of specific game mechanics/designs.

Also, this line:

"There is no real cohesion to the levels in the Igavania games, where you can go through a door and you'll be just like in a totally different style from where you were just prior. There's no like, transitions between locations. You're just on a big fucking mansion full of crazy monsters."

So, either he has never played an "Igavania" (as he calls them) before (which not only HAS transitions, but is pretty cohese overall), or he doesn't realize that by changing one or two words, this becomes a perfect description of Metroid:

"There is no real cohesion to the levels in the Metroid games, where you can go through a hatch and you'll be just like in a totally different style from where you were just prior (Tourian, the whole of Metroid Fusion and Prime series). There's no like, transitions between locations. You're just on a big fucking cavern full of crazy monsters."

I'd say Castlevania has much more variety of locations than Metroid does. If one of them looks all "samer" with "no transition", it is Metroid. About the "no transitions" argument, Castlevania's loading rooms work for this. JUST LIKE A REAL MAN-MADE STRUCTURE. So he flat out lied about there being no transitions. His gripe is purely aesthetic ("Oh, the entrance looks different from the Alchemy Laboratory, thus it sucks!") which is obviously intentional as such is the case with a real castle -- open a door, BAM different location with different decor. Castlevania is supposed to feel like that.

And this line:

"Metroid is very methodical and supposed to feel like one cohesive world"

Yeah dude. That's what happens when most of your game takes place on a giant cave. Everything looks like a cave. But then you start giving your Metroid more variety (again, look at Fusion, the Prime series, or even Zero Mission which is a remake) and it suddenly starts looking more like the things you're criticising on Castlevania. But I bet he won't say the same about Metroid.

The dude is obviously biased as fuck towards Metroid. He didn't even understand the design philosophy behind the Wargs in the beginning of SotN as a display of Alucard's powers.

His entire argument hinges on "Castlevania isn't Metroid, therefore it shouldn't carry the metroidvania flag" which makes zero sense because "metroidvania" isn't Metroid. He wants the ENTIRE CORE FORMULA of the Metroid series to be copied before something can call itself "metroidvania" which is ridiculous, as metroidvania is not taking core formulas, but elements and blending both in a NEW formula. I'm done with this guy.

PS: I agree in full with his argument about calling Axiom Verge a "metroidvania." It doesn't look or feel even slightly like a metroidvania, but was obviously marketed as such to cash in the fanbases of both Castlevania and Metroid. But then I see his dipshit feathers appear when he argues bullshit like "Shantae isn't metroidvania because it has combat elements" which basically means "once you put combat elements on a Metroid formula, it ceases being metroid" which is the point of the "metroidvania" genre: Metroid's exploration and item progression elements + Castlevania's combat and linearity.

[Shiroi Koumori]

Thanks for the summary plot.
I won't be viewing his youtube video.

[Jorge D. Fuentes]

I'm watching the video, and all I'm thinking of, is

"I want to hose this man down, and then force-shave him".

The man constantly scratches and looks like a disheveled bum, holy shit.
Is this a trope of Youtube 'reviewer/ranter' guys, these days?

**watches CollegeHumor**
Oh, it looks like it is:

[Belmontoya]

The world spins another day as another abnoxious dipshit gets over 10,000 hits on YouTube.

Shocker.

[piscesdreams]

I have never been shy about my feelings of what Castlevania became from Symphony of the Night forward, and while I DO agree the term metroidvania needs to die...in a fire...in a volcano...Castlevania has not always had "transitions" between areas.  And that's okay.  Just because we go from an aquaduct to an ossuary doesn't mean there isn't cohesion.  It lends itself to the fact of the castle being it's own living entity.  It's supposed to be a creature of chaos and if it were just simply dungeons, chapels and clocktowers...well that would just be stupid and terribly boring.  I'm not crazy about the exploration styled Castlevania games, but there a farcry better than the garbage that was Lords of Shadow.


Comparing Metroid that was mostly comprised of organic planets that were slightly modified by living organisms to Castlevania with it's living castle is an unfair, uneducated comparison.  But what do I know?  I'm not getting 10k views from talking out of my ass.

[theANdROId]

Thanks for the summary plot.
I won't be viewing his youtube video.

Ditto...it sounds like this guy will just tick me off, so...I'll pass.

I don't mind the use of the word though.  It doesn't always really fit, but whatever remote likeness led to someone labeling a game with that word at least alerts me to a game I might enjoy.  I mean, someone said I should look into Axiom and Shantae (to use examples others have mentioned here) because they were (or were like) metroidvanias.  Maybe they are, or maybe they aren't, but I've found two new games I really like because of that term!  (Okay, I still haven't bought Axiom, but everything I've seen makes it look really good, and I'm gonna get it at some point!)

[chainsawmidget]

... I've always kinda looked at the term Metroidvania as an insult.  Like, "Oh, it's not a real Castlevania game.  It's a game that's trying to hard to be Metroid."