As a lover of pixel art as a medium this plagues any game that doesn't look like it's trying to challenge Metal Slugs obscene level of detail and quality. If you're not aiming to eclipse the gods you're just doing it for nostalgia....no consideration for the low skill floor of pixel art, no consideration for the art style to exist as something to explore and love for its own merits no it MUST be because you're pandering to a time forgotten. Should such people have their way the exploration of the visual space of old games would never occur and the space would become even more dull as they lament that games are all boring now and the medium is dying....well, even more than they already do~
Fantastic little write up, looking forward to Angeline Era!
I played Anodyne in 2020, and absolutely loved it! I still listen to highlights from the soundtrack on my headphones while going for walks. What a great, emotionally affecting game.
You make great points...it would feel silly for someone to apply that kind of ageism to books or music.
I definitely feel the same on the element of friction. I've found the "cozy games" genre to be pretty dull because so much of the genre is fully set on making things as effortless and controlled for the player as possible. Even Animal Crossing, a series that was typically great at keeping things balanced with just enough friction, fell into this trap entirely with New Horizons.
But yeah, games don't age. I am a firm believer of that. Games do not change with time, only the perspective we have of them. If a game is tedious now, it was tedious for those same reasons when it released. If a game is fun now, it was fun for those same reasons when it released, etc.
This medium is a near-endless ocean to explore of experiences that can impact and resonate in countless different ways. People who look at the industry this way are merely denying themselves valuable experiences that they could have if they were simply willing to come out of their shell a little bit.
I like the overall message of this article, but there was a section I noticed that really rubbed me the wrong way, and it's about an element of game design that I've noticed are missing from anodyne 1 and anodyne 2.
"Generally when an action game becomes ‘better,’ it usually gains complexity either through number-itis (adding lots of customization, number-fiddling), or through actual difficulty (Angeline Era… Mega Man, etc is pretty hard and there’s not much way around it unless you lower the difficulty or practice)."
"Look at Ocarina of Time. Is that game’s combat of holding ‘defend’ until the sword man puts the shield down ‘really good’?"
I think both of these statements are missing a key component of something that is pretty essential to adventure games, especially ones like metroidvanias and rpgs, and that's expanding the player's toolkit and giving that toolkit a purpose.
While I was playing Anodyne 1, I found myself feeling very little sense of progression in my character as I progressed, as you mainly get a broom at the start, and a jump ring later on as your main abilities along with a few small modifiers to the broom's hitbox. There was not a steady doling out of events where you tell the player, "hey, look at this cool new thing you can do now!" I think this hurts the developer just as much as it hurts the player, as an expanded toolkit can help the developer with creating less repetitive puzzles and challenges. You missed an EXTREMELY important portion of Legend of Zelda's combat which is how the player is regularly given new items and powers to manipulate their world and handle combat i.e. the hookshot, the bomb, etc.
Additionally, you actually had a little satirical moment in anodyne 1 with the guy who sold horribly overpriced goods. While it was funny, I did find myself wishing that you could actually get currency from enemies and buy things from a shop. Multiple other players commented on how the game actively pushes you to avoid enemies as they give you nothing to work towards by killing them, and it does make it where the player isn't engaging with your world as much as they could be.
With all that being said, I've been very impressed with some of the changes that have been implemented in Anodyne 2. The main player power (the vacuum) has already been used in quite a few creative ways so far, and I'm genuinely impressed with how much more distinctive and purposeful the dungeons are in this one. You did a great job with the engaging puzzles. I haven't finished the game yet, so I'd have to give an update later if I notice if this changes.
So uh, to make my point more succinct, player progression is really damn important. Combat doesn't need to just be a checklist you have to cross off when making these kind of games.
As a lover of pixel art as a medium this plagues any game that doesn't look like it's trying to challenge Metal Slugs obscene level of detail and quality. If you're not aiming to eclipse the gods you're just doing it for nostalgia....no consideration for the low skill floor of pixel art, no consideration for the art style to exist as something to explore and love for its own merits no it MUST be because you're pandering to a time forgotten. Should such people have their way the exploration of the visual space of old games would never occur and the space would become even more dull as they lament that games are all boring now and the medium is dying....well, even more than they already do~
Fantastic little write up, looking forward to Angeline Era!
As a huge fan of Anodyne and someone deeply engaged in studying the history of video games, this was such a wonderful read. Thank you!
I played Anodyne in 2020, and absolutely loved it! I still listen to highlights from the soundtrack on my headphones while going for walks. What a great, emotionally affecting game.
You make great points...it would feel silly for someone to apply that kind of ageism to books or music.
thank you for reading!!
I definitely feel the same on the element of friction. I've found the "cozy games" genre to be pretty dull because so much of the genre is fully set on making things as effortless and controlled for the player as possible. Even Animal Crossing, a series that was typically great at keeping things balanced with just enough friction, fell into this trap entirely with New Horizons.
But yeah, games don't age. I am a firm believer of that. Games do not change with time, only the perspective we have of them. If a game is tedious now, it was tedious for those same reasons when it released. If a game is fun now, it was fun for those same reasons when it released, etc.
This medium is a near-endless ocean to explore of experiences that can impact and resonate in countless different ways. People who look at the industry this way are merely denying themselves valuable experiences that they could have if they were simply willing to come out of their shell a little bit.
I like the overall message of this article, but there was a section I noticed that really rubbed me the wrong way, and it's about an element of game design that I've noticed are missing from anodyne 1 and anodyne 2.
"Generally when an action game becomes ‘better,’ it usually gains complexity either through number-itis (adding lots of customization, number-fiddling), or through actual difficulty (Angeline Era… Mega Man, etc is pretty hard and there’s not much way around it unless you lower the difficulty or practice)."
"Look at Ocarina of Time. Is that game’s combat of holding ‘defend’ until the sword man puts the shield down ‘really good’?"
I think both of these statements are missing a key component of something that is pretty essential to adventure games, especially ones like metroidvanias and rpgs, and that's expanding the player's toolkit and giving that toolkit a purpose.
While I was playing Anodyne 1, I found myself feeling very little sense of progression in my character as I progressed, as you mainly get a broom at the start, and a jump ring later on as your main abilities along with a few small modifiers to the broom's hitbox. There was not a steady doling out of events where you tell the player, "hey, look at this cool new thing you can do now!" I think this hurts the developer just as much as it hurts the player, as an expanded toolkit can help the developer with creating less repetitive puzzles and challenges. You missed an EXTREMELY important portion of Legend of Zelda's combat which is how the player is regularly given new items and powers to manipulate their world and handle combat i.e. the hookshot, the bomb, etc.
Additionally, you actually had a little satirical moment in anodyne 1 with the guy who sold horribly overpriced goods. While it was funny, I did find myself wishing that you could actually get currency from enemies and buy things from a shop. Multiple other players commented on how the game actively pushes you to avoid enemies as they give you nothing to work towards by killing them, and it does make it where the player isn't engaging with your world as much as they could be.
With all that being said, I've been very impressed with some of the changes that have been implemented in Anodyne 2. The main player power (the vacuum) has already been used in quite a few creative ways so far, and I'm genuinely impressed with how much more distinctive and purposeful the dungeons are in this one. You did a great job with the engaging puzzles. I haven't finished the game yet, so I'd have to give an update later if I notice if this changes.
So uh, to make my point more succinct, player progression is really damn important. Combat doesn't need to just be a checklist you have to cross off when making these kind of games.