Quantcast More Thoughts on Crackdown and Zelda: Twilight Princess - Ozymandias

More Thoughts on Crackdown and Zelda: Twilight Princess

Yes, oddly enough they're related. Smile

I wrote some thoughts earlier on Crackdown that were super-positive. Having played through and "finished" the main storyline as well as received quite a few of the achievements, I thought I'd give you a few more thoughts.

First, the game really is just that fun. It reminds me of the old days when you could hop into a quick shooter on the 2600 and just play for an hour or so. The sandbox world is wonderfully realized, and even as you head off and chase down different bosses you'll find yourself distracted by a missed orb, a great place to put a ramp truck, a huge collection of explodable things just begging to go bang... the list goes on and on.

That said, the game is not perfect. As you attack bosses you quickly realize they're really nothing more than a differently-named henchman with buffed-up health. It's still lots of fun finding different ways to get to them, but the actual end-fight is pretty anticlimactic. A couple of rockets or kicks and you're done. Targeting can be finicky, and sometimes you stay locked on a target that you just don't want anymore. And the majority of the music is disappointing; I like a few of the rave/ambient tracks in the Volk territory, but that's about it.

It would be unfair to say that co-op is the saving grace for the game because even if it hadn't been included you'd still have a ton of fun. The good news is that co-op does add yet another layer of replayability, and I just can't stress enough how much fun it is. But even there one wishes there were more cooperative requirements or objectives. While you can attack bosses together, there aren't any "co-op only" bosses or puzzles that would require you to coordinate and solve the problem. Some might consider that a strength (in that you can individually attack the world independently), but I'd love to be a little more closely-connected to my partner. There was a social intimacy when playing Splinter Cell cooperatively that Crackdown is missing.

But here's the funny thing - even though I can highlight areas I'd like to see Crackdown (or hopefully, a future sequel) improve, it's sort of crass to criticize the game. In the end it really does deliver an incredibly fun experience. I saw a blog post somewhere (which I can't find again unfortunately - please send if you know it!) where someone compared Crackdown to watching a Ninja jump a flaming motorcycle over the pit of death but being disappointed because the Ninja wasn't juggling. (Note that I'm not remembering the description correctly either, but you get the gist.) It's still an amazing experience, built on an firm base, and being able to experience it with a friend (game-design flaws and all) is a blast.

So how does this all relate to Zelda: Twilight Princess? Simply put, I think I'm done with it. I'm about half-way through Zelda and enjoyed what I've played of it. But when Crackdown came out it won over my time and I didn't even think about Zelda for weeks. Now that I'm "done" with Crackdown I could return to Zelda at any point - but I just don't have the urge. And when I try to analyze why, I realize it's for two reasons.

The first is simply that it's the same game I've played a million times before... it's good, but hasn't advanced in, what, a decade? And much as it pains me to say it, there are enough new experiences out there that I fear I may have outgrown Zelda as it exists today.

The second is that I realized that what would have brought me back to Zelda, as-is, would be the ability to play through with a friend. Just as Crackdown adds a whole layer of replayability thanks to its co-op support, being able to play co-op in Zelda would be absolutely magical. I think it could even hit that magical level of social intimacy Splinter Cell was able to achieve in cooperative play. I can only hope that future versions of Zelda will take that online, connected experience seriously. If so, I'll be back in a heartbeat.

Share this post: email it! | bookmark it! | digg it! | live it!

Comments

Tim said:

I'd be a lot more likely to get Crackdown if it offered offline co-op. Games like splinter cell are far more fun when you are playing co-op with a buddy in the same room as you and to get rid of that option is just madness.

# February 24, 2007 9:45 AM

Sean said:

This actually happens to me  a lot with 40 hour+ games.  It's one thing to get into an MMORPG where you'll always have bragging rights and social interaction surrounding your achievements.  With offline RPG's though, it's just painful to spend that much time on what is essentially a pre-scripted journey.  In the mean time things happen in life, new games come out, and eventually I loose interest.  I think it took me 3 years to finally go back and finish Final Fantasy X, and so far I'm content with getting half way through FFXII.  It's been a great game and I feel like I've experienced most of what it has to offer; to back now would feel more like "work."  The one thing that would change this for me would be to have a full-fledged FF, Dragon Quest, Zelda, etc. on the DS or PSP.  It would be so convenient to work my way through such a long game in the spare moments of the day, rather than having to sit in front of a TV for 40+ hours.  Luckily some of these have been announced; if only they would come sooner!

# February 24, 2007 10:07 AM

imaginedbug said:

The crackdown demo had me convinced I should get the game, but then as the release neared I thought about it some more and realised it's just the orb-hunt I liked from the demo. The driving and fighting bits just didn't do it for me, so I cancelled my pre-order.

Maybe I'll get lucky and win one of the contests where the prize is a copy of Crackdown, otherwise I'll wait for it to hit the bargain bin.

As for Zelda; even though it's my first Zelda game on my first Nintendo console, and I thus can't say that it's something I've played before, I stopped playing a long time ago. Zelda has been collecting dust for weeks, and it's a shame because it is a decent enough game.

The problem with Zelda, and perhaps the Wii, is that there's no reason to finish a game (read: achievements). Although I've never gone out of my way to get all 1000 points in a game, like playing ranked games in RS:V or Gears, I do like having as many achievements as possible.

# February 24, 2007 10:14 AM

RomeoDude said:

The Wii really needs some online games.  Co-op Zelda would be great.  Crackdown is fun, but it really needs some plot twists that make you do stuff other than hunting down the gang leaders.  I find myself purposely taking forever to kill the bosses to make the game last longer.

As for Zelda, the beginning of the game is pretty boring, but the end levels are pretty unique; especially the new tools (I love that spinner!).  I still think that Ocarina of Time is the greatest Zelda game of all time (but I don't think I'm going to buy it on Virtual Console - I already have it for N64, and about 3 copies for Gamecube).

# February 24, 2007 10:28 AM

Mike Kozlowski said:

I bought the Wii just to play Zelda, but I've pretty much stopped playing at the first temple -- the problem is, saving doesn't actually save your position (you go back to the beginning of the temple) and there aren't frequent checkpoints as there are in Gears, so I have to commit to playing for a huge block of time up-front.  Ten years ago, I could do that; now, it's a lot harder.

Plus, it feels a LOT like I'm just replaying Ocarina, but with worse graphics.  (I know that objectively the graphics are better, but Ocarina's graphics were great for their time, and TP's are hideous for their time, so they're worse, relatively speaking.)  Oh, and with irritating controls that force me to shake my wrists to attack (which is just like pressing a really mushy button that sometimes doesn't work).

# February 24, 2007 11:18 AM

Jason said:

Mike K. you stole my post!  I was going to say the same exact thing, but you said it better (and first).

I did decide to get Crackdown after playing the demo, and unfortunately got really sick the day after I picked it up.  But, that first fevered night after playing I had some incredibly weird dreams relating to the game ;)

Hoping I can get back on tonight finally to play again.  Great posts, keep them up!

# February 24, 2007 11:57 AM

Deano said:

You are dead on about the bosses Ozzy, it's disappointing that they don't each offer a specific, unique challenge.

I'm on my third day of playing the game and enjoying it immensely.  I have found what I consider to be a couple of bugs; I offed a bunch of guys but was blown back by the force of the explosion into the water.  I lay there floating but there was no option to regenerate.  On another occasion I was told to go get Guerra, long after he was dead.

Another minor irritation is the narrator's commentary if often unsynchronised with events.  Reminds me of Pro Evo where the commentator appears to have no idea what's unfolding on the pitch.

But overall this was a great buy for me as I don't have a lot of spare cash these days and I wanted something that wasn't an all-out shooter but was immediately accessible.

BTW I'm playing on Psychotic and that offers a way of extending the game's duration and it's very hard to get near a boss.

# February 24, 2007 12:51 PM

Matthew said:

"The problem with Zelda, and perhaps the Wii, is that there's no reason to finish a game (read: achievements). Although I've never gone out of my way to get all 1000 points in a game, like playing ranked games in RS:V or Gears, I do like having as many achievements as possible." - imaginedbug

I found the exact same thing.  I rented excite truck and played through it for a bit but after 2 days I just took it back because I had played it enough to have had a good time, but there was no incentive to play at this point.  The game continued awarding me medals for completing a certain number of things, but outside of going to a menu to see them again there was no reason for them.  I could help but seeing a wonderful oppurtunity to earn 50 achievement points...

I did complete Zelda, but I don't have the same motivation to get all the wallets and heart pieces that OoT had.  The game is just a carbon copy, and even the world, albiet it flipped for the wii, looks and feels similar to OoT.

I know I'm not the most avid of achievement point seekers, but I still have a friendly competition with my friends which brought us back to GoW again for a co-op play through. Its things like this that really still claim the 360 and my top console

# February 24, 2007 1:20 PM

B Diddy said:

Finish Zelda, its worth the extra time.  :)  Not sure how far you have gotten, but until you get the spinner, you are missing out.

After reading your post, I am glad I finished Zelda before Crackdown came out.   Played Crack for about 1.5 hrs last night with a friend.  We are hooked.

# February 24, 2007 1:46 PM

FriedOstrich said:

I see what most of you are saying about Crackdown, but in this age we live in, a lot of the problems can be fixed via downloadable content. If enough people ask for co-op enhanced bosses, I really believe that its not only a possibility, but an inevitability that developers, in this case Realtime Worlds, will have to take note. Crackdown has 350 achievement points left to play around with, and all in all I think it will be a game that will just keep on giving. One thing that could and SHOULD be changed is the boss fights. In some cases, it took me 10 minutes to beat the minions yet 10 seconds to beat a boss. Very, very anticlimactic.

Take a note from other series and have different objectives; I know this is an odd comparison, but take 'Shadow of the Colossus'. Each Colossus has vitals, so you can't just blatantly fire away at will, but it requires thought, and a plan of attack. Its almost like a puzzle within a fight, and its very rewarding when you work your way up a gargantuan beast and finally get that crucial blast.

That said, I'm not even finished Crackdown yet, and I'm still having a great time. Though as a lot of you eluded to, it could easily be greater.

Cheers!

# February 24, 2007 3:45 PM

Porktree said:

Blasphemer!! Do not dis the Triforce ;)  These are the two games I'm playing now, and I'm enjoying both.  I've just finished snowboarding in Zelda, and am only about 2 hours into Crackdown. I agree co-op would have been fun in Zelda, but not having it hasn't spoiled me yet.  I also wish it had some achievement points :)

Here's the way I play games, I find an rpg (Zelda or Oblivion et al) and I gamefly that in and buy it. I then I play it in the downtime while gamefly is sending me the next game on my queue. (I'm not rich as Croesus like you Ozzy, so I can't buy every game I want).  This seems to keep the rpg fresh enough to come back to, and let's me blow thru games like Crackdown, Lost Planet, etc etc that are much shorter.

Take back what you said about Zelda, or you'll have to change your name to Gannondorf.

# February 24, 2007 3:56 PM

Ozymandias said:

Heh... I may try to revisit Zelda if I can't find anything newer to play - though I finally started through Call of Duty 3, and am enjoying it so far.

For what it's worth, Gamefly rocks! It's how I get a bunch of the Nintendo and Sony games to review - and the occasional 360 title, as well. <shh!>

# February 24, 2007 5:12 PM

Masked Dave said:

This thread makes me cry inside.

The problem with one of the most perfect examples of games design ever created isn't enough for you because it doesn't have a High Score table!

Game achievements are one of the worst things to be enforced onto game design. The only thing they can possibly serve to do is to destroy your suspension of disbelieve.

Sure, that's fine for a lot of games where they are just a mechanic for skill or puzzle solving. Racing games and most Arcade titles for example. But a game where you are in a meticulously designed world, following a story and characters, where you need to believe in that world, be emersed in it, for the experience to be realised, and then suddenly you get a great big flashing reminder of 'Oh yeah, it's only a game'.

You want to RUIN Zelda by including something like this? To destroy the amazing work that has gone into every tiny aspect of that game?

Oh, I'd just like to address the save point issue. You *never* have a lot of ground to cover because all the short areas of a dungeon are accessible from a central point. You may walk all over the place to complete the whole thing, but at any time it takes only moments to go from the entrance to where you were. Why is this? Because they have been DESIGNED to work like that.

Sure you may enjoy running around and shooting random people in the face once in a while. But if you don't save Hyrule Ozymandias, <i>who will??</i>

# February 24, 2007 5:26 PM

Deano said:

I would disagree with you about achievements being terrible Dave.  If used well they cement that feeling of progression and ceremony that exists in all games.  Additionally they can encourage the player to experiment with different approaches to gameplay.

The news that Real Time Worlds will evolve the extra achievements based on what players actually do is evidence of something deeper than a highscore table

Highscore tables are of questionable value I would admit, but they are not the same as each player seeking to unlock gamerpoints for a given game.  I tend to skip over leaderboards as they are normally riddled with cheating and the overly competitive.

Achievements can also be used badly and actually detract from the game (see ranked multiplayer achievements).  Would Zelda be less cool with achievements?  Used wisely they would enhance the game for many people.

# February 25, 2007 8:19 AM

darkbhudda said:

<i>I offed a bunch of guys but was blown back by the force of the explosion into the water.  I lay there floating but there was no option to regenerate</i>

Just want to confirm, you know you can swim in Crackdown, right?

Just asking because when I accidentally drove into the water I frantically tried to jump out of the car so I wouldn't drown.  Too late.

Only to my complete shock I didn't die.  So I swam to shore.

Gazounds, a sandbox game where water isn't instant death.  What will they think of next?

# February 25, 2007 8:32 AM

ericdrdum said:

I think Crackdown is a masterpiece in gaming. No game I have ever played has ever got a grip on me like Crackdown. Yeah, I know in my mind that there are "better" games released out there, but I've never played another that I think about so much when I'm not playing and every time I have a spare minute, I want to be collecting orbs, completing challenges or taking out gang members. And like you Ozy, it has killed any progression in twilight princess for me. I was only 8 hours in, but it's going to be a while before I start playing it again. It is a good game, but reputation has given many reviewers reason to let things slide that they would never let slide in another game.

RTW has just elevated themselves in status to one of my top 5 favorite studios!

# February 25, 2007 9:44 AM

Deano said:

HI darkbhudda, I guess I wasn't clear enough.  I was dead but didn't have an option to regenerate which is normally indicated by the A button.  I got no such option.

For a game with such freedom I'm not surprised that we are going to find our fair share of bugs/glitches.

# February 25, 2007 11:37 AM

Matthew said:

Dave,  You do have a point the game is very well designed, it is a world that you need to love and care for, but at the same time there is not much really new and revolutionary to the game.  Some of the new items are extremely fun, but for the rest of the game outside the dungeon don't mean too much.  

I think everyone's comments here are not that its a bad game, just that its a carbon copy of an amazing game released 7 years ago.

# February 25, 2007 1:18 PM

John-Paul said:

Crackdown is great fun but I think it gets even funner when you realize what all can be done just scewing around with the physics.  As for game depth it took me about 2 days to clear mostly everything... not a lot of bang for the buck, but I guess the Halo 3 beta balances that out. But the car achievements seem retarded and I doubt I'm gonna spend hours trying to do stunts when that's clearly not the games strong point.

On Zelda I'm still in the first dungeon, I haven't played it hardly any. I want to play it, I think its cool, but at the same time my 360 keeps getting my attention instead.  It did piss me off it took like 5 hours to even get to the first dungeon, and I could care less about all the wolf/shadow-world crap. Honestly, I've been having more fun playing Link to the Past on V.C.

# February 25, 2007 7:10 PM

TristanK said:

Bleh, you people who've already finished it are obviously playing on the lower difficulty levels! :P

I'm playing on Ruthless (the middle one), and it's taking me Serious Time to clean out the bosses. I'm not yet at four-star everything, but it's *such fun* working up to it.

# February 26, 2007 4:31 AM

jones said:

What Crackdown NEEDS is offline, splitscreen co-op. I hope the devs get to releasing it as downloadable content, as for example in Kameo's case.

# February 26, 2007 5:07 AM

Cubeos said:

Crackdown with split screen co-op would be an instant buy for me. Split screen co-op adds alot, and it's frustrating that devs for the 360 are adding online co-op and leaving out split screen. I know that the 360 does not have unlimited power, but please! It'd sell more than a few 360s to have a better version of GTA- with co-op enabled.

As for Zelda, my main critism is the slow start. It happens with every zelda game, they start incredibly slowly. I'm glad I endured the pain though, as the game picks up the pace(and the graphics) pretty quickly.

# February 26, 2007 6:09 AM

Aedrin said:

"But when Crackdown came out it won over my time and I didn't even think about Zelda for weeks. Now that I'm "done" with Crackdown I could return to Zelda at any point - but I just don't have the urge."

You forget one point here.

When you're playing a game, and you buy another. You're obviously going to play the one you just bought.

It's a common effect, and it doesn't mean the original game is not that good.

You could almost say its psychological. Maybe even subconscious, in how you will stop wanting to play a game because you've bought a newer one.

I've had it happen often to me.

# February 26, 2007 6:49 AM

Misframed said:

I have what I call "Video Game ADD" too.  It's hard for me to finish a game anymore.  I could list many games that I "could" finish but just haven't yet (Oblivion, Kameo, PGR3, etc, etc).  I think if it weren't for achievements, I would never go back to finish any game.  

# February 26, 2007 12:46 PM

Masked Dave said:

I'm the opposite, for the most case new games get stacked up in the pile and wait for me to get them. There are certain exceptions (Zelda was one, the astounding Okami is a very recent other) but for the most part it can take me ages to get to one.

I only just started Call of Duty 2 (bought that around the time it came out) and still haven't gotten onto GTA3, KotOR2, Pathologic, Pirates!, Dark Messiah and a load more too.

It's not surprising that I'm a bit behind on my final year project is it.

# February 26, 2007 3:29 PM

DanFilth said:

Interesting angle Ozzy, and as always very articulately written.

As for me, the thing detracting from my experience in Zelda is the wiimote controller.  I'm so annoyed with it, that I find myself not wanting to play it.  I feel like purchasing the Gamecube version and seeing if I enjoy it more.  But at the expense of the 16x9 format?  

I think part of it is also feeling put off by the whole casual thing Nintendo is striving for with the Wii.  I grew up on Nintendo, man.  I traversed every inch of NES Zelda, Ocarina, went crazy looking for warp pipes in the 20 million Marios.  Now, after playing Gears or Crackdown, creating a "Mii" or shaking this nunchuk thing around just doesn't seem so revolutionary.  I think Nintendo forgot about what made them great, or maybe I grew up.

# March 1, 2007 8:28 AM