Current Events > Is Zelda a Metroidvania?

(+) Yeah! (+)

I believe the correct term is fetch quest
---

No, if only on the basis that if somebody wanted more games like the major Metroidvanias, you wouldn't suggest a Zelda game right away

A lotta game genre names're really dumb'n completely break down when ya look at 'em closely, but there's still a big need for categorization'n even if they share similarities, somebody who wants ta play more games like Symphony of the Night prolly won't be immediately on board with a Zelda game

If somebody played Devil May Cry for the first time'n wanted more games like it, you wouldn't suggest they play Dynasty Warriors or whatever cuz they're mission-based games with hack'n slash combat where you style on enemies

Cobra1010 posted...

Gaining new items or abilities to progress in areas otherwise you couldn't get to earlier.

^ is there a name for that?

Not a snappy one.

Most people just settle for metroidvania, though overhead ones are typically called Zelda likes. Symphony of the night was actually inspired by zelda. Lol the plot thickens!

In design circles its roughly agreed upon like this.

Genre Action adventure:
Sub genres required:
Level 3-4 open world game. (Stopping here would get you something like Dark Souls).
&
Item/powerup based progression design.
---

paerarru posted...

EffectAndCause posted...

Thats be like saying 3D, behind the back third person RPGs arent true RPGs because original RPGs are from a 2D, top down perspective.

No because being 2d or 3d isn't one of the things that makes rpgs. Therefore you can have 2d or 3d rpgs. Now maybe there's such a thing as a 3d Metroidvania, and you can call them that if you want, but they're different from (actual, 2d) Metroidvanias in a more meaningful way than 2d rpgs being different from 3d rpgs.

2D isnt one of the things that makes a Metroidvania either.

Its absurd to have that 2D/3D rule apply to one genre but not another when the only reason only 2D Metroidvanias existed for a while was because of technology at the time.
---

paerarru posted...

Rikiaz posted...

Metroidvania means that it follows the design philosophy of a maze-like megadungeon in which you find power ups and new abilities in order to unlock new paths through the megadungeon in order to progress. As this was the design philosophy behind Metroid and post-Symphony of the Night Castlevania.

Awesome! Just like I said, that's why Metroidvania is not a good way to classify a game. All kinds of games can

-be maze like
-consist of a megadungeon
-have power ups/abilities that unlock new paths through the dungeon in order to progress

Yeah thats the point. A Metroidvania (or any subclassification of games, such as rogue-like, or dungeon crawler) can be a variety of different styles or genres of games, they could be a 2D platformer (original Metroid and Castlevania), or a first-person shooter (Metroid Prime), with RPG elements (later Castlevania) or without (All Metroid titles). Same goes for other subclassifications as well. For a Rogue-likes you could have a two stick shooter (Binding of Isaac or Enter the Gungeon), or a 2D platformer (Rogue Legacy or Dead Cells) or a 3D dungeon crawler (Delver), or even a card based, deck building rogue-like (Slay the Spire).
---

Rikiaz posted...

Agreed. Anyone who disagrees can go watch Gamemakers Toolkits series Boss Keys (Season 2) for an in-depth look at the level design of Metroidvanias to see that the level design follows the same philosophy.

His stuff is awesome

---

KillerSlaw posted...

No

You like never have to backtrack in a Zelda game that I can recall.

Maybe for gold Skultullas in OoT?

dude what. You backtrack in Zeldas all the time. Especially Link's Awakening
---

mattnd2007 posted...

No
For one Zelda is older

Checkmate.

---

Zelda games are open world (in the old fashioned sense) action adventure RPGs. They can be 2d or 3d but they all follow basically the same formula.
---

No, but it's a good example as to why people calling other stuff like dark souls "metroidvania" is a really stupid thing, because it has all of the same gameplay ideas as something like metroid or SOTN, just presented in a different package

"Metroidvania" honestly shouldn't apply to anything except exploration-heavy sidescrollers with an open world accessed via upgrades and backtracking

---

mattnd2007 posted...

Rikiaz posted...

Agreed. Anyone who disagrees can go watch Gamemakers Toolkits series Boss Keys (Season 2) for an in-depth look at the level design of Metroidvanias to see that the level design follows the same philosophy.

His stuff is awesome

Him and 8-bit Music Theory are pretty much my favorite gaming channels.
---

it's a zeldatroid
---

Rikiaz posted...

Him and 8-bit Music Theory are pretty much my favorite gaming channels.

Yeah I like him too. But I don't know a lot about music so a fair amount goes over my head

---

Zelda games typically feature linear progression, with zero incentive to revisit an old level unless you missed something on the first pass (or left early and need to return to complete it, as is common in LttP). Link's Awakening would not be considered a Metroidvania because while you may revisit overworld areas you never revisit a dungeon (where most of the action takes place). It has even more linear progression than LttP, primarily because MANY of LA's events are directly linked to dungeon completion. LttP could be completed in virtually any order once you got to the Dark World.

Metroidvanias feature interlaced, complex progression with many areas often available but with branching paths that can only be reached with powerups found in other zone. Backtracking isn't just incentivized in Metroidvanias, it is usually required, with each new power up unlocking one or more new paths in areas already visited.

2D isn't a requirement at all, that has nothing to do with it. What defines a Metroidvania is the progression method, not the medium.
---

resident evil remake board argued that mario 64 was a metroidvania
---

Rikiaz posted...

Yeah thats the point. A Metroidvania (or any subclassification of games, such as rogue-like, or dungeon crawler) can be a variety of different styles or genres of games, they could be a 2D platformer (original Metroid and Castlevania), or a first-person shooter (Metroid Prime), with RPG elements (later Castlevania) or without (All Metroid titles). Same goes for other subclassifications as well. For a Rogue-likes you could have a two stick shooter (Binding of Isaac or Enter the Gungeon), or a 2D platformer (Rogue Legacy or Dead Cells) or a 3D dungeon crawler (Delver), or even a card based, deck building rogue-like (Slay the Spire).

Sounds right, "rogue-like" is also not a good way to classify games. It's just a feature or a collection of features of a game, not a description of its design. Same goes for "Metroidvania"; a lot of people have confused some features of some games called Metroidvanias as being intrinsic to their design, when they're not (which is not surprising, this happens a lot when discussing game design and classification). Then since they see some of these features in other kinds of games they think that all these games are somehow grouped in some fundamental, defining way. They're not.

EffectAndCause posted...

2D isnt one of the things that makes a Metroidvania either.

Its absurd to have that 2D/3D rule apply to one genre but not another when the only reason only 2D Metroidvanias existed for a while was because of technology at the time.

First of all like I said it doesn't matter what makes a "Metroidvania", or not. All I know is that a game like SotN is not the same kind of game as either the old or the new Zeldas. Regardless of whatever features they share in common, that are not intrinsically related to their design.

With the advent of 3d (around the fifth generation) a lot of new genres emerged that simply did not exist before due to limited technology. The shift from 2d to 3d radically changes the design of platformers. In other words being 2d is a fundamental part of the design of 2d platformers to the point that when you make the shift in perspective you have to deal with a completely different design. Other genres that are radically affected by the shift are the many varieties of shooters, for example.

3d also became part of a lot of old genres, but it didn't turn them into new genres because the shift to 3d doesn't impact their design in such a radical way. Whether an rpg for example is 2d or 3d does potentially change the gameplay a lot (precisely because it may now include 3d perspective, movement, targeting, etc as opposed to 2d), but it doesn't change the fundamental design because that doesn't depend so much on the perspective of the game. If the design of the game does depend heavily on the perspective then it's not an rpg in the first place.
---

No. Its in the adventure genre. Always has been.

Zelda has you exploring the world and diving into dungeons.

While Metroid has you exploring a world too, your constantly in enclosed winding halls and mazes.

The difference is that Link is like an ant in the field that sometimes goes underground to the mazelike colony, while Samus is like a rat in a maze.
---

KillerSlaw posted...

tri sapphire posted...

You backtrack all over the place to access new areas in LttP and LA.

But not to the dungeons themselves, I mean. You don't backtrack into dungeons to collect items to progress further, typically.

A Link to the Past has you doing Hyrule Castle twice.

Spirit Tracks has you backtrack to the Tower of Spirits several times.

Windwaker has you go through Forsaken Fortress twice.
---

Lil_Bit83 posted...

KillerSlaw posted...

tri sapphire posted...

You backtrack all over the place to access new areas in LttP and LA.

But not to the dungeons themselves, I mean. You don't backtrack into dungeons to collect items to progress further, typically.

A Link to the Past has you doing Hyrule Castle twice.

Spirit Tracks has you backtrack to the Tower of Spirits several times.

Windwaker has you go through Forsaken Fortress twice.

Three examples across a thirty-year-old franchise proves his point more than yours tbh
---

Rikiaz posted...

paerarru posted...

tri sapphire posted...

Anyways, the reason it's not a Metroidvania is because it's not a 2D platformer

pegusus123456 posted...

I've always thought "2d platformer" was such a dumb requirement for the genre. It makes way more sense that the exploration and item collection is what decides it.

And that's why "Metroidvania" is not a good way to classify a game. Metroidvania was just the name given to games that played like the old Metroid and Castlevania. All those games were 2d platformers. Now you can call fucking Tetris a Metroidvania if you want. That doesn't make it a game that plays like the old Metroid and Castlevania. Same goes for Zelda and whatever else.

Metroidvania means that it follows the design philosophy of a maze-like megadungeon in which you find power ups and new abilities in order to unlock new paths through the megadungeon in order to progress. As this was the design philosophy behind Metroid and post-Symphony of the Night Castlevania.

It's an interesting question. My gut feeling is Zelda is at best Metroidvania-adjacent.

That's my final offer.
---