Kanon (2006) Rewatch - 4: Shiori

Minor CW: minor allusions to self-harm...again

Finally...we're back.

I wrote about Mai's arc all the way back in =January= of this year, and then never got around to finishing my watchthrough of Kanon or continuing with my analyses, but after making it past the summer months, we're back into colder weather and Christmas letter-writing, and my heart turns back toward Kanon.

This time we're talking about Shiori, who we first encounter in episode 2.  In contrast to Makoto's flashy entrance, or Mai's picturesque one, the first that we see of Shiori (outside of the OP animation) is actually quite unflattering:

 

You can already see how she's different than the other characters

So yeah, she slips and falls after Ayu bonking into a tree in one of those classic Ayu-Yuuichi prankster moments.  This comedic moment comes right after a somewhat foreshadowing scene of Ayu and Yuuichi "realizing" who each other are (though Yuuichi probably doesn't remember the full truth of it).  If you've already watched through all of Shiori's arc, you know that there's an extra reason why she looks a little frazzled here with all of the things she bought sprawled onto the ground. (and yes, the spoilers are going to start right here)

The first thing that I notice here is how...=ordinary= Shiori's entrance is.  If you didn't know better you might even think she's just some passerby NPC who got caught in the crossfire between Ayu and Yuuichi.  I think this "normalcy" is an important part of Shiori's character.  It's not so much that I think "Shiori is an ordinary person", it's more that I think the relationship that's portrayed with her is a little more quiet and subdued, and I think that gives it a much different feeling, especially when you contrast it to the two stories that we've gone through so far (Makoto and Mai), both involving a lot of supernatural magic of sorts.

The second thing I want to say is that I think it's fitting that Ayu is the one to bump into Shiori at this time, and inadvertently "save" her from herself as she would contemplate self-harm.  The story would have it that Shiori changed her feelings due to how happy Ayu and Yuuichi seemed as they were laughing and joking, and I think that's definitely part of it, but I think also knowing what =Ayu= has been through, and her semi-metaphorical "angel" role (signified by the wings on her backpack, as well as the glorious angel-wings shot in the OP), I think it just makes sense symbolically that she would be the one to remind Shiori that life is precious.

I wrote last time how Yuuichi's interactions with Mai were completely different in nature from his interactions with Makoto, and I think the same is honestly true with Shiori as well.  Even last January after I finished rewatching Shiori's arc, I could say confidently that it's the most "romantic" one.

Damn if this isn't a mood

There are a lot of reasons why I get this feeling, but I think a big part of it is simply because the bulk of Yuuichi and Shiori's interactions involve just them two.  "Shared secrets" I feel like is a key part of romance and I think that's something that is noticeably absent from some of the other characters (Makoto being mostly family, and Mai constantly having Sayuri's company).

Yuuichi still gets his teasing in with Shiori, but there's less "pranking", and so the energy feels a little bit more flirtatious.  This is probably in part due to Shiori's character/persona, but she probably also just gets a sort of "immunity to physical pranking" from her physical frailty.  Another notable difference -- there's no "oh, =actually=, Yuuichi already knew her 7 years ago and just forgot" this time, so there's also more of a natural chemistry of "these two people are actually trying to get to know each other".

About Shiori herself, I think it's really interesting to try to compare and contrast her to Sayuri, because they actually have some very similar attributes.  They both speak in a reserved fashion, usually with a smile on their face; you can tell that they don't quite wear their heart on their sleeve, but are deliberate with how they show their outward self in most cases.  Of course Sayuri has her "ahaha~" catchphrase and Shiori has here "I don't like people who say things like that...", but you have to admit that they really are more similar than not (even down to the self-harm idea).  Unfortunately, I don't think the two ever interact with each other; that's something I'd be fascinated to see how it would play out.

Interestingly, I think Sayuri, as shown in Mai's arc at least, has a stronger feeling of "quiet strength" than Shiori, especially given her role as "the one who figured it out" in contrast to Mai and Yuuichi.  You can feel the age difference (Sayuri being two years older) and how Sayuri's self-harm incident was sometime in the past whereas Shiori's is fresh.  But Sayuri also gives off more of a "teehee" energy, almost like she's happy to play dumb so that she doesn't stand out, despite her being ostensibly the most mature character that we see in the entire series (her and Akiko, probably?).

Perhaps the easiest way to understand the difference between Sayuri and Shiori (why did it just hit me now that their names both start with 'S'...) is in their sisterly relationships -- Sayuri is/was an older sister, while Shiori is a younger sister.  Sayuri's role as the older sister -- especially as it was during her last day with her brother -- was to make her loved ones feel like they were the important and special ones.  You can see this in the way that she minimizes her presence, deflects all of the compliments she's given, and generally plays the supporting role (ok, ok, I know a lot of it is because she's just not a main character, but still).  But Shiori is a little bit more...how do I say this...

 

...it's almost like, she's quiet, but wants to be heard?  She doesn't say outright that she wants attention, but if she really wanted to fade into the background, she wouldn't say things the way that she does, right?  Almost like saying "tee hee, I have a secret, but I won't tell you!~"  She spends her days waiting outside in the school courtyard, "waiting for someone that she actually doesn't know very well herself -- not their name, year, or class".  I like the ambiguity of that part, actually, you're not sure who exactly she's talking about.  Is she waiting for someone in particular?  Or is she just waiting for someone like Yuuichi to come along?  There's that subtle hinting of "hey, actually you could be the one I'm waiting for...".  This energy is key to Shiori's character, I think.  And she's aware of it, too, saying "They say that mysteries give girls a certain allure."

"I know no one is here, but I stand here all the same.  When I arrived, of course no one was here.  But I still could not move from this spot.  Inside me was a vague hope.  That hope kept me locked here.  Locked here all alone.  Up to now."

I think these words make up the first time that Shiori actually speaks in a bit of a monologue, so even though the music and stage aren't really set for it, it feels somehow impactful.

Shiori's words kind of remind me of...well, me, actually.  Knowing that something is lost forever, but still continuing to watch for its return.  That sort of "hopeless futility" is something that I'm not sure how to describe succinctly as a character trait.  It's not just determination, it's almost a sort of folly mixed with the idea of being a hopeless romantic.  That even when something has zero chance, you still can't help but be drawn to the idea that it might turn out.

Also, is it just a coincidence?  Or do we keep on seeing more connections between Shiori and Ayu for some reason?  Just after the above monologue and sunset view, we get this line from Ayu, which seems oddly relevant to Shiori:

Later on we even get a scene where Ayu and Yuuichi run into Shiori at the hospital...I guess it's hard to keep viewing these as coincidences, huh?

Shiori's arc starts proper in episode 15 when Yuuichi and her go on their little "date" and we get to see a rather impressively cute scene where she manages to score zero at the whack-a-mole game.  It's definitely playing into one of many "moe" tropes, but in a more down-to-earth way than most of the other antics with Ayu and Makoto, which again lends this relationship to feeling a little more "believable" in a way.

We even get a little date montage with an upbeat version of "Last Regrets" playing in the background, which honestly I didn't remember at all.  It's...a little off-character, honestly, in how "generic cute date scene" it plays out, and I think while the energy tries to build a sense of "happy company, fun time", I think the upbeat-ness of the scene and music doesn't play to Shiori's strength as a character, at least not at this point of the story.

After that we get a scene where Shiori and Yuuichi visit the school alone at night, and =that's= where we return to the real energy of their relationship.  Just the two of them, off somewhere, alone, gently poking fun at each other while walking next to each other.  This is where Yuuichi finally confronts her about her illness, and about just exactly what her deal is.

Side note: It's weird how much of a golden sunset color scheme we get with Shiori, actually, especially since I feel like the gentle blue and white of the school courtyard is the background I associate most with her.  I don't know if this is a consistent theme within the entire show (might have to flip through again), but I'm starting to almost think that the "gold sunset" scheme is almost symbolic of loss and sadness (well, memories as well, of course).  Which is interesting because the white and blue snow is actually the "happy everyday" color, where in other shows it might be the opposite.  I like that, it's something about Kanon that I think makes it a little more magical, not just ordinary-feeling.

We move into "act 2" of Shiori's arc as we get this scene where Kaori stands in clear contrast to Yuuichi in a not-so-subtle scene composition (that I'm sure I totally ignored the first time through because I was like 15 years younger than I am now):

Shiori's whole arc plays out much similarly to Makoto's in that the whole conceit is that she's ill and is (essentially) expected to disappear in the near future.  It's a good thing that these two arcs didn't follow each other directly back-to-back as it would just feel like a retelling of the same story again, but you just can't help but draw the parallels here between Kaori, as Shiori's sister who doesn't want to acknowledge her, and Amano, the girl who had experience with the fox spirits in the past and is reluctant to become friends with Makoto.

We can look to thus understand Shiori's arc in the ways where it differs (and doesn't differ) in comparison to Makoto's.  Yuuichi still plays the same role -- trying to do his best to make the rest of his friend/lover's life worthwhile despite the impending tragedy.  But this time Kaori is a bigger deal in the story (where Amano played a minor role).

Kaori's whole deal is that she "pretends" she doesn't have a sister, doesn't acknowledge her existence.  You could say that she's avoidant, thinking that if she can build up a wall between them, that she won't get hurt when the inevitable happens.

Which is interesting, because even as early as the end of episode 15 when Kaori first tells the truth to Yuuichi, saying "If it means so much pain, I just wish I'd never had a sister", she starts crying -- clearly suffering a lot from thinking about it.  So it's not actually as if she's insulating herself from ever being close with her sister and caring at all.

Which makes me think it's a little inaccurate to say that Kaori "pretends she doesn't exist because she doesn't want to form a bond".  Rather, Kaori =has= already formed a bond with her sister, but doesn't really want to confront the bitter truth about what that means for her.  Perhaps almost like when someone learns that their friend has cancer, but then awkwardly dodges the topic and pretends like it doesn't exist, because they simply don't know how to handle that conversation, those feelings.  I see Kaori's "coldness" as a sort of bitterness at life that she uses to drown out the pain.

Besides looking at Makoto's scenario, we also can't help but draw parallels to Sayuri's relationship with Kazuya here -- Sayuri, as someone who put up a strong emotional barrier between her and her brother, until she learned that her brother was going to disappear, and she regretted not being able to connect with him earlier.

I think all of these different characters have different approaches to end-of-life.  Sayuri, regretting the time she never had, and trying desperately to reclaim some of it.  Kaori, pained but unable to confront that emotion, feigning anger and coldness instead.

Even Yuuichi, who I mentioned as "playing the same role" for both Makoto and Shiori, in trying to make their remaining time worthwhile, does so in a noticeably different way for both of them.  With Makoto, he tries to fulfill everything that she ever wanted -- spending time with family, playing together, even getting "married".  With Shiori, he does try to do the same thing, in a way, but it's different, because Shiori only ever wanted to be "normal".  Her wish was simply "to go to school with her sister".  And of course, this is important, too.  What people want when they are at the end of their time is different, right?  And what people want even when they =aren't= at the end of their time, is similarly different.

That Yuiichi has already been through one major loss (well....more than one, if you think about it...) from Makoto, and yet still chooses to adopt the same approach (trying to stay close to them and fulfill their wishes), means that he really believes in it even despite carrying somewhat-fresh scars from the last time it happened.  We also get this scene (notice the golden hue!!) where he finds himself internally asking Makoto, "What was it like for you?"

I love this because Makoto is the best it's something that you can't do in the original visual novel medium but you can do in the anime.  You get Yuuichi actually changing and reflecting on what happened before, instead of just 5 disparate standalone routes.

I like that we get little bits of development and deepening in this way, not just with Makoto, but with the others, too.  When Yuuichi comes back home after learning that Shiori is going to pass away after her birthday, he doesn't really want to talk to Ayu about it, but Ayu still understands as a friend that she should sit next to him and keep him company.  And later at school, Yuuichi mentions offhandedly, "yeah, my other lunchmates [Mai and Sayuri] are still gone...".  It's not like he's just up and moved on from all of these people, their relationships are all still playing a role in his life (as they should).

Bed-ridden Mai straight up tells him near the start of Shiori's arc, "Somebody close to you is running away from her pain.  You should stay close to them."  I love this, too, because the obvious answer is "Shiori.  Shiori is in pain".  But when you dig further into the arc, you start to wonder, was it actually Kaori that Mai was talking about?  The one who is running away from their pain?

Shiori's arc culminates in a birthday party for Shiori that Yuuichi organizes and desperately tries to get Kaori to attend, wanting the two sisters to make up as they clearly both care for each other but can't really seem to get past the status quo of acting awkwardly distant.  I like that this arc comes after Makoto's as I think Yuuichi needs to show a little bit more nuance and maturity here.  With Makoto, he kind of was the only person deciding on how to care for her, but with Shiori, he needs to navigate his role as a friend -- one who ends up essentially disagreeing with how Shiori and Kaori are doing things.

As a friend is Yuuichi supposed to trust that these two sisters can handle themselves and not butt in?  Or is he supposed to try and convince them of the error of their ways?  Of course the real answer is somewhere in between and I think it's nice that he spends some time showing restraint at first while getting to know the situation, before ultimately deciding that he wants to push things along because he feels that it's what everyone kind of wants but can't really manage to get to.  ...Unlike like with Mai where he kinda decided up-front that the "goal" was to get Mai to be more outgoing and popular.  Woo, maturity!

At the birthday party we get Kitagawa stealing the spotlight for a little bit with a boisterous dance performance, as well as some shy-tsundere type side-eying between Kaori and Shiori.

I love how the music fades from the peppy dance to the warm pads and piano, creating a sort of "introvert moment" for the two sisters in the midst of the lively scene.  I honestly don't know if I've seen this kind of thing portrayed often in these types of shows -- this sort of "silence in the midst of a crowd" feeling.

I feel like there is some alternate telling of the story here where Yuuichi and Kitagawa's antics end up making Shiori and Kaori burst helplessly into laughter and they can't help but break the distant atmosphere between the two of them as a result.  That....version of the story would be really lame, I think, haha.  It's cheap and doesn't really do justice to the weight of inertia for these two.

But Kaori =does= end up being convinced.  She's still got her sense of pride (tsundere attitude...) so she doesn't break down and give her a hug or anything, but she concedes in her own way, acknowledging Shiori as her sister and telling her "let's talk a bunch later, ok?".

This whole thing honestly reads....a little bit confusingly at first, if you ask me.  Like, the energy of the scene is easy to understand, but like....everyone important kinda already =knows= that these two are sisters, why is it such a big deal for Kaori to say it out loud?  Why is she so stubborn in not doing so, and more importantly, why does she change her mind now?

But I think there seems to be a big theme of "being honest/dishonest with your feelings" when it comes to both Shiori and Kaori.  These two sisters are constantly saying one thing but really holding another truth in their inner emotions.  When Shiori and Yuuichi are poking fun at each other, it works as a fun playful energy, but when it comes to forming an actual connection, you can feel a sort of emotional distance put up because of this dissonance.

I think the anime does a good job of playing out this transition.  At first you just see the "cutesy secret" side of Shiori, but as things go on further, you see the little moments from everyone -- Shiori, Yuuichi, and Kaori -- where they are caught with their true feelings showing through the cracks.  Even this simple scene above where Shiori looks up and sighs as she walks home, speaks a thousand words (again something that isn't possible in the VN, but only in the anime, woo!).

Shiori puts on a smile, but in reality she's really sad that her time is coming to an end.  It feels somehow easier for her to just act happy and not have to deal with the weight of the truth.  Kaori, too, does this, although she puts on a cold face instead.

And I actually totally get this.  Emotional vulnerability can be =hard=.  And maybe these girls think, "what good does it do to confront the truth?".  It's Yuuichi, then, that comes and disturbs the status quo.  Pushing firmly but respectfully that "it's important to connect while we still can".  But more importantly, questioning whether it's =really= easier to keep hiding all of our true feelings.  Putting on a mask is...tiring, isn't it?

The video that largely spurred on this rewatch/reanalysis project points out how Kaori and Yuuichi have a sort of dichotomy here, in that Kaori chooses to avoid forming a bond with Shiori, so that she doesn't have to confront the truth of Shiori's fate, while Yuuichi chooses TO form a bond with Shiori because of it.  I'll just repeat this image here for emphasis on that:

If we examine Shiori's story from the perspective of Kanon being a story about loss and grief, then I think you can read it as being specifically about making amends with those who are about to pass away, or about reconnecting with them while you still have the chance.  It's slightly similar to Makoto's in that it deals with end-of-life, but this time it's more about communicating feelings, rather than caring for someone.

I think my reading on it is a little more broad and general than that.  Shiori's story, I think, tells us how important it is to be honest with our feelings.  Both toward each other, and for ourselves.  This is a bit paradoxical as one of Shiori's main "appeal points" as a character is her sort of tact and...lack of straightforward bluntness when compared with everyone else.  But I think because of this, Shiori's story is the one that can authentically illustrate how =hard= it can be to be honest about our feelings.  And rather than invalidating Shiori's way of being, I think it tries to paint her in a sympathetic light.  Like, "of =course= it's hard for these girls to confront the truth."

After Shiori breaks down (during the night of her would-be-attempted-self harm), she talks about how "she realized she was crying because she was sad".  This line is in the context of how she was first laughing (from remembering Ayu and Yuuichi), then crying, but I like how simply it illustrates the conflict.  When we are in the darkness (also see: literal darkness), we can forget that we were sad to begin with.

But we can remember these things.  Just like Shiori could remember that "I don't want to die", even though a few moments before "it felt like I'd already left the world behind".

The conflicting feelings that Shiori has toward emotional authenticity make the scenes at the end of her arc feel like a big payoff.  I can really see where Shiori fans are coming from when I think about this growth...It's exactly because you've seen Shiori insist for so long that she's "just fine" and doesn't really want anything for herself, that when she finally musters up the courage to ask Yuuichi if they can hold hands, you understand that it's a big moment for her.  And the relationship between the two of them is built up appropriately such that you feel that Yuuichi really =wants= to hold her hand, not just do it because "well, I better be nice to this girl who's gonna die".

These last few moments between Yuuichi and Shiori in episode 18 are really some of the strongest in the entire series (so far at least).  Just look at that lighting!

We already knew, though, from both Makoto's route and Mai's route, that we can't just have a happily-ever-after end.  And just as we start to see Shiori really open up, and say "I don't think I want to die", we also get her running off, making an excuse of "I'll go buy something warm", and then leaving us with this as the last we get to see of her (for now at least):

So yeah, we kinda get the "tragic end" story here, too.  But this time I think it works a lot better than in Mai's arc (which was just confusing).  Even at the very end, Shiori wasn't completely honest in what she said.  I think this works here because it feels like too drastic of a change for Shiori to just do a 180-degree reversal of her character.  She is still Shiori, she doesn't need to just say everything straight out.  Kaori, too, still maintained her (admittedly rather stiff) boundaries around how far she was willing to go after the birthday party ended.

And I think that's important for us to consider, too.  That the moral of the story isn't just "don't be like Shiori, you gotta speak your HEART man!!!".  It tells us that even if we are still like Shiori in the end (and who isn't, just a little bit?), we, too, can connect with others, and connect with ourselves.  Maybe sometimes, with a little gentle encouragement from others.

"I'm a weak person who cannot live without help from others."

"That's fine!  Everyone has to live with support from others.
If miracles can't happen, why even have a word for it?"

While Makoto's arc I think places us pretty firmly in the shoes of Yuuichi in terms of how we can relate to it, Shiori's arc is a bit more multifaceted in that I think we can choose to place ourselves in Shiori's shoes, or even Kaori's shoes, as well as Yuuichi's point of view.  At times, we may be too afraid to confront other people.  At times, we may be too afraid to confront ourselves.  And at times, we may also be the people who can gently show that we =want= to know.  We want to know both the Shiori who "kept smiling until the end", but also the Shiori who was willing to admit that they were afraid, too.  This, along with the fact that Shiori's arc is much less "fantastical" than Makoto's or Mai's, perhaps makes it feel more obviously relatable, even if we don't literally know someone who is terminally ill, or someone who is undergoing an awkward conflict with their older sister.  There's bound to be some part of the experience that we can understand, even if it's only the "I realized I was crying because I was sad" part.

 

...and with that, we're onto the last 6 episodes of the anime!  Phew...I've done quite a bit of writing here, and I have to assume that will probably continue as we examine Nayuki and Ayu's stories.  But it's wintertime, so what better time to continue on with Kanon...?

I'm gonna be real with y'all, I'm having some struggles.  That much was pretty clear after like 5 minutes of thinking about it (usually is!).  I'll be alright, butttttt the usual protocol is to blog a little more often when I notice this kind of thing, so here we are.

Thanksgiving was pretty chill this year.  Last time around I prepped a veritable feast, with marinated skirt steak, teriyaki roast quail, stuffed jalapenos, roast brussel sprouts, and a mushroom/bacon thing too I think.  This year I took it "easier" in a way and harder in a way and "just" made some shoyu tonkotsu ramen.  Been a long while since last time so it was a good opportunity.

Ramen turned out ok, definitely not my best, but I think every time I learn a little bit more that I can tweak.  I made a few changes for the broth this time -- one was doing a pre-roast of the bones instead of the soak-and-blanch that I usually do.  I don't really think I could discern that much of a difference that could be attributed to that, so I get the feeling that it's mainly a matter of preference and I think the bone roast is actually easier; it's less active time and generally requires less cleaning and easier to just do it all in a big batch.

Another big changeup was that I immersion-blended the broth after straining it.  Becomes =almost= weirdly-too emulsified, takes on an almost-milky look (if you did it in a countertop blender you'd probably only want to blend a small portion).  After freezing the broth, the difference here was actually pretty apparent -- the emulsion wasn't =completely= stable and there was still a top layer of fat sitting on top, but the rest of the broth was significantly whiter in color due to the fats being emulsified better.  Normally I get a bigger layer of fat on top and then all the broth on the bottom, which isn't necessarily like a huge deal, you just boil it all together anyways and it's not that much of a difference (added bonus, it's easier to control the amount of fat in the final product if you'd like), but I'd like to think that the better emulsion is generally what I want to shoot for here.

Did notice that the broth was in general a little less intense / thick / aromatic.  Part of this is probably just that I was a little stingy on the tare...I was doing a new serving method where I add the tare directly to the broth instead of trying to measure everything into individual bowls, which I think also was a good success (but of course only works if you're making the same soup for everyone).  But I also think the broth itself maybe just needed to either reduce more, or I needed to just use a higher ratio of pork bones to end-product.  I mean, it's not the worst to err on the side of less bones -- stretches the broth out more and you have to pay less in the end -- but I think I =was= using less than the recommended amount, so that's a change I'll have to keep in mind for next time.

For this batch of broth I =could= actually just play around with reducing it a little more and in theory that should have the same effect, so I might try that next time.  Like if I serve for 3 people I could take my 2 containers of 2 servings each and then reduce the 4 servings down to 3.  It'll be a little hard to kinda measure that precisely but I guess it doesn't necessarily have to be precise either.

While we're on the subject of cooking, I've been making some more attempts at understanding saag/palaak paneer a little more, as well.  I'm definitely still iterating on my technique there, and kind of pleased with my results so far.  I've found that some of my previous attempts, while tasty, have definitely been missing out on a level of richness / flavor compared to versions I've tasted.  One other issue is that in order to get the spinach/veggies to really blend smoothly I end up having to end up adding a bunch of water, otherwise my stick blender just can't handle it.  One of the downsides of not having a proper countertop blender, but I also just don't like dealing with those...

Anyways, I think I'm going back to erring on the side of adding not as much water and just living with a little bit coarser of a consistency as opposed to something that's as smooth.  In addition I'm kinda moving from pure palaak paneer (spinach only) to more of a saag (leafy greens mixture, esp mustard greens).  This past time I used fresh mustard greens and it really added a different note to the flavor (as you would expect), one that I kinda liked.  The other thing I'd like to try (besides just continually amping up all the spices, which I've already done) is to just use a really big chunk of butter to make the tadka or flavor / oil base for it (which I'm now doing as a separate step), but unfortunately we were completely out of butter today, so that will have to wait until next time.

Which...who know, may not actually be in that long of a time?  With the struggles I mentioned at the beginning of this post, one thing I sometimes try to do when I'm in a bad place and need to kick some good habits into gear is to try and eat a little lighter and a little healthier, and vegetarian meals generally fit into that picture.  I'll have to think of some nice meals that I can do over the next week or two that align with that -- probably be sticking to more brown rice (which we've already been doing anyways), but I'll have to think about dishes as well.  I can make mapo tofu vegetarian, but it's not really that light of a dish.....maybe something more just like mushroom stir fries, or chinese chives with tofu or something.  I'll have to figure it out.

Looks like I'm going to bed late again, mreh.  I did "eh" today.  The cooking and all went okay, I finished another letter (started on one of the last ones, too), even did a small bit of work on Rhythm Quest (though maybe not quite enough).  I did some online shopping, handled OHC and my Monthlies release, and probably the biggest win of the day was just sitting down and realizing that I'm in not a great spot.

I won't drill into it in too much detail, but a lot of it had to do with feelings I'd already been aware of for the past few days.  Little bit of depression here, loneliness there, hopelessness in some amount as well.  But up until now I had kind of just been running on "survival mode" in that regard, like I knew I wasn't doing well but I was trying to just see if I could make it day to day and just keep on walking forward despite those pains, because I didn't really know what to do about them.  Now it's more like, okay let's actually try and get things back on track.  Nothing =huge= or drastic, just like little things here and there.  It's a mindset thing.

Well, wish me luck, I guess?  I should be showing up here a little more often in the coming days...

Link's Awakening, and more ranting on Visual Readability

I watched a tiny bit of the gameplay in the Link's Awakening remake for switch (2019).  It's an interesting little thing that...exists, I guess.  I feel like they really made the right choices to make this one appeal to people.  Which is not to say that I agree with most of the decisions, but I think that the one thing the remake does obviously well is sell itself to its audience.  It's got this aesthetic that's filled with [cough] bright saturated colors, and makes you go "aw, that's cute".  I think that's the goal -- "this looks so cute, colorful, and refreshing!"

When I searched for material comparing the remake to its predecessors I found a lot of comments on the added quality-of-life features, extra content, and small changes made to the game content here and there, as well as the feel of movement and combat.

I can't really speak to that last point confidently, not having played the game, but I think I'm honestly less interested in any of the other parts because I think there are two elephants in the room that you have to discuss.

The first is the idea of seamless overworld navigation (as opposed to screen by screen).  It isn't necessarily a "bad" thing to have this, I think it actually is quite a clever idea since it fixes several issues at the same time (dealing with a widescreen aspect ratio, for example).

But this is perhaps the most jarring design aesthetic that you can point to, coming from the original.  The entire world of Koholint was designed around small screen real-estate in such a way that each screen uses tiles "efficiently" to paint a picture, to serve one main idea.  ChevyRay mentions this in their Ikenfell design language article.

You can't just see "no more screen transitions!" as a strict upgrade, because it really isn't.  Each screen being distinct makes it into its own little mini story.  You get to =remember= locations better because you associate the entire screen as a visual silhouette.

Of course, I'm sure the in-game map functionality in the Link's Awakening remake is much better.  It probably =needs= to be, because the world was carried over one-to-one from the original, and the original was not designed to give you visual landmarks to help you find your way!  At least, not in the traditional sense.

 

In a game with screenless navigation, you (hopefully) have these sort of large "land features" to help you orient yourself to where you are.  A tower here, a big rock there, maybe a lake.  But in the language of Koholint, screens are differentiated by their patterning.  "This is that screen with the four trees in the corner", you might subconsciously think.

But of course, you're probably not going to remember "a set of four trees" as a signpost in the remake because that shows up all over the place and there's nothing special to set them apart.  Everything is positioned relative to everything else.  Seamless overworld scrolling just operates under a different set of orienting principles.

Like with everything, this isn't strictly a BAD change, necessarily.  The original Koholint overworld was honestly quite labyrinthine at times, and I think simply navigating through it with a detailed map does probably ease the experience in some ways.  But you do also lose something in that process too, right?  Think about navigating through a town using google maps, versus having to do it on your own by sight.  You might be taking the same path, but you're perceiving things in a very different way.  It's an important difference, regardless of which option you prefer.

I could talk about the faux "depth of field" effect at the top of the bottom of the screen which didn't seem to bother me at first until I started noticing it more and more...but I won't.  Instead I'm going to talk about the color palettes and visual focus in this game because oh boy, do I always have words to say about visual readability.

The surprising thing that I'll say here is that when you look at a side-by-side, I actually think the remake does pretty ok on visual readability from some spots that I've seen.  Honestly a lot of the screens read better when compared to Link's Awakening DX.....kinda.  ...Sigh, I WAS going to say that, but even in the process of looking for random screenshots, I already start to see the issues...

One of these issues is that....everything in the overworld is seen from this camera angle, with this specific directional lighting, which means that all of the significant elements that happen to be embedded into walls (i.e. every dungeon entrance) are all.....just dark and bathed in shadow.  (The grass is also =incredibly= noisy, but we'll get to that later)

You can see the same thing happening here on the right with this dungeon...

 

Doesn't really help that now the dungeon entrance is -- in addition to being darkened -- also blurred out by the postprocessing effect.  Aiyee.....

The other thing I wanted to comment on, though, is that in ALL of these examples there is a decided lack of visual focus.  EVEN the Link's Awakening DX screenshots.

And that's because (incoming hot take) I think Link's Awakening DX has kind of sh*t visual design too.  The color palettes add a bunch of saturation and contrast everywhere and mess up all of the values in the tiles and that makes all of the screens really, really busy.

As a case study, let's look at the entrance to Tail Cave in all three versions of the game.

First the switch remake:

I already talked about this above, but again, the entrance to the dungeon is completely in shadow.  Not only that, though -- the three "pillars" (the focal point of the screen here) are the LEAST saturated elements in the screenshot here (why are they a dull greenish mud color?)  The most attention-grabbing element on this screen is probably the big spiky tree decoration.  (Why?)  On the bottom of the screen frame you see a big splotch of blue, which of course is visually interesting but totally irrelevant here.

Sudden lightbulb moment...is this why they implemented the blur effect at the top and the bottom of the screen???  Was it an attempt to try and reduce the loss of visual cohesion caused by other map tiles bleeding over into the camera area?  HMMMmmmmmm.........

Now let's look at Link's Awakening DX:

It's less "cute", but it reads better, right?  The dungeon entrance is clearly visible and the purple hue (while not really coherent with the rest of the colors) serves as a nice unifying and distinct factor -- purple statues link to purple dungeon entrance, nice!  The screen size might feel a little small coming from the widescreen aspect ratio above, but do you see how the green trees nicely frame the composition and how the focal point of interest (the keyhole slot) is perfectly framed according to the rule of thirds?  This is not a coincidence!  The natural thing would have been to just put the dungeon entrance in the middle of the screen, right?  But no, the composition has been reoriented this way on purpose!  This is the kind of stuff that gets lost when we throw away the division between map tiles...

We don't see any of the adjacent screen (to the east of the trees) as we do in the remake, because why would we?  It's not relevant to this segment of the map, so it would just be a distraction...

But all that said, there are still issues with this screenshot of the game too, right?  As I mentioned before, the color palette isn't really that cohesive -- green and purple against reddish-brown...?  And the busiest element here is by far the floor tiles, which just should at you to notice this unholy sea of SQUARES EVERYWHERE.  Yeech.

 

Now here's how that screen originally looked:

Do you see what I mean here?  This is by far the best-reading screenshot of the three and it's not particularly close.  The square tiles are faintly present, echoing the idea of a tiled brick road without being too distracting.  The collision areas are clearly demarcated -- dark means impassible, light means walkable.  Even if you look from a distance and squint your eyes, it's extremely easy to piece together the geometry of the screen.

There are only four shades of gray being used in the entire image, but it turns out that in order to get away with that you have to be very intentional about your usage of those shades.

 

Somehow, in Link's Awakening, we had more colors to play with, but we used them like this:

(why is there a river of lava around this tree?)

What happened here?  Why does Link's Awakening DX look like it came out of a child's coloring book, where we simply chose each of the brightest and bestest colors and floodfilled all the way with each of them, instead of settling on cohesive color palettes?  You know, the kind of colors that we love from good pixel art.  Palettes like these:

Was it just due to technical limitations?  Well...not exactly.  The Game Boy Color =is= capable of more subdued color ramps.  Just look at this screen, from Oracle of Seasons/Ages -- where we seem to have realized that we can stick to two main colors in a composition, and highlight/shadow them appropriately:

 

But we don't see any of this in Link's Awakening DX.  You see, you have to remember that LA:DX was one of the premier titles for the just-released Game Boy Color, releasing in 1998 just in time for the holiday season in December after the console itself was launched a month or two before.

The original Link's Awakening originally debuted on the original Game Boy =five years earlier=, and was not only the top-selling game of that year, but single-handedly increased sales of the GB by thirteen percent!  And in terms of content, Link's Awakening DX only includes a few more end-game features (some of which were criticized as being lackluster).  How are you going to convince people who have already played and beaten the original, to play a remake that has essentially 95% of the same gameplay?

That's right, the way you do it is by making BOLD use of color.  "Look here!  At how vividly you can experience the world of Koholint!  If only you buy a Game Boy Color for Christmas....".  Part of the "extra content" added to this version of the game was the Color Dungeon, an entire dungeon built with gimmicks around red/green/blue patterns.  Because oooooo, COLOR.

...and this strategy worked!  With reviews of the game praising it as being "sharp" and adding "vibrant life" to the world, as well as "helping objects and enemies in the environment stand out tremendously".  .... ............  sigh....

Sometimes, history repeats itself...

Look, I'm not saying that Link's Awakening (2019) is a bad game.  It's probably just fine.  But when you look at it from these lenses (as I can't help but do), you can start to see the little rough edges.  Why are the statues in this entryway GREEN and why do they look so ominous and detailed when they aren't actually interactable?  (it's because they're solid green in Link's Awakening DX, see the screenshot above this one)  How many new players reach this room and (like the one I watched) assume that there is some puzzle to be solved based on the visual focus that they command?

Why do we insist that the cuttable grass in the overworld occupy such a high level of contrast and detail compared to everything else in the screen?

 

Why did we forget about what things can look like, with a little more restraint?

 

Listen to the theme of Mabe Village for me, will you?  One of the all-time classic town themes.  Soft, gentle, yet with a peppy energy that can put a smile on your face.  Why did we take away the soft edges from that village, dousing it instead in a paint job reminiscent of a high-school sports jersey?

Maybe we got a remake of the wrong game...

I guess maybe I don't want to be the damsel in distress after all, but that doesn't mean that I want to be the knight in shining armor, either.

White mage, right?  That's what I'm supposed to be, I guess?

Are you out there?  Somewhere?

Will you find me?

Do you read me?

I haven't given up, you know?  Even as I try to grow up and be someone who doesn't need you, I know, also, that I never will be.

Will you gently lift me from the stream again?  Someday?  I'll be waiting for you to visit in my tower.

I'll be there for you.  No matter what anyone else says, I'll listen.  I may not always be able to catch you when you fall, but I'll be there to sit by your side until you are ready to stand up again.

And no matter what anyone else says, or blames you for, I'll know why you are the way you are.  I'll understand more than anyone else ever will, all of the things that you have been through, all of the struggles that you faced, and all of the worries that you hold.  I know what you want, and what you deserve.  What can help calm you down even in the face of your tranquility being broken.

You never have to be anything that you don't want to be.  You can change, grow, learn, but only if you are ready to.  And if that day never comes, that's okay because I'll still be right there with you, even if we never move from this very spot.  Even if nobody else comes to find us, it'll be okay, because I've got your back.  I'll support you the best that I can.

I loved who you used to be, too, though I know you have mixed feelings about that version of yourself.  That's understandable.  You probably have mixed feelings about who you are now, too, right?  I think everyone has some of that within them.  Do you ever worry that you aren't carrying forward the promises that your former self made?  I think you are doing great.  I know that not everything turned out the way that you hoped.  Many things that you wished for didn't come true.  I'm sorry that it had to be that way.

But despite it all, you are still you.  You are beautiful, did you know that?  "Earned beauty", I would say.  It's not something that came naturally to you, I know.  But that makes it all the more impressive what you have been able to become.  When you turn around I know you'll see it too.  How far along the path that you have traveled to reach this point.  I know that you can keep going, over these hills and into the next sunrise.  And even if you decide not to, we'll just shelter for a while, until we wake to the gentle morning mist, the first gentle beams of light filtering through the dewdrops in the trees.

There are so many other people who care about you too, do you know that?  People who would support you, even if you were to decide to simply hide in your shell for a while.  Maybe even forever.  I'm one of them, too.  In your worst moments I root for you.  In the depths of your regret I shake my head and silently pray that you'll realize that it wasn't your fault.  That even if you made a terrible mistake, it's never a reflection of your soul, your spirit.  It's merely a thing that happened to you along your path.  And in your triumphs I'm there, quietly smiling, knowing that you feel it too.  The stillness of the lake.  The quietness in the air.  Everything is as it should be.  Even when you feel that you have lost your way there, nobody can ever truly take that from you.  I know, because I watched you go through so much.  And even in the depths of your despair, when you tried so hard to blot out the blazing sun, and cover your ears against the cacophony, there was still something that you believed in so strongly that gave you the courage to persevere through it all.

Don't ever forget that I love you.  I won't leave you.  I'll stay.

Remakes, Pixel Art, Context, Fangames, and seeing things through different lenses

The topics of game remakes, games as an industry, how people consume games, and all of that stuff, have been swirling around recently as I read some posts and writings from some people whose articles I genuinely enjoy (Kayin, Melos Han-Tani, etc).

Kayin had a recent article called "Why Do You Want To Play a Remake?".  We get into these periods of time where sometimes it feels like we have more remakes happening than original games -- certainly for a while it feels we got more sequels than new projects.  I feel like in the popular film industry (I hesitate to say "in film" as that is too reductionist) that probably already happened a while ago; didn't we have a period where we ended up rebooting all the popular series because we felt like no more sequels could be farmed off of them?

Anyways, I don't really have a substantive point to make about all of this, honestly, it's just been a large web of interconnected thoughts that have been mulling about sometimes in the back of my head.  How should we evaluate games?  How important is it that we acknowledge the authorial intent of a game?  How important is it that we play the "original version" of a game?

Every once in a while you see these images pop around showing off how CRTs display old pixel art better, and cries about how when we yap about the "crisp pixel outlines" of our past we're really just victims of a weird sort of mandela effect because when we played these games on CRTs there =weren't= any crisp outlines.

And yet...that's really not the end of the story, is it?  You can't make the same argument for modern pixel art -- that you should play Shovel Knight, Ikenfell, or Owlboy, on a CRT, because of course those games weren't authored that way, were they?  (or even if they took this into account, clearly the developers knew that most audiences would not play on CRTs)

It's not always so simple.  There's nuance to these things.  You can't just develop a one-size-fits-all solution.  Contrary to what I just said above, there =are= people who enjoy playing modern pixel art games (Hyper Light Drifter, The Messenger, ...) on CRTs, or at the very least using CRT filters.  But you can't tell me with a straight face that you'd want to do that for Sword and Sworcery (a game developed specifically for iOS), right?

I'm sure we already went through this same facade and dance when it came to film.  You aren't getting the "true" experience unless you watch in theaters -- no, you need to watch in =IMAX=.  Does your home theater have a surround sound setup?  Did you watch the =director's cut= of the movie?  Because, you know, that's the real deal.  Authorial intent, and all.

We have similar discussions sometimes in music as well.  What is the nature of "chiptune"?  How faithful should you be when recreating a sound chip?  Luckily, music and pixel art are ubiquitous enough that every author simply has their own answer to these questions and we largely move on with our day.  But the questions don't stop there.  Do you stereoize the sound output when you playback Mega Man NES tunes, or keep them in mono?  When you listen to music in your living room do you use your 6-speaker-surround-sound setup?  Or is it important to you to listen using high quality headphones, so you get pristine sound quality?  Don't chiptunes still sound good out of small phone speakers?

When we talk about CRTs and pixel art, sometimes it's easy to forget that an entire series of handheld game consoles used pixel art for their graphics, which were displayed on LCDs.  Yes, even as far back as the Game Boy.

Remember the Game Boy Advance and GBA SP?  Yeah, that used pixel art, too:

Say it with me now, Pixel Art is not "meant to be viewed on CRTs" any more than music is "meant to be listened to live".

Of course, when we analyze and critique games (and, =hopefully=....when we review them), it's important to recognize the context in which they're made.  But it doesn't mean you view the entire piece through that one lens.  A well-rounded critique or analysis should provide multiple viewpoints of the same work, the same way that a well-rounded analysis of a film or story should provide multiple ways to analyze its themes and metaphorical threads.

Sometimes, however, we get into trouble when the people evaluating games (film, art, music) are missing those lenses with which to provide these evaluations.  Even worse, they see the game through their own warped lenses, and then sell you on their perception of it as if you will necessarily see the same thing.

Melos wrote a piece where he notes:

"Something bizarre that people who play games say is that if a game shares even one system from a popular game, then the influenced game is a rip-off or imitator. This makes about as much sense as eating a donut and saying it’s a ripoff of pizza because it uses flour. It doesn’t make any sense and all this line of criticism shows is that someone has a strange fixation on pizza."

Of course, we see this all the time in other forms of media too, so I would hold that it's not unusual (though it certainly still is bizarre, which was the point).  Funnily enough, not only do we see this come into play in ironic ways (this "Earthbound" game is just an Undertale rip-off), but we also see frequent contexts where works are lauded for being "pioneering" even when they are nothing more than a circumstance of "right thing at the right time".  We get people celebrating Squid Game as a "fresh concept" despite it (and the creator) clearly being influenced by several "death game" stories from quite some time ago.  We get Baldur's Gate 3 as "this game where you can make these choices that really influence how the story plays out!  And all these NPCs that you can talk to!" as if that's some weird foreign concept that hasn't existed before.

Which is not to say that these people are ignorant and "how DARE you have opinions on something you're not an expert on".  I don't think that's fair at all, though I do think there are limits on what you should say when you bring your own (necessarily tinted) lens onto the table.  I once got a comment on a track that I produced that essentially said "Cool song, but I don't enjoy it because one of the sounds reminds me of a horror game I once played".  And you can't really invalidate anyone's personal experience of a work, I mean I'm sure we all have at least one or two songs that have been forever ruined for us because we were unfortunate enough to hear it sung or played one-too-many-times from a neighbor or dormmate.

But when we bring these personal experiences onto the table and present them as "reviews" or "critiques" of a game (and we see this a LOT with games, more notably than with other mediums), it's not a great look.

We often also get people who are unwilling to see their own biases toward works, or simply unaware that they remember 90% of the great qualities of a game while simultaneously overlooking everything about it that could make it a terrible experience.  I read some comments about why Baldur's Gate 3 was able to reach mainstream appeal because many cRPGs are too complicated and BG3 was able to ease the barrier of entry.

Honey...you must have played a different game because Baldur's Gate 3 is NOT an intuitive experience.

In addition to figuring out how to control the camera, what all of the billion different actions do, how the hell sneak attack works, what the fuck "camp" means, how to effectively manage your inventory (hint: most people end up just giving up), you also have to keep in mind that this game is based off of 5th edition DnD rules.  You know, this thing:

But the thing is, people are willing to give all of that a pass when they really like something about a game.  And by corollary, people are just as willing to point their finger at all of these things when they just decided (for any reason) that they just don't like a game.

Cryptic NPCs.  Difficult combat.  Not always clear where to go.  Frustrating boss fights.  Am I talking about the much-derided Zelda 2?  Or am I talking about the lauded game, Dark Souls?  The same descriptors apply to both.  You just see those qualities through a different lens.  What was once labeled as "barrier to entry" gets relabeled as "quirks that give a game character".

 

Yes, your favorite Zelda game is Ocarina of Time, but have you ever stopped to think about why it's your favorite?

Melos has another article called "Why Ocarina of Time Can't be Recreated" and he explains how you can feel the design philosophy change from OoT/MM versus later games like TotK/BotW.  How there is an "emotional immediacy" to the spaces and dungeons in Ocarina of Time that is missing from later installments.  While I can't say I understand this comparison (never having played later games, and having stinted interest in OoT despite having finished it aeons ago), there is one thing that I found curiously absent from this article under the heading "What do fans really miss about Ocarina of Time?"

I'm sure that there are certainly a number of fans who resonate with what Melos wrote about, but I'm just as positive that there are a number of people who like Ocarina of Time better than all of the other Zelda games because it was their first 3D Zelda game.  (I'm not going to get into Majora's Mask here, sorry MM fans, I know you exist and I know why but I simply don't have the credentials to speak on it) Hell, there's probably a good number of people who enjoy it most because it was their first Zelda game period.

And when you think back on an experience that made you go "wow, this game just blew my mind and it felt like anything was possible when I was playing it", that's just not something that a different Zelda game can really live up to.  Even if you got something that was "another Ocarina of Time", it wouldn't make you feel the same thing because it wouldn't be your first (3D) Zelda game.

And that's a fine emotional viewpoint to have, but it's also important for us to =recognize= that about ourselves -- to understand that our lens is colored in this way.  Otherwise we're no better than a serial dater who can't ever seem to capture "that magic" that they felt when they first fell in love.  We can't just keep comparing everything to the subjective experiences that we had because of our own personal circumstances.  It's not fair.

You're free to chase after nostalgia (as long as you think about why you want to).  You're free to love the Silent Hill 2 Remake, or hate that it exists.  There's nothing wrong with enjoying things in your own way, or even liking flawed works.  Not everything we consume has to live up to some arbitrary standard.  But as we do so we should be realistic about our own experiences and how utterly non-universal they may be.

...which brings me to that Link to the Past fangame that I played a while ago:

I was looking for a post where I wrote about this game here but apparently I didn't.  Where do I even start here...?  There's too much.

I think Kayin had the right idea (not sure, maybe the thread is gone) about critiquing the game in that "it's a roguelike but doesn't understand why".  That's potentially a little unfair because I get the notion that this is a roguelike because "person just thought 'Hey, Zelda + roguelike sounds cool'", but to Kayin's point, that doesn't make for objectively good game design.

You can definitely see the game wearing its influences sort of on its sleeve here as opposed to being a culmination of clean and well-thought out design.  Now, not every game needs to be Celeste (probably the #1 game I use for an example of "clean" and good design), and some games can be really fun just because they decide "to hell with it" and just make crazy decisions for shits and giggles.  I'm struggling to think of great games that take this approach at the moment (Broforce?), but I'm sure I've played some.

With Zelda: Dungeons of Infinity, though, you kind of get something that dips its toes into being like part zelda-ish hack-and-slash, part rogue-like with procedural generation and random drops, but then there's also this weird interlude halfway through the game where you get to the "town" and then there's like a billion different things to do there.

And like, I'm not saying these things can't work, but in this case I feel like the game just kinda half does all of these things and as a result there's not really a compelling experience in any of the different parts.  Because the dungeons are procedurally-generated (why?), there's no Zelda-like cohesion to the dungeon layout and no "puzzles" to solve.  I use the word "puzzles" loosely because even in the absence of puzzles to "solve", you can still have a game that requires some dynamic and engaging thinking to play (ref: Super Metroid Map Randomizer, ALTTPR).  The roguelike item drops don't offer any of the "juicy" moments of a lot of roguelike games -- trying to form an "item build", looking for synergies, finding out a playstyle that works for you.  The combat is like....a workable system, but rather one-note.  Even worse, the enemies rarely drop any loot at all, so you're incentivized to avoid combat and the number one thing that can kill you is actually a lack of patience.  And then you get to the end boss and all of your items are taken away -- so much for the roguelike elements.  I think this is probably overrated in terms of how feel-bad it should be, but =anything= that's a feel-bad for players is usually something to be wary of (this is why I allow attack-spamming in Rhythm Quest -- learned that lesson already from Melody Muncher).

And then there's this whole town area that clearly a lot of love and work was put into, but of course, if you're playing this game because you want hack and slash action, you get there and it's going to seem like a chore because it was never part of the main experience that you were looking for. 

Two of the most common complaints that this game gets are that diagonal movement is too fast (because movement on each axis operates independently), and that you should be able to hold out your sword or sword spin.

And this is where things get icky, because yes, this is where this game connects to everything else I said above about viewing things through a certain lens.  While you can argue that diagonal movement should be normalized because it just "seems" more natural, I've played plenty of games where nobody ever seemed to bat an eye.  Ever heard of this little game called Undertale?  Movement is independent on both axes not only for overworld movement in Undertale, but also for movement in the "bullet dodging" action encounters.  TVTropes has a whole list of other games that exhibit this type of movement.

I acclimated to the game's movement after no time at all because I knew this game wasn't trying to be A Link to the Past.  Why would I assume that it would have the same physics engine?  And yet, this sort of "uncanny valley" is an issue that people have.  They can't seem to see things outside of the lens of games that they've already played.

But...counterpoint -- why should they?  If you're going to make a game with ALTTP assets, shouldn't it conform to some expectations that people may have going in?  If you're going to make a ladder in a game, shouldn't you be able to climb it?

The spin slash suggestion I actually find to be egregious because it would make the already-boring combat system way, way more of a snooze-fest.  At least at present, there is some degree of spacing required, but if you implemented an ALTTP-style spin slash into the game, the ideal strategy would just be to back off, charge your spin (which, remember, you're completely invincible while doing, and it does 2x damage!), and then release a spin, then repeat.  Slow, safe, and boooooringggggg.  To the creator's credit, it seems like they have not implemented either of these common suggestions as of this writing, though I can't pretend like there aren't a thousand other possible reasons for that.

You see, ALTTP gets away with the spin slash because not only is combat not a focal point of the game, but there's also no permadeath element and health refills are plentiful.  You aren't incentivized to take the safest approach to combat in ALTTP (unless you get into a dire situation, or are playing ALTTPR and don't happen to have a lot of health on hand, in which case there's also a natural time pressure element), so it works.

This fangame is this weird microcosm of conflict because it mixes up all the things I called out in the rest of this blog post into a big mess where nobody is right.  Honestly, thinking about it just illustrates the absurdity of trying to argue about what a game "should" be.  Are the players wrong for wanting the game's physics to exactly match what they're used to?  Is it a travesty that the lighting in the game doesn't conform to the pixel grid at all?  Is it really the creator's fault when all they wanted to do was make a cool project, not necessarily a well-designed game?

I don't think we ought to say what "should" or "shouldn't" be.  The measure that we should be striving toward is a fuller understanding of different possible viewpoints for a given piece.  When you try to evaluate someone's work, maybe your job isn't to convince everyone to see things from your own perspective -- maybe it's to provide a variety of possible perspectives that people could have, and explain the context behind each one.  And if you don't understand a given viewpoint, maybe there is something that you could learn there.  Yeah, it's true that Squid Game wasn't really a new concept, but why is it that people who never paid attention to Battle Royale, etc paid attention to this one?  If you (like me) don't believe that Baldur's Gate 3 caught on due to being an easy-to-get into, unique experience, why =did= it catch on?

We can go further beyond "Super Metroid is a classic and it's the best".  We can try to understand what about it ages so well (Show not tell.  Memorable environments and set pieces.  Structured map design that strikes a balance between area uniqueness and "hub-spoke" patterns) while at the same time understanding what might turn people off of it if they've never played it before (Somewhat clunky controls at times.  Occasional stumbling blocks / "stuck" moments.  etc.)  We can tell people not just that it's our favorite game, but WHY it's our favorite game.

And if you're =truly= introspective about it, the reason you liked Super Metroid better than Metroid Dread might not actually be "I love that you can sequence break in these old games", because how many of you actually did that in your first playthrough?  And what WAS it about your first playthrough that made you play the game again?

Yes, for some people, it's going to be a sense of wonder about the world of Zebes, or the fact that you felt a sense of "wide open exploration" even when you were being subtly guided by the game's hand.  Maybe it's something poetic about the loneliness of being a bounty hunter in a strange planet, something something about the sense of freedom and power you felt once you had the combo of space jump and screw attack.  But for other people it's going to be "because I didn't have anything better to do with my time and it was 1996.  As a kid I didn't have a ton of choices".  Or maybe you just simply saw someone speedrun the game in 2022 and you said "I wanna be like that".

And that's okay.