Deathmatch: Super Metroid (SNES) vs. Castlevania: Symphony of the Night (PSX/360/PSP)

There are many genres of gaming that I really love. In fact, I don’t think there’s one that I really dislike. But of them all, one that’s near and dear to my heart is the “Metroidvania” game. This is a game that focuses mainly on exploration, giving you an open map, and power-ups that are used to advance to previously inaccessible areas. It’s named after the two games that we’re comparing today: “Super Metroid”, and “Castlevania: Symphony of the Night”. Both of these games helped pioneer the genre, and are incredibly similar. They do have a few differences though; after all, that’s the entire point of this article. So let’s get down to the nitty-gritty: which is truly better? Let’s find out.


Obviously, there are spoilers for both games below. If you haven’t played these games yet (and I highly recommend you do), stop reading and do so first.



ROUND ONE: STORY
The story of “Super Metroid” is a simple one: after the events of “Metroid II”, Samus recieves a distress signal from the Ceres Space Colony, where she had previously donated a baby Metroid. Upon arriving, she finds the place in ruins, and just as she sees the baby, it is stolen by her arch-nemesis Ridley. Samus follows Ridley back to Planet Zebes, where she finds that the Space Pirates have recovered from Samus’s previous assault on Zebes.

After much exploration, she finds the baby, but this time he’s grown to an enormous size, and he nearly kills Samus before realizing who he’s attacking, after which he flees. Later, Samus encounters the final boss, Mother Brain, who also nearly kills her, until the baby shows up to drain Mother Brain’s health. After draining Mother Brain and healing Samus (Metroids can do that, apparently), Brain gives the baby the old lethal laser beam, and the baby dies. Having been given the last of the baby’s strength, Samus easily kills Brain and escapes Zebes mere minutes before the planet explodes. The galaxy is at peace. The end.

The story of “Symphony of the Night” is more complex. The actual game picks up a few months after “Rondo of Blood”: Richter Belmont has disappeared mysteriously, and when Maria starts to look for him, Dracula’s Castle inexplicably shows up as if to show the way.

Meanwhile, our hero, Alucard (Dracula’s son), decides that there’s no better time to give his dad a good “F*** you” than now, and storms the place. Just as soon as he enters, though, the Grim Reaper shows up and takes away all of his gear, leaving Alucard in an awkward, “Samus at the beginning of every Metroid game” scenario. After getting better equipment and meeting with Maria a few times, he finds Richter working for the bad guys. Depending on how you choose to go about things, Alucard either kills Richter, or frees him from his mind-controlling curse. If you choose to free him, a dark priest named Shaft clears the way for another variation of the castle (this time upside-down), which Alucard also explores. He soon not only meets with the Reaper to get all his stuff back, but also finally encounters both Shaft and Dracula, and they have a final duel to the death.

The story of “Super Metroid” is very simple and basic, but the story of “Symphony” is far more complex, and has themes such as that of the nature of mankind. So I have to give the nod to “Symphony” for this round.


WINNER: SYMPHONY OF THE NIGHT

ROUND 2: PRESENTATION
By presentation, of course, I mean graphics, art direction, and sound.
The presentation of “Super Metroid” is far darker than that of “Symphony”. Instead of a medieval castle, the game takes place on a desolate, mostly isolated planet. Samus is pretty much the only real character, and the game definitely has a sense of isolation and loneliness. The soundtrack adds to this feeling, adding further to the creepiness of the world of Zebes.
The presentation of “Symphony”, however, is much more lively. The setting of a castle allows for much more frivolous environments, characters, and music. Unlike “Super Metroid”, which had darker environments like ruins and caverns, “Symphony” has more areas like libraries, galleries, laboratories, and even a chapel. There were more memorable characters in “Symphony”, too; I’ll never forget the shopkeeper in the library. The areas were more colorful as well. The enemies were quite varied, and looked cooler than the ones in “Super Metroid”. Given the choice between generic-looking aliens and monsters like demons, skeletons, and witches, I think we all know what we would choose. And the music, like any “Castlevania”, is awesome and catchy as hell. Who doesn’t love “Bloody Tears”?
Having read this, it’s obvious who’s going to take this round.


WINNER: SYMPHONY OF THE NIGHT

ROUND 3: CONTROLS
I’m not a huge fan of nitpicking on control schemes, based on the fact that I can get used to pretty much any control scheme, no matter how clunky. Nevertheless, these two games control very differently.
In “Super Metroid”, Samus can aim her arm cannon in any direction. She can crouch, go into her Morph Ball, shoot missiles, lay bombs, wall-jump, and even “Shinespark”. (Look it up. It’s awesome.) The SNES controller makes doing all this very easy and natural, and the controls feel perfect, no matter how familiar you are with the series, or the controller.
The controls in “Symphony” are excellent as well, but I have several complaints. First of all, I dislike having to constantly go into the menu screen whenever I want to heal. In “Metroid”, health power-ups just naturally appear whenever an enemy dies. But in “Symphony”, you have to unequip either your sword or your shield, replace it with whatever your healing item is, exit the menu, heal, and then re-equip your sword or shield. That, in my opinion, was a disaster.
Also, Alucard’s sword is difficult to aim at low enemies. Using sub-weapons, while not uncomfortable by any means, is unconventional.
“Super Metroid” takes this round.

WINNER: SUPER METROID



ROUND 4: THE GAME WORLDS
I’ve already lauded the environments of “Symphony” as being graphically and artistically better than those of “Super Metroid”, but aesthetics are never everything.
Both Planet Zebes and Dracula’s Castle are huge game worlds, there’s no denying that. However, when you compare the two side-by-side, there’s no denying that compared to the castle, Zebes is absolutely huge. The size of the world in “Super Metroid” is absolutely humongous. Brinstar, Norfair, and Maridia, when combined, could easily match the size of Dracula’s entire castle. And that’s just half of Zebes.
And then you have the Inverted Castle. Sure, it increases the size of the world of “Symphony”, but it just feels like the developers got lazy. All it is is an upside-down version of Dracula’s Castle.
Bottom line: there’s simply more to do and more to explore in “Super Metroid”. While the world of “Symphony” looks and sounds amazing, in actuality Planet Zebes is much more varied.


WINNER: SUPER METROID

FINAL ROUND: GAMEPLAY
And here we arrive at the most important aspect of any video game: gameplay. The deciding factor in any gaming grudge-match.
The gameplay in “Symphony” is far more complex than that of “Super Metroid”. It borrows a lot from not only “Metroid”, but also from a lot of JRPGs. You have experience points, armor upgrades, a shop, and magic. Hell, if not for the glaring similarities to the “Metroid” franchise, I would’ve mistaken it for yet another action-RPG.
But does this system work well for a Metroidvania style game? Not necessarily. I mean, it works well, but I believe that for this genre of this depth, an RPG-style system only makes it more confusing.
Also, as I previously mentioned, Alucard’s sword(s) are not as fun to use as Samus’s arm cannon. The ability to easily aim, as well as easily hit targets at a distance, is immensely more satisfying than swiping at a nearby enemy.
Another thing to point out: even though “Symphony” tells a better story, and has a better artistic direction, the presentation and story of “Metroid” ties together with the gameplay a bit better. That sense of isolation and loneliness really helps improve the already stellar atmosphere, which in turn helps improve the gameplay.
Just to reiterate: “Castlevania: Symphony of the Night” is a brilliant and amazing game, and is easily my favorite in the “Castlevania” series. But what “Symphony” does really well, “Super Metroid” does far, far better. The gameplay round goes the “Super Metroid”, the superior game.



WINNER: SUPER METROID

Classic Movie Review: A Clockwork Orange

       This is a very interesting movie. It's a classic, to be sure, but it's also very hard to watch. It's about a kid who loves the ultra-violence, rape, and of course, the Ludwig Von. It's a film about justice, free will, and torture. It's story asks a lot of questions that you're left to ponder once the movie is over.
       The movie centers on Alex DeLarge, a teenage boy who loves drinking drugged milk, listening to Beethoven, and participating in ultra-violent acts with his friends, including rape and murder. After finally getting caught by the cops, he is submitted into an experimental treatment, where he is given pain-inducing drugs while being forced to watch violent and sexual films, thus associating violent and sexual acts with pain. He is released a few weeks later an upright citizen, where he becomes an outlet for the anger of the other "civilized" people that he had wronged in the past. He is eventually tipped over the edge, and attempts suicide, after which he is sent to a hospital where he is "uncured", and he becomes violent again.
       If it sounds complex, it's because it is. As I said, it leaves a lot of questions. Is it better for the government to rob people of their own free will for the sake of safety and security? Did Alex really deserve all of the hatred and rage that his victims inflicted upon him? And is Alex's savagery truly that different from our own?
       I also said that it's really hard to watch. In the beginning of the film, you see some of Alex's acts of violence, some of which are truly brutal. At one point, you watch him gag and rape a young woman whilst singing "Singin' in the Rain". He truly knows no bounds.
       "A Clockwork Orange" is an amazing film. Brutal, and philosophical, but amazing.

Rating: ****

Classic Game Review: Chrono Trigger (SNES/PSX/DS)

       Last week, I posted a less than enthusiastic review of "The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time", stating that I didn't care for it that much and that nostalgia was the only thing keeping it alive. If there were a word to describe it, "timeless" would not be it. However, that word describes "Chrono Trigger" quite well. A timeless game is one you can experience any time, one that ages really, really well, and one that I could recommend to anyone today, regardless of how old it is. "Pac-Man", "Donkey Kong", and "Paper Mario" come to mind (although that last one might be more nostalgia talking). And "Chrono Trigger" fits the bill just as well.
       When I was surfing the Wii Shop Channel to download "Final Fantasy VI", I noticed another game, this one, that I was meaning to try out for a while. After finishing the grand epic that was "Final Fantasy VI", I decided to give "Chrono" a spin. I had never played it before, and after finishing it for the first time, I can safely say that I thoroughly enjoyed it and can recommend it to any video game fan, young or old.
       The aesthetic, designed in part by "Dragon Ball Z" artist Akira Toriyama, fits the game perfectly. The story involves a young man, aptly named Crono, who, along with two of his friends, are sent back in time, and forward in time, and everywhere in between. They find themselves in prehistoric times, medieval times, and even in the far-flung, post-apocalyptic, Terminator-ridden future. The multitude of settings expands the game's world very well. The story was nowhere near as good as "Final Fantasy VI", but then again, that game's story is one of the best told in the gaming medium. The story of "Chrono" works well enough for the job.
       The game's battle system is pulled straight from the "Final Fantasy" series, but that's not really a bad thing, because the system works really well. In fact, much of the gameplay is identical to "Final Fantasy", with very few exceptions. For example, there's no more random encounters. That's a huge win in my book.
       I do have to nitpick at a few small issues, though. Battles initiate like they do in "Paper Mario", in that they start as soon as you touch an enemy. However, the battle menus can get in the way of the enemies, making it hard or even impossible to see the enemy or how much damage you're doing to it. Also, later in the game, some important items become prohibitively expensive, adding significantly to the games challenge. And the dual- and triple-techs, as cool as they look, and as strong as they are, often throw strategy out the window in favor of using brute force. But these are just small problems that I can easily overlook.
       Unlike "Ocarina of Time", I can recommend this game today, to any gamer, of any age. For a sixteen-year-old game to hold up this well for that long is an incredible achievement. This game is truly timeless.

Rating: ****

Classic Game Review: The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time (N64/3DS)

       I'm going to be brutally honest in this review. Whenever discussions with fellow gamers shift to "Ocarina", I always get uncomfortable. They laud this game as "the best game of all time". They talk about it's genius gameplay, it's wonderful characters and story, and of course, it's many memorable moments. But, to be honest, past and future Zeldas have done it far, far better.
       That's right, I never cared much for "Ocarina of Time". It was okay. Passable. Satisfactory. But definitely not "best of all time" material.
       You have to understand, though, that I never had "Ocarina" back in the N64 days. I was too busy having fun with games like "Paper Mario", "Super Smash Bros.", and "Super Mario 64". The GameCube rolled around soon after, and I was engrossed in games like "Metroid Prime", "Super Mario Sunshine", and "Wind Waker". I hadn't gotten around to "Ocarina" until after I had beaten all of those games, and by then it felt bland and uninspired. Not bad, by any means, but not great.
       I had loved other Zelda games. "Majora's Mask" was fantastic. "Wind Waker" was phenomenal. "Link to the Past" was amazing. "Ocarina of Time" was just okay.
       Maybe the reason I don't care for it so much is that it's way past it's prime. The only quality backing it up now is nostalgia. I never played it back when it was considered "new" and "refreshing", adjectives that simply don't apply to it now. It feels outdated. The story is cliche by now. The controls feel a little clunky without an N64 controller, which is a pretty funky controller to begin with. The characters are uninspired and don't have much personality. And the whole time travel schtick is far too similar to other Zelda games that execute the "dual worlds" concept far better.
       If you grew up with this game, I'm not saying you should drop it and move on. I'm just saying that I never got into this game, and if you've never played it before, perhaps you can let it pass.

Rating: ** 1/2
     

Movie Review: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part 2

       What a journey it's been. Ten years ago, the first Harry Potter film entered the cinema, and blew me and my childhood friends away. Almost every year since, Harry matured as we did. There have been twists and turns, and we are finally at the end, what I consider to be the best movie in the series.
       The local theater was jam-packed with avid, die-hard witches and wizards, all ready to give Harry and the gang a fond farewell. I went to a double feature showing, where they showed both Part 1 and Part 2 at once, which is how I think the films should be viewed. I wouldn't consider them separate, standalone films at all; neither is complete without the other. If you missed out on Part 1, you will be left completely in the dark if you go see Part 2. They tie each other together like the Lord of the Rings trilogy, which I think was a wonderful decision.
       But this is about the second half of the story, and it is a wonderful send-off to the boy who lived. Characters both new and old make appearances, and nods and references to older Potter movies abound. This is a movie for the fans, and it shows. The dedication that they gave to the film is amazing.
       The actors themselves give excellent performances. In particular, Ralph Fiennes plays a chilling Voldemort, alive with anger and evil. Alan Rickman's performance as double agent Severus Snape is just as well-done. Of course, our leading characters put up brilliant performances as Harry, Ron, and Hermione. Even the supporting characters are well acted; Neville Longbottom, for example, has grown from a cowardly little dork to a brave warrior worthy of battle.
       For those of you who have not yet read the book, I'll dare not spoil anything. The plot will leave you on the edge of your seat until the very emotionally-satisfying conclusion.
       For Harry, this is the adventure to end all adventures; the end of an era, really. As a kid who read and watched Harry Potter almost religiously, I simply must recommend this movie to anyone who grew up at Hogwarts. It surpasses all other Potter movies, and is truly a classic among classics.

Rating: *****

NOTE: Although Part 1 was in 2-D, the theater gave us these neat little 3-D glasses shaped just like Harry's, for Part 2. The movie isn't worse with the 3-D, but it isn't really much better either. I'd say just save your cash and see it in 2-D; the movie is dark enough as it is.

Classic Game Review: Final Fantasy VI (SNES/PSX/GBA)

       So I'm going to tell another story, since I know you all love them so much. Unlike others, though, this took place rather recently.
       Wanting to get caught up in the whole Final Fantasy phenomena that was building during the release of "Final Fantasy XIII", I asked a friend, who was a FF fanatic, what would be a good starting point in the series. I already knew a bit about the series, like how each installment was a separate story from the other games, etc. So my friend recommended that I just walk into Gamestop and pick up the first Final Fantasy game I see, so I walked in, and boom: "Final Fantasy III" for the DS. I picked it up, payed for it, and after I got home to play it, the game proceeded to kick my ass relentlessly. It definitely wasn't a good experience, so I decided to say "F*** it" to the series and move on.
       Many months pass, and the friend tells me that there's a new Final Fantasy on the Virtual Console that I just have to try, just to give the series another chance. Feeling forgiving, I hopped on the Wii Shop Channel to see none other than... "Final Fantasy III". Confused, I talked to my friend later to ask why he had recommended the very same game that I disliked a couple years ago. He explained the whole 16-bit renaming fiasco that had went on in the early 90's, and told me that it was in fact, "Final Fantasy VI". So I sucked it up and spent the 800 Wii Points, and guess what?
       I loved every single minute of it.
       It was almost like a cross between Pokemon, Lord of the Rings, Mass Effect, and Miyazaki's "Howl's Moving Castle". I don't think I need to explain the story or premise at all, and if you don't know, well, that's what Google is for. The story, without spoiling it, is grand, epic, twisting, sad, funny, and very dramatic. I really found myself attached to these small sprites of characters. Kefka, in particular, steals the show as the villainous Imperial general, and he may well be one of the greatest villains in all of gaming, if not any medium.
       The gameplay was good too, but it did have a few flaws. The Active Time Battle system is a genius concept that certainly felt fresh in the eyes of a guy who was only used to the simple turn based systems of games like "Paper Mario" and the Pokemon series. But if there was one thing that was a constant thorn in my side, it was the random encounters. It's like every single square inch on the map (with the exception of towns) is filled with Zubats. Granted, the monsters looked really cool, but seeing them over and over was kind of a pain.
       Not a huge complaint by any means, but the second half of the game felt very open compared to the first. The change felt kind of sudden, almost as if I had switched from a simple, laid-down path to a Metroid game. The circumstances behind the change are understandable, but it was just a bit sudden.
       Still, this is one of the best RPGs ever. I really enjoyed it, and I can't wait to try some of the rest of the series.
       "Final Fantasy IV" is next, if you're wondering.

Rating: **** 1/2

Classic Movie Review: The Big Lebowski

       I have judged that it is physically impossible to even speak of this movie without relentlessly quoting it. I would even go so far as to call it one of the most quotable movies ever made, right up there with "Ghostbusters" and "Life of Brian". Ten years after it's release, it's become a comedic masterpiece.
       For those of you who've never seen the movie before, it's actually kind of difficult to describe. Essentially, the story focuses on Jeff Lebowski, who prefers his handle, "The Dude". He's a pretty lax kind of guy: single, unemployed, and usually either high on marijuana, or drunk. Or both.
       The movie begins with a couple of thugs busting into his apartment and pissing all over his rug. Unhappy about what happened to this rug, which really tied the room together, he learns that he was mistaken for the local millionaire, also named Jeff Lebowski, who goes by the titular name of "The Big Lebowski". Sooner or later he gets entangled in a kidnapping case that involved Big Lebowski's wife, Bunny. I'll stop explaining there because I don't want to spoil the multitude of jokes and quotes.
       Seriously, I'll stop typing right here, because if you've never seen the movie before, I don't want to spoil any of the jokes. And, as I've said, it's impossible to talk about this movie without quoting it constantly. I even referenced a big line in the paragraph above. Just watch it, I guarantee that you'll find it funny. And if you talk to someone about it, make sure they've seen the movie first. Or else you might ruin it.

Rating: **** 1/2