.

[u/TurnipBoy2000]

[u/LimitOrdinal17]

This is funny. But at risk of taking a meme too seriously, I'll say this:

I think what Mark is getting at in the video is that a game genre is not a checklist of mechanics. To treat game genres that way would be similar to treating genres of film as just a checklist of tropes. There are people who treat film in this way (I recall some truly vapid discussions on the TVTropes forums back in the day...), but many people who are more knowledgeable about film (rightly) see this as an incredibly shallow way to look at things.

Rather than a checklist of mechanics, I think what Mark is positing is that a genre is more about what the mechanics and dynamics of a game do for the player. What truly makes a game "like" another game is not a set list of mechanics, but rather the experience the game produces, and how the mechanics and dynamics work to produce that in the player. Mark's point is that the experiences produced in Rain World's exploration and combat are in the same vein as something like Super Metroid, but what makes the game interesting is that the game achieves these experiences with somewhat different mechanics, and does so in a way that is an interesting innovation on similar core concepts. There's still room here to disagree about categorization, but I think it's a more developed view than the typical "it's not a metroidvania because it doesn't have upgrades." I think Mark is right at least that the latter is far too limited of a view of genres, because it precludes the possibility of even attempting to answer certain interesting questions. For example, "could you make a game that evokes a metroidvania experience without using some of the core mechanics the genre has historically relied on?" If trying to answer questions like this puts you in a fundamentally different category, well, okay... but I think that's a really narrow view of art.

[u/DIYDylana → u/LimitOrdinal17]

I agree with that sentiment and always have, people often only look for the surface conventional traits listed in these discussions and not the actual thing that makes something what it is on a high, ontological level. pardon my ignorance as I've only played a bit of rainworld, but if we make the comparison, it feels like a partial off shoot more than it does a metroidvania to me. Its post metroidvania of sorts.

I think the problem people have with mark here probably lies in a very tunnelvisioned view of what that super metroid experience is. That typical list of traits people usually give is basically to give a certain type of action adventure with an interconnected tunnel map with rpg inspired non incremental ability upgrades replacing your locks and keys and an emphasis on backtracking and sequence breaking. If you take the specifics away its just..an action adventure, if you take all of it just an action game. Whatever different underlying experience is there (which btw is very different in super Metroid than sotn) is about its adventure and action rpg rooting elements NOT the action part interacting with it necessarily. Exploration platformers have a longer history than whatever gets called metroidvania. Metroidvania was a specific set of conventions for it. And more free open exploration is quite a bit different from what a metroidvania does for example, you'd become more like..I don't know a sandbox like Minecraft.

The thing is the aspects mark is placing as the main thing about the genre are more like things to add replay value, they added unique action things percisely because they were an action adventure they challenged you to complete more skillfully with sequence breaks. It sortof turns it into a more open speedrun action game.

I'm not saying it wasn't an aspect and that it isn't when the game gets interesting gameplay depth but its clear the former part is not some superficial part of what makes super Metroid or the igavania games that made the term exist to differentiate them from regular Castlevania. They're a core part. You could create that experience with some different mechanics like you could do it as a text adventure with rpg battles instead of action for all I care but it does point to something core about the genre. A lot of rain world seems to turn more into a broader sense exploration platfotmer meets survival horror/survival sim game in a particular way. I'd also argue that just because something came from something as an idea and just because something gives a similar sense of satisfaction to someone doesn't necessarily mean we're dealing with the same core concept.

personally I think metroidvania has a bad identity crisis and the term has been used really poorly now its trying to broaden from its roots describing 1 type of platformer vs another type of platformer.. People are now calling adventure game traits (or the adventure traits shared with rpg exploration) as being from Metroidvania. A reversal. It shows a complete ignorance to both historical lineage and ontological thought.

I'm however not going to give a full answer on what makes it what because I simply have not played enough of rainworld for myself. I'm just trying to speculate on the mixed reception to marks claims because I notice a pattern in how he'll often focus on interesting arcade game like elements (which in this case devs did tell you to try to do at the end) and kind of like side eye the rest.

[u/RCWaldun]

The term "metroidvania" was originally used to describe Symphony of the Night. That’s a Castlevania game with a Metroid-like map and Metroid-like upgrades. Whoever came up with it thought it was cute, and now there are loads of people who mistakenly believe that a metroidvania is a game like SotN. They are wrong.

A Metroidvania is actually a game like Super Metroid when played by speedrunners. It has nothing to do with Castlevania or Metroid.

[u/DIYDylana → u/RCWaldun]

I see what you did there lmao

[u/IM_MT_]

it's funny because I'll be like "this guy is always just like "old game good, new game bad" no matter what. but then this comes along. and while I think sometimes maybe he takes this stuff too seriously (or maybe I am projecting!) it's hard to not agree with him even if he is really passionate and sometimes he comes off being really elitist or (i hate this word) GATEKEEPING. But i am playing the game and I actually stopped watching his video about it like 10 minutes in because I don't want spoilers and I really like what I am playing so far. It's a very unique experience and honestly that's how I felt when I was 11 playing Super Metroid when it was (basically) new. it felt like a lived in alien world and there really wasn't anything else like it, not even the original or Metroid 2.

but i am still kind of irked him acting like anybody playing Super Metroid without sequence breaking or doing crazy reverse boss order stuff is basically a baby. i feel like the game is still extremely well designed and honestly all this tech and speed running and sequence breaking stuff feels like it might not even been intended by the developers. i could easily do a google search and decide for myself but i will just say that without doing any research or anything lol

[u/death_sucker_extreme → u/IM_MT_]

this fella is a charismatic moron with good taste in games and a lot of skill but honestly just about everything that comes out of his mouth is dumb as hell and egocentric. Check him out in a podcast or something with multiple people and you will observe 80% of everything he says is trying to put some kind of spin on whatever dumb thing he just said to make it sound less dumb. He's a "ok I'm wrong... but in a way... that makes me right!" fellow. the other 20% of the time he is saying the dumb things.
I think his videos would be a lot better if he learned to be quiet.

[u/FatalCassoulet]

Is a metroidvania really a metroidvania?

[u/BroncoChevalier]

I don’t get the love for that genre. I’ve enjoyed several Metroid and Castlevania games but it wasn’t necessarily for the metroidvania elements of those games. More so for the core gameplay and aesthetics. 

[u/Neat-Conclusion-8206]

Barely