By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - What makes Shadow of the Colossus so special?

Tagged games:

 

How much do you like SotC?

5/5 Best game ever 20 43.48%
 
4/5 Top 100 games of all time 19 41.30%
 
3/5 Really good game 1 2.17%
 
2/5 Quite average 4 8.70%
 
1/5 A bit annoying 1 2.17%
 
0/5 Total failure 1 2.17%
 
Total:46
SvennoJ said:

What makes it so special is how it makes me feel. The landscape feels realistic, vast, serene, empty, wide open, a place to explore, not to check off to do list items. No quest marker or way point compass, simply hold your sword up and a beam of light will vaguely point in the right direction. The few things you do find on the way become special.

The isolation and sense of scale really comes into perspective when you happen onto one of the Colossi. Each one fits perfectly in its part of the landscape and is its own puzzle to figure out. The landscape and the Colossus are part of each other and soon you start feeling a sense of guilt for disturbing the peace for your own selfish gain.

Yet on to the next and so forth, until you wonder at the end if the end justified the means or if you've actually turned into the bad guy. Yet the rush of meeting each new Colossus is unlike any other boss encounter. The first time getting picked up high in the air, or under water, or found out in your little hiding spot underground, it's all unique and memorable.

SotC is a wonderful deviation from the usual, find something every 10 steps and have a dozen objectives going at once. It's not a min max game, it's not about loot or upgrades, it's just you wondering what you are doing literally and figuratively. No other open world game has this feeling. One quest, no distractions, no repeat boss fights. You actually can upgrade your most important ability, grip duration and also your health (less important). It's all you need, minimalistic game design for maximum effect.

This post nails it. Its basically what I wanted to say.

I wish I can turn back time to 2007 and experience the game for the first time again. It was truly breathtaking. 

This makes me want to boot up my ps2 to play the game again.



Bet with Intrinsic:

The Switch will outsell 3DS (based on VGchartz numbers), according to me, while Intrinsic thinks the opposite will hold true. One month avatar control for the loser's avatar.

Around the Network

I tried to play it on PSNow and its virtually unplayable because of the controls.  As they didnt change that in the remake I will be passing.



Marth said:

So hey,

I have a topic regarding SotC. Pretty much the title but I want to give more information.

I was never owner of a Playstation. I have played a few games when I visited friends but mostly grew up with Nintendo.

So there were quite a lot of games I never layed hands on and SotC is one of them.

But it gets so much hype. I have seen many people here, on reddit and on my twitter praising the game to the heavens and celebrating another remaster of it.

So... why?

What I have seen of this game so far was a lot of empty landscapes that you traverse with a horse to kill a few bosses.

Is that the whole game or is there something i am missing? Or something i dont understand?

I am curious to know what you guys love so much about this game when it seems pretty shallow to me.

I think this is where a lot of people tilt their heads and look at you funny.  You've said you are a Nintendo fan so I can't imagine shallow being a problem for you to begin with.

Some games are about more than simply hitting stuff or jumping over stuff.  They are about the atmosphere and the emotional experience.  They are about establishing empathy with the character you're playing and understanding their struggle.  Some people don't want or get that from games, which is totally fine.  They just want to turn their brains off and press the right buttons at the right moments.  There are tons of games like that so no problem.

Some people want more, though, or at least a range of experiences.  They're looking for a degree of depth, something that can provoke and engage their imagination as well as their motor skills.  Something they can care about, that they can think about beyond wondering how to beat the next puzzle.

Personally, I've played enough games with shallow characters following a hollow shell of a story to last me a lifetime.  If that was all gaming offered me then I'd probably stop caring about it the way I did during the SNES era.  I need games that try to go outside those bounds and I think it's clear a lot of other people want that as well.  

I'm also well aware that there will be people who try to belittle what they don't understand.  That's okay, though, as what they don't realize is that doing so will only reflect back on them and make them look shallow and petty in comparison.



Kind of off-topic but I actually want to play that game too some day, so I'm kind of interested in people's responses as well. If only to satisfy curiosity about the game. However, I don't have a PS2 and the game's kind of rare. I don't really want one of the remasters, because I believe a first experience should always be with the original to see it as it was meant to be played. I don't mind a remaster of a good game I already played before obviously.



RolStoppable said:

It was branded as art from the get-go, so everybody had to like it regardless of its shoddy controls and framerate. Naturally, its improved re-releases had to be admired as well.

My favorite anecdote concerns a German video game magazine that gave the original release a rather generous score (77/100) despite the reviewers not being convinced that they were playing a good game, then years later they elevated SotC to one of the most important releases of the decade, likely due to peer pressure and a desire to fit in with everyone else.

If you are looking for games as art, then maybe this is something you'll like. The same holds true for everything else that is commonly said to be art.

EDIT: Added paragraphs. Quick Reply still not fixed.

So, considering that the peer pressure existed several years later, hence millions liked it, it was one of the most important releases of the decade? I mean you are kind-off saying it was one of the most important games of the decade yet you try to make it sound overrated in pretty much every discussion that this game appears in.



Vote the Mayor for Mayor!

Around the Network
CGI-Quality said:
pokoko said:

I think this is where a lot of people tilt their heads and look at you funny.  You've said you are a Nintendo fan so I can't imagine shallow being a problem for you to begin with.

Some games are about more than simply hitting stuff or jumping over stuff.  They are about the atmosphere and the emotional experience.  They are about establishing empathy with the character you're playing and understanding their struggle.  Some people don't want or get that from games, which is totally fine.  They just want to turn their brains off and press the right buttons at the right moments.  There are tons of games like that so no problem.

Some people want more, though, or at least a range of experiences.  They're looking for a degree of depth, something that can provoke and engage their imagination as well as their motor skills.  Something they can care about, that they can think about beyond wondering how to beat the next puzzle.

Personally, I've played enough games with shallow characters following a hollow shell of a story to last me a lifetime.  If that was all gaming offered me then I'd probably stop caring about it the way I did during the SNES era.  I need games that try to go outside those bounds and I think it's clear a lot of other people want that as well.  

I'm also well aware that there will be people who try to belittle what they don't understand.  That's okay, though, as what they don't realize is that doing so will only reflect back on them and make them look shallow and petty in comparison.

Very much how I viewed Heavy Rain and why I defended it to such a degree. Although I was late to the ICO party in 2011, when I finally beat the Remastered version on PS3, I understood why it was so loved. Sometimes, it's just about taking in the experience, rather than timed head-shots or jumps from platform to platform. Nothing wrong with options.

That's why I'm willing to love a flawed game that strives to offer something unique and varied.  There are a million "game-play first" experiences out there.  That shouldn't be all there is.

ICO was one of two games that revitalized gaming for me.  It turned me into more than a person with a controller in their hands trying to execute combos or score more points.  It was like a great book that makes you forget you're reading and puts your heart there with the characters.



It's in a weird place on my rankings - it's a game I will totally always remember playing and how it made me feel. It really is art. But I have no interest in playing it again.



Owner of PS4 Pro, Xbox One, Switch, PS Vita, and 3DS

RolStoppable said:
hunter_alien said:

So, considering that the peer pressure existed several years later, hence millions liked it, it was one of the most important releases of the decade? I mean you are kind-off saying it was one of the most important games of the decade yet you try to make it sound overrated in pretty much every discussion that this game appears in.

The game didn't sell millions. The peer pressure was coming from other gaming journalists, so sales of the game were pretty much irrelevant to their decision.

Shadow of the Colossus had neither the sales nor the influence on other games to label it as one of the most important games of the decade, that's why its standing in the gaming community (including gaming journalists) is greatly overrated.

One could argue that it pretty much proved that current indei interaction-laking adventure titles could thrive in the industry. Also, there are plenty of games that sold comparativly shit by todays standards and yet they had a huge influence on the industry. First release of games like Doom, Populous, Tomb Raider and even Half-Life sold as much as a mid-tire IP would today, or for most AAA games those sales would be a dissaster.

Don't get me wrong. I am not trying to overblow the importance of SotC. I liked the game but IMO ICO and TLG are superios entries by a long shot. But I do consider it to be fairly influential especially that plenty of people were talking about it a decade later and this includes both fans of the games and game developers.



Vote the Mayor for Mayor!

mZuzek said:

@bold that seems to be exactly what you're doing with your post.

I'm sure it's not exactly what you meant to say (...or maybe it was), but you did imply Nintendo games are all just about "turning your brains off and pressing the right buttons at the right moments", and it sounded quite ignorant. Apparently the brain can only be used to digest a narrative? I guess maybe solving a puzzle or understanding how to defeat a tough enemy is just "motor skills". I wonder if you've at least played Breath of the Wild, or any Nintendo game that isn't Mario for that purpose.

Edit: in fact saying Nintendo games are "shallow" is usually a reflection of just how little you allowed yourself to think otherwise, because most Nintendo games actually aren't shallow at all. They usually feature few commands, but that doesn't mean they're shallow, it just means they're more basic - but they usually go very deep with those commands. Do you think games like Super Mario Odyssey or Super Metroid are shallow? Watch a speedrun and then we can discuss. Even Nintendo's "simple" take on the fighting game, Smash Bros., is actually a much deeper and more complex fighting game than almost any other just because of the wide range of possibilities that can be created through few simple interactions.

Brain was probably the wrong word choice.  Imagination would be better.  I also never meant to imply that all Nintendo games are shallow, simply that many of them are.  I don't think that's disputable, it's something Nintendo does on purpose.  I'm not talking about mechanics, either, I think you can see that in the context.  I mention story and characters specifically.  None of what I said is about mechanics.  I believe that part was fairly clear.



mZuzek said:
pokoko said:

Brain was probably the wrong word choice.  Imagination would be better.  I also never meant to imply that all Nintendo games are shallow, simply that many of them are.  I don't think that's disputable, it's something Nintendo does on purpose.  I'm not talking about mechanics, either, I think you can see that in the context.  I mention story and characters specifically.  None of what I said is about mechanics.  I believe that part was fairly clear.

You did use shallow in reference to Marth's comment about the game, not the story, so whatever misunderstanding was definitely caused by a poor choice of words. Imagination is still a bad choice though... I don't need a game to be story-driven for it to stir my imagination, in fact quite often it's gameplay focused titles that do (of course this can be different for each person).

Again, Nintendo games aren't shallow. They're basic, they give you few options, and that's a different thing altogether. Being shallow means there's little you can do with what you're given, Nintendo games usually allow you to do plenty of things with the few tools they give you - here's an example of just how seriously they take that mentality. Of course there are shallow Nintendo games, such as most Yoshi games or some of the 2D Zeldas or whatever, but it isn't a rule for most of them. In fact even when talking story, they do have a fair share of great narratives in the likes of Metroid Fusion or Mother 3, among others.

Just because the gameplay comes first doesn't mean the story can't be great, in fact I think Shadow of the Colossus is a perfect example of a game that has brilliant storytelling mostly through its gameplay.

Now you're being pedantic.  You know exactly what I'm talking about but you want to argue over a supposed slight.  I've already explained what I mean.  Me saying many Nintendo games have shallow characters and story is no more belittling than someone saying ICO has shallow fight mechanics.