Only the long development time acts as an argument for why it couldn't have been an option. And that option would have made the game much more enjoyable to play. What's even worse? A thing I'll get to in the next video. :P

@@finntrovertI’m not positive, but if it had done the right analog stick looky thing, this might have been the first game to have done it. I chalk it up as not understanding how to make 3D games properly yet. See the reviews for Alien Resurrection that had the traditional FPS left analog stick move and right analog stick look and it was slammed by reviewers. No one knew what worked yet.

@@ProfessorFessor I wasn't really a console player at the time, so I too have no idea which game began to use the analog sticks for camera controls first. Might look into it if I remember when I have the energy. I have heard of the Alien Resurrection reviews though, slamming the now traditional controller FPS controls. It's quite funny in retrospect.

ps2 games barely even use the left analog even though every ps2 controller had them. GTA 3 and Vice City really would have benefited from camera control

It really is. A thing that may seem little can still add a surprising amount of character to something usually plain, like a main menu.

Thanks! The human worship portion was a thing I had missed on my first playthroughs as well, and only found out later, don't even remember how. I don't know much about cut content, to be honest, but I might look into it better at the end of the series. I try to do these by exposing myself to as little information outside the games and manuals as possible to try and keep the focus on the game as is.

@@finntrovert Completly fair, and there is quite a lot actually. A good chunk of it is still on the disc, though I think fans found some beta ROMs a few years ago and took them apart as well. "The Lost Worlds" (I won't post the URL as KZfaq doesn't like that but a quick Google should lead you to it) is a fantastic resource if you want to read up on everything cut out of the five games. To be honest a "Soul Reaver with everything cut added back into it" is the one remake I'd most want to see.

@@pawcanada Bookmarked. Thank you!

Yeah, there were and are quite a few games that do the "win to lose" gameplay choice. Some FF games are indeed good examples, one of the worst offenders to me lately has been XIV. Don't remember that much about Vagrant Story, but it's on my list of. "want to play again".

@@finntrovert Yea I know what you meant by that in ff14. Vagrant story is a great game that is somewhat less known for a variety of reasons, since you've played FF14 you probably know the setting for the stormblood alliance raids which were based off ivalice (which was the setting for FF tactics, FF12 and Vagrant story) They used the music from the final boss from Vagrant story for the TG cid fight.

The only way I approve of "win to lose" scenarios is when winning is basically impossible, and doing so triggers a non-standard ending because you weren't supposed to win. Usually a new game + sort of thing.

The whole PC versus consoles things is a very complicated topic. There are games which have definitely suffered from console limitations, but it's not as simple as some people would like to make it. With Soul Reaver, the Dreamcast version is in many ways superior to the PC versions, such as having higher detail 3D models etc. It's an interesting topic far too tainted online by the whole "console war" thing.

@overt Indeed, it's not a simple one-way street phenomenon. Speaking of which... The DC version is the definitive one? I did not know that, thank you, I've learned something new! I agree; the topic is a LONG historical thread, leading all the way back to multi-platform releases for the Amiga and Atari ST designing for the Atari ST and sloppy porting it to the more powerful Amiga. It has very little to do with consoles and has much more to do with the difficulty of releasing anything across multiple disparate systems. To be frank, I'm impressed that the PS1 renders Soul Reaver as well as it does.

Thanks for watching them!

I wish I could say, but all I have is a list, some which have been done more, some far less, all I find interesting. Depends on my mood when I finish this series. XD

@@finntrovert well I can't wait! Great content man, keep it up!

@@The_NaiveMelody Thanks!

Exactly!

God damn it Shan. XD

Was missing my "God damn it Shan"s. xD xD

@@shanara99 Well, you got one now! :P

Thanks for watching!

Thanks! Hope you'll like it!

Nice! Have fun!

That's definitely one of the best parts of the game.

Glad you liked it!

It's just saved my Sunday but 3 weeks later 😂🎉

@@LovelyRottweiler-nn5ot Works for me! XD

Much appreciated!

Thanks!

Thanks!

Hope you'll enjoy it!

Loved it I was so young when I played it such a nostalgia blast

@@aarongrabel4201 Same here. It was such a trip going back into this game again. Sure it has flaws and it has aged, but it's still fantastic for a game of its era even without my nostalgia bias.

Hell to the yes!

I understand what you mean, but this isn't really that type of game. The whole point of the game is that it's a puzzle box centred around interacting with the mechanics in order to proceed. If the world made logical sense then the game wouldn't be able to happen. This is a game where story progression is a reward for successfully solving an involved sequence of small challenges that seek to take advantage of the game being in a 3D environment, which was largely unexplored territory from a game design standpoint. Without the puzzles and platforming it would effectively just be a game where you walked between cutscenes and occasionally got into fights. There isn't really a way of executing the design they're going for without it being game-like. It's like how the first game had a bunch of enemies walking in short little patterns instead of behaving more realistically. The more you try and hide the fact that it's a game, the less diverse and creative the game can be from a design standpoint. I think that it's valid to feel like the block pushing is tiresome, but it's a 3D block pushing game with a really impressive visual design and narrative layer on top of that fundamental design, not a story with gameplay interludes that only need to justify how the player moves to the next cutscene. It's also worth noting that Soul Reaver was apparently not originally intended to be a sequel to Blood Omen, so a lot of these design elements were potentially conceived with a different narrative tone in mind that may have been more surreal and abstract, and possibly less grimdark.

I always saw it as influence from Tomb Raider. Fully 3D games were still relatively new and block pushing was one of the trends at the time popularised by games like Tomb Raider. Could be that they just wanted to add what was popular or maybe the publisher (Eidos) suggested it because it worked on Tomb Raider. It's like regenerative health in military shooters or "souls-like" elements in 2D exploration games. They are out of place but it is a cliche developers feel they must add.

Never played those, but I'll take your word for it!

Yeah, I hated LOU 2 for that reason. Tried to make me care about the bad guy and failed. I only ever wanted to kill them. Also the final battle was similar to the first 1 here vs Kain, a battle with a pre-ordained outcome that robbed me of the ending I wanted.

@@ProBreakers I've never played either of them, and honestly, all the negative talk about the games kind of made me not want to. But perhaps one day I will, so I have a better understanding of the controversy surrounding TLOU2.