Face it people. None of the Mana games are any good.
 

I think I've reached breaking point.
When was the last one of these? Oh yeah NEVER.

Mana games have never been good. You go back, you play Zelda: Link to the Past these days and it's not that good. And here's the thing, Link to the Past was better than Secret of Mana in just about every way. And while the Zelda series has gone on to be one of the strongest franchises in gaming. It's constantly pushing the frontiers of game design and remains in the upper echelon of not just it's own genre but video games as a form of interactive art. Mana games on the other hand, originally Zelda with stats, have floundered about like a lost puppy waiting to die, kept alive by meager sales from confused and disillusioned fans, eyes clouded by nostalgia. Even I was suckered into this. I bought Sword of Mana the day it came out. I'll give it a quick review right here: Mindless shit, score: No Fist*.

Just face it guys. The series is a joke, it's not getting any better, and these tenuously related games wouldn't sell at all if they didn't have 'Mana' tacked onto their name somewhere.


* The Fist scoring system I use is quite simple.
Double Fist: Excellent games
Fist: Good games
No Fist: Poor games
Weak: Shit

I for one played Legend of Mana to the point of creating No Future mode weapons. I had a blast with it, and the winning aspect of Legend of Mana was the rich dialogue, various quests, the soundtrack and it's aesthetic value. It's a game of beauty with a decent amount of flaws that held back it's true power. Battle wasn't too great in Legend of Mana, the AI is just dumb.

I do enjoy SD2 and SD3 for the most part. And I do agree that is a nostalgiac heart attached to the series, for myself and probably for many fans... considering Kikuta's score was so phenomenal, as well as Shimomura's. Although I am a little scared about how these new mana games will fare. Milking this series is just not a smart thing to do...

Fist.

Or maybe that'sthe thing that is really annoying me. Mana has te ability to be so much more. I'm no fan of game music but I really like the music in all the Mana games I've played. The games characters tend to not be too cliché ridden and the games more often than not have decent storylines.

It's just it fails so hard on the gameplay front. Combat is completly asinine and the inclusion of stats in a real time game is something I've always found ridiculous, especially anything determining skills. Arn't I the one playing? Isn't it my skills on display? But yeah I mean the combat. Strategy consists entirely of moving out of the way if you see the enemy wind up for an attack. And with nothing else determining the difficulty of quests otehr than the number and ferocity of the mindless enemies, it get's old really really fast.

LTTP is good every time I play it.

^

Also the fact that you even bother comparing Zelda games with Secret of Mana means you have absolutely no idea what you're saying. This is something Total! magazine and its ilk did back in the days, when the viewpoint defined game genres and when Zelda was considered an action RPG.

To say Link to the Past isn't good today is shooting your whole credibility in the foot, as is saying the same about Secret of Mana.

Certainly, someone who bought a PS2 as their first console because Kingdom Hearts looked nice probably won't get that much out of them, but this will apply to any old game they've never seen or heard about. Anyone who knows anything about appreciating good gaming can tell what wonderful pieces of software they are.

That later Mana titles have not matched the charm of Seiken Densetsu 2 isn't that surprising. Not because they are not identical to SD2, but because each later title has been an elaboration (or a mutation, if you will), an unnecessary attempt to make something different, usually something simpler. People didn't play Mana just because you got to press a button to swing a sword. You didn't play just because you could use a multitap with it (well, some people did, but they are idiots). There was a lot more to it and the later titles seem to have missed this, but not notice since each title has had its fans.

It's funny because a lot of people still consider ALTTP to be the best Zelda game.

Just from your sig and avatar set alone gives me enough reason to just ignore you. You just sound like some retarded fanboy who doesn't like to except the fact that there ARE better action adventure games besides Zelda.

It is REALLY hard to take you seriously.

Said the man with the grainy Dragonball av/sig.

Secret of Mana was pretty fuckin boss back in the day. Coming out now and saying that it's an awful game is more retroactive reasoning than anything that can be considered objectively sound. Because the modern mana games are awful doesn't mean that the first games sucked, or even that they're comparable to Zelda in any reasonable fashion.

Just a note, the purpose of the opening post isn't to gloat about how good zelda games are. You might notice he's actually disrespecting one of the most beloved titles in the series.

Hmm. Yeah it's still pretty fun. It's more, I rushed out and bought it on GBA when the port game out, not dissimilar to the way I bought Sword of Mana. I played it and enjoyed it but I really felt it's age. When I played it as a kid on SNES it was the most amazing game I'd ever experienced but playing it again a decade later made me realise just how much gaming has progressed.

But comon, they are. They're both top down, sword swinging action adventures. Are tehre many other games taht fit this mould? Zelda was item and puzzle based, while Mana was statistics and story based but on a fundamental level they played in a very similar way.

Morons living in the past. While ten or so dungeons was nice, the game was just a long slog to the end through the dark world. It doesn't come close to what was acheived in the 3D Zeldas.

Lol care to name any? Because I noticed you didn't. I am a Zelda fanboy, I'm not hiding that, but I can still judge other games on their merits.
Look guys the comparison to Zelda was just that, a comparison. Mana could've been Zelda. It could've gone through the stratosphere and become one of the strongest and most influential franchises in gaming. But it didn't it failed. And I don't see where it's fans are pulling the optimision from that future games in the series will be as great in their time as Secret of Mana was.

You're quite right. The thing is, people expect and hope for the newer Mana games to deliver and be great games, like Secret of Mana as if it's still an example of excellence in gaming. I definately enjoyed playing Secret of Mana back in the day, but I'm not one of those gamers living in the past. By today's standards the game isn't good, hell objective eyes might even see it as inferior to current Mana games.

SD2 still holds up to this day with fantastic gameplay and great music. I love it every time I play it. SD3 isn't quite as good but it's still enjoyable. The other games (aside from nostalgic value for SD1) do absolutely nothing for me.

By today's standards Secret of Mana is a work of fucking art. The Zelda franchise is an exception to the rule produced by a company that's made a living for itself in a niche market, let's not kid ourselves here.

It's true you can simplify and look at it like that, but I still disagree with you in the end. If the focus is different, the game style is different and thus shouldn't be judged by comparing to something it isn't supposed to be in the first place.

Because then the people saying Metroid Prime is a terrible game because they are judging it as an FPS are somehow right. In fact, Metroid Prime is much closer to generic FPS games due to its viewpoint and foreground presence of a weapon, than Mana is to Zelda, but we all know Prime isn't an FPS, nor should be judged as one.

1 - Zelda is an action/adventure series. Mana games are action RPGs. They are not in the same genre.

2 - A Link to the Past is a good game.

3 - Secret of Mana and Seiken Densetsu 3 are excellent games. Legend of Mana is fun, and a work of art.

4 - The only similarity between the two is the perspective. Comparing them is like comparing Super Contra to Super Mario World - "hey, they're both side scrollers with a jump button and an attack button."

I feel that having a gauge that fills to 100% before you can execute a focused
attack was the main reason Secret of Mana was so good. All the other Mana
titles after this were basically Hack and Slash with no pause or time to think.

Also, filling the gauge to perform a LV 8 attack with your favorite weapon
ALWAYS felt good ^_^

Does anyone really take RABicle seriously in terms of his video game perspectives? Burn a copy of SoM and make a stupid video of it or leave forever.

Haha, yeah. Ok. This is what is called "opinion", and just because someone doesn't share yours does not make them a moron. If you are going to debate something, at least do it right; being a jackass just serves to discredit everything you say.

Well, I should hope not at any rate. =/

What a complete coincidence. I just played Sword of Mana last month. I came to find out what garbage it was and what the series is. Never goin back to that series again, I'll tell ya.

Your taste in games is worse than Elixir's, Rab. You should be ashamed of yourself.

Has anyone witnesed Denicalis ever add anything to a conversation other than baseless potshots?

Ooo ooo good one it doesn't make then a moron. But wait, what if it's my opinion (which it is) that they're a moron?

Finally, Mucknugle. Did you read any of my subsequent posts?

Both games are completely terrible excuses for virtual reality entertainment system electronic games. All you do is like, swing your sword in both Secret of Mana and Zelda Link to the Past. That gets old after four seconds. Hell, witnessing the title screen of each is enough sword swinging. It's no surprise that they're bad, what, sixty years later. You want sword swinging, go back to Secret Quest.

http://img151.imageshack.us/img151/4...tquest2ss4.png
Watch out. Main hero's even got a tail and some sorta rash spread across his entire squished head. Its quality sword swinging gameplay never gets old, and will forever be remembered by everyone as it is written in the Bible. Look, he's swung it so much it's not even in his hands anymore. Maybe because his hands are scary.

I'm curious - where do you get this from? Seriously, it's the obscure japanese titles, isn't it? Have you even seen my games?

In regards to the topic, I think comparing Mana's series to Zelda's series is inaccurate. That's like comparing Final Fantasy to Azure Dreams, or Lemmings to Snatcher. It just doesn't make any sense at all.

I've never played Legend of Mana, but I enjoyed Children of Mana. If you don't like dungeon crawlers you won't enjoy it at all, though. It's just a game to tie you over until Dawn of Mana is released in March 07. Shut up until then.

I really loved Secret of Mana and Legend of Mana. The former for the weapon charging system which would understandably annoy others, and the latter for the simply magical atmosphere of watercolours, story arcs, and dungeons. You also didn't have to confine yourself to one hero in SoM, and you could almost always bring a friend or some assistance (NPC, Pet, Golem) to help you at most points of the game.

I'm not liking the recent progression of the series so far. Playing a couple of minutes of Sword of Mana turned me off, and Children of Mana being more of a dungeon crawler doesn't even peak my interest.

Seiken Densetsu 3 falls in between since it looks like a beautiful game, and there's so much different class combinations to have to decide sticking with, but it's fairly long, and I still haven't finished it. The removal of the charge system for full screen attacks was a mixed bag for me, and having to wait until the endgame for cool spells like Ancient is much different than having cool spells throughout the whole game (via instruments/elementals with different spells).

I heard some things.

I need this bad. Real bad.

I whole heartedly agree. This was a distinguishing difference between the two games.

Whomever actually thinks that should be taken out back and shot in the face. Opinions should no longer belong to them.

I loved Secret of Mana and Seiken Densetsu 3, both were in fact excellent. I don't know why SE keeps pouring money into the Mana series when it hasn't made anything decent in about 10 years, though...

This topic is complete bullshit. It's like comparing CS:S with BF2. Or Guildwars with WoW or RO. This is complete opinion based.

I personally liked Mana better when it comes to old-school games. I never liked any of LoZ that came out before LoZ:OOT

I agree the series never realy picked back up to Dunsetu 3's (Whilst not perfect in any sence of the word, still good) standards and that LTTP doesn't hold up as it used to in this "Use can actualy use your shield to actualy protect yourself" world of ours.

This is coming from someone who's first SD was Secret Of Mana and his first Zelda was Zelda OOT.

Rab, I think it's fair to say you're on No Fist this week.

Much as I disdain JRPGs, you can't contend that the Manas are fundamentally poor games because Zelda happens to (in fact) be a better series; it's retarded. I haven't a problem with the comparison--I question the assumption that genre is the Only Valid Criterion Ever as well--but your foundation's pretty gay.

Seiken Densetsu 3 > Seiken Densetsu 2 > Link to the Past > Legend of Mana > Children of Mana > Seiken Densetsu 1 > * > You > Sword of Mana.

The natural order of things.

Children of Mana's soundtrack is pretty decent too.

Personally, I've enjoyed every mana game up to date and still enjoy to play them every now and then. The music in the games is different then any other game/series I've played, which to me is a good thing. While they have gotten of track just a bit from the earlier Seiken Densetsu's, mostly with the selection of characters now, I believe it is still a great series, and should have a great future ahead. Heroes of Mana I heard will be great.

Sword of Mana wasn't a revolutionary game or anything, but it was still a great remake. The artwork and gameplay of the whole series has always been unique. I can understand how people might think of it as a "you either like or hate it" series, but I can't imagine the majority of gamers generally disliking it.

I think you lost most people at the "Link to the Past isn't very good" part. If you're going to go on an angry rant, it's best not to preface with an additional opinion that's so absolutely apeshit that it ruins people's ability to take anything you say seriously. I mean, I'm all for tipping over sacred cows, but if there's one game that's held up over time, it's Zelda 3. You went and poisoned your own well.