The vibe of the the first Nights game is one of the closest things to magic that I'm capable of feeling as an adult. Thanks to its combination of nostalgically polygonal graphics, an easy to get into gameplay loop, a vibrant art style, and an absolutely sublime soundtrack, I feel one with Nights, in the same way that its main protagonists do. Though it may not necessarily be a Christmas-themed game, it elicits that same sense of wonder I had as a kid. Watching those old Christmas DVD's, finding myself escaping to a world where everything feels exactly right, exactly as it should. Free of worries, and full of joy. Life is but a dream, and the night is synomous with beauty, not the risk of getting mugged in an alley.
Admittingly, I just said that the gameplay is easy to get into, but during my first couple attempts, I didn't actually get what Nights wanted out of me. You do combo chains by collecting as many things as possible, okay, I'm with you so far. You can draw circular trails to attract nearby objects, that's pretty cool too. You break open the capsule with enough collectibles gathered, and then you head over to the goal, to proceed with the next segment of the level. But the one thing I couldn't grasp is why did I keep getting D ranks and F ranks for my efforts. In hindsight though, my effort was bare minimum.
Nights is a score-based game, and though it leaves the option of heading straight for the endgoal open to you, unlocking the game's finale requires a series of high scores. To get them, what you really want to do is go AROUND the endgoal instead, and do another loop of the stage, which causes all of the collectibles to respawn. And then you do another loop, and another. And all the while, your time limit continues ticking down, meaning that while each loop is a chance to score additional points and improve your rank, the time you have to do so grows tighter, and at some point, you'll have to choose whether you want to risk another loop, or call it there and move on to the next segment. Playing Nights this way turns it into a game all about risk, seeing how much you can chew off, and how much faith are you able to place on your skill and efficiency. I don't normally say stuff like this, but I think it's valid enough to say that if if you're not playing Nights in this way, you are gonna get very little out of the experience. Otherwise, what's at play is an incredibly unique gameplay system that elegantly combines a simple control scheme with a satisfying depth in how you utilize it, and what sorts of choices you make with it.
I think the only real problem with Nights into Dreams is kind of the one we echo for more recent Nintendo Switch games: The fact that it was made for the Sega Saturn, instead of a more powerful console. Though arguments can be made on just how underpowered the Saturn was, fact is that most developers didn't know how to utilize it to its fullest potential. Nights itself suffers from its console's limitations, resulting in a depressingly low draw distance, and a poor field of view that gives the classic Sonic games a run for their money. Especially as you start picking up speed, it's really not easy to plan ahead for anything before you ram into it head-on. The modern ports provide a better draw distance, and I consider them the better way to play. But the field of view still remains an unfixed problem. At some point, it'd be nice to have a version of the first Nights game where things get zoomed out a bunch, but considering the nicheness of this franchise, it may take another 10 years before we get anything that nice...
Ah, well. Even with this flaw at hand, Nights is very short and really not that hard to play. Anyone who carries the same fascination I have with these sorts of old 3D games owes it to themselves to try it out. Unconventional games like this don't get greenlit often these days, they'd be deemed too much of a risk to even make it out of the pre-production phase. The very idea that Sega even allowed Sonic Team to go through with this instead of putting them on a major Sonic title is in itself an insane decision. Were mistakes made? Oh, no doubt there were several. But I respect the freedom of Nights into Dreams's existence way too much to call it one of them.
Admittingly, I just said that the gameplay is easy to get into, but during my first couple attempts, I didn't actually get what Nights wanted out of me. You do combo chains by collecting as many things as possible, okay, I'm with you so far. You can draw circular trails to attract nearby objects, that's pretty cool too. You break open the capsule with enough collectibles gathered, and then you head over to the goal, to proceed with the next segment of the level. But the one thing I couldn't grasp is why did I keep getting D ranks and F ranks for my efforts. In hindsight though, my effort was bare minimum.
Nights is a score-based game, and though it leaves the option of heading straight for the endgoal open to you, unlocking the game's finale requires a series of high scores. To get them, what you really want to do is go AROUND the endgoal instead, and do another loop of the stage, which causes all of the collectibles to respawn. And then you do another loop, and another. And all the while, your time limit continues ticking down, meaning that while each loop is a chance to score additional points and improve your rank, the time you have to do so grows tighter, and at some point, you'll have to choose whether you want to risk another loop, or call it there and move on to the next segment. Playing Nights this way turns it into a game all about risk, seeing how much you can chew off, and how much faith are you able to place on your skill and efficiency. I don't normally say stuff like this, but I think it's valid enough to say that if if you're not playing Nights in this way, you are gonna get very little out of the experience. Otherwise, what's at play is an incredibly unique gameplay system that elegantly combines a simple control scheme with a satisfying depth in how you utilize it, and what sorts of choices you make with it.
I think the only real problem with Nights into Dreams is kind of the one we echo for more recent Nintendo Switch games: The fact that it was made for the Sega Saturn, instead of a more powerful console. Though arguments can be made on just how underpowered the Saturn was, fact is that most developers didn't know how to utilize it to its fullest potential. Nights itself suffers from its console's limitations, resulting in a depressingly low draw distance, and a poor field of view that gives the classic Sonic games a run for their money. Especially as you start picking up speed, it's really not easy to plan ahead for anything before you ram into it head-on. The modern ports provide a better draw distance, and I consider them the better way to play. But the field of view still remains an unfixed problem. At some point, it'd be nice to have a version of the first Nights game where things get zoomed out a bunch, but considering the nicheness of this franchise, it may take another 10 years before we get anything that nice...
Ah, well. Even with this flaw at hand, Nights is very short and really not that hard to play. Anyone who carries the same fascination I have with these sorts of old 3D games owes it to themselves to try it out. Unconventional games like this don't get greenlit often these days, they'd be deemed too much of a risk to even make it out of the pre-production phase. The very idea that Sega even allowed Sonic Team to go through with this instead of putting them on a major Sonic title is in itself an insane decision. Were mistakes made? Oh, no doubt there were several. But I respect the freedom of Nights into Dreams's existence way too much to call it one of them.