>>718975782
Repostan a little rant:
>1's time limit is too generous, so it's not important!
Yes, but despite the extremely generous time limit, how 1 handles time is still important for a number of reasons:
>The time limit is inflexible. You know exactly how much time you have, and nothing can change that; no matter what you do, you can't gain more time. 3's time system seems like 1 on the surface, but makes time into something that can be earned through playing the game, dissolving pressure and tension.
>The time controls the pacing. Gameplay session lengths are fixed, 13 minute long days. With the caves in 2 and 4, a day can last any amount of time, given the variable lengths of caves and their subfloors, and the loading screens between them, making play sessions widely variable in time, with longer sessions just making you wish it would end.
>The time limit binds the gameplay systems together. The total elimination of a meaningful time limit in 2 totally erases the need for efficiency and careful planning. It's like allowing Tetris blocks to fall indefinitely; once you remove the timed pressure, the simple systems that make up Pikmin totally fall apart, as the time limit was the key factor in making all of these systems interesting. Combat becomes a boring button masher rather than something that needs to be evaluated; transporting objects and breaking walls are a meaningless chore.
>The time limit adds pressure and stakes to the narrative. Olimar will die in thirty days unless you get off your ass and get to work. 1's macabre, Tim Burton-esque tone is enchanting and immensely satisfying, and though the timer is generous, it offers an intensity to the game not seen since.
Remove the time limit and the things that make Pikmin enjoyable; the stress under pressure, the tension, the decision-making, the various systems in the game, the narrative all lose their effectiveness. Thirty days is generous, yes, but it's how 1 handles time in general is what's so effective.