secret of mana?
Granted, some of those are weaker examples than others, but in the terms that he talked about, I'd say that the Metroid connection is probably one of the strongest.
The rules that he cites as the minimum rules basically describes the "metroidvania" subgenre. Essentially, games in this genre have an open world, in which you explore to find powerups in order to reach more places to explore. While the genre doesn't demand level puzzles, that's how the games are typically designed.
And precision combat? The Metroid Prime series is probably the most difficult thing Nintendo's put out in the past 20 years. While they're not the most difficult games ever, they require you to think and analyze the enemy and your surroundings, then finding the perfect way to attack it. With Zelda, you're given the weapons you need to use right before fighting any boss and it's just a matter of hitting the action button and rolling out of the way. They're notoriously easy games (the first two games aside).
I love Zelda, but I'd say Metroid fits the bill better than Zelda does.
Neither Metroid (which I love to death and have played through several times) nor Castlevanina have precision combat as just one feature missing. In other words Metroid and Castlevania have #7 (action combat) but not #8 (precision combat + unique enemies)
Metroid should probably be marked for #3 (unique items) though I did mark it for #6 (unique weapons)
Castlevania seems to be missnig #6 (unique weapons). At least that's my recollection. Sure, the weapons are different but you can use any weapon against any creature if I remember correctly so each weapon does not really have a unique use. Maybe I'm remembering wrong.
Several (all?) of the 2D Castlevanias have elemental damage types and certain monsters that have archetypal strengths and weaknesses (ice vs fire, etc.), though the gameplay is also about optimizing cost/benefit of a weapon's magic/speed/attack versus the zones of damage it inflicts. Basically it'll suck if you use your awesome danger with wimpy range on certain foes/bosses, while your really slow hitting claymore swings at an arc that protects you from projectiles and what not at the expense of requiring a tad it of timing.
Ahh good times... makes me want to replay SotN again now. :)
Excellent game.
(1) the combat was unsophisticated, for the most part you kind of button mashed;
(2) the magic spells mostly all did the same thing;
(3) the world didn't have a lot of topography, and mostly you used the cannons to jump from one area to another;
(4) there were not a lot of puzzles in the dungeons, and those that existed were not as sophisticated as in Zelda.
I admired SOM for its lush visuals, dazzling soundtrack, expansive world, and compelling story. But to me it did not have the feeling of getting the small details right. Zelda, in contrast, was pitch-perfect on the small scale (IMHO).