Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
April 30, 2016, 05:07:54 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Check out the latest RPG news!
236851 Posts in 7064 Topics by 2350 Members
Latest Member: octorick
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  RPGFan Message Boards
|-+  Media
| |-+  Single-Player RPGs
| | |-+  Zelda for the Wii U
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] Print
Author Topic: Zelda for the Wii U  (Read 7320 times)
Jimmy
Posts: 1395


Wakens the Ferine Strain

Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #45 on: June 21, 2014, 10:59:52 PM »

Disagree. Not having multi-item usage in dungeons due to its non-linear progression was a big demerit to the series.

Very interesting point. Though Twilight Princess has garnered some love recently, it seems one of its main criticisms even still is that, with very few exceptions, most items were relatively useless outside of the dungeon in which they were found. I think that Skyward Sword remedied this somewhat, though that may be due to the fact Skyward Sword placed a heavy emphasis on the sword mechanic. And much as I loved playing ALBW, you're assessment is very accurate.

That being said, I wonder how they could remedy this situation? I would think maybe using fewer, quality items (such as the hook/clawshot, bow, and etc.) could work. Shadow of the Colossus used a minimalist design style, and look at how well it did. However, most of the items players most frequently use in the Zelda series have been series staples for a long time now, and Zelda is known for introducing new and interesting items no matter how little they may be used. Hopefully they can overcome this design obstacle with the tech arrows that were introduced in the demo.

EDIT: That being said, I still think ALBW was a step in the right direction. It was fun without being bogged down by series conventions.
Logged
Sagacious-T
Posts: 2381


Official Pony Thread

Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #46 on: June 22, 2014, 02:55:25 AM »

Disagree. Not having multi-item usage in dungeons due to its non-linear progression was a big demerit to the series.

Very interesting point. Though Twilight Princess has garnered some love recently, it seems one of its main criticisms even still is that, with very few exceptions, most items were relatively useless outside of the dungeon in which they were found. I think that Skyward Sword remedied this somewhat, though that may be due to the fact Skyward Sword placed a heavy emphasis on the sword mechanic. And much as I loved playing ALBW, you're assessment is very accurate.

That being said, I wonder how they could remedy this situation? I would think maybe using fewer, quality items (such as the hook/clawshot, bow, and etc.) could work. Shadow of the Colossus used a minimalist design style, and look at how well it did. However, most of the items players most frequently use in the Zelda series have been series staples for a long time now, and Zelda is known for introducing new and interesting items no matter how little they may be used. Hopefully they can overcome this design obstacle with the tech arrows that were introduced in the demo.

EDIT: That being said, I still think ALBW was a step in the right direction. It was fun without being bogged down by series conventions.

I think there are compromises to be found between some sort of linear item progression simultaneous to the non-linear dungeon and non-linear item progression. I think most of us want a less-linear Zelda. I'd be very interested in playing a Zelda game where dungeons and their puzzles had multiple solutions, and perhaps even greater rewards/meta-rewards depending on how the dungeon was solved. Using item progression to create a sort of choice and consequence system in Zelda would be incredible... of course I'm just dreaming here.

For Twilight Princess, the game was heavily re-worked and included dungeons removed from Wind Waker. To take advantage of the Wii's IR sensor and pointing mechanic, several items were completely swapped out for projectiles, and thus the dungeons had to change as well. I think that's a big reason the dungeon items don't have much synergy.
Logged
Aeolus
This is the Monado's Powerbomb!
Posts: 8662


Little did he know, the fall damage would KO him.

Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #47 on: June 22, 2014, 04:09:34 AM »

Disagree. Not having multi-item usage in dungeons due to its non-linear progression was a big demerit to the series.

Very interesting point. Though Twilight Princess has garnered some love recently, it seems one of its main criticisms even still is that, with very few exceptions, most items were relatively useless outside of the dungeon in which they were found. I think that Skyward Sword remedied this somewhat, though that may be due to the fact Skyward Sword placed a heavy emphasis on the sword mechanic. And much as I loved playing ALBW, you're assessment is very accurate.

That being said, I wonder how they could remedy this situation? I would think maybe using fewer, quality items (such as the hook/clawshot, bow, and etc.) could work. Shadow of the Colossus used a minimalist design style, and look at how well it did. However, most of the items players most frequently use in the Zelda series have been series staples for a long time now, and Zelda is known for introducing new and interesting items no matter how little they may be used. Hopefully they can overcome this design obstacle with the tech arrows that were introduced in the demo.

EDIT: That being said, I still think ALBW was a step in the right direction. It was fun without being bogged down by series conventions.

Admittedly when I think back to games with massive inventories like aLttP or MM, I've noted that many of the individual item functions have been folded into either other items or within Link's natural abilities (for instance, the Bug-Catching Net's function ended up becoming built straight into the Bottle's basic use) and those that haven't are either core items or items with very limited functionality to them (like the Bremen Mask or the Book of Mudora). When you get right down to it, Link's core items are:

A Boomerang (a generally low level/basic item that can retrieve distant items dropped by enemies and stun weaker ones)
Bombs (explosives used to uncover secrets or reveal passageways as well as having variable amounts of attack power and use depending on the game, but limited by stock)
A Bow (a usually powerful item that functions as your goto ranged weapon when Sword Beams are not available or useful, but like Bombs, are limited by stock)
A portable source of light (ranging from a Stick to a Lantern, never much of an attack item but essential for navigating dark locations, lighting torches, and setting other things on fire)
An instrument (from recorders to ocarinas to batons and so on, and can at the very least provide a means of fast travel and at most be the single most essential and pivotal tool in your arsenal being rivaled only by the Master Sword itself)
Potions (commonly for healing but also potentially capable of other miscellaneous effects)
A Hooked or Clawed Shot (and/or other tools capable of grappling onto distant objects to be pulled in by you or to pull yourself towards it, its combat utility is mostly for removing enemy protection or an enemy from protection but sometimes has actual combat capability)
A Hammer (for smashing, pounding, & crushing enemies and obstacles)
Something that can project fire or explosions from a range (like a Magic or Fire Rod or Fire or Bomb Arrows, always a generally advanced tool and powerful weapon and a generally useful one for tripping out of the way switches and for when the torch is out of reach)
And arm-wear that improves your lifting/pushing capability, as well as some means of traversing over or submersing under water (both kinds of tools that serve to bypass obstacles and to grant greater access to your environment though combat utility is generally nil outside of expanding your arena/options)

Everything else is either too specific in use, too dependent on whether the game is in 2D or 3D, too powerful to be doled out regularly, too complicated in function to carry over to other titles, or one of the reasons stated at the start of this post. TP's problem was that if it wasn't a core item, it either got folded into Link's Wolf form or was too gimmicky and poorly utilized beyond its dungeon.
Logged

In my vision, I see that one of us is going to KO the other.
Jimmy
Posts: 1395


Wakens the Ferine Strain

Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #48 on: June 22, 2014, 11:02:12 PM »

Disagree. Not having multi-item usage in dungeons due to its non-linear progression was a big demerit to the series.

Very interesting point. Though Twilight Princess has garnered some love recently, it seems one of its main criticisms even still is that, with very few exceptions, most items were relatively useless outside of the dungeon in which they were found. I think that Skyward Sword remedied this somewhat, though that may be due to the fact Skyward Sword placed a heavy emphasis on the sword mechanic. And much as I loved playing ALBW, you're assessment is very accurate.

That being said, I wonder how they could remedy this situation? I would think maybe using fewer, quality items (such as the hook/clawshot, bow, and etc.) could work. Shadow of the Colossus used a minimalist design style, and look at how well it did. However, most of the items players most frequently use in the Zelda series have been series staples for a long time now, and Zelda is known for introducing new and interesting items no matter how little they may be used. Hopefully they can overcome this design obstacle with the tech arrows that were introduced in the demo.

EDIT: That being said, I still think ALBW was a step in the right direction. It was fun without being bogged down by series conventions.

I think there are compromises to be found between some sort of linear item progression simultaneous to the non-linear dungeon and non-linear item progression. I think most of us want a less-linear Zelda. I'd be very interested in playing a Zelda game where dungeons and their puzzles had multiple solutions, and perhaps even greater rewards/meta-rewards depending on how the dungeon was solved. Using item progression to create a sort of choice and consequence system in Zelda would be incredible... of course I'm just dreaming here.

For Twilight Princess, the game was heavily re-worked and included dungeons removed from Wind Waker. To take advantage of the Wii's IR sensor and pointing mechanic, several items were completely swapped out for projectiles, and thus the dungeons had to change as well. I think that's a big reason the dungeon items don't have much synergy.

I wouldn't be surprised if multiple ways to solve puzzles is on Aonuma's list of things to change in the series. He did say recently that retooling the series' puzzle conventions was on his to do list, so I don't think that offering players with multiple options to solve puzzles is out of the picture.

A consequence system that changes the puzzle's outcome depending on how player's choose to solve it is an intriguing idea. It makes me think of the inFamous series' choice system that either leads you down the Hero or Infamous paths. Or the various scenarios that result when making choices in Mass Effect. I doubt that the Zelda series would introduce this kind of mechanic on such a macro level that changes the story given the series' history, but it would be cool if, for example, a dungeon could be more dynamic in the player's progression through it. For example, you can come to a dungeon capable of completing it with your current equipment, and the dungeon adjusts itself accordingly through procedural generation so that the player can complete it with their current equipment. That way, each player could experience a certain dungeon differently, depending on the equipment they have. They could even do something where, when the player solves a multi-solution puzzle in a certain way, the next room changes and they face a different challenge then they would had they solved the puzzle another way.

That is a cool dream. I doubt that Nintendo would implement such a complex system, though it would be cool if players could experience unique dungeons with each playthrough depending on where they are in the game when they enter it.

Sorry for rambling, I guess I just needed to think my way through your idea.
Logged
Andrew
Administrator
Posts: 7545


Member
*


View Profile Email
« Reply #49 on: June 22, 2014, 11:17:30 PM »

I've never had a problem with linearity, honestly. Not in terms of story and dungeons in Zelda, anyway. As long as each dungeon has varied ways to make use of that new piece of equipment you just picked up, I have no issues with the standard formula. That said, I'm not opposed to new experiments with it either.

I liked how ALBW allowed you to do the dungeons in any order, but that wasn't "better" for me than the complete gameplay linearity of most other games in the series. I don't think linearity, as a broad term, should be associated with awful design, as it seems to have become in recent years.

The only thing I want them to move away from is the hand-holding and minimal exploration found in Skyward Sword - which it looks like is the case.
Logged



Aeolus
This is the Monado's Powerbomb!
Posts: 8662


Little did he know, the fall damage would KO him.

Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #50 on: June 23, 2014, 01:32:11 AM »

The only thing I want them to move away from is the hand-holding and minimal exploration found in Skyward Sword - which it looks like is the case.

Yeah, that I think we can all agree we can do without.
Logged

In my vision, I see that one of us is going to KO the other.
Sagacious-T
Posts: 2381


Official Pony Thread

Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #51 on: June 23, 2014, 03:04:34 AM »

@Jimmy

I agree that variations in storyline outcome probably isn't ever going to happen. I wouldn't mind another Clock Town though.

I've pushed enough digital blocks and and lit enough digital torches in my life, haha. The idea of such boring puzzles turns me off from playing the game entirely.

@FlamingR1ft

The Zelda formula has always been one that changes or evolves. There's no real standard formula to follow. Arguably, ever since Twilight Princess, the series' growth has hit a bit of a standstill, replaced with new control mechanics which primarily interacted with dungeons, rather than staggering design changes of the overall game.

If we look strictly at the first six games of the console series:
Zelda 1
Zelda 2
LTTP
OoT
Majora's Mask
Wind Waker

Each one is magnificently different from one another.

For some more perspective, it took 11 years to go from Zelda 1 to Ocarina of Time. Thirteen years after that, we ended up at Skyward Sword.

Older Zelda games were the platform that Nintendo used to hammer out brand new ideas we didn't even know we wanted. Of those first six console games, not one of them was in response to desires of series fans. Twilight Princess was made to appease the OoT fans that were pining for a more realistic Zelda game, and honestly I can barely remember anything about that game. What makes me apprehensive about this new Zelda game is that Nintendo seems to be clearly giving us what we want, rather than what we don't know we want yet.

When Aonuma said, “No one explicitly said that that was Link," in response to the Zelda Wii U trailer, I was stunned and interested. I'm the last person who enjoys feminism-driven female protagonists shoved into games for the sake of it, but the thought having a female Link or Zelda as a protagonist genuinely excited me.

At least Aonuma has promised less tutorials, thank god.
Logged
Nel
Posts: 180


Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #52 on: June 23, 2014, 12:29:10 PM »

Old habits die hard. When I played ALBW, I still ended up doing the second set of dungeons in (mostly) ALttP order, when possible. Except they switched where the ice and lava dungeons were, but I still wound up doing Turtle Rock last.
Logged
Bleaker
Posts: 309


Member
*


View Profile Email

Ignore
« Reply #53 on: June 23, 2014, 12:52:38 PM »

Finally finished ALBW last night, amazingly enough it was the second Zelda I ever beat, and the first was two days before that, and that was OOT. A Link to the Past was the first Zelda I ever played, so ALBW hit all the right notes for me, and was simply freaking amazing. When I was playing OOT I wasn't having very much fun at all. The story was actually surprisingly surprising, and the music and graphics were freaking FANTASTIC. The only problems I had with the game were heart pieces being locked behind Mini-Games. Especially the baseball and Hylian foot race ones.

The painting mechanic was well used for the most part, aside from a few problems I had with it. The dungeons felt creative and fun aside from the fact that they were all mostly based on one or two tools. I also never, EVER, EEEVER used that boomerang once. Not once. It was useless. This game has gotten me really pumped for Zelda U. I really hope they don't call it that.
Logged

Laugh and the world laughs with you.
Weep, and you weep alone.
Dice
I'm fart and I'm smunny
AMG A GIRL
Posts: 12962


...AND STEVEN.

Member
*


View Profile WWW

Ignore
« Reply #54 on: June 23, 2014, 01:14:03 PM »

The painting mechanic was well used for the most part, aside from a few problems I had with it. The dungeons felt creative and fun aside from the fact that they were all mostly based on one or two tools. I also never, EVER, EEEVER used that boomerang once. Not once. It was useless. This game has gotten me really pumped for Zelda U. I really hope they don't call it that.

There's only ONE place the boomerang is used and it's one of those mini-rupee puzzle dungeons... yeah.
However, since you're given WAY too much money in that game anyways, boomers cut grass and bushed and (of course) do that awesome retrieval in one awesome toss (but yeah you never-ever actually need it).

Old habits die hard. When I played ALBW, I still ended up doing the second set of dungeons in (mostly) ALttP order, when possible. Except they switched where the ice and lava dungeons were, but I still wound up doing Turtle Rock last.

Probably best.  The shield is not particularly useful and by difficulty standards that dungeon is really out to hurt you at any point it can.  I always felt the Swamp Palace best to go after first to get the tunic (and make Hero Mode slightly easier).

I'm glad the new Zelda is going for a very non-linear or very open world style.  Skyward Sword was so annoying for that.  The Sky gave too much freedom (i.e. you can go wherever you want but there's almost jack-all to do) and the ground didn't really let you explore because the cookie-cutter environment (Lethal Lava Land, Shifting Sand Land, and Foliage Forest with fifteen-minute Water World).  I find it funny that link Shadow of the Colossus you really don't need to occupy the players every two seconds with some environmental hazard to keep the player entertained.... The gaming "downtime" is just as important as the action-packed times.
Logged

http://society6.com/Dice963
http://www.redbubble.com/people/dice9633
http://dice963.tumblr.com/

Support your local Dice (and pitch her ideas)!
RAINBOW PIXEL POWER!!!
Aeolus
This is the Monado's Powerbomb!
Posts: 8662


Little did he know, the fall damage would KO him.

Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #55 on: June 23, 2014, 04:57:16 PM »

So apparently we might still be on track in regards to a playable female character, if said character winds up being P2.


Old habits die hard. When I played ALBW, I still ended up doing the second set of dungeons in (mostly) ALttP order, when possible. Except they switched where the ice and lava dungeons were, but I still wound up doing Turtle Rock last.

I had to do that too. Though I should also mention that the Desert and Swamp Dungeons also got swapped around. Actually, I was surprised at how useful the Gale Rod wound up being (its basically a sidegrade to the Roc's Feather).
Logged

In my vision, I see that one of us is going to KO the other.
Tomara
Posts: 2743


Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #56 on: June 25, 2014, 03:46:23 AM »

I little co-op may not be a bad thing. I really liked Four Swords so if they can take a bit of that and add it to the new game, I probably wouldn't mind. It'd be  very difficult to design a game that is fun for both one or two gamers, though. I wouldn't want to be a player two that can't do anything but assist during battles. I'd want to help with the puzzle solving, too, you know? But to make a game with puzzles suitable for co-op, you need to design those puzzles for co-op. It could mean having two sets of dungeons: one for singleplayer, one of co-op.
Logged
Maxximum
Posts: I am Error
RPGFan Editor
Posts: 1581


Fills you with determiantion

Member
*


View Profile Email
« Reply #57 on: June 25, 2014, 04:24:29 AM »

I little co-op may not be a bad thing. I really liked Four Swords so if they can take a bit of that and add it to the new game, I probably wouldn't mind. It'd be  very difficult to design a game that is fun for both one or two gamers, though. I wouldn't want to be a player two that can't do anything but assist during battles. I'd want to help with the puzzle solving, too, you know? But to make a game with puzzles suitable for co-op, you need to design those puzzles for co-op. It could mean having two sets of dungeons: one for singleplayer, one of co-op.

I highly doubt that.
Its much more likely that the dungeons would be designed for co-op with a slapped on AI partner for single player, with watered down the puzzles to accommodate the NPC's limitations. I hate the tendency of shoving in multiplayer everywhere these days. Sure, its fun when the game is designed around it but some games should be designed from the ground up for a single player experience without compromising anything for a tacked on multiplayer. In my opinion, the Zelda series belongs in that category.
Logged

NOW PLAYING:
I can't tell you
Tomara
Posts: 2743


Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #58 on: June 25, 2014, 04:59:18 AM »

And I highly doubt that. That would be the easy way out and it wouldn't be anything special. It'd be something like the Ys installments with multiple playable characters. Nintendo isn't exactly the type of company that's a fan of the easy way.

(Not that there wouldn't be an easy way of designing two dungeon variations. All you'd have to do is confine puzzles to one room and only make a second version of the bigger puzzle rooms. Bosses could be given more health and stronger attacks.)
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  



Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!