Support NeoGAF

Kevin Shields · Mar 9, 2016

I'm playing through Twilight Princess HD and while the dungeons are exquisite, I'm left with the question - why do the geniuses behind Zelda feel the need to put so much time wasting crap in their games? It really blows my mind. H

First off, I want to say that this is not just referring to Twilight, Skyward, and Wind Waker which have obvious fetch quests meant to make the game longer.

But OOT has it (although out of all 3D games it is the least offensive) and Majoras Mask certainly has it. Besides Tears of light in TP, ive never wanted to throw my controller at the screen more than then "get two milk bottles" and "three whatever" near the end of MM. It was so frustrating as was the collecting all the eggs and other fetch quests.

It brings me to my question: These games are plenty long, they are filled with amazingly designed dungeons (besides the back half of Wind Waker) and fun gameplay loops. Why do they insert these time wasters that drag the game down? Twilight Princess and Skyward Sword still offer 25-30 hours of awesome material if you took away the mindless filler. Why do they keep doing this? Did they not learn from the MM or the triforce quest in WW?

Sorry, I just needed to rant. This is why LBW is probably my favorite Zelda game because it cuts this shit out and gives you meat the whole way through. I hope Zelda U follows suit.

Shuggananas · Mar 9, 2016

OoT and MM hardly have any padding which is why they're so good
The trend started with TWW which is the worst offender, TP is pretty bad too, SS is a bit better but still has some annoying sequences

butalala · Mar 9, 2016

There's hope that Zelda U follows LBW's example. I remember that Aonuma frequently mentioned lessons learned in LBW would pay off in Zelda U. However, in my experience, open world games are often high in padding, so it will be interesting to see how this all pans out.

To me, TP is the most padded game in the series. SS did a great job of making the overworld more interesting, but the opening sequence of the game is still a drag.

LiK · Mar 9, 2016

the biggest issue is the long ass tutorial sections. they treat their fans like they're idiots with every installment. just make those parts optional.

mrmickfran · Mar 9, 2016

I don't understand why people say that Wind Waker had padding.

I finished that one faster than Ocarina of Time. Twilight Princess and Skyward Sword definitely had padding though.

Shuggananas · Mar 9, 2016

mrmickfran said:
I don't understand why people say that Wind Waker had padding.

I finished that one faster than Ocarina of Time. Twilight Princess and Skyward Sword definitely had padding though.

You finished TWW faster because it has 5 dungeons

Red Hood · Mar 9, 2016

OOT definitely not has any kind of paddling that WW, TP and SS have. Not even close. It has the best pacing out of all 3D Zelda games.

Crayolan · Mar 9, 2016

Why do so many people not know that almost everything you need to do the well in MM is found inside of the well? The only things you have to bring in advance are the items that the first two gibdos at the start ask for.

LegendofLex · Mar 9, 2016

Shuggananas said:
OoT and MM hardly have any padding which is why they're so good

OoT, yes

MM has the Woods of Mystery (you're forced to walk the path to Koume twice), Lens of Truth (it's almost entirely useless outside of a single plot-related moment), Zora Eggs (you're forced to either collect many bottles by that point or make many trips to get eggs), and Ikana Well (it's not as bad as I remember it in the 3DS version, but it's still a chore).

To answer the OP's question, when they strip most of the challenge out of combat in the overworld, making it trivially easy to get anywhere - compare how difficult it is to get from place to place in the original LoZ to TP - they need to add some friction to make getting from place to place actually worthwhile.

georly · Mar 9, 2016

Padding is best left as optional content. The main run through the game should have as little padding as possible, imo.

In TP there are tons of 'minigames' thrown in at random to diversify gameplay, but the problem is that they're forced on you. Using the hawk to get the crib. Fishing for the cat. Following a monkey through poisonous woods. Collecting tears of light. Flying around avoiding obstacles. Etc etc. The problem with diversifying gameplay and forcing you to do it is that not everyone enjoys all of the different parts. If you make all of it optional, it makes the main game much more streamlined, better paced, and enjoyable. People who would normally complain the game is too short can seek out the bonus stuff as a way to lengthen the gameplay. There's a balancing act to be had here, and if done right, you can have a content-rich game with gameplay variety that isn't bogged down with bad pacing. We live in a world where SO MANY GAMES are coming out all the time that streamlining the main story of the game makes it more enjoyable to more people. For every person who complains a game is too short if it's short, many more never even finish a game if it's too long. No need to stretch out the main story in games any more - it's not as big a selling point as before. If people buy the game digitally, reselling the game if they finish it too quickly isn't a concern anymore either.

I mean, seriously, imagine twilight princess where all of the intro stuff and weird gameplay minigames were for heart pieces (with the two bonus heart pieces taken out of each dungeon). The game would flow a lot better. ALBW was wonderful because you could basically run from dungeon to dungeon and beat the game if you wanted to. Very little 'in-between' is forced on you. It still didn't feel too short as it had tons of secrets and bonus content on the side. In ocarina/majora, the padding in between primary dungeons felt like 'mini-dungeons' anyway. Gerudo fortress, beneath the well, Deku palace, etc. They were all 'zelda' content. You weren't forced to do an on-rails sequence or some sort of shooting minigame, those were all optional. I think that's why they excel and are much more well-regarded than TP/SS. WW had a mix of traditional zelda content (fire/ice island, ghost ship) between dungeons and forced 'other stuff' (windfall island sail quest, triforce hunt) which they went full ham with on TP/SS.

killroy87 · Mar 9, 2016

Because despite what some people will tell you, not every Zelda is that well designed a game.

Link Between Worlds is the best-designed Zelda in a long, loooong time. And a big part of that is the lack of filler.

spliced · Mar 9, 2016

Editing out the fluff is one of the top priorities for 3D Zeldas as far as I'm concerned. I wish the community was more against it and sending Nintendo the message like what has been done with Metroid FF.

Frodo · Mar 9, 2016

I think it has something to do with the belief, that seems to be in decline, that if your game isn't 40+ hours long it isn't worth buying. TP and SS have some really obvious padding, with SS being the worst offender with those quests after you finish the last dungeon. IT ends up hurting the experience more than anything.

Shuggananas · Mar 9, 2016

LegendofLex said:
OoT, yes

MM has the Woods of Mystery (you're forced to walk the path to Koume twice), Lens of Truth (it's almost entirely useless outside of a single plot-related moment), Zora Eggs (you're forced to either collect many bottles by that point or make many trips to get eggs), and Ikana Well (it's not as bad as I remember it in the 3DS version, but it's still a chore).

To answer the OP's question, when they strip most of the challenge out of combat in the overworld, making it trivially easy to get anywhere - compare how difficult it is to get from place to place in the original LoZ to TP - they need to add some friction to make getting from place to place actually worthwhile.

These aren't padding at all, they're part of the main game and there's nothing tedious about them. Yeah the well is fucking annoying I'll give you that.
Koume takes literally 5 minutes, lens of truth too. Zora eggs are annoying if you don't have 4 bottles, that's true, but this is more due to a technical limitation imo

Frodo said:
I think it has something to do with the belief, that seems to be in decline, that if your game isn't 40+ hours long it isn't worth buying. TP and SS have some really obvious padding, with SS being the worst offender with those quests after you finish the last dungeon. IT ends up hurting the experience more than anything.

but these aren't padding in SS ? You have 3 things to do only once and there's no repetition
The triforce quest in TWW, now that's padding af

AdmiralMikey · Mar 9, 2016

The time padding is why I never went back for another playthrough of Wind Waker or Skyward Sword. I actually find Twilight Princess to be least offensive of the latter games in the time-padding category, but that doesn't mean it isn't there. There's just nothing in TP that felt like a slog as much as the Triforce Pieces in Wind Waker or needing to fight The Imprisoned THREE TIMES in Skyward Sword.

I think there's a lot of lessons to be learned from Link Between Worlds. The game is tight and pace is quick. I had more enjoyment in the 15 or so hours it took me to beat that than the 50+ hours I spent dragging my way through Skyward Sword. The quality of the game is measured not in the number of hours spent playing the game, but how engaged you are with the game in those hours. Outside of the dungeons, I wasn't very engaged for the majority of time I spent in Wind Waker or Skyward Sword. I only hope they don't mistake time padding for quality in the Wii U Zelda.

10k · Mar 9, 2016

There's this notion at Nintendo, especially before the HD era, where short games were looked down upon by the community. It was almost critical and commercial suicide to release a short game. If a Zelda, Mario, MGS or FPS could be finished in less than 12 hours or so you were dead. So Nintendo believed that the meat of a Zelda game wasn't long enough and deciding to add in filler.

I'm very worried Zelda U got delayed to add in more side missions and filler content (like Witcher 3 or dragon age 3 levels of side quests) when the core game was most likely long enough.

Now with indies and walking simulators and episodic content and smaller attention spans, everybody loves shorter games and you can get away with it.

I'll take an Ocarina of Time type game (no padding, around 20 hours my first play through, close to 25 to 100% it) over a 42 hour Twilight Princess with an empty over world and tears to collect or triforce pieces in wind Waker.

Azuardo · Mar 9, 2016

OoT 3D was a really refreshing experience when I played it again recently - just a focus on dungeons and not much else. Was brilliant.

MM is fine for me, because it's a very different type of Zelda game designed around quests to actually get to the few dungeons in the game.

WW was okay up until the Triforce hunt. It's clear the game suffered from time restraints, what with the cut dungeons and all, but I can just about forgive it because I like the sailing and such.

TP and SS are definitely culprits, though. The dungeons in TP are awesome, but boy, does it drag on. SS is the only 3D Zelda I've never replayed, which says it all.

Seems things have got worse over time, but as mentioned, it's hoped Zelda U follows ALBW's solid focus on dungeons with little stoppages, just like OoT.

FunkyPajamas · Mar 9, 2016

mrmickfran said:
I don't understand why people say that Wind Waker had padding.

I finished that one faster than Ocarina of Time. Twilight Princess and Skyward Sword definitely had padding though.

Shuggananas said:
You finished TWW faster because it has 5 dungeons

I can see where mrmickfran is coming from; to be honest I didn't feel the padding when I was playing the game because I was so in love with sailing and the ocean that as soon as the game let me, I started going all over the place to see what I could find. And so I started getting shards/charts because I ran into them, not because I was doing a fetch quest at the end of the game. For the people that played through the dungeons and then *had* to do the fetch quest to advance the story, yeah, I can also understand how that would have sucked.

Arkeband · Mar 9, 2016

Kevin Shields said:
This is why LBW is probably my favorite Zelda game because it cuts this shit out and gives you meat the whole way through.

LBW managed to make every dungeon past the first "padding" by having them all the same exact difficulty. For this reason it's likely the worst Zelda in the entire series. No progression waters down the adventure.

Skilletor · Mar 9, 2016

It's why I've never finished a 3D zelda and have beaten most 2D ones multiple times.

Rodney McKay · Mar 9, 2016

The only thing I consider padding in Majora's Mask was the (totally optional) fairy collection stuff they added to the dungeons, and even that isn't that bad once you understand the layout of the dungeon and you have the Great Fairy mask.

Maybe the section before the water temple where you have to get the eggs from the Pirates, but if you have enough bottles it's not bad at all. The game is focused a lot on the sidequests and the character stories, so it makes sense that there is a TON of sidequests and stuff to do, but I don't feel like any individual one is too padded. There are only a few quests that are huge and hard to do, like the Anju+Kafei quest and the Zora singer one (but even that one is tied to the main progression of the game).

I just beat Wind Waker HD so I can definitely agree about the triforce hunt being pretty poor padding (takes quite a while and most of it isn't particularly fun IMO). I even like exploring the overworld the best in Zelda games, and even I felt like there should have been an extra dungeon or two instead of a collectathon there.

And I haven't started TP HD yet, but I don't remember hating the collection quest you do in that one much. It was over pretty quick and was easy to do compared to WW from what I remember (granted I only played it when it came out on the Wii, so I could be misremembering).

A Link to the Past · Mar 9, 2016

OoT definitely had padding. What do you think the Adult Link section was? With only few exceptions, all of the new areas are dungeons. Forest Temple has no new areas before it, Fire Temple has one new area (that really doesn't have much outside of the temple), Water Temple doesn't have any new areas, and Shadow Temple just has an area that you can't access without a Hookshot (IIRC). The desert was the only new area in the game, really.

stuminus3 · Mar 9, 2016

Console Zelda games ended up with so much time wasting crap because that's what became expected of video games in the early-mid 2000s.

If Wii U Link has to climb up hundreds of towers I'll be pissed.

Orniletter · Mar 9, 2016

Most of the "padding" is fun. Some things were overdone (like the toad collecting in SS, or the last insect hunt as a wolf in TP), but I can't say I've been bothered by most of what some people consider padding.

I loved the stealth sequence in SS, the Twilight Realm sequences and the first 2 tear collecting sequences in TP.

Edit: Metroid Prime's Chozo relikt collecting and WW's Triforce hunt were not too bad either.

nynt9 · Mar 9, 2016

LegendofLex said:
To answer the OP's question, when they strip most of the challenge out of combat in the overworld, making it trivially easy to get anywhere - compare how difficult it is to get from place to place in the original LoZ to TP - they need to add some friction to make getting from place to place actually worthwhile.

This right here. The implications of the design changes highlighted in this video basically:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XOC3vixnj_0

Pro · Mar 9, 2016

I never had a problem with it until SS which I think was largely so annoying because of the Wii Mote motion controls. That really made some of the fetch quests and mini games hair tearing.

wrowa · Mar 9, 2016

I don't think the tears collecting in Twilight is meant to be padding. They had the idea for the Twilight Ream and needed to fill it with something, but apparently they didn't have a better idea than spreading a dozen shining tears across the map.

I thought it was fun enough and quite well designed in Odon and Kakariko, but I can see why a lot of people get instantly frustrated when a game tasks them to collect a lot of seemingly pointless stuff.

So, I go with: In a lot of cases, they've got stuff in mind they want the players to do, but they fail to find interesting incentives why the players need to do this stuff.

LegendofLex · Mar 9, 2016

Shuggananas said:
These aren't padding at all, they're part of the main game and there's nothing tedious about them.

If the game is telling you to go to a place and actually lets you get there but stops you from actually doing the meaningful thing you came there for until you go do X first, that's padding.

A game without padding doesn't throw up arbitrary plot barriers to keep you from getting somewhere or doing something.

nynt9 said:
This right here. The implications of the design changes highlighted in this video basically:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XOC3vixnj_0

My dream Zelda game is a 3D Zelda game with the combat intensity of the first two. Your first trip anywhere will probably be treacherous because the enemies will whittle down your health, but once you grow in power the enemies there will become trivial, while other enemies suddenly become manageable. And enemies won't be so easy to just avoid outright.

Junahu · Mar 9, 2016

Empty space during a playthrough is part and parcel of an adventure's pacing. It helps the player better appreciate and anticipate the exciting payoffs, along with giving the player an excuse to zone out and do whatever. It's one of the important ingredients of immersion, but it's definitely something that's difficult to get right (WW's triforce quest leans on the wrong side of tedious, even though its heart was in the right place)

NinjamicWZ · Mar 9, 2016

Trying to give interactive or aesthetic meaning to 360 degrees of space only to end up stretching the design and ideas thin.

Instro · Mar 9, 2016

I'm surprised people are saying SS had less padding? The game has a ton of backtracking, and a lot of annoying fetch quests. Only difference is the condensed overworld.

Vertti · Mar 9, 2016

Padding in general should go away. There's more good games than I have time to play. Just give me the good stuff and skip all the boring filler quests and padding.

However, it doesn't mean that games should be action scene after another. Good pacing is still very important.

BGBW · Mar 9, 2016

Zelda is about the adventure not just the dungeons.

What you consider padding others consider core content. It's sometimes nice to break up the flow a bit so you're not just running from one dungeon to another. Variety is the spice of life.

Shuggananas · Mar 9, 2016

LegendofLex said:
If the game is telling you to go to a place and actually lets you get there but stops you from actually doing the meaningful thing you came there for until you go do X first, that's padding.

A game without padding doesn't throw up arbitrary plot barriers to keep you from getting somewhere or doing something.

So... super metroid has padding because you need power bombs for those orange doors ?
Koume is a matter of minutes to solve, and the lens of truth is basically on your way, can hardly miss it
The well and the zora eggs are annoying but that's because of how items where managed with bottles

MM put a big focus on unlocking dungeon as well as completing them, and it's interesting in most cases, and is a clever use of the 3 day system

The_Lump · Mar 9, 2016

10k said:
There's this notion at Nintendo, especially before the HD era, where short games were looked down upon by the community. It was almost critical and commercial suicide to release a short game. If a Zelda, Mario, MGS or FPS could be finished in less than 12 hours or so you were dead. So Nintendo believed that the meat of a Zelda game wasn't long enough and deciding to add in filler.

I'm very worried Zelda U got delayed to add in more side missions and filler content (like Witcher 3 or dragon age 3 levels of side quests) when the core game was most likely long enough.

Now with indies and walking simulators and episodic content and smaller attention spans, everybody loves shorter games and you can get away with it.

I'll take an Ocarina of Time type game (no padding, around 20 hours my first play through, close to 25 to 100% it) over a 42 hour Twilight Princess with an empty over world and tears to collect or triforce pieces in wind Waker.

This is true. In late 90's/early 2000s it was all bragging about how many hours a game would take to complete. And to a certain extent thats good. Games are too short for the money they cost nowadays.

I've got no problem with extra fetch quests and side-quests as long as you can complete the game without doing them. OoT struck the perfect balance. There were loads of side quests to do if you wanted to 100% the game and take 40+ hours doing so. But you could complete the main quest in 12 hours if you wanted.

alr1ght · Mar 9, 2016

I've always said 3D Zeldas post OOT are terrible. The major reason is due to the bloat. I guess if there's only a few games worthy of playtime a year you want them to last, but I'd much rather have a better paced, replyable short game than one long big slog.

toythatkills · Mar 9, 2016

People who buy games put too much value on how many hours they get from the dollars they put in, so it's in the interests of Nintendo to make the games appear as "big" as possible.

If they release a Zelda game that lasted 10-15 hours, people would freak out about how it wasn't worth the money. This isn't true of just Zelda, it's gaming in general. Far too many people use "length" as a marker of value rather than "quality" which is why we get so much "RPG-lite" stuff these days.

Nocturnowl · Mar 9, 2016

You could say Wind Waker had padding due to being rushed as evidenced by its second half. At the same time I believe it got some flak for being too short so when we got to TP it's like the Zelda team used their skills at creating padding to ensure TP wouldn't get struck with the too short dilemma.
Thus we got a perfectly decent length game with extra padding, I could say the same for Skyward Sword as well.

So like with most padding I figure the answer is because of the old idea that a game is more worth putting the money down for if it's long as opposed to short, regardless of how that's achieved.

Afrocious · Mar 9, 2016

SS is the one 3D Zelda game I never played more than once.

That part when you have to swim around and collect notes was hilariously awful

muteki · Mar 9, 2016

Padding in 2D Zeldas exists in the form of time spent figuring out what to do next. In 3D Zeldas that is for various reasons not really there anymore, so they pad it out in other ways (fetch quests, etc.)

10k · Mar 9, 2016

The_Lump said:
This is true. In late 90's/early 2000s it was all bragging about how many hours a game would take to complete. And to a certain extent thats good. Games are too short for the money they cost nowadays.

I've got no problem with extra fetch quests and side-quests as long as you can complete the game without doing them. OoT struck the perfect balance. There were loads of side quests to do if you wanted to 100% the game and take 40+ hours doing so. But you could complete the main quest in 12 hours if you wanted.

Yup. I remember picking up Xenosaga episode 1 and the back of the cover's first bullet point was "over 80 hours of gameplay!"

It was a major selling point. I remember Metroid prime 3 getting some flack for being a 15 hour or so game when the first two were around 20 hours.

But then HD development happened and 8 hour or less AAA linear experiences became the norm and now a 15 hour game is considered long and meaty.

John Kowalski · Mar 9, 2016

I really don't get what people think is padding.

Spieler Eins · Mar 9, 2016

Excluding the tutorial, I consider nothing between the dungeons of TP padding. Excellent game with tons of gameplay variety and building the right atmosphere especially for the wolf parts. Barely anything feels like it's there to stretch gameplay time. In particular since there's not much repetition in the tasks.

takriel · Mar 9, 2016

Because the directors don't fucking know better. They had 5 years to streamline Skyward Sword. Instead, we got 20-30% of padding. Fuck this shit.

Chase17 · Mar 9, 2016

What OP is considering "Padding" can be good though. I liked the return to Eldin Volcano and Lanayru in Skyward Sword. It can be bad though too, like with the swimming around Faron Woods.

Personally, I don't really consider it padding, just part of the game.

Shuggananas · Mar 9, 2016

Afrocious said:
SS is the one 3D Zelda game I never played more than once.

That part when you have to swim around and collect notes was hilariously awful

Bleh, tadtones were all in the same area, and weren't too hard or long. See them as a SM64 red coin star. Not too exciting but it's done quickly.
You want really bad padding ? TWW triforce quest or in TP where you had to awake all those fucking statues to "revive" the scepter thing in order to access the sky temple. Fuck. That. Thing.
Oh and forced escort mission or dumb bridge fights

Spieler Eins said:
Excluding the tutorial, I consider nothing between the dungeons of TP padding. Excellent game with tons of gameplay variety and building the right atmosphere especially for the wolf parts. Barely anything feels like it's there to stretch gameplay time. In particular since there's not much repetition in the tasks.

And let's not forget the wonderful lost woods that you have to do twice.

HeresSomeWeapons · Mar 9, 2016

Arkeband said:
LBW managed to make every dungeon past the first "padding" by having them all the same exact difficulty. For this reason it's likely the worst Zelda in the entire series. No progression waters down the adventure.

Oh my god this. The praise that continually gets heaped upon ALBW blows my mind. Is this what people want? Zelda games with a difficulty curve for babies? The best thing about that game is that if you squint really hard, you can pretend you're actually playing A Link to the Past.

Kevin Shields · Mar 9, 2016

Nocturnowl said:
You could say Wind Waker had padding due to being rushed as evidenced by its second half. At the same time I believe it got some flak for being too short so when we got to TP it's like the Zelda team used their skills at creating padding to ensure TP wouldn't get struck with the too short dilemma.
Thus we got a perfectly decent length game with extra padding, I could say the same for Skyward Sword as well.

So like with most padding I figure the answer is because of the old idea that a game is more worth putting the money down for if it's long as opposed to short, regardless of how that's achieved.

Interesting. What I find funny is that now that I'm past Arbiter's Ground (I've never been past here because of the filler before it) TP is moving along nicely and I'm falling a bit in love with this game. The reduced Tears of Light helped ease my anger this time around. It seems like TP padding is front heavy whereas WW padding is back heavy and SS is a little more sprinkled throughout. I don't know which one is worse...

Alex_Mexico · Mar 9, 2016

TP definitely has padding but SS is the worst. I'm starting to forget that slog of a game but the Other Realm collect quest with forced stealth and no weapons that you have to make 4 times in the game is the worst. Couple that with making you fight the Imprisioned (which was already a frustrating fight) 3 times makes SS easily the worst 3D Zelda and the worst Zelda overall since Zelda II.

I forget how many times SS made you go back to the same three areas (forest, desert, volcano) to do something different. Oh so thy flooded Faron Woods? Cool but before you can progress here's 30 musical notes you have to collect while you control Link with what can only be described as the worst swimming controls ever implemented for a 3D game.

God, I (mostly) hate SS! And those are just a few major complaints I have with that game.

LegendofLex · Mar 9, 2016

Shuggananas said:
So... super metroid has padding because you need power bombs for those orange doors ?

The existence of barriers in the world isn't so much the problem.

It's when the game introduces entire segments of gameplay - peripheral to the natural restrictions of the game's design approach (locked doors that need keys, for example) and any challenges that you'd already find all over the game (like enemies) - that exist solely for the purpose of arbitrarily gating progress to the place the game was already pointing you toward.

Support NeoGAF

Why Do 3D Zeldas Have So Much Padding?

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Banned

Banned

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Maturity, bitches.

Banned

Banned

bish gets all the credit :)

Member

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Member

Similar threads