PRjumpman124
Member
I would a prefer a "new legend of zelda' in the style of new super mario bros. Make it similar to link to the past.
3D zeldas have been boring, imo.
I think they should do something like this but for 3DS.
I would a prefer a "new legend of zelda' in the style of new super mario bros. Make it similar to link to the past.
3D zeldas have been boring, imo.
For the 50th time? No how fun is it to know that the dungeon item will damage the boss before the battle even starts.
Y'all know I'm a pretty big Zelda fan, so I'm gonna be continuing anyway, but please tell me it gets better.
For the 50th time? No how fun is it to know that the dungeon item will damage the boss before the battle even starts.
As said, this stuff is not worthwhile if the game is easy as hell to begin with.You mean like, say, arrow and bomb and magic meter and wallet upgrades?
As said, this stuff is not worthwhile if the game is easy as hell to begin with.
You do realize that Zelda bosses aren't just amorphrous blobs that die when you rub a specific item against them, right? Shoving a bomb down a giant dodongo's throat is a different experience from pulling Morpha's nucleus out of its water tentacle with the hookshot. You might as well complain that Link explores dungeons by running around, or uses keys and switches to open doors.
Why do Zelda fans like to complain about really vague concepts being reused as though they're not implemented different ways every time?
You gotta figure out HOW it works against the boss, and the items are often new.
I'm just going to leave these here. This is what could have been for a modern Zelda title.
Why should we be satisfied with the same concept game after game? Would it hurt to switch up some things? And why are you seemingly offended over this, lol.
I'm just going to leave these here. This is what could have been for a modern Zelda title.
Instead, we get shit like Twilight Princess and Skyward Sword.
Skyward Sword has moments like those, though. Looking over cliffs, going through dark catacombs, etc. You don't hold a lamp though.
I like it when people can't come up with an actual response so they just go "lol u mad bro lol"
As for the dungeon item vs boss discussion, I do believe they should use the new item somewhere in the battle, however it doesn't have to be as obvious/should be used in conjunction with some of your previously acquired items and such. For example after finding the bow instead of simply using it to shoot a flashing/brightly-coloured/obvious weakspot, there could be a fire in the boss room where you have to shoot the arrow through the fire to set part of the environment on fire to damage the boss. This would be less obvious if done correctly, the only kind of similar example I can think of is the grappling hook onto the dragon's tail in the WW, albeit that was still pretty obvious.
What more should I come up with? I already stated I didn't like the idea of having all future zeldas using the dungeon item to exploit the weakness of the dungeon boss. Geez.
I'm just going to leave these here. This is what could have been for a modern Zelda title.
Instead, we get shit like Twilight Princess and Skyward Sword.
Well, OoT had:
Forest
Fire
Water
--PLOT TWIST--
Forest 2
Fire 2
Water 2
Shadow
Light/Desert
Combo Dungeon
Earth Temple was at least more interesting than Dodongo's Cave and Goron Mines with its boulder rolling mechanics, and the Fire Sanctuary had some clever puzzles.
So Skyward Sword, then?
Yeah, I'm so bummed out we didn't get a cliff overlooking a forest or a cave with some pillars in it.
hmmmmmmm
Now that I think about it, didn't Skyward Sword have a part where you shoot arrows through fire?So Skyward Sword, then?
I disagree. The Sky aside, the three ground areas in SS were all designed very well and became even more diverse as they branched out. TP and its barren wasteland was the problem, and it was basically fixed, though in SS the Sky was like an even less interesting version of WW's ocean. So, you take the good with the bad.My point is that the world design has suffered horribly since Ocarina of Time.
And you skipped my reply to that. So good for you.
My point is that the world design has suffered horribly since Ocarina of Time.
it could have been drawings?
What's interesting about the world design in those pictures? Because stuff like the Twilight Realm and Sea of Sand (or whatever it was called in Skyward Sword) are a hell of a lot more interesting than a cliff and a cave.
It's kind of hard to translate the feelings evoked by artwork to the actual video game experience. That's the problem. Artwork gives an idea that sparks the imagination, but for the game itself to work you also have to add in gameplay mechanics, sensible world structure, scenario design, etc.
I would indeed enjoy a Zelda title modeled after Okami (but much harder, of course)
1) Zelda is not an RPG. 2) Link "levels up" by getting new swords and heart containers, and he "learns new abilities" through new sword techniques in just about every game since Ocarina of time, and every new item he gets is a new ability as well.
Of course, with that paragraph about Pokemon, I can't be sure if your post is even serious or not.
Serious question: Why do we have these threads every two weeks? All they do for me is articulate 1) Why Nintendo shouldn't listen to its fans when it comes to Zelda and 2) How completely different everybody's tastes in Zelda are. Something about Zelda threads in particular seems especially fruitless.
So, Zelda is Zelda, Pokemon is Pokemon. That's the problem...for me.
The last pokemon I played was the one on the ds, black. It was the same as all the others I have played. You go to a town win badges, walk in bushes, find pokemon, level them up.
I'll just leave my pokemon idea here. It's just an idea, I just thought it would introduce some ideas instead of JOKE POST????
You could incorporate pokemon. NOT THE GAME WE ARE ALL USED TO, the pokemon themselves. They are characters right? As Link, you could find some of these new pokemon (in forests, fighting bosses, etc). These pokemon could have abilities such as fire, ice, blah, blah, blah. You can then have a pokemon, of your choice, be your companion instead of an annoying fucking fairy. This companion could then fight along side you, level up, help you solve puzzles. Fire ability opens ice...etc. You could also have a designated arena where you could fight your Zelda pokemon with others using that weird thing called the internet. All of this is organized by the game pad. Again, I can more readily see pokemon inhabiting the Zelda universe than the one they are now (fire breathing dragons, monsters, etc) Now, I didn't come up with this idea. I first saw this type of thing implemented in Everquest 2 and then WoW. You could find pokemon type monsters and collect them during your quests. You could then fight others in the game with your collected pokemon type monsters. I then thought, why couldn't the company that actually own the pokemon name introduce them into other franchises? The answer I've received in this thread is basically FUCK YOU, Zelda is Zelda and Pokemon is Pokemon!!!! Zelda is almost 30 years old and doesn't have a compelling story beyond Ganon steals Zelda, Link rescues her. Pokemon doesn't HAVE a fucking story. I don't understand why so many are adverse to changing up the same old zelda narative?
For everyone against putting some 'Dark Souls' in Zelda, go play Zelda II, then get back to us.
I would a prefer a "new legend of zelda' in the style of new super mario bros. Make it similar to link to the past.
.
I'm just going to leave these here. This is what could have been for a modern Zelda title.
Instead, we get shit like Twilight Princess and Skyward Sword.
I could dig that if it were also another Four Swords game. There should be more Four Swords games and people who don't think so are people who don't have friends.
As enticing as a massive truly open-world Zelda title is I think I'd prefer having fewer but very well designed dungeons over countless minimally branching repetitive dungeons hidden throughout. I remember a few small micro-dungeons in TP (one by Kakariko and one by Lake Hylia) that were both incredibly bland and boring but they both show you what you get when the game becomes non-linear (because neither assume you have specific items other than maybe Bombs).I don't know if this is appropriate for this thread but this is some of the things I want in Zelda Wii U.
Overworld
I want Zelda Wii U to have the best over world, I want it to have a huge open over world that is non linear, I want explorable forests (non linear ones), Twilight Princess beta showed an explorable forest which of course was taken out of the game for some unknown reason.
I want hidden caves, swamps, lakes, etc. Anything adventures.
Majora's Mask has a arrow-through-fire puzzle in the first dungeon (not combat but yeah).Now that I think about it, didn't Skyward Sword have a part where you shoot arrows through fire?
I'm just going to leave these here. This is what could have been for a modern Zelda title.
Instead, we get shit like Twilight Princess and Skyward Sword.
You must not have played SS, otherwise you wouldn't have included it in #1.
So, Zelda is Zelda, Pokemon is Pokemon. That's the problem...for me.
The last pokemon I played was the one on the ds, black. It was the same as all the others I have played. You go to a town win badges, walk in bushes, find pokemon, level them up.
The intro to Skyward Sword is shorter than the intros to any 3D Zelda, if I recall correctly.
Or this...
Mario 2 is the same game as Mario 1, you run and jump in both!
Pokemon changes:
Gen II: 2 new pokemon types: Dark and Steel. Night and Day cycle. Hold items.
Gen III: Abilities, berries, natures, double battles, contests
Gen IV: Physical/Special split (MAJOR OVERHAUL), online battles and trades, underground
Gen V: Triple battles, rotation battles, dream world, interesting plot
Every generation: new pokemon, new type combos, new moves, alterations to old pokemon and moves, new regions, new bosses