So your solution is to just cram that field full of enemies, chests, entrances, and pick-ups?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Aonuma on BotW: "it's OK if there's pocket of emptiness" "Getting lost is fun."
- Thread starter BY2K
- Start date
So your solution is to just cram that field full of enemies, chests, entrances, and pick-ups?
Getting lost can be fun I think, but it all depends on what you can do while you're lost. I remember getting lost in Wind Waker on the gamecube years and years ago, back then I never looked at walk throughs, it literally took me a month or so to figure out the next step. During that time I sailed island to island just exploring and I looked everywhere to find out how to get into the two sage islands, I didn't even have fire and ice arrows at the time. But I remember really enjoying that experience. Admittedly my brother quit the game when he got stuck on the same thing.
Getting lost in a barren world like the one in TPP is the problem because there's really no incentive to explore the world.
Getting lost is fine if there is something I know that I need to accomplish. For example you can get lost in Metroid Prime (if you don't use the map), but you always know the rules defined by the game and that there is a path you need to follow. I don't like games where the creators say "eh, just do what you feel like".
Coffee Dog
Banned
That's BOTW's solution, given that there is pointless moblin location #23 every few steps with irrelevant trash loot like bow +1.
You all need to go outside more often and see how the rural world is. This planet is full of all sorts of environments including large open areas.
I don't see anyone complaining about their being monsters dancing around campfires, waiting to ambush you all over the place when in the real world there are none.
Edit... beaten by post above. Nevermind.
I don't see anyone complaining about their being monsters dancing around campfires, waiting to ambush you all over the place when in the real world there are none.
Edit... beaten by post above. Nevermind.
Ugh, yeah... when I saw the map filled with icons it was such a hype-killer.
Or maybe make the field smaller and have more wildlife?
From what we've seen, the overworld is nothing like MGS V. I love the game, but the overworld literally has nothing except for a few animals. There is nothing to do or see. MGSV is very hub based with a lot of emptiness between them. Even outside of the shrines and dungeons, we've seen places to explore, enemies to fight, and puzzles to solve in BotW. There's a lot of empty space, and I'm sure people will quickly grow bored of boboklin camps, but keep in mind this is the first area of the game with sections purposefully removed.
Not really a big difference from typical Zelda then.
Rupees have largely been useless for a long time now. Making them not pop up in every shrub makes sense.
Zelda also has had an empty feeling overworld in the 3d games too. MM less so, but the field in OOT, ocean in WW, sky in SS, all were very "empty" on the surface anyway.
Rupees have largely been useless for a long time now. Making them not pop up in every shrub makes sense.
Zelda also has had an empty feeling overworld in the 3d games too. MM less so, but the field in OOT, ocean in WW, sky in SS, all were very "empty" on the surface anyway.
I think the icons where demo stuff so users could get there in the limited time. On the treehouse stream they had no such markers unless they chose to put them.
Although that doesn't change the fact thay yes, indeed, the world is vast and to be made more entertaining their is trashlooting and spawndicing along the way. Witcher 3 calls it "bandits" and "hidden """""treasure""""".
Cow Mengde
Banned
Yes, really. They weren't "tough" tough, but they were relentless. Even though they had no real AI to speak off, Moblins are constantly launching spears and arrow. Octorocks were shooting objects in all directions. Zoras jumped out and shot fireballs while you're trying to fight on land. Those Centaur things were really tough to kill. The enemies weren't intelligent, but they attacked anywhere and everywhere. If you're not careful, you get hit.
Zelda 2's enemies were the same. Those damn boomerang enemies were a pain. Things charged at you and chased you.
I'll just imagine that MGSV doesn't exist.
Skittzo0413
Member
Keep in mind that very little of the gameplay we've seen has shown horse riding, which is definitely MUCH faster than traditional walking or sprinting.
With regards to huge open fields, look at the gif of the horseback fight with the guardian- that type of thing doesn't work in small, densely packed fields. And I am 99% convinced that we will be getting not only horse upgrades (saddles, horseshoes) but we will also get different vehicles or mounts which will let you move MUCH faster or potentially even fly.
Edit: This gif-
When traversal is fun and easy, wide open spaces feel much more natural and beneficial to gameplay.
I've never been an open world game hater, but I haven't found many that really interested me. There have been some that have for sure, but this game really does. It's so "survivalist" which helps, and my favorite looking games in this category have survivalist elements. It adds so much extra richness/realism/whatever you want to call it to the genre.
Haha, as far as we know! But yes, there are so many different environments that, well, simply, it's fine to have variety believe it or not.
Neither are movies, pictures, etc. They are all representative, but it's how they are presented in the medium and your own personal response to it that means anything in the end. Lots of people like meandering around even in open world video games. What if walking through that field triggered an ambush from some enemies? What if there is hidden treasure in there, or a hole you could fall into to find a shrine? It just takes an iota of imagination and you're really just being obtuse.
So you want a small world instead? Does that not defeat the purpose of having a vast world?
Coffee Dog
Banned
This hasn't changed. The AI is generally good enough to hit you, even in modern zelda games.
What has changed is enemies doing a quarter heart of damage. :^)
Being vast for vastness' sake isn't a good thing.
I think the important thing with the open world is not that there is something in every nook and cranny, but that there are always things you can see in the distance or close to you that you want to go towards. Then you give the player a goal, and prevent that feeling of "what's the point of this place, there's nothing here" which you don't want to have. It's important that it's not too empty, but I think you get a more rewarding experience if not every piece of exploration you do means you'll find something. If you see a waterfall you want the player to think "I wonder if there's something behind that waterfall?", which only becomes a valid question if you sometimes find something behind it.
From the videos I've seen I think they've found a really good balance. There are places where basically nothing is going on, but there are enemies popping up often and they've made sure that every enemy encounter is rewarded. It's not just one rupee, but weapons and material. Also, every tree you see can be cut down and made into material. Even in the most meaningless places you can at least create a fire to warm you up or to cook things that might be useful for the road ahead. It's a bit Minecraft in that every piece of the world can be valuable to you.
I haven't been this hopeful about a game in so long. I really thought they were basically going to do A Link Between Worlds in a bigger world in 3D, but this is so much more. It feels like a Zelda game 30 years in the making, and I don't mean that as a shot against how long it's taken for this game to get made.
From the videos I've seen I think they've found a really good balance. There are places where basically nothing is going on, but there are enemies popping up often and they've made sure that every enemy encounter is rewarded. It's not just one rupee, but weapons and material. Also, every tree you see can be cut down and made into material. Even in the most meaningless places you can at least create a fire to warm you up or to cook things that might be useful for the road ahead. It's a bit Minecraft in that every piece of the world can be valuable to you.
I haven't been this hopeful about a game in so long. I really thought they were basically going to do A Link Between Worlds in a bigger world in 3D, but this is so much more. It feels like a Zelda game 30 years in the making, and I don't mean that as a shot against how long it's taken for this game to get made.
That is not remotely what's being done. Aonuma specifically says "pockets of emptiness".
Cramming every square inch of a supposedly open world game with items/enemies/rewards so the player is forever getting brief but instant gratification nonstop is also not a good thing.
Red Dead Redemption did this perfectly already. There is plenty to do and find, but there are stretches where there is just open wilderness. That ensures the game world does not feel tiny, while also not feeling empty.
Petrae
Member
Not this open world hater. The more I hear and read about this game, the less I find myself wanting to bother with it.
I'm not one of those "It's the journey, it's the destination" people. I don't mind the journey so long as the destination is clear and the journey doesn't bore me to tears. More often than not in open world games, though, I do get bored... and this looks no different.
mrmickfran
Member
What happened to Aonuma after Skyward Sword?
He's a changed man.
He's a changed man.
For the better
Ah, well, I'm not agreeing that it's the only game with several ways to defeat enemies, it is however the only open world game with this level of interaction with the environment that leads to such an interactive environment, enemies included.
MGSV's environments, from what I played, are basically empty desert with bases scattered throughout. I only played a bit though, so I don't know if the whole game is like this.
Didn't say that but rather trying to balance size with things to do, so that the game keeps feel like there's always something going on. Xenoblade X from what I've seen did a much better job of that than BotW. Just having a large overworld doesn't mean jack.
If you're having pitfalls or hidden treasure everywhere then it's obviously not a barren field is it? However they should be carefully of avoing many of the issues with Wind Waker where there's not much going on at times when you're transversing from point A to B.
The reason I enjoyed OoT's Hyrule field at the time was because it felt big and vast. I enjoyed the open space, least not to just ride Epona in.
As long as the features of the terrain are interesting and varied, it needn't ever feel 'empty' - you don't go to national parks and say "wow, I sure wish there were houses here".
It's a balance of atmosphere and entertainment, and I trust Nintendo to get it right.
As long as the features of the terrain are interesting and varied, it needn't ever feel 'empty' - you don't go to national parks and say "wow, I sure wish there were houses here".
It's a balance of atmosphere and entertainment, and I trust Nintendo to get it right.
Chezzymann
Member
From what I've seen there seems to be a good amount of hidden treasure, shrines, goblin forts, and mini bosses scattered around the world so there seems to be a good amount of things to do. Now the issue is if it gets repetitive and if they re use these things over and over in other areas outside the plateau
Neoleo2143
Member
Except with how fast everything breaks in this game, you do need that loot. It's not irrelevant. You're not going to always have your best weapon on hand.
Also despite the game filling in the map at the towers, you still have to find everything in it. It doesn't tell you where everything is. You have to mark up your map in the process.
thomasmahler
Member
From what I've seen so far, they've been doing everything exactly the right way - Can't wait for the new Zelda on NX! 
Great, cause I never understood the point making these huge open worlds, only to guide you about like a puppet, and in the end, never truly giving players a sense of exploration and discovery, or never riddled with the fear of getting lost in a strange/new region.
On the topic of no rupees in the grass; Thank God! I always have the insatiable urge to cut every blade of grass in Zelda games, to see what I may find. The total estimated size of this world and the sheer amount of grass I'd need to cut - for several months - would surely earn me a vacancy in a psychiatric center. I suspect the team wanted to avoid such a distraction. Kudos!
On the topic of no rupees in the grass; Thank God! I always have the insatiable urge to cut every blade of grass in Zelda games, to see what I may find. The total estimated size of this world and the sheer amount of grass I'd need to cut - for several months - would surely earn me a vacancy in a psychiatric center. I suspect the team wanted to avoid such a distraction. Kudos!
True! But, hopefully the map will show that somehow, or you could tag it yourself or something similar! It could get confusing with all those shrines and things though for sure if they don't do that!
How true that is! It's not a gatcha game, but an adventure!
You can set up some great experiences too with a wide environment, and possibly getting lost. What if there is a giant cave system somewhere? What if you wander into a huge desert trying desperately to find a location the nearby townsfolk talked about? What if you wander onto a huge sheet of ice from a frozen lake, trying to get to the visible dungeon on the other side, and suddenly something breaks through it? Like you said, it looks like the balance is really good from the many varied videos!
Oh definitely I agree about with Wind Waker! Sometimes sailing along was just too much, as much as I love that game! I can definitely relate to your concerns with not just emptiness but just outright "nothing"ness. But, I think if done correctly, you can have a barren field still be interesting, even if it's just a one-shot thing like a raid or such that doesn't ever happen again. Going with the survivalist aspects, how often would you want to go out in the open in just your underwear knowing goblins are around? Or, what if there's a certain flower you're looking for that only grows there because of it's microclimate? But, again, we have no idea everything they are putting in it; that's why it'll be so fun to play, explore, and find out ourselves as we enjoy the world!
Cow Mengde
Banned
The damage part is true, but attacking is not. They strafe around and wait before hitting. The NES games, they attack aimlessly, but also relentlessly. Doesn't matter they're throwing spears in the opposite direction, they move around at random and will eventually end up throwing them in your direction. Especially when there are multiple enemies on screen.
Herbspiceguy
Member
Pockets of emptiness and getting lost are fine, but some of those area's that seem empty/desolated should have something really special/awesome that's not easy to find. Something that may also require you to solve a really challenging/cryptic puzzle amongst ruins in the middle of nowhere. You solve the puzzle and boom an entrance rises out of the ground.
The feeling of reward and exploration will be very satisfying then.
The feeling of reward and exploration will be very satisfying then.
John Rabbit
Banned
completely agree with Aonuma, some of my favorite "spaces" in games are "empty". he's really saying all the right things to make me want this title.
exploration is its own reward.
You can have both
OrbitalBeard
Member
Which is exactly what Aonuma is saying. He used the word "pockets" for a reason.
Like, a town or a dungeon should be dense and full of things to do. A grassy field doesn't need to be.
Calamari41
41 > 38
I love it, I'm so thankful for this game.
My favorite part of Xenoblade X was just exploring the areas and uncovering new landmarks. I had more fun just doing that than I've had doing almost anything else in other open world games. They really crafted an amazing world there... and my hopes are high in this regard for Zelda, considering that Monolith has been helping out with the world in this game.
My favorite part of Xenoblade X was just exploring the areas and uncovering new landmarks. I had more fun just doing that than I've had doing almost anything else in other open world games. They really crafted an amazing world there... and my hopes are high in this regard for Zelda, considering that Monolith has been helping out with the world in this game.
I wish the world map was all black when you first start the game and it gets opened up as you move across the map. you have no idea whats a head of you.
damn top page post!
I would like that too.
The emptiness was fine in MGSV, the problem lied in that the lack of real landmarks or notable locations beyond a glut of repeated assets and villages. There was a sever lack of diversity amidst the giant landmass.
Zelda looks to differ greatly in that respect despite it also having large spaces of empty traversal.
I don't think getting completely lost to a point of frustration is going to be an issue in the game.
In the demo when Link got out of the room the map was clearly marked as to where he should go. Other portions of the demo showed the whole climb a tower to mark points of interest on the map.
In the demo when Link got out of the room the map was clearly marked as to where he should go. Other portions of the demo showed the whole climb a tower to mark points of interest on the map.
This is the one thing Xenoblade X got right (at least in its first 3 continents) I wonder if Monolith is assisting them in this game since they did for Skyward Sword iirc.