Ghost_Protocol
Member
Asking for a "darker" Zelda is ridiculous people. It's never going to happen. Just move on to Demon's/Dark Souls like everyone else. It's a much better series.
Something that annoys me:
People say Zelda needs a new direction...
Then they say it needs to be exactly like something else...
What
I still don't really see the similarities besides the lock-on combat.Asking for a "darker" Zelda is ridiculous people. It's never going to happen. Just move on to Demon's/Dark Souls like everyone else. It's a much better series.
Well if you're talking about the original Japanese Super Mario Bros 2 that's pretty much true; it's the laziest sequel Nintendo has ever made
Im the friend in question, and this argument came out of an article citing 3D Zelda as an example for a game that doesn't innovate and where the formula has grown tired, which I disagreed upon. I think Zelda has a great feel to it and I think each game felt fresh and changed it up just enough where it was still Zelda but felt new.
I suppose if they really wanted to change it up though, I wouldn't be opposed to them aiming for the plot first. They've done a BIT with that in TP and I think they did more in SS (didnt play it all yet) but Id go crazy with it. Make a really good plot. Maybe even make Link talk, who knows? A Zelda game with a very deep plot could be cool. Change the feel of the game but keeping the dungeons and stuff. I think that would be pretty sick.
There really aren't any. Could maybe say the both have dungeons or something but the general gameplay is very different between them aside from Lock-on being a feature. Their combat isn't even very similar (Zelda enemies are one-hit or more pattern-y in nature usually).I still don't really see the similarities besides the lock-on combat.
While I'm unsure how I'd compare them as far as best/worst goes, SMB2 JP did more make the levels more complex an interesting than SMG2 did with SMGs gameplayWell if you're talking about the original Japanese Super Mario Bros 2 that's pretty much true; it's the laziest sequel Nintendo has ever made
I still don't really see the similarities besides the lock-on combat.
Asking for a "darker" Zelda is ridiculous people. It's never going to happen. Just move on to Demon's/Dark Souls like everyone else. It's a much better series.
I always scratch my head when people say they want Zelda like dark souls..I dont get it at all.
I could see taking little things from dark souls like the ability to go anywhere unprepared but the whole make it like dark souls makes me question if people has actually played the damn game.
This is the ridiculous kind of definition I've been reading in Zelda threads for ages. It's why people are always complaining the game is slow and the start is boring. Instead of exploring the town, talking to the people, enjoying the writing and what the game is throwing at you lots of people seem to think the game only starts when you're in a dungeon. Which is absolutely absurd.
Asking for a "darker" Zelda is ridiculous people. It's never going to happen. Just move on to Demon's/Dark Souls like everyone else. It's a much better series.
One must wonder how much the "make it like dark souls" comments are due to flavor of the week syndrome - Dark Souls is currently the hot thing for anything resembling an action-RPG. And it's understandable to a degree. People want things to be like whatever they currently like most. It's especially prevalent in gaming. Like first person shooters the most? Odds are, you tend to think every game is better in first person, and will cite whatever reasons make you like first person games the most.
Not that there's nothing a Zelda title couldn't possibly borrow from a Souls game, as good ideas are good ideas. But just saying "make it like Dark Souls" isn't really helpful IMO. That betrays more adherence to trendiness than solid suggestions for how Zelda could be better.
it's been the flavor of the week
since september 2011!
dark souls does zelda better than zelda. not to say it's perfect, but it's the DIRECTION I'd like to see future Zelda titles go in.
modern zelda overworlds, for example, ain't got shit on dark souls. THAT'S a next gen zelda overworld done right, large but filled with secrets and things to do.
if you didn't think it was one of the most brilliantly designed level in the series and arguable one of the best in all gaming then Zelda is obviously not for you.
I wish Zelda was a tiny bit more Fable like. In the sense of being able to date/marry people and buy houses. I always find that stuff fun.
Obsidian would probably take existing canon and mold it to their liking. Double Fine would just make something funny. At any rate I'd sooner suggest to someone else unless it was a co-development thing.Yes, give it to Obsidian or Double Fine. Give them directives not to care at all about established canon.
That's why I try to articulate why, and honestly it's mainly just seamless design (that Wind Waker had dabbled in) and that sense of exploration (that Zelda HAD at the start) that I want. Going darker, harder, whatever in the same manner as Dark Souls isn't what I'd want, closest is maybe a bit more bite to combat (Skyward Sword did some of that) and for it to be dark in a way that older artwork was: not REALLY dark, more like (80s?) cartoon dark.Not that there's nothing a Zelda title couldn't possibly borrow from a Souls game, as good ideas are good ideas. But just saying "make it like Dark Souls" isn't really helpful IMO. That betrays more adherence to trendiness than solid suggestions for how Zelda could be better.
Let's be honest: at least it's a better choice for "mature Zelda" than Darksiders is.sigh
One must wonder how much the "make it like dark souls" comments are due to flavor of the week syndrome - Dark Souls is currently the hot thing for anything resembling an action-RPG. And it's understandable to a degree. People want things to be like whatever they currently like most. It's especially prevalent in gaming. Like first person shooters the most? Odds are, you tend to think every game is better in first person, and will cite whatever reasons make you like first person games the most.
Not that there's nothing a Zelda title couldn't possibly borrow from a Souls game, as good ideas are good ideas. But just saying "make it like Dark Souls" isn't really helpful IMO. That betrays more adherence to trendiness than solid suggestions for how Zelda could be better.
I might approve. But, sorry, nope, the best designed dungeon in all zelda series?
This might go to...
Except that from every description I've read of Dark Souls it does nothing close to Zelda, at all, the game is more similar to Pokemon or Monster Hunter than Zelda.
Quintessential Zelda is the last dungeon of Skyward Sword, if you didn't think it was one of the most brilliantly designed level in the series and arguable one of the best in all gaming then Zelda is obviously not for you.
Zelda needs to be less of a girl. I mean, for the main character, he's kind of a sissy.
Hah.
In all seriousness, Zelda should remain the same, that's what Zelda fans want. What SHOULD be new is story, worlds, with a few new gimmicks.
Asking for a "darker" Zelda is ridiculous people. It's never going to happen. Just move on to Demon's/Dark Souls like everyone else. It's a much better series.
Psssshaw. Best dungeon in Zelda was Twilight Princess' Snowpeak Manor.
Ooh, sorry. We were looking for Stone Tower Temple, but thanks for playing.
Ooh, sorry. We were looking for Stone Tower Temple, but thanks for playing.
I definitely feel like Zelda games are too formulaic. The formula of going from dungeon to dungeon, of finding keys and key items, etc is all too obvious. Maybe its because I've played so many Zelda games before but at this point I feel like knowing exactly how the game is going to proceed hurts my enjoyment of it. Even though the Zelda franchise has not become an annual serial like other popular series when a new Zelda game comes out it already begins to feel "stale" in a way. Usually taking a good few years between entries helps a series keep a sense of freshness but with the Zelda franchise its the exact opposite for me. I'd love to think the 3ds and Wii U entries will be radically different but they most likely will not. I remember Nintendo talking up how different Skyward Sword would be but in the end it just felt like a retread of the classic Zelda formula with a little different dressing.
Stone Tower Temple is okay, except you have to see that creepy ass Link face repeatedly and it just gets WEIRD from there.
-forced tutorials, handholding and partner characters. dark souls proudly yells FUCK THAT BULLSHIT to all those things, and subscribes to the megaman x ideology of teaching the player how to play the game. a beautiful, gradual difficulty curve, teaching the player how to play as you go. no fi required.
I feel that the Zelda fan base is divided by the time period in which they were introduced to the series. This is especially prevalent when we look at the 2D/3D entries.
I myself, started off with OoT, which can be said to be more "linear/formulaic" than the past games. This explains why I never really understood the notion of wanting more exploration and freedom (Ala Dark Souls) in Zelda games. To me, it's more about the dungeons and lore/story.
I have tried the 2D Zelda iterations, but have only truly enjoyed LA and the Oracle twins (Yes, I dislike LttP, surprise surprise).
I do, however, agree with adding more engaging quests. The process of obtaining the biggoron sword and plethora of masks were excellently handled.
The Zelda development team faces an upward slope if they want to satisfy both sides of the party. I doubt they'll able to do so, but I'm excited to see what they have planned.
Bring on the HD Zelda!
Asking for a "darker" Zelda is ridiculous people. It's never going to happen. Just move on to Demon's/Dark Souls like everyone else. It's a much better series.