Yeah, sounds like they're going to continue leaning on Monolith and Grezzo.
-
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.
New Miyamoto interview (Asturias) - on creations, Zelda by Retro, online, Miiverse...
- Thread starter CaVaYeRo
- Start date
Yeah, sounds like they're going to continue leaning on Monolith and Grezzo.
Skiesofwonder
Walruses, camels, bears, rabbits, tigers and badgers.
Let Retro create their own IP, and the Zelda team keep building on the positives from Skyward Sword with help from Moonlith and Greezo (if needed).
A hidden "Retro working on Zelda?" thread?
Let me play devil´s advocate here. I don´t want to see Retro working on Zelda. Zelda is way too japanese to be pulled of by a western studio. Approbiate IPs for them: Donkey Kong, Metroid, Starfox, partly Mario and partly FZero. Maybe Yoshi and Kirby.
Do we have some Retro guys on board here?
Let me play devil´s advocate here. I don´t want to see Retro working on Zelda. Zelda is way too japanese to be pulled of by a western studio. Approbiate IPs for them: Donkey Kong, Metroid, Starfox, partly Mario and partly FZero. Maybe Yoshi and Kirby.
Do we have some Retro guys on board here?
*citizenkaneclap.gif*
Sad thing is, the Mario camp has been going down this same path. Between those who continually decry the NSMB series for whatever reason, the rift that exists between 2D Mario and 3D Mario devotees, and how even the likes of Paper Mario aren't exempt (check any recent Paper Mario Sticker Star thread, and you'll find a number who are disappointed because the game isn't a retread of TTYD) and it just makes me shake my head.
On that note, it just makes me realize that no matter wherever the new 3D Mario/Zelda entrants on Wii U may go, it won't satisfy some people simply because it's not "groundbreaking enough" or "not enough like *insert favored game here*".
metalslimer
Member
Why do people want Retro bogged down with something like Zelda anyway? Nintendo will continue to do what they want with Zelda. I agree with Kajima in that the Zelda series is a collection of great games that gets shit on because people's expectations are way out of line as to what Nintendo wants to do with the things. But at the same time Nintendo seems to be struggling themselves to understand what the public wants out of the series. I'm extremely interested to see where they take the next iteration because at the very least I'll get a good game out of it. If it's not the best ever oh well.
Sorry if this translation sounds a little weird, the original Spanish is a little iffy imo, probably because its a translation from the original Japanese
If Retro Studios presented themselves to Nintendo with passion and creativity saying that they feel mature and capable/qualified enough to develop a new Legend of Zelda, how would you react to that effusiveness?
(Smiles) Really, with every game we develop, Zelda grows bigger. It's reached a point where, if we had to do it entirely inside Nintendo, we would have to dedicate ourselves exclusively to Zelda given the dimensions it has reached. That's why Nintendo is working with more and more companies either in-house or subcontracted, like Monolith (Xenoblade) or Grezzo (that was related with Final Fantasy) [parenthesis in the original]. Ultimately [in Spanish the word they used doesn't make much sense, in English it makes a little more sense, go figure], Aonuma is very close with this kind of companies in his work, so the possibility of Retro Studios making a new Zelda with a good proposal isn't a farfetched idea at all and could be totally possible.
But on the other hand, so far the design and script of Zelda have been created at Nintendo and that has to keep being the case. Even if Retro Studios is qualified, at the end Nintendo would have to be in very very close contact with the companie that were to create this Zelda and being outside Japan the distance and the timezone differences would make the communication more difficult, so Retro Studios is a company that is more focused on developing projects more independently from Nintendo. Ultimately they wouldn't be the most indicated. This last paragraph really needs an editor in the original, it was unclear and awful sounding in a lot of parts
The OG Metroid Prime team isn't even there anymore.
Hence why they should continued to be ignored. Do your thing, Aonuma-San.
What about Visceral? Vigil? Ninja Theory? Or any random western developer? I don't get what the label fascination about Retro Studios trying to make a Zelda game. They made an FPS and a 2.5D platformer and there is this stupid meme "omg they can make any type of game". Newsflash. Most of the A-B developers have made great games in multiple genres.
I think Retro won't do any Zelda mainline or spin-off anytime soon. I think they are mature enough to bring something new that is not Zelda.
Probably because Retro Studios is 1st party to Nintendo. I don't see any of them making a Nintendo game. Let alone I don't think Nintendo trusts them.
Probably because Retro Studios is 1st party to Nintendo. I don't see any of them making a Nintendo game. Let alone I don't think Nintendo trusts them.
You say "they make an FPS and a 2.5D platformer" like that isn't an incredible feat. They brought Metroid to life in 3D so perfectly that it's hard to believe even after almost 10 years since Prime's release.
Retro has the resume. Those other devs do not. Which other Western dev has taken not only one, but TWO beloved Nintendo franchises from the Super Nintendo era and brought them back to life in the current gen with great success? I am certain they are capable of making a new Zelda game that would blow EAD3's recent efforts out of the fucking water.
This makes sense, I guess, but I don't like that Zelda has been skimping on upgrades and hidden weapons these days. Three console Zelda's without a bonus sword makes me sad, and I LOVED Skyward Sword.
I think Zelda is still doing a lot right, but in terms of exploration, I wish there were more motivation for it. Twilight Princess, Skyward Sword, and Wind Waker all had HUGE maps in one sense or another, but at times there was very little to see. In my perfect Zelda, it'd be like in ALttP, where going to these far off places netted you a new item, like the Ice Rod or the Quake Medallion or the Golden Sword. I would settle, though, for something akin to SotC' hidden Garden. Just, you know, an area which I had to fight my way through so I could sit down, recover my hearts, and have Link take off his hat as he watched the sun set beyond the mountains.
Now, by and large Zelda still does things like this. There's still Hero's Shields and Magic Armor to be getting, but I'd like more of it, as there was in ALttP and MM.
That's all I really want. Oh, well, that and a Roc's Feather/Cape in a 3D Zelda. LET ME JUMP DAMMIT.
Cerebral Assassin
Member
Rare did(DK & Starfox) & no-one would want them to make a Zelda game ( it always strikes me as interesting that Nintendo were happy allowing Rare to make its own IP's but they have never shown any faith in Retro to do so).
They never completely owned Rare.
They adapted Metroid into a great overall game with Prime. But "perfectly" is subjective in that the dynamics of Samus changed greatly. Samus was a heavy tank in a beautiful Metroid landscape. And DKCR was an extension of RARE's work. It was not a re-inventing of the wheel or anything.
Heard of Next-Level Games? Punch-Out. Super Mario Strikers 1/2. Luigi's Mansion 2. It is not out of the realm of possibility to be good developer and work magic when given the opportunity and great intellectual properties.
Retro would probably be able to blow your socks out of the water if they were developing a game funded by you, for you. Now the dilemma is that Nintendo is trying to make 3D Zelda stay relevant in Japan. Do you think the hand holding (which I don't think is Aonuma's mandate, but Miyamoto's) is something they design with the western market in mind? It probably has nothing to do with the development team, and more Nintendo trying to figure out how to grab their domestic audience.
So in your scenario Retro would be able to make this awesome hardcore Zelda game if Nintendo said "yeah, screw the Japanese market". But at the same time, what if Aonuma and EAD were given that same freedom.
Nightstick11
Banned
The main problem with Zelda fans is the high number of idiots among the fanbase, as evidenced by the vocal minority bleating and squawking for a Retro-developed Zelda (really?)
Cerebral Assassin
Member
That's because Rare were actually worth more than a million dollars (& had a track record spanning nearly a decade).
Kai Dracon
Writing a dinosaur space opera symphony
I'd actually be the first to say think ALTTP is the best game in the Zelda series, in relation to both 2D and 3D Zelda.
And it's very true; part of what makes ALTTP the best, is that it has the most stuff in it. The most dungeons, most nooks and crannies.
A reason why I do like Skyward Sword is because I really, really dug the idea of every square inch of the overworld (well, underworld) being a dense maze of mechanics and stuff to do every step of the way. I do feel they found a strategy for replicating the feel of ALTTP's dense overworld. For the first time in 3D Zelda.
Now, all that's needed is scale. I didn't mind the notion of 3 underworld hubs to visit as distinct areas, for one game. That will make Skyward Sword unique from here on out. But for the next game, I'd like to see something even closer to ALTTP in 3D. A large connected overworld, but sufficiently dense in design to replicate the impression of 2D Zelda's screen transition to a new area full of things to do.
Which, btw, I think is why 3D Zelda has a lot of trouble resonating with the full sensation of playing 2D Zelda. Never underestimate the power of presentation. 2D Zelda's trademark grid-based overworld is a key why it feels as it does. Every screen transition brings a note of anticipation, wondering what the next block will have in it. Also dread, if you're low on health and resources. 3D can display far off vistas but it's difficult to replicate the density of the top-down games.
The thing is that Japan hasn't been fond of modern Zelda for a while. The series was at its peak over there when it was a challenging and mostly non-linear dungeon crawler. And based on their love for games like Monster Hunter, I'd say that going back to basics would be rather well received.
A Retro made Zelda wouldn't have to be a re-inventing of the wheel either. I'm not expecting first person Link, nor should anyone.
Oh please. One of those games isn't out, and the other two don't approach anything near near the scale, budget or quality of a Retro Studios game.
Pretty much the bolded, yeah. Zelda has a FAR larger audience in North America, Skyward Sword was pretty much a bomb in Japan. Why even bother dedicating valuable Japanese resources to a game that isn't going to sell well in Japan?
Better yet, EAD3 can work on a portable Zelda (which would absolutely sell better in Japan given the popularity of the 3DS and handheld gaming in general), while Retro takes the helm on a console Zelda. Hell, release them on the same day. It'll be like Prime/Fusion all over again
Great argument.
It's been done, my friend
Cerebral Assassin
Member
It's been done, my friend
How is Dark Souls anything like LttP?
A Retro made Zelda wouldn't have to be a re-inventing of the wheel either. I'm not expecting first person Link, nor should anyone.
Oh please. One of those games isn't out, and the other two don't approach anything near near the scale, budget or quality of a Retro Studios game.
Pretty much the bolded, yeah. Zelda has a FAR larger audience in North America, Skyward Sword was pretty much a bomb in Japan. Why even bother dedicating valuable Japanese resources to a game that isn't going to sell well in Japan?
Better yet, EAD3 can work on a portable Zelda (which would absolutely sell better in Japan given the popularity of the 3DS and handheld gaming in general), while Retro takes the helm on a console Zelda. Hell, release them on the same day. It'll be like Prime/Fusion all over again
Great argument.
It's been done, my friend
Isn't Dark Souls a JRPG? What does that have to do with Zelda?
decoyplatypus
Member
Dark Souls has a dense, interconnected overworld - something many people value in LttP and LA that has never made its way into the 3D games (MM was probably closest).
Many people also feel that the Souls games marry exploration and combat in a way that is reminiscent of the first two Zeldas. At the very least, they are both action-RPGs with a relatively slow-paced battle system - by which I mean combat is neither twitchy nor flashy/cinematic. In fact, Zelda could pretty easily adopt Souls-like combat without changing the dynamics of the game.
It's been done, my friend
I'm amazed at how long it took for this one to pop up in this thread.
Dark Souls is nothing like Zelda people. C'mon!!!
You guys should try it.
Check out the bolded:
Dark Souls has already brought this to life in full 3D. The overworld has an undeniable Zelda feel.
Gamer @ Heart
Member
Every time. Every time I enter Zelda threads like these I leave hating message boards.
But I keep coming back because I remind myself that Nintendo will never read this stuff.
But I keep coming back because I remind myself that Nintendo will never read this stuff.
Yeah, it comes across as if he doesn't actually understand the question, or that the idea of just having another studio produce Zelda entirely on their own is inconceivable to him. And the strange part is, why those two things? Does anyone play Zelda for the iconic scripting? And has anyone said of recent Zeldas, well, it had some parts I didn't like too much, but the overall design was amazing?
I am not a "Retro-is-Second-Coming-Let-Them-Make-Zelda" person. I'm just a guy that wants a fresh take on Zelda. Nintendo's not doing anything memorable recently with the property. Give somebody else a chance. Make some F-zero titles or something in the meantime.
evilromero
Member
As a Zelda fan Dark Souls has been my favorite Zelda-like experience since aLttP. One of the few games in many years to feel fresh and exciting. It is as far from a jrpg as you can be.
Cerebral Assassin
Member
The dread in LttP is overplayed(once you have more than 6 hearts you shouldn't really die again) & if that(the bolded) is all it has in common with LttPit would make a rather poor Zelda game(given LttP's focus on Dungeons & its Puzzles).
I feel the same way.
But that's because of the defense-force always trying too hard to prove that, all these people who express their disappointment about the series, have no right to do so because they’re either crazy, stupid or haters.
Cerebral Assassin
Member
It's pity you ignore the people like Kajima who have made a coherent argument on why they think Zelda is OK with the team that currently makes the games, & just concentrate on the crazy outliers(or should I paint the people who are unhappy with modern Zelda games as people who think Miyamoto is just jealous of superior talents?)
One member VS pretty much every Zelda-related thread.
Neff
Member
In a lot of ways Zelda II was the Dark Souls of its day. But that's where the similarities end. Typically Zelda is about experimentation and puzzle-solving and the joy of exploring and discovery. Souls is strictly about combat and careful leveling and even social networking.
Zelda says "Go inside the cave, something cool is in there."
Souls says "Don't go in the cave. You will die."
Zelda says "Go inside the cave, something cool is in there."
Souls says "Don't go in the cave. You will die."
Cerebral Assassin
Member
I don't understand this post, but if you mean what I think you mean( that the majority of posts on Gaf are pro-current Zelda), then I think you are wrong, I thik the majority view is that Zelda needs drastic changes(which I disagree with for reasons I have stated in various threads).
This is so incredibly wrong it's hilarious. Have you played Dark Souls?
For newer Zeldas, it should probably read: "Go inside the cave, you'll find a bunch of useless rupees and put them back in the chest since your wallet is full."
Maybe that's the way you see it, but I have been playing Dark Souls like a Zelda game (i.e. Going inside a cave because something is cool in there) and having a great time. Hell, my character has pink hair =D
Neff
Member
Yes, a lot. Have you?
The distinction for me is that exploration and screwing around is something you're meant to do in Zelda without thought of consequence, you figure out multiple uses for items and weapons, or find specific places to use them, and reap the rewards. Or not.
Souls on the other hand is solely about killing and being killed. It's not something you can play flippantly or passively. Wrong decisions are costly, every action must be considered.
There are more differences than similarities between the two in terms of design and play.
The distinction for me is that exploration and screwing around is something you're meant to do in Zelda without thought of consequence, you figure out multiple uses for items and weapons, or find specific places to use them, and reap the rewards. Or not.
Souls on the other hand is solely about killing and being killed. It's not something you can play flippantly or passively. Wrong decisions are costly, every action must be considered.
There are more differences than similarities between the two in terms of design and play.
Same here, I'd love to see a return to actual rewards for completing side-quests like LttP's Magic Cape or Cane of Byrna.
King of the Potato People
Member
Miyamoto can't always be right, Retro Studios have proven themselves perfectly dependable of handling their classic franchises.
They should ask Monolith Soft to have full control over the next Zelda, if they want a developer closer to home. I just don't trust Nintendo EAD as much as I used to with that franchise.
They should ask Monolith Soft to have full control over the next Zelda, if they want a developer closer to home. I just don't trust Nintendo EAD as much as I used to with that franchise.
Actually, he can in this case. Its his creation, he has the right to do with it as he pleases.
SuperAngelo64
Banned
As long as Retro act purely as code-monkeys and have no hand in aesthetics, music, or gameplay design I don't see a problem with them making a Zelda.
Skyward Sword solves the rupee issue, among other things
I actually found meself grinding for rupees