Support NeoGAF

[Timeaisis]

At what point did we conflate dungeon difficulty with multiple item requirements?

I don't see it. ALBW had some great freaking dungeons and puzzles and you still only made use of two things -- the duengeon's "theme" item and the wall-flatten mechanic. Dare I say, ALBW had some of the best (and most consistent) dungeon design in the whole series.

Multiple-item puzzle solving is something fans have made up as they imagine it to be more complex, challenging and fun (or something). Truly, a dungeon can be challenging without you having to go through your entire inventory of tools. I'd much rather them focus on dungeon design for the sake of challenge than dungeon design for the sake of needles complexity.

As strange as it sounds, I think the next Zelda can learn a lot from Skyward Sword in terms of the puzzles. SS had this whole "zone puzzle" situation where you gained and item and used it to solve puzzles outside of dungeons. Adopting a similar style for a large open world is an exciting and fun prospect. I'd imagine Aonuma is thinking more of an "open" style though, where you can access portions of the world (and by extension, dungeons) by utilizing different types of items that you get at different times on your quest. Surely, you wouldn't need specific item X to progress, but maybe it would be easier to solve the puzzles with it that way.

I have faith in Aonuma, he knows what he's doing with the series. As weird as it sounds, I'd like a combination of SS and ALBW's puzzle solving style, as I really think that could fit well with the "open world" setting.

 

[Lord Azrael]

If people's main problem is "decreased complexity" due to single-item puzzles - not that I agree with that notion, mind - there are plenty of ways around that. Just an idea: Have some of the recurring or auxiliary items (bombs, iron boots, hookshot, etc.) be obtained outside of dungeons, and have the new or more specialized ones be obtained within the various dungeons. That way you can still have multi-item puzzles. Furthermore, certain sections of the overworld could still require you to have several items in order to progress or find secrets.

 

[Trevelyan]

Real good interview, thanks. As for tackling something like, I feel they should make an approach for dungeon tackling something along the lines of: 1 > 2, 3 > 4, 5, etc.

Maybe make 2 new dungeons open up from an item that you gain in one dungeon, etc. That way there is a since a freedom, in that you can choose which of 2 dungeons you go to, but you will still use the items for puzzle solving.

 

[TangoAlphaLima]

How do you guys like that idea I found in the comment's section of the article?



So every dungeon has a unique dungeon item but there are also many items that can be found in the overworld and these overworld items can be used in the dungeons which will like he said checked at the entrance, and these dungeon items you find in the dungeons can be used on many different ways on the overworld to make sure every items is used often enough and make dungeon order still non linear.

What you are describing is a linear game. So yeah, that would work.

 

[Vampirolol]

I'm ok with that. Albw is their best game since Galaxy.

 

[Jawmuncher]

The dungeons in ALBW weren't "simpler" because of the one item. Nearly all of them had other mechanisms in place that were used in tandem with the key item you brought and your ability to merge into walls. Like luring the Wallmaster in Skull Woods into toggling switches, collapsing floors or hitting out-of-reach enemies. The dungeons were still perfectly complex, especially with all of the ways wall-merging played into each room. They just seemed "shorter" on the whole because you already had the main item so they weren't broken up into a "before" and "after." They were just one unbroken string of beautifully crafted puzzles.

I agree with this. One of my favorite Zelda games for exactly what you describe

 

[LegendofLex]

So every dungeon has a unique dungeon item but there are also many items that can be found in the overworld and these overworld items can be used in the dungeons which will like he said checked at the entrance, and these dungeon items you find in the dungeons can be used on many different ways on the overworld to make sure every items is used often enough and make dungeon order still non linear.

This was easily the worst thing about ALBW's dungeons. There is nothing "interesting" about having the required items signposted at the very beginning of the dungeon.

Indeed, this is the same problem that makes item puzzles uninteresting as a whole - the contents of your inventory usually make the solution obvious. Moreover, forcing players to turn back because they lack the required item is also obvious.

It is, however, very interesting, very un-obvious to not have a very formulaic rhyme or reason to how to approach the dungeons, and instead rely on testing the player's navigation and combat skills.

 

[dampflokfreund]

What you are describing is a linear game. So yeah, that would work.

No it isn't linear because you can get the items to enter the dungeon at any point in the story progession you want. Linear would it be if you can't get the item to enter the dungeon.

This was easily the worst thing about ALBW's dungeons. There is nothing "interesting" about having the required items signposted at the very beginning of the dungeon.

Indeed, this is the same problem that makes item puzzles uninteresting as a whole - the contents of your inventory usually make the solution obvious. Moreover, forcing players to turn back because they lack the required item is also obvious.

It is, however, very interesting, very un-obvious to not have a very formulaic rhyme or reason to how to approach the dungeons, and instead rely on testing the player's navigation and combat skills.

Not like ALBW. Just have some puzzles at the entranche and if you solve all puzzles, the door to the dungeon will open. There were many entranches in past games for example think of OoT Forest Temple or Lakebed Temple.

 

[Kuro]

Like I've said before, I really really really don't want this to be like ALBW. I hated the item rental aspect and most of the dungeons were dreadfully boring. The only thing I liked was the free roam aspect and discovering things yourself.

 

[Gotdatmoney]

I haven't played ALBW but in ALTTP, Windwaker, Phantom Hourglass and Minish (only Zelda games I played granted), multiple items never made the dungeons more complex or difficult. It's obvious what item you need to use to advance through different spots. The level design of the dungeons, layout and ordering of actions is what made dungeons good.

 

[LegendofLex]

No it isn't linear because you can get the items to enter the dungeon at any point in the story progession you want.

"You must get X item before you can enter/complete Y dungeon" is linearity.

"You can enter/complete Y dungeon without getting any item beforehand" is non-linearity.

 

[dampflokfreund]

I haven't played ALBW but in ALTTP, Windwaker, Phantom Hourglass and Minish (only Zelda games I played granted), multiple items never made the dungeons more complex or difficult. It's obvious what item you need to use to advance through different spots. The level design of the dungeons, layout and ordering of actions is what made dungeons good.

Of course nobody doubt that, but it gives the dungeon's puzzle design more variety.

"You must get X item before you can enter/complete Y dungeon" is linearity.

"You can enter/complete Y dungeon without getting any item beforehand" is non-linearity.

Hmm. But why? If you go to overworld point X at any time and find Item X you can use it to enter dungeon Y would be non linear for me.

If you can't get to item X because you need to complete dungeon Z before, that would be linearity for me.

 

[3bdelilah]

Bullshit, of course he knows. This is bad fucking news, man. He was on some serious winning streak and now he basically confirms it will be piss easy again. Then drop the fucking nonlinearity, I seriously don't care if it's linear if it means no challenge whatsoever in the dungeon and combat department.

 

[disappeared]

I wonder if Aonuma's ever taken even a passing look at Dark Souls. It's a different formula than Zelda, of course, but there were some sparks of similarity there.

 

[Effect]

Hmm. For those that had issues with ALBW you do realize the game can be made harder if one wanted right?. More more "equal". All Zelda games have this ability. For example not taking hearts after boss fights. Playing on Hero mode. All those items you get and claim makes the later dungeons "easier". Don't use them. Die so they go back to the item shop. Just rent and don't buy any of them. Don't rent them all at once either. Don't upgrade them if you buy them. Then just get the one you need for the dungeon. Problem solved. The options are there in the game to play however you want. If one doesn't rush through the game and doesn't only play it once and move on you'll see this! This is why the complaints about ALBW sounds like whining to me in the end.

Anouma's answer sounds like he knows how he designed the game, why the game was design the way it was and what the options are in the game. He knows what they're doing with the new game and that isn't going to change. Especailly if the game really is coming out next year. Yet he's not going to completely dismiss the question. I trust him and his team to know how to proceed going forward. There are va;od problems in Zelda games from hand holding, time it takes to start playing the game proper, something like the Triforce hunt being a solution to a game being rushed, etc. Stuff that can and they've attempted to address. This complaint isn't one of them I feel, especially when the game in question has to many options for how it can be played.

 

[Timeaisis]

I need to go back and play ALBW, because apparently it's crap now and it's dungeons suck.

 

[Freedom = $1.05]

Bullshit, of course he knows. This is bad fucking news, man. He was on some serious winning streak and now he basically confirms it will be piss easy again. Then drop the fucking nonlinearity, I seriously don't care if it's linear if it means no challenge whatsoever in the dungeon and combat department.

then what do you have if not just another HD Zelda? We already got one of those, fuck that. Let them do ALBW 2.0 HD with whatever they have learned or yearned for since that game and let's see where it goes.

After all, it can't be worse that Twilight Princess, right?

 

[dampflokfreund]

then what do you have if not just another HD Zelda? We already got one of those, fuck that. Let them do ALBW 2.0 HD with whatever they have learned or yearned for since that game and let's see where it goes.

After all, it can't be worse that Twilight Princess, right?

Sure it can, TP is one of the best Zeldas.

 

[Guevara]

Everything he's been saying lately makes me think the Wii U Zelda will be turrible.

 

[Neff]

LttP did it best. It featured non-essential overworld items that aided the player in combat, but also featured alternate methods of solving dungeon puzzles. It also managed to be semi-linear due to this.

Sounds like he's already committed to a NES template for Zelda U, where you basically only need your wits and a dungeon item at most to solve puzzles. Or he may have something completely different in mind, like the overworld traversal puzzles he's hinting at. Really hope he and his designers can do all these big ideas justice.

 

[dampflokfreund]

Everything he's been saying lately makes me think the Wii U Zelda will be turrible.

Well... before that he only said good things so why?

 

[Tookay]

You can still make complex dungeons with a single item being used, in conjunction with other skills/abilities that the developers know are going to be in the player's possession.

Like the wall mechanic - a skill that every player was going to possess at any point in time - being used alongside the dungeon-specific item.

Difficulty doesn't come merely from the number of items used in a dungeon.

 

[Kouriozan]

Ok let's all remember the last time puzzles in dungeons that were hard.
First thing that come to mind is Water Temple from OoT, but the difficulty have nothing to do with items, it was good at making people lost.
Then maybe the desert dungeon in SS, and then again, you didn't need a particular item, it was the present/past switch gimmick that made the puzzles interesting.

So nope, one item + one gimmick is enough for complex puzzles, and for sure I'm one of the people who want hard ones.

 

[Aquamarine]

How can you not have thought of that.......

Well, when you're the boss, it's sometimes hard to see issues with your strategy when you have everyone just nodding in agreement and doing whatever you say.

Schreier's comment may actually have a real impact in how Zelda plays out.

 

[RagnarokX]

then what do you have if not just another HD Zelda? We already got one of those, fuck that. Let them do ALBW 2.0 HD with whatever they have learned or yearned for since that game and let's see where it goes.

After all, it can't be worse that Twilight Princess, right?

Just another HD Zelda? Are you refering to Wind Waker as if it was a new game? Wind Waker is a great game with fantastic characters, story, and world but in terms of gameplay it's very weak. Only 5 real dungeons and none of them particularly great.

Skyward Sword had some pacing issues, but its world and dungeon design were top notch. It made great use of its items throughout the game unlike ALBW where you're not given any reason to touch the bow again after the first dungeon. A problem with letting them do ALBW 2.0 is that judging by this interview they haven't learned about a major flaw from it.

What Zelda needs is some kind of middle ground. A big open world can be great but not if it impedes level design complexity. Some measure of linearity is necessary. There are plenty of games where I can wander around a map but few that do what Zelda does.

 

[DVCY201]

I think many of you here are overreacting, as if Aonuma comments imply anything EDIT: that the dungeons are severely lacking. I would like to see a focus on building the world. The over-world needs more to flesh it out, make it breathing and habitable. I'd also love to see some complex sidequests come back, similar to Majora's Mask. Enemies should be tougher and more challenging than they were in previous installments.

We have no indicator for how difficult the dungeons will be, or even if they open up one at a time, or etc. I think it's too early to say that they next Zelda is doomed already.

 

[Taruranto]

I need to go back and play ALBW, because apparently it's crap now and it's dungeons suck.

Meh, I had more fun in ALBW dungeons than I ever did in TP/WW/SS. I actually got stuck a couple of times in ALBW, which it's more than I can say about TP corridors.

 

[injurai]

Dungeons need to build on a collection of mechanics, not being solely one-offs to demonstrate one single-mechanic. late game is so interesting in Zeldas because everything builds on itself.

 

[Skilletor]

I thought ALBW's dungeons were awesome.

I also can't remember (in a 2D game) when I used more than one item in a dungeon to progress and not for fun. Other than, like, bombs.

I haven't finished a 3D zelda, so maybe there are some in those?

 

[ameleco]

ALBW actually had a couple puzzles that were difficult for me. One was so difficult that even with my friend's hint, it took forever to figure it out (I believe it was in the dark palace). Other than those, I didn't think the game was overly easy puzzle wise.

 

[Real Hero]

all zelda games are easy. There's been two moments in all zelda games (not counting the second) when i thought it was hard. The water temple in ocarina and the water temple in TP.

 

[Team Filler]

I thought the dungeons & grottos in ALBW were great. Surprised to see so many complain about them now. Zelda cycle in effect maybe?

 

[Needham]

I would like to hear some examples of these complex puzzles that require multiple items to solve, and not have the items be the standard arrows or bombs. I really doubt we'll be renting items again, so I'm sure a few standard items will be acquired and kept throughout the new game.

Off the top of my head I can think of using the grapple hook and iron boots in Wind Waker to pull down statues. This is pretty much the only time the iron boots are used outside of entering this specific dungeon, and you found the grappling hook inside the dungeon. Not too complex since both items are associated with the specific dungeon, not unlike in A Link Between Worlds.

That's the most complex thing I can think of.

 

[Pappasman]

Hmm. For those that had issues with ALBW you do realize the game can be made harder if one wanted right?. More more "equal". All Zelda games have this ability. For example not taking hearts after boss fights. Playing on Hero mode. All those items you get and claim makes the later dungeons "easier". Don't use them. Die so they go back to the item shop. Just rent and don't buy any of them. Don't rent them all at once either. Don't upgrade them if you buy them. Then just get the one you need for the dungeon. Problem solved. The options are there in the game to play however you want. If one doesn't rush through the game and doesn't only play it once and move on you'll see this! This is why the complaints about ALBW sounds like whining to me in the end.

Combat difficulty is not the problem though. ALBW was hugely disappointing for me not because I never even came close to death, but because I never had to use my brain.

I felt that, because you could go to any dungeon in any order, each dungeon felt like it was the "first" one. There was no difficulty curve. I don't know if its just because I'm familiar with the core concepts of Zelda, but I went on autopilot through those dungeons with no problems.

I thought hero mode would solve my problems, but increased damage is a superficial change that didn't fix the core issues with the game's design.

The item system was fundamentally broken. You always had more than enough money and the items were cheap, but those weren't problems because death wasn't a problem.

 

[backlot]

Using multiple items per dungeon would definitely add some welcome variation but I'm not sure it adds to the the challenge too much. Even in traditional Zelda's most of the puzzles only focus on one item at a time anyway.

 

[Cuburt]

2D games like ALBW will inherently have less complex puzzles than a 3D game since they fill different space. So I think the idea that multiple items making puzzle in Zelda more complex is a strange stance. I can't really think of many multiple item puzzles/dungeons but yes a linear dungeon layout makes such a thing more possible. On the other hand, having the items before you enter a dungeon also made it so the whole dungeon can have puzzles for the item, rather than having to progress through the dungeon to get the item and then using the item in the remaining part of the dungeon. Personally, it felt to me like it gave them a little more freedom in some ways because the whole dungeon became an item puzzle. It's a trade-off rather than one way being inherently better than the other.

Side note: simplification of puzzle elements =/= simplifying puzzles

Just because you use less items doesn't make a puzzle easier, or it shouldn't if you are clued in to the design cues that will tell you when you should use an item, just like more items doesn't make a puzzle more complex and therefore more challenging.

Personally, I think the common complaint is more that people want the items to feel more useful throughout a game. They want them all to be able to be utilized in more than just to beat one dungeon, especially in puzzles. If there was multiple ways to solve a puzzle with different items I think people would find that more compelling than simply having to use more items in a puzzle.

BTW the title seems misleading since the OP seems to be taking a part of his response out of context to make a more provocative thread

 

[Artorias]

Like a few others have said, I don't think non linearity is what made the game easy. The dungeons were just extremely short for the most part. I think it was less complex than the biggest 3D Zeldas in many ways, but seemed at least in line with other handheld and/or 2D Zelda games.

I thought the wall walking added complexity to a lot of dungeons.

 

[RagnarokX]

I would like to hear some examples of these complex puzzles that require multiple items to solve, and not have the items be the standard arrows or bombs. I really doubt we'll be renting items again, so I'm sure a few standard items will be acquired and kept throughout the new game.

Off the top of my head I can think of using the grapple hook and iron boots in Wind Waker to pull down statues. This is pretty much the only time the iron boots are used outside of entering this specific dungeon, and you found the grappling hook inside the dungeon. Not too complex since both items are associated with the specific dungeon, not unlike in A Link Between Worlds.

That's the most complex thing I can think of.

It's not so much that puzzles used more than one item but that puzzles that used multiple items existed throughout the game. ALBW makes you use the bow in the first dungeon and then you might as well just throw it away. Bombs are pretty much the only item that get much utility in multiple dungeons, but any time you need bombs they give you an infinite supply of bomb monsters.

 

[majik13]

I feel the thread title and the actual comment dont really relate.

Its not so much about non linear dungeons but lack of multi-item dungeons. If it is possible to play the game non linearly, and have every item at the begining, there is nothing stopping them from having dungeons require multiple items. The non linearty doesnt have much to anything to do with that.

What would be better and what I hope they do is let you find and discover all the items in the open world, either through puzzles, completing tasks for NPCs, taking out a stronghold, etc. But it is not required to have other items first.

Just so we get back the exploration and thrill of obtaining the items. There really isnt a need that they all can just be bought early on, or conversely always found in a dungeon like previous Zeldas.

as for ALBW I found the puzzles and dungeons pretty good, maybe just a bit short. Especially because you found permenant item gear in dungeons(gloves, etc) as well as he puzzles requiring inventive uses of items and wall merging being used together. it was also a sort of spatial/environmental puzzle just trying to reach and enter dungeons in the first place.

 

[Instro]

This isn't really an issue, ALBW's dungeons were pretty complex from a puzzle standpoint and often very unique in that regard. Their only failing is that they tend to be on the shorter and smaller side, making them pretty straightforward in regards to exploration. All I really ask is that they don't go the item shop route again, and make hero mode available from the get go.

 

[Anura]

Zelda puzzles have never really been hard. I would even say the puzzles in ALBW is slightly better quality than the rest. Very rarely are items used in combination anyways and if they are it's because they use a universal gimmick that has been figured out ages ago (Eye switches anyone?). I am having trouble thinking of a puzzle that used items in a combination to form a trickier puzzle and not simply remixes or repeating already known tactics in combination with the newer stuff.

Seriously, I've played OOT, Minish Cap, ALTTP, ALBW, TP and WW and I can't think of a single time I have been stumped... Well not with stuff that requires items anyways. Things like the sacred grove statue puzzle in TP are just plain BS. Heck the "block pushing" stuff tends to get trickier than the item usage

 

[Leiru]

It's been quite a long time since Zelda dungeons have required more than one item, hasn't it?

Not really the last Dungeon in skyward sword used almost all of them if not all.

 

[MoogleWizard]

I feared that open world meant dumbed down Zelda... Simple puzzles and dungeons but who cares you can go to that mountain, just like in Skyrim and all those other walking simulators! I'll never understand this obsession with open world.

 

[Leiru]

Just another HD Zelda? Are you refering to Wind Waker as if it was a new game? Wind Waker is a great game with fantastic characters, story, and world but in terms of gameplay it's very weak. Only 5 real dungeons and none of them particularly great.

Skyward Sword had some pacing issues, but its world and dungeon design were top notch. It made great use of its items throughout the game unlike ALBW where you're not given any reason to touch the bow again after the first dungeon. A problem with letting them do ALBW 2.0 is that judging by this interview they haven't learned about a major flaw from it.

What Zelda needs is some kind of middle ground. A big open world can be great but not if it impedes level design complexity. Some measure of linearity is necessary. There are plenty of games where I can wander around a map but few that do what Zelda does.

THANK YOU!

 

[SMgamer83]

You guys know he doesn't make the games by himself right? I mean quite often the Director of a title has a team of talented developers and designers behind them. Just because he wasn't aware, doesn't mean you should jump to the conclusion that no one on his staff is aware.

 

[Lunar15]

Just another HD Zelda? Are you refering to Wind Waker as if it was a new game? Wind Waker is a great game with fantastic characters, story, and world but in terms of gameplay it's very weak. Only 5 real dungeons and none of them particularly great.

Skyward Sword had some pacing issues, but its world and dungeon design were top notch. It made great use of its items throughout the game unlike ALBW where you're not given any reason to touch the bow again after the first dungeon. A problem with letting them do ALBW 2.0 is that judging by this interview they haven't learned about a major flaw from it.

What Zelda needs is some kind of middle ground. A big open world can be great but not if it impedes level design complexity. Some measure of linearity is necessary. There are plenty of games where I can wander around a map but few that do what Zelda does.

You are so fucking on point. You and I share a lot of the same views on Zelda.

I have a significant amount of hope for the new Zelda because Aonuma mentioned that Skyward Sword was a step in the direction they wanted to take the series, but the new one will allow them to fully realize it. Inferring that he's talking about his main goal with Skyward Sword, which was overworld density, as in, more puzzles and fighting outside of dungeons like in the older Zeldas. In the reveal video for the new Zelda, I feel like he's talking about how the new system allows him to do both: have a big, open world while also letting it remain dense in content. At least, that's what I think he's going for based on what he's said in interviews and videos. I never fully know if what they're saying is really what they mean or not, but I have good faith for now. I'm always a bit hopeful and a bit skeptical at the same time.

Most people miss what they were going for in SS, because pacing is so wonky in areas, and the boxed in areas are a distraction that people don't like. The density in the actual world of SS was a blessing and it gave me so much hope for the future of the franchise. ALBW had a few steps forward (open overworld, puzzles and things to find in the overworld, less tutorials) but it also had some weird steps back (No scaling difficulty due to linearity, items being useless due to not needing them all the time). We'll just have to see how it all shakes out. I think both ALBW and SS are really good signs of where they're heading.

 

[Prototype]

The puzzles shouldn't be the focus anyway. Go back to the series roots Aonuma!
Survival, exploration and combat.

 

[dampflokfreund]

THANK YOU!

Skyward Sword's dungeon are way too easy, short and linear though. But the design and ideas are really creative, fresh and fun

 

[3bdelilah]

then what do you have if not just another HD Zelda? We already got one of those, fuck that. Let them do ALBW 2.0 HD with whatever they have learned or yearned for since that game and let's see where it goes.

After all, it can't be worse that Twilight Princess, right?

I believe the structure needs changing, not the linearity. ALBW also had a similar structure like "something bad happens, you're the chosen one, you have to collect 2/3 things before something big happens, then you'll need to find another 4/6 things before a plot twist occurs and fighting the end boss". This is literally the standard plot for at least 12 of the 17 Zelda games. It really doesn't have to do with the nonlinearity in my opinion, the formula is just as stale as can be and extremely predictable.


I like to believe TP proves what I like the most about Zelda. The washed out art was (due to its lack of colour) disappointing in my opinion, overworld was extremely boring and barren, tutorial was pretty long and uninteresting, but despite all that I consider it one of my favourite Zelda's nonetheless. I liked the boss fights, the combat felt fresh because of the Hidden Skills and the dungeons were absolutely stellar.

 

[Needham]

It's not so much that puzzles used more than one item but that puzzles that used multiple items existed throughout the game. ALBW makes you use the bow in the first dungeon and then you might as well just throw it away. Bombs are pretty much the only item that get much utility in multiple dungeons, but any time you need bombs they give you an infinite supply of bomb monsters.

But that's every Zelda ever.

Most of the puzzles outside of an item's origin dungeon are the exact same puzzles you encountered in the original dungeon. Remember those rusty switches you needed to hit with a hammer in the fire temple? Well guess what, that's the only thing you're ever going to do with the hammer, see rusty switch, hit with hammer. Did the cracked wall really screw with your mind in the dunegeon with the bombs? Well how about we throw a few more cracked walls at you in every once in a while, how will you ever figure it out? Not really puzzles so much as reminders that you have that item and now you need to use it.