-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
How do you think Nintendo could make a better Zelda?
- Thread starter tanod
- Start date
Moz La Punk
Member
Im not going to read everything here, but basically Nintendo knows they are not going to better Twilight Princess if they keep sticking to the current 3D Zelda formula, that's why they told us that they're going for something new next time.
Karma Kramer
Banned
Zelda Kart?
Moz La Punk
Member
I'm sensing a lot of stupid ideas here.
Yeah, and sarcasm.
Yeah, and sarcasm.
The only cool way to play a Zelda game where you weren't Link would have to take place in the timeline before Wind Waker. Basically, you would be Ganon and it would be your destiny to defeat the false hero of time (maybe a Shadow Link?). You would still be evil, but it would be presented in a way that you were fulfilling some sort of need by keeping balance. Then at the end, the Gods would flood Hyrule to leave it in the state you find it in Wind Waker.
This wouldn't even have to necessarily be a spinoff, as it would still be a canonical battle between Link and Ganon.
This wouldn't even have to necessarily be a spinoff, as it would still be a canonical battle between Link and Ganon.
Some things I've been thinking about:
- I would really, really like a 2D zelda II remake. Same basic gameplay but more fleshed out, with the story evolved etc.. I know this is because i'm playing a lot of zelda II on VC, but I think it could be great. Do it on DS for all I care, although a 2D console game gets my preference. (will never happen)
- Re-use the zeldaTP engine for ANOTHER game, not zelda. It's a great engine, with a lot of quirky stuff programmed (like how chickens/animals/townspeople behave etc) that nintendo should re-use to revive an old franchise (kid icarus maybe?). Let this franchise take over the traditional 3D zelda roll. With other game-conventions but on the same engine, it should feel pretty fresh.
- Make zelda Wii something totally original. Not just in gameplay, but also in setting. Put it in the beginning or complete end of the timeline of hyrule, or not in hyrule at all. Graphically I would prefer a darker version of the WW look (although my prefered link-look is the minish cap one like in my avatar). It can be shorter (25 hours or something) but like someone allready said, make sure you can revisit the world after you finish it, for nothing else but satisfaction.
- I would really, really like a 2D zelda II remake. Same basic gameplay but more fleshed out, with the story evolved etc.. I know this is because i'm playing a lot of zelda II on VC, but I think it could be great. Do it on DS for all I care, although a 2D console game gets my preference. (will never happen)
- Re-use the zeldaTP engine for ANOTHER game, not zelda. It's a great engine, with a lot of quirky stuff programmed (like how chickens/animals/townspeople behave etc) that nintendo should re-use to revive an old franchise (kid icarus maybe?). Let this franchise take over the traditional 3D zelda roll. With other game-conventions but on the same engine, it should feel pretty fresh.
- Make zelda Wii something totally original. Not just in gameplay, but also in setting. Put it in the beginning or complete end of the timeline of hyrule, or not in hyrule at all. Graphically I would prefer a darker version of the WW look (although my prefered link-look is the minish cap one like in my avatar). It can be shorter (25 hours or something) but like someone allready said, make sure you can revisit the world after you finish it, for nothing else but satisfaction.
If nothing else, this thread demonstrates why it's good that fans aren't in charge of Zelda. I liked some of MasterMFauli's and Anihawk's ideas. Besides those, this thread has some of the worst ideas, bar none, I've ever heard.
Link having party members? Riding a motorcycle? Talking? Playing as Zelda?
You guys should be ashamed.
The game could use a bicycle and some titties though.
Link having party members? Riding a motorcycle? Talking? Playing as Zelda?
You guys should be ashamed.
The game could use a bicycle and some titties though.
A Black Falcon
Member
Dolphin said:
Why not play as Zelda? It's not like there isn't precident for playing as someone other than Link... and no, I mean more than just the two CD-i games where you play as Zelda; while they are Zelda games, their obvious lack of Nintendo oversight makes the three CD-i titles less important. Such things do not apply to BS Zelda for the Satellaview, however. Instead of playing as Link, you played as a male or female character that were based off of the Satellavew mascots. Why? Because the game was online, in a sense, and competitive -- four players played at once, and at the end there were scores for who did best. Kind of like Four Swords, in a way, from what I understand, but different (and with live voice actors, evidently, transmitted over the satellite service, as games like that Zelda one only worked at certain times).
Compared to that, how would it be unspeakably horrible to have had, in TP, when you go to Zelda's tower, instead of having her stay in captivity and be sad over how bad she messed up in surrendering and instead having her join the group (and it IS already a group; you may not directly control Midna, but she's there too, and is a more tangible ally than the fairies you had in OoT and MM...)? She had cause, and powers (that sword in that video she never uses, or her bow, or magic -- magic is an estabilished part of the series too...). Seriously, saying "that shouldn't happen because it never did before" is stupid. What's a better argument? "That shouldn't happen because Zelda games mean playing as Link, always"? As I said, that isn't true either... "Because good Zelda game plots involve rescuing the princess from the evil king who kidnapped her and wants to conquer the world"? I very strongly disagree with that one, that's for sure... that plot should go away and not come back. Link's Awakening has the most interesting plot in the series for many reasons, but the fact that it doesn't involve rescuing anyone or saving the world is a pretty big one. It was more original.
Really, if Link is supposed to be 'the player' (as his lack of dialogue shows)... well, I guess it's the PC RPG fan in me thinking, but I couldn't help but think 'how different would it be with character creation?' I don't think it would be any different at all. If it can work in PC-style RPGs, it could work elsewhere too.
... yeah, I shouldn't have said that, that'll get people even more annoyed than 'playable Zelda' I bet... oh well, I did.
Zelda games aren't really about Link, they're about the adventure; Link is just the players' way of experiencing the world and the adventure. So why not let them do that with even more freedom? If your answer is "Because they should have a deeper, more complex story that draws Link into a plot which makes him a more defined character (and maybe gives him a voice)", then that would be a way to say "no, Link should stay Link". But Nintendo has said before that that isn't what they picture Link's character to be, he is instead a more nebulous 'aspect of the person playing', so that doesn't seem likely. Or the right thing to do, I think; even just leaving it as it is would be better than having Link talk and take on a defined character...
Haha, I like how you've tried to do all my arguing for me. Go play with your Legos.A Black Falcon said:Why not play as Zelda? It's not like there isn't precident for playing as someone other than Link... and no, I mean more than just the two CD-i games where you play as Zelda; while they are Zelda games, their obvious lack of Nintendo oversight makes the three CD-i titles less important. Such things do not apply to BS Zelda for the Satellaview, however. Instead of playing as Link, you played as a male or female character that were based off of the Satellavew mascots. Why? Because the game was online, in a sense, and competitive -- four players played at once, and at the end there were scores for who did best. Kind of like Four Swords, in a way, from what I understand, but different (and with live voice actors, evidently, transmitted over the satellite service, as games like that Zelda one only worked at certain times).
Compared to that, how would it be unspeakably horrible to have had, in TP, when you go to Zelda's tower, instead of having her stay in captivity and be sad over how bad she messed up in surrendering and instead having her join the group (and it IS already a group; you may not directly control Midna, but she's there too, and is a more tangible ally than the fairies you had in OoT and MM...)? She had cause, and powers (that sword in that video she never uses, or her bow, or magic -- magic is an estabilished part of the series too...). Seriously, saying "that shouldn't happen because it never did before" is stupid. What's a better argument? "That shouldn't happen because Zelda games mean playing as Link, always"? As I said, that isn't true either... "Because good Zelda game plots involve rescuing the princess from the evil king who kidnapped her and wants to conquer the world"? I very strongly disagree with that one, that's for sure... that plot should go away and not come back. Link's Awakening has the most interesting plot in the series for many reasons, but the fact that it doesn't involve rescuing anyone or saving the world is a pretty big one. It was more original.
Really, if Link is supposed to be 'the player' (as his lack of dialogue shows)... well, I guess it's the PC RPG fan in me thinking, but I couldn't help but think 'how different would it be with character creation?' I don't think it would be any different at all. If it can work in PC-style RPGs, it could work elsewhere too.
... yeah, I shouldn't have said that, that'll get people even more annoyed than 'playable Zelda' I bet... oh well, I did.
If your answer is "Because they should have a deeper, more complex story that draws Link into a plot which makes him a more defined character (and maybe gives him a voice)", then that would be a way to say "no, Link should stay Link". But Nintendo has said before that that isn't what they picture Link's character to be, he is instead a more nebulous 'aspect of the person playing', so that doesn't seem likely. Or the right thing to do, I think; even just leaving it as it is would be better than having Link talk and take on a defined character...
[edit]
On further reflection, that was a little harsh. I'm not trying to be mean, truthfully a lot of the ideas in here are just really bad. They don't warrant argument, just a good eye for quality.[/edit]
A Black Falcon
Member
Dolphin said:
Unless you mean that you want to have Link start talking, I highly doubt that...
And also, only the first two paragraphs were really the response to your post... the last three were a new point.
Zelda should be the playable character. Not Link.
...time for Nintendo to make a Legend of Zelda that actually makes sense of its title...
They should start a Chronicles of Link or something if they still want you to play as the elf boy...
Also, for f*ck's sake...Link speaking != voice acting.
Voice acting should be implemented, though...
...time for Nintendo to make a Legend of Zelda that actually makes sense of its title...
They should start a Chronicles of Link or something if they still want you to play as the elf boy...
Also, for f*ck's sake...Link speaking != voice acting.
Voice acting should be implemented, though...
carbonbased
Member
:lol perfectSegata Sanshiro said:
QuickKick89
Banned
Kevar said:
And the thread is killed after the first post. Impressive.
A Black Falcon
Member
AniHawk said:
You mean the explanation they came up with to explain why all the princesses are named Zelda (that is, the plot of the game)? That explains why the name Zelda is used, but has nothing at all to do with the issue of whether Zelda should be a playable character or not.
(note, though, that I'm not basing my 'Zelda should be playable' case on 'because her name is in the game's title'. I can understand why they'd use that name without having her be playable, so it's not really part of why I'd say it should be done...)
Agreed here at least.
Adagio said:
As I said choice is better, though, and having just Zelda wouldn't really be any better on that regard than having just Link is...
MasterMFauli
Banned
agent069 said:
Stop playing Zelda.
Mithos Yggdrasill
Banned
1) All characters have to speak (Link not, if Miyamoto wan't);
2) The game must have more secondary quest then Majora's Mask;
4) All tracks have to be orchestrated;
3) ........? What else ? Twilight Princess was really perfect in the rest !!
2) The game must have more secondary quest then Majora's Mask;
4) All tracks have to be orchestrated;
3) ........? What else ? Twilight Princess was really perfect in the rest !!
Does The Adventure of Link explain why Majora's Mask is a "Legend of Zelda"?AniHawk said:
Or Link's Awakening?
Or the Oracles? (Am ignoring the rather tacked on "rescue Zelda!" shit at the end...you just saved two demi-sort-of-goddesses...who cares about Zelda...)
Or even The Wind Waker? Zelda was hardly the main focus of that game...let alone most "Zelda" games...
Well...if Nintendo is going to insist on stickin' with this whole retarded mute angle...at least give him the ability to steal folks' memories or something...
At least the title could then be considered a meaningful "accessory"...A Black Falcon said:
You sexist fool...MasterMFauli said:
She's a Sheikan warrior!I like your "one dungeon to rule them all" idea, though...
MasterMFauli
Banned
I really hate the idea of playing Zelda. Playing a princes in her her ling, white-pink skirt, swinging a tihn sword, and so on. That´s no fun at all. If you want girlish action, go play Tomb Raider, there´s a new game coming up.
But as it seems this thread is about detailed ideas, i´ll write my latest down:
There should be only ONE dungeon in the whole game. This dungeon is one giant ancient temple with many rooms, obstacles and traps. The idea behind this is the following: In former Zelda-games, especially Twilight Princess, you got new items, used them in the dungeon where you got them, and that´s it. The idea of only one giant dungeon would be, that you enter it, progress, but then you cant go any further. So you have to look for new equipment and then try again.
This one dungeon should be desigend totally no-linear, no map with typical floor-desigend rooms, no. There could be a room where you have to fight a iron knuckle, then a small gangway below leads to the next room. After beating the puzzle of this room (and there doesnt have to be one in every room), you can find any way further. You watch around, and by accident you burn some grass at one side of the wall, finden a small hole. You enter it, and on your stomage you climb up an endless seeming narrow way.
In the beginning, you would explore the upper part of the one dungeon, later it goes unbelievably deep into the earth.
It should be not so much about clearing a puzzle in every room, than rather finding your way. Optional ways, laternative ways, everything could be.
And once you cant go any further because you arent equipped enough, you can leave the dungeon by saying some ancient spell, taking you to the exit, and when you re-enter you get teleported wo ehere you were.
Around this one giant dungeon, there would be a small but live-fully world. One town, but better, like Windfall Island, forests, mountains, lakes, and everything is on an island, allowing you to sail around the island. You would get items and all the euqipment by sidestories. 1000s of events like the Anju/Kamui-quest in Majoras Mask, but better.
Once in a while you´d meet people that know a bit about that ruined temple you always go to, and bit by bit, eithe by talking to people or by reading ancient writings found in the dungeon, you get more of the story. From here on, anything could happen.
But as it seems this thread is about detailed ideas, i´ll write my latest down:
There should be only ONE dungeon in the whole game. This dungeon is one giant ancient temple with many rooms, obstacles and traps. The idea behind this is the following: In former Zelda-games, especially Twilight Princess, you got new items, used them in the dungeon where you got them, and that´s it. The idea of only one giant dungeon would be, that you enter it, progress, but then you cant go any further. So you have to look for new equipment and then try again.
This one dungeon should be desigend totally no-linear, no map with typical floor-desigend rooms, no. There could be a room where you have to fight a iron knuckle, then a small gangway below leads to the next room. After beating the puzzle of this room (and there doesnt have to be one in every room), you can find any way further. You watch around, and by accident you burn some grass at one side of the wall, finden a small hole. You enter it, and on your stomage you climb up an endless seeming narrow way.
In the beginning, you would explore the upper part of the one dungeon, later it goes unbelievably deep into the earth.
It should be not so much about clearing a puzzle in every room, than rather finding your way. Optional ways, laternative ways, everything could be.
And once you cant go any further because you arent equipped enough, you can leave the dungeon by saying some ancient spell, taking you to the exit, and when you re-enter you get teleported wo ehere you were.
Around this one giant dungeon, there would be a small but live-fully world. One town, but better, like Windfall Island, forests, mountains, lakes, and everything is on an island, allowing you to sail around the island. You would get items and all the euqipment by sidestories. 1000s of events like the Anju/Kamui-quest in Majoras Mask, but better.
Once in a while you´d meet people that know a bit about that ruined temple you always go to, and bit by bit, eithe by talking to people or by reading ancient writings found in the dungeon, you get more of the story. From here on, anything could happen.
Adagio said:
This argument is pretty dumb. I'm not sure why you think the character in the title needs to be playable. ****, the title character for Twilight Princess wasn't even playable.
Mute characters can have a certain charm to them. Nintendo may have gone too far by removing his badassness from the E304 trailer (slightly different model then), but it's never bothered me before. Hell, even in Okami, it was fine.
Adagio said:
What would playing as Zelda provide over playing as Link? This has never made sense to me and I've never seen someone come up with a legitimate reason why. Each game featuring Zelda as a main focus would suck too. Some of the best games in the series (MM and the best 2D game, LA) didn't rely on her.
A Black Falcon
Member
MasterMFauli said:
Tomb Raider? Oh come on, those games are no good... I never liked them at all, not even the first one, which was popular at the time...
Really, though, that's a pretty bad way to defend your "case". Seriously, think for a second. We see Zelda in combat several times in the Zelda series.
-CD-i Zelda -- standard princess clothes
-Zelda cartoon -- adventurer-style clothes
-Ocarina of Time -- combat costume (Sheik)
-Wind Waker -- both in alternate, adventurer-style costume (Tetra) and in 'standard princess' one (bow only)
-TP -- princess clothes. Sword scene -- seems to be ornamental, at least as shown.
bow scene - princess clothes.
... I could also mention the scene in the final part of the NP LttP comic with Zelda with a bow (in her dress), and others (perhaps the final battle of OoT too, but that's a bit different).
The point is, Zelda has not always had a white-pink skirt on while adventuring; in fact, her two most active roles, Tetra and Shiek, had very different clothing styles from the standard one. I won't try a 'realism' argument because that has no relevance here (that is, trying to fight in clothes like her standard stuff is stupid; it's a game, that doesn't matter, even if it is silly when games do stuff like that (Re: Fia's outfit in Riviera, for instance...)), but 'they have done it other ways before when she was truly being an adventurer. Why not the next time too?' is more than good enough. "She's Zelda so she has to wear a princess dress" is not a valid point, because the series itsself has invalidated it.
AniHawk said:
But she is, kind of... well, not directly, but in wolf mode you have some control of her... the magic arm used for grabbing things, etc...
I'm not trying to make a 'the title character should be playable so that is one reason why Zelda should be' argument though, I don't really believe that. I just wanted to point that out.
Quest for Glory's model worked really well, I think -- they wanted the main character to talk and had to have a conversation system since the series' genre is (Graphic) Adventure/RPG and there are a lot of branching conversation trees to navigate... so you select options which describe what you are asking about, without it actually directly putting words in your characters' mouth. You select the word from the list, and then it has some sentences describing your question (again, without saying the actual words) followed by the person replying to it (with normal speech, as if you had spoken). Since there are descriptions of the questions it's somewhat different from Zelda's system, but the intent, to identify the player with the character by letting them fill in themself exactly how they would phrase the statements, is the same. And I thought it was great.
Anihawk said:
This is somewhat unrelated, but it is interesting to see how even when Zelda was simply 'the princess you have to rescue' in some of the outside media she was more active -- her role in the comics, or most obviously the cartoon, or the CD-i games, for instance. So people had been putting an active role on her from the beginning, even before Nintendo did itsself. But then they did, in OoT, and I thought that was great... I definitely prefer her in a more active role as opposed to a more passive one (like most of TP), and consider it a good thing when they do that.
Really though, why not? Zelda is one of the three main characters in the series and is the only other good main character other than Link. Since I doubt there will be a Ganondorf game anytime soon he's out as a playable character, but Zelda certainly isn't... I think I described how in TP for instance the situation was perfect (plotwise) for her to be there. "why not?" is just as good a question as "why?", I'd say -- "Why have playable Zelda?" Well, why not? "It would be bad" is ridiculous of course and does not merit a response. Is there any actual point you can make that can advance your position?
Oh yes, and as for LA and MM... well, when the previous three games simply had her as a princess to be rescued, having no role at all is an improvement in some ways, honestly... though that's not why the story is great, its originality and the great way they tell it is (to paraphrase one of the questions you ask the children in Mabe Village, "When did we come to this island? Mister, what do you mean by 'when'?"). Brilliant stuff.
As for MM, it's main story is more conventional (save the world from destruction!); it's the sidequests that really make that game's plot good. And I rank OoT, both game and story, very, very high... well above MM in gameplay. Story... that's harder to decide, but I think I'd go with OoT. That's a very hard decision though. The point really is that they have done good stories with Zelda not in the game, true, but they have also done good ones where she is there... the fact that some of the games with among the best stories in the series are games which she is barely in isn't really related to the issue of whether Zelda should be playable or not, I think. Unless you believe that she should be removed from the series entirely...
(yeah, thought not... )So make a game that does rely on her...not suck?AniHawk said:
I realize, of course, that it's too late for Nintendo to go back and create an Adventure of Link "side-series"...but the title still annoys me.
And I just think that Zelda is more interesting than Link. That's why I want to play her. Oh my.
There's not much story there as it is. Nintendo just has rather uneven storytelling skillz...makes 'em seem longer and more interesting (or, perhaps, more dull) than they really are...Synth_floyd said:
Well...that's not something particular to just Nintendo...the industry's weakest point is certainly the writing...
Synth_floyd
Banned
More exploration, less story, up the difficulty.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
They need to make a free-roaming game like Wind Waker with (online) co-op. It could be 4 swords adventure only in 3D WW style. They can then make puzzles that cater to more than one person.
If they did take it in a new direction, I would imagine all your reactions would be similar to that of Mario's waterpack in Sunshine. They need to make a Zelda game where Link is killed and the dungeons are heaven and hell. Then you have to find station to build good robot Bill & Ted and save the babes.
If they did take it in a new direction, I would imagine all your reactions would be similar to that of Mario's waterpack in Sunshine. They need to make a Zelda game where Link is killed and the dungeons are heaven and hell. Then you have to find station to build good robot Bill & Ted and save the babes.
A Black Falcon
Member
Adagio said:
It took me almost 20 minuites to finish editing the post, but I think now my post above yours there has some stuff to say on this now...
Anihawk said:
See above.
Oracles was fantastic, gameplay-wise. The story wasn't very good (some good NPCs excepted), but the gameplay was great enough that I didn't care... I did like Ages quite a bit more than Seasons though, for some reason.
Ages was the better game because its gimmick was simple and fun. Just use the time travel thing wherever you want. Seasons sucked because you had to find a stump and then change the season to the right one by clicking the button and then waiting for it to switch, then clicking the button and waiting for it to switch. Worthless.
A Black Falcon said:
LA could've had Zelda being rescued and it could've still have been a dream, but they didn't do that. Instead it made it look like Link was lost on some island for most of the game, away from his normal adventures, and that's why it was so strong. It was a fantasy world within a fantasy world.
Wait, what? I know. MM and LA am me favorites.AniHawk said:
I was saying that...well I'm not quite sure what I was saying in direct response to this point. Something about creating a good game (not unlike the caliber of MM or LA) with a more impressive focus on Zelda... Right.
F*ck, I'm tired.
Confidence Man
Member
Go back to the more freeform gameplay of Zelda 1; no towns or cities, no stupid Zoras and Gorons, no theme dungeons, no more item "puzzles", and leave the storytelling to RPGs.
AlternativeUlster
Absolutely pathetic part deux
AniHawk said:
I love going to a videogame forum and actually seeing people talk about playing videogames. This is where the love is at.
A Black Falcon
Member
AniHawk said:
Yes... it's only after you beat it that you notice some of (what I think are) the subtle hints that all is not what it seems...
A Black Falcon said:
If it had simply been 'need to rescue Zelda, it was all a dream' I doubt it'd have had anywhere near as good a story as it does, both because of what you say and because "rescue the princess" is a bad plot device... the way it was designed to provoke the player into a slow realization of what is really going on and, next, what you will have to do to get off the island, is done almost perfectly.
Anihawk said:
That is true, the 'four seasons' thing was a lot more annoying than the two ages one... I wouldn't go as far as you do in saying it was awful, but it certainly was the weaker of the two devices. I also felt that Ages' puzzle-focus dungeons are also better than Seasons' action-focus ones, though... still, Seasons is a great game, even if it doesn't match up to Ages.
A Black Falcon
Member
Adagio said:Wait, what? I know. MM and LA am me favorites.
I was saying that...well I'm not quite sure what I was saying in direct response to this point. Something about creating a good game (not unlike the caliber of MM or LA) having a more impressive focus on Zelda... Right.
F*ck, I'm tired.
Heh...
But yes, I agree. They could do a game with Zelda as the focus just as good as LA or MM (or at least, just as good as MM... LA is a higher standard...) if they tried... they just have to want to try.
A Black Falcon said:
AlternativeUlster
Absolutely pathetic part deux
I think for the best Zelda game they should make the story where all the Links have to come together via some sort of portal to stop a massive evil. Make it explain how each Link got to each other, tie it together, bring back all the different aspects from all the other different Zeldas, and make it the biggest game ever. Call it the The Army of Links or some nonsese like that and it will be killer.
Still would rather have a 16-bit Console War game where it was like Nintendo vs. Sega vs. Turbo Grafix 16 characters in some bizarro RPG setting.
Still would rather have a 16-bit Console War game where it was like Nintendo vs. Sega vs. Turbo Grafix 16 characters in some bizarro RPG setting.
PepsimanVsJoe
Member
Better combat. No I don't want Ninja Gaiden/DMC but maybe something closer to Zelda 2(which for it's time had a really good combat system). Much of the focus could be on exploiting weaknesses and striking at the right moment(and none of this "HIT THE A BUTTON TO WIN" crap from Wind Waker ugh ugh ugh)
Well combat in newer Zeldas is just boring in general IMO. Give me the days of Zelda 1. Room full of monsters gunning for you, gargoyles spitting fireballs everywhere, just you and your sword running around trying to clear the room.
Oh and ditch the entire "here is a new item you will use it for the rest of the dungeon and for the boss fight" whoop. It's gone on for way too many games. Hell ditch the Ocarina system altogether and focus on making a Zelda where there are no limits to your exploration(Go anywhere, do anything, any dungeon in order, all of the sub-items are for shits and giggles, etc)
Oh and just for kicks I'd like to play a GTA style game as Link, even just to grab random people with the hookshot and fling them into walls.
Oh and you should be able to actually beat the chicken swarm and get like a heart piece or something for it.
Hell just make the games more open in general. One of the few things I liked about Metroid: Zero Mission is that it was designed with many ways to play through the game. Low % runs, speed-runs, areas specifically designed for sequence-breaking and whatnot. Great stuff, adds a bunch of replay value and keeps things interesting. I'd like to see a Zelda game where I could beat it with say...hell I dunno, throwing a chicken at Ganon. Course it wouldn't be that silly but you'd have tons of fresh and inventive options for completing your quest.
All else fails I guess I'll just go back to Sega's Oasis games and/or Landstalker cause they're better anyway.(How about a third game? Please? I'd even take it on the DS!)
Well combat in newer Zeldas is just boring in general IMO. Give me the days of Zelda 1. Room full of monsters gunning for you, gargoyles spitting fireballs everywhere, just you and your sword running around trying to clear the room.
Oh and ditch the entire "here is a new item you will use it for the rest of the dungeon and for the boss fight" whoop. It's gone on for way too many games. Hell ditch the Ocarina system altogether and focus on making a Zelda where there are no limits to your exploration(Go anywhere, do anything, any dungeon in order, all of the sub-items are for shits and giggles, etc)
Oh and just for kicks I'd like to play a GTA style game as Link, even just to grab random people with the hookshot and fling them into walls.
Oh and you should be able to actually beat the chicken swarm and get like a heart piece or something for it.
Hell just make the games more open in general. One of the few things I liked about Metroid: Zero Mission is that it was designed with many ways to play through the game. Low % runs, speed-runs, areas specifically designed for sequence-breaking and whatnot. Great stuff, adds a bunch of replay value and keeps things interesting. I'd like to see a Zelda game where I could beat it with say...hell I dunno, throwing a chicken at Ganon. Course it wouldn't be that silly but you'd have tons of fresh and inventive options for completing your quest.
All else fails I guess I'll just go back to Sega's Oasis games and/or Landstalker cause they're better anyway.(How about a third game? Please? I'd even take it on the DS!)
i NEED a next links awakening... seeing link exploring a complete new and hugh island with new cultures and people. with loaats of puzzles and sidequest to be solved and some badass wii graphics. while using wiimote for slashing and whiping trough the enviroments and new weapons to fight the beasts of the jungle
Take the current zelda formula and flush it down the shit can. Nintendo needs to pull a final fantasy... im not talking about making the game turn based or FF like but do what square does, keep some elements across the series but make each game new... screw hyrule, gorons, ganon, zora and other crap, give me something new and fresh. Hell make link and zelda different people in each game...
I read somewhere that nintendo said they're doing something new with zelda wii so im hoping for the best because if im collecting shit again in the same cookie cutter formula im going to push brown into the game box and mail it right to nintendo.
I read somewhere that nintendo said they're doing something new with zelda wii so im hoping for the best because if im collecting shit again in the same cookie cutter formula im going to push brown into the game box and mail it right to nintendo.
cartman414
Member
AniHawk said:
Switching seasons took no more than approximately a second. There are many other recurrent things in other Zelda games that took longer.
PepsimanVsJoe said:
Combat in the original Zelda was hard for the wrong reasons, namely Link's somewhat stiff control (4 directional control, having to move an extra bit when having to change direction), and often random enemy movement that often punishes you for simply getting too close and not being able to move away in time due to said stiffness of controls. Not cheap hard, but just annoying at times.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll
- Poll