Emasher Posted January 3, 2009 Posted January 3, 2009 It's not elitist at all. I don't want games to become easier as time goes by and whilst i want more people to get into gaming I DON'T want people them to dumb down existing franchises. Look at CAPCOM and what they've done with MegaMan 9, SFIIHD:TR and SFIV, they've stuck with their roots and i love it. I'm completely fine with the wii fit's and Wii music of the world, they can only be a good thing. Just don't make the next zelda and waggle fest which is aimed at my mum and i'm happy. Thats not what people mean at all. Its possible to make a game accessible to casual gamers without making it any worse for the hardcore. The game could have multiple difficulty settings, or something and it would be fine. Zelda will never become a waggle-fest. Just look at how poorly link's crossbow training did.
Goron_3 Posted January 3, 2009 Posted January 3, 2009 Thats not what people mean at all. Its possible to make a game accessible to casual gamers without making it any worse for the hardcore. The game could have multiple difficulty settings, or something and it would be fine. Zelda will never become a waggle-fest. Just look at how poorly link's crossbow training did. Multiple difficulty settings is definately something they should put in. definately
D_prOdigy Posted January 3, 2009 Posted January 3, 2009 Multiple difficulty settings is definately something they should put in. definately Absolutely. I found most of the general enemies in TP to be a little too easy to fell. The armoured knights on the other hand were perfect. I would have liked to see more of them.
Jonnas Posted January 4, 2009 Posted January 4, 2009 It's not elitist at all. I don't want games to become easier as time goes by and whilst i want more people to get into gaming I DON'T want people them to dumb down existing franchises. Look at CAPCOM and what they've done with MegaMan 9, SFIIHD:TR and SFIV, they've stuck with their roots and i love it. I'm completely fine with the wii fit's and Wii music of the world, they can only be a good thing. Just don't make the next zelda and waggle fest which is aimed at my mum and i'm happy. But that was my point. Accessible =/= easy. A few examples: -LoZ: Wind Waker (this game is not easily accessible, but it's easy as hell); -LoZ: Twilight Princess (ditto); -Super Mario Bros. (it's difficult, but one of the most accessible titles in history); -Megaman 9 (you suggested this one yourself. Hard, but easy to pick up and play) -Arguably, EBA falls into this list as well. Some songs are hard to complete, but so easy to understand (the gameplay, at least). You do have a point, though. Games in general are getting easier, and I'd like them to be more challenging. But it certainly has nothing to do with accessibility. Games started to lose difficulty...since the SNES/Megadrive, probably. You're right in one more thing: Smash Bros. is a rare case where the game can't be deep/difficult and accessible at the same time. Fighting games in general rely on button-mashing for accessibility, while skilled/competitive players can have fun at another level. SSB can't have both, though, due to the nature of the fighting system.
Emasher Posted January 4, 2009 Posted January 4, 2009 Not to mention games like Guitar Hero and Mario Kart. Both games are both easy to pick up and play and also attractive to newer players. But both are also not that easy on the harder difficulties.
Marcamillian Posted January 4, 2009 Posted January 4, 2009 You've hit the nail on the head with the staleness of the franchise Edjamakated. In the opening on TP I was loving it, the highlight of the game was the little unexpected event on return to Kakariko was probably the highlight of the game for me cause it wasn't the reason you'd returned. From then on in it was one big fetch quest. Im not sure about the animals/powers idea but i think thats just personal preference, feels a little bit cliche. It could lead to linearity if specific powers were used in puzzels to access areas and basically force you into the fetch quest senario again. Personally I think it hinges on three things. 1) Story/NPC's - Nintendo always seem to be light on story relying on a simple main story arc. Good zeldas flesh this out with vibrant NPC's (which is where I felt TP is lacking) to create a universe rather than just a story. It would be amazing if Nintnedo would put time and effort into the story to draw you in and to make it feel like you WANT to follow it rather than just following orders. 2) Items - I understand that creating barriers to progress using items is used to keep you going the way the designer intended you too but it feels a little out-dated now. Especially when they have no practical use outside of barrier passing. IMO there should be a path you can take that doesn't require the item yet it makes it harder/longer it you don't. One thing that the OoT style zeldas have lacked is the combining of items to get extended uses (e.g. pegasus boots and rocs feather), this kind of experimentation with items could really add to the experience with non-essential little tricks to pick up. 3) Combat - I know that zelda isn't a fighter. However, it would be nice to see fights be dependant on fighting skill rather than just a breif period of figuring out what item to use and copy and paste it to similar enemies. Fights very often get monotonus when its the application of a simple process to thwart enemies. Give us a toolobox of strikes and tactics that will work against an enemy and let us decide how we want to fight as opposed to (again) just following what the designer wanted us to do.
Emasher Posted January 4, 2009 Posted January 4, 2009 Another thing I wouldn't mind is to start out with most of the main items you always get, like the lantern, the bow. Sort of like in Metroid Prime 3 where you already had the Varia Suit, the Missiles, the space jump, ect.
Edjamakated Posted January 5, 2009 Author Posted January 5, 2009 You've hit the nail on the head with the staleness of the franchise Edjamakated. In the opening on TP I was loving it, the highlight of the game was the little unexpected event on return to Kakariko was probably the highlight of the game for me cause it wasn't the reason you'd returned. From then on in it was one big fetch quest. Im not sure about the animals/powers idea but i think thats just personal preference, feels a little bit cliche. It could lead to linearity if specific powers were used in puzzels to access areas and basically force you into the fetch quest senario again. Personally I think it hinges on three things. 1) Story/NPC's - Nintendo always seem to be light on story relying on a simple main story arc. Good zeldas flesh this out with vibrant NPC's (which is where I felt TP is lacking) to create a universe rather than just a story. It would be amazing if Nintnedo would put time and effort into the story to draw you in and to make it feel like you WANT to follow it rather than just following orders. 2) Items - I understand that creating barriers to progress using items is used to keep you going the way the designer intended you too but it feels a little out-dated now. Especially when they have no practical use outside of barrier passing. IMO there should be a path you can take that doesn't require the item yet it makes it harder/longer it you don't. One thing that the OoT style zeldas have lacked is the combining of items to get extended uses (e.g. pegasus boots and rocs feather), this kind of experimentation with items could really add to the experience with non-essential little tricks to pick up. 3) Combat - I know that zelda isn't a fighter. However, it would be nice to see fights be dependant on fighting skill rather than just a breif period of figuring out what item to use and copy and paste it to similar enemies. Fights very often get monotonus when its the application of a simple process to thwart enemies. Give us a toolobox of strikes and tactics that will work against an enemy and let us decide how we want to fight as opposed to (again) just following what the designer wanted us to do. I'm not so sure. Yes it is a little cliche, but that's not the point. I don't care if it's animals or roaming giants, the point is, you seek them out and conquer them. Just like you mentioned in your item paragraph, if you don't have the proper item, conquering a creature would be much harder to do. I see how needing certain powers or items to advance to new areas can lead to linearity, but on the other hand, without barriers, how can you know you need that item? For instance, I used a Dragon as an example to get the ability to fly. It just so happens you saw a village across a huge gorge earlier in the game. Now you can get there! But I agree with you about the NPC's. They need more personality, and one that changes. For instance, I really would like the NPC's to convey the current state of the world. I want them to be scared of the impending doom. Oh and one more thing. Get rid of Rupee chests. I hate that shit! In fact, get rid of any chests that aren't an item or a heart.
mcj metroid Posted January 5, 2009 Posted January 5, 2009 my main thing is to get straight into the action after a short time.. non of this wake up your a kid, you cant go through until you have a WEAPON!! etc etc you know... be different about it.. most rpgs have this problem too..
Marcamillian Posted January 5, 2009 Posted January 5, 2009 Edjamakated, I know what you mean about the barriers, they are useful in guiding the player. looking at the source of the series though...alright there were some things like the raft but I spent ages trying to do the sixth dungeon straight after the first cause it was the next dungeon I found. Alright it was such a leap that I was forced to find other dungeons but I liked the fact that my adventure was distictly different to what other people played. As for knowing what item you need, NPC's could lend a hand in giving hints. I know it would be a difficult task but my aim would be to create circumstances in which you didn't need the item. If you had it you could progress faster, if you didn't you could solve it with whatever you have to hand. I suppose what its working towards is a scribblenaughts type puzzle system where puzzels arn't a series of predestined actions but a goal that can be achieved in a number of ways.
Edjamakated Posted January 5, 2009 Author Posted January 5, 2009 I understand what your saying and I am like you. I would love there to be multiple solutions to the same puzzle, but I'm not talking about puzzles. I think that's where our discrepancy lies. I am talking about barriers in exploration; as in, needing a boat to travel to another continent. Now the puzzle to receive the boat may have multiple solutions (money, blackmail, trading, favors, etc), but the fact remains that you still need to get that boat. There may also be multiple solutions to traveling to that other continent (dragon, whale, hot air balloon, etc.), but that still requires you to have at least done something in order to progress. Other than that, I think it would be really cool to be able to defeat creatures that you happen to find without the need for the specific item that makes them easier to manage. That way people can just roam about looking for these creatures and deal with them in any order and in any fashion they like. All I'm really saying is, in OOT you had to get a red tunic that withstood heat in order to enter the volcano. There should be more of that in the next game and less of "here is an item; its useful in this temple, but useless everywhere else." That's it. I want to find myself looking for solutions to problems that are hampering my exploration.
Marcamillian Posted January 5, 2009 Posted January 5, 2009 I guess its just my eagerness to stray far from TP leading me to a T-total free roaming solution. Compromises would have to be made at cirtain points. The alternative transport could have varying degrees of dificulty in their discovery. An investment if you wish, time invested in exploration will be paid back with time savings in your fancy new mode of travel? The hot air baloon would require most searching, the boat less so. But for those not in the adventury mind, a ferry, a barrel/log by the shore that could serve as a makeshift raft? Hell, bring in the NPC's if you just want to get to the next part of the game without the rupees, ask for a lift, do some "favours". You wouldn't get to divert off the route but thats the incentive of finding your own transport.... seeing an inaccessable island in the distance from the deck of the ferry and finding something that enables you to get to it. I get what you mean about the red tunic, seeing a problem and solving it rather than being solved by someone else and told what you need (though it could be said that the red tunic was pretty useless outside the volcano :p)
Coolness Bears Posted January 5, 2009 Posted January 5, 2009 Yeah but the red tunic made Link look badass. :p I want the next Zelda to stray slightly from it's dungeon premise and make the open fields and other areas much more exciting again. I say the Dungeons in TP and in any Zelda game Nintendo pretty much nail it each time. The only reason these may have been a little bit boring or easy is because it has followed the same formula for years. In TP what first grabbed me about the game when I switched it on was again entering the Hyrule fields for the first time. I thought to myself OH THE POSSIBILTIES. Unfortunately what I was met with was something a bit bland and lifeless and after the intial excitement of riding Epona again I realised this new world was rather empty. I feel NPC's should not be restricted to towns and villages. Remember in TP when you had to guide that person with her Kart across the field protecting her as she went along? That was fun but in the new Zelda rather as a set piece that should be standard gameplay. I think it would be great if you are just walking along hyrule when you suddenly notice that the postman is being attacked by Moblins and you can rush over and save him, then take him back on Epona to where he needs to go and he then gives you an item or something. Let me try and explain what I mean: You start off in the village. The chief of the village runs into your house sayingthat his herd of Ice Dogs have gone missing or whatever. you don't have to complete this there is an option but if you choose not to it affects what happens later on. After you do or Don't decided to do that it is off to the first dungeon. Say in the first dungeon you get the item you need straight away and then from there on in there are elaborate puzzles to complete to advance to the Boss. So this first bit gets you back into classic Zelda but with a slight twist, so as to not to alienate the fans and to keep things a bit fresh. Your next task could be travel up to the top of an Icy mountain. Now if you chose help retrieve the ICe Dogs this part is now much simplier and quicker you can ride one to thetop of the mountain but if you didn't then it is much harder to traverse up. It will take longer and you'll have to implement more puzzles to get across the broken ground or something. Where as if you did the Ice dog sidequest you could just run right up. (which you get from the village) Once you get to the top you find that a BOSS (a blue dragon or something) is waiting for you and you have to fight it using the weapon you have just gained from the last Dungeon. I like these ideas as it makes use of the weapon you have already gained (unlike in TP) it makes use of a sidequest you did or didn't do and whatever you chose has a different outcome making it more of your own adventure. So instead of a sidequest having an immediate effect it could be something that helps or hinders you later. Such as perhaps you failed the quest. So you chose to get the Ice Dogs back but failed to. And then also instead of having all this grained terrain going to waste. It is also placing more puzzles into them and also a Boss at the top outside of a dungeon which never happens, you never get some giant enemy just wandering around. Which should happen, this would make it more exciting. okay once you defeat the enemy he crashes down into the centre of the mountain revealing a dungeon. from their on in you have to work your way spiralling down into a dungeon. At the end of this one you finish off the Boss from before. Hopefully you understand slightly what I'm saying. I feel the next Zelda should incorparate Sidequests, Dungeons, Areas and Villages moer seamlessly insteadof keeping each seperate which makes the game feel like a fetch quest. Also difficulty settings. Say on hard mode the enemies take more damage and you deal out less. That would be a challenge. Or some Bosses should be timed. Finally more interaction with the NPC's giving them some personality. PS: That's the longest post I've ever written, please somebody read it.
DomJcg Posted January 5, 2009 Posted January 5, 2009 Tl;dr kidding, i did, the first was valid and i support it whole heartedly, lets email nintendo!
Guest Maase Posted January 6, 2009 Posted January 6, 2009 So, Coolness Bear, basically, what you're proposing is: Legend of Zelda, Fallout 3 like. And while that sounds a little stupid with this title, I have to admit, with your description, it sounds awesome. However, Nintendo won't do that, so you might as well forget that idea or email them with it and never see it made :P
Edjamakated Posted January 13, 2009 Author Posted January 13, 2009 I think Zelda needs to change like this song changed the original meelody. http://www.supload.com/listen?s=C9BQL7 It didn't. Instead it added to it something more progressive that new users can easily identify while keeping the core as complex as ever. Still, the end product is fresh and enjoyable to old and new alike. /solicit I know, I know, I shouldn't solicit my work but I started this thread so cut me some slack.
Recommended Posts