Retro_Link Posted October 14, 2012 Posted October 14, 2012 Actually, no it isn't. The Deku Tree has a huge monologue before and after said dungeon, you're expected to gather 40 Rupees before entering it, and you're interrupted by tutorials such as "HEY! You can open doors if you press A!" I've seen plenty of beginners being turned off by the morose start. You can't hold it against Ocarina of Time for having somewhat of a tutorial considering it was a brand new generation of console, but more importantly controllers! There was a lot to get used to. In terms of subsequent tutorials, Ocarina actually left a lot for the player to learn on their own!
Mokong Posted October 14, 2012 Posted October 14, 2012 I respect your opinion on most games but this is the worst Zelda in my opinion. I couldn't be paid enough to play this twice. I love Zelda. Own and have played them all. Majoras Mask being my favourite, then a toss up between TP and Links Awakening. You can tell they didn't try too hard, it was released too late for Wii. I liked the motion controls in general besides the constant resetting and oh yeah the constant resetting. Instead of creating new areas, they just reused the same assets non-stop over and over. I keep telling myself you can't hate this game, right, c'mon it's Zelda, ZELDA? But I think I do and there is something really disconcerting and annoying about this game. Wii if you hate the game so much why did you bother to come into the thread? You already made your opinion clear in the Top 25 voting thread. It's not the best of Zeldas yeah it has its problems but what Zelda doesn't have a few problems, I fully enjoyed it when I first got it and loved it and I am enjoying my 2nd play so far too. I'm trying to replay a number of Wii games before teh WIi U comes out, this is next on my list. I just wanted to post about that and my initial expereince with Hero mode and was wondering if anyone else had done the same already yet.
Jonnas Posted October 14, 2012 Posted October 14, 2012 You can't hold it against Ocarina of Time for having somewhat of a tutorial considering it was a brand new generation of console, but more importantly controllers! There was a lot to get used to. We are comparing it to Skyward Sword, right...? Because you can't hold this argument against Skyward Sword, either In terms of subsequent tutorials, Ocarina actually left a lot for the player to learn on their own! The only truly useful tutorial in OoT is teaching you the value of the Z-Lock, true. They did waste plenty of time telling you the different uses of the A Button, though ("You can dive by holding A!" "You can push blocks by pressing A!"), not to mention Navi spoiling a few of the more interesting puzzles here and there. In that respect, OoT is a lot like SS, it's just that the whole thing had better flow than SS's slow texts.
Hero-of-Time Posted October 14, 2012 Posted October 14, 2012 Actually, no it isn't. The Deku Tree has a huge monologue before and after said dungeon, you're expected to gather 40 Rupees before entering it, and you're interrupted by tutorials such as "HEY! You can open doors if you press A!" I've seen plenty of beginners being turned off by the morose start. In SS, you can enter the initial cave and practice with your sword pretty early, and then you get stretches of plot afterwards (one of which involves learning how to ride your bird, another one involves following Fi throughout the night). As far as structuring goes, SS is not significantly worse than OoT. In fact, I'd go as far as saying Majora's Mask is the only 3D Zelda with a quick start (the game was going to be an expansion of OoT, maybe that's why) That said, SS's problem was the sloooow texts, making everything seem slower, and Fi sound worse (I believe half of her advice was supposed to be amusing banter that fell flat). I wonder if anyone would be complaining about the hand-holding if the scenes flowed just a little better. Eh? It takes 10-15mins to start the first real dungeon in OOT, if that. It's not some side dungeon or training dungeon, it's the first games proper dungeon.
Fused King Posted October 14, 2012 Posted October 14, 2012 Fi is a bit cold if you'd ask me. Was her character really justified by the story? Did she have a robotic state of mind because her sole purpose was to help the next Hero as efficient as possible? I don't know. I guess it sort of makes sense because she dwells in the Mastersword, which is a serious blade throughout the Zelda series, and you can't go and have some crazy ghost inhabit it. Still, Fi made the game a little less enjoyable for me. But only slightly, only slightly. I really cannot wait to see what Aonuma and co. are doing to Zelda on the 3DS and WiiU. For the 3DS, I expect a different artstyle than the previous 2 DS Zelda, although I can see them refining the look to make it look more like WindWaker. I'd love to see Toon Link return in full glory Perhaps they'll even change the camera angle so that the 3D will be as effective as possible. On the WiiU, I can really see them rockign the art direction boat. I hope they'll pull another WindWaker on us, because now a lot of people would love to see a super HD Zelda with fantasy-realistic graphics. I guess they could take that epic, Twilight Princess kind of artstyle even further on the WiiU, or they could try to surprise us with an artstyle no one could've come up with.
Jonnas Posted October 14, 2012 Posted October 14, 2012 Eh? It takes 10-15mins to start the first real dungeon in OOT, if that. It's not some side dungeon or training dungeon, it's the first games proper dungeon. A lot of focus is given to "proper" dungeons in Zelda, often forgetting to see what they actually are. Deku Tree is a tutorial dungeon with very basic puzzles to help you learn the ropes. The biggest differences are the presence of a boss, and the "fall into the web" puzzle. The oracles have a similar dungeon (or was it just Seasons?), but nobody counts it as a "proper" dungeon. Probably because it doesn't have a boss. Functionally, the Deku Tree is nearly identical.
Wii Posted October 14, 2012 Posted October 14, 2012 Some improvements for the next Zelda. Not have the companion character be so annoying. Get lost Fi, I know what I'm doing. No stamina meter. Silly idea. Speed up or skip dialog boxes. So slow and infuriating. I don't want to be told for the 100th time what something is when I collect it. I knew the first time. Create an overworld full of life. The sky is vast and empty, so was Skyward Sword. Don't reuse areas instead of creating new worlds. More meaningful characters would be nice, besides Groose that was it. A whole game and one developed character? One last thing. I think there should be speech. Do it right and it'll add greatly to the immersion of the game.
MoogleViper Posted October 14, 2012 Posted October 14, 2012 One last thing. I think there should be speech. Do it right and it'll add greatly to the immersion of the game. I completely disagree. Adding speech can ruin adventure and RPG games. Without speech you can put your own inner voices into characters, make them part of your own, connect with them. You can't do that when you're hearing some cartoony voices from low rent actors. I think Final Fantasy took a dive when it added voices. Especially when it fucked everyone over by pronouncing Chocobo as "choke-ah-bo".
Fused King Posted October 14, 2012 Posted October 14, 2012 (edited) Voices should be added in a Midna-like fashion in which every race has their own made-up language and tongue. Hylian Goronian Zorandish Dekoustic Kikwish Minishish etc... No recognisable language, but a further immersion into the mythos of The Legend of Zelda. Edited October 15, 2012 by Fused King
Wii Posted October 14, 2012 Posted October 14, 2012 I completely disagree. Adding speech can ruin adventure and RPG games. Without speech you can put your own inner voices into characters, make them part of your own, connect with them. You can't do that when you're hearing some cartoony voices from low rent actors. I think Final Fantasy took a dive when it added voices. Especially when it fucked everyone over by pronouncing Chocobo as "choke-ah-bo". What did I say? Do it RIGHT and it can add to the immersion. Have you played Xenoblade? Is it ruined or enhanced by voice acting?
MoogleViper Posted October 14, 2012 Posted October 14, 2012 What did I say? Do it RIGHT and it can add to the immersion. But it's so hard to do it right. Especially as the budget for voice actors won't be very high. Voices should be added in a Midna-like fashion in which every race has their own made-up language and tongue. Hylian Goronian Zorandish Dekoustic Kikwish Minishish etc... No recognisable language, and but a further immersion into the mythos of The Legend of Zelda. I think this would be a good idea.
Retro_Link Posted October 14, 2012 Posted October 14, 2012 Except Midna's 'speech' is annoying as feck! The Old Hyrulian they've used in the past has been fine, as it's been quite soothing as relaxing as it's generally spoken by god/king type figures. I'm not sure I'd like each race to save a different 'gibberish' sound though. Ultimately it could prove far more annoying than what we have now.
Wii Posted October 14, 2012 Posted October 14, 2012 But it's so hard to do it right. Especially as the budget for voice actors won't be very high. Why would the budget be low. It's Nintendo, it's Zelda. It would be the first time adding voice. They would make sure to get it right. It's not like there some indie developer than can't rub 2 pennies together. It's irrelevant because it'll never happen. Like I said, it is Nintendo. They're stubborn as F#€k and as much as they do right, they do wrong.
Magnus Posted October 14, 2012 Posted October 14, 2012 Nintendo isn't going to create a dozen fake languages for a video game, so the best we could hope for when it comes to Fused's idea would be vaguely different-sounding nonsense for different races. And then what's the point? They'd express no emotion and hearing a Goron go "wubwubwub" for the millionth time would just get annoying. You may as well say that the Banjo-Kazooie games have voice acting. Or if Nintendo decided to just have everyone speak Hylian and actually went to the trouble of creating a rudimentary language (hey, they did it for Avatar...) they'd still need to get good voice actors, because Johnny from accounting isn't going to know how to pronounce anything and what do you mean I'm emphasizing the wrong words?
Jonnas Posted October 14, 2012 Posted October 14, 2012 Why would the budget be low. It's Nintendo, it's Zelda. It would be the first time adding voice. They would make sure to get it right. It's not like there some indie developer than can't rub 2 pennies together. Like the universally-accepted Metroid: Other M?
Grazza Posted October 14, 2012 Posted October 14, 2012 (edited) Pacing... @Hero\-of\-Time are both right, it's just that I don't think it has an enormous effect upon whether or not any given Zelda is a true great (see my "league table"!) Ocarina of Time and Wind Waker are not exactly Link to the Past or Link's Awakening in how they start, yet are still as great, in my opinion. On the other hand, the tutorials/beginnings have been too much since Twilight Princess, and I think that did lessen the games. Voice-acting... Have you ever played an RPG where the NPCs repeat the same phrase (or a series of phrases) every time you speak to them? It breaks the immersion, even if it's done well. There's just something about hearing (as opposed to reading) repetitive phrases (no jokes about my posts on here please!) that makes it more jarring. I have only seen voice-acting done well once and that was Dragon Quest VIII. Even then, it was a highly-talented British team (including an actor from Alan Partridge!), whereas the Japanese release didn't have voice-acting at all. The point here is that it would be extremely difficult for Nintendo of Japan to set the voice-acting in the right tone, then repeat that properly for every accent in the world. At the very least you'd have to have European and American, otherwise Americans would think they were in Britain rather than Hyrule (so would I, frankly). In short: good voice-acting would be extremely difficult, if not impossible. Art style... What bothers me about art styles is the feeling they are experimenting just for the sake of experimenting. For example, Wind Waker and Twilight Princess both felt like they were trying to provide better graphics, just that one was cartoony and one was realistic. Skyward Sword didn't feel like they were trying to be better, just different. More than that, it felt like they were too scared to pick a side and decided to occupy the middle ground. Now we have a culture where people want a different art style every game, with some suggesting the "Kirby's Epic Yarn" look for Zelda. I'm sorry, but no!! On the positive side, the E3 2011 Zelda demo was exactly right (someone clearly knows what they are doing), and I still think they could take the Wind Waker look even further and make it even more gorgeous and cartoony. Watch as Nintendo does neither! Anyway, it's time for... The Grand Zelda League Table League 1 Wind Waker Ocarina of Time Majora's Mask Link to the Past Link's Awakening These are all outstanding and I'm happy for them to define Zelda, whether 2D or 3D. Some have better pacing than others, but none of them has "problem" pacing. League 2 Twilight Princess Minish Cap Phantom Hourglass Spirit Tracks The games in this league are very good, it's just that there are aspects that feel a little bit "off". League 3 Skyward Sword Legend of Zelda Zelda II ...These are the "bad" or "outdated" games. Whilst I can understand that about the NES games, it is indeed disconcerting that the latest title falls into this category. What they all have in common is that they are more of a pain to play than a pleasure. I'm not going to say the motion control doesn't matter, because it does. The thought of clashing my sword against all those Moblin/Lizalfos shields makes me think "forget it". But there were also a lot of problems not associated with the motion control. I won't make a long list for now, but I'll just say this: Next time, I hope the designers think long and hard about what would create compelling atmospheres and a feeling of "magic". Every game that focuses on controller gimmicks (or even just "features", if you prefer) is a missed opportunity for another game that truly draws you into its world and is cherished for years. Edited October 14, 2012 by Grazza Forgot about the DS games
Wii Posted October 14, 2012 Posted October 14, 2012 Like the universally-accepted Metroid: Other M? Jesus Christ! For future reference if somebody is going to question me, please let it be relevant. The main problem people have with Metroid: Other M has nothing to do with voice acting, it's the story that people find annoying.
Dcubed Posted October 14, 2012 Posted October 14, 2012 (edited) There was a topic on Neogaf the other week that got on about the hand holding and tutorials of the newer Zelda games. I can see why Nintendo do it, they want to try and get more people to play the games and make it easy as possible for them to learn how to play. By doing this though they are just annoying fans who grew up with the series. I don't understand why you can't skip such segments or have an option at the start of the game to knock off hints, tips and tutorials. If you look back at the start of LTTP, that is how a Zelda game should start. You have a little introduction, great atmosphere and within 5 mins you have a sword in your hand and are exploring a dungeon. Even OOT is a good example, as you enter the Deku Tree pretty much straight away as well. The problem with their way of thinking though is that they assume that a Zelda game doesn't start until you get to the first dungeon; and that's just patently false. What's great about Twilight Princess and (especially) Skyward Sword's intro is that they do a great job of introducing the game and its mechanics/story through simply showcasing the world and allowing you to explore the first couple of areas/talking to NPCs/carrying out tasks on your own - giving you a feel for all the different non dungeon mechanics that the game has to offer (indeed, half the point of Skyward Sword was to take the emphasis away from the dungeons and bring more of those elements out into the overworld environments themselves) Technically speaking, if you discount the FMV intro, you actually come into contact with enemies faster in Skyward Sword than you do in any other 3D Zelda game (the first cave where you encounter the Keese. That's a combat tutorial, and it's done with absolutely no dialogue or explanation at all - which I suppose isn't really needed since the combat requires no button presses) If you listened to those guys, Zelda would have no gameplay outside of dungeons and any form of backtracking (even when the environment has been completely terraformed like in Skyward Sword) would be considered as filler. Zelda is much more than a simple dungeon crawler! Edited October 14, 2012 by Dcubed
Jonnas Posted October 14, 2012 Posted October 14, 2012 Jesus Christ! For future reference if somebody is going to question me, please let it be relevant. The main problem people have with Metroid: Other M has nothing to do with voice acting, it's the story that people find annoying. I recall one of the points of contention being the choice for Samus' voice, though. "Deliberately monotone" was what the director/producer wanted, right? Plenty of money, big franchise, the producer actively participating in casting... And yet even the choice of her voice managed to be controversial. (I may have been unclear, as several points in Other M were controversial, not just voice acting) But I fear this may start to veer off-topic. I can see your point, Grazza. Phantom Hourglass acted as the introduction to a new control scheme, and was handily surpassed by its sequel. Wii U Zelda may do the same for Skyward Sword, true, but I don't think that's the sort of thing anyone can claim so soon. (Also, do yourself a favour and find a way to play the Oracle games as soon as you're able to) That's a combat tutorial, and it's done with absolutely no dialogue or explanation at all - which I suppose isn't really needed since the combat requires no button presses) Actually, Eagler gives you a quick tutorial with them logs (though I think it's optional, not sure). Just pointing that out.
Dcubed Posted October 14, 2012 Posted October 14, 2012 Actually, Eagler gives you a quick tutorial with them logs (though I think it's optional, not sure). Just pointing that out. It is entirely optional, hence why I did not count it (you have to actually go out of your way to find the sword training dojo - just like in Majora's Mask)
Jonnas Posted October 14, 2012 Posted October 14, 2012 It is entirely optional, hence why I did not count it (you have to actually go out of your way to find the sword training dojo - just like in Majora's Mask) Um? I thought the sword was found at the dojo in the first place...
Hero-of-Time Posted October 14, 2012 Posted October 14, 2012 (edited) The problem with their way of thinking though is that they assume that a Zelda game doesn't start until you get to the first dungeon; and that's just patently false. What's great about Twilight Princess and (especially) Skyward Sword's intro is that they do a great job of introducing the game and its mechanics/story through simply showcasing the world and allowing you to explore the first couple of areas/talking to NPCs/carrying out tasks on your own - giving you a feel for all the different non dungeon mechanics that the game has to offer (indeed, half the point of Skyward Sword was to take the emphasis away from the dungeons and bring more of those elements out into the overworld environments themselves) Technically speaking, if you discount the FMV intro, you actually come into contact with enemies faster in Skyward Sword than you do in any other 3D Zelda game (the first cave where you encounter the Keese. That's a combat tutorial, and it's done with absolutely no dialogue or explanation at all - which I suppose isn't really needed since the combat requires no button presses) If you listened to those guys, Zelda would have no gameplay outside of dungeons and any form of backtracking (even when the environment has been completely terraformed like in Skyward Sword) would be considered as filler. Zelda is much more than a simple dungeon crawler! Just tested this by timing the game as soon as you get to control Link and doing what the story wanted me to do, such as talking to Zelda, then Groose and then getting my sword. It took 15 mins to get to the point where I could get the sword and then get into the cave and kill some Keese. I fired up OOT and did exactly he same, not starting the stopwatch until I had control of Link and it took me 5 mins to get the sword and shield and kill a Deku plant. The guys on Gaf weren't making that point at all, its more what Grazza said about pacing needing to be right. As for Zelda being a dungeon crawler, it may as well be at this point as there hasn't been an interesting overworld in a console Zelda since Wind Waker IMO. Um? I thought the sword was found at the dojo in the first place... It is, you have to go there to get it but can't enter until you have spoke to a few people first. You can by pass the tutorial if you wish though. Edited October 14, 2012 by Hero-of-Time Automerged Doublepost
Dcubed Posted October 14, 2012 Posted October 14, 2012 (edited) Just tested this by timing the game as soon as you get to control Link and doing what the story wanted me to do, such as talking to Zelda, then Groose and then getting my sword. It took 15 mins to get to the point where I could get the sword and then get into the cave and kill some Keese. I fired up OOT and did exactly he same, not starting the stopwatch until I had control of Link and it took me 5 mins to get the sword and shield and kill a Deku plant. Difference here though is that you know exactly where to go to get those rupees and the sword. If you didn't know where they were by heart, it would take much longer. And all the other 3D Zeldas take much longer than that to get to your first real enemy (especially Majora's Mask and Twilight Princess) Edited October 14, 2012 by Dcubed
Hero-of-Time Posted October 14, 2012 Posted October 14, 2012 Difference here though is that you know exactly where to go to get those rupees and the sword. If you didn't know where they were by heart, it would take much longer. I knew exactly where to go in Skyward Sword as well, which means if I didn't, again it would take much longer.
Dcubed Posted October 14, 2012 Posted October 14, 2012 (edited) I knew exactly where to go in Skyward Sword as well, which means if I didn't, again it would take much longer. Fair enough. I could argue that Skyward Sword offers a more obvious path to follow for those who bought the game just to kill the first Keese they saw and then never touch the game again (but that would be a pretty flimsy argument ) It's still much faster than any other 3D Zelda aside from OoT though (I was actually thinking of MM, TWW and TP when I made that claim TBH) and my other points still stand. Skyward Sword does a better job of showing that there's more to the series than just dungeons. Plus OoT's 1st "dungeon" is just a glorified tutorial anyway, so the first "real" dungeon you go to in that game is Dodongo's Cavern - which you dont get to for at least an hour, so nerr! :p Edited October 14, 2012 by Dcubed
Recommended Posts