The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild Wii U / Switch

[Retro_Link]

http://uk.ign.com/articles/2014/07/04/miyamoto-doesnt-like-to-call-zelda-wii-u-open-world

 

Miyamoto Doesn't Like to Call Zelda Wii U 'Open World'

 

"We used the term to make it easier for consumers to understand."

 

The Legend of Zelda creator Shigeru Myamoto has suggested that Zelda's next Wii U adventure may not be quite the "open world" game we might have been expecting after this year's E3.

 

Speaking at a Q & A between Nintendo & its investors at Nintendo's annual shareholders meeting last week, Miyamoto said that he prefers not to use the term.

 

"I prefer not to use the generally used term “open world” when developing software, but we used this term [at E3] in order to make it easier for consumers to understand. This term means that there is a large world in which players can do numerous things daily."

 

With this said, Miyamoto does not hesitate to call Zelda's new world "vast."

 

"In the traditional “The Legend of Zelda” series, the player would play one dungeon at a time. For example, if there are eight dungeons, at the fourth dungeon, some players may think, “I’m already halfway through the game,” while other players may think, “I still have half of the game to play.” We are trying to gradually break down such mechanism and develop a game style in which you can enjoy “The Legend of Zelda” freely in a vast world, whenever you find the time to do so."

Guess we'll have to wait for more info to find out exactly what the world design is like.

Edited July 5, 2014 by Retro_Link

[Falcon_BlizZACK]

I dont care for these massive MMO worlds - Open world to me can mean Termina or OOTs Hyrule Field, both of which I am happy with (of course, with certain technical improvements) as opposed to Skyward Swords World.

 

I think an overworld the size of WW but with grass will be just about perfect.

Edited July 5, 2014 by King_V

[Wii]

This doesn't pertain to the new Zelda but it makes for some interesting reading. There's tonnes of info broken down on all the Zelda titles and how they sold. Here's the list of how much each Zelda title sold:

 

 

That's just one example. You'll find much more here:

 

http://www.zeldadata.com/zeldadata_SalesInContext2014.html

[Blade]

Quite interesting actually, majority there are top quality titles.

 

Ocarina of Time deserves the top spot of course

[Wii]

Wind Waker HD has done well on the Wii U. It's just short of the million mark but will definitely get there soon. Just goes to show that there's an appetite for more HD remakes.

[Hero-of-Time]

It pains me to see Skyward Sword ahead of Majoras Mask, Minish Cap and A Link Between Worlds on that chart.

[Fierce_LiNk]

I dont care for these massive MMO worlds - Open world to me can mean Termina or OOTs Hyrule Field, both of which I am happy with (of course, with certain technical improvements) as opposed to Skyward Swords World.

 

I think an overworld the size of WW but with grass will be just about perfect.

 

Why wouldn't you want a huuuuge world? Have you played Xenoblade? It blew Skyward Sword away in terms of the size of the world. So expansive, so much to see, tons of variation, etc.

[Wii]

It pains me to see Skyward Sword ahead of Majoras Mask, Minish Cap and A Link Between Worlds on that chart.

 

It pains me to see Skyward Sword.........exist!

[Falcon_BlizZACK]

Why wouldn't you want a huuuuge world? Have you played Xenoblade? It blew Skyward Sword away in terms of the size of the world. So expansive, so much to see, tons of variation, etc.

 

Because I dont feel Zelda will work with such scope. Its hard to explain - but for me, Zelda worlds are about village-like, tightly connected regions - that also make the gameplay/action 'tight'.

 

In OOT and MM, having a bigger overworld wasn't a desire at all, as they seemed just about perfect, and to make the worlds bigger would have just seemed meaningless. In the end, wether rolling as a Goron or warping, we will use the quicker means of travel to continue the game - therefore (to me) story-scope/depth is the most important as opposed to geographical scope.

[peterl0]

I could do with a bit less of the:

Go here, do that, complete that dungeon.

 

Of course the game has to have scripted segments but the could be a lot less prescriptive.

That was why I liked the link between worlds so much.

That style in a 3d zelda would be good for me I think.

[Fierce_LiNk]

Because I dont feel Zelda will work with such scope. Its hard to explain - but for me, Zelda worlds are about village-like, tightly connected regions - that also make the gameplay/action 'tight'.

 

In OOT and MM, having a bigger overworld wasn't a desire at all, as they seemed just about perfect, and to make the worlds bigger would have just seemed meaningless. In the end, wether rolling as a Goron or warping, we will use the quicker means of travel to continue the game - therefore (to me) story-scope/depth is the most important as opposed to geographical scope.

 

The regions in Xenoblade were tight in that sense, so to speak. Especially when you consider the premise that the overworlds take place on the bodies of two gods. The progression from each region to the next was lovely and seeing areas such as the fallen arm from above and being able to actually make out each finger digit was mindblowing. It made sense why each region was the way it was and it was interesting to find secret areas within different places. I must have been 120 hours into the game or something and I still found new areas that I hadn't discovered before.

 

I doubt Nintendo will do something as interesting as this for Zelda, but I'd love to see it. Would love to see what Monolith Soft could do with the overworld for a Zelda game.

 

Even with the story scope, Xenoblade ruined Zelda in that regard, too. There's no reason why we can't have both an expansive world and a kick-ass story. We didn't have either in Skyward Sword.

[Wii]

Monolith Soft are said to be working on a lot of Nintendo titles. If they are working on Zelda, I for one won't complain.

[Grazza]

 

That's an extremely interesting chart' date=' and although it's a shame to see top class games like Majora's Mask and Link Between Worlds near the bottom, I do think it correlates [i']very[/i] strongly with how much hype/excitement there was for each title.

 

Link to the Past? Seeing it in a magazine made me buy a SNES. Ocarina of Time? It was the N64 game we were all waiting for. Twilight Princess? I've honestly never been as excited for a game in advance, before or since.

 

I won't count Legend of Zelda because I didn't have a NES, and Wind Waker (my personal favourite) is pretty much the last one on the list that genuinely made me buy a console for it (I did buy a DS for Phantom Hourglass, but my expectations weren't high). What I'm saying is that this list is an excellent indication of which Zeldas were exciting, rather than a 100% fair representation of their quality.

 

I suppose I'm stating the obvious, really - after all, it's a sales chart - but the Top 6 are the ones that truly felt like Nintendo was going all-out to make the best game they could at the time.

[Fused King]

The sales from Twilight Princess to Skyward Sword is a pretty big drop.

[Goron_3]

The sales from Twilight Princess to Skyward Sword is a pretty big drop.

 

The Wii was completely dead by the end of 2010, let alone 2011. Compare that to hype around Twilight Princess

 

That said, Four Swords in bloody fantastic and deserved more. Co-op Wii U game please!

[Ike]

The sales from Twilight Princess to Skyward Sword is a pretty big drop.

 

Twilight Princess was on the GameCube and a launch title for the Wii which probably helped with the sales numbers.

[Hero-of-Time]

The sales from Twilight Princess to Skyward Sword is a pretty big drop.

 

Dat waggle effect.

 

Both Ike and Goron make very valid points though.

 

The fact that there has been no Four Swords on the Wii U just baffles the hell out of me. You want a game that uses the GamePad, Nintendo? It's right in front of you!

[Fierce_LiNk]

Does that count every iteration of Ocarina of Time. E.g. Virtual console downloads, Master Quest being bundled with Wind Waker, OoT3D?

 

Glad to see Twilight Princess so high. One of my favourite games.

[Hero-of-Time]

Does that count every iteration of Ocarina of Time. E.g. Virtual console downloads, Master Quest being bundled with Wind Waker, OoT3D?

 

Glad to see Twilight Princess so high. One of my favourite games.

 

Yeah, it's with the remakes.

 

If you click the link that Wii provided it has the individual sales numbers, which is probably a more fair representation.

[Fierce_LiNk]

Yeah, it's with the remakes.

 

If you click the link that Wii provided it has the individual sales numbers, which is probably a more fair representation.

 

Ah, didn't see that. I got drawn towards the numbers like a moth to a light.

[Mr_Master_X2]

Why wouldn't you want a huuuuge world? Have you played Xenoblade? It blew Skyward Sword away in terms of the size of the world. So expansive, so much to see, tons of variation, etc.

 

I would assume people are worried about it being empty. Twilight had a habit of making things look big and then having barely anything to do in it. Of course there's at least one Zelda game I'd consider a bit cramped with game size-secrets ratio.

 

It sounds like this new world has specific patterns for game world mechanics that vary day by day,if I get what Miyamoto is on about. Which could mean; MM character style "we do different things on each day of the week". Pokemon style, you can do certain mini quests on certain days of the week, such as special items or maybe Gold Stalfos appear on sunday mornings in certain areas? I would so love for a full-on weather system that sweeps Hyrule. Market traders having different produce on certain days, rivers flooding swamplands on certain days leading to different areas exposed. Lake cave unflooded on certain days etc. I envision some sort of system of interaction with other players such as bottles sent online stuffed with treasure maps for mini quests and such.

[darkjak]

Dat waggle effect.

 

Both Ike and Goron make very valid points though.

 

The fact that there has been no Four Swords on the Wii U just baffles the hell out of me. You want a game that uses the GamePad, Nintendo? It's right in front of you!

 

You can only hook up two gamepads to your Wii U.

 

 

I think that Zelda has taken too many strange turns instead of just evolving. GTA is a series that's handled its evolution correctly. Let's make parallells between the two franchises.

 

Legend of Zelda - Grand Theft Auto

The originals, which set the basis for the franchises.

 

Zelda II - GTA: London

These two aren't as comparable as I'd like, but still deviations which aren't as revered as the rest of their respective series.

 

A Link to the Past - GTA 2

A crystal clear evolution of the 2D franchise, featuring improvements in gameplay and graphics. In fact, here the Zelda franchise has gone further in both departments than GTA.

 

Ocarina of Time - GTA 3

The franchises take the step into the realm of 3D gaming and both are for their respective times, glorious experiences. They are trailblazers and gaming wouldn't be what it is today witout them.

 

Wind Waker - GTA 4

So, Nintendo add a completely different art style (universally panned on the time of its unveiling), which freaks fans out. The new mechanics in Majora's Mask are gone, as is the riding mechanics from Ocarina.

GTA 4 is a quantum leap in graphics, physics and includes online multiplayer. The RPG-style leveling of your character from San Andreas was removed because gamers didn't like that. Also airplanes were missing, probably because the urban environment in the game wasn't suitable for use of planes.

 

Skyward Sword - GTA 5

GTA 5 evolves the art style of GTA 4, adding more colour and just straight up squeezing more out of the hardware. Airplanes are back and vehicle physics are improved over the last entry.

 

Skyward Sword didn't contain the wolf mechanic of Twilight Princess, the boat mechanic from Wind Waker or any other mechanic introduced in the previous games. And for the umpteenth time, Nintendo have added an assinine art style noone asked for. By now Red Dead Redemption had been released and gamers knew what they could expect from Hyrule. Instead, Nintendo make the most linear, artificial world so far. The motion controlls which were supposed to be the unique selling point is ruined due to the annoying enemy design. Nintendo add a wall-running mechanic which feels archaic, when compared to what we see in Assassins Creed. Oh, and they included a bird. Which will in all likelyhood never be seen again.

 

 

Can you see what I mean? Nintendo have done everything with Zelda except to evolve it. Zelda has gone from cutting-edge to archaic.

[Falcon_BlizZACK]

You can only hook up two gamepads to your Wii U.

 

 

I think that Zelda has taken too many strange turns instead of just evolving. GTA is a series that's handled its evolution correctly. Let's make parallells between the two franchises.

 

Legend of Zelda - Grand Theft Auto

The originals, which set the basis for the franchises.

 

Zelda II - GTA: London

These two aren't as comparable as I'd like, but still deviations which aren't as revered as the rest of their respective series.

 

A Link to the Past - GTA 2

A crystal clear evolution of the 2D franchise, featuring improvements in gameplay and graphics. In fact, here the Zelda franchise has gone further in both departments than GTA.

 

Ocarina of Time - GTA 3

The franchises take the step into the realm of 3D gaming and both are for their respective times, glorious experiences. They are trailblazers and gaming wouldn't be what it is today witout them.

 

Wind Waker - GTA 4

So, Nintendo add a completely different art style (universally panned on the time of its unveiling), which freaks fans out. The new mechanics in Majora's Mask are gone, as is the riding mechanics from Ocarina.

GTA 4 is a quantum leap in graphics, physics and includes online multiplayer. The RPG-style leveling of your character from San Andreas was removed because gamers didn't like that. Also airplanes were missing, probably because the urban environment in the game wasn't suitable for use of planes.

 

Skyward Sword - GTA 5

GTA 5 evolves the art style of GTA 4, adding more colour and just straight up squeezing more out of the hardware. Airplanes are back and vehicle physics are improved over the last entry.

 

Skyward Sword didn't contain the wolf mechanic of Twilight Princess, the boat mechanic from Wind Waker or any other mechanic introduced in the previous games. And for the umpteenth time, Nintendo have added an assinine art style noone asked for. By now Red Dead Redemption had been released and gamers knew what they could expect from Hyrule. Instead, Nintendo make the most linear, artificial world so far. The motion controlls which were supposed to be the unique selling point is ruined due to the annoying enemy design. Nintendo add a wall-running mechanic which feels archaic, when compared to what we see in Assassins Creed. Oh, and they included a bird. Which will in all likelyhood never be seen again.

 

 

Can you see what I mean? Nintendo have done everything with Zelda except to evolve it. Zelda has gone from cutting-edge to archaic.

 

While I respect this post and came close to throwing a like (and also welcome you back to your thread). I think Skyward Sword - even though its the only Zelda I couldn't be bothered to finish - has many advancements that count as a form of evolution.

 

The shield upgrades.

(Flying mechanic, an evolution of the flying part of TP to get to Zora's Domain)

Rolling/Throwing bombs.

And as much as I hated it, the fighting mechanic is an evolution of TPs non-sensical waggle. I was crap at it, but Ive seen people master it so it is surely a learnable skill.

 

Let Nintendo do what they want to do with their series'. Zelda is not as simple as GTA, in the sense that all that is being replicated is a 'New York-like' city, with realistic isms just for the wow effect of "Dis iz like reaal life" as you jack a car. In many ways, GTA is a lot easier to create.

 

Its not necessarily about what people want - the same fans asked for an OOT-like Zelda - then complained at TP being too similar to OOT thus being almost irrelevant.

[Ronnie]

I like that Nintendo tries something different with Zelda, given that the gameplay has to remain pretty similar for each game they can't always have the same mechanics from game to game.

 

So, Nintendo add a completely different art style (universally panned on the time of its unveiling), which freaks fans out.

 

What does it matter if at the time it freaked fans out? Wind Waker's art style is critically acclaimed now, everyone loves it and it looks stunning. The graphics were ahead of their time and they still stand up today and will do for a long time.

 

The new mechanics in Majora's Mask are gone, as is the riding mechanics from Ocarina.

 

So you want a horse on the open sea with 3 day time travel thrown in? All because it needs to keep certain arbitrary mechanics from past games to maintain a hazy semblance of "evolution"?

 

GTA 4 is a quantum leap in graphics, physics and includes online multiplayer.

 

Looks pretty bad nowadays though doesn't it. As for multiplayer, of course it does, that fits in with GTA's gameplay, unlike Zelda.

 

Also airplanes were missing, probably because the urban environment in the game wasn't suitable for use of planes.

 

But horses belong on the open sea, re: your earlier point about a missing riding mechanic in Wind Waker?

 

GTA 5 evolves the art style of GTA 4, adding more colour and just straight up squeezing more out of the hardware. Airplanes are back and vehicle physics are improved over the last entry.

 

Do you have any idea how flimsy this argument sounds? You praise GTA for 'improved physics' and 'airplanes are back', yet ignore the ground-breaking motion controls for combat in Skyward Sword or the fact that 'the horse is back'.

 

Skyward Sword didn't contain the wolf mechanic of Twilight Princess, the boat mechanic from Wind Waker or any other mechanic introduced in the previous games.

 

So what? Did wolves belong in Skyward Sword? And fyi, there was a boat mechanic in Skyward Sword and the combat was most certainly an evolution from TP.

 

And for the umpteenth time, Nintendo have added an assinine art style noone asked for.

 

You can question a lot of Nintendo's decisions, but their art styles? Really?

 

Oh, and they included a bird. Which will in all likelyhood never be seen again.

 

So let me make sure I'm clear on this, to you Zelda U needs to include a two time periods, a musical instrument that lets you control time, masks that allow you to transform, a boat that lets you sail the open seas, a companion that lets you transform into a wolf, motion controls, a bird and a horse for transport. And putting all of that into Zelda U will show that they're "evolving" Zelda? Gotcha.

 

Every GTA game feels the same, conversely every Zelda game feels and plays differently, that's a good thing.

 

It sounds to me like you'd prefer Nintendo to release Ocarina of Time 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6. That's not what they're trying to do, unlike what GTA is trying to be. Each Zelda game is supposed to be a standalone adventure with different mechanics.

Edited July 6, 2014 by Ronnie

[Kav]

@Ronnie, awesome post!