Topic: What do you want in the next Zelda game?

[pokepal148]

Seriously, I just want 3 new mechanics that make me play those 3 areas differently than I have in a Zelda game before. That's all.

i agree completely. the basic formula of get 3 items, get the master sword few more dungeons beat ganon doesn't really need to be messed with, its what you do with that formula.

I could also do without so many obvious "You can't get the clearly visible heart piece because you don't have the obvious Zelda troupe yet" setups.

eh, i'd rather that then play the archery minigame type things

[Toruresu]

All great ideas! I've been thinking and I don't want to be Link anymore.

Don't the other races have heroes too? Playing a Zora, Goron, Kokiri and a sand thief (forgot the name) and each would have different abilites/items. I'd create a tag mecanic, like a song or something.

What's the goal? Save Link, so he can wield the Master Sword and save Zelda. This would allow for different enemies and puzzles, of course, it would need a multiplayer mode, but not for the main quest. Something like 'raid mode'.

[Shaymin]

A button-controlled 2D Zelda set in the Link to the Past universe, but with an updated art style and some Wind Waker fan service thrown it.

What's that?

Oh, never mind. I'm good.

[lolmonade]

I loved what Skyward Sword did in the first half of the game, where the story had you in pursuit to save Zelda.  It brought a sense of urgency to the story that I never recalled feeling in OoT or LttP (only other Zelda games i've completed).
 
I hope they don't have to remind me every time I pick up a common item what it is, and what it does.  I also think they need to work on not making their companion characters break up the pacing in the game.  Why can't navi just talk to Link during battle instead of pausing the world so they can have a 1-on-1 conversation?

[Pixelated Pixies]

Do we know yet whether or not those rumblings of a Majora's Mask 3DS remake were bogus?

[Adrock]

i agree completely. the basic formula of get 3 items, get the master sword few more dungeons beat ganon doesn't really need to be messed with, its what you do with that formula.

That's exactly what needs to go first. It's part of what makes the series so predictable now since I always know what's going to happen. The menu screen shows you all the artifacts/plot tokens you need to collect to cash in for the end game. There's no sense of mystery or wonder since the game is plainly mapped out for you. "I now have all the X. Time to fight the final boss."

I'd love to be able to explore the world instead of there being a hub with branching areas. I don't want to know I'm about to fight a boss. I want to be caught off guards and be forced to think my way around defeating it. What if I could avoid it all together? I wouldn't get a useful item, but ultimately, I weigh my options. What if I can change a boss fight because I did something earlier in the game? For example, if you save the dog from the bear trap at the very beginning of Resident Evil 4, he comes back and distracts El Gigante way later, making the boss much easier. You're rewarded for not being an asshole.

I also liked how you were chasing Zelda in the first half of Skyward Sword, but you were doing so within the confines of Nintendo's strict structure. It was like Nintendo had all the ingredients to subvert their own formula yet lacked the fortitude to do so.

[Ian Sane]

Don't the other races have heroes too? Playing a Zora, Goron, Kokiri and a sand thief (forgot the name) and each would have different abilites/items. I'd create a tag mecanic, like a song or something.

Majora's Mask effectively did this with the masks so you could easily take it one step further and have the option to play multiple characters.  I think Nintendo is probably hung up on this "one lone hero" idea and the masks in MM might have been a way to explore the concept while still having it be Link.  Back when GC-GBA Connectivity was first revealed I thought of how to work it into Zelda and I came up with a concept where you have to switch between 3D Zelda on the Cube and 2D Zelda on the GBA.  I had Link as one character in one and a Sheikah character in the other.  The two were in different time periods that could interact with each other and you would switch between the two characters/views on the fly.  Zelda has already had you switch between timelines and dimensions so the mechanic of this is really no different.

In SS what did not make sense to me was that on the ground surface I could not walk from the volcano to the forest.  Logically those are all in the same area so why can't I?  It was just an arbitrary mechanic that made it so I had to go to the sky first.  Zelda is typically good at not showing you this whole world and then having a three foot high fence keeping you from going there but in SS they came close to that.  In a lot of Zelda games they have a hub but there is an illusion of it being a continuous world.  In SS the different areas might as well have been the paintings from Super Mario 64.  If I have to enter a "level" to explore an area that somewhat betrays Zelda.  I should be able to just walk there.  You can complain about OoT's Hyrule Field but at least the travel to it and then to the next area was seamless.

[ThePerm]

I don't think I like SS as the abrieviation for Skyward Sword...I just think of Nazis

[Pixelated Pixies]

In SS what did not make sense to me was that on the ground surface I could not walk from the volcano to the forest.  Logically those are all in the same area so why can't I?  It was just an arbitrary mechanic that made it so I had to go to the sky first.  Zelda is typically good at not showing you this whole world and then having a three foot high fence keeping you from going there but in SS they came close to that.  In a lot of Zelda games they have a hub but there is an illusion of it being a continuous world.  In SS the different areas might as well have been the paintings from Super Mario 64.  If I have to enter a "level" to explore an area that somewhat betrays Zelda.  I should be able to just walk there.  You can complain about OoT's Hyrule Field but at least the travel to it and then to the next area was seamless.

I have to agree. I found the area integration in Skyward Sword to be disappointing. The sense of a continuous world might have been merely an illusion in previous Zelda games, but for me it was an important illusion. What I want from the next Zelda game is for them to improve upon the illusion of an integrated world, not remove it completely as in the case of Skyward Sword.

[pokepal148]

i agree completely. the basic formula of get 3 items, get the master sword few more dungeons beat ganon doesn't really need to be messed with, its what you do with that formula.

That's exactly what needs to go first. It's part of what makes the series so predictable now since I always know what's going to happen. The menu screen shows you all the artifacts/plot tokens you need to collect to cash in for the end game. There's no sense of mystery or wonder since the game is plainly mapped out for you. "I now have all the X. Time to fight the final boss."

I'd love to be able to explore the world instead of there being a hub with branching areas. I don't want to know I'm about to fight a boss. I want to be caught off guards and be forced to think my way around defeating it. What if I could avoid it all together? I wouldn't get a useful item, but ultimately, I weigh my options. What if I can change a boss fight because I did something earlier in the game? For example, if you save the dog from the bear trap at the very beginning of Resident Evil 4, he comes back and distracts El Gigante way later, making the boss much easier. You're rewarded for not being an asshole.

I also liked how you were chasing Zelda in the first half of Skyward Sword, but you were doing so within the confines of Nintendo's strict structure. It was like Nintendo had all the ingredients to subvert their own formula yet lacked the fortitude to do so.

mario galaxy follows the same basic formula as 64... not hearing any complaints there...

[Adrock]

I didn't bring up Mario at all so I don't know how that's a relevant counterargument.

Since you brought it up, I'll address it. Almost every Zelda game in the series has followed the same basic formula which is what makes that an issue in 2013. With Mario, 2D and 3D play much differently (e.g. 2D has one goal per stage, 3D has multiple). Looking strictly at 3D Mario for now, there's also only one game between Super Mario 64 and Super Mario Galaxy. The enter-stage-then-collect-Star/Shine has been used more than once and it will be more predictable and less interesting the more Nintendo uses it. Nintendo had the good sense to radically change the level design from Super Mario Sunshine (which felt like an extension of 64 with an abundance of tropical stages) to Super Mario Galaxy. The gravity aspect changed the game enough to keep things fresh. Unfortunately, I didn't even finish Super Mario Galaxy 2. I would ask a rhetorical question here, but since you're you, I'll just tell you that the familiarity made it less interesting.

Then, there's the New Super Mario Bros. games. The formula has been wrung dry. I'll probably buy New Super Luigi U, but mainly because it's $30. The time aspect (stages begin at 100 seconds) does attempt to change how the game is played. We'll see how that goes.

[pokepal148]

But so many games follow similar structures, thats what makes them a series. Zelda is just horribly blatant about it...

[Fjurbanski]

Yes, every franchise has their own structure, or their own core components, but the thing is, recent Zelda's have been following a structure that they don't have to follow. The whole "3 things, mild twist, 5-7 more things" structure is not what makes Zelda, Zelda. Majora's Mask didn't do that. And it's still just as Zelda as any other. The original didn't do that. Wind Waker kind of did it, but still did it differently. The real core of the franchise is basically exploration+dungeons+items. There's so much that you can do with just those 3 things that it is kind of sad to see them following such a rigid structure. I really hope the next Zelda follows through and it really is a less linear experience like they said they wanted. And it would be really cool to see a genuine new villain. Zant and Girahim were cool. But it bugged me that they had to take the backseat when the "real" villain emerged (Ganondorf and a guy who basically is Ganondorf). At least in WW you knew it was Ganondorf from the beginning, and he was still fairly new.


So yeah, less linearity/different structure. New villain. (And get rid of the slingshot and just give me the bow right away.)

[pokepal148]

the thing is Zelda has become a narrative experience. it has been that way for a very long time. the best you can hope for is something like the adult segments of Oot where you could check whats going on with those clouds over death mountain or you can go and torture yourself in the water temple.

[Nemo]

Zelda II: Adventures of Link is one of my favorite Zelda games because it is so different. But it still has the essential elements (exploration, dungeons, items).

Same goes for Majora's Mask.

Many of the other Zelda games kind of melt together in my mind, where it seems like it's all the same thing.