Quote
Originally posted by: Smoke39
Looking at it is basically the same thing as aiming at it.
True, but pixel-perfect aiming shouldn't be required when the challenge is supposed to be solving the puzzle with your mind, not your fingers.
Quote
Either that, or if they made it so you only had to look in its general direction then it would still attract your attention too easily. And either way, if you could lock onto it, you'd realize pretty quickly that shooting it is what you're supposed to do with it.
Is that a problem after the first time? You'd already know to shoot it from experience. I don't quite agree that letting you lock onto something gives a particularly strong hint what you should do with it. There are other items in the game, after all.
Quote
And even regardless, the more you automate stuff like aiming, the closer and closer games come to glorified slide shows.
Aiming is 100% automated during combat. Is combat in Zelda just a slide show? Besides, is the point of the puzzle to test your mind, or to test your thumbs? I'm talking about removing things that get in the way of the game's purpose. This was just the most obvious example I could think of. Getting back to the question of reflecting light with a shield, what's the most intuitive use of the pointer? To point it at the target to illuminate (essentially Z-targeting with the pointer, as in Link would face what you pointed at), or to relate it directly to Link's shield and move it until the shield lines up correctly? Once the player figures out what to do with the shield and the light, isn't the problem solved? Why make it difficult? Just like the perfectly accurate aim, if you Z-target an Octorok and raise your shield, you can't help but reflect his attack right back at him. It's completely automated.
Obviously, there's a line to be drawn somewhere. I'd never suggest that once you figure out that you need to jump from platform to platform over the lava that you might as well be teleported to the other side. I just think that there shouldn't be a discontinuity such as aiming being completely automated one moment and completely manual the next. It may be that the sense of immersion is better with more manual control, and that might make it worth the trouble. That would be one of the benefits of the Wii's controller if it turns out to be true, but with a joystick, it didn't really add to the immersion for me. It didn't annoy me, either, contrary to how it probably sounds. I was just trying to point out that the gameplay could stand to be streamlined in a few small ways.
To tie this back to the topic, Link's not going to mimic your sword swings exactly. It'll probably be limited to jerking the controller, and then he'll slash or stab in that direction according to a programmed animation. That is a good thing for this sort of game. Zelda isn't a fencing simulation. It's not an archery simulation, either. The amount of realism in the controls has to be moderated by what makes the game fun and accessible.