Topic: Zelda: Wind Waker was it a let down?

[KDR_11k]

Well, at least WW had better dungeons than OOT. Okay, I got frustrated at the wood temple and left the game to rot (I do that when a game gets me so angry/frustrated that I hate every minute of it), but the quality of the four dungeons I played went constantly downhill. Considering what I hear about the water temple, which I still have to reach, I don't think I really want to go on... Besides, I hate the travelling in OOT even more than the sailing in WW. In LttP or LAw you never had such open, empty areas. That might be a problem with 3d, but really, I'd prefer if they had stayed with 2d instead of hurting the gameplay wit their graphics.

Damn, my keyboard is eating many letters today...

[Ian Sane]

Wood temple?  You mean the forest temple?

"Besides, I hate the travelling in OOT even more than the sailing in WW. In LttP or LAw you never had such open, empty areas."

Well I did prefer the traveling in OoT to WW but I'll agree that Hyrule Field was incredibly dull.  Likely that was because of the limitations of early 3D.  I think they did a fairly good job of fixing that with MM by putting a huge town in the middle of the map.  That issue should be resolved as 3D technology improves and it's possible to get more objects on screen at once.  Compare the first Zelda to LttP.  The original Zelda barely even had NPCs, had no towns, and had virtually nothing distinct about any of the areas.  It was just a big videogame level.  I'm willing to cut it some slack since it's the first Zelda game and since OoT was the first 3D Zelda game it's entitled to some slack as well.  OoT sure as hell did a better first job than the original Zelda did.

As for WW I thought it was a great game and one of the best on the Cube.  It just isn't as good as some of the other Zelda games so I would rank it fairly low in my own personal best Zelda games list.  But being one of the worst Zelda games is not a bad thing.  So as a game on it's own merits it was great but by Zelda standards yeah I'd consider it a let down.

My main problem with it is that the ocean is just so damn dull.  I didn't find the world in WW interesting at all since it was just a bunch of blue with some tiny uninteresting islands scattered here or there.

[Guitar Smasher]

I just have to say that Windfall Island was my favourite 'town' of the series.  The music was enjoyable and appropriate, and the the whole island seemed well designed.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

Agreed.  Indeed.

[Smashman]

KDR_11k- WW... better dungeons than OoT? Each dungeon in tWW was a cakewalk, while OoT had 9 superb dungeons, with each having a reasonable amount of difficulty correlating with its number in the game (Inside the Deku Tree=easy first dungeon, then got more and more difficult). Forsaken Fortress was the worst dungeon in the entire Zelda series, and the rest were quite uninteresting compared to OoT's and LTTP's. LTTP had 11 dungeons- all excellent, and reasonably difficult. OoT= 9 dungeons, and they were all great. Forsaken Fortress=terrible dungeon. Dragon Roost Cavern and Forbidden Woods= easily beaten in 15 minute sittings, no brains involved. Tower of the Gods= only TRULY great dungeon. Earth Temple and Wind Temple were both good dungeons, as they both had good puzzles in them, but these are the only two TEMPLES in the game, as opposed to OoT's 5- more proof the game was rushed.

I seriously believe SOME of you to be GC fanboys, and only favoring tWW over OoT because it is on the GCN. OoT > WW= general opinion of gaming populace. Deal with it. Ian Sane is completely correct in his above post (I'm surprised he even joined the debate).

[Berny]

Just because everyone else thinks OOT is better doesn't mean I'm going to agree with them, Smashman. I still hold that WW is best. I thoroughly enjoyed every minute of it. I really don't care if you or anyone else likes OOT better. In my 17 years on this earth I've come to expect that not everyone is going to agree with me.

Anyways, my vote goes to Not a Let-Down. I'm done.

[thecubedcanuck]

traded WW today for ESPN NFL2k5, so thats what I think of it.

[The Omen]

1 ALTTP
2 OoT
3 WW
4 MM
5 TLOZ
6 TAOL

Out of the Zeldas i've played, thats my ranking.

[Smashman]

Switch TLOZ and WW around and I agree with those rankings, The Omen.

thecubedcanuck- I could NEVER sell tWW, because it is just very good, but I do not think it is a bad game, just had some flaws. lol- trading WW for a sports game, so u MUST have really disliked it.

Berny- maybe you're not one of them, but I feel some people on this site are biased towards GC because that is the one they own, therefore, they "favor" tWW over OoT. And, you enjoyed EVERY MINUTE. What about the tedious sailing. I refuse to believe it was NOT boring, eventually. Just a thought.

[darknight06]

The ONLY thing WW ever really did wrong for me was the difficulty.  I mean, when Gannon goes down on the FIRST TRY of all things, something's not quite right and it left me a little empty afterwards.  I remember actually applauding a boss when I actually lost 2 hearts off of one of it's attacks. It's kind of sad to me though, because otherwise this would've been the epitome of Zelda IMO.  

[KDR_11k]

Smashman: Be the general oppinion whatever it wants to be, it doesn't make the game fun for me. Yes, the first non-dungeon (sneaking through the fortress? What, are we including stealth elements into every Nintendo game where they don't belong now?) was awful and I still don't get why they started the game with something as bad as a stealth section (I just hate waiting for guards and having to guess when a guard can see you and when they can't). The dungeons afterwards were fun, though. I wouldn't rank WW as the best game of this generation, but it still beats out OOT, IMO. Maybe I just don't like 3d Zeldas...

[mouse_clicker]

Quote
What about the tedious sailing. I refuse to believe it was NOT boring, eventually. Just a thought.

Never- I voluntarily mapped out every single square in Wind Waker. I loved the sailing- I didn't like how most of it was pointless, but I definitely enjoyed myself while engaging in the activity. Also, you can't assume that anyone who prefers WW only has a Gamecube- Bill will set you straight in that regard.

I myself still prefer Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask in terms of gameplay, but Wind Waker had both absolutely killed in atmosphere and style.

[xts3]

I think WW was a let down but it was OK.  What wind waker was missing was : Content and developers loving polish.  Wind waker and Mario Sunshine definitely felt unpolished.  Wind waker definitely also felt rushed by nintendo, I'm sorry to say.  Don't get me wrong I love these kinds of games and did enjoy them just not as much as previous games.  Wind waker I finished but it never totally 'hooked me' like all the other Zelda's.

Another complaint was that there was hardly any dungeons and the ones that were there were not that great (for example the endless drop 'dungeon' was a bit repetitive).  The sea travelling was gut-wrenchingly boring (thank goodness for the teleport).  I'm sure this is the thing most gamers hated about wind waker was the 2-5 or 10 minutes of sea travelling where you are doing nothing but passively watching and getting bored from the lack of interactivity between you, your character and it's environment.  Fighting on the water was very cumbersome and not that fun IMHO just because the way it was implemented was half baked and cumbersome.  Also not being able to skip or speed up certain dialouge messages in between characters really began to get on my nerves.  They've got to make some of the options more customizable.

For being so used to action and actually doing something during travel (rolling, fighting a few monsters on the way, interacting with the environment, rocks, etc in OoT) windwaker was sub-par in the action/interactive category.  Also the story was well to put it bluntly: Sub par.  I really thought a link to the past and OoT drew you into the Zelda universe but windwaker just kind felt like it had no atmosphere and was retreading OOT (the 'great tree anyone?') in a vain attempt draw you in and attach you to the characters.  For first time players of Zelda WW was probably great, but for veterans it was nothing new.

I know Zelda is 'for everyone' but it when I played it I felt like it was dumbed down for the younger generation.  This is probably a complaint of older "curmudgeon gamers" like myself but personally I'd like to see Zelda get more mature and diversify its plots/cinematics a bit more then the 'story light' and very naive cliche storyline they used in WW.  I'd really like to get know about and feel immersed in the Zelda universe I'm playing in.  Why can't link in an alternate universe such as WW (just as a concept comparison), say have the hots for two ladies or vice versa and play off that theme for some interesting and funny social scenes?  We also never learn about links heritage, parents, or 'development' as a hero kind of character, it'd really be great if they'd infuse some of the characters with real personality characteristics and emotions.  It'd be really neat to see some more mature themes in the Zelda series or a 'spin off' series that totally focuses on enhancing and enriching the Zelda universe for the more mature Zelda fans among us.  It's such a hot property and amazing universe but Nintendo may be wearing it out with the same 'very light' "pre-teen" kinds of stories and characters every... single... game.


Things I liked about wind waker:

-Improved battle system (I liked the timing parry's, links new moves and how easy they were to pull off, although I think they could have designed it to take a little more skill instead of just waiting until the right time and tapping the button)
-The art direction (while I really disliked the look before it was released, some of the characters and bosses looked FANTASTIC, Ganon and the king especially, the best looking characters in the game besides the bosses).
-Classic OOT gameplay mechanics /w the new wind waker enhancements.  I think they are definitely on to something here that should be explored (giving link new moves, modes of attack, and methods of interacting with his enemies).
-The fact that it has a lot of the 'cliche' and classic things that make it "Zelda".

I still think one of the best (and most original) Zelda's --for it's time-- was Zelda 2: The adventure of link for the original NES.  The fact that the game creators at nintendo tried to re-invent the gameplay of Zelda was fantastic, but for the third one they adopted the original Zelda's perspective (which I have to admit I was not as fond of as sidescrolling action of Zelda 2, after all where did link's "signature" moves, such as the upward and downward thrust moves come from in Soul Calibur 2? That's right, the reference all the way back to--Zelda 2, a classic!). I 'm really hyped about the next zelda though. The screenshots alone have got me feeling my faith in Zelda developers restored.  I just hope they try some new things for once.  Zelda is only as good as their willingness to innovate theirs only so much interest Zelda or any type of game thats been sequeled to death can generate after so many games featuring stale and predictable things we've experienced in the previous games.  

[SgtShiversBen]

Smashman, Ocarina wasn't my first Zelda I played and I'm not biased towards anything (don't even care what the word means) but I still favor Wind Waker over it.  I liked WW more because it had MUCH better controls, a EXCELLENT camera (basically what I was playing around with the whole time) and it was just so damn funny that it's like a good Disney movie.  They're hilarious and make you want to watch them all over again, even if they do have singing (Disney).  I just think it's funny that if someone says they like WW more than Ocarina, they must be either little kids or not "THE HARDCORE GAMER LOL HAHAHAH!!"  But yeah, that's my opinion and I'm sticking to it.  BTW, I still love Ocarina, but I'd have to rank it like this.

1.  Wind Waker
2.  Majora's Mask
3.  Adventure of Link (first one I played)
4.  Ocarina
5.  Link's Awakening

Call me a child of the new revolution (even though I'm 21) I still find the 3-D Zelda's to be superb.  And I know how most of you hate Zelda 2, but since it was the first one I played (I think, it might have been the original, just I was three) I never really "deviated" from the basic concept, which is why I still regard it as one of the greatest.  

[Smashman]

KDR_11k- there were only 2 ACTUAL temples, afterwards, while OoT had 5, LTTP had 7. They were all somewhat enjoyable to play through, but the game never picked up in difficulty, unlike OoT and LTTP.

mouse_clicker- I find sailing boring in the fact that there wasn't much to do with the King of Red Lions. I thought of it as a bathroom break, to go between islands, in an empty, bland ocean. At least Hyrule Field wasn't that big, and you weren't there ALL THE TIME, and you only ride Epona for a couple minutes AT MOST. It takes -TWO MINUTES- to go through a square, and it just took far too much of the game. Darn the tediousness!

xts3- yet another person who jacked into my brain and took my thoughts...

SgtShiversBen- I never said YOU were biased. I am saying I believe there to be some people on this site to prefer WW over OoT simply b/c it was on GCN. And, seriously, the graphics mean very little.

[KDR_11k]

Yes, I know WW is low on dungeons (though I don't differentiate between temples and other dungeons...) but at least they were dungeons I enjoyed. If Nintendo did the same thing with OOT as with WW (kicking out sub-par dungeons) I don't think OOT would have many left.

[mouse_clicker]

Quote
mouse_clicker- I find sailing boring in the fact that there wasn't much to do with the King of Red Lions. I thought of it as a bathroom break, to go between islands, in an empty, bland ocean. At least Hyrule Field wasn't that big, and you weren't there ALL THE TIME, and you only ride Epona for a couple minutes AT MOST. It takes -TWO MINUTES- to go through a square, and it just took far too much of the game. Darn the tediousness!

I love riding Epona, too! Epona's one of the best parts of Ocarina of Time. I'd just ride around Hyrule Field watching the sun and moon rise and set and looking for secrets and poes.

Quote
Yes, I know WW is low on dungeons (though I don't differentiate between temples and other dungeons...) but at least they were dungeons I enjoyed.

I completely agree- while I definitely would've liked more challenge in WW's dungeons, they were fun as hell. Case in point the mirror puzzle (can't remember which dungeon it's from, but you know what I'm talking about). The mirror puzzle wasn't hard at all but I had a blast doing it. Probably my favorite single puzzle in a Zelda game yet.

Quote
If Nintendo did the same thing with OOT as with WW (kicking out sub-par dungeons) I don't think OOT would have many left.

I completely disagree- I think every single dungeon in OoT was nothing less than superb. The Water Temple especially just blew me away. If Nintendo had kicked out the sub-par dungeons in OoT, it would have had the exact same amount.

[Ian Sane]

I don't think the amount of dungeons is that important.  I love Majora's Mask yet it only had four dungeons.  However they were all great.  The important thing is what happens between dungeons.  If there are less dungeons there should be a lot of interesting side quests in between.  MM had a lot of mini-dungeons for example.  Between dungeons there was tons to do.  WW didn't quite have that.  A lot of the non-dungeon time was spent sailing, there were portions of the the map that were useless to the story and only existed for heart pieces and treasure, and there was a time wasting fetch quest towards the end.  If it had a tighter design those problems wouldn't have been there.

Personally I think the ideal template is Link's Awakening.  Lots of dungeons and lots of stuff to do between the dungeons.

[Smashman]

Only ONE 3D Zelda game has given me enough dungeons, but at least MM's were LONG, without growing tedious.

All 9 of OoT's dungeons were nothing short of superb, as mouse_clicker put. WW had 5 dungeons because it was RUSHED. WW dungeons were cut from the game to get it out quicker. They applied every last bit of effort to make OoT the classic it is. WW is not a bad game, but it is NOT the classic some of you say it is.

OoT is an undeniable classic, so STOP undermining it.

And, Ian San, I agree with your post, as well.  

[ThePerm]

you can't rank zelda games in a way everyone would agree with. I mean sometimes they go in different directions...some people like those directions more then others.  

oh and kdr...yeah highrule field was a bit dull, i rememberh woever earlier games liek quest 64 having a larger overworld...however they were not as detailed nor interactive. I would like to see a game that has a combination of huge world and lots of interactivity.

[The Omen]

I just want to clarify my rankings-I love every Zelda game I ranked.  Even TAOL.  Some happen to stand above the rest.  IMO, ALTTP, is the definative Zelda game.  The dungeons were all incredible, the light and dark world was great, and the graphics for the time were outstanding.  I still remembre in the begininng when it was raining, I was in awe.  OoT had an incredible awe factor as well.  And probably the best dungeons in any game ever.  Which is why I rank them 1&2.  It seems I really missed something with the GB games though.  Does the GBP play GB games?  I'd like to go back and play Links awakening and the others.

[Ian Sane]

"Does the GBP play GB games? I'd like to go back and play Links awakening and the others."

Yes.  Make sure to get Link's Awakening DX for the colour, the camera shop, and the extra dungeon.

[KDR_11k]

Smashman: I never claimed OOT isn't a classic. I hate lots of classics like Metroid, Space Invaders, Tetris, Defender, ...  

[bostwick202]

Me, personally, I loved WW. It is definetly my favorite game of all time. I thoroughly enjoyed it. The swordplay was amazing, I just loved the way that it flowed, all fluid and stuff. Also, I enjoyed sailing alot. I thought it was fun, personally. The graphics and atmosphere are top-notch. The music and sound effects are great. I also enjoyed the way that all the islands and dungeons were designed. I felt really emmersed by the atmosphere. I find it hard to find any fault with the game at all. (Except the length, which, although it's rather short, i would rather have a short, tightly packed game then a long, tedious one.)

[Smashman]

KDR_11k- maybe you shouldn't play video games...

Some more thoughts:

tWW was just inferior to OoT in every way, and, now that the we have lost some of that etheral wow effect, the game is just plain worse than OoT. OoT is amazing, and tWW is its retarded cousin. OoT is bigger, and tWW just didn't revolutionize the way OoT did. tWW is just shorter, and the dungeons are smaller, and EACH and EVERY one is easy, and can EASILY be beaten by a 7-year-old, while OoT's were all superb. Everywhere else other than this site, everyone thinks sailing is a flaw, while people here overrate the game, greatly. If you can beat the tWW in over a week, then you either suck at video games majorly. tWW can take 5 hours to beat if one knows what they're doing, while OoT takes 8-9 hours. There was NO point in getting all of the heart pieces in tWW, unlike OoT and tWW, because the world was just too big and tedious to traverse. OoT definitely beats WW in terms of game size. WW is almost nothing but a vacuous Great Sea, while OoT has more and larger dungeons.

I know I am have repeated myself a couple times, but those are a few thoughts I needed to share.