Post by: GoldenPhoenix on November 04, 2006, 01:49:13 PM
Post by: vudu on November 04, 2006, 01:52:48 PM
QuoteNo.
70 hr quest too long?
Post by: Bill Aurion on November 04, 2006, 01:53:59 PM
Post by: ShyGuy on November 04, 2006, 01:58:28 PM
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on November 04, 2006, 01:58:41 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion
Yes, but it's Zelda so I don't care...
Even if it is artificially extended in parts by being either:
A) Way too hard
B) Multiple Scavenger hunts
C) Lots of time spent going from one place to another
Post by: Smash_Brother on November 04, 2006, 02:02:12 PM
As far as I'm concerned, if 50-70 hours is true, then this will be the longest, most epic game ever created. No FF or Xenosaga will TOUCH this game because, unlike standard RPGs, Zelda revolves around GAMEPLAY, not grinding for levels, not watching cutscenes, not watching the same spell animation for the nth time...GAME...PLAY.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on November 04, 2006, 02:04:51 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: ShyGuy
This is why I'm not getting Zelda at launch. I want to enjoy a few other Wii game before I jump into Zelda. I usually take longer to play through games than their advertised time, so TP will probably take me 100 hours. In real world time it will probably last me several months.
What I hate the most about that is a game like OOT took me 2-3 days to beat (I forget exactly how long it took, I know it took me around 20hrs), so I fear I could be sucked in and not get to play anything else along with my school studies suffering. So I definately understand your descision, I too am getting other games around that time and want to play them as well. Let's see this month I am getting Rayman, Red Steel and Elebits along with potential purchases like Gears of War, heck just today I got The Godfather for my 360 (great game!).
Post by: Bill Aurion on November 04, 2006, 02:05:28 PM
B) I love scavenger hunts!
C) I love great distances between locations! That's what made Wind Waker a better exploration game than OoT; you actually felt like you were on an epic adventure, not taking a minute to get to the next dungeon...
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on November 04, 2006, 02:06:48 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
Yeah, ever since I moved out, I've had less time to play games.
As far as I'm concerned, if 50-70 hours is true, then this will be the longest, most epic game ever created. No FF or Xenosaga will TOUCH this game because, unlike standard RPGs, Zelda revolves around GAMEPLAY, not grinding for levels, not watching cutscenes, not watching the same spell animation for the nth time...GAME...PLAY.
I hope that gameplay doesn't get tedious through lame quests or backtracking that are not necessary, feeling forced!
Post by: Mario on November 04, 2006, 02:09:51 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: VGrevolutionQuote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion
Yes, but it's Zelda so I don't care...
Even if it is artificially extended in parts by being either:
A) Way too hard
B) Multiple Scavenger hunts
C) Lots of time spent going from one place to another
Welcome to videogames
Post by: Smash_Brother on November 04, 2006, 02:11:10 PM
I'm curious to see the first reviews...
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on November 04, 2006, 02:11:13 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion
A) The last hard Zelda game was AoL, and I don't see that level of hard...ness...returning...
B) I love scavenger hunts!
C) I love great distances between locations! That's what made Wind Waker a better exploration game than OoT; you actually felt like you were on an epic adventure, not taking a minute to get to the next dungeon...
Well as you may know I am a huge Wind Waker fan and I like all those things if they are done right. But I felt the triforce hunting section in Wind Waker was completely unnecessary and tacked on to make it longer (I've talked to a few people who gave up when they got to that part). If the scavenger hunts are integrated creatively then I have no problem with it, but if they are there just to make the game longer then I have a big problem with it (I fear that could be the case with TP in places since the same hands are on TP as Wind Waker!).
Post by: Bill Aurion on November 04, 2006, 02:18:16 PM
Quote
(I fear that could be the case with TP in places since the same hands on are TP as Wind Waker!).
I do not like this wording... >=|
The team was rushed into putting out Wind Waker, that's why it's not quite as fleshed out as it could have been...TP was delayed so this mistake wouldn't be made again...Insulting the potential of the Zelda team because of deadline woes over one game is NOT something I want to see...
Post by: Kairon on November 04, 2006, 02:20:05 PM
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on November 04, 2006, 02:32:38 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Bill AurionQuote
(I fear that could be the case with TP in places since the same hands on are TP as Wind Waker!).
I do not like this wording... >=|
The team was rushed into putting out Wind Waker, that's why it's not quite as fleshed out as it could have been...TP was delayed so this mistake wouldn't be made again...Insulting the potential of the Zelda team because of deadline woes over one game is NOT something I want to see...
Is that why I consider Zelda: Wind Waker my 2nd favorite Zelda game behind LTTP? I'm not insulting the team but I think it is a legitimate fear that they could rely on some pointless or tacked on backtracking/searching to extend the length especially for a game that is 70hrs long. Even with all the time Zelda: TP has been in development that is alot of gameplay there to keep things interesting without relying on a couple Wind Waker "triforce" sections.
Post by: NWR_pap64 on November 04, 2006, 02:37:50 PM
Sometimes developers exaggerate their games, making them out to be something they are not. The best recent example was Kingdom Hearts 2. Nomura and Square constantly boasted that the worlds would take more than 8 hours to complete, that the game featured had content that equaled 4 full length games and that the main quest would last around 80 hours. In reality, the worlds can be beaten in under an hour each and if you know what you are doing the game can be finished in LESS than 30 hours.
True, they could be counting the fact that you can level the characters up to level 100, level up the drive forms and the summons, acquire every synthesis item, acquire all the ultimate weapons, find every treasure and complete Jimminy's (sp?) journal. But even then, they kept boasting that the main quest would take a really long time to complete.
The way I see, a game's completion time is relative, it depends on the effort the player is willing to give it. For example, the original KH lasted around 30 hours, but I have more than 70 in my save because I spent it leveling up the characters, beating the extra bosses and getting the ingredients for the ultimate weapons. Another good example was Chibi Robo. In PGC's review, they stated that the game could be as long or as short as you want it to be. If you decide to just follow the main story, the game ends in a couple of hours. But if you decide to do EVERYTHING in the game, it will last you a good couple of weeks.
What I am getting at is don't be surprised if you find yourself going over or under the 70 hour promise in TP, and that if part of those 70 hours is spent doing sidequests and mini games.
Post by: Luigi Dude on November 04, 2006, 02:46:33 PM
This isn't like Sega who's messed up nearly every Sonic game in the last ten years where we all now the next Sonic is going to suck just because Sega has a history of doing that.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on November 04, 2006, 02:54:55 PM
Quote
After I spent 10 hours with the game, I barely managed to squeak by two temples, with the third so far off that I could scarcely imagine getting there, let alone approach the objective. (For the record, out of 30 or so journalists, nobody came close to the third temple.) I asked how long it took Nintendo's testers to complete the entire game the first time through. The answer is a whopping 70-plus hours. Adding insult to injury, diabolical Nintendo translator and localization manager Bill Trinen told me that he was working on his second play-through of the game. Knowing what to do and where to go, and skipping cut-scenes, Trinen said that he had logged about 27 hours to make it about two thirds of the way through the temples themselves - and that doesn't account for any of the side quests or time sucks like fishing, a single operation that could easily add hours upon hours to Zelda's depth.
When publishers claim that their games are 50 hours long, seasoned players usually half that number for the truth. But with Twilight Princess, I think we can really look forward to a 50-plus-hour adventure, bare minimum. This quest will keep you busy through the holidays and beyond. So, I'm pondering this revelation a lot as I try to imagine how in the hell I'm going to find the time to beat Zelda and still review 30 other games for the Wii launch. Of course, that's more than a little terrifying, but at the same time I am absolutely thrilled by the prospect of spending some quality time with Link, Epona, and Zelda again. Oh yeah, and Midna, too.
Post by: Arbok on November 04, 2006, 03:12:37 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: VGrevolution
My reasoning for this is, one, I do not have the time to spend 70hrs on a game...
Neither do I if I was going to play "hardcore" on the game... but that's not the case. These days, spending a month or two to beat a longer game is really no problem for me. I don't see why a game being very long, if it's good, is a problem. Hell, if a game can keep me locked up for that long, that's great. My wallet would sure be happy about that.
Quote
Originally posted by: VGrevolution
...but another is that I fear we could be facing some dry spells or artificial means to extend the length (Wind Waker triforce hunting anyone? But instead of 1 section maybe multiple).
Let's not dwell too much on what might be at this stage. In about 15 days we will all know for sure.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on November 04, 2006, 03:21:27 PM
Post by: Nick DiMola on November 04, 2006, 03:37:33 PM
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on November 04, 2006, 03:47:42 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Mr. Jack
I am glad to hear this game is going to take around 70 hours. If it can draw me in at the start, I will wind up consistently playing this game over the next few months. If it is filler like the triforce finding in WW I think I'll kill somebody. I dragged myself through that part of the game just because I need to finish all Zelda games. That one part left a sour taste in my mouth and actually hinders me from playing the game more often. I really hope they avoided this in TP because artificial filler is the worst and it ruins the good memories of the game.
Well like I said WInd Waker is my favorite 3D Zelda (and my 2nd favorite of all time), but that part left a sour part in my mouth as well. But luckily it had so many other redeeming features the vast majority of the game has fond memories (Whether it be the gorgeous visuals, dead hyrule, storytelling and character development, lots of exploration etc etc).
Post by: blackfootsteps on November 04, 2006, 03:59:49 PM
In regard to Wind Waker, when I played through it I had all but one of the Triforce pieces by the time I found out why I needed them. I don't recall that 'quest' feeling tacked on.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on November 04, 2006, 04:02:24 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: blackfootsteps
The longer the gameplay time the better for me. With Excite Truck being delayed in Oz this is my only certain launch purchase at the moment. It's summer holidays for me til March, so if Zelda can keep me entertained throughout it'll be fantastic. This is a game I want to savour for as long as possible, just like I did with OoT.
In regard to Wind Waker, when I played through it I had all but one of the Triforce pieces by the time I found out why I needed them. I don't recall that 'quest' feeling tacked on.
Well you are one of the lucky few to think that. The vast majority of us didn't start collecting them (nor felt we needed to) until close to the end which was all triforce collecting which was quite boring.
Post by: Smash_Brother on November 04, 2006, 04:50:20 PM
As long as you can still save at any time (which you've been able to do in 3D Zeldas, thus far), you should be able to pick it up and put it down at your own pace.
Post by: King of Twitch on November 04, 2006, 05:06:37 PM
Post by: stevey on November 04, 2006, 05:16:04 PM
Post by: SixthAngel on November 04, 2006, 05:19:29 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: stevey
50-70 hr is too short, were my 100 hour Zelda miyamoto promised me.
Isn't everyone complaining about it being too long enough for one thread. I can only take so many pointless complaints at a time.
Post by: Spak-Spang on November 04, 2006, 05:35:12 PM
My opinion is that 50-70 hours is the UPPER limits of a game...and only should be achieved by games that completely engrossing in all aspects of the game, and do not feel repetitive. If the designers succeed in that accomplishment then a game can be 50 hours without problem.
However, I will not that the longer a game is the LESS likely I am to play it through again. I love Zelda games, they are my favorite franchise, but they require so much time I have to be in the mood for a Zelda game...specially the 3D Zeldas.
The 3D Zeldas require much more side quests and communication with characters throughout the games. These meddle tasks are great for the first experience, but get in the way of repeat gaming. I have tried to start playing OoT and WW several times over again, and never finish because it takes to long to visit the dungeons, and is just too much work to visit those later Dungeons I would love to play again.
This isn't so with Link to the Past and the 2D Zelda's in general, I can't even remember how many times I have beaten those...two many.
It just takes too much time to get to the great elements of the 3D Zeldas...and in that respect a 50 hour game may only be completed once by me.
Post by: slacker on November 04, 2006, 05:59:12 PM
Post by: Kairon on November 04, 2006, 06:06:32 PM
For example, I logged 150 hours into Pokemon Red, but I could play in small or long portions as my schedule required, and the game never completely took over my every waking thought... I think...
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Nile Boogie on November 04, 2006, 07:09:17 PM
Is 70 hours too long for a Zelda game?
Is 11 hours too long for a movie trilogy?
Is 05 hours too long for a playoff hockey game?
And the best thing about this is my 4year old son loves Link(Smash Bros. FTW!) so we can sit down and play together. "He will become strong... like his father before him."
Post by: IceCold on November 04, 2006, 07:56:58 PM
QuoteHell no! Preach it, brother..
Is 05 hours too long for a playoff hockey game?
As SB, I believe, said, this game has been in development for so long that I'm sure they filled up those hours with a lot of variety.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on November 04, 2006, 08:26:16 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: IceColdQuoteHell no! Preach it, brother..
Is 05 hours too long for a playoff hockey game?
As SB, I believe, said, this game has been in development for so long that I'm sure they filled up those hours with a lot of variety.
Well I hope you guys are right, if the game maintains a consistent pace that does not feel repetitive those 50-70 hrs then I'm all for it, but I do think it is fair to raise the question. We'll of course know for sure come November 19th (well maybe not until 2008 until we finally beat it lol).
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on November 04, 2006, 08:28:05 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Nile Boogie
It took me a while to figure your trepidation then it hit me ... Zelda: OOT "isn't" you're favorite game of all time, hell, it's not even your favorite Zelda game. I can't believe anyone who thinks OOT is the G.O.A.T. will have any problem with the length of this game.
Actually my top 5 games of all time would be:
1. SMB 3
2. Link to the Past
3. Super Metroid
4. Zelda WW
5. Zelda OOT
And each one of those games are only a smigen from being number 1 (though SMB3 still beats them all!).
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on November 04, 2006, 08:30:00 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
I'm actually not averse to a 100 hour game if that 100 hours is fun all the way through and I don't feel rushed through either.
For example, I logged 150 hours into Pokemon Red, but I could play in small or long portions as my schedule required, and the game never completely took over my every waking thought... I think...
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
That is like me playing the WCW and WWE Games for N64. I probaly spent over 250hrs just on WCW vs NWO, and probaly like 125 on WWF No Mercy. I loved those games!
Post by: NWR_pap64 on November 04, 2006, 08:58:42 PM
OoT was the first Zelda game I ever played. I had heard of Zelda and played some of the NES games, but it never picked up my interest like Mario and the gang did. The only reason I played OoT was because the hype for this game was AMAZING. Since there wasn't any other big games for the N64 at the time, I went with OoT. To this day, its one of the few days that has left a deep, emotional impact...
Everything from the music to the graphics, story and characters captured my imagination. I played this game nearly non stop. I wasn't ready to let go of it. I replayed the game more than once. I saw the ending like a 100 times. I even got the soundtrack from Nintendo Power! OoT was so great I couldn't stop thinking about it. I dreamed about it, I kept whistling the ocarina songs, I kept drawing the triforce and imagined myself in Link's world. In other words, I became nearly obsessed with this game.
Because of this, I expect every Zelda game to leave an impact. Majora's mask was great successor to OoT. While it didn't leave an impact similar to OoT, it sure left its mark. I was captivated by the thrilling and scary world of Termina. I loved how the music changed in order to reflect the fate of the world. I LOVED the villagers with deep stories. Hell, the freaking moon gave me nightmares for MONTHS! The moon was so scary that I kept dreaming about it. I would imagine the moon looking at us, awaiting to destroy us while Majora was on the distance laughing it up. My love towards the Zelda games grew stronger.
And then came Wind waker...While I didn't hate the graphics as some people did, the game felt...lacking. Something about it failed to capture my imagination. OoT inspired me, MM scared me, Wind waker...Nothing. The game definitely felt rushed. They developed and finished the game alright, but forgot to put in the heart that captivates my mind. The music was good but felt lacking, and the characters lacked that charm. In fact, I was so underwhelmed by WW that I didn't finish till months after I got it.
Which is why I am HOPING with all of my soul that TP is able to capture my imagination, or provokes deep emotions in me. I've avoided a great deal of the screenshots and trailers that have been released online because I want that experience to be fantastic when I first boot up the game.
Here's hoping...
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on November 04, 2006, 09:06:05 PM
Post by: Kairon on November 04, 2006, 09:07:47 PM
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: IceCold on November 04, 2006, 09:14:27 PM
Post by: Kairon on November 04, 2006, 09:36:21 PM
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: The Traveller on November 04, 2006, 09:48:58 PM
Now up until this point the only console I owned was a Sega MegaDrive, so it took me awhile to fully understand how to play the game. For instance, when the A button said 'attack' I thought that was Links attack.. trying to play a 3D game with 16 bit knowledge..heh it took me about 13-14 goes to kill queen Gohma aswell :S. Although I had a MegaDrive for that long, I did play various games at friends house's. Mainly fighting games and Goldeneye though.
So yah Oot pretty much blew me away in terms of scope, controls, graphics and epicness!! While MM was good, it didnt have the same impact. Neither did WW, although with both of those I found out quite a bit about them before I played them. This time however, I have tried to keep it to a minimum and I think I will ban myself from the net from the 19th to the 7th. (Aussie Release Date)
Post by: Kairon on November 04, 2006, 10:06:16 PM
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on November 04, 2006, 10:23:07 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
The Traveller, you are TOTALLY AWESOME for getting into Zelda so pure and unprepared for it's AWESOMENESS. God, that must've been something else, to go from 16-bit to Hero of Time over the course of one the highest rated videogames of all time. I'm so envious.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
I have a friend I talk to online that has never even experienced any Zelda game except for the original (which he recently played several months ago for the first time), I really envy him as well. He really wants to play Zelda: OOT but doesn't have a system to play it on, but says he wants to and will in the future.
Post by: WalkingTheCow on November 04, 2006, 11:27:22 PM
I think it's great news. Based on everything I've read and heard it seems to me this game could pull off a long quest quite well. I'm aware that it's possible we'll get a repeat of Wind Waker's fetch quest but I know Nintendo is aware of those complaints. For a long time we've been hearing about this game being long, about how so many members of the development team have had so many great ideas and about how many dungeons are in place, about how many optional quests ect ect. . . I'm not getting the tacked-on-length-vibe from this game and I'd love a Zelda I can spend months upon months on, still discovering.
By the way, I really would like to say I am digging the sort of Ico feel going on with certain aspects of Twilight Princess.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on November 04, 2006, 11:49:55 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: WalkingTheCow
I just thought I'd chime in with my opinion of the length issue.
I think it's great news. Based on everything I've read and heard it seems to me this game could pull off a long quest quite well. I'm aware that it's possible we'll get a repeat of Wind Waker's fetch quest but I know Nintendo is aware of those complaints. For a long time we've been hearing about this game being long, about how so many members of the development team have had so many great ideas and about how many dungeons are in place, about how many optional quests ect ect. . . I'm not getting the tacked-on-length-vibe from this game and I'd love a Zelda I can spend months upon months on, still discovering.
By the way, I really would like to say I am digging the sort of Ico feel going on with certain aspects of Twilight Princess.
ICO can stay FAR FAR away from my Zelda. In the way of length I was watching the 1up video where they were talking about it, I get the impression that the dungeons are HUGE (I refuse to read the spoilers though on them), and even though there are only 9 there are so many other "non-dungeon" places like caves, the sewers etc where you get treasure chests. Also they said that Hyrule field is roughly 5 times bigger than OOTs!
Post by: Famicom on November 05, 2006, 02:17:59 AM
Post by: KDR_11k on November 05, 2006, 02:43:48 AM
Post by: Pittbboi on November 05, 2006, 08:53:42 AM
I used to be like that, but now a good RPG/Adventure game like Final Fantasy or Zelda are like good books to me. I don't have the time to devote to sitting and reading a book for hours on end until I finish it like I used to, but that doesn't mean I shy away from large books. I just squeeze in an hour or so whenever I can and that way it becomes a healthy part of my daily routine instead of shutting myself off from the world until I finish. Works for games too.
So they can make Zelda as long as they want, in my opinion.
Post by: WalkingTheCow on November 05, 2006, 09:04:49 AM
Post by: Ceric on November 05, 2006, 09:55:42 AM
Post by: Smash_Brother on November 05, 2006, 10:58:56 AM
Everything else, meh. I would have only played though this once so the fact that it'll be so long is quite welcome news.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on November 05, 2006, 11:11:24 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
The only game I was willing to play through multiple times was Eternal Darkness.
Everything else, meh. I would have only played though this once so the fact that it'll be so long is quite welcome news.
Great underrated game there! That reminds me I want to play through ED again.
Post by: Smash_Brother on November 05, 2006, 11:32:33 AM
Also, I wanted to get the final ending.
Post by: Ceric on November 05, 2006, 11:37:20 AM
Post by: zakkiel on November 05, 2006, 12:02:23 PM
QuoteI would go farther and say I flatly disbelieve it. OoT was maybe 20-30 hours, and TP has the same number of dungeons. I would, of course, love to find out I'm wrong.
While I believe in Nintendo and its main developers are not ones to hype their own games, I would take this 70 hour quest claim with a grain of salt.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on November 05, 2006, 12:08:52 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: zakkielQuoteI would go farther and say I flatly disbelieve it. OoT was maybe 20-30 hours, and TP has the same number of dungeons. I would, of course, love to find out I'm wrong.
While I believe in Nintendo and its main developers are not ones to hype their own games, I would take this 70 hour quest claim with a grain of salt.
I think you will be wrong, from what I've read the game is made up of lots of "mini"dungeons whether they be caves, sewers or other places. In addition to that Hyrule field is roughly 5 times bigger than OOT. Everyone that played it said that even at 10hrs they barely scratched the surface (no one got to dungeon 3), so that does not sound like a 20-30hr quest to me!
Post by: SixthAngel on November 05, 2006, 03:00:59 PM
I for one am looking forward to this being extremely long. The last couple of games I liked were too short and at times I wanted to stop playing them just because I wanted it to last.
Post by: Pittbboi on November 05, 2006, 03:26:46 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: SixthAngel
They also talked about how all the characters are very fleshed out and memorable. I imagine this means that quests for characters may be common and character interaction is more common. That will certainly make the game longer in good ways.
God I hope this is the case. I love the Zelda series, but if there's one thing that has always bothered me it's how solitary everything feels. Sure, there's always a lot of NPCs around, but they only ever seem to exist for one purpose, all to meet one end. Hopefully they add more activity, more people, more going on outside of the adventure. For how many cultures dwell within hyrule, it has alwys felt too empty to me.
Hopefully they add more text, more memorable characters that have an impact. I want to feel like Link's adventure takes place within Hyrule. Not like Hyrule exists simply for Link's adventure.
Fortunately, it seems like that's what they're doing.
Post by: blackfootsteps on November 05, 2006, 03:49:25 PM
Post by: DeadNote27 on November 05, 2006, 03:57:37 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Pittbboi
God I hope this is the case. I love the Zelda series, but if there's one thing that has always bothered me it's how solitary everything feels. Sure, there's always a lot of NPCs around, but they only ever seem to exist for one purpose, all to meet one end. Hopefully they add more activity, more people, more going on outside of the adventure. For how many cultures dwell within hyrule, it has alwys felt too empty to me.
Hopefully they add more text, more memorable characters that have an impact. I want to feel like Link's adventure takes place within Hyrule. Not like Hyrule exists simply for Link's adventure.
Fortunately, it seems like that's what they're doing.
Agreed, the Zelda series had never had this much focus on character development, it's a welcome change as far as I'm concerned.
Post by: Shecky on November 05, 2006, 06:21:09 PM
I'm sure it's "long", especially in the face of how much time I have to play it ("short"). However if history has indication, I will end up "making" time to play this, much to the chagrin of work and other life type things.Matt's played a few dungeons and in most RPG's that doesn't attest to the pace of the whole game. I'd consider the 1st temple (forest) in OoT to be long in comparison of the others. It takes time to get acquainted with the game (remember where things are, can get there quickly, etc). Play testers are taking their time to try and find faults... and so on.
Really, if your short up on time to play a game is the difference between 50 and 70 hours a big deal? I mean it's still long either way. If you have time to burn then it's a moot point.
Post by: mantidor on November 05, 2006, 07:24:40 PM
Post by: KDR_11k on November 05, 2006, 07:57:31 PM
Post by: Kairon on November 05, 2006, 08:01:30 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: PittbboiQuote
Originally posted by: SixthAngel
They also talked about how all the characters are very fleshed out and memorable. I imagine this means that quests for characters may be common and character interaction is more common. That will certainly make the game longer in good ways.
God I hope this is the case. I love the Zelda series, but if there's one thing that has always bothered me it's how solitary everything feels. Sure, there's always a lot of NPCs around, but they only ever seem to exist for one purpose, all to meet one end. Hopefully they add more activity, more people, more going on outside of the adventure. For how many cultures dwell within hyrule, it has alwys felt too empty to me.
Hopefully they add more text, more memorable characters that have an impact. I want to feel like Link's adventure takes place within Hyrule. Not like Hyrule exists simply for Link's adventure.
Fortunately, it seems like that's what they're doing.
I'm fine with that too. As long as they don't add voice-acting.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Hostile Creation on November 05, 2006, 09:13:23 PM
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on November 05, 2006, 09:56:00 PM
Post by: Bill Aurion on November 06, 2006, 12:42:25 AM
In that recent Iwata interview, members of the Zelda team talked about how Miyamoto sent them e-mails all the time that had subjects like "When I do this, I don't get a reaction from the other characters!"...Miyamoto is primarily gameplay, but he's also the King of Details...
Post by: KDR_11k on November 06, 2006, 01:12:38 AM
Didn't Miyamoto say he already vetoed an even more evolved story because he found it too complicated?
Post by: MaryJane on November 06, 2006, 02:48:28 AM
I've said it before, and I'll say it again, I want a 100 hour long RPG, that stays involved, and the way I play games, (never using a strategy guide, and intentionally backtracking to make sure I found every last item possible, fighting every enemy I come across, talking to every person after every event in the game (their responses often change just by the time of day), and constantly dying) Zelda: TP has the potential to be that 100hour game I've been looking for.
I hate nothing more than playing a game for 4 or 5 days and then it's over, that is not worth $50.
I didn't think the triforce hunting was that bad, by the time I HAD to do it to progress in the game I already had 4 pieces, and most of the triforce maps, so it really wasn't too difficult.
Said before but, This is Nintendo, and this is Zelda, there has never been a better parent child relationship in the history of videogames. Nintendo and Mario come close but Zelda is becoming Nintendo's namesake, while Mario is it's mascot. Don't get me wrong, I love Mario, but if we ever have Zelda(or Link) party, I might have to kill someone.
Post by: couchmonkey on November 06, 2006, 05:02:09 AM
Personally, it took me 4 months to beat Majora's Mask and that only added up to about 40 hours of play (yes I'm pretty slow). I can easily see this one taking me 80 hours and I don't have that kind of time any more. My biggest fear is that it'll be 40 hours of fun and 40 hours of travelling and collecting and crap - but even if it isn't, I still simply don't have 80 hours.
Of course I'm still going to get it and love it, and if it doesn't contain too much "filler" I might consider it the best in the series, but my point is just that I don't feel more=better anymore. I'm not hardcore!
Edit: Wind Waker took me about 50 hours on my first play and almost exactly 30 hours my second time, did anyone else keep track?
Post by: ginx619 on November 06, 2006, 06:46:27 AM
As long as the world is big enough and enjoyable to travel around and the story and characters are intriguing then the length of the game doesn't really matter to me.
I'm personally happy that Zelda is reported to be this long because other than Trauma Center the other games don't interest me much.Between Zelda, Trauma Center, and Wii sports I should be set until long after the new year. This will make both my wallet and my wife happy.
Post by: Hostile Creation on November 06, 2006, 07:06:31 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on November 06, 2006, 08:31:10 AM
I don't want to see tedious game design elements to lengthen the game and I always am afraid of that. Yeah Wind Waker is the only Zelda to have it but it isn't the only Nintendo game to have it. Metroid Prime 1 & 2 have it as well so you never know. Hopefully it will be okay.
One problem I often have with games through is that once all I have left to do is beat the last boss my motivation dimishes. That's because there is usually nothing new to see. If the story isn't really grabbing me there is often no reason to continue if the boss is kicking my ass and it's going to take a lot of tries to finish him off. But this hasn't happened to me in Zelda yet so that should be okay too.
If any of you are concerned that you won't have time don't be. The Wii is a brand new console. All brand new consoles have a dead zone after launch. Hopefully because you're playing Zelda you won't notice it but there isn't just going to be games flying at you from everywhere unless you want to play THQ crap. And if you get it on the Cube you're never getting another Cube game again so you've got all the time you need.
Post by: JonLeung on November 06, 2006, 08:36:43 AM
50-70 hours just means you'll be playing Zelda instead of two to four games in the same amount of time.
The "I have less time for gaming" argument should only really mean that you'll take longer to finish it. Boohoo, so you can't play games for 10-15 hours a day like some people. So it's in seventy one-hour instalments instead of seven ten-hour runs. So it takes you half a year instead of a week. This is Zelda we're talking about, known as the greatest game series ever made by a lot of people, so even if this game only lives halfway up to the promise of being the best Zelda ever made, it should be worth your time - you're less likely to lose interest before your half-year journey is done, than with any other 50-70 hour game or activity.
Games are expensive and you're complaining that you're getting more gameplay for your hard-earned dollar?
Post by: Smash_Brother on November 06, 2006, 08:45:44 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane you won't notice it but there isn't just going to be games flying at you from everywhere unless you want to play THQ crap. And if you get it on the Cube you're never getting another Cube game again so you've got all the time you need.
Actually, I got gamefly recently because of the sheer number of DS/Wii titles which I see as being well worth my time.
Even though I can't buy all of them, there are a LOT of Wii titles I'd like to try out, likely more than enough to keep me occupied into early next year at which point more will have launched.
Post by: zakkiel on November 06, 2006, 09:49:56 AM
QuoteHe's right. Good videogame stories are simple. They don't have to be shallow, and they should certainly not be cliche, but elaborate plots and twists are counterproductive. If TP is about the level of OoT with more character definition for Ganon, I'll be happy.
Didn't Miyamoto say he already vetoed an even more evolved story because he found it too complicated?
Post by: Kairon on November 06, 2006, 09:57:27 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: zakkielQuoteHe's right. Good videogame stories are simple. They don't have to be shallow, and they should certainly not be cliche, but elaborate plots and twists are counterproductive. If TP is about the level of OoT with more character definition for Ganon, I'll be happy.
Didn't Miyamoto say he already vetoed an even more evolved story because he found it too complicated?
Quoted For Absofrickinlute Truth
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Kairon on November 06, 2006, 10:00:21 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion
That's absolutely not true...In fact, Miyamoto probably concentrates more on the "interaction" of characters than anyone in the gaming industry...
In that recent Iwata interview, members of the Zelda team talked about how Miyamoto sent them e-mails all the time that had subjects like "When I do this, I don't get a reaction from the other characters!"...Miyamoto is primarily gameplay, but he's also the King of Details...
Yeah, Miyamoto pays attentions to the small human interactions that actually shape our relationships and interactions to the game's characters. Other people think that character and story exists predominantly in plot twists and melodrama like that, but they're wrong. Essential Human experiences are created by the minutest details of our everyday lives.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on November 06, 2006, 10:06:40 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: KaironQuote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion
That's absolutely not true...In fact, Miyamoto probably concentrates more on the "interaction" of characters than anyone in the gaming industry...
In that recent Iwata interview, members of the Zelda team talked about how Miyamoto sent them e-mails all the time that had subjects like "When I do this, I don't get a reaction from the other characters!"...Miyamoto is primarily gameplay, but he's also the King of Details...
Yeah, Miyamoto pays attentions to the small human interactions that actually shape our relationships and interactions to the game's characters. Other people think that character and story exists predominantly in plot twists and melodrama like that, but they're wrong. Essential Human experiences are created by the minutest details of our everyday lives.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Don't get me wrong I love Miyamoto and consider him the best dang game designer ever, but I have never felt he was particularly strong with creating characters that you feel for. I know in OOT I felt pretty disconnected from the NPCs, which I felt had pretty blah personalities, and characters like Ganon felt 1 dimensional (which is why I loved Wind Waker so much).
edit: A few exceptions to this are the girl from the forest temple who had to become a sage, that was pretty sad. Besides that I can't think of many characters I felt for, but he is amazing with atmosphere and emotion!
Post by: couchmonkey on November 06, 2006, 10:18:44 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
If any of you are concerned that you won't have time don't be. The Wii is a brand new console. All brand new consoles have a dead zone after launch. Hopefully because you're playing Zelda you won't notice it but there isn't just going to be games flying at you from everywhere unless you want to play THQ crap. And if you get it on the Cube you're never getting another Cube game again so you've got all the time you need.
Wii's dead zone kicks off with Wario Ware: Smooth Moves on January 7th. Metroid, Mario, Batallion Wars, Super Mario Strikers, Sonic, SSX, and up to 7 new games from Ubi Soft are predicted to come out between then and May. I will probably finish Zelda, but I have a feeling I'll be rushing through it unless Mario Galaxy is delayed.
Post by: Ian Sane on November 06, 2006, 10:52:05 AM
A good videogame story is one you play, not watch. There should be a vague mission, a setting, and an ending but the middle part should be created by the player. The story is your experience playing the game. So you don't remember when this plot twist occurs. You remember that time you were just in the zone and slaughtered that dungeon boss that was giving you troubles.
Post by: Smash_Brother on November 06, 2006, 11:00:53 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: VGrevolution A few exceptions to this are the girl from the forest temple who had to become a sage, that was pretty sad. Besides that I can't think of many characters I felt for, but he is amazing with atmosphere and emotion!
Saria.
And yeah, I don't remember becoming attached to the characters themselves, but the story carried a great deal of emotion for me.
Post by: Hostile Creation on November 06, 2006, 11:53:42 AM
And all of this without forcing it. Genius in how subtle it is.
Post by: couchmonkey on November 06, 2006, 12:40:22 PM
Post by: Pittbboi on November 06, 2006, 01:50:30 PM
I’m not entirely sure if I agree.
On one hand, there’s very little I can offer in the way of criticism of the Zelda series, a feat in itself.
But, on the other hand, ever since I was young and first got my hands on Ocarina of Time, I’ve always been a little unnerved by how…deserted everything seemed to be. I don’t know, maybe it’s because I was into Playstation RPG’s before I discovered Zelda, but I was always unnerved by these grand scale adventures and all these temples, but at the end of the day I felt like I was only saving the world for, like, 30 people. It’s not that Nintendo should add loads of Final Fantasy-esque teen-angst or M. Night Shyamalan style cheesy plot twists. But, I personally think that technology is at a point that Nintendo can start embellishing the sense of immersion in Zelda by making Hyrule a living, thriving world that Link has to save, instead of a simple puppet stage backdrop for his adventure.
OoT had some memorable characters, but one thing I didn’t like was the fact that just about every character you meet that’s of any importance became too important. There weren’t really any “ally” characters, or characters that were semi important but only for a certain aspect of the game. Every character you meet either becomes a main bad guy or a main good guy, and there really isn’t much besides them. When you have to find the sages in the second half of the game, there was really no shock or suspense because you already knew who the sages were going to be, you just had to make your way to the temple were you knew they were trapped in in one way or the other. Every possible important role is distributed amongst the relatively small roster of players, and the settings are usually more empty than not. The result, to me, makes Hyrule feel like a small community than an actual kingdom. Don’t get me started on the big empty field.
And Ganon has to be the flattest, most boring manifestation of the concept “evil” in a game ever. I don’t know why they’re attempting to make the end of Twilight Princess suspenseful. Anyone who knows anything about Zelda knows that at the end we’ll be facing some form of a Ganon who really has no motive for why he wants to take over Hyrule other than “because I want to”.
I love Zelda because it has the gameplay aspect in the bag. But I notice that a lot of people complain about certain aspects of the game (dungeons, treasure hunting), that becomes tedious, and one way I feel this can be alleviated is if they provide a more compelling storyline/setting.
Post by: Bill Aurion on November 06, 2006, 02:04:32 PM
I don't believe you actually played Wind Waker...
Post by: Kairon on November 06, 2006, 02:07:27 PM
I can see where you are with OoT, but that was probably because of technical limitations. Majora's Mask has shown that Aonouma tends to go for more robustly populated towns and story threads, and this is also hinted at with some TP footage where we see plenty of ghosts and spirits for Wolf Link to interact with. I guess you could say that Zelda: TP seems to be going in a satisfying direction in this regard.
It's just that traditional Miyamoto-esque thinking would purport that gameplay and story are not seperate things that can cover up for each other, but rather are deeply intertwined. For example, the character of Midna in TP came about not because they wanted this character for story purposes, but because Miyamoto wanted something to ride on top of the wolf so that the player wouldn't become bored looking at a 4-footed animal from behind all the time. Only later did they create a story where Midna actually has a role to play.
Consequently, this thinking suggests that story should be naturally emergent from the gameplay. It can't be developed seperately and then bandaged on as a distraction to endless level grinding or item collection, it should instead be part and parcel to the what the gameplay IS. When nintendo gamers complain about poorly designed dungeons or excessive treasure hunting, they don't want the distant promise of a cutscene or the unfulfilling concept of a village full of people who are far away and inaccessible at the moment to distract them from these failings: they want these portions of gameplay to be essentially improved since compelling story and exciting settings should be natural by products of good gameplay.
... but this is only one worldview of videogames, the worldview adopted by raving Miyamoto fanboys like me who drink excessive amounts of Kool-Aid.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Smash_Brother on November 06, 2006, 02:10:20 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion I don't believe you actually played Wind Waker...
Or Majora's Mask...or Four Swords and Minish Cap, but those were more spinoff games.
Majora's Mask sure as hell wasn't Ganon...
Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon Consequently, this thinking suggests that story should be naturally emergent from the gameplay. It can't be developed seperately and then bandaged on as a distraction to endless level grinding or item collection, it should instead be part and parcel to the what the gameplay IS. When nintendo gamers complain about poorly designed dungeons or excessive treasure hunting, they don't want the distant promise of a cutscene or the unfulfilling concept of a village full of people who are far away and inaccessible at the moment to distract them from these failings: they want these portions of gameplay to be essentially improved since compelling story and exciting settings should be natural by products of good gameplay.
The short version of what you're trying to say is that many games hold the story for ransom, the ransom being playing through hours of boring gameplay to see the next portion of the story.
From what I understand, Kingdom Hearts 2 and FF12 both do this, with the "introductory" period at the beginning being long and boring before you get to the good parts of the game.
Post by: Pittbboi on November 06, 2006, 02:17:21 PM
Post by: The Traveller on November 06, 2006, 02:44:14 PM
Post by: Pittbboi on November 06, 2006, 02:53:56 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
I'm not so sure that the way to fix bad gameplay is to band-aid compelling story on top of it.
I can see where you are with OoT, but that was probably because of technical limitations. Majora's Mask has shown that Aonouma tends to go for more robustly populated towns and story threads, and this is also hinted at with some TP footage where we see plenty of ghosts and spirits for Wolf Link to interact with. I guess you could say that Zelda: TP seems to be going in a satisfying direction in this regard.
It's just that traditional Miyamoto-esque thinking would purport that gameplay and story are not seperate things that can cover up for each other, but rather are deeply intertwined. For example, the character of Midna in TP came about not because they wanted this character for story purposes, but because Miyamoto wanted something to ride on top of the wolf so that the player wouldn't become bored looking at a 4-footed animal from behind all the time. Only later did they create a story where Midna actually has a role to play.
Consequently, this thinking suggests that story should be naturally emergent from the gameplay. It can't be developed seperately and then bandaged on as a distraction to endless level grinding or item collection, it should instead be part and parcel to the what the gameplay IS. When nintendo gamers complain about poorly designed dungeons or excessive treasure hunting, they don't want the distant promise of a cutscene or the unfulfilling concept of a village full of people who are far away and inaccessible at the moment to distract them from these failings: they want these portions of gameplay to be essentially improved since compelling story and exciting settings should be natural by products of good gameplay.
... but this is only one worldview of videogames, the worldview adopted by raving Miyamoto fanboys like me who drink excessive amounts of Kool-Aid.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Of course gameplay and story should emerge from each other, but in my opinion they are still separate entities that come together for one complete experience, and Nintendo has definitely been a little slanted towards gameplay.
Over systems and installations, Nintendo has spent so much time working on the gameplay in the Zelda series that the experience is near perfect. But the story always seems, at least to me, to be developed only just enough to provide an explanation for why there’s this character named Link going around slashing things in temples and collecting gemstones.
Graphics have improved, gameplay has improved, but it seems to me that story really hasn’t followed this trend. This isn’t altogether a bad thing, because the basic story is still pretty compelling, but the fact that the depth of the storyline really hasn’t changed much since the early Zelda’s may explain that empty feeling the later games have had. Every character introduced has a specific role, several specific roles even. There isn’t much in the way of the innocent bystander. Your example with Midna suits my point as well. Midna is a character whose only purpose in the story is to keep Link from being boring. Hopefully, there’s more done with Midna.
I think this is only going to become more of an issue the more detailed everything else about the series gets. But fortunately it seems like TP is going to attempt to alleviate some of this sentiment.
Post by: The Traveller on November 06, 2006, 03:12:36 PM
Post by: Hostile Creation on November 06, 2006, 03:38:42 PM
First off, let's point out that OoT and Wind Waker were directed by two different people, and the one that directed Wind Waker will be directing Twilight Princess. So more than likely, TP will take after the style of that game and Majora's Mask, insofar as story elements go.
Secondly, I don't understand your gripe with the small world thing. That applies to many Zelda games. Let's look at Ocarina of Time, where you save a reasonable number of people, but it's not a massive, FF-size world and ultimately you get no recognition for it. Or Majora's Mask, where you save a small world and at the end are placed back in your own world, alone again. Or Link's Awakening, where you basically save no one whatsoever.
Zelda isn't about huge, apocalyptic battles and saving millions of people. It's about the struggles of one person, Link, and the relationships he forms with the people he meets.
"Every character you meet either becomes a main bad guy or a main good guy, and there really isn’t much besides them."
This isn't even a matter of opinion, this is just plain false.
Darunia, Saria, Zelda, character like that are important, sure. But each only plays a certain role. And you have Impa, who becomes a sage but doesn't do a great deal beside that. And what about the hordes of characters (Kakariko Village, various Zora and Gorons, the kids in Kokori) that you may interact with, or do things for, or have them do things for you, but who don't become major characters? The carpenter's son. Ingo. The big Goron. Not to mention the nameless gerudos and marketplace people.
Ocarina wasn't a huge world, partially because of technological limitations. But it did have plenty of characters, of varying degrees of importance to the plot (or to Link as a character), and I think you're just overlooking that. You're conveniently remembering those certain characters who became sages, and not the large cast of other characters. You're looking at the important characters and saying only important characters exist, and that's simply not true.
The Windmill guy? Dampe the gravedigger? The Poe salesman? The Happy Mask Salesman? The running man? See, plenty.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on November 06, 2006, 05:09:09 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_BrotherQuote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion I don't believe you actually played Wind Waker...
Or Majora's Mask...or Four Swords and Minish Cap, but those were more spinoff games.
Majora's Mask sure as hell wasn't Ganon...Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon Consequently, this thinking suggests that story should be naturally emergent from the gameplay. It can't be developed seperately and then bandaged on as a distraction to endless level grinding or item collection, it should instead be part and parcel to the what the gameplay IS. When nintendo gamers complain about poorly designed dungeons or excessive treasure hunting, they don't want the distant promise of a cutscene or the unfulfilling concept of a village full of people who are far away and inaccessible at the moment to distract them from these failings: they want these portions of gameplay to be essentially improved since compelling story and exciting settings should be natural by products of good gameplay.
The short version of what you're trying to say is that many games hold the story for ransom, the ransom being playing through hours of boring gameplay to see the next portion of the story.
From what I understand, Kingdom Hearts 2 and FF12 both do this, with the "introductory" period at the beginning being long and boring before you get to the good parts of the game.
Kingdom Hearts 2 took a bit to get started but I never thought it was boring, it just made me appreciate the overall story and characters, which is why I would have to put Kingdom HEarts 2 in my top 10, I LOVED the characters in that!
Post by: Smoke39 on November 06, 2006, 05:14:49 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Hostile Creation
Zelda isn't about huge, apocalyptic battles and saving millions of people. It's about the struggles of one person, Link, and the relationships he forms with the people he meets.
I totally agree. Zelda games are much more personal experience, I feel, than massive "save the world" type stuff. The focus is more on Link and the challenges he faces than on his ultimate quest.
Post by: Ceric on November 06, 2006, 05:48:14 PM
Post by: Nephilim on November 06, 2006, 06:33:45 PM
Post by: zakkiel on November 06, 2006, 06:37:25 PM
QuoteSo, more NPCs, make sure each NPC has a personality and backstory? I could get behind that, but I really don't understand what that has to do with the plot. Also, the NPCs are never going to number in the hundreds or thousands - there's a child-like narrowness to the Zelda franchise's focus that would be obliterated by Oblivionesqe numbers of people.
But, on the other hand, ever since I was young and first got my hands on Ocarina of Time, I’ve always been a little unnerved by how…deserted everything seemed to be. I don’t know, maybe it’s because I was into Playstation RPG’s before I discovered Zelda, but I was always unnerved by these grand scale adventures and all these temples, but at the end of the day I felt like I was only saving the world for, like, 30 people. It’s not that Nintendo should add loads of Final Fantasy-esque teen-angst or M. Night Shyamalan style cheesy plot twists. But, I personally think that technology is at a point that Nintendo can start embellishing the sense of immersion in Zelda by making Hyrule a living, thriving world that Link has to save, instead of a simple puppet stage backdrop for his adventure.
Post by: NWR_pap64 on November 06, 2006, 06:38:12 PM
Post by: Kairon on November 06, 2006, 08:18:02 PM
Introduce too many people and npc relationships and story-heavy concepts and you'll take away from the pure joy of adventuring itself. The focus will veer away from the sensation of personal, revelatory exploration, and become more about existing in the society of Hyrule. Link would be visiting less dungeons and talking to more npcs for access to juicy backstory.
I like the idea of a more fully fleshed out world with some deeper subtexts to what's going on, but I don't think that Zelda can remain Zelda if all of a sudden the world of Hyrule becomes more important than the adventures of Link.
... I LOVE Kakariko village. It had great subtexts in The Legend of Zelda: LttP, what with townspeople running away from you and all, but that was just a part of the game to shape the player's direction. Kakariko village didn't exist to give Link greater backstory or juicy town gossip, no way. It was there as a venue for shops, minigames, the blacksmiths, some secrets, and the fourth dungeon in the Dark World.
But Kakariko village done in a Final Fantasy style? We'd have to slow down to talk to everyone, we'd start spending more time in town instead of in dungeons, and we would get trapped in this one dense village to the detraction of all the interesting hills and countryside and caves out there to delve into.
And when it boils down to it, Zelda is about a sense of adventure that calls to mind exploring a wooded countryside as a child. This experience is often solitary, often completely self-contained, and oh-so magical because of that level of child-like innocence and purity.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: couchmonkey on November 07, 2006, 05:43:13 AM
Post by: MaryJane on November 07, 2006, 06:11:55 AM
Sorry I got stuck.
I'm starting to think that all I'm going to buy on launch day is this game, and just play and play play play.
Almost got stuck again.
Maybe I should start looking at more screen shots instead of just waiting for video. I had never seen that pic before.
Also, notice the absolute massivity of the town, that's just one section.
:
rool::
Post by: Spak-Spang on November 07, 2006, 06:28:38 AM
Than I would say, 50-70 hours of sex is just too much sex. That is like a massive amount of sex.
So umm...for one Zelda game I would think it would be better to have 30-40 hours...because 30-40 hours of sex is not too much.
Post by: Ian Sane on November 07, 2006, 06:50:19 AM
Post by: Killer_Man_Jaro on November 07, 2006, 06:56:09 AM
Is it compulsory for some people to have completed a game within a month? The game isn't going to go anywhere. Spread out your game hours and take your time playing through the game. You should find it a good thing that a game lasts longer as it creates a better gaming experience.
Post by: Artimus on November 07, 2006, 07:15:23 AM
Post by: Smoke39 on November 07, 2006, 09:40:52 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Spak-Spang
If Legend of Zelda games are like sex...and many people believe it is or better.
Than I would say, 50-70 hours of sex is just too much sex. That is like a massive amount of sex.
So umm...for one Zelda game I would think it would be better to have 30-40 hours...because 30-40 hours of sex is not too much.
I have large sexual appetite. 50-70 hours is good.
Post by: Kairon on November 07, 2006, 09:41:18 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Artimus
I've never beaten OoT, but every so often I attempt to do so! I just stop playing most games after a while, rarely beating any. But I still enjoy them!
I accept and respect your lifestyle choice.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Hostile Creation on November 07, 2006, 10:54:52 AM
Post by: Kairon on November 07, 2006, 11:11:02 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Hostile Creation
50-70 hours of sex is too much for one time, but I'd argue that it's not enough for two months.
I'd argue that even ten minutes of sex is more than some married couples get in two years.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Kairon on November 07, 2006, 11:17:32 AM
Quote
Takano: Well, the plots of Zelda games have always been broadly outlined by the director at the beginning. Then each time a new and interesting gameplay element is devised, something is later added to the story to accommodate it.
Iwata: Oh, so the emphasis isn't put on the story from the beginning?
Takano: Not at all. It's never been done like that.
Iwata: So in a nutshell, the storyline of Zelda is created to bring out the best of the fun and interesting gameplay elements in such a way that the consistency of the story is maintained.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: JonLeung on November 07, 2006, 11:29:57 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
Regarding the amount of NPCs I think having virtually every character provide some importance is an important part of what makes Zelda work. Zelda has virtually no waste.
What about "It's a secret to everybody" and "I am Error" from the first two games?
Post by: Kairon on November 07, 2006, 11:33:22 AM
LOL.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: MaryJane on November 07, 2006, 11:47:24 AM
Let those of us who have dreamed of this moment revel in it.
If this were (as mentioned before) FFXII or Kingdom Hearts2 where you watch the game more than you play, I would agree. However, as this is Zelda, 50-70 hours means, that much time of exploration, intense gameplay, evolving storylines, and magic.
This will be a game for the history books.
Post by: Ian Sane on November 07, 2006, 12:01:29 PM
Those are the NES games which like most games from that time period are incredibly user-unfriendly. From A Link to the Past onwards though Zelda's design is usually really tight and user-friendly. It's a generalization, not a rule. I personally really don't care for the NES Zeldas. LttP took out the rough edges of the first game and more or less set the "standard" that the other games have followed. When I first played the NES games it became very apparent to me that the common elements of Zelda I enjoy the most were introduced in the third game.
Post by: Smoke39 on November 07, 2006, 12:39:32 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: KaironQuote
Originally posted by: Hostile Creation
50-70 hours of sex is too much for one time, but I'd argue that it's not enough for two months.
I'd argue that even ten minutes of sex is more than some married couples get in two years.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Boo marriage.
Post by: Kairon on November 07, 2006, 01:24:19 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
"What about 'It's a secret to everybody' and 'I am Error' from the first two games?"
Those are the NES games which like most games from that time period are incredibly user-unfriendly. From A Link to the Past onwards though Zelda's design is usually really tight and user-friendly. It's a generalization, not a rule. I personally really don't care for the NES Zeldas. LttP took out the rough edges of the first game and more or less set the "standard" that the other games have followed. When I first played the NES games it became very apparent to me that the common elements of Zelda I enjoy the most were introduced in the third game.
I think... I'll agree with you... maybe the first zelda wasn't realy the purest zelda... but instead the rawest?
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: IceCold on November 07, 2006, 05:23:03 PM
Post by: Caliban on November 07, 2006, 05:38:43 PM
I'm really fine with the "70 hours" that they've anounced, heck it could have even been 100 hours and I would still be fine with it.
Btw Zelda II ROCKS!!!
Post by: MarioAllStar on November 07, 2006, 06:17:35 PM
That being said, I need to learn to enjoy myself more in Zelda games. I remember with Wind Waker I rushed through it because I was "competing" with my friends to see who could beat it first. It wasn't an official competition, but the game is all we talked about for weeks. (This was in 6th grade when not everyone thought they were too cool for Nintendo.)
