Topic: They should make a Zelda RPG.

[KDR_11k]

The timeline isn't comprehensible and doesn't make any sense because they're not planning it or anything, they're making stuff up on the spot (noone thought the Mario games had any consistent plotline...). Miyamoto apparently is against giving Zelda a deeper story (he vetoed Windwaker's old story) and as either Miyamoto or Aonuma said, the story in a Zelda game is an afterthought.

Seriously, if Ninty needed a deep RPG franchise they should make one, not adapt an old one that doesn't really fit the bill to it.

[Ocarina_Jedi]

actually, RABicle's idea doesn't sound half-bad.  would i get it? probably not, but that's just because i'm not a fan of RPGs.  however i just might rent it and spend a day or two with it enjoying rolling around as a goron.  the game potentially could have plenty of content and it would be a huge hit comercially.  though i'm sure some fanboys would still cry, 'blasphemy!' about it.  it might be difficult to accept a game stituated in the zelda universe not being a zelda game.  this isn't like the mario universe, where supporting characters spin off into their own series' and then return for a cameo. u can't really have a game in hyrule without link, because that is his world.

[startswithx]

Done correctly, Zelda as an RPG would be quality.  So long as the makers don't lose sight of what makes Zelda great (the endlessly aggravating puzzles, the labyrinthine dungeons, etc.) it could be done.  Also, no cop-out, crap RPG ending!

[RABicle]

Of course my idea isn't half bad. It's completly fistworthy because I exist in a state of fist which removes any weakness from my system.

Startswithx: I suggest you read what everyone has had to say in this thread.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

I've just added "fistworthy" to my vocabulary.  Thanks, RAB.

People can soooo take that root word the wrong way *_*

[nemo_83]

It does seem like the story is an afterthought in Zelda games.  But Nintendo seems bipolar for saying something like that after claiming that the author of the "Zelda legend" created an entire storyline linking every game.  Why claim story as afterthought one day and claim it to be this huge interlinking storyline another.  

I know what you're thinking, Nintendo was feeding the media BS with the whole interlinking storyline.  That is what I have been thinking too.  

By the way, what the hell is the point of making fiction if there is nothing but plot and no story.  By brushing off criticism's of Nintendo not being good at story by saying that Nintendo doesn't care about story, Nintendo is only making themselves look horrible.  The F'N game is called The LEGEND of Zelda.  The game isnt called The Link Simulator.  The games cannot stand on gameplay alone.  Each game must progressively have more story, better written story, and better woven story with the gameplay.  

Example:  The plot is farm boy finds sword and saves the princess.
                The story is...

Let me put it another way.  The plot consists of events and actions you take in the game.  In other words every swing you make and stone you throw is a part of a series of events that take place in the plot.  The story would be what seperates each game keeping them from being the same game over and over just remade with prettier graphics or a gimmick.  Eventually in gaming graphics will get to where they can go no farther.  Example:  LttP.  It didnt take long for 2d to reach its pinacle.  So when faced with the situation of no new graphical advances then one must actually sit down and come up with something that differentiates the new from the old besides the look and sound.  You cant just come up with a new plot line.  You cant change what characters are in the plot.  You cant switch the gameplay from one weapon to another(gimmicky masks or time consuming musical instruments anyone?).  You cant just add multiplayer (didnt Super Mario Bros make it a standard?).  You also cant just flood the world and redo the same plot line with the new set.  If they just intend on giving us the same game with more dungeons and weapons then why dont they just do an expansion?  

The question of should Nintendo worry about story is like asking should Nintendo worry about doing another Zelda?

[Deguello]

Story comes second.  It always has, and always will.

[KDR_11k]

Well, unless you're Hideo Kojima or Hironobu Sakaguchi...

The way Nintendo makes a Zelda game is to make the game first. After the game is good they start thinking about a storyline. The games can stand by themselves, they don't need a story to be fun. They're not Final Fantasy. I'd rate the story of Wind Waker about on par with Doom or Quake, a bit of explaination between levels what you're doing that stuff for but nothing really important. Did you ever wonder what was going to happen next when playing Wind Waker? Were there any plot turns that really surprised you?
Yes, seen by themselves the changes between games aren't major, but the games are good enough that there's no reason to complain, right?

[nemo_83]

How can you make a game and then a story.  You get a game like FZero GX.  Fun game; cringe worthy story.

A similar example would be like trying to put story into Gran Turismo or Mario Kart.  

You also do not want a game like RS2.  In the situation of most Star Wars games like RS2 everything is broken up into stages.  The game comes off as a Star Wars simulator with accessable controls and gameplay.  I loved the game though.  It was the reason I got a Cube when the system came out.  But I want an adventure game.  I want the story to flow through the gameplay.  

A parasite has attached itself to many games in the past two generations.  That parasite is the cinema.  I am tired of games taking hours to really get started in the game.  I want the story to be minimal at the beginning.  An obvious example of a long beginning would be FF11.   The character is reasonably easy to control in FF11.  But then there is a keyboard of comands to go with that.  The glory of Zelda is that it has in depth real time character control.  Though in the state it is in now using analog sticks it is half way between accessable and true.  It is merely developed.  The game control is stuck in pergatory.  The game controls are based on the gameplay which is run, hit, pick up, and throw.  With the advent of 3d we get jumping and camera.  What Zelda needs to make its controls more accessable and do away with the tutorials it has developed (aside from voluntary ones like advanced sword play) is a revolution in game control.  Zelda needs its action (sword fighting) to be simulative in scheme.  Rather than pushing buttons and doing combinations you have to learn, your sword control should be just as your character and camera control are; literal.  So you would be like a child swinging a sword for the first time and you would learn by doing it more rather than having to sit through instructions that should be read in the booklet.

WW is very easy to get into compared to FF11.  FF11 takes things to an extreme compared to WW.  But WW has far too many story pieces at the begining of the game for a Zelda game.  I like the story pieces in WW but I don't want so many at the beginning.  The thing you find whe you are learning to write fiction is that you usually need to throw out the first couple of pages because all of that getting started and narrative on the character is boring.  The character is expressed through actions and images.  You show, you don't tell.  

All of the tutorial stuff got in the way.  If you find yourself as I did trying to get into  new games on WW and finding it difficult to sit through all the boring Pirate Ship *insert word containing alliteration and rhyme whith ship here* then you know now what I mean by a slow beginning.  One can jump straight into the old 2d ones (particulary the original).  There is very little story in the original game.  But far more than any previous game.  LttP incorporated the characters' stories into the gameplay (mostly through the characters speaking rather than narrative animations).  

When we got to OoT suddenly we had to watch Link watch Gannondorf and Zelda ride out of the castle.  In LttP I believe they would have ridden out while you walked up to the castle in real time.  This is definatly something they tackled with MM.  

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

"How can you make a game and then a story."

Easy!  It's how the Legend of Zelda series has always been.  The development process has always started with the development of core gameplay mechanics and concepts -- the interactive element(s).  Story/cinema/non-interactive stuff can be trashed and re-written during development much more easily than gameplay mechanics.  The story element in Nintendo games, I've perceived, is generally used to present the different gameplay elements with some coherency or sense of progression.

Mario64 is another example.  It's experience is defined by its gameplay, since there was very little story to take in.  A fungus telling you "good job you got blah blah stars!" every once in a while doesn't tell you a whole lot.  In any case, fun game.  You can easily lose sight of whatever story there was and still enjoy it.  Rather than "what will happen next" I become eager to find out "what can I do next".  This is similar to the original Legend of Zelda.  And let us not forget Miyamoto's explanation of the conceptualization of Pikmin.

On the flip side, Eternal Darkness did a remarkable job of tying the story into the gameplay (or miami vice versa).  The gameplay WAS the story, or the other way around.  Who cares.  Well done.  But it had a rediculously long development time.  'Dog' knows how long the story was re-written, how many characters and scenarios were thrown out or transformed, in addition to the task of moving the project from N64 to GCN.  But I don't believe the game mechanics changed a whole lot throughout its development from what I remember.  Mainly the story went thru near-drastic changes (which would somewhat dictate the level design).  A ha.  Game first, story second.

WHAT THE HECK AM I TALKING ABOUT
HELP ME SOMEONE

EDIT:  oh, and Majora's Mask is another Zelda example of developing gameplay before applying story.  It's not an explicity black & white case like F-Zero GX where the game is still intact after removing any story it has, but you see what we're trying to say.  Nintendo games don't begin with a story idea, they begin with a gameplay idea.  MM was born out of the masks and time-cycling/chronology ideas that were originally intended for Ocarina of Time.  Wind Waker is in a similar boat (hah) since its concept of utilizing wind physics was also originally planned for Ocarina.  We can see that Ocarina has a couple children, regardless of their stories.  AM I ON A TANGENT AGAIN.  DAMN YOU SINE AND COSINE.  

[Deguello]

" How can you make a game and then a story. You get a game like FZero GX. Fun game; cringe worthy story."

F-Zero GX is a better GAME than every RPG I've ever played and that includes some fan favorites.  Can I have more games like those, please?

Does F-Zero GX have a better story than, say, Vagrant Story?  Probably not.  But I think Les Miserables has a better story than both of them.  I'll paraphrase somebody's post I read on this here internet: Stories in games are like stories in pornos.  They're there, but that's not the point.

[nemo_83]

The thing is that they already know generally how the mechanics of each progression in these games like Mario and Zelda are going to be.  I understand that they always get the physics of the world correct before they start making the world, but when you create a world you generate a story and cast of characters with that world.  

I like for a Mario game to have some story, but as of yet they haven't tackled any stories outside the RPG series.  I always wanted a Mario game story that revolved around explaining the pipes and the dinosaurs in the game.  Im not talking about that bad movie that came out in 93.  I want a story that propels the gameplay.  The pipes go everywhere in the Mushroom Kingdom and have to connect together.  They act as worm holes.  Someone built them and someone can control them.  What if Mario and the looney cast of characters from the games crossed over and came Earth for the last world of the game?  Most Mario games have been about plot.  Save the princess.  The story is just like that of Mario Kart; the story is the story of you playing the game.  At the end of Mario 64 you got to watch these awesome credits that showed all of the places you had played with cinematic camera work.  

So Deguello you only play games for the thrill of gaming?  Or do you play games for unique imaginative experiences?  

[Deguello]

"So Deguello you only play games for the thrill of gaming? Or do you play games for unique imaginative experiences?"

Like what?  Hovering inches over a magnetic track at ludicrous speeds on a planet that is 99% water?

[Koopa Troopa]

So Deguello you only play games for the thrill of gaming? Or do you play games for unique imaginative experiences?

Save the world. Get the girl. Maybe die just to switch things up. Boom, every RPG ever created. I like a nifty story, but there are so few unique stories you may as well not game at all.

Great gameplay IS my unique and/or imaginitive experience.

[Switchblade Cross]

I am reminded by things said by Miyamoto and Nintendo developers...   (paraphrased)

Story is simply a means to progress the game play, and not vica versa, where the gameplay is simply a means to progress a story.

Also...

We typically create games by taking a basic object, like a cube and get it to do something, just has jumping on other blocks.  We build and expand on this untill a game is created.  The story is an afterthough and simply sprinkled over top to give you a reason why you are doing these things.

I must say though, that the newer a Zelda games are getting progressivly better and better in story.  And I was particularly taken by ther reffrence to OoT in Wind Waker.  I think this shows a possible start of an actual continuium and linking of storys.  We'll see with Zelda in '05...

[KDR_11k]

I think that game story = porn story quote came from an id employee, probably Carmack. I'm sure it was a game developer, though.

What I'd like to see would be game development, Miyamoto versus Sakaguchi on one game. Those two wouldn't get along. Miyamoto wants a game to be about gameplay and doesn't care how ridiculous the story ends up (a carpenter that attempts to rescue his girl from the clutches of a large gorilla throwing barrels at him?!?), whereas Sakaguchi went on the record saying that story is the most important part of a game...

[Nephilim]

complex story lines dont make a RPG
Games like Lufia 1 and 2:
Simple story line, 10hours + of play the first time and really enjoyable

[PaLaDiN]

Will you guys stop your bickering. There's two reasons to play games:

a) Entertainment
b) Food for thought

Gameplay satisfies the first one. Story provides for the second one, same as in movies and books.

Neither is better than the other. It depends on the people playing the games. Personally, either one is fine by me, but I generally play games to have fun... leave the food for thought for my slavemasters/college teachers to provide.

[MaleficentOgre]

A great story with awful gameplay makes a bad game.  If a game is not fun to play its not woth playing.  Xenosaga has a great story behind, but unfortunatly you spend as much time watching it as much as you do playing it.  And the playing part of it needed work.  therefor you have bad game.  Great gameplay with a crap story however is amazing.  In fact, when a game is fun to play and the story if laughably outrageous then you win more so than if the story is good.  Viewtiful Joe is a great example of a game with awesome gameplay and a ho-hum story that works for the game.  The zelda stories are good.  If you have some imagination the stories are great.

[Truthliesn1seyes]

I think the only direction they should go if they were to make a zelda rpg would be to make it similar to fable or a mmorpg.  You create your own character in the game,  it takes place in the hyrule but link had nothing to do with the game besides be a mythical hero from long past.  Prob have a statue in the main village where you start off.  Kids grow up idolize and  striv to emulate him.  The title can not have any mention of Link or zelda or "legend of".  Like that they can go in any direction they want and it wont trully have a signifficant affect on the main serries and wont upset the hardcore fans ( like me lol)  The game would have a large selection of armors, bows, swords and whatnot.  Guilds to join to look for side adventures when you want to take a break from the main quest.  Just imagine, you can make your character to resemble link yet have a different style with his outfit.  Also, if you REALLY want Link to be involved in some way.  Have him appear at the end of the game and you'll have to team up wit him to get through the last dungeon.  Have 2 end bosses or somethin lol, have link disapear with one of them and you batle the other.  Then whatever that happened with link and the other boss can be implemented into one of the stand alone zelda games, storywise though, not the actual gameplay.

EDIT: on a side note, you dont play the zelda games for a good story, people play the zelda games for the sence of exploration, the freedom you have to travel across the land.  You dont look back at A Link to the Past and say, wow that was a great story, you replay the game cuase its an overal fun game of exploration and discovery.

[nemo_83]

What does seperate Zelda from the pack is its gameplay.  That does not mean that the game cannot reach the same standard for story as it does for gameplay.  



If you take out the characters of Link, Zelda, and Gannon then it is nolonger The Legend of Zelda so what is the point of making it a Zelda game.  Just throw everything out the window and create something fresh preserving the gameplay philosophies.


I think we need to ask ourselves what percent is Zelda a world driven game?  To what extent is Zelda a character driven game?  How much is story driven?  How much is action driven?  

[Truthliesn1seyes]

Quote
Originally posted by: nemo_83

If you take out the characters of Link, Zelda, and Gannon then it is nolonger The Legend of Zelda so what is the point of making it a Zelda game.  Just throw everything out the window and create something fresh preserving the gameplay philosophies.

If they were to make a zelda game with a totally different style of gameplay, they'd have to take out all the main characters and not have it associated directly with zelda as to not get the purists and hard core fans mad.  In my post I said if they were to go with a totally different direction.  Use Hyrule as the setting and the legend of link and his adventures as a part of that world's history.  As for the title, they cant use the standard "legend of zelda" or anything of the sort, again, just to keep the purists and hardcore fans happy.  The only thing I can compare to this idea is Final Fantasy 11 in the sence that it uses the history and typical setting of the majority of FF games but doesnt include any major characters in it.  Its a loose comparison, but thats as close I can can think of to my idea.

[Deguello]

Screw FF11 and all Massively Multiplayer Online Repeated Payment Games.

I honestly don't hope that is what you had in mind for Zelda.

[nemo_83]

The only type of gameplay that I would use for an "alternative" Zelda would be RTS.  But I would rather see that be an aspect of a new Zelda rather than the focus of the game.  Its just that the Zelda universe (Hyrule) is overflowing with character and possibility for a game that is like a mix between WarCraft and FF11 using the Zelda engine.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

ZELDA WARS BATTLEFRONT.

Kokiri Vs. Goron.

Zora Vs. Rito.

Man Vs. Wife.

"Aid the Hylians as they fight THE GANNON and help restore teh Reggie's REAL ULTIMATE POWER and bring peace to the irrate Summon Sages!  Comes with free 5-pack battle card set."