I think the Wii Tennis shows how Wii games should control. People want things to control simply. Instead people came back from E3 talking about how Red Steel had you use the remote to activate prerecorded moves. They said Metroid needed an option to lock the cross hair and camera together like a PC shooter. And then there was Zelda which virtually everyone I have either read or listened to on various podcasts has said the game controlled like puke with the remote. I try to keep in mind that the game was made for another controller but we may be able to control the Wii version with a pad instead of the wiimote setup (in case people just can't get the hang of it). In a perfect world Nintendo would go back to the drawing board after people said the game felt like trying to rub your stomach and pat the top of your head at the same time, but I'm thinking about the future; how will the first Zelda built from the ground up play on Wii (and god I hope its trees look better).
You ask me, pare Zelda down to what it was originally about. You move this kid around on screen hiding behind bushes and rocks, swinging a sword, shooting a bow, throwing a boomerang, and laying bombs (exploring). The game should control as simply as the original games. If you want to swing the sword, you should be able to swing the remote (like Wii Tennis) rather than having to work the analog stick, the nunchuck sensors, button combos on two hemispheres, targetting, and shield attacks with the remote. I don't want more stuff to memorize, I want to simply be given the sword and let me go into the field and play and learn from my experiments; don't put me through any hand holding. Part of the fun of first playing NES games was just jumping in. First time I played Super Mario Bros. I swung the controller up and down and left and right. I find myself doing it these days in Metroid Prime 2 when that bounty hunter butch (see how changing a letter can give a new meaning to your insult) won't move her butt a little faster.
If you need to use the bow, the perspective should not change, keep the camera above the characters; keep the space out unless the player manually changes the view (optional first person shooter mode as well, though I don't believe it should be in a Zelda game, people demand the perspective and the ability to move while in it wouldn't be bad; I would guess most of your fps gamers would play the game this way). When you aim with your camera above the action you aim from left to right and the character automatically takes care of the height of the shot. I'm sure certain puzzles would require you to lower the camera and explore spaces better (but as far as combat goes, the 3/4 view is best). There could even be a novice mode allowing players to simply click on what they want to shoot at (like Warcraft). I want the camera under control during combat so the remote can be used for sword control.
Thinking about this game, I've been envisioning the first Wiigend of Zelda looking toon shaded with more Final Fantasy CC super deformed characters than Twilight Princess' realistic style. But Miyamoto has said the next game will be radically new (what if he means mature?).
I've always been a fan of the idea of having a full Zelda adventure with co-op. Halo sold me on it, I has to haves it; give me the Four Sword.
I've said it before, but I would like to see all three of the series' main characters in an adventure together (over the internet or LAN) against a greater evil (like in Paper Mario 3). Each character would have a sword but there would be items that are Link only (boomarangs) or Gannondorf only (lance). Then there would be weapons two characters could switch out; Link and Zelda could both use bows, or Link and Gannon can both wield heavy swords/axes/etc. Each character would have their own instrument allowing them to talk to animals. Perhaps they could even continue their lechanthropic theme as well.
Topic: Simple (literal) controls vs. Motion activated commands (the first true Wiigend of Zelda) (Read 9213 times)
