Author Topic: A realistic Zelda afterall? (Read 20036 times)

mouse_clicker · « **Reply #50 on:** October 24, 2003, 10:29:53 PM »

Maybe they say it in the instruction manuals, but I remember very clearly Ganon/Ganondorf being referred to as a wizard on several accounts.

Swordsplay · « **Reply #51 on:** October 24, 2003, 10:32:28 PM »

Number one, Ganondorf is not a wizard, he is a Gerudo raised by his two grandmothers (Koume and Kotake, also known as Twinrova). He was taught the evil forms of magic yes, but technically he is not a wizard (besides it would be a warlock), he is a gerudo. Second of all, Ganondorf is immortal and technically cannot be killed. He only can be delayed when he will strike again and try to destroy peace in Hyrule. There is no known way of permantly killing Ganondorf yet.

mouse_clicker · « **Reply #52 on:** October 24, 2003, 10:46:44 PM »

::NES Zelda Spoilers::

A wizard IS someone who uses magical powers, and no, he wouldn't be a warlock- that's a male witch. He's a wizard, and they call him a wizard numerous times throughout the series. And Ganondorf is technically not immortal- he was mortal before he took the Triforce and presumably the Triforce of Power made him immortal afterwords. Immortal does not mean invincible, though, it means unable to die of natural causes- he can still be killed, and he IS killed, I believe, at the end of The Legend of Zelda for the NES, the last Zelda game chronologically that Ganondorf/Ganon appeared in.

MysticGohan24 · « **Reply #53 on:** October 25, 2003, 09:53:20 AM »

What about Zelda: Adventures of Link? He's there

as a shadow when you die.

The annoying evil laughter.

Shin Gallon · « **Reply #54 on:** October 25, 2003, 01:05:43 PM »

Personally, I loved Wind Waker's graphics. It reminded me (moreso than any Zelda since Link to the Past) of the original NES Zelda game (you know, the FIRST one, where Link is a cartoon kid? Sound familiar?). I was never that big a fan of his OoT design (the artist wasn't very good at drawing faces, in my opinion, and I'm extremely picky about faces in artwork since that's wherre the essence of the character is). I'd play Soul Calibur II more (read: at all) if there were an alternate costume for Link that made him the Wind Waker cel-shaded version (you can't tell me that a little cel-shaded Link kicking Cervantes' ass wouldn't be beyond awsome).
I also loved the story and characters and sheer amount of stuff to do in the game. Anyone complaining that it wasn't long enough obviously didn't complete all the side-quests and minigames. I wasn't impressed at all by the original Spaceworld video. "Oh look, it's ocerina all over again, yay" was pretty much my reaction (and to this day, OoT remains the only Zelda other than Majora's Mask that I've not beaten and loved...I just lose interest in it after about an hour of playing), and I couldn't have been happier that Miyamoto went in the direction he did with Wind Waker. Better control, much better graphics and visual style and characters that aren't ugly as sin (Impa in OoT is...ugh...did I ask for a mannish pro wrestler woman?) made Wind Waker my second favorite Zelda to date (the first being Link to the Past, which is still one of the best games ever).

the_zombie_luke · « **Reply #55 on:** October 25, 2003, 05:01:52 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
Personally I don't care whether WW has a standard-anime or its own style (celshading), but WW came short on a more important area: Dungeons! It had too few dungeons!

I strongly agree, but they were also very easy compared to earlier Zeldas and the director of Wind Waker thinks that side quests are more important than the dungeons.

the_zombie_luke · « **Reply #56 on:** October 25, 2003, 05:14:53 PM »

Since we're sort of talking about where Zelda should go in the future, I say continue the story! In the next game, the Wind Waker and Hero of Time should somehow team up to fight a terrible and evil foe. Imagine if they developed the cooperative elements in Wind Waker even further. For instance, the statues following you in Wind Waker. Instead of that have two Links go through the dungeons. Make the dungeon bosses extremely hard for two players. I guess two player Zelda would have to be LAN, since a split screen would be hard to make for a game like Zelda. Also, imagine two Links in a boat, one sails and controls, and the other one bombs. I guess you could argue that Zelda is a single player game at its core, but don't deny that you would love a cooperative GameCube Zelda(not Four Swords) but a cooperative 3D Wind Waker 2 or Ocarina of Time 2.

Dynamitega · « **Reply #57 on:** October 25, 2003, 09:17:27 PM »

I just hope in the next Zelda that they actually finish the 2nd half of the game. I don't want an item collectathon like Rare makes. I want some dungeons to find those hidden pieces... not, find this place on the map and you got it type of thing. I loved the game up until that point. The whole ending sequence was cool too...

Shift Key · « **Reply #58 on:** October 25, 2003, 10:18:46 PM »

NO! NO TWO PLAYER ZELDA! IT'D BE TOO WRONG TO COMPREHEND.
The premise of Zelda has always been Link fighting evil alone, against the odds, yada yada yada. Other players only take on a small role, even Zelda did in WW, and I think it would take away from the feel of the game.
I don't want a rehash of OoT with two player modes either. The game is simply too long to play through with two players.

To be critical of OoT for the faces (Impa doesn't count

) and not play it is crazy. While he doesn't have the facial expressions in WW, the game still ranks highly on my all time list, in the top two definitely, because the game always consumes me every time I play it.

Go play FF:CC for multiplayer combat. Leave Zelda the way it is.

VideoGamerX · « **Reply #59 on:** October 26, 2003, 12:00:26 AM »

A) Ganon has always been referred to as "the evil wizard, Ganon" You see it in the first Zelda. You see it in the old cartoon. You see it in a Link to the Past (especially in his alter-ego form, Aghanim). I'm not sure where you see it in Ocarina of Time, but it's clear that he uses magic. You can refer to him as a wizard or sorcerer. It doesn't matter. It's also important to remember that before Ocarina of Time, we didn't even know there were Gerudus, or that Ganon was a Gerudu. Those are all concepts that came about as a result of OoT.

B) One reason you might be seeing fewer dungeons is because not everyone likes the dungeons. I for one do not like the dungeon designs in Ocarina of Time. I also don't like being restrained to dungeon missions as they make the game exceedingly time consuming and boring. Personally, I think they need to work on new dungeon ideas. I want a longer Zelda as much as anybody, but I don't like the fact that I have to spend 3 to 4 hours playing the game to get through a dungeon because I can't save midway through the dungeon without being sent back to the beginning or if I plan to play Zelda for a few hours, I have to spend them in a stupid dungeon if I want to advance a little further into the game.

Personally, I loved LttP's dungeons. They are the best to date even though they're top-down and fairly two dimensional. The boss battles are the best, too. I had a lot more fun with those than any others. Zelda in 3D is pretty awkward especially with how they're trying to be so creative with the size of the bosses and the different ways to beat them. I yearn for something that touches back on the roots of Zelda a little more. Throw in some more dragons that move around in the battle area that we have to dodge... or something.

And for anyone that's wondering... I happened to cruise through the Water Temple in OoT no sweat. It was the most straight-forward dungeon for me, which is strange since most of the other dungeons ticked me off. Go figure.

Ocarina Blue · « **Reply #60 on:** October 26, 2003, 01:40:40 AM »

I think the last two Zelda games have had fewer dungeons just as a coincidence. Majora's Mask had a very strong aspect of sidequests, and the dungeons it did have were fairly long and difficult. Wind Waker had dungeons cut because of time constraints.

I remember hearing about an interview with Aonuma (sp?) and Miyamoto at E3 when WW2, was confirmed to be in development. Apparently, the next Zelda will 'go back to it's roots', or something. I can't remember where I heard it, so take it with a grain of salt, but by that I imagine they mean more dungeons, less sidequests (as in LoZ).

Shifty: Isn't multiplayer Zelda done already with Four Swords?

Rellik · « **Reply #61 on:** October 26, 2003, 01:48:22 AM »

I don't know about you, but I don't really like dungeons all that much. Yeah, some are fun, but some are just boring. I don't care if the next LoZ is cel-shaded or not, but what I do want is for there to be more of a plot. WW was a small step in the right direction. I am much more interested in playing through the plot as it unfolds (plot-based scenarios) than seeing a plot element, and then playing through a bunch of dungeons to get to the next element. Not "Gannondorf captures Princess Zelda, go do 3 dungeons and come back later to see what happens." but "Gannondorf captures Princess Zelda. He's imprisoned her at his secret fortress in the bottom of the ocean. Invade and take over a Moblin submarine. Then navigate the submarine to the underwater fortress. On the way down you see a Zora being chased by a HUMONGOUS shark. Save the Zora; etc". A sequence like that is way more interesting than 3 dungeons.

Don'tHate742 · « **Reply #62 on:** October 26, 2003, 03:56:21 PM »

I agree totally.

To me its not about the number of Dungeons, its about was it a fulfilling adventure.

mouse_clicker · « **Reply #63 on:** October 26, 2003, 04:04:43 PM »

True, it's not about how many dungeons there are, if the ones that are there are fulfilling, but when those dungeons are so incredibly fun, you feel the craving for more.

Bill Aurion · « **Reply #64 on:** October 26, 2003, 04:06:46 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Ocarina Blue
I remember hearing about an interview with Aonuma (sp?) and Miyamoto at E3 when WW2, was confirmed to be in development. Apparently, the next Zelda will 'go back to it's roots', or something. I can't remember where I heard it, so take it with a grain of salt, but by that I imagine they mean more dungeons, less sidequests (as in LoZ).

I believe they meant that the game is going to be more like LttP, which can only be a good thing...

And just so you guys know(can't remember if I've posted this or not), 2 dungeons were cut out of Wind Waker and will be put into the next game...So we are most likely looking at a game with at least 2 more dungeons...

Ocarina Blue · « **Reply #65 on:** October 26, 2003, 04:52:54 PM »

Wasn't ALttP Zelda returning to it's roots after AoL?

mouse_clicker · « **Reply #66 on:** October 26, 2003, 04:56:32 PM »

And wasn't WW Zelda returning to its roots after MM and OoT?

Ocarina Blue · « **Reply #67 on:** October 26, 2003, 05:07:25 PM »

Oh, good point. I guess that interview was about WW then... Opps.

Bill Aurion · « **Reply #68 on:** October 26, 2003, 05:15:11 PM »

I want my Lost Woods!

*pouts*

Swordsplay · « **Reply #69 on:** October 27, 2003, 05:02:24 AM »

I agree with Bill, I love the Lost woods music!

cheers69 · « **Reply #70 on:** October 27, 2003, 01:14:01 PM »

cel shaded is ok but i dont think it looks better than realistic graphics, ww was one of the easiest games i have ever played because it was too much like OOT. i heard its easier for the game designers to use cel chaded over other graphics is this true?

Bill Aurion · « **Reply #71 on:** October 27, 2003, 01:21:03 PM »

Actually it's not...What I believe EAD did was first make 3D models, and then they layered them with the "toon textures"...Sort of like painting on a figurine that you get in a model kit...

cheers69 · « **Reply #72 on:** October 27, 2003, 01:26:36 PM »

WW would have to be one of the worst zelda's made how annoying was that long sailing crap, that wasnt fun gameplay that was just trying to make the game go longer and more boring.

Bill Aurion · « **Reply #73 on:** October 27, 2003, 01:45:11 PM »

*sigh*

Of course the game is drawn out, just as an adventure is supposed to be. I loved sailing, and I couldn't wait to finish the next dungeon so I could sail out on the open ocean some more...WW > OoT, and I can find many that agree...At least, those that can truely appreciate the Zelda series for what it is...an ADVENTURE title...

</protective rant>

VideoGamerX · « **Reply #74 on:** October 27, 2003, 02:22:21 PM »

I want optional dungeons and more items and upgrades. What I don't like is a game that has some odd number of dungeons that comprise each facet of the story. Then it becomes a mission of completing dungeons rather than exploring, discovering, and growing.

The thing I hate most about Ocarina of Time is the reliance upon dungeons to craft and evolve the story. The dungeons were mostly annoying and repetitive. I felt more excited while playing LttP's dungeons, but that's in part due to how much I liked the story in LttP and the music really left an impression upon me. Ocarina of Time wore me out because Navi was constantly saying "Hey, go here!" "Hey, aren't we supposed to blah blah?" "What's that blah on the blah over blah?" "We should go to the blah and spend a few hours blahing." Grrrr. I really wanted to take my sword to that fairy and shut it up by about the third dungeon. :-P

What I have always wanted is a world with more options. Hyrule has always offered these certain fundamental elements like exploration, discovery, and accomplishment. What I find is that I don't always want to be completing dungeon missions and advancing through the game. I want more ways to waste my time prolonging certain experiences. What I think would be nice are x number of dungeons and y number of extra places to storm and explore. The y places wouldn't have any bearing over the game itself and would offer certain rewards. Like say if there was an old abandoned fort on a hill south of Karakiro village, there'd be a rumor of some old magical armor there. You wouldn't neccesarily have to go there to advance the game, but if you have some free time and you want to add something more to your game, you could go there and storm the old fort.

Wind Waker had some of these ideas and Ocarina of Time did too. The bottom of the well was a non-dungeon dungeon. Wind Waker had something similar to this but in a much smaller, simpler fashion. I really wouldn't mind having extra dungeons. I wouldn't mind having some very difficult extra dungeons that are there just for grins and chuckles. Keep a sword upgrade in there. Keep a special boomerang upgrade there. You can beat one really hard dungeon and make the rest of the game easier. You could do any number of things to the rest of the game by completing these optional places.

It's not a new concept to Zelda really - having side quests. But we've never quite had the luxary of optional dungeons like this in an actual Legend of Zelda game.

News:

Author Topic: A realistic Zelda afterall? (Read 20036 times)