The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
We now return to our regularly scheduled PA Forums. Please let me (Hahnsoo1) know if something isn't working. The Holiday Forum will remain up until January 10, 2025.

The Future Of Zelda

14567810»

Posts

  • bruinbruin Registered User regular
    edited March 2007
    Because I don't really have anywhere else to post this...

    I love Zelda, but I've never played Link to the Past. I realize now that I must. Should I try to track down a copy for SNES, or is the GBA version any good? I think I'd rather play it on my Micro if it's a well done port, and it'd be a lot easier to find.

    bruin on
  • darunia106darunia106 J-bob in games Death MountainRegistered User regular
    edited March 2007
    bruin wrote: »
    Because I don't really have anywhere else to post this...

    I love Zelda, but I've never played Link to the Past. I realize now that I must. Should I try to track down a copy for SNES, or is the GBA version any good? I think I'd rather play it on my Micro if it's a well done port, and it'd be a lot easier to find.

    I got the GBA version and it is a pretty good port but they did change quite a few things like giving Link some voice-work (as in the grunt noises from his child-form in OOT) and expanded the menu to be less confusing. You could also try getting the VC version, it's a perfect port imo.

    Back on topic, voicework: will it happen?

    darunia106 on
    pHWHd2G.jpg
  • FyreWulffFyreWulff YouRegistered User, ClubPA regular
    edited March 2007
    I think they got halfway there with TP, since everyone animated their lines.

    Just as long as Link himself doesn't talk, I don't care.

    FyreWulff on
  • LaveLave regular
    edited March 2007
    They are not going to change the core of the game.

    Just how you interact with it.

    Stylus controls on the DS, and Remote Controls on the Wii.

    Whats interesting (to me) is that this may mean a change to First Person for Wii Zelda 2....

    Lave on
    poirot1vi.gif
    Scholar and a Gentleman? Critical of bad science and religion? Skeptobot - Is for you!!
  • Captain VashCaptain Vash Registered User regular
    edited March 2007
    Lave wrote: »
    They are not going to change the core of the game.
    Just how you interact with it.


    Whats interesting (to me) is that this may mean a change to First Person for Wii Zelda 2....

    These two statements are in direct conflict with one another. Revise your argument for non-insanity.

    Captain Vash on
    twitterforweb.Stuckens.1,1,500,f4f4f4,0,c4c4c4,000000.png
  • Dominic DragonDominic Dragon Registered User regular
    edited March 2007
    A first person Zelda would be awesome. But, really only the little things or sort of important things in Zelda need help. I really wish Zelda: TP didn't have so many short cinema sequences for stupid stuff. I don't like getting an item I've already had, and then having a text box explain it's a key. They should only have explanations for items once, and that's it. Another thing that bothered me about TP was how you had to do trigger something to progress, no matter what. Like the part before the second dungeon. You can't go straight to Bo, you have to go up the mountain, get beat up, and then talk to Renado, and then go.

    Also, hunting for the bugs just wasn't that great of an idea in TP. Couldn't they have just had a boss that stole the tears, or an area full of those Twilight creatures, that appear from the portals? Also, repeating the forest sequence twice for the Master Sword and then a dungeon was annoying. If a Zelda game clocks in at 15 hours, I'm not going to care. Too many parts in TP seemed thrown in to extend the game. The other thing I think needs change in Zelda is the story. It always ties the game together sort of well, but there's never a payoff. Link never gets Zelda, Ganon is beaten, and everything works out. That's pretty much every Zelda game, right there, and they always play it safe. TP hinted that the Fused Shadows could corrupt Link, but they never went in that direction.

    The only Zelda games where the stories were great and didn't play it safe are Link's Awakening and Majora's Mask. Other than that, I can't really fault Zelda. It's still amazing, but they really need a game that surprises old fans. Getting the Master Sword, and watching the treasure chest cinema, just isn't exciting anymore. The next game needs to be crazy. And just one more thing, Z-targeting and Epona's controls must find their way into another Nintendo game. How sweet would a Western shoot-em up be with a horse that controls a well as in TP? :)

    Edit: Sorry just one more idea to attach to this giant post. My friend and I always talked about how cool-and sad- a Zelda game would be where you played as a false Link. There would be this giant battle, and everyone expects Link to beat Ganon, but it turns the Link is not really the chosen hero, and he and Hyrule lose, setting up the events of Wind Waker.

    Dominic Dragon on
  • LoneIgadzraLoneIgadzra Registered User regular
    edited March 2007
    Personally, I barely even play Zelda for the puzzles any more. They're fine, but the last time I was ever really excited by solving one was when I was playing my first Zelda game: A Link to the Past, and even in that the sense of accomplishment wore off as I approached the end. I was so excited when I got the master sword, but the 4th level upgrade was just kind of "meh".

    What I play it for (and have been satisfied by since OoT) is the narrative. I don't just mean all the text and cutscenes, I mean the sense of adventure, of going to new places and seeing new things, and experiencing things. For example, the part in Wind Waker
    where you go under the ocean and everything's suddenly quiet and black and white, and you are told "there is something you need to do here".
    That kind of thing is my ultimate adventure-gaming experience, and Zelda has been delivering on that for a long time now. I don't outright dismiss puzzling, because to a certain degree it also forms and shapes the "narrative" of the game experience for me, but it's not my primary focus. Equally important is the endlessly charming and well-done presentation and so forth.

    Short of a whole new Zelda paradigm (and I know some people are going to crucify me for this), I'd like to play a game with the concepts of Majora's Mask and enjoy it. The NPC's, the three days, the amazing atmosphere conveyed by several locales, and so forth, but transplanted into a game that I find fun. For whatever reason, I didn't find most of Majora's Mask fun. Exploring the towns and meeting and learning about NPC's was fantastic, something that I haven't been able to wholly appreciate for a long time, until now when I see how few games actually implement something of the sort. There were a number of locations (Woodfall temple comes to mind) and events (love the scene that played after every dungeon) that were beyond awesome. I didn't really care about the mask mechanic though; I got sick of having to juggle the mask items, and found the controls annoying, but I don't think transformation is an inherently bad mechanic.

    Without trashing the rest of the game more than necessary (and really I can't put my finger on the problem, but I just found most of it except for the aforementioned things to be a tiresome eyesore for which I had to frequently refer to a walkthrough due to a scarcity of clues, and assumptions that I knew things about NPC's that I would only know if I'd been in the exact right place at the exact right time on the exact right day), I would say that a future Zelda should have that kind of detailed NPC interaction.

    They called you the "Hero of Time" in Ocarina, but Majora's Mask was the game where you really got to be the motherfucking hero of time, and I don't think the NPC mechanics are played out yet. It doesn't need to be in three days (in fact I'd prefer not, not only because such a blatant rehash is out of the question, but because it made MM far too stressful and claustrophobic for my liking, as cool as the idea seems in my head), but give NPC's detailed schedules, behaviors, problems, and interactions and you will have something very new to every Zelda except Majora's Mask. The rest of the game doesn't matter to me, as long as I can fully engross myself in the adventure and have fun.

    LoneIgadzra on
  • DirtyDirty Registered User regular
    edited March 2007
    I just don't want to see a first-person Zelda.

    Ever.


    I don't see how it could possibly add to the experience. And I really liked how Twilight Princess removed the few lingering first-person elements from the game.

    Dirty on
  • BlackDog85BlackDog85 Registered User regular
    edited March 2007
    Someone's already basically brought up this idea, but I just had a thought recently that what can be introduced to make the Overworld/non-dungeon areas more interesting is the concept of having Link make choices that affect other characters, or even the plot itself.

    When you think about it, Link has usually stood in as an avatar for the person playing as him; hence, he doesn't speak, and you're allowed to put your own name in at the beginning of the game.

    So why not start adding elements where you can shape the way Link responds to certain things? Quick example: notice how, in a lot of recent Zelda games, there seems to be an oddly long list of female NPC's who are attracted to Link on some level? Well, how about introducing a sort of Harvest Moon-like mechanic, where, depending on your choices and actions, you can chose to attempt winning over one of the girls? Maybe one girl runs a certain shop that has an item that she'll give you if you chose her, maybe one is the leader of a tribe who'll help you on your quest, hell, maybe one girl is Zelda, end of story.

    Extend it; how about you have to make proper choices to get certain NPC's to do something for you, or the order in which you do dungeons have an effect on the world at large, etc. etc. etc.

    The result? Different branching plot-lines (while still revolving around the main plot line), side-quests (maybe some involving lands besides Hyrule?), a few alternate endings, etc.

    I hate to sound like I'm biting off Fable, but I'm not looking for it to go THAT far. I'm just going with what a lot of us have said already: Hyrule, since Zelda jumped to 3-D, has become to many gamers a big, living world, and with each new title, Nintendo should strive to make it feel even more alive, more epic in scope (in one way or another). Adding in an element where the player's character choices have an effect on how the game plays out adds replay value, and an incredible level of immersion.

    So, in summary: not Fable, but you SHOULD be able to have a deeper level of interaction with the world and characters around you, plot/storyline/etc. wise.

    BlackDog85 on
    KeithBeKnives.png
    Wii Code: 5700 4466 3616 6981 (PM if y'all add me)
  • ZampanoZampano Registered User regular
    edited March 2007
    Dirty wrote: »
    I just don't want to see a first-person Zelda.

    Ever.


    I don't see how it could possibly add to the experience. And I really liked how Twilight Princess removed the few lingering first-person elements from the game.

    The problem with First Person is that it removes the possibility for all the acrobatic combat developed in Wind Waker and (more heavily) in Twilight Princess. I though the Hidden Skills were fantastic, and it seems like Nintendo is just on the cusp of nailing down the perfect and most unique combat system for the franchise. I'd hate to have it thrown away in order to develope in First Person.

    LoneIgadzra:

    I agree with you that the puzzles in Zelda have become somewhat worn out, which is a shock coming from TP, which had a plethora of incredibly unique items, and even some new uses for old items. The Iron Boots, for instance, got a lot more uses than just letting Link walk on the bottom of lakes. The Magnetic Paths in the Goron Mines alone validated the entire dungeon, but we never saw them again. The Spinner could have given us a lot more than it did, although it had some applications (there's an area in Hyrule field with a Spinner Track that leads to a Piece of Heart with is fantastically cool). But what disappointed me the most was the Dominion Rod, which could have been given a plethora of additional uses. Why not let it give you control over certain enemies? How about turning it into the Zelda equivalent to the Gravity Gun? That would have created some mind bending puzzles. Instead, they copped out.

    It seems like TP was full of cop outs, daring moves that had somewhat weak follow throughs.
    Halfway through the game, Zelda seems to sacrifice herself, but she comes out fine. Link is given a romantic interest in Ilia that never comes to pass. A new villain is created, but is replaced rather quickly by Ganondorf again. And the ending could have been incredibly powerful had Link done something as daring as following Midna into the Twilight World. But he never makes any decisive moves that could have been genuinely surprising.

    What I want to see the next game as is a bridge between WW and the games that come after it (LoZ, LttP, ect). How was the Kingdom of Hyrule rebuilt and the royal line restored after being completely wiped clean by the flood? That would be a fascinating story, which would help to better link together the games.

    And screw TP's placement in the Chronology. It doesn't fit either of the current theories. Miyamoto has said that there is indeed a grand primer for the Zelda chronology, but I doubt we'll ever see it.

    (As a final note, I am nit picking here. Twilight Princess is one of the best games I've played in a few years)

    Zampano on
    BrawlSig.gif
  • LaveLave regular
    edited March 2007
    Lave wrote: »
    They are not going to change the core of the game.
    Just how you interact with it.


    Whats interesting (to me) is that this may mean a change to First Person for Wii Zelda 2....

    These two statements are in direct conflict with one another. Revise your argument for non-insanity.

    The bit you edited out made it clearer. But ok. In simplo-language.

    The comments about playing as Ganon etc, aren't viable, the core of the game will still be Link + Overworld + Dungeons, as has it has been for twenty years.

    But, nintendo doesn't have a platform where they wish to use a joypad anymore. They want to focus on remote and stylus controls. That is the revolution they were talking about,.

    Lave on
    poirot1vi.gif
    Scholar and a Gentleman? Critical of bad science and religion? Skeptobot - Is for you!!
  • AngelofVengeanceAngelofVengeance Registered User regular
    edited March 2007
    No, no first person for Zelda. The kind of acrobatic combat that makes the recent Zelda games like Twilight Princess and Wind Waker so exceptional is impossible with first person. One thing I would like for the next Zelda would be full, or at least partial-motion capture sword combat. In TP, a stab with the Wiimote could equal a slash of the sword. I want a slash = a slash, a stab = a stab and everything else. Something like that for greater immersion in this fantasy world. In fact, you should need greater movements with the Wiimote to initiate combat. In TP, merely shaking the wiimote lightly is often more effective in combat as Link attacked much faster. That's not immersion.

    AngelofVengeance on
  • YarYar Registered User regular
    edited March 2007
    A truly happenin' cooperative multi-player. You know they want to go that way. Like the Tingle thing with the GBA in WW, except not sucking. Like Double Dash or something. Two distinct characters that work together.

    Yar on
  • MikeRyuMikeRyu Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Bump To The Moon.

    I want to talk about Zelda. I've been looking at some of the Zelda sites forums but it's just not the same.

    There was a few posts I missed before this thread sunk. I like the suggestion for altering the eco system of the area of the dungeon you complete. Also making the world more alive is definately something I'd like to see; NPCs with schedules and routines just not in a MM three day manner. Something else that I remembered that seems out of place but might work is the gang meters in GTA2. I liked them because you could fall in and out of favour with the gangs. A more sophisticated version in Zelda might be cool, as you can become liked or disliked based on your decisions. Like getting thrown out of Goron City because you helped the Zoras first and having to make amends with the Gorons before you can tackle the dungeon on Death Mountain.

    Also I came across this piece of music, does anyone know if this was an actual possible overworld theme for OoT or just fan work? I wasn't sure at first but I think it would have been quite good.

    http://www.zelda-infinite.com/files/music/oot/overworld.mid

    MikeRyu on
    Ranmasig5.png
  • Psycho Internet HawkPsycho Internet Hawk Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    I want to see the roles of the holders of the Triforce get messed with-i.e. have the holder of the Triforce of Power be the hero, the holder of the Triforce of Courage be the supporting character, and the holder of the Triforce of Wisdom be the villain. After all, it's never established that any one of the Goddesses is any more evil than another, so why should any Triforce holder be put in one role more than another?

    Of course, this might require MASSIVE amounts of fucking with the traditional characters (imagine the hero being an older, strong soldier type and the bad guy being a princess), but hey, I like dramatic change. :D

    Psycho Internet Hawk on
    ezek1t.jpg
  • MikeRyuMikeRyu Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    I want to see the roles of the holders of the Triforce get messed with-i.e. have the holder of the Triforce of Power be the hero, the holder of the Triforce of Courage be the supporting character, and the holder of the Triforce of Wisdom be the villain. After all, it's never established that any one of the Goddesses is any more evil than another, so why should any Triforce holder be put in one role more than another?

    Of course, this might require MASSIVE amounts of fucking with the traditional characters (imagine the hero being an older, strong soldier type and the bad guy being a princess), but hey, I like dramatic change. :D


    I don't know, I quite like Link being the holder of the Triforce of Courage as it doesn't hold any inherent power. He's the underdog hero. Also power corrupts, that's why Ganon has that piece.

    MikeRyu on
    Ranmasig5.png
  • DeVryGuyDeVryGuy Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    MikeRyu wrote: »
    I want to see the roles of the holders of the Triforce get messed with-i.e. have the holder of the Triforce of Power be the hero, the holder of the Triforce of Courage be the supporting character, and the holder of the Triforce of Wisdom be the villain. After all, it's never established that any one of the Goddesses is any more evil than another, so why should any Triforce holder be put in one role more than another?

    Of course, this might require MASSIVE amounts of fucking with the traditional characters (imagine the hero being an older, strong soldier type and the bad guy being a princess), but hey, I like dramatic change. :D


    I don't know, I quite like Link being the holder of the Triforce of Courage as it doesn't hold any inherent power. He's the underdog hero. Also power corrupts, that's why Ganon has that piece.

    There was a LoZ comic I read back in the day where Link managed to gank the Triforce of Power from Gannon, and he started being all assholish and eventually started turning Pig-like as Gannon did. The Triforce of Courage passed to Zelda who had to save him from the corruption of the Triforce of Power.

    Of course, this is prior to the current Zelda mythology where the triforce was created where the goddesses left the material plane.

    DeVryGuy on
    Pokemon Diamond: 5369 6910 9799
    FFTSig.jpg
  • jothkijothki Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    DeVryGuy wrote: »
    MikeRyu wrote: »
    I want to see the roles of the holders of the Triforce get messed with-i.e. have the holder of the Triforce of Power be the hero, the holder of the Triforce of Courage be the supporting character, and the holder of the Triforce of Wisdom be the villain. After all, it's never established that any one of the Goddesses is any more evil than another, so why should any Triforce holder be put in one role more than another?

    Of course, this might require MASSIVE amounts of fucking with the traditional characters (imagine the hero being an older, strong soldier type and the bad guy being a princess), but hey, I like dramatic change. :D


    I don't know, I quite like Link being the holder of the Triforce of Courage as it doesn't hold any inherent power. He's the underdog hero. Also power corrupts, that's why Ganon has that piece.

    There was a LoZ comic I read back in the day where Link managed to gank the Triforce of Power from Gannon, and he started being all assholish and eventually started turning Pig-like as Gannon did. The Triforce of Courage passed to Zelda who had to save him from the corruption of the Triforce of Power.

    Of course, this is prior to the current Zelda mythology where the triforce was created where the goddesses left the material plane.

    So the division of the Triforce into Courage, Wisdom, and Power actually preceded OoT?

    jothki on
  • MikeRyuMikeRyu Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    jothki wrote: »
    DeVryGuy wrote: »
    MikeRyu wrote: »
    I want to see the roles of the holders of the Triforce get messed with-i.e. have the holder of the Triforce of Power be the hero, the holder of the Triforce of Courage be the supporting character, and the holder of the Triforce of Wisdom be the villain. After all, it's never established that any one of the Goddesses is any more evil than another, so why should any Triforce holder be put in one role more than another?

    Of course, this might require MASSIVE amounts of fucking with the traditional characters (imagine the hero being an older, strong soldier type and the bad guy being a princess), but hey, I like dramatic change. :D


    I don't know, I quite like Link being the holder of the Triforce of Courage as it doesn't hold any inherent power. He's the underdog hero. Also power corrupts, that's why Ganon has that piece.

    There was a LoZ comic I read back in the day where Link managed to gank the Triforce of Power from Gannon, and he started being all assholish and eventually started turning Pig-like as Gannon did. The Triforce of Courage passed to Zelda who had to save him from the corruption of the Triforce of Power.

    Of course, this is prior to the current Zelda mythology where the triforce was created where the goddesses left the material plane.

    So the division of the Triforce into Courage, Wisdom, and Power actually preceded OoT?

    Yeah I believe that its mentioned that the piece that you are assembling in the first game is the Triforce of Wisdom.

    MikeRyu on
    Ranmasig5.png
  • commathecommathe Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    I know it wont happen, but I'd like to see zelda take after god of war. At least from a control/gameplay aspect, obviously the gore and such would make people cry.

    Or a more refined zelda 2 style, like the "find the triforce" levels from smash bros melee.

    Hell, even a more single-player focused 4 swords type game, I just dont want to play another OoT expansion pack.

    commathe on
  • ZampanoZampano Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    MikeRyu wrote: »
    jothki wrote: »
    DeVryGuy wrote: »
    MikeRyu wrote: »
    I want to see the roles of the holders of the Triforce get messed with-i.e. have the holder of the Triforce of Power be the hero, the holder of the Triforce of Courage be the supporting character, and the holder of the Triforce of Wisdom be the villain. After all, it's never established that any one of the Goddesses is any more evil than another, so why should any Triforce holder be put in one role more than another?

    Of course, this might require MASSIVE amounts of fucking with the traditional characters (imagine the hero being an older, strong soldier type and the bad guy being a princess), but hey, I like dramatic change. :D


    I don't know, I quite like Link being the holder of the Triforce of Courage as it doesn't hold any inherent power. He's the underdog hero. Also power corrupts, that's why Ganon has that piece.

    There was a LoZ comic I read back in the day where Link managed to gank the Triforce of Power from Gannon, and he started being all assholish and eventually started turning Pig-like as Gannon did. The Triforce of Courage passed to Zelda who had to save him from the corruption of the Triforce of Power.

    Of course, this is prior to the current Zelda mythology where the triforce was created where the goddesses left the material plane.

    So the division of the Triforce into Courage, Wisdom, and Power actually preceded OoT?

    Yeah I believe that its mentioned that the piece that you are assembling in the first game is the Triforce of Wisdom.
    But the first game isn't the first in terms of chronology.

    Most likely OoT is the first time it was broken, since Ganondorf didn't know it was going to do that, and if it had happened before, he would have known about it, since the Triforce is his sole obsession.

    Besides, where did the comic come from? Chances are it isn't canonical.

    Zampano on
    BrawlSig.gif
  • HenroidHenroid Mexican kicked from Immigration Thread Centrism is Racism :3Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Spoilering some Triforce explaination. Because y'never know.
    The Triforce is one object. When it is found, someone can make a wish on it. That is, if they're heart is balanced (likely in the three aspects that represent the Triforce - power, wisdom, and courage). In OoT Ganon finds it, and his heart being unbalanced breaks the Triforce apart. So in order for someone to wish on the Triforce, the three parts have to be reassembled. This is why in Wind Waker Ganon seeks out Zelda and Link.

    And for the record, in an unofficial timeline way, OoT is the first Zelda story to happen. I don't think it does any good to say the Triforce was divided BEFORE this game.

    Henroid on
  • The Muffin ManThe Muffin Man Registered User regular
    edited April 2007
    Guek wrote: »
    that's not a bad idea.

    more than anything i want some better itemss that can be used throughout the ENTIRE game. I want to get an item in the last dungeon that I can be used to unlock sidequests mentioned in the starting area. Maybe not ALL items should be this usefull but MOST of them should. This should ultimately lead to a better overworld and environment as well that is more cleverly designed. One thing I really missed in TP is the feeling of accomplishment. I like the idea of the people of the world, the townspeople especially, knowing and gossiping about your latest adventures and being actively affected by it but not knowing who link is.

    Maybe the above idea of altering the ecosystem, and you have multiple paths.

    Get the Hookshot first, but the bow is required? Use the Hookshot to be the Ranged weapon.

    Maybe the only reason the item of the dungeon is useful is because of the boss. And lock you in the dungeon, but only to keep people from getting every item and then saying the games "too easy". It'll also keep some of the challenge if you start a dungeon and you can't just hop outside, grab some milk and faeries, and pop back in.

    The Muffin Man on
Sign In or Register to comment.