Support NeoGAF

[Tatersalad]

I don't care about them either way. If they're in I want then to be fun, if not it's no skin off my back.

That said I dislike the greater focus they've been getting in the more recent games. I don't think everything should be a puzzle, and I don't think combat should take a backseat.

My "dream Zelda" is pretty much Dark Souls with a few fundamental changes. Slightly less complex mechanics, more open exploration with a bigger map, and very "natural" puzzles like those of Shadow of the Colossus.

My dream Zelda would not have a short cutscene with a jingle that shows a door open when I push a button.

Agree, especially the bolded. Puzzles mostly just seem to be a chore these days. Fewer puzzles that are more in depth and require more thought than the typical 'light the torch for a key' to advance to another room repeated 10 times. I think the older games were much better about this.

I think when we're talking about bringing back a sense of exploration we're talking about removing the hand holding that is becoming more frequent. How did we manage to beat the earlier games without a helper telling us exactly where we must go? I know in Wind Waker I was so excited when I got the sail and wanted to explore the sea...but no, you must go to Dragon Roost Island first. Alright, defeated that, can I explore now? No, must go to the Forest Haven now. Especially after getting the song to change the wind direction, why can't I go exploring?

 

[BeberMan]

I love puzzles in games. Especially those who really make you think and use the level design to guide you. Too bad we don't see that as much in games anymore...
So to answer your question - yes.
And I want Darksiders 3 please.

 

[MisterGrey3000]

If I know exactly what to do when I enter a room, then it is an obstacle course, not a puzzle.

Err...that's generally how puzzles work (Jigsaw puzzles, Rubik's Cubes, crossword puzzles, Sudoku, etc.)
The player usually knows exactly what their goal is and how they can do it, but it's their job to actively put the pieces together in the heat of the moment.
It's generally not wise to create puzzles that don't have some sort of obvious logic behind them; it would be incredibly easy to frustrate the player and turn them away.

 

[Nickle]

Err...that's generally how puzzles work (Jigsaw puzzles, Rubik's Cubes, Crossword puzzles, Sudoku, etc.)
The player usually knows exactly what their goal is and how they can do it, but it's their job to actively put the pieces together in the heat of the moment.
It's generally not wise to create puzzles that don't have some sort of obvious logic behind them; it would be incredibly easy to frustrate the player and turn them away.

If I have to put the pieces together in the heat of the moment, then I obviously don't know exactly what to do.

I'm taking about something like this room from the Wind Waker. You know that you have to cut down the vines from the moment you enter the room, and it's only really a matter of using the boomerang to cut a path to let you glide through.

Spoiler

Maybe there was something special that you had to do in this room, but just pretend that their wasn't for the sake of this example.

I noticed a lot of this in ALBW, where I often felt like I was just gliding through dungeons without even thinking about what I was doing (especially the water temple). I'm not saying that this is a terrible thing, but I'd rather encounter puzzles where I have to stop and think for a bit.

 

[TDLink]

Puzzles are Zelda. I don't even understand the people who want a Zelda game without puzzles. What do you want? Do you really even like the Zelda franchise? Zelda is a Puzzle adventure franchise through and through. The combat has been pretty basic in the majority of the games.

 

[AdventureRacing]

Puzzles are Zelda. I don't even understand the people who want a Zelda game without puzzles. What do you want? Do you really even like the Zelda franchise? Zelda is a Puzzle adventure franchise through and through. The combat has been pretty basic in the majority of the games.

People like things for different reasons. I enjoy the exploration, combat, music and general atmosphere in the zelda games. I've never been a huge fan of the puzzles but i still love the series. No need to be a dick to people because they don't agree with your opinion.

 

[H2intensity]

Puzzle is what Zelda game to me...i dont really care about other things in Zelda game as long it gives me great puzzle to solve. And what i meant about puzzle is including: boss battle puzzle, dungeon puzzle and other puzzle in outside world.

 

[Eric the Red]

Err...that's generally how puzzles work (Jigsaw puzzles, Rubik's Cubes, crossword puzzles, Sudoku, etc.)
The player usually knows exactly what their goal is and how they can do it, but it's their job to actively put the pieces together in the heat of the moment.
It's generally not wise to create puzzles that don't have some sort of obvious logic behind them; it would be incredibly easy to frustrate the player and turn them away.

A puzzle being cryptic somehow makes it illogical? You'll have to explain that one.
Brb gotta put my goggles on, I've got a crossword puzzle to solve in the heat of the moment.

 

[Heavy's Sandvich]

i 100% a link between worlds and i really don't want that structure in the new Zelda.

puzzles are paramount, that's why i love Zelda games so much.

 

[RagnarokX]

If I have to put the pieces together in the heat of the moment, then I obviously don't know exactly what to do.

I'm taking about something like this room from the Wind Waker. You know that you have to cut down the vines from the moment you enter the room, and it's only really a matter of using the boomerang to cut a path to let you glide through.

Spoiler

Maybe there was something special that you had to do in this room, but just pretend that their wasn't for the sake of this example.

I noticed a lot of this in ALBW, where I often felt like I was just gliding through dungeons without even thinking about what I was doing (especially the water temple). I'm not saying that this is a terrible thing, but I'd rather encounter puzzles where I have to stop and think for a bit.

The point of that room in Wind Waker is not to be a puzzle. Those vines are just obstacles put there to introduce the idea of using the boomerang to target vines and ropes. The room directly following that one requires you to target 5 vines simultaneously to drop a house through the floor. It's priming. This is a good example of how Zelda games do this. The vines in that room block your path, but unlike the vines on the house you need to drop you cannot reach them with your sword. So you need a ranged weapon and you just got one. Zelda had never used a boomerang to cut ropes or vines before and it's not an intuitive use of the tool. That room basically exists so that you can figure out the next room in a fair and natural way.

 

[spekkeh]

Interesting that so many suddenly find puzzles essential, I reckon it's partly due to the wording of the question, because in a previous poll IIRC it was lower on the list of important elements.

For me, Zelda games are about fairy tale adventures and exploring a fantasy world. Puzzles are rather inconsequential, just one of the gameplay elements that keeps it interesting over longer time periods. I also feel that after so many Zelda games, we've basically seen all configurations, so I'd rather they keep the puzzles light or they feel too much like padding.

 

[Earthpainting]

If I have to put the pieces together in the heat of the moment, then I obviously don't know exactly what to do.

I'm taking about something like this room from the Wind Waker. You know that you have to cut down the vines from the moment you enter the room, and it's only really a matter of using the boomerang to cut a path to let you glide through.

Spoiler

Maybe there was something special that you had to do in this room, but just pretend that their wasn't for the sake of this example.

I noticed a lot of this in ALBW, where I often felt like I was just gliding through dungeons without even thinking about what I was doing (especially the water temple). I'm not saying that this is a terrible thing, but I'd rather encounter puzzles where I have to stop and think for a bit.

While I don't remember this specific room, it don't think it was meant to stump you. It looks like a room with junk in it that allows you to use your item. I think most of these simple "puzzles" are basically variations of going through a door or unlocking a door in a way that isn't simply beating all the enemies and using a key. It's providing you with a level of interaction with the world that isn't poking with a sword or talking to someone to make something happen. In this case though, I doubt it's supposed to be little more than making you feel good about having obtained the boomerang, teach you how to use it and make the world feel interactive. Going on auto-pilot in these sections seems fine to me. If you didn't have different tiers of complexity, exploring dungeons may be tiresome.

It all depends on the execution and the level of involvement to me. Some games, like Matrix' Alundra, mostly had puzzles that felt like variations of reading and applying bicycle lock combinations. Dark Souls pretty much has no puzzles aside from having to find and and equip a contextless ring. Those puzzles never felt right with me. Capcom's Okami on the other hand does this much better in my opinion.

Spoiler

Perhaps even better than most actual Zelda titles.

It had tight integration of the brush abilities in and out of battle. You start with getting teased with what you lack, and then when you finally get it, you are treated to different uses of your new-found abilities. Most of them may not be head-scratchers, but they do provide satisfying interaction with the world.

 

[petghost]

Interesting that so many suddenly find puzzles essential, I reckon it's partly due to the wording of the question, because in a previous poll IIRC it was lower on the list of important elements.

For me, Zelda games are about fairy tale adventures and exploring a fantasy world. Puzzles are rather inconsequential, just one of the gameplay elements that keeps it interesting over longer time periods. I also feel that after so many Zelda games, we've basically seen all configurations, so I'd rather they keep the puzzles light or they feel too much like padding.

honestly though dungeons and the puzzles they are designed around are what make up like 80% of zelda mechanically. exploration and all that is kinda secondary imo. even the boss fights are puzzle-y.

 

[spekkeh]

honestly though dungeons and the puzzles they are designed around are what make up like 80% of zelda mechanically. exploration and all that is kinda secondary imo. even the boss fights are puzzle-y.

That's kind of stretching the meaning of the world puzzle though. If figuring out where to go or how to defeat an enemy is a puzzle, then yes, given that the conflict in Zelda is not very motor skill-based, 80% of the mechanics revolves around puzzles. Probably more.

But a game is also more than its mechanics. To use the (in)famous game design model, there's also dynamics and aesthetics.

 

[Benzychenz]

Puzzles are like the most important part of Zelda for me.

 

[tiggerkiddo]

This is why I enjoyed Oracles of Ages so much, the dungeons in that game were really enjoyable. I much prefer the puzzles on the 2D games as opposed to the 3D though.

 

[Nohar]

Puzzles are a very important part of Zelda for me. I was disappointed by many of the ALBW puzzles (some were good, other were bare-bone), and I hope that Zelda Wii U will somehow have good puzzles.

 

[Sami+]

Dark Souls pretty much has no puzzles aside from having to find and and equip a contextless ring

I think the boulders in Sen's Fortress are a good example of a dungeon puzzle that would work well in a Zelda game. They're clearly an obstacle hindering your progress, and they force the player to find a route to the control room so that they may continue, and direct the boulders to fall in certain directions to open specific paths and get certain items. It's all very seamless and I have infinite appreciation for the fact that the game doesn't come to a grinding halt in order to present the puzzle, establish the rules and acknowledge that I have completed it (complete with a "congratulations you did the thing" jingle). It's just really good level design that feels natural, IMO.

With that said, Sen's Fortress is a single level in a game that otherwise places very little emphasis on puzzle solving. I would personally choose Shadow of the Colossus as my template for what I would want the puzzle design to be like, should it be a major part of the game.

 

[Card Boy]

If you don't like the puzzles in Zelda then the Zelda series isn't for you plain and simple. For me like 80% of the experience from Zelda comes from discovery, figuring shit out and puzzles.

 

[Mihael Mello Keehl]

When you stuck on a puzzle, and you figure it out, and then you get that feeling.. Thats when you know you playing a Zelda. And its always a rewarding feeling thats why Zelda will and always be the pinnacle of this hobby.

 

[Makai]

Puzzles are one of the main draws for me.

 

[Nickle]

The point of that room in Wind Waker is not to be a puzzle. Those vines are just obstacles put there to introduce the idea of using the boomerang to target vines and ropes. The room directly following that one requires you to target 5 vines simultaneously to drop a house through the floor. It's priming. This is a good example of how Zelda games do this. The vines in that room block your path, but unlike the vines on the house you need to drop you cannot reach them with your sword. So you need a ranged weapon and you just got one. Zelda had never used a boomerang to cut ropes or vines before and it's not an intuitive use of the tool. That room basically exists so that you can figure out the next room in a fair and natural way.

While I don't remember this specific room, it don't think it was meant to stump you. It looks like a room with junk in it that allows you to use your item. I think most of these simple "puzzles" are basically variations of going through a door or unlocking a door in a way that isn't simply beating all the enemies and using a key. It's providing you with a level of interaction with the world that isn't poking with a sword or talking to someone to make something happen. In this case though, I doubt it's supposed to be little more than making you feel good about having obtained the boomerang, teach you how to use it and make the world feel interactive. Going on auto-pilot in these sections seems fine to me. If you didn't have different tiers of complexity, exploring dungeons may be tiresome.

It all depends on the execution and the level of involvement to me. Some games, like Matrix' Alundra, mostly had puzzles that felt like variations of reading and applying bicycle lock combinations. Dark Souls pretty much has no puzzles aside from having to find and and equip a contextless ring. Those puzzles never felt right with me. Capcom's Okami on the other hand does this much better in my opinion.

Spoiler

Perhaps even better than most actual Zelda titles.

It had tight integration of the brush abilities in and out of battle. You start with getting teased with what you lack, and then when you finally get it, you are treated to different uses of your new-found abilities. Most of them may not be head-scratchers, but they do provide satisfying interaction with the world.

That was probably a bad example, and I guess that most of these obstacles are still technically puzzles (although they aren't very puzzling). I guess I just haven't been challenged by many of the puzzles in the last few Zelda games. I don't need to stop every 5 minutes to solve a cryptic puzzle, but 2-4 thought provoking puzzles per game is just too few.

 

[Vampirolol]

Puzzles are 90% of the game. Albw is 98% puzzles. I love its dunegons... they were easy but clever, like you know, every puzzle in Zelda. It was a fast game so people tend to see it as simple, but man Skyward Sword is praised for its puzzles and it's not harder/smarter than Albw.

 

[MisterGrey3000]

If I have to put the pieces together in the heat of the moment, then I obviously don't know exactly what to do.

....that's the point.
You know how to interact with puzzle, and you know what your goal is but actually applying that knowledge to everything that happens between your start time and the end-goal is what's challenging; basically, putting all of the pieces together is the meat of puzzle design.
I don't understand how designing puzzles with clues and clear end-goals could be a bad thing.

Brb gotta put my goggles on, I've got a crossword puzzle in the heat of the moment.

Hope those goggles can fit around your cheeks, you big smart ass.

The point of that room in Wind Waker is not to be a puzzle. Those vines are just obstacles put there to introduce the idea of using the boomerang to target vines and ropes. The room directly following that one requires you to target 5 vines simultaneously to drop a house through the floor. It's priming. This is a good example of how Zelda games do this. The vines in that room block your path, but unlike the vines on the house you need to drop you cannot reach them with your sword. So you need a ranged weapon and you just got one. Zelda had never used a boomerang to cut ropes or vines before and it's not an intuitive use of the tool. That room basically exists so that you can figure out the next room in a fair and natural way.

While I don't remember this specific room, it don't think it was meant to stump you. It looks like a room with junk in it that allows you to use your item. I think most of these simple "puzzles" are basically variations of going through a door or unlocking a door in a way that isn't simply beating all the enemies and using a key. It's providing you with a level of interaction with the world that isn't poking with a sword or talking to someone to make something happen. In this case though, I doubt it's supposed to be little more than making you feel good about having obtained the boomerang, teach you how to use it and make the world feel interactive. Going on auto-pilot in these sections seems fine to me. If you didn't have different tiers of complexity, exploring dungeons may be tiresome.

Good post.

 

[Nickle]

....that's the point.
You know how to interact with puzzle, and you know what your goal is but actually applying that knowledge to everything that happens between your start time and the end-goal is what's challenging; basically, putting all of the pieces together is the meat of puzzle design.
I don't understand how designing puzzles with clues and clear end-goals could be a bad thing.

I never once said that knowing the end goals or clues were bad. I said that easily figuring out the solution is bad. Once you have figured out the solution, then it is just a case of doing the necessary actions until you get to the end goal.

 

[Teppic]

The puzzles is the game.

 

[MisterGrey3000]

Once you have figured out the solution, then it is just a case of doing the necessary actions until you get to the end goal.

That's every puzzle ever regardless of if they're simple or complex.

I'm generally completely fine with simple puzzles that serve as a way to prime the player for a challenge or teach them how to use their item, especially if there are more complex designs that come right after them. They're important from a "game feel" and pacing perspective

 

[Qasiel]

Without puzzles, Zelda would just be a simplistic hack-and-slash style adventure game where you get to trawl dungeons looking for things to kill. As fun as that may be for some, it won't last for a long time whereas puzzles give the games longevity. They make you want to search the dungeons for the new item which'll open up new areas (which was lost completely in ALBW's "rental system" - A huge mistake in the game for me, but that's a discussion for a different thread).

At its core, the Zelda games are definitely a great mix of puzzles, exploration and combat - as has already been stated - and to remove just one of them would be a massive step in the wrong direction.

 

[dragonbane]

Matters a lot to me.

 

[YourMaster]

Puzzles are important, but not in the way the recent games think they are.
Puzzles in game are difficult to do right, because what is unsolvable to some, is really simple and therefore not fun to somebody else. This could frustrate both the bright and the dim.

The solution the first two Zelda games had, was perfect: The puzzles in those games would have quite an obvious solution once you got the answer wrong, however, they forced you to face more monsters.
And the game was about making it to the end without getting worn down by the monster battles.

That was an excellent addition. Pushing 3 blocks aside in the correct order does nothing for me.

 

[BGBW]

Very. In fact it's one of the things that differentiates it from other action adventure titles; it's one of the few games to do puzzles well.

I actually liked Spirit Tracks a lot simply because the puzzles were great. Iwata Asks revealed they had different staff for them which would explain it.

 

[Vampirolol]

With difficult puzzles some people mean the confusing ones, and I don't like those. Another kind of hard puzzle I don't like is the one made by trials, like the Triforce statue in Wind Waker or the square puzzle before the Master Sword in TP. Skyward Sword and ALBW are just, they are very clear in what you should do, I respect that even if I don't justify lazyness. The best puzzle must be clever, clear and hard, like the ones in Portal 1 and 2.

 

[eyeball_kid]

The point of that room in Wind Waker is not to be a puzzle. Those vines are just obstacles put there to introduce the idea of using the boomerang to target vines and ropes. The room directly following that one requires you to target 5 vines simultaneously to drop a house through the floor. It's priming. This is a good example of how Zelda games do this. The vines in that room block your path, but unlike the vines on the house you need to drop you cannot reach them with your sword. So you need a ranged weapon and you just got one. Zelda had never used a boomerang to cut ropes or vines before and it's not an intuitive use of the tool. That room basically exists so that you can figure out the next room in a fair and natural way.

That room is not 'priming', that room is babysitting and busywork. Treating the player like they're three. It's very obvious what the mechanic is, and even if it isn't to some players, a couple items for target practice are plenty to get the point across. Making it into a mini-quest was just tedium.

An example of good puzzles is Catherine. Show the player a new mechanic, then give them an environment in which to apply it. Not a giant tutorial disguised as a tedious mission quest, but an interesting puzzle where you can actually die. Next level, give the player a new mechanic and put them an environment that requires both mechanics. There's no camera pans to hint at a solution, no glowing or sparkly blocks, no sidekick offering to solve it for you. It treats you like an adult and expects you to use your brain and the game mechanics to get yourself out of danger.

 

[Mihael Mello Keehl]

That room is not 'priming', that room is babysitting and busywork. Treating the player like they're three. It's very obvious what the mechanic is, and even if it isn't to some players, a couple items for target practice are plenty to get the point across. Making it into a mini-quest was just tedium.

An example of good puzzles is Catherine. Show the player a new mechanic, then give them an environment in which to apply it. Not a giant tutorial disguised as a tedious mission quest, but an interesting puzzle where you can actually die. Next level, give the player a new mechanic and put them an environment that requires both mechanics. There's no camera pans to hint at a solution, no glowing or sparkly blocks, no sidekick offering to solve it for you. It treats you like an adult and expects you to use your brain and the game mechanics to get yourself out of danger.

Catherine is a pure puzzle game, the comparison makes absolutely zero sense.

 

[eyeball_kid]

Catherine is a pure puzzle game, the comparison makes absolutely zero sense.

I'm comparing how game mechanics to solve the puzzles are introduced. How does this make zero sense? What type of game each one is makes little difference within the context of how they introduce puzzle mechanics to players.

 

[MBR]

It depends on what kind of puzzles you mean.

We've had:
- Room-to-room dungeons (Simple "shove block/kill monsters, get key, open locked door in same room, repeat until boss" stuff)
- Dungeon objective puzzles (Whack down all pillars in Eagle's Tower (LA), find all ghosts in Forest Temple (OoT) to get to the basement, help the yetis in Snowpeak Ruins (TP), etc.)
- Exploration puzzles (Side quests such as Biggoron Sword (OoT) and Couple's Mask (MM), story sequences like from after Forest Haven up until ToTG cutscene (WW), etc.)
And probably more types of puzzles that I can't think of now.

It's a combination of things like these that makes Zelda for me, and it's why ALBW was lacking, since Nintendo had to make the game approachable from many angles they didn't form the story in a way that had you doing interesting stuff from dungeon to dungeon, instead you went from dungeon 1-3 in a somewhat random order, then dungeon 4-8 in an even more random order.

 

[Sparrowhawk]

They're essential, but I've played so many Zelda games that I don't really have to think about them anymore.

 

[Mihael Mello Keehl]

I'm comparing how game mechanics to solve the puzzles are introduced. How does this make zero sense? What type of game each one is makes little difference within the context of how they introduce puzzle mechanics to players.

An adventure rpg will guide players on how to approach a type of puzzle differently than a pure puzzle game. There are so many things you can do in a zelda game where a player could be thinking of maybe I can cut this.. or maybe I can cut this with a boomerang.. or maybe I can cut it with an arrow where in catherine all you do is grab, push pull and climb and use that to overcome an obstacle depending on a situation. Zelda is not purely a puzzle game so the need to teach you the same way catherine doesnt translate well. Its not as if catherine has a diverse range of puzzles a zelda game would have anyways the basis is always pushing and pulling blocks every single time.

PS I love catherine.

 

[Nickle]

That's every puzzle ever regardless of if they're simple or complex.

And I clearly said that it's a bad thing when you immediately figure out a solution in the sentence before.

"I need to get to that door" is not you thinking of the solution, it's you thinking about the end goal. "I need to push that block, hit that switch, and jump over that pit" is you thinking of the solution.

 

[Praise the Lorde]

Very. They are a big part of why I love the Zelda series.

 

[zoukka]

They are one of the biggest differentiating factors to other adventure games. Very important.

 

[RagnarokX]

That room is not 'priming', that room is babysitting and busywork. Treating the player like they're three. It's very obvious what the mechanic is, and even if it isn't to some players, a couple items for target practice are plenty to get the point across. Making it into a mini-quest was just tedium.

An example of good puzzles is Catherine. Show the player a new mechanic, then give them an environment in which to apply it. Not a giant tutorial disguised as a tedious mission quest, but an interesting puzzle where you can actually die. Next level, give the player a new mechanic and put them an environment that requires both mechanics. There's no camera pans to hint at a solution, no glowing or sparkly blocks, no sidekick offering to solve it for you. It treats you like an adult and expects you to use your brain and the game mechanics to get yourself out of danger.

The room is priming regardless of whether you feel it was necessary or not.

And how the hell is it a miniquest? You clear a path with 1 or 2 throws of the boomerang.

That room is exactly what you are lauding Catherine for. You get a new item and are put in an environment where you have to apply it. No camera pans or shiny blocks. They just put you in the situation and expect you to figure it out.

 

[VegiHam]

Puzzles are important, but they shouldn't be so much of a focus that there's nothing else in the game. Looking at you ALBW.

...well, that's an exaggeration. But I finished ALBW yesterday and was dissapointed in the lack of plot, characters, sidequests, exploration, interesting visuals and all the other non puzzle things I like in Zelda.

 

[CaVaYeRo]

I think it's just impossible to get a perfect balance between dungeon-open world freedom (ALBW) and super tight, linear and deeper item-based puzzle design (SS). If Wii U game delivers both, I'd welcome that, but it'd surely disappoint with its unfocused approach. There's just no sweet spot imo.

Replaying Minish Cap now. I like the game, but item-limited paths in the map seem outdated. At the same time, item-based puzzles are where creativity lies.

 

[Shojx]

Puzzles are as important to me in Zelda as platforming is to me in Mario.

They're important elements that attract me to those respective genres.

If you were to remove the puzzles from Zelda, I don't know what it'd be anymore.

Obviously balance is important, and I haven't played ALBW yet, so I can't really express my opinion there, but puzzles are an important mainstay to the series.

 

[BGBW]

That room is not 'priming', that room is babysitting and busywork. Treating the player like they're three. It's very obvious what the mechanic is, and even if it isn't to some players, a couple items for target practice are plenty to get the point across. Making it into a mini-quest was just tedium.

One room equals a mini quest now?

Welp. Now I know why people complain about too many mini quests in Zelda games, they think every other room is one!

 

[monome]

In terms of template Zelda I is still my preferred Zelda.

So not very important.
Exploration and discovery are what Zelda is about, IMO.

 

[spekkeh]

This seems topical now.

People complained about the the empty overworld in TP. They introduced a lot more puzzles in Skyward Sword, to essentially turn the overworld into the dungeons everybody supposedly loves. Then Skyward Sword gets massively shat upon. Subsequently, Aonouma said he was moving away from puzzles and was going to focus more on exploration. Now suddenly everyone wants more puzzles in their Zelda games.

 

[10k]

It's more important then combat to me.

1. Puzzles
2. Exploration
3. Items
4. Combat
5. Story

 

[Tatersalad]

It depends on what kind of puzzles you mean.

We've had:
- Room-to-room dungeons (Simple "shove block/kill monsters, get key, open locked door in same room, repeat until boss" stuff)
- Dungeon objective puzzles (Whack down all pillars in Eagle's Tower (LA), find all ghosts in Forest Temple (OoT) to get to the basement, help the yetis in Snowpeak Ruins (TP), etc.)
- Exploration puzzles (Side quests such as Biggoron Sword (OoT) and Couple's Mask (MM), story sequences like from after Forest Haven up until ToTG cutscene (WW), etc.)
And probably more types of puzzles that I can't think of now.

Maybe we're not all on the same page about what type of puzzles we do and don't like. I don't consider stuff such as the Biggoron sword and the like puzzles, more like side quests. Personally I'm really tired of the 'room-to-room' type puzzles, they are rarely difficult and only seem to pad the length of a dungeon. However I really like the 2nd type, whole dungeon based puzzles. Other examples I like, the Temple of Hera in LttP (managing the switches and floor areas via holes) and the water temple in OoT (water level opens up or seals areas off).

Another factor could be number of Zelda games played. I've played most of them and wouldn't mind the formula be shaken up.