Calm Mind
Member
I like you.
Nintendo @ E3 - No Direct, Just Zelda Treehouse Stream
- Thread starter Lucifon
- Start date
- Status
I like you.
Hm, what do you mean by "do not suspect"?
As to the 100 mini dungeons, as another poster said, if they borrow the Mario 3D World design philosophy of endless small ideas that don't overstay their welcome, perhaps they can come up with plenty of great mini dungeons. Also, we know there's no lack of ideas in the Zelda team, see upthread for the discussion of 50 LBW dungeons being designed and thrown away. I guess my point is (a) if they throw away half the ideas during the development cycle, and they came up with, say, 200 ideas for mini dungeons, there are still 100 left to make, and (b) if past mini dungeons like in LBW are any indication, and they may or may not be, then there will be some ideas with multiple variations on display.
DecoReturns
Member
Maybe I'm stupid, but what exactly is a Mini-dungeon? Because its confusing me slightly here, are the 4 main Dungeons like typical Zelda ones?
brandonh83
Banned
Louis Cyphre
Banned
This game will be amazing but sadly it won't help the Wii U at all but it's nice they didn't screw those owners over and be NX only.
OrbitalBeard
Member
Think of the ice cave or the well in OoT. Those are what I'd consider mini-dungeons.
If we're getting over 100 though, I'd expect most of them to be smaller than those.
Think Ice Cavern OoT, or perhaps smaller like Wind Waker's smaller island dungeons.
EDIT: Haha beaten!
Angry Chair
Member
I doubt Nintendo would be making such a big deal about the tablet/book if it was just a better bomber's notebook. It has to be something heavily important to the overall story.
3D Zeldas are so much easier than the 2D games.I feel excited about this, but then I remember how punishingly difficult and incredibly formulaic I find 3D Zelda games, and the hype deflates
Something that facilitates a pick up and play play style. Do a dungeon here, do another dungeon there. I knew Nintendo would go this route. They make all of their games feel like bitesize, pick up and play games nowadays. It's a recent trend of theirs. Not that I mind of course, it can be a nice change of pace.
DecoReturns
Member
Oh, that makes sense, but I wonder if those dungeons are just filled with money or other gems that nobody cares for.
I hope they are important or rather completing them is progressive to the story in some way.
Tuesday can't come fast enough
Angry Chair
Member
You sir, are an idiot.
It can be both.
I do wish they'd go back to that kind of feeling in dungeons, as well. It felt like you were exploring the dungeon. It's hard to achieve that without it strictly being a maze, though, and tbh mazes are a pretty dull puzzle design. I'd like to see them do it a bit more, make you think spatially a bit more. ALttP had a few good ones. Zelda 1 did, too (know where boss is, know where you are, have map, but no doors to get there, eg). If they can bring it back in a few places and do it well, then i'm down - just don't make me feel like i'm backtracking and getting lost for no reason.
Quality over quantity. Who is to say how long those 4 dungeons are? Who is to say how long some of the mini dungeons are? Until you see more or have the game it'll hard to judge if 4 + 100 has the same level of impact of TP's 9 (tied w/ ocarina if you exclude ocarina's 'mini dungeons') or ALttP's 11 (ignoring the sewers as a dungeon).
We could have mini dungeons on par w/ the ice cavern, for example (in terms of length/types of unique puzzles) - so don't discount mini dungeons yet.
Maybe the concern is we'll only have 4 bosses? I kinda doubt it.
I'm thinking it'll likely be 4 'normal' or even 'mega' dungeons, with 8 'real' mini dungeons (ice cavern in size or larger), where you gain something you need to progress in the the story and possibly fight a boss, and 92+ optional dungeons.
Of course, I wrote about that in the same post you quoted. Sorry if I didn't explain myself correctly as english is not my main language. We could argue that those 100 mini dungeons wouldn't be part of the main quest, or at least most of them, so if you play the game following the story and go through only those four dungeons you'll get a pretty small game in a really big world, and as you know many people don't enjoy keep playing on a game after finishing the story. It's like only playing the main missions of Watch_dogs or Arkham Knight, and ignoring all the secondary stuff that is bigger than the main quest.
When Aonuma said they're doing a open world game with a Nintendo spin, I hoped there'd be a good balance between the main story and the secondary stuff.
I don't really know what to expect out of Zelda, and I don't know if we should be comparing it to similar games like Skyrim and Witcher 3.
Witcher 3 in particular strikes some of the exploration feeling I like so much in Zelda (if you turn off some of the HUD elements). The sword and horseback theme makes a superficial comparison somewhat easy, but the similarities might end there. New Zelda probably isn't going to be as vast, but it'll probably be more tightly designed with puzzles and other adventure elements to figure out.
Witcher 3 in particular strikes some of the exploration feeling I like so much in Zelda (if you turn off some of the HUD elements). The sword and horseback theme makes a superficial comparison somewhat easy, but the similarities might end there. New Zelda probably isn't going to be as vast, but it'll probably be more tightly designed with puzzles and other adventure elements to figure out.
Cipher Peon
Banned
I'm lining up at a Nintendo World overnight to get a chance to play Zelda U
lmao
lmao
Sounds good.
wild wild rice
Member
DecoReturns
Member
Jokes on us when they are playing the NX version with Reggie guarding the console.
Valjean Lafitte
Banned
Not exactly. I remember first hearing about Majora's Mask at least 6-8 months prior to it's release. Back then it was being referred to as Mask of Mujula, and there weren't as many screenshots released as when OoT was being made. Ura Zelda was also in development at that time and some of the rumors surrounding that game also became associated with MM, to the point that when it was finally released, I wasn't entirely sure whether Ura had evolved into MM or was cancelled.
i wish, but no way that'll happen. At least not for E3. MAYBE for some other reason down the line, but not E3.
I'm speaking strictly of japanese release. Yeah, it was like 8 months until the US got it.
MM came out April 27 in japan.
So yeah, we heard about the game in jan/feb, title was revealed in march, and the game was out in april in japan, according to the timeline of IGN articles citing famitsu.
Cipher Peon
Banned
I go to these things for the experience more than actually doing the thing in the first place.
I was already here for the Amiibo Card swap thing and I have nothing better to do between the hours of now and 9 AM so why not? Besides, I look amazing and people deserve to see how good I look and shower me in compliments (which I've already received a few here 😘
Valjean Lafitte
Banned
It was 6 months till the US got it, but I could swear I was seeing beta screenshots even months before the Japanese release. I didn't think they could have released the game that soon after announcing it. Hmm.
edit: Just saw your edit. Yeah, that seems about right now that I think about it.
Council Pop
Member
I dunno which 2D Zeldas you're talking about, but surely can't be A Link to the Past, Link's Awakening, Oracle of Seasons/Ages, Minish Cap or A Link Between Worlds- all of which I completed, most at a much younger age, and never got stuck on.
They were challenging, but the learning curve was perfect. But the 3D Zeldas have much more difficult combat- dungeons are a slog because it's just room after room of irritatingly difficult enemies getting in the way while you're trying to solve some unsatisfying and badly signposted environmental puzzle.
I remember getting up to the first dungeon as adult link in OOT, and never being able to get past the ghost Gannon boss. I started playing Wind Waker again and the first boss was solid. Started playing Majora's Mask and the dungeons are just nonsensical and it's impossible to know what parts of the environment you can interact with/set on fire/smash with deku nuts etc. They're just badly constructed puzzle games. Whereas the 2D games are crisp, clear, rewarding and amazingly designed. The two types of Zelda couldn't be more different from one another.
Assuming the 100 dungeon thing turns out to be true, I hope they are integrated well with the overworld. Many should feel like natural extensions of the environment, not just holes in the ground or caves that lead to a separate area (although I expect a decent number of these).
I guess you're right. It was "Zelda Gaiden" for a while, details surfacing august of 99
http://www.ign.com/articles/1999/08/20/first-zelda-gaiden-details-exposed
http://www.ign.com/articles/1999/08/21/more-details-on-zelda-gaiden-surface
We did get SOME screenshots the year before as well:
http://www.ign.com/articles/1999/08/24/eye-on-gaiden
Hands on at space world:
http://www.ign.com/articles/1999/08/27/hands-on-zelda-gaiden
It just wasn't called majora until march the next year, and then finally plopped out in april.
Still August > April is an insane turnaround from 'seeing a screenshot of early footage and early details' to 'It's out now'
Cipher Peon
Banned
First things first, I'm watching X-men Apocalypse. I came here to watch it and I'm gonna watch it dammit.
If we're talking about difficulty, I found Wind Walker significantly more difficult than Zelda II.
If we're talking about difficulty, I found Wind Walker significantly more difficult than Zelda II.
Valjean Lafitte
Banned
Zelda Gaiden! Now that's a name I haven't thought of in years. IIRC Nintendo had even released images of the logo using that name.
Man, that brings back memories. I remember checking the old Nintendo.com every day for updates on the game and freaking out when they announced you could ride pony Epona.
jwillenn
Member
tbh, that's like BEST CASE scenario in my mind. Or stuff like Ikana castle/Pirate fortress in majora's mask.
If we're lucky they'll have boss fights, too
OrbitalBeard
Member
what
His opinions are bad, don't feel bad. He thinks a link to the past is awful, too. Shh.
Empyrean Heaven
Member
Out of curiosity, how much coverage can we reasonably expect this year? Obviously the big sites will be there, but independent YouTubers have sworn off Nintendo due to their insane monetization procedures. Can we reasonably expect them to show or even discuss Zelda?
OrbitalBeard
Member
There are plenty of big YouTubers who still cover Nintendo. A lot of the YT commentators who "swore off" Nintendo never covered them in the first place.
As far as I'm concerned, if you're attending E3 to present video game coverage to your audience and you don't preview Zelda, you're not worth my time.
I can't speak about Markiplier (honestly don't know who he is), but Angry Joe and Pewdiepie never covered Nintendo in the past, so nothing has changed.
kinaesthete
Member
This leadup to E3 is def bringing me back to my days of following IGN64's updates and finally renting an imported JP copy of Zeruda no Densetsu: Mujura no Kamen. Loved that first feeling of getting my hands on something I wasn't "supposed" to have yet, despite not understanding a word of it and never figuring out how to get through the first Deku Link only cycle.
Empyrean Heaven
Member
Not many, mainly the Game Theory guys and Normal Boots. But Markiplier, Angry Joe, and Pewdiepie? Nope.
Of all the wishes I can muster up for this game, the one that I keep coming back to is difficulty. I want them to offer Hero Mode right from the start, but I know they won't because they want it to be used as an incentive to replay the game, and only ever offer it from the get-go if it's a remake/remaster people may have already played.
They could of course just have a naturally high difficulty, but I doubt that's going to happen.
They could of course just have a naturally high difficulty, but I doubt that's going to happen.
Meesh
Member
You have my axe.
kinaesthete
Member
If this new 4 dungeons + 100 mini-dungeons rumor has any credibility my speculation about how they'll go about handling difficulty might have some merit. If there's that many more optional areas than the last few 3D Zeldas have, the idea of having the more challenging "post-game" levels ala Mario Galaxy hidden away has some merit. That wouldn't be my ideal where the main path would be a proper challenge, but it has precedent cause that's how Nintendo has done the Expert Levels in other big games recently. Unlikely that there will ever be massive nightmare dungeons filled with aggressive enemies and truly hellish puzzles though, we get the scraps
ShockingAlberto
Member
jwillenn
Member
OricWindstar
Member
This is so rarely used correctly, but for real. How?
This isn't a rumor, just a thing I thought would be cool in Zelda but know they're definetly not doing.
Anywho, as you know there's a big push, and rumor for a female Link in the game, or at least being choose to play as one. The female Link argument is one I was never interested in so I won't delve too much into it, simply put I don't really care either way, however I thought of what would be an interesting way to have a female playable character but without really changing Link's gender.
While I agree that on games were you're supposed to project yourself as the main character, such as Pokémon or some Dragon Quest games, being able to choose the gender of your main character is important, however, at the same time I don't think changing the gender of a character with 30 years of history is a good idea either.
So I thought of the super original idea of, make a new female character and make it playable. I know your mind was blown at that super original thought, but hear me on how it could be implemented.
Think of 3 games, Pokémon Emerald, Resident Evil 0 and Grand Theft Auto V.
As you may know Pokémon introduced a female playable character in Crystal, but didn't make it interesting until Ruby/Sapphire (I haven't played either which is why I mention Emerald) on those games you get to pick your character at the beggining, a boy or a girl, same as Crystal, however unlike Crystal the character you don't pick is still in the game, playing a role in the story, such has been the case with all Pokémon games released afterwards. That would be the idea, you pick your hero based on gender, but the other character still serves purpose in the world.
Now through RE0, the interesting mechanic about that game is playing as two characters as one, and being able to switch between both at any given time (mostly), so we could do something similar with that, of course in a much more open manner. Playing as two heroes at once could also change the way the game could be structured, here's a thought, Link remains a silent protagonist, however the female character does speak with others, she interacts through the world more directly than Link would.
Finally GTAV, and here everything comes together. Now I haven't actually played GTAV so I can't comment on how well this works personally, this is based simply on how I've read the game works. In GTAV there are 3 protagonist from which you can switch to play at any time, similar to RE0, however here each character can act independetly, as you are playing as one character the other one could be doing some other business somewhere else in the world. Now bringing everything full circle.
You play as two heroes from oposites genres, you may choose to switch between the heroes as you play, or not and you can play as just the one for the entire game as the other one plays a supporting role in the story, however the other hero still exists in the game world and you could just bump into him/her as she/he is just making his/her way around, the other character could also complete "mini dungeons" or sidequest without the main character ever knowing.
At the same time the other character could be controlled by another player bringing multiplayer into the series, but just as switching characters it would be optional, to accomodate this there could be mini dungeons, or areas in larger dungeons where cooperation would neccesary to advance, but these would be interely optional that way the game is designed for single player without compromising too much and it adds multiplayer as well.
I won't say how Zelda should be like Dark Souls because I've yet to play a souls game, or how it should be like Skyrim because I've never played a Bethesda game.
Hopefully all of this makes sense, please excuse spelling mistakes.
Anywho, as you know there's a big push, and rumor for a female Link in the game, or at least being choose to play as one. The female Link argument is one I was never interested in so I won't delve too much into it, simply put I don't really care either way, however I thought of what would be an interesting way to have a female playable character but without really changing Link's gender.
While I agree that on games were you're supposed to project yourself as the main character, such as Pokémon or some Dragon Quest games, being able to choose the gender of your main character is important, however, at the same time I don't think changing the gender of a character with 30 years of history is a good idea either.
So I thought of the super original idea of, make a new female character and make it playable. I know your mind was blown at that super original thought, but hear me on how it could be implemented.
Think of 3 games, Pokémon Emerald, Resident Evil 0 and Grand Theft Auto V.
As you may know Pokémon introduced a female playable character in Crystal, but didn't make it interesting until Ruby/Sapphire (I haven't played either which is why I mention Emerald) on those games you get to pick your character at the beggining, a boy or a girl, same as Crystal, however unlike Crystal the character you don't pick is still in the game, playing a role in the story, such has been the case with all Pokémon games released afterwards. That would be the idea, you pick your hero based on gender, but the other character still serves purpose in the world.
Now through RE0, the interesting mechanic about that game is playing as two characters as one, and being able to switch between both at any given time (mostly), so we could do something similar with that, of course in a much more open manner. Playing as two heroes at once could also change the way the game could be structured, here's a thought, Link remains a silent protagonist, however the female character does speak with others, she interacts through the world more directly than Link would.
Finally GTAV, and here everything comes together. Now I haven't actually played GTAV so I can't comment on how well this works personally, this is based simply on how I've read the game works. In GTAV there are 3 protagonist from which you can switch to play at any time, similar to RE0, however here each character can act independetly, as you are playing as one character the other one could be doing some other business somewhere else in the world. Now bringing everything full circle.
You play as two heroes from oposites genres, you may choose to switch between the heroes as you play, or not and you can play as just the one for the entire game as the other one plays a supporting role in the story, however the other hero still exists in the game world and you could just bump into him/her as she/he is just making his/her way around, the other character could also complete "mini dungeons" or sidequest without the main character ever knowing.
At the same time the other character could be controlled by another player bringing multiplayer into the series, but just as switching characters it would be optional, to accomodate this there could be mini dungeons, or areas in larger dungeons where cooperation would neccesary to advance, but these would be interely optional that way the game is designed for single player without compromising too much and it adds multiplayer as well.
I won't say how Zelda should be like Dark Souls because I've yet to play a souls game, or how it should be like Skyrim because I've never played a Bethesda game.
Hopefully all of this makes sense, please excuse spelling mistakes.
ShockingAlberto
Member
Alternatively, people could just get over the idea that having a gender toggle for Link in any way harms them.
But how will I be able to IMMERSE myself in the role of being a blond elven pretty boy if I know that *somewhere* somebody is playing a......female version of that same character???
The only way this thing makes any sense if you lost your 2 arms between 1987 and 2002.
You mean you want people to not get over this blasphemy that a male has the choice to be a female link? Or vice-versa? Please. Stop with this amateur hour nonsense.
- Status