Good. If they make too many changes to exactly match feedback, then the game won't really be a Zelda game. In my opinion that'd be a game designed by forum posters and youtube commenters. A 'Zelda' game is a concept derived from a specific group of people at nintendo and their ideas should only be influenced by feedback, not entirely controlled.
Eiji Aonuma teases surprise twist on open-world in Zelda U, talks about fan feedback
- Thread starter DownGrader
- Start date
Zelda has always been 'open-world'. They're just using that term now because its the IN thing.
As long as the world in the game is actually dangerous, I'll be happy. Exploring a world with no danger makes the area your exploring not seem so special. It doesn't need to be completely dangerous, just have certain areas.
A bit like a less claustrophobic Dark Souls no?
This. The open world should function like the ocean in Wind Waker, but instead of islands you have isolated areas within the world that contain all the gameplay substance. This is where you'll solve puzzles and find collectibles like piece of heart. In the overworld you may stumble across random generated ish dungeons with nothing of real substance, just like a typical Skyrim cave. You'll find rupees, materials and other not so important items.
DownGrader
Member
3D Zelda games were more like systems of regions connected by hallways. Twilight princess map is a good example:
Aonuma and his crew want to eliminate hallways and allow people to chose their own ways to approach some region, like in 2D games.
Kind of worries me, to be honest.
I'm very clear on what I want - something like the original LoZ where you can just explore the world and find dungeons out of order. A return to properly classic Zelda.
What I don't want is another OoT / TP design, but with much larger areas so that it 'feels' open-world. That would be horrible.
The core point of a good open world game is the ability to go where you want and find something meaningful to do in any direction you choose. That's the standard. I'm worried that Aonuma might cucco out when faced with the scale of it.
I'm very clear on what I want - something like the original LoZ where you can just explore the world and find dungeons out of order. A return to properly classic Zelda.
What I don't want is another OoT / TP design, but with much larger areas so that it 'feels' open-world. That would be horrible.
The core point of a good open world game is the ability to go where you want and find something meaningful to do in any direction you choose. That's the standard. I'm worried that Aonuma might cucco out when faced with the scale of it.
Open world doesn't imply non linearity. Xenoblade is the perfect example of a linear open world game.
The dungeons need to be ordered, if the game wants to have something that resembles an actual learning curve with gameplay getting increasingly more complex. You could also have a tier system, do 1-3 in any order, then you trigger an event that unlocks 4-6, etc.
Finale Fireworker
Member
I find myself at war with my memories of Twilight Princess.
At the time, I loved the game. It really appealed to me as a teenager who only played Nintendo games. As lastgen as it was, I was convinced it was next generation, and this was the power of my Wii.
Which was both right and wrong.
But anyway, the game ends on such a high note. Ganon's castle and the final fight is such a highlight of the entire series. It's really something amazing for a Zelda fan. So, leaving the game, that was what I held onto the most.
And it has so many great moments. The Snowtop Mansion, basically every temple, seeing the bustling alleys of castle town the first time, it's incredible.
But when I tried to replay the game a few years later, I hated it. I hated playing as Wolf Link. I hated the slow pace of the first length of the game. I hated the enormous emptiness of Hyrule Field, threatless and inert. I hated that you didn't get Epona until after you could teleport anywhere you wanted. I hated that there was nothing hidden to discover.
And I kind of realized that I hated Twilight Princess.
I love PARTS of Twilight Princess and think they are the absolute peak of the entire series. But getting to them is unbearable. Especially when you know they're out there.
So, for Zelda U/NX, that's what I need considered the most. TP showed me that the dungeons can be amazing, the moments can be memorable, and the individual parts can be the best Zelda game I ever played, but if there is no cohesion to the package and no unifying game world, I can't enjoy it. I can't revisit it. I don't know if I could go back to an empty world with everything I've seen and played since TP.
I have faith that the dungeons and the combat will be the best iteration Zelda has ever seen. My concern is in that overworld. The sense of mystery, place, and danger.
This is a post-Souls world. If I walk into another huge empty field surrounded by cliffs, with literally nothing in it I will become disillusioned with the entire experience.
At the time, I loved the game. It really appealed to me as a teenager who only played Nintendo games. As lastgen as it was, I was convinced it was next generation, and this was the power of my Wii.
Which was both right and wrong.
But anyway, the game ends on such a high note. Ganon's castle and the final fight is such a highlight of the entire series. It's really something amazing for a Zelda fan. So, leaving the game, that was what I held onto the most.
And it has so many great moments. The Snowtop Mansion, basically every temple, seeing the bustling alleys of castle town the first time, it's incredible.
But when I tried to replay the game a few years later, I hated it. I hated playing as Wolf Link. I hated the slow pace of the first length of the game. I hated the enormous emptiness of Hyrule Field, threatless and inert. I hated that you didn't get Epona until after you could teleport anywhere you wanted. I hated that there was nothing hidden to discover.
And I kind of realized that I hated Twilight Princess.
I love PARTS of Twilight Princess and think they are the absolute peak of the entire series. But getting to them is unbearable. Especially when you know they're out there.
So, for Zelda U/NX, that's what I need considered the most. TP showed me that the dungeons can be amazing, the moments can be memorable, and the individual parts can be the best Zelda game I ever played, but if there is no cohesion to the package and no unifying game world, I can't enjoy it. I can't revisit it. I don't know if I could go back to an empty world with everything I've seen and played since TP.
I have faith that the dungeons and the combat will be the best iteration Zelda has ever seen. My concern is in that overworld. The sense of mystery, place, and danger.
This is a post-Souls world. If I walk into another huge empty field surrounded by cliffs, with literally nothing in it I will become disillusioned with the entire experience.
NeonZ
Member
The map they showed in the gameplay demo seemed to suggest a completely open world, rather than interconnected areas like in previous 3d Zeldas.
The game might still force the player to go through dungeons in order though.
Majukun
Member
didn't they already said that they are trying to make the game about how to get in certain places,with the environment itself that becomes kind of a puzzle?
that sounds to me really different from open world games nowadays where the gameplay is less based on level design,and more around other aspects
basically,it will still be opern world..but you'll be forced to take certain approaches to reach that mountain that you can see on the background
that sounds to me really different from open world games nowadays where the gameplay is less based on level design,and more around other aspects
basically,it will still be opern world..but you'll be forced to take certain approaches to reach that mountain that you can see on the background
I don't consider Xenoblade an open-world game. (Talking about the first one.) It was a linear JRPG with huge maps, that's all. And it was all the better for it.
And secondly, the original Zelda showed how dungeons could get more difficult despite you having access to them early. Don't be scared off by ALLBW's lame rental system. As for the tier system, that would be preferable to a set order.
It did, but it's been a long time since we saw that or anything else, and things may have changed. And yes, I'm still expecting some kind of order on the dungeons.
What I'd accept is the first dungeon to be the first and the last to be the last, but all the ones in between to be findable at your leisure.
Finale Fireworker
Member
A Link Between Worlds was like that and it was the easiest Zelda game. Without actual incrimental difficulty progression, there is no learning curve.
At the very least, it should be tiered. SOME dungeons can be completed in any order, before progressing to the next group.
Majukun
Member
I imagine something like
to reach a dungeon you have to traverse a river,but the current is way too strong..and every time he tries,link gets pushed to the near waterfall end ends up in a place way more far from the dungeon..
so the players checks the banks of the river..and several hundred meters later founds some trees near the river..he brings out his bomb arrows/spinning blade disk/whatever,and cuts the trees that fall on the river and follow the current...getting stuck in the place where the player wanted to traverse on some rocks,making a lucky bridge that makes the traverse of the river possible.
that's the kind of open world gameplay that i think (hope) he intended
to reach a dungeon you have to traverse a river,but the current is way too strong..and every time he tries,link gets pushed to the near waterfall end ends up in a place way more far from the dungeon..
so the players checks the banks of the river..and several hundred meters later founds some trees near the river..he brings out his bomb arrows/spinning blade disk/whatever,and cuts the trees that fall on the river and follow the current...getting stuck in the place where the player wanted to traverse on some rocks,making a lucky bridge that makes the traverse of the river possible.
that's the kind of open world gameplay that i think (hope) he intended
Zelda isn't an RPG where you can just scale the enemy levels and call it a day. In terms of dungeon design and difficulty, you'll need some sort of progression or else you'll limit each dungeon's complexity by a lot (only making use of basic items + dungeon item, designed in a way that it could be played as the first dungeon). So, I don't think it'd be bad at all if Zelda U has some kind of tiered progression system that either doesn't unlock every dungeon from the start or has different "open world hubs" (similar to Witcher 3) to explore.
Anyway, at the end of the day my biggest worry remains whether or not the team will be able to design an overworld that is both big and interesting. There have been so many open world games this year and yet I can't recall a single one where I actually thought the world had interesting stuff to discover.
I think Wind Waker is the perfect template for open world Zelda, just turn water into land land and swap king of red lions with epona. The equivalent of islands would be named areas that you access from the overworld.
Was just about to say this. They scale levels in RPGs because there is no way to roughly predict a player's path. Since Zelda is item based this method doesn't work.
Majukun
Member
so lots of the same thing just more sparse?
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
You can transform into various forms of wildlife to get to areas out of reach.
3 dungeons -> Master Sword -> 5 dungeons -> Ganon/Substitute
I'd be fine with this because honestly, it's a good formula. But maybe the twist is that we'll be constructing all of Hyrule's dungeons. We just don't know.
And for the love of the Goddesses; get Mahito Yokota to compose all the music - people said it when SMG2 came out and it's still true. yes yes yes
Well land is infinitely more interesting than ocean.
I'm personally more concerned with how the gameplay condesed areas/dungeons will be handled than the open world aspect. You can think of these areas as the islands in Wind Waker, this is where you did the typical Zelda gameplay, while the ocean parts were supposed to be where you did your open world exploration.
I mean I don't expect to explore every inch of the vast world to find all heart pieces, that's terrible game design. They're not gonna evenly spread out the gameplay substance across the entire game, I'm convinced there will be a distinction between Skyward Sword esque areas and exploration in the overworld.
Mr.Galahad
Member
What does a japanese developer think is normal open world game?
It is really rare to see a open world game by a japanese developer these days. I do hope that they will make a really good game, but before getting hyped, I will wait to see more of this innovation he is talking about. It is really hard to create somethin new with a flood of indie games coming out recently.
It is really rare to see a open world game by a japanese developer these days. I do hope that they will make a really good game, but before getting hyped, I will wait to see more of this innovation he is talking about. It is really hard to create somethin new with a flood of indie games coming out recently.
GabeTheGrouch76
Member
...then don't put all of the feedback of the fans in? It shouldn't even be about how much feedback they should put into the game; if Aonuma and his team are genuinely serious about implementing fan feedback into the game, they should be more focused on differentiating the quality feedback from the garbage first, and then consider whether they should implement whatever feedback they obtained from that into the new Zelda title.
I'm sure Aonuma and his team will still make a great game regardless, I just don't really like the notion that developers taking input from the fans is (always) a bad idea. Even if that not being outright stated here, I feel that's what being implied.
I would not be surprised if they have somehow implemented a procedural quest or dungeon generator for parts of the overworld or for how items are discovered. This would expand on the philosophy of players sharing different experiences in how they tackled the game, similar to LOZ and ALBW.
Realistically, I still think they will attempt, which has long been my dream, to implement the dungeons in the overworld to be fully seamless. This would mitigate some of the barren overworld concerns by bringing the content that is usually included in separated maps into the overworld. SS partly attempted this by infusing puzzles into the overworld before each dungeon, but dungeons were still separated. I remember how Aonuma has complained about how past Zelda games have not yet achieved fully seamlessness in the E3 2014 Direct. I remember watching the E3 2010 SS demo and thinking that they had achieved this with the forest.
Realistically, I still think they will attempt, which has long been my dream, to implement the dungeons in the overworld to be fully seamless. This would mitigate some of the barren overworld concerns by bringing the content that is usually included in separated maps into the overworld. SS partly attempted this by infusing puzzles into the overworld before each dungeon, but dungeons were still separated. I remember how Aonuma has complained about how past Zelda games have not yet achieved fully seamlessness in the E3 2014 Direct. I remember watching the E3 2010 SS demo and thinking that they had achieved this with the forest.
Twist on open world? Zelda fans love little twists.
I'm in the same boat, this mirrors my feelings pretty well. It has really great parts, but there's just something about it that doesn't feel right. SS rectified a lot of it for me, but everyone wanted a really big open world out of that game or something.
I'm in the same boat, this mirrors my feelings pretty well. It has really great parts, but there's just something about it that doesn't feel right. SS rectified a lot of it for me, but everyone wanted a really big open world out of that game or something.
Sensational.
I'm expecting some kind of online functionality as the "twist", expanding on Wind Waker HD's ideas and fulfilling what he said in 2013 about their vision for the game ("not necessarily play by yourself"). They will do something that makes the world feel more alive with more to do without having to add obscene amounts of content to the open world. That's what I think will be different with this game.
!!
Wind waker may be a rushed game, but it captured that feeling of exploration and discovery wonderfully. If only they had had more time to put content into the game...
thisisvlad
Member
One possibility could be that Link's actions and decisions have a direct effect on the world itself. So you can choose to uncover the hidden temple behind the waterfall, but you have to block the current to open up that passage. If you do this, the nearby town suffers a drought and all of their citizens are forced to leave to other towns. Maybe they need to be protected or else they'll get mobbed by monsters.
In essence, the stuff that you do in the world help to shape it.
This is something I rarely see in modern open world games. Especially games like W3, where your decisions have impact to your quest's storyline, but rarely to the shape of the world itself.
In essence, the stuff that you do in the world help to shape it.
This is something I rarely see in modern open world games. Especially games like W3, where your decisions have impact to your quest's storyline, but rarely to the shape of the world itself.
He says that as if the Zelda fandom almost always unanimously agreed on everything.
Wasn't there a TP mini-game in which you had to guide a ball.
That isn't completely new to the series.
Joke post? I can't really tell...
"Classic Zelda" you say, but in reality only the first Zelda did that, even if it was like that they'd need several modifications for modern times, anybody that goes and plays the first Zelda today will likely find it pretty rough if they aren't used to more classic games.
I still think the twist is related to Ganondorf.
Wasn't there a TP mini-game in which you had to guide a ball.
That isn't completely new to the series.
Joke post? I can't really tell...
"Classic Zelda" you say, but in reality only the first Zelda did that, even if it was like that they'd need several modifications for modern times, anybody that goes and plays the first Zelda today will likely find it pretty rough if they aren't used to more classic games.
It will have the same structure as the last 6 games, but with a larger overworld and perhaps more side stuff to do.
This thread is already full of people saying what the next zelda should be like, thus showing why Aonuma has to say that they don't listen to fans. The reason there's any kind of "zelda cycle" at all is mainly because people just set themselves up for disappointment each time with oddly specific expectations.
I have no idea what it is about Zelda, but the game's nature is so nebulous that literally everyone thinks it should be something it isn't while also stating exactly what they think it is.
I have no idea what it is about Zelda, but the game's nature is so nebulous that literally everyone thinks it should be something it isn't while also stating exactly what they think it is.
I agree. At least nowadays Dark Souls is always a common theme on these conversations.
To me that sounds like nearly every other Zelda...
While it could be different, I would expect something very similar to old zelda games except now instead of having corridors/mountains separating every section, everything's a little more open and visible. That's really all we've heard so far, so it's all we can go on.
But you know, that's why Aonuma has to come out and say "it's not like other open world games", because otherwise, everyone expects Skyrim/Dragon's Dogma/Witcher/You Name it.
CopperPuppy
Member
After ALBW, my hype for this game is strong. The extended wait is excruciating.
What are current estimates on release? Holiday 2016?
What are current estimates on release? Holiday 2016?
NX launch day.
Schnozberry
Member
I hope he means that they plan on filling the world with chance encounters that encourage you to explore and take risks.
The Assassin's Creed method of padding the game world with repetitive busy work in order to make the game world feel like it's brimming with stuff has no real appeal to me. If Aonuma can shake up the formula I welcome his ideas. It would be nice to get the impression the game world is doing things regardless of whether or not the player is there, and have the consequences of not being able to be everywhere at once play out in front of you and affect how NPC's feel about you.
The Assassin's Creed method of padding the game world with repetitive busy work in order to make the game world feel like it's brimming with stuff has no real appeal to me. If Aonuma can shake up the formula I welcome his ideas. It would be nice to get the impression the game world is doing things regardless of whether or not the player is there, and have the consequences of not being able to be everywhere at once play out in front of you and affect how NPC's feel about you.
I feel like the 3d ones have a very linear path that you have to take to get to an objective, with the exception of Wind Waker.
Well, obviously. Fanbases aren't monolithic hive minds. But developers should ideally be smart enough and have enough confidence in their own vision to know what feedback is useful to them and what isn't, as well as what's feasible and not.
I really hope so because I want to see the sales especially if they straight up exclusive it to the NX.
J
Jotamide
Unconfirmed Member
So, Skyward Sword again?Fans: "We want a good game"
Aonuma: "Hmm, what if we make a bad game to surprise everyone?"
I'm only kidding.
Either November 18th or 20th 2016.