Legend of Zelda Wii U Gameplay Demo

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'd like to start an open game like this with the bow, a weak sword, and maybe one other item; something simple like bombs. It gives you flexibility and options in how you start exploring, but leaves your options few enough that you'll want to find more. Metroid Prime 3, for example, is a game that greatly benefited from this approach.
 
Excuse me? Try playing Level 6 first in the original game, then we can talk about whether non-linearity means anything. Just because they completely missed the opportunity to get it right with ALBW doesn't make it a bad idea.

Zelda 1 doesn't have complex item puzzles, so the entire game is worse than ALBW in that respect.
 
I feel like every single Zelda overworld since the beginning has had enemies and secrets sprinkled all over. What more do people want?

I do not want a Skyrim or Dragon Age level of boring, forgettable "events" sprinkled every 5 feet. Keep it Zelda.... keep it interesting. ;-)
 
Do you think Koji Kondo will compose again for this Zelda game, or will it be done by the Mario Galaxy composer? I think that music is very important to this franchise and hope they will create memorable music (offcourse its difficult these days, but I hope they will do the series justice in music).

I see no reason to believe it won't be Yokota & Wakai (Skyward team) again. Koji Kondo has only really been a supervisor for a long time. If it's like Skyward Sword, he'll contribute a few tracks.

Given that Nintendo has only increased the quality of their soundtracks over these past few years, I think we're in safe hands here.
 
Count me in as one that isn't crazy about the dungeons in any order. If that is going to be done then there needs to be a compromise. Tier the dungeons. Have it so the dungeons of a certain tier can be done in any order but you need certain items and story progression to unlock the next level of dungeons which will be harder and require more items to be used. As much as I enjoyed A Link Between Worlds being able to tackle the dungeons in any order did make them seem not as complicated and as challenging as they could have been. It's part of why the challenge caves were included I felt because the developers knew the dungeons were easier on the whole as a result and they needed something more.

I want the dungeons to be as involved as the ones in past console games and even hand held games. That's FAR more important then being able to do things out of order or being able to buy every weapon right away. I don't actually like that. Between Skyward Sword and A Link Between Worlds I like what was done in Skyward Sword a LOT more as far as how equipment was handled. If you have the rental and buying system from ALBW then up the difficulty from the very start and require several items to be used, not just one.
 
You can make an item required to enter a dungeon without saying directly to the player.

Like in OoT, you need the hookshot to enter in the Forest Temple, and need the goron tunic to reach the Fire Temple. You need the Iron Boots to enter the Water Temple, and the Longshoot and the Lens of Truth to reach the Spirit Temple.

Those items are required to beat the dungeon, so they came up with a way to make it inacessible without them.

The same can be done here, while avoiding the blocks with the item icon in the entrance of each dungeon, like in ALBW
 
I think the dungeons need some sort of order. Either that or just make some difficult and say, "yeah you can do dungeons in any order, but if you haven't found the item somewhere else, or if you don't have many hearts, some are gonna be too hard/impossible to complete."

But we definitely need some of the more basic items in our inventory from the start. Sword, shield, bow, and bombs at least. It's not fun to find these in dungeons anymore since they're in every game. And get rid of the slingshot. It's redundant.

What they've shown suggests to me that All of the above minus bombs might be part of the starter package this time. In TP bombs weren't found in a dungeon either. You just bought them from the shop after the Goron Mines were saved.
 
I don't really care how they plan to execute this, but i don't want that ridiculous open-world bloat of useless shit rippled across many square miles. Leave the MMO quest design to MMOs.(Even though that has been a complaint about that genre since they first appeared)
 
You can make an item required to enter a dungeon without saying directly to the player.

Like in OoT, you need the hookshot to enter in the Forest Temple, and need the goron tunic to reach the Fire Temple. You need the Iron Boots to enter the Water Temple, and the Longshoot and the Lens of Truth to reach the Spirit Temple.

Those items are required to beat the dungeon, so they came up with a way to make it inacessible without them.

The same can be done here, while avoiding the blocks with the item icon in the entrance of each dungeon, like in ALBW

Only issue is the sheer scale of the world. They have to be careful not to make it so natural that you're stuck for hours trying to figure out how to get into almost every dungeon. Like a pair of Iron Boots being in a random woods area in an area of an area somewhere near what looks like a Water Temple. You could be scouring for quite a while looking for things. There has to be some order or hint dropping
 
Zelda 1 doesn't have complex item puzzles, so the entire game is worse than ALBW in that respect.

I don't think the presence or absence of complex item puzzles makes a game better or worse. The better question would be "do the dungeons offer an appropriate level of challenge?" And I'd say without hesitation that the dungeons in Zelda 1 offer a much more appropriate level of challenge than the dungeons in most other Zelda games (bar Zelda II, LttP, and possibly MM).

In Zelda 1, they achieve this through a combination of map complexity and the much more frantic combat (much easier to get hit = get hit more = die through sheer attrition if you haven't polished your skills or your familiarity with the dungeon layout).

Zelda II still has a good amount of map complexity, and obviously amps up each enemy encounter considerably since the side-scrolling perspective demands fewer enemies on-screen at any one time.

LttP is far easier than either Zelda I or Zelda II in both dungeon complexity and enemy difficulty, but I think was still in a very comfortable range for most players.

MM doesn't win a lot of points for combat difficulty, but I'll be damned if those dungeons still don't confuse me if I haven't replayed it in awhile.

The problem with "puzzles" is that it's usually trivial to replay a dungeon if you already know the puzzle solutions - especially since the map complexity and enemy challenge is so watered down at this point. They'd get a lot more mileage by focusing on more complex dungeon layouts and more difficult enemy encounters than by trying to make the "puzzle solutions" harder to read.

That's not to say that "puzzles" should be stripped away or shouldn't exist. I just think that they've been a poor leg for dungeons to stand on without appropriate challenge from the map itself and the enemy encounters. You might get "stuck" one or two times, but then you find the solution and the dungeon's fairly easy to run through on subsequent plays. Much harder to remember every twist and turn of a maze-like level or flawlessly execute combat challenges.

You can make an item required to enter a dungeon without saying directly to the player.

Like in OoT, you need the hookshot to enter in the Forest Temple, and need the goron tunic to reach the Fire Temple. You need the Iron Boots to enter the Water Temple, and the Longshoot and the Lens of Truth to reach the Spirit Temple.

Those items are required to beat the dungeon, so they came up with a way to make it inacessible without them.

The same can be done here, while avoiding the blocks with the item icon in the entrance of each dungeon, like in ALBW

The depressing thing about ALBW was that even though you could get the items in any order, you still pretty much just used them in the one dungeon anyway. So they might as well have just been in those dungeons, instead of used to enter the dungeons in the first place (with signposted obstacles blocking the entrance).
 
Miyamoto uses superior fingernail approach to the WiiU gamepad confirmed

Don't hurt me, but the part where Link vaults off of the horse and enters bullet time while aiming made me think of Vanquish

Oh, nm, it's been mentioned like 200 times

Maybe because I'm a 100% Zelda casual, I thought ALBW's approach was quite superior in nearly all respects to ALTTP. Before playing it, I was really concerned it would make the game not feel like a Zelda game and would totally ruin the pacing and structure, but instead I felt like it improved the pacing significantly, made the game feel much more open, and it didn't really affect the where and how or quality of the puzzles, just the when.
 
Zelda 1 doesn't have complex item puzzles, so the entire game is worse than ALBW in that respect.

Yeah, Zelda 1 is a completely different beast from post-ATTP Zelda games. The elements that "worked" in that relatively simple and archaic game don't really mesh with modern LoZ's design principles; it's as simple as that. Dungeon complexity is obviously hindered by an open level structure, and the existence of Ravio's dumb shop and ALBW's simple 1 item dungeon design is proof of this. It's incredibly transparent.

If EAD3 wants to give us a big open pretty scenery porn overworld with complex SS/TP-caliber level/dungeon design they're gonna have to either give the player a few starter items (The slingshot/bow, whip, and bombs are probably the best suggestions so far) from the beginning or tightly structure it for the first few dungeons.
I'm cool with either of those options as long as I know that the dungeons aren't gonna be brain-dead WW/ALBW/pre-OoT caliber stuff.
 
Miyamoto uses superior fingernail approach to the WiiU gamepad confirmed

Don't hurt me, but the part where Link vaults off of the horse and enters bullet time while aiming made me think of Vanquish

Oh, nm, it's been mentioned like 200 times

That's no opinion worthing hurting for.

THIS IS: the way he jumps off the horse seemed very rough animation wise, I hope they fix that.

Come at me.
 
I do not want a Skyrim or Dragon Age level of boring, forgettable "events" sprinkled every 5 feet. Keep it Zelda.... keep it interesting. ;-)

Agree. Don't want another checklist. I want an adventure. give me that wind waker feeling. Discoevering new places and treasure was more rewarding than completing 50 same old ubi-quests
 
reposting updated post:

Do you think Koji Kondo will compose again for this Zelda game, or will it be done by the Mario Galaxy composer? I think that music is very important to this franchise and hope they will create memorable music (offcourse its difficult these days, but I hope they will do the series justice in music).

What do you think? ;) -->>>

List of composers for recent Zelda and Mario games:

The Wind Waker
  • Kenta Nagata ------------- also on Zelda: PH
  • Hajime Wakai
  • Toru Minegishi ------------- also on Zelda: TP, PH, ST // Mario: SM3DW
  • Koji Kondo

Twilight Princess
  • Toru Minegishi ------------- also on Zelda: TWW, PH, ST // Mario: SM3DW
  • Asuka Ohta ------------- also on Zelda: ST
  • Koji Kondo

Phantom Hourglass
  • Kenta Nagata ------------- also on Zelda: TWW
  • Toru Minegishi ------------- also on TWW, TP, ST // Mario: SM3DW

Spirit Tracks
  • Toru Minegishi ------------- also on Zelda: TWW, TP, PH // Mario: SM3DW
  • Manaka Tominaga
  • Asuka Ohta ------------- also on Zelda: TP
  • Koji Kondo

Skyward Sword:
  1. Hajime Wakai ------------- also on Zelda: TWW, TP
  2. Shiho Fujii
  3. Mahito Yokota ------------- also on Mario: SMG, SMG2, SM3DL, SM3DW
  4. Takeshi Hama ------------- also on Mario: SM3DL
  5. Koji Kondo

A Link Between Worlds
  • Ryo Nagamatsu ------------- also on Mario: SMG2

---------------------/////////////////////////////////////////////////-------------------------------

Super Mario Galaxy
  • Mahito Yokota ------------- also on Zelda: SS // Mario: SMG2
  • Koji Kondo

Super Mario Galaxy 2
  • Mahito Yokota ------------- also on Zelda: SS // Mario: SMG, SM3DL, SM3DW
  • Ryo Nagamatsu ------------- also on Zelda: ALBW
  • Koji Kondo

Super Mario 3D Land
  • Takeshi Hama ------------- also on Zelda: SS
  • Mahito Yokota ------------- also on Zelda: SS // Mario: SMG, SMG2, SM3DW
  • Asuka Hayazaki

Super Mario 3D World
  • Mahito Yokota ------------- also on Zelda: SS // Mario: SMG, SMG2, SM3DL
  • Toru Minegishi ------------- also on Zelda: TP, TWW, PH, ST
  • Yasuaki Iwata
  • Koji Kondo
 
That's not to say that "puzzles" should be stripped away or shouldn't exist. I just think that they've been a poor leg for dungeons to stand on without appropriate challenge from the map itself and the enemy encounters. You might get "stuck" one or two times, but then you find the solution and the dungeon's fairly easy to run through on subsequent plays. Much harder to remember every twist and turn of a maze-like level or flawlessly execute combat challenges.

No one really likes that maze bs though,it's one of the reasons why most people groan when they get to the water temple in OoT and the Great Bay Temple in MM; there is a reason why EAD3 has abandoned that kind of level design in favor of more action-based puzzle-filled dungeons. It's a complete and utter tedious hassle to play through/navigate a 3D maze for the first time you encounter it.

Also I think you're overestimating the longevity of enemy encounters and maze-like level design; most human beings can easily memorize the correct path in a maze on their second run through, and video game enemies generally have repeatable patterns that are easy to understand and often exploited.
 
That's no opinion worthing hurting for.

THIS IS: the way he jumps off the horse seemed very rough animation wise, I hope they fix that.

Come at me.

No, I agree with this. It's not quite smooth.

In fact, I don't think he should be doing that flip at all. The simpler jump in the reveal trailer is smoother and makes more sense; if anything, flipping off the horse like that is a bizarre place to insert a flip and a roll should instead be happening on the ground when he lands to dissipate/redirect his momentum. If you could roll forward into a ground attack after leaping from Epona, it would preserve the initial advantage you had and make the whole thing flow better. I think Twilight Princess let you attack out of a roll like this? One of the games does. I think it would make the entire action feel "smoother" and like Link was more experienced, though it's still a minor issue.
 
To the people thinking about co-op: If you think about it for a second, it's pretty clearly not happening and we already know why. The slow-mo jump. You can't do co-op when one player can slow down time during combat. Max Payne 3 barely made it work in a competitive multiplayer setting. Let this one go, we can scratch that off the list with 100% certainty.

Yea, good call. There is a bit of wiggle room where they can work it out multiplayer, like if the slowdown is possible off the horse as well and wears down your magic meter or whatnot. I wouldn't count on it, though.
 
Oh hey, cool Ragnarok, your work is on Kotaku :p

http://kotaku.com/everyones-trying-to-figure-out-the-new-zeldas-map-1668306739

ndhyb9je4flappr0fsgv.jpg
cozwwfohsq7jvmyhnhcv.jpg
t7knvuqs2v93ss6mc7af.jpg
te6hz2a32xryt9ljb06w.jpg
 
No one really likes that maze bs though,it's one of the reasons why most people groan when they get to the water temple in OoT and the Great Bay Temple in MM; there is a reason why EAD3 has abandoned that kind of level design in favor of more action-based puzzle-filled dungeons. It's a complete and utter tedious hassle to play through/navigate a 3D maze for the first time you encounter it.

Also I think you're overestimating the longevity of enemy encounters and maze-like level design; most human beings can easily memorize the correct path in a maze on their second run through, and video game enemies generally have repeatable patterns that are easy to understand and often exploited.

But both of these flaws can be overcome through non-linearity (using throwaway examples instead of real ones to illustrate the point)-

- While you might be able to remember the way you took through the maze last time, if you accidentally stumbled on Level 4 first you might not have realized that there are tons of shortcuts (and secrets!) that you can access with bombs. The point, of course, being that the "maze" can have multiple solutions and it can be fun to discover these alternative solutions based on your equipment for different playthroughs.

- Same goes for enemy encounters. Level 4 might have been cake if you did Levels 1-3 first; not so much if you do it first and don't have the better sword/shield/armor this time.

With puzzles, so much rests on "finding the solution" that non-linearity doesn't really add much of a benefit (unless every puzzle has workarounds, which then makes them trivial).

But with combat difficulty and map complexity, there's almost always a way you can approach the game to make enemies easier (or harder!) and there are more ways you can "break" the level design (puzzle-driven dungeons demand that you finish the puzzles to extract value out of the content; with maze-likes, the satisfaction really is about "getting to the end").

I also don't see how you can crave more complex/difficult to figure out puzzles, while at the same time declaring that complex/difficult to figure out mazes are too tedious. You can't have it both ways - complexity and difficulty by necessity are a tedious hassle (since they slow down your progress!), whereas if you want non-tedium non-hassle dungeons, you got them in ALBW.
 
Yea, good call. There is a bit of wiggle room where they can work it out multiplayer, like if the slowdown is possible off the horse as well and wears down your magic meter or whatnot. I wouldn't count on it, though.

As RagnarokX already discovered, it does drain the meter. It just doesn't work with co-op. There is no wiggle room here. Not for this type of game.
 
As RagnarokX already discovered, it does drain the meter. It just doesn't work with co-op. There is no wiggle room here. Not for this type of game.

This game just doesn't feel like a co op game, period. Definitely not local, that's for sure. If anything, it'll have miiverse-type multiplayer or mario galaxy-type helper functionality.
 
No, I agree with this. It's not quite smooth.

In fact, I don't think he should be doing that flip at all. The simpler jump in the reveal trailer is smoother and makes more sense; if anything, flipping off the horse like that is a bizarre place to insert a flip and a roll should instead be happening on the ground when he lands to dissipate/redirect his momentum. If you could roll forward into a ground attack after leaping from Epona, it would preserve the initial advantage you had and make the whole thing flow better. I think Twilight Princess let you attack out of a roll like this? One of the games does. I think it would make the entire action feel "smoother" and like Link was more experienced, though it's still a minor issue.

Ooh, yeah I agree with you guys. I hope that is changed. Especially if it's going to be used often.
 
No one really likes that maze bs though,it's one of the reasons why most people groan when they get to the water temple in OoT and the Great Bay Temple in MM; there is a reason why EAD3 has abandoned that kind of level design in favor of more action-based puzzle-filled dungeons. It's a complete and utter tedious hassle to play through/navigate a 3D maze for the first time you encounter it.

Also I think you're overestimating the longevity of enemy encounters and maze-like level design; most human beings can easily memorize the correct path in a maze on their second run through, and video game enemies generally have repeatable patterns that are easy to understand and often exploited.

shit, the OoT water temple was awesome! but im probably in the minority lol
 
I think you'll be hunting large creatures in this game, like that octopus monster. All they have to do is create a co-op mode where 4 people team up to track down these monsters. It'd be monster-hunter lite, really.
 
I don't mind dungeons which can be done in arbitrary order but I agree there needs to be tiers. ALBW basically had two tiers; I think adding another tier, and increasing the complexity of the dungeons with each tier would help a lot.

I would be interested if there was also one huge dungeon which you can complete a step at a time as you acquire items, as long as it doesn't suck like the Temple of the Ocean King.
 
This game just doesn't feel like a co op game, period. Definitely not local, that's for sure. If anything, it'll have miiverse-type multiplayer or mario galaxy-type helper functionality.

Yea some local asymmetric stuff and asynchronous stuff (like Demon's Souls and TWWHD) might be possible but definitely no multiple characters running around together.

I think you'll be hunting large creatures in this game, like that octopus monster. All they have to do is create a co-op mode where 4 people team up to track down these monsters. It'd be monster-hunter lite, really.

There will be no co-op.
 
I think you'll be hunting large creatures in this game, like that octopus monster. All they have to do is create a co-op mode where 4 people team up to track down these monsters. It'd be monster-hunter lite, really.

"All they have to do"
 
I don't think the dungeons should be "tiered" at all, actually, but I do think they should be restricted based on items you have. There just needs to be multiple levels to it. If you can't enter a dungeon without item A, why not require item B or C to obtain item A? Why not make B come from a dungeon and C from a sidequest? You can still build a dungeon around multiple items while preserving the freedom to tackle them in varying orders, especially if you pair it with two or three "starter" items. It seems like often when this argument comes up that people assume nonlinearity means you can only build a dungeon on one or two items, but there's another option: you tier the items instead of the dungeons, and have a few puzzles with more than one solution.
 
I don't think the dungeons should be "tiered" at all, actually, but I do think they should be restricted based on items you have. There just needs to be multiple levels to it. If you can't enter a dungeon without item A, why not require item B or C to obtain item A? Why not make B come from a dungeon and C from a sidequest? You can still build a dungeon around multiple items while preserving the freedom to tackle them in varying orders, especially if you pair it with two or three "starter" items. It seems like often when this argument comes up that people assume nonlinearity means you can only build a dungeon on one or two items, but there's another option: you tier the items instead of the dungeons.

Beautifully put. I'd love this.
 
How do you think miiverse will work.

In TWW you had Tingle bottles. In ALBW you had Dark Links.

I bet this time other players will leave their mark as animals. C:
 
How do you think miiverse will work.

In TWW you had Tingle bottles. In ALBW you had Dark Links.

I bet this time other players will leave their mark as animals. C:

The hero's spirit of someone who dies in a battle appears in your game as an enemy in the location they died because the dark forces corrupted his spirit upon defeat in another dimension/reality. Basically a mix of StreetPass in ALBW and the bottles from TWWHD and ZombiU. ;D
 
The hero's spirit of someone who dies in a battle appears in your game as an enemy in the location they died because the dark forces corrupted his spirit upon defeat in another dimension/reality. Basically a mix of StreetPass in ALBW and the bottles from TWWHD and ZombiU. ;D

Would be cool to have, reminds me of Vagrants. Though I guess they wouldn't be anonymous if it's from the Miiverse.
 
JDrjjWI.png


Oh wow. Haha.

OMG!!!!
Ok this game is jumping on my radar at the 3rd position for incoming games (after xeno and splatoon)

Yep, the "choose the order of the dungeons" is kind of a dumb thing people got behind IMO. It only really matters to mix up replays, but if all the dungeons are available at the start then the dungeons can't be too hard and the dungeons can't use more items for their puzzles which limits what they can do.
There could be a way to fix it like Ravio's shop, but with how big the world is, going from where you need an item to the shop would be kind of annoying unless they give you all the items at the start which would be admittedly cool (but that's another problem by itself).
And people chanting for a big non linear world are likely now complaining that there wasn't something big happening in ever second of that Zelda U footage

I think they can give him a voice too. Their work around in Hyrule Warriors was just silly.

Excuse me? Try playing Level 6 first in the original game, then we can talk about whether non-linearity means anything. Just because they completely missed the opportunity to get it right with ALBW doesn't make it a bad idea.



I don't think the presence or absence of complex item puzzles makes a game better or worse. The better question would be "do the dungeons offer an appropriate level of challenge?" And I'd say without hesitation that the dungeons in Zelda 1 offer a much more appropriate level of challenge than the dungeons in most other Zelda games (bar Zelda II, LttP, and possibly MM).

In Zelda 1, they achieve this through a combination of map complexity and the much more frantic combat (much easier to get hit = get hit more = die through sheer attrition if you haven't polished your skills or your familiarity with the dungeon layout).

Zelda II still has a good amount of map complexity, and obviously amps up each enemy encounter considerably since the side-scrolling perspective demands fewer enemies on-screen at any one time.

LttP is far easier than either Zelda I or Zelda II in both dungeon complexity and enemy difficulty, but I think was still in a very comfortable range for most players.

MM doesn't win a lot of points for combat difficulty, but I'll be damned if those dungeons still don't confuse me if I haven't replayed it in awhile.

The problem with "puzzles" is that it's usually trivial to replay a dungeon if you already know the puzzle solutions - especially since the map complexity and enemy challenge is so watered down at this point. They'd get a lot more mileage by focusing on more complex dungeon layouts and more difficult enemy encounters than by trying to make the "puzzle solutions" harder to read.

That's not to say that "puzzles" should be stripped away or shouldn't exist. I just think that they've been a poor leg for dungeons to stand on without appropriate challenge from the map itself and the enemy encounters. You might get "stuck" one or two times, but then you find the solution and the dungeon's fairly easy to run through on subsequent plays. Much harder to remember every twist and turn of a maze-like level or flawlessly execute combat challenges.



The depressing thing about ALBW was that even though you could get the items in any order, you still pretty much just used them in the one dungeon anyway. So they might as well have just been in those dungeons, instead of used to enter the dungeons in the first place (with signposted obstacles blocking the entrance).

I agree with LegendofLex here, the fact that you need items or not isn't that important.
What's important is that the challenge is there.
That's why WW is the most boring for me and SS and TP are way above.
Seriously TP in a 3hearts run is a beauty that makes the game shine.

SS is way harder and it ampered by way too much BS to be remotely fun in future playthrough.
What they need for Zelda is not necessarily out of order dungeons but dungeon designs that is challenging and that can't be done if the battle system is shit/boring.
SS was nearly there with the controls but, again, puzzles everywhere meant that something like swordfighting with another swordfighter wasn't that fun.
TP did it absolutely right with the hidden moves and everything, it's a little easy but it's satisfying and build on the foundation that WW squandered.

And OMG it's starting to look good, but I'm wondering how/if they'll screw it up again like the flying of SS or the sailing of WW....
Then again since I've never had a horse ridding Zelda game disappoint before, looking awesome.

The hero's spirit of someone who dies in a battle appears in your game as an enemy in the location they died because the dark forces corrupted his spirit upon defeat in another dimension/reality. Basically a mix of StreetPass in ALBW and the bottles from TWWHD and ZombiU. ;D

I should leave this thread before it jumps at position -1....
OMG imagine a system like ZombiU with the game being hard enough to warrant this!
If the boss of dungeon X is extra hard, you're looking at a miniboss fight before entering the boss room!
It can even be dark link with a fight as good as ever (basically the game remember how you play and make each darklink adopt the playstyle of the fallen player)
 
What they've shown suggests to me that All of the above minus bombs might be part of the starter package this time. In TP bombs weren't found in a dungeon either. You just bought them from the shop after the Goron Mines were saved.

You got them from Niko on the Pirate ship in Wind Waker, and purchase the Bomb Bag in Skyward Sword as well.
 
This game just doesn't feel like a co op game, period. Definitely not local, that's for sure. If anything, it'll have miiverse-type multiplayer or mario galaxy-type helper functionality.

I think it will have a dark souls - esque multiplayer. Not the invasion, but everything else.

EDIT: Also, I would like to know your opinions on the two following systems:

1) The rental system in ALBW: This opens up all the the world at once, but are hidden behind a paywall. Naturally, then, the more expensive it is, the harder the dungeon will be (at least that was the theory of it). Although I am personally not a fan of it, it does open up the world instantly.

2) The upgrade system of SS: It was frankly useless in SS but it was very fun as well. Combine items with rupees to make your items stronger. It was great! I don't know how I'd feel if it served a greater purpose though. Even if this stuff is optional, I'd hate to miss out on a piece of heart just because my item isn't strong enough just yet. I also wouldn't care for a more complex system though I think people will dig that.
 
I think it will have a dark souls - esque multiplayer. Not the invasion, but everything else.
Sooo...

Seeing where people died? The game would have to actually be challenging for that to happen.

If they take ALBW's idea and mix it with the Zelda minigame in Nintendoland...you basically have Dark Souls/ZombieU. If you die...all of your weapons and loot leave you right there. And you have to get it back or watch as another player totally takes your s***.

But...that relies on whether this game will be hard or not. And Zelda is notoriously easy.
 
Sooo...

Seeing where people died? The game would have to actually be challenging for that to happen.

If they take ALBW's idea and mix it with the Zelda minigame in Nintendoland...you basically have Dark Souls/ZombieU. If you die...all of your weapons and loot leave you right there. And you have to get it back or watch as another player totally takes your s***.

But...that relies on whether this game will be hard or not. And Zelda is notoriously easy.

Pfft, w'ell be lucky if it's anything more than windwaker bottles.
 
Sooo...

Seeing where people died? The game would have to actually be challenging for that to happen.

If they take ALBW's idea and mix it with the Zelda minigame in Nintendoland...you basically have Dark Souls/ZombieU. If you die...all of your weapons and loot leave you right there. And you have to get it back or watch as another player totally takes your s***.

But...that relies on whether this game will be hard or not. And Zelda is notoriously easy.
Souls-style messages would make a ton of sense. It's basically an in-game Miiverse integration. It would solve a development issue on puzzle difficulty, which is something Aonuma had mentioned struggling with in the past.

Edit: I haven't played the Wind Waker WiiU version yet, but yes, as far as I'm aware something like those bottles but more in-depth and tied into the story.

For example, how about a Mask of Truth-style visor (by holding up the Gamepad) that shows ghosts of other players and their messages/hints on how to get through difficult parts of the game?
 
Sooo...

Seeing where people died? The game would have to actually be challenging for that to happen.

If they take ALBW's idea and mix it with the Zelda minigame in Nintendoland...you basically have Dark Souls/ZombieU. If you die...all of your weapons and loot leave you right there. And you have to get it back or watch as another player totally takes your s***.

But...that relies on whether this game will be hard or not. And Zelda is notoriously easy.

Not necessarily die, but leaving your spirit whenever you like, the messaging system should be similar too, but closer to NSMBU in that regard.

I'm going way too deep into this.

Will people stop demanding everything be Dark bloody Souls already?
we are not demanding, we are speculating, and multiplayer is not a wild speculation since it WAS hinted at by the developers.
 
Pfft, w'ell be lucky if it's anything more than windwaker bottles.

Hahaha...I know. But they've probably been thinking about miiverse integration since the initial brainstorming. So we don't reaaally know. They might've come up with something crazy.

Not necessarily die, but leaving your spirit whenever you like, the messaging system should be similar too, but closer to NSMBU in that regard.

I'm going way too deep into this.


we are not demanding, we are speculating, and multiplayer is not a wild speculation since it WAS hinted at by the developers.

Oh. That makes a lot more sense and I like it.

But I want my message to be left on a bunny instead. Maybe a spirit bunny.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom