Zelda U/NX What do you want to see in Zelda U/NX?

[animeapple]

all i want is a good game that plays like a normal zelda game

i dont care about anything else

[Alex95]

I'm afraid Zelda will never be playable. The title paradox is one of the core pillars of the Zelda franchise. Like a law of the universe, it is unbreakable, and resistance is futile.

...and no, possessed phantoms in Spirit Tracks don't count, especially since you're still half-playing as Link.

Well, Zelda's been stepping into the spotlight quite a lot recently. Who knows? This is Nintendo we're talking about.

[Anacybele]

I didn't know you were Aonuma, Zera. Oh wait, you're not.

Zelda being playable would be fine with me, though I'd be more interested in a brand new female being Link's co-op buddy.

[JasonMendez]

I'd like it to be a lot more challenging than the other 3D Zelda games. A lot of the 3D games are a bit too easy.

They are a bit too easy. Granted ALBW had a reason for it as well as a fun way to do it. Traveling through dungeons in any order you like was fun, but far from difficult. Maybe in the future they can find a balance between what they tried in ALBW.

E3 isn't too far away and the sheikah symbol on nintendo's E3 page makes me think they will play a role in the next game. Of course that may just be my wishful thinking.

[DragonLord]

E3 isn't too far away and the sheikah symbol on nintendo's E3 page makes me think they will play a role in the next game. Of course that may just be my wishful thinking.

It probably isn't just wishful thinking, I mean there's also the stone tablet/book with the sheikah symbol on it, clearly they must play some role. There's quite an emphasis in artwork too.

[Zera]

ALBW had an interesting method of difficulty. Since the dungeons can be done in any order, Nintendo decided to make ALL of them cake to avoid frustrating new players. However, I noticed on a subsequent playthrough that the world is structured so you are almost guaranteed to stumble across Thieves' Hideout and Swamp Palace first, which are the cakiest dungeons. Meanwhile, the dungeons that take the longest to reach - Dark Palace and Ice Ruins - are the least cake. But they're still all cake. Lorule Castle was the only one that felt moderately challenging, and it still separated item usage by room, which is the dumbest thing ever. What ever happened to using items in tandem? That's how good puzzles are made!

Edited June 3, 2016 by Zera

[Alex95]

I just started playing ALBW again, but this time on hero mode (which I've had unlocked for a few years, but never got around to playing it). That'll make the dungeons more difficult, but still simple to navigate. I know this has been suggested earlier, but if Hero Mode does return, it should really be like the original or Master Quest.

Also, dungeons being done in any order isn't exactly new. The original did it, and they said Zelda U will do it as well. But with a game that lets you explore freely, it's difficult to get the difficulty right *experience*.

[Zera]

I think instead of making all the dungeons easy, Nintendo should make all of them hard. That way every dungeon will be challenging and fun.

[Alex95]

See, here's the thing, though. "Easy" and "hard" are subjective. A dungeon can be hard for one person, but incredibly easy for another. For example, OoT's Water Temple is easy for me to do, but most everyone else says it's hard. Like I said, it's difficult to draw the line between the two in a free-roaming game, because players can visit any dungeon at any time.

So, question about this is, does Zelda focus on exploration or story?

[B.Leu]

To me ALTTP, ALBW and MM are the best Zeldas. Minimal story and characters, but just enough to be present, and good if not awesome. You step in the chose of shoes of Link, as in, the link between the game and you, not the destined legendary hero bullcrap of SW, who do awesome adventure stuff five minute after typing your name.

Just putting my opinion here, but it is seriously annoying to wait X hours to tutorial/story just to go to the first cave. In OOT my worst fears are the Water Temple and the prologue. The stuff of nightmare.

In TP's case, I thought the story and characters were just too good to complain about it. Or the linearity of it all. Oh gosh...

Edited June 3, 2016 by B.Leu

[Anacybele]

So, question about this is, does Zelda focus on exploration or story?

Story and dungeons. Sure, Zelda started out with no story, but early on, dungeons were a big part of it. In fact, Zelda was originally being developed as a dungeon CREATOR of sorts, but Miyamoto and company found that they had more fun playing them than actually making them, and thus Zelda was born.

The no story thing was probably because of the technological limitations back then. Since then, great stories like those of TP and SS have come to be, and both have a lot of great dungeons too. There isn't a single dungeon in SS that I don't like, in fact (while in TP, I did hate Snowpeak Ruins and City in the Sky, but that's two out of like nine dungeons total).

Exploration, to me, is just a nice bonus. It also depends on how it's done. I felt it was done poorly in TWW because the massive sea felt empty. Most of the islands were too tiny and didn't have much to find. And let's face it: there's not a lot you can do with just water anyway. I did sorta like collecting all the treasure charts though.

TP, imo, does it better. There's not a whole bunch of empty water, but there are a lot of secret grottos to find, secret little areas in the different parts of Hyrule, a few optional caves to explore, etc.

SS...not much exploration going on here. But I didn't mind it, because I found the story, characters, and dungeons so amazing, and the overworld was beautiful. The linearity and lack of exploration didn't bother me at all. Yet, it could've been better, as there was the sky above to possibly explore, but there wasn't much there. I wish more had been done with it.

[Magical Glace]

I like Zelda largely for the exploration, characters, and side things that can be done, followed by dungeons.

What Zelda's about really depends on who you ask.

[Zera]

Zelda's got it all. Except in recent years nearly all of them have been lacking in challenge. In fact, here's a great video on the subject.

[Anacybele]

I disagree. Yeah, TWW is boringly easy and ALBW and TP aren't that hard either. But SS was pretty challenging, mostly due to the sword gameplay. It took practice to master all the different slices and nearly every enemy had to be hit a certain way to be defeated. This was a reason I enjoyed the game so much, because the motion controls added a new level of challenge and fun.

Ghirahim especially was a pain in the butt to beat the first time around.

Edited June 3, 2016 by Anacybele

[Zera]

If you just slow down and just watch the enemy/boss movements, you'll find that they are VERY slow. If you're not super aggressive, Skyward Sword is pretty easy. Only really challenging part is the Hero Mode Lightning Round, and you can cheese it with three full minutes of invincibility via Guardian Potion+. The other challenging part was the Spirit Realms. They should make a whole game outta that.

[Anacybele]

Only some of them are slow. I find that a good lot of them are rather quick. And the moblins...oh don't get me started on them. They are ANNOYING in this game.

[Loki Laufeyson]

o, question about this is, does Zelda focus on exploration or story?

Exploration. Story is good, but it should not be to the point where it railroads the player. Its also not impossible to have good story with exploration. ALBW has a minimalistic story, but its actually pretty good and intrudes on the player at just the right times. Zelda is not about cutscenes all over the place, and linear dungeon progression (like order of doing them) can feel like railroading. I also dont see the need for sidekicks who wont keep their teeth together. (Fi) I feel like Midna and Tatl were the best because they were story-significant but didnt get so in your face all the time.

Skyward Sword's overworld was offensively tiny and linear. I dont ever wanna see that kind of shit in a Zelda game, ever again. This is one of the reasons the game pissed me off so much. (outside of pointless busywork like Silent Realms and collecting crap like tadstones)

Wind Waker had the right idea with its overworld, but there wasnt enough dungeons in the game itself, which led to a lot of disappointment. (and not being able to explore underwater Hyrule was :( too.)

I play Zelda because i get freedom to explore shit on my own. Whether its overworld, dungeons, and even how i tackle enemies. If i want a linear story heavy game experience, ill play a different genre.

Edited June 3, 2016 by Loki Laufeyson

[Alex95]

Totally agree, Loki. Zelda has always been about the exploration, ever since the start. While it's still a good story for most titles, when it focuses on it too much, players can lose their interest.

[Magical Glace]

Honestly SS's motion controls were my main gripe with the game. If the game is going to be designed to be challenging, let it be the puzzle design. I don't give a shit about combat, really. Including glitchy gimmick controls is just annoying to me.

But again, just me. I don't play Zelda for swordfighting. If I want to play a game for combat, I'm going to play an RPG because turn based best.

Edited June 4, 2016 by Glaceon Mage

[Anacybele]

So basically you people are saying I play Zelda for the wrong reasons since I gave a totally different answer? lol no, not at all. I'm surprised I'm the only one that hasn't said exploration. I've NEVER seen Zelda as being mainly about exploration, even as a kid. Back then I still mostly looked forward to more story and the dungeons. ALttP had little story, sure, but there were enough dungeons to make me love it anyway. I never played the first two Zeldas because I heard they're really hard.

And really, how many exploration heavy Zelda games do we actually have? I can't think of many. ALttP and ALBW and probably the first two Zeldas if we're talking games where you can do dungeons in different orders..

Loki/Florina: lolwut? SS's overworld is ANYTHING but tiny. You have three huge areas to explore below the clouds (Lanayru being very massive in particular), plus the large sky. It felt bigger than TP's world to me. I get the annoyance of Fi being hand-holdy though. I still like her (because I love her design, her voice, and her dancing), but I can understand why others don't. I would still like SOME degree of hinting to what you have to do though, because I hate being thrown into an overworld and told have at it with no clue whatsoever. I feel totally lost and confused this way and forced to consult a guide because I just can't figure out what to do at all.

Edited June 4, 2016 by Anacybele

[Alex95]

No, I don't think we're saying that, Ana. Actually, I think the ideal Zelda game has a good mixture of both exploration and story elements. Players and fans want to know the lore behind Hyrule, but also want to be able to explore it themselves.

And really, how many exploration heavy Zelda games do we actually have? I can't think of many. ALttP and ALBW and probably the first two Zeldas if we're talking games where you can do dungeons in different orders..

The original Zelda lets you explore to your heart's content. The only level you really can't do at first is the last one. Ocarina of Time, too, to an extent. You can go through either the Fire OR Water temples, then the Shadow OR Spirit temples.

I never played the first two Zeldas because I heard they're really hard.

Oh, they are. The second one I think is still held as one of the hardest games ever. Could be wrong, but I've only managed to get through the first dungeon. Heck, took me a while to FIND the first dungeon. But just because they're hard doesn't mean they're not good.

[Anacybele]

Okay, I was hoping you weren't. Glad to get clarification on that. And yeah, but when you're progressing through the game, what levels are you completing? Dungeons! They should be considered at least equally important here. A Zelda without true dungeons would be like a Mario game without mushrooms and Fire Flowers.

And yeah, I'm glad I'll never touch the first two Zeldas. They sound way beyond my level.

[solrocknroll]

Okay, I was hoping you weren't. Glad to get clarification on that. And yeah, but when you're progressing through the game, what levels are you completing? Dungeons! They should be considered at least equally important here. A Zelda without true dungeons would be like a Mario game without mushrooms and Fire Flowers.

And yeah, I'm glad I'll never touch the first two Zeldas. They sound way beyond my level.

I agree, but 64 and Sunshine do say hi.

I typically dislike difficulty so I like easier games. SS wasn't really hard, it just took patience, which I believe I have in spades.

[Alex95]

A Zelda without true dungeons would be like a Mario game without mushrooms and Fire Flowers.

I agree, but 64 and Sunshine do say hi.

[Anacybele]

Well, I didn't play much of either of those two games, SORRY. I didn't enjoy them much either.