"it's not that good" Eiji Aonuma on OoT

[QUOTE="GAMESHARQ"]OoT was epic for it's time. Anyone who played it when it first debuted knows that. Obviously today's generation of gamers won't feel the same way, but you could say the same about all old platform games.Scythes777

[QUOTE="GamerForca"]Well, I guess he's right sincee people that play it now or did just recently won't think it's that great. But for its time, it was pretty much flawless.Arc2012

I disagree with his views about Oot but I do believe the Zelda needs a new direction. Zelda need to go back to it's roots with little narrative and open ended gameplay. TP was too linear due to how force fed the plot was. That's why many people here desire a game like 3D dot game Heroes because it reminds them of a time when gameplay took priority over cinematics and the "artistic" approach to gaming. I just want to pick up a sword and go whereever I want with as little BS as possible.

Well, I guess he's right sincee people that play it now or did just recently won't think it's that great. But for its time, it was pretty much flawless.GamerForca

I think I heard a while back he won't quit until he tops Ocarina Of Time so how can he say this and then change his mind.

I think I heard a while back he won't quit until he tops Ocarina Of Time so how can he say this and then change his mind.

chocolate1325

[QUOTE="chocolate1325"]

I think I heard a while back he won't quit until he tops Ocarina Of Time so how can he say this and then change his mind.

BrunoBRS

I agree, but I think the reason it sticks out to other people is that it brought so many things that are now used in Zelda games and others as well...

Im gonna go ahead and say it, the best Zelda games where the ones Miyamoto conceaved and developed himself. Zelda, Zelda2, Link to the past and to a lesser extent OoT, the best of those being Link to the Past in my opinion. Cant tell ya how many times Ive played through that one.

[QUOTE="BrunoBRS"][QUOTE="chocolate1325"]

I think I heard a while back he won't quit until he tops Ocarina Of Time so how can he say this and then change his mind.

Nintendo_Ownes7

I disagree with his views about Oot but I do believe the Zelda needs a new direction. Zelda need to go back to it's roots with little narrative and open ended gameplay. TP was too linear due to how force fed the plot was. That's why many people here desire a game like 3D dot game Heroes because it reminds them of a time when gameplay took priority over cinematics and the "artistic" approach to gaming. I just want to pick up a sword and go whereever I want with as little BS as possible.

InfinityMugen

I agree. I wish they would do a sort of 3D remake of the original. Notice I said remake and not reimagining. I think the formula was spot on, I just want more dungeons, items, monstersand a bigger more detailed Hyrule.

I've always thought of Oracle of Seasons to be a Remake of the First Game, since the bosses look similar and the map layout is also similar (but not by much).

It would be interesting if they were to remake the first Zelda with Twilight Princess graphics.

[QUOTE="InfinityMugen"]

I disagree with his views about Oot but I do believe the Zelda needs a new direction. Zelda need to go back to it's roots with little narrative and open ended gameplay. TP was too linear due to how force fed the plot was. That's why many people here desire a game like 3D dot game Heroes because it reminds them of a time when gameplay took priority over cinematics and the "artistic" approach to gaming. I just want to pick up a sword and go whereever I want with as little BS as possible.

blueydwlf

I agree. I wish they would do a sort of 3D remake of the original. Notice I said remake and not reimagining. I think the formula was spot on, I just want more dungeons, items, monstersand a bigger more detailed Hyrule.

[QUOTE="InfinityMugen"]

I disagree with his views about Oot but I do believe the Zelda needs a new direction. Zelda need to go back to it's roots with little narrative and open ended gameplay. TP was too linear due to how force fed the plot was. That's why many people here desire a game like 3D dot game Heroes because it reminds them of a time when gameplay took priority over cinematics and the "artistic" approach to gaming. I just want to pick up a sword and go whereever I want with as little BS as possible.

I agree. I wish they would do a sort of 3D remake of the original. Notice I said remake and not reimagining. I think the formula was spot on, I just want more dungeons, items, monstersand a bigger more detailed Hyrule.

[QUOTE="InfinityMugen"]

I disagree with his views about Oot but I do believe the Zelda needs a new direction. Zelda need to go back to it's roots with little narrative and open ended gameplay. TP was too linear due to how force fed the plot was. That's why many people here desire a game like 3D dot game Heroes because it reminds them of a time when gameplay took priority over cinematics and the "artistic" approach to gaming. I just want to pick up a sword and go whereever I want with as little BS as possible.

I agree. I wish they would do a sort of 3D remake of the original. Notice I said remake and not reimagining. I think the formula was spot on, I just want more dungeons, items, monstersand a bigger more detailed Hyrule.

Considering Eiji Anouma didn't helm the Zelda series until Majora's Mask, as well as that fact MM, WW and TP borrow heavily from OOT, I'd say he's a little biased here.

[QUOTE="blueydwlf"]

[QUOTE="InfinityMugen"]

I disagree with his views about Oot but I do believe the Zelda needs a new direction. Zelda need to go back to it's roots with little narrative and open ended gameplay. TP was too linear due to how force fed the plot was. That's why many people here desire a game like 3D dot game Heroes because it reminds them of a time when gameplay took priority over cinematics and the "artistic" approach to gaming. I just want to pick up a sword and go whereever I want with as little BS as possible.

Sepewrath

I agree. I wish they would do a sort of 3D remake of the original. Notice I said remake and not reimagining. I think the formula was spot on, I just want more dungeons, items, monstersand a bigger more detailed Hyrule.

I don't think that's what anyone is suggesting. In Oot, MM, WW, and TP link has to collect 4-6 'things' by defeating a boss in a dungeon be it oracles, shadows, spirits, triforce shards...whatever. Now, instead of forcing player to do the dungeons in order, let the players explore for the dungeons and tackle them in any order they want. Bam, less linear and still has story.

That's just one example of how the zedla formula needs changing.

This just means that he's motivated to make the next Zelda even better. This is a good thing.

Wow, I left this thread over 24 hours ago thinking it was gonna die overnight but now I see 50 new posts?!?

Could this be a result of OoT's power still?

I can't really read all the posts now but I see some good conversations and comments.

Like I said before, OoT is my all time favorite Zelda game and video game of all time, period, MM is secong also in both categories. That being said, the N64 was my 1st gaming console and OoT was like my 6 or 7 video game EVER and by default my first Zelda game. I'm not gonna pretend like those factors are not playing a role in me ranking it so high and I see many agree on that front.

As for Zelda Wii, I'll welcome some key gameplay changes but I just don't think they can be as big as OoT was no matter how hard they try right now. I just don't see motion controls as a big enough change. The next time I see a Zelda game making OoT level changes well be when Zelda goes VR and I believe that can easily top OoT and be the greatest game ever!

Ya I get what you mean by nostalgia playing into it. I maaay only be replaying OoT because of that :P but I still think it's a great game, nonetheless.

And if he can really pull off another gaming revolution like OoT than I'm way excited to see just what he's planning. =D

Considering Eiji Anouma didn't helm the Zelda series until Majora's Mask, as well as that fact MM, WW and TP borrow heavily from OOT, I'd say he's a little biased here.

FFCYAN

[QUOTE="blueydwlf"]

[QUOTE="InfinityMugen"]

I disagree with his views about Oot but I do believe the Zelda needs a new direction. Zelda need to go back to it's roots with little narrative and open ended gameplay. TP was too linear due to how force fed the plot was. That's why many people here desire a game like 3D dot game Heroes because it reminds them of a time when gameplay took priority over cinematics and the "artistic" approach to gaming. I just want to pick up a sword and go whereever I want with as little BS as possible.

GAMESHARQ

I agree. I wish they would do a sort of 3D remake of the original. Notice I said remake and not reimagining. I think the formula was spot on, I just want more dungeons, items, monstersand a bigger more detailed Hyrule.

I've always thought of Oracle of Seasons to be a Remake of the First Game, since the bosses look similar and the map layout is also similar (but not by much).

It would be interesting if they were to remake the first Zelda with Twilight Princess graphics.

LegatoSkyheart

[QUOTE="blueydwlf"]

[QUOTE="InfinityMugen"]

I disagree with his views about Oot but I do believe the Zelda needs a new direction. Zelda need to go back to it's roots with little narrative and open ended gameplay. TP was too linear due to how force fed the plot was. That's why many people here desire a game like 3D dot game Heroes because it reminds them of a time when gameplay took priority over cinematics and the "artistic" approach to gaming. I just want to pick up a sword and go whereever I want with as little BS as possible.

Sepewrath

I agree. I wish they would do a sort of 3D remake of the original. Notice I said remake and not reimagining. I think the formula was spot on, I just want more dungeons, items, monstersand a bigger more detailed Hyrule.

I wasnt suggesting they completely abandon story. All I am saying is the first few games were much more open and gave more freedom. Not to mention if you know the story of the first game it was pretty cool.Plus theolder games were much more challengeingbecause you had to use your head and werent being spoon fed directions on where to go and what to do next.Picture this, You are Link, a wanderingadventurer who finds himself in a land called hyrule. As you travel you come across a small settlement of people who are under atack by (insert random zelda bad guys) You spring into action and single handedly save the villagers only to learn that this is going on throughout the whole kingdom and that an evil sorceror has taken over hyrule and captured the princess. Its up to you to collect the scattered triforceect....... Anyways from there on you are free to go where you want and do what you want. Bits of the story can be explained as you go by completing quests or by interacting with NPCs.

This just means that he's motivated to make the next Zelda even better. This is a good thing.

DS_Lightning21

Nice way of looking at it! I hope he tops it! It's going to be tough to beat Ocarina of Time.

why biased? he says he wants to do it better than OoT was at it's time.BrunoBRS

[QUOTE="BrunoBRS"]why biased? he says he wants to do it better than OoT was at it's time.FFCYAN

I don't think that's what anyone is suggesting. In Oot, MM, WW, and TP link has to collect 4-6 'things' by defeating a boss in a dungeon be it oracles, shadows, spirits, triforce shards...whatever. Now, instead of forcing player to do the dungeons in order, let the players explore for the dungeons and tackle them in any order they want. Bam, less linear and still has story.

That's just one example of how the zedla formula needs changing.goblaa

Thats exactly whats being suggested whether they intend to or not. Its impossible to have a story if you can go anywhere, anytime. Thats like saying you want to read a book starting with chap 8, then chap 2, then chap 12. The only way to tell a story is through linear progression, like lets take OoT the story started in the Deku Tree, with the first scene, the story of the triforce being told and all that, what would that happen no matter what dungeon you went to? To do that you would have to design the game 8 times over, so no direction=no story. Thats not a change thats going back to what the first Zelda did. All you have to look at is LBP that is a great example of basic game development, if you set up emitters or speech sections or set pieces, you have to force the player to go there. You cant just leave the level open for them to roam randomly and have these things.

Who said a free roaming Zelda game had to be about nothingness and no have no direction? The early Zelda games emphasized freedom and a wonder for exploration which slowly whittled away when narrative took more priority in the modern Zelda games. Am I saying that Zelda needs to have ablsolutely no story? No. Twilight Princess was as linear as you can get and it shows that the Zelda series needs to go back to the drawing board before the series gets to the point of being stale. Majoras mask was excellent, Windwaker was a breath of fresh air, Twilight Princess was good but it felt like I was playing Oot all over again with a force fed narritive. I dont like the cinematic direction Zelda is going with tbh. Continuing in this direciton is going to hold the series back whether you believe it or not.InfinityMugen

FIrst off, WindWaker and Majora's Mask were no different from Twilight Princess in structure, all they had was a different setting. The transformation gameplay of MM was just an expansion on the system in OoT, and Windwaker was just like OoT, just with a few more gameplay mechanics and Epona was replaced with a boat. Now the original Zelda had no direction and had no story and going bact to that would be holding the series back. Its a pretty silly concept to think that stripping the game of a story would make it better.

You will still have the same basics of using a sword and shield and weapons, the gameplay would be basically the same, so let me ask you this, what would be the difference between having to go the forest temple first and just ending up at the forest temple first? The overworld wouldn't be different because of that, the enemies within wouldn't be different because of that, the only thing different would be the bosses would be more hack and slash like instead of puzzle like because there's no telling what weapons you have. Hack n Slash Zelda? I'll pass on that idea. Or whats your idea, make it a Megaman clone, where it easy if you have the right weapon or difficult if you don't. Have you really thought about the repercussions of going in that direction, outside of the fact that you can go wherever you want?

I invite you to check out a little game called Fallout 3, the story is very linear like it should be so that there can be a story. Then there are dozens of side quest which makes the game feel much more open, thats what Zelda needs. Increased content outside of the main quest thats not just hunting for hearts or rupee chest; imagine a side quest to find an out of the way, elusive fairy fountain to get the only location for fairie's in the game? Or a side quest similar to the trade missions in OoT or ones like Majora's Mask which focused on the individual. Thats what the series needs, it will easily make people who feel the series is too linear to feel like the world is much more open than it really is, like Fallout 3. Sacrificing the narrative is the worst possible decision they could make.

OOT has aged gracefully but it has still aged. A lot of the gameplay innovations introduced back in 1998 have since been perfected and tuned. It's still a must play for any Zelda fan but I would not recommend it as an series entry point because Wind Waker and Twilight Princess are technically much better as stand alone titles. In short, I agree with Aonuma, hopefully he's challenging himself with making the next Zelda as great as OOT was during it's time. Better Zeldas have come and gone but none have lived up to the legend and reverence OOT has garnered.

I wasnt suggesting they completely abandon story. All I am saying is the first few games were much more open and gave more freedom. Not to mention if you know the story of the first game it was pretty cool.Plus theolder games were much more challengeingbecause you had to use your head and werent being spoon fed directions on where to go and what to do next.Picture this, You are Link, a wanderingadventurer who finds himself in a land called hyrule. As you travel you come across a small settlement of people who are under atack by (insert random zelda bad guys) You spring into action and single handedly save the villagers only to learn that this is going on throughout the whole kingdom and that an evil sorceror has taken over hyrule and captured the princess. Its up to you to collect the scattered triforceect....... Anyways from there on you are free to go where you want and do what you want. Bits of the story can be explained as you go by completing quests or by interacting with NPCs.blueydwlf

Thats called Prince of Persia, but even that game forced some kind of direction on you. The game was fun, but because of that "go almost anywhere" setup, the narrative suffered, especially in comparison to the Sands of Time Trilogy narrative. The story from the first Zelda existed away from the game, not in the game. Also your idea, just the like the other guy is keep the same old Zelda, all your changing is the order in which you experience the dungeons. So I ask you like I asked the other guy, what is the difference between going to the forest temple first because of the story, or just stumbling upon it. Neither of you have presented any real argument for changing the mechanics, all you've said is change the structure.

Take OoT for example, in that game you had a choice of whether to tackle the water temple first or the fire temple. Did it make the game better by going to the fire temple first, even though it in no way changed the games mechanics or content? Did it make it better by going to the water temple first? If you said a problem with the basic game mechanics like combat and using the dungeon weapon to beat the boss, fine, I cant argue that, its something I would like to see change to make the game more cerebral anyway. However doing it your way comes at the cost of puzzle like combat, unless they vastly change what Link can do physically and of course the story. Like I said to the other guy, side missions will take care of that problem of being toolinear for people like you and allow the rest of us to continue enjoyinga strong narrative.

[QUOTE="goblaa"]

I don't think that's what anyone is suggesting. In Oot, MM, WW, and TP link has to collect 4-6 'things' by defeating a boss in a dungeon be it oracles, shadows, spirits, triforce shards...whatever. Now, instead of forcing player to do the dungeons in order, let the players explore for the dungeons and tackle them in any order they want. Bam, less linear and still has story.

That's just one example of how the zedla formula needs changing.Sepewrath

Thats exactly whats being suggested whether they intend to or not. Its impossible to have a story if you can go anywhere, anytime. Thats like saying you want to read a book starting with chap 8, then chap 2, then chap 12. The only way to tell a story is through linear progression, like lets take OoT the story started in the Deku Tree, with the first scene, the story of the triforce being told and all that, what would that happen no matter what dungeon you went to? To do that you would have to design the game 8 times over, so no direction=no story. Thats not a change thats going back to what the first Zelda did. All you have to look at is LBP that is a great example of basic game development, if you set up emitters or speech sections or set pieces, you have to force the player to go there. You cant just leave the level open for them to roam randomly and have these things.

Of course you can have story in a non linear game. Example:

Link is a boy in the woods, something bad happens that leads him to dungeon 1 where he gets the gist of the story learns about zelda and gets a tutorial on how to play the game, to fight gannon he must collect 4 widgets each guarded by a boss in a different dungeon, link finds all 4 dungeons and collects the 4 widgets in whatever order, he then goes to hyrule to fight gannon and save zedla. The end. It's like the basic plot of every zelda ever made.

Basic quicky premise, done right there. Just needs fleshing out with details like a guide, characters, settings, and so forth.

Just because a game is a little less linear does not mean they just drop you off in the middle of hyrule and leave you to your own devices. That's bad design.

I'd really like some more freedom. Every zedla story has you collecting 4 "things" (be it triforce shards, spirits, shadows...whatever). They usually force you to collect these in order, but that could let you tackle them in the order you like. Let the first dungeon be the tutorial. Then let me tackle dungeon 2-5 in any order, then end on dungeon 6. Let me explore to find the dungeons.

I'm also very very tired of the "go to dungeon-get item-use item to solve puzzles and beat boss-leave dungon and never use item again" formula. Give me 3-4 items I NEED to beat the game. Give me the boomerang, lantern, bombs, and grappling hook. Those with the sword and shield should be everything you need to complete the game...you would just be missing about 50% of the game by doing so. Everything else is hidden. In TP there was nothing lamer than finding hidden stuff only for it to be either a heart piece you didn't need or a ruppie you didn't need or couldn't hold. Exploring outside should find me a magic wand or a better bomb. Exploring hidden parts of a dungeon should find me a bow or a hookshot. Items should let me get to places I couldn't go before, they should let me beat enemies and bosses easier, they should let me solve puzzles easier or out right skip them. I should be rewarded for finding them, but not be forced to find them. There could even be a whole extra dungeon (a real dungeon, not a tower of trials) that can only be accessed with a certain hidden item.

Miyamoto described his inspiration for Zelda from taking the scenic rout walking home from school as a child; being amazed to discover a lake up in a mountain. That's what's been missing from zelda.

First off the story you described is like the story from SMB, you know you have to rescue Peach and thats it. Thats great for a platformer, but an adventure game needs a narrative, not a simple over arching story. And you said find weapons in Hyrule and do what with them? Since you don't need them, thier completely optional, they will have no real purpose. You couldn't exactly make a part of the game that needs it, because then it wouldn't be optional and its doing exactly what you just said you don't like about Zelda. Not to mention TP made you use a number of your weapons repeatedly, hell you use the iron boots against 3 bosses and for stage navigation in multiple stages and all the weapons could also be used optionally in combat.

And now I will ask you the same thing I asked the other two, what would be the difference between going to dungeons 1-8 in that order because the game is designed that way? vs going to dungeons 1-8 because you just happened to roam into them in that manner. The sense of adventure of roaming Hyrule and going into your first town will be the same, the NPC's will be the same, the scenery will be the same, So why is it so important to be able to go to them in any order? Unless they can figure out how some way to make the world evolve based on what you have done, some way they can make beating bosses still have a puzzle element even though there is no gurantee of your equipment, I will pass on that. The just go wherever you want thing has way more negatives then positives, it doesn't move the series forward, it send its hurdling backwards. Not to mention your idea of weapons is contradicatory of what you say is a problem in Zelda.

All I could agree with you on is they could loosen up the system of collecting the weapon to beat the boss. They could make it so that you need not only the weapon you find in that dungeon, but one you found in two dungeons earlier. There was a hint of that in TP with you having to whip out the iron boots in the final boss battle, but I wouldn't mind seeing some more weapon matches. Like say using the spinner in conjuction with bow and arrow instead of just the one weapon beats the one boss. And having more things happen in the overworld storywise and side quest wise, both of which once again was hinted at in TP.

Hmm, I'm seeing the debate in here and I kinda like to super simplistic story approach that would allow for more open gameplay.

I loved the Nes Zelda (beat it dozens of times) and I would welcome another Zeda game like that with no real narrative and definitive path.

Of course critics would probably hate, and for good reason to, but I would still enjoy it loads!