Does Zelda generally have mediocre combat?

It's good enough.

It's not great, it's not bad. In other words

In the case of 3d zelda, yep.

Its serviceable, there is no real depth to it

I always felt it was serviceable, yeah. Certainly not the best element of a Zelda game . The Zelda games have always been the sum of their parts.

Particularly in 3D Zelda games.

The latest main entry in the series had some of the best combat I've seen in an action adventure game.

Sword play was right on and you had to look for and exploit openings. A lot of the bosses werent just use this item and win... you still had to time your swings right.

The final boss in Skyward Sword was an absolute joy to fight. I think a lot of people have not had a chance or desire to experience this, bUT it was a suprising excellent fight with great sword play.

I mean if you call Zelda combat mediocre, you have to say the same about Dark Souls series. It's not as unforgiving as Dark Souls with its many cheap tactics.... but by and large its the same structure.

Also Zelda combat is not dial a combo like a lot of other action/ melee games out there. With a ton of tools at your disposal to boot too.

pls no...

def better than ELder ScrlLs

Only Wind Waker's combat was a little too easy for me. But it just like any game, once you figure it out, you become Master.

@aigis: if you can't see the similarities you are not looking

@enzyme36: Yeah, my first few times on Skyward Sword's final boss i got my ass handed to me. Was frustrating to face such raw power. One of my favorite fights ever though.

@iandizion713: Everything from the stage to the music to the weather to how you had to earn your killing blow was amazing.... It felt like a samurai showdown by the moonlight in an old Kung fu flick.

I generally found it as acceptable. It's not clunky, it's responsive, it's not complicated. There is some variety involved with the various weapons at your disposal. In other words

@jg4xchamp: TP and MM had pretty good combat.

Depends what you're comparing it to:

Hack & Slash > Action-Adventure > Japanese ARPG > Zelda > Western ARPG

@darkspineslayer: feel free to use your words at any time.

But I'm not saying Dark Souls is bad combat... I think very highly of both. I'm just saying they are fundamentally the same. Dark souls has more momentum and weight classes, and link is always using the same weapon for thr most part... but still the same basics.

@enzyme36: this is prime example of someone trying to sound smart. Zelda and Dark Souls combat is not similar. You really are way off and seem to be grasping. Please try again.

It's never anything to write home about.

Agreed, it was an intense but beautiful fight. And yeah, that final blow was a pain to nail. You had to be on point. That fight is hard to forget.

It's simple, but enjoyable. And like others said, one part of a larger whole.

@enzyme36: Yeah, Demise at the end of Skyward Sword is one of the best bosses in the series. Just a pure, strait-forward sword fight. Too bad so many people never ended up experiencing it.

@judaspete:

The Koloktos boss fight in Skyward Sword is also a major highlight for combat in the series. I thought Skyward Sword was a heavily flawed game but it definitely had moments of pure gold in there.

it's basically this but in 3d environment and HD

i am fine with this.

Skyward Sword featured some of my favourite sword fights of any game, ever.

As for the rest of them, they're serviceable. I wouldn't say that any of them have bad combat, but they also aren't Ninja Gaiden (nor do they have to be).

@jumpaction: Koloktos was a really good fight too. Also a fan of the four-armed skeleton mid-boss in that same dungeon.

Well, it works and it's precise. It still amazes me today to see many 3rd person games struggle with camera. Just copy and paste from Ocarina of time lol, the blueprint is there. The combat is not too deep, but not too simplified either. I think that overall it fits well with the overall style of the game.

They really aren't though. On a basic game design level, stamina management completely differentiates it. You seem to be connecting them on a surface level. (hur dur they both use swords and make you wait)

Dark Souls combat is not cheap, in any way. It's completely the opposite. It sticks to the rules it very clearly defines. Combat is a back and forth between AI and player, where the players decisions drive the direction of combat.

Zelda enemies, especially in 3D games have bullshit periods where they can't be hurt at all regardless of player input. It's the illusion of difficulty, where it's simon says in reality.

@judaspete:

I really wish other elements outside of the dungeons were as strong as the rest of Skyward Sword. :/ If the pacing, hand-holding, over-world and contextualizing of the quest threads were as good as some of the puzzles and bosses, I would have adored Skyward Sword.

It's such a divisive game but sometimes I feel its major qualities are forgotten.

Souls' combat mechanics are definitely rooted in Zelda, but the difference is that Souls improved on the combat mechanics.

@Juub1990: Lol no they don't.

@jumpaction: Totally agree. And seriously, if that's the worst game in the series, then that is a good series.

@jg4xchamp: Lol they do. See I can do that too.

I was about to say that is neither good or bad, but that fits in the definition of mediocre so yes it is.

Yes.

I have only tried 2 Zelda games (Phantom Hourglass for DS and Twilight Princess for Wii) but I couldn't finish them thanks to shallow, repetitive combat system. Half Life 2's combat was mediocre too but at least I finished it because it has great level designs (the opening scene is still arguably the best ever imho) and Alyx :)

The combat in Zelda isn't terrible or amazing. It's just simple and it works.

Half Life 2 feels almost exactly like every other fps game out there at the time. Asides from the Gravity Gun, Half Life 2 is just average combat-wise.

Its simplistic so kids playing the game wouldn't be lost.

@darkspineslayer: Good point about the stamina bar. It was added in SS but had no role in combat.

I didnt mean the 1v1 combat was cheap in DS.... I meant some of the scenarios in it were cheap where the odds are stacked heavily against you. It's difficulty isn't in the combat it's in the set up.

At the end of the day, you lock on and circle each other. Either game if you hit a shield long enough you will get an opening. I fully admit that Dark Souls is way more of a challenge... but fundamentally the combat in Dark Souls and SS is very similar.

Okay sunshine.

Twilight Princess has good game feel and controls nicely, that's where all its positives end. First of all its pretty damning that the games combat is as easy as Wind Waker. Not that it doesn't make Wind Waker dull as well, but at least Wind Waker you can sort of forgive given the aesthetic and tone of that game. It's more light hearted, so the general ease of play at least fits. Twilight Princess is trying to be the more darker Zelda, and without the hero mode they added in a fucking overpriced remaster close to a decade later, is a massive cake walk. So the lazy counter of "well Souls games are just zelda but they hit hard"....uh yeah, because difficulty balance is a pretty important aspect of game design. Stakes are a product of conflict, conflict in games isn't a product of the story, it's a product of the mechanics, through difficulty. The deliberate animations and precise nature of Souls combat carries a ton of weight, because small **** ups lead to massive chunks of your health bar taking a hit. TP doesn't have, and that would just be the basic problem.

The other foolish defense people make for TP is that "it has a bunch of moves" you can unlock from ghost link. Problem, they are all optional to find, and because they are all option to find, there aren't any enemies in the game that actually take advantage of your trick moves. The base attacks are all you really need to beat the game, because the game had to be designed in a way to adjust to the fact that you may or may not find those moves. So they are ultimately a superfluous addition to the game. In a vacuum just looking at the mechanics? Sure TP would actually have good combat, the problem? The rest of the game lets it down, and that part is just as important to the make up of an action game.

Beat em ups have scoring systems, different enemies that are fundamentally more difficulty to deal with standard means (though beatable), but can be made quick work the better you understand the tools at your disposal. Not the case with Twilight Princess. And Majora's combat isn't exactly any different from Ocarina to warrant some massive praise, so don't exactly know what we're giving credit to there.

And Skyward Sword's combat is some shitty simon's says shit that people apologize for because of the novelty of the games motion controls. But if anything it's as shallow as it's always been, if not more rigid than usual.

It's why people who actually know shit about shit when it comes to action games or have an understanding of in what ways the Souls combat is a massive improvement on Zelda's z-targeting combat, Zelda is anything above "meh". I mean Uninspired also doesn't know shit about shit (I mean I'd still take Zelda over Half Life 2 all things considered), but that's just broken clock rule in effect. Even ghost makes a valid criticism every blue moon.

The addition of hero mode only fixed one half of the problem in Twilight Princess combat, a pretty significant half, but half. Lucky for Zelda, the highlight of the series isn't really it's core combat. It's supposed to be more about the exploration and puzzle solving in the dungeons. Which admittedly has its own short comings, but it's a lot better and more worthy of praise than Zelda's combat which is at best functional, but mediocre.

mechanically its very sound. its just a question of enemy design and where nintendo pitch the difficulty. the comarisons to something like the souls games is apt: under the hood it takes a lot of leaves from OOT.

the weakness is probably more to do with nintendo not pushing it out much. most enemies in zelda games are just cannon fodder.

It is servicable.

The thing about the gunplay in Half Life 2 is that it is NOT servicable. Killing enemies in Zelda doesnt feel like a chore. Killing enemies in HL2 did.

Yeah, but it works.

@jg4xchamp:

The enemy AI in Skyward Sword is hilarious. If you move, like three paces from the moblins, they forget you are there.

That dude got on my nerves. Id get so frustrated with him id waggle and itd only make it worst. It took me forever to figure him out.

Plus Dark Souls combat isnt that hard once you figure it out and use your powerups wisely. You just powerup, then stab them in the butt. Its difficulty is highly overrated. Most just dont know how to play the game.

I don't even know what that means...

No, you'll fucking die doing that in Soulsborne.

Again, no it isn't. @jg4xchamp does a solid job of explaining it though, so I don't feel I could really add to that.

@jg4xchamp: Well that's what I meant by "pretty good". The controls, the feel, the responsiveness and the fluidity are all there. In general it is indeed too easy but one has to understand enemies in Zelda for the most part aren't there to hinder your progress or challenge you like in Souls games but meant as a distraction from exploring and solving puzzles. It all changes with mini-bosses and some more difficult enemies.

Darknuts for example provide a legit challenge(relatively speaking) and can wreck your shit if you just push buttons. You mentioned enemies don't take advantage of your optional moves but Darknuts do. Moves like the Helm Splitter and Mortal Draw can be very effective against them. They'll punish the shit out of the lunge attack if you try it on them. Some enemies like the Flying Lizard can be dealt with more easily with the Mortal Draw and will dance through regular mistimed moves.

Overall the combat is pretty good as I mentioned. It's fun, it's engaging. Bad combat is Skyrim with floaty controls, horrible hitboxes, weapons that are all the same and worthless magic system. TP's main problem is as you mentioned, the difficulty.

As for MM it has key differences from TP.

- Enemies are more aggressive

-Multiple enemies will engage you at once, not just the one you Z-target

-Much more difficult

-Mini-bosses have more erratic and unpredictable patterns and you don't just hit them when they are stunned and there are generally multiple ways to defeat them

I legitmately find myself engaged in the enemy encounters in Majora's Mask. The fight against Igos Du Ikana was good. Facing the Garo Master was awesome and the Lizalfos actively try to **** you up with their fire breath and double-teaming. It's a good deal better than the combat in OOT which to me was mediocre.

They got nothing on Souls games or Ninja Gaiden but then again, not a lot of games do. In the grand scheme of things when compared to other adventure games with a similar combat system, TP and MM are in the upper half, not the lower one.

Sorry for the spelling, on mobile.

Zelda's combat is also very smart. Its not like most games where you can go caveman style like Bayonetta, Dark Souls, etc. Sometimes in Zelda if you dont use your brain, youll never make it past the fight. Every time you get comfortable with Zelda, she takes you out your comfort zone again. You dont feel like youve mastered the game until you beat it. Zelda's combat is nowhere near medicore, very few games have better combat.

That they both have combat? Thats pretty much where it begins and ends

@aigis: Its goes way more then that. Dark Souls borrows a lot from Zelda. You even break pots like you do in Zelda. Same type mysterious sales man. Its so much you could write a massive article on it.

Damn you got me

@aigis: Just breaking you in. It even uses potions on the fly like Zelda does.