Zelda doesn't need saving, but

I would love to see Nintendo consider these four points for the Wii U iteration. I don't think they're too unreasonable.

1. Stop trying to make Zelda accessible like Mario. The whole point of making a game accessible is to increase sales and the fanbase. After a quick start, Skyward Sword's sales have slowed down quite a bit. It has been proven that "hardcore" games can sell much better than these Zeldas that are supposedly so accessible. I hate the term "hardcore" but you know what I mean. The hand holding, the Kikwis, the Mosters Inc. sea monster boss, the exaggerated character designs, etc. I think Zelda is a game that you can target towards a more mature audience and still sell millions. It's got the widespread appeal, respect, and acclaim. It just needs the presentation to match.

2. Wash their hands of the entire timeline situation. It is so convoluted at this point, every game, fans look for answers but are just met with more questions. The Wii U version should just be its own story, in a vacuum. Keep Link, Zelda, and maybe the Triforce. Create a brand new story, i think this would help in avoiding the formula of collecting artifacts, collecting more artifacts, destroy evil boss. With a new mythology there can be all sorts of new new story elements, and build new gameplay elements on those to mix it up.

3. Get back to basics. Exploration. Combat. Puzzles when necessary. I really think puzzles should be used to signify something important, or a secret. They should be an event, not something you are constantly running into. Give us an open world to run around in, with enemies to kill and places to find. Towns aren't even necessary, but if they are included, go all out. No more half-assing it.

4. Fresh perspective. Obviously Skyward Sword had some genius designers pouring their creativity into the game. But I think that the current team has squeezed all the big ideas they can out of their brains, and I really think that a new team should get a swing at Zelda U. Retro would be my favorite developer to take on the job, simply because they could contribute some western sensibilities into the game design. Really I think it takes stepping back or a new set of eyes to come up with something new in a series with so much creativity in it already. And Retro is probably more in tune with what North American and European gamers look for in an adventure. Nintendo EAD obviously knows exactly what they're doing with Super Mario, but with a series like Zelda I think that Nintendo needs some more western input into their concepts.

Thoughts? Do you agree with any of these, or am I way off base on some of them?

1. I agree with the hand-holding bit. It feels out of place and really breaks up the flow of the game.

2. Timeline has never been an issue with the series. It is rarely referenced, and never a major plot point.

3. Back to basics would be nice, but that would mean more dungeons to make up the content. Somehow, I doubt Nintendo would want to work that hard.

4. Maybe, maybe not. They're still handling the series well enough. Let Retro do something else the fans want.

Better start power leveling buddy. Only level ten posters are allowed to make threads.

I loved the puzzles in SS, but I would have loved multiple approaches to be able to solve the puzzles instead of only one way. There's rarely one solution to problems in life, so the same should be true of those in video games.

1. The exaggerated designs and vibrant world fit Zelda very well and have nothing to do with being any less or more mature. I'd choose WW or SS designs over TP's any day.

2. Agreed

3. Agreed, but towns are necessary.

4. Doesn't this contradict point 3? Let retro develop their own IP.

3. Get back to basics. Exploration. Combat. Puzzles when necessary. I really think puzzles should be used to signify something important, or a secret. They should be an event, not something you are constantly running into. Give us an open world to run around in, with enemies to kill and places to find. Towns aren't even necessary, but if they are included, go all out. No more half-assing it.

PSWiiU

Say what you want about how derpy it looked, but that tentacle monster was the second best boss in the game next to koloktos

IMO Skyward Sword was the worst Zelda game period. Even based off Fed up Zelda logic and standards it was bad.

4. Doesn't this contradict point 3? Let retro develop their own IP.

meetroid8

Lol that's kinda what I was thinking while typing, didn't explain it well enough. I mean bring the focus back to exploration and fighting more enemies, but in terms of world structure, puzzle/level design, story, mission objectives, etc., a new set of developers could freshen things up.

[QUOTE="meetroid8"]

4. Doesn't this contradict point 3? Let retro develop their own IP.

PSWiiU

Lol that's kinda what I was thinking while typing, didn't explain it well enough. I mean bring the focus back to exploration and fighting more enemies, but in terms of world structure, puzzle/level design, story, mission objectives, etc., a new set of developers could freshen things up.

[QUOTE="PSWiiU"]

[QUOTE="meetroid8"]

4. Doesn't this contradict point 3? Let retro develop their own IP.

Shinobishyguy

Lol that's kinda what I was thinking while typing, didn't explain it well enough. I mean bring the focus back to exploration and fighting more enemies, but in terms of world structure, puzzle/level design, story, mission objectives, etc., a new set of developers could freshen things up.

I agree and I loved the combat, but there just weren't enough enemies, or enemy variety (in my opinion). I loved technoblins though. I guess the big problem is there wasn't much of an over world to put them in. Usually traveling across Hyrule includes fighting enemies along the way, in SS and TP there was mostly just empty space, no challenge in getting anywhere.

I would love to see Nintendo consider these four points for the Wii U iteration. I don't think they're too unreasonable.

1. Stop trying to make Zelda accessible like Mario. The whole point of making a game accessible is to increase sales and the fanbase. After a quick start, Skyward Sword's sales have slowed down quite a bit. It has been proven that "hardcore" games can sell much better than these Zeldas that are supposedly so accessible. I hate the term "hardcore" but you know what I mean. The hand holding, the Kikwis, the Mosters Inc. sea monster boss, the exaggerated character designs, etc. I think Zelda is a game that you can target towards a more mature audience and still sell millions. It's got the widespread appeal, respect, and acclaim. It just needs the presentation to match.

Agreed, Zelda is not meant to be "casual" or hand our hands (Fi I'm looking at you).

2. Wash their hands of the entire timeline situation. It is so convoluted at this point, every game, fans look for answers but are just met with more questions. The Wii U version should just be its own story, in a vacuum. Keep Link, Zelda, and maybe the Triforce. Create a brand new story, i think this would help in avoiding the formula of collecting artifacts, collecting more artifacts, destroy evil boss. With a new mythology there can be all sorts of new new story elements, and build new gameplay elements on those to mix it up.

Solution: Make the actual sequel to Twilight Princess, but place the game in Termina. :cool:

3. Get back to basics. Exploration. Combat. Puzzles when necessary. I really think puzzles should be used to signify something important, or a secret. They should be an event, not something you are constantly running into. Give us an open world to run around in, with enemies to kill and places to find. Towns aren't even necessary, but if they are included, go all out. No more half-assing it.

Agreed. I didn't like how Skyward Sword only had one town.

4. Fresh perspective. Obviously Skyward Sword had some genius designers pouring their creativity into the game. But I think that the current team has squeezed all the big ideas they can out of their brains, and I really think that a new team should get a swing at Zelda U. Retro would be my favorite developer to take on the job, simply because they could contribute some western sensibilities into the game design. Really I think it takes stepping back or a new set of eyes to come up with something new in a series with so much creativity in it already. And Retro is probably more in tune with what North American and European gamers look for in an adventure. Nintendo EAD obviously knows exactly what they're doing with Super Mario, but with a series like Zelda I think that Nintendo needs some more western input into their concepts.

Can't agree with this one. The current developers are still plenty capable of new ideas.

Thoughts? Do you agree with any of these, or am I way off base on some of them?

PSWiiU

IMO Skyward Sword was the worst Zelda game period. Even based off Fed up Zelda logic and standards it was bad.

Shielder7

It was better than Spirit Tracks. :P

the monster designs in the series have nothing to do with how mature the games are. this notion that games like gears of war are more mature because they use a more limited color palette is ridiculous. skyward sword had a light tone that worked its way into the character design. both the tone and the character design were excellent.

anyway, i guess the biggest thing id like to see in future zelda games is a breaking down of barriers in the world. load screens, cut scenes, and the separation of the overworld into rooms can all go. id like to see smooth transitions between the regions of hyrule that the player sees gradually as they explore. discovery of dungeons has gotten too abrupt. smooth it out with a focus on a seamless entrance. those are the sorts of things i want.

.

I might get lynched for saying this, but I think its time for LoZ to get some voice acting.
I'm hesitant to say that though, Nintendo and Voice Actors don't seem to go on very well [ahem, Metroid, SM Sunshine come to mind].

A nice topic, but you have to be level 10 to post it.