Breath of the Wild "Rethink the Conventions of Zelda"

[Xinnamin]

The new video that just came out regarding WW HD also had some information about ZeldaU on it. Namely, Aonuma stated the "driving theme behind development" was to "rethink the conventions of Zelda". He listed two examples of what they were "rethinking"

• Completing Dungeons in a Specific Order
• Playing by Yourself

The first implies they are gonna work on non-linearity. YAYY =O

The second implies they really are considering implementing Co-op features?

What do you all think?

Also here's the video again just for reference. All the ZeldaU stuff is in the first half of the video:

[video=youtube;xSF-yNvKmjI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=xSF-yNvKmjI[/video]

 

[Spirit]

The 'playing by yourself' thing is what gets me.

As long as we don't end up with a 4 Swords affair then i'm happy.

As far as potential co-op is concerned I'm gonna wager its more of a goods trade kind of thing in a market place for rare treasures/materials/funds. I really don't think it'll be a fundamental part of the main game.
Unless Aonuma has something completely different up his sleeve, focusing on things we take for granted like 'playing by yourself' may not be simply a multiplayer notion. Probably is, but maybe he meant A.I field help etc. Although that may be best described as 'playing along side' who knows, gonna be an epic e3 though.

 

[DarkestLink]

I'm not looking forward to this. Linearity has drastically improved the quality of Zelda since OoT used it and the last games to use co-op did not go so well.

 

[JuicieJ]

I remember thinking how perfect the GamePad would be for a co-op function in Zelda back at E3 2011, and I've been hoping it would happen ever since. It seems like they actually might be taking this route! Kind of on the side, but also gives me even more reason to believe they'll stick with the Wii MotionPlus, since using two GamePads at once would lower the frame rate from 60 to 30, and I highly doubt Nintendo would force us to put up with that.

As far as the non-linearity goes, I'm really glad they're planning on bringing that back. It's something that should never have been dropped. I'm also glad to know they intended to bring it back with Skyward Sword -- which I wasn't surprised to hear, given that the level design, while linear, often encouraged exploration, especially when compared to most other modern titles -- even though it's not the thought that counts when it comes to game design. It's just encouraging to know that Nintendo hasn't forgotten Zelda's roots.

All in all, this has seemingly confirmed my predictions about Zelda Wii U, so I think it's pretty safe to say "I called it."

 

[Ronin]

Some Zelda U news at last.

I like the first bit of information best. Supposedly "Complete dungeons in a certain order" means that they are finally going to allow non-linear progression of the story, since they are rethinking the old ways (the conventions) of the Zelda series. This factor is something that many players, including myself, have been wanting for years. Hopefully it means that every area is already opened to us so that we aren't cut off from potential exploration later on. And as such, we'd be able to visit Dungeons along with their areas anytime we wanted to. Very exciting concept.

The second reconsideration (Co-op, multiplayer, or whatever the apt term) makes me iffy on what they'll do with the main story. However given that we now have the GamePad, a tool that can do virtually anything inside the game, I imagine that one player will stick to the Wiimote and Nunchuk while the second or more players use the Pad to complete puzzles and/or unlock hidden secrets. There's a lot of optimistic potential if they go down a route like that; and it's much better than doing a multiplayer like Battle Quest, I'm sure. Time will tell what it truly holds though.

Whatever the case, I'm relieved to finally see some tidings.

 

[Djinn]

Well let's not forget that Wind Waker actually did have areas where there was a helper character along with Link in Medlii and Makar. It might be possible to have a second controller take over them instead of the same old auto follow and use the wind waker to switch over to them thing. That might be a lot more helpful in getting through the dungeon to have a second flying player take care of various traps and puzzles while Link stops the enemies etc.

This was a concept they had in the early stages of ALTTP, that Link would have multiple helper characters that followed him around and had other uses outside of just combat. They would have a few extra abilities that would be very helpful in getting through terrain or making it past various puzzles. Sadly the idea fell apart and the sprites made for the helper characters became other NPCs like the great fairy and kiki the monkey. I really wish Nintendo would try this idea again in another game sometime. They have been somewhat toying with the concept with helper characters and secondary NPC's like Medlii, Tingle, and ST Zelda.

 

[Xinnamin]

I'm not looking forward to this. Linearity has drastically improved the quality of Zelda since OoT used it and the last games to use co-op did not go so well.

To be fair, OoT was linear in story, but not in dungeon progression. Water and Fire temples could be completed in either order, so could Spirit and Shadow, and I think Dondongo Cavern and JabuJabu as well. And I really liked that about OoT. It's a small thing, but it did give us some choice as players.

Well let's not forget that Wind Waker actually did have areas where there was a helper character along with Link in Medlii and Makar. It might be possible to have a second controller take over them instead of the same old auto follow and use the wind waker to switch over to them thing. That might be a lot more helpful in getting through the dungeon to have a second flying player take care of various traps and puzzles while Link stops the enemies etc.

THIS. For some reason I'm reminded of Kirby's Epic Yarn, where you were able to have a second player come in and control Prince Fluff to help Kirby get through each level. It was totally optional, but it was a lot more fun than single player IMO. Zelda could easily do this by say, making the partner/companion controllable and able to, at least to a certain degree, help out with puzzles and dungeons and stuff. They could still have an AI programming that allows the game to be completed ala Medli/Makar fashion, but to hand over their controls to a second player would be great.

 

[DarkestLink]

To be fair, OoT was linear in story, but not in dungeon progression. Water and Fire temples could be completed in either order, so could Spirit and Shadow, and I think Dondongo Cavern and JabuJabu as well. And I really liked that about OoT. It's a small thing, but it did give us some choice as players.

Was OoT completely linear? No. And that's simply because there was methods of playing the game in a way other that intended. But was OoT more linear than its predecessors? Definitely. And that's what gave it better puzzles and more story.

 

[A Link In Time]

Too much news in one day...

Wow. I was not expecting this at all. The Wind Waker HD looks gorgeous.

Drop in, drop out coop is a great idea and as JJ mentioned, the GamePad could effectively serve as a second screen for the helper player. If Nintendo implements cooperative options during segments where Link is together with a companion, it will no doubt be to test out the concept and reflect upon fan reaction. Knowing Nintendo, I doubt coop play will be an option throughout the entire adventure. It wouldn't entirely be convenient from a narrative perspective either.

At its core Zelda remains a single player experience and I'd prefer a separate mode entirely for cooperative play or harder and more enemies in the main quest at the very least.

 

[Cfrock]

Drop in, drop out coop is a great idea and as JJ mentioned, the GamePad could effectively serve as a second screen for the helper player.

While is in the hands of the main player? So you'd have to look over the other person's shoulder? I don't get how that would work or how it sounds like a good idea.

 

[Vaati101]

• Completing Dungeons in a Specific Order

The first implies they are gonna work on non-linearity. YAYY =O

Though it's great that they are trying to be less linear, I don't want linearity to completely disappear. DarkestLink is right, Linearity has improved the series drastically and to completely get rid of that would be quite a huge risk. Overall I don't mind that they are trying to make the game less linear, but as long as there is some form of linearity I'm good.

• Playing by Yourself

The second implies they really are considering implementing Co-op features?

I hope this is on the lines of Co-op like Super Mario galaxy where it was optional and didn't have too much impact on the game. It's fine because it was just a pointer that collected items which would actually be beneficial when collecting Rupees. However If Aonuma is on about proper co-op then I don't want to know. That doesn't define Zelda for me and both Four Swords games prove that that sort of Zelda game doesn't sell well. I play Zelda to play it alone, I don't want co-op to be a mandatory thing otherwise I will never complete the game. I don't mind the co-op similar to Super Mario Galaxy since it's very minor and optional, but if it's required to play the game with another person, then I'll be very reluctant to buy Zelda Wii U.

 

[MW7]

I'm really happy with this announcement. I really wish completing dungeons in a specific order had never become a convention in the first place. My enjoyment of Twilight Princess and to a lesser extent Skyward Sword would have been greater had there been less rigidity in the progressions of the respective games.

As for the rethinking of playing by yourself I just hope they are brainstorming multiplayer options that won't detract from the single player experience. I might be interested in this depending on what they implement, but I think I'd have trouble finding people to play with me.

Was OoT completely linear? No. And that's simply because there was methods of playing the game in a way other that intended. But was OoT more linear than its predecessors? Definitely. And that's what gave it better puzzles and more story.

I think the game designers were aware that the game could be completed in various orders, and I would argue that there were actually two true intended orders through the game if anything was intended at all: Sheik's order and the menu's order. Sheik tells you to do Shadow before Spirit whereas the start menu places the spirit medallion before the shadow medallion. The game designers themselves weren't sure what they intended. Also the locations on the map indicate where you should go next, and right now I'm in the middle of a playthrough in which I just became adult Link then got the hookshot and finished the Ice Cavern. Now my map flashes to indicate that I could proceed to the Lost Woods, Death Mountain, Lake Hylia or Lon Lon Ranch (because I haven't gotten Epona). Why would the game designers program the game to tell me that I could do 4 different things next if they intended the game to be completed a certain way?

I think linearity plays a minor role in determining the quality of puzzles as opposed to things such as Ocarina being the first 3d game which added a dimension and just simply the level of creativity of the game designers. It does ensure that you have a certain toolkit at a certain point in the game, but I don't think this is at all essential for designing excellent puzzles. A branching path in the story instead of extreme nonlinearity would suffice to ensure no one gets stuck while still having plenty of items to base puzzles around. Story does go well with linearity, and I'm assuming the quote implies less rigidity rather than the outright free-for-all that the first Zelda game was. I'm expecting (hoping for tbh) something like A Link to the Past or Ocarina of Time. They've put too much emphasis on story in the series to totally throw out the convention. Or maybe they are experimenting with a nonlinear story which who knows how well that would work in a Zelda context.

 

[Castle]

As long as we don't end up with a 4 Swords affair then i'm happy.

a more... robust... co-op would be preferable, sure.

As far as potential co-op is concerned I'm gonna wager its more of a goods trade kind of thing in a market place for rare treasures/materials/funds. I really don't think it'll be a fundamental part of the main game.

This is Nintendo, not Blizzard.

The first implies they are gonna work on non-linearity. YAYY =O

Glad to see me and the Big N are on the same page.

 

[JuicieJ]

Though it's great that they are trying to be less linear, I don't want linearity to completely disappear. DarkestLink is right, Linearity has improved the series drastically and to completely get rid of that would be quite a huge risk. Overall I don't mind that they are trying to make the game less linear, but as long as there is some form of linearity I'm good.

What about it has improved the series? All it's accomplished is forcing us to follow a straight path with little to no wiggle room.

 

[ihateghirahim]

Linearity needs to be removed for at least one more major zelda game. In Skyward Sword, we lost the ability to explore the whole world, bit by bit, at our choosing. That was what made OoT awesome. It was even cooler when I found out no everyone did the Spirit Temple before the Shadow Temple. Non-Linearity will give us the unlimited exploration and adventure we got in the older games. An explorer game could rejuvenate the franchise. Remove all boundaries and let the temples flow.