Search results for query: *

It's definitely old, but we have about as much information about the game as we did when this thread was created. A developer unwilling to even reveal the title of the game for fear of spoilers does not engender much hope in me.

They certainly have resistances, yeah, but they do not have an armor stat. General purpose jump attacks: yehh. Gimmick boss fights that depend on stunning a weakpoint and slashing three times with the sword: bah.

That just... is not true. Especially since enemies don't have have any sort of armor stat in Dark Souls. I don't want to drift too off topic here. My point is just that I don't like gimmick boss fights and I've never encountered a Zelda boss with a giant glowing weakpoint that I thought was any...

They have unique animations, but a plunging attack is strong against literally every enemy you can smack with a sword (except sucubi). Any enemy you can drop down on can be dealt extra damage with a plunging attack. I mean that I prefer bosses that don't rely on a gimmick that takes away from...

It's not a weakness thing, it's that plunging attacks always deal more damage than a regular attack. No one is specifically weak to it. The goal is to create situations where it's useful, and it's still plenty useful against regular enemies.

Mostly just enemies that are on a lower platform that the player can drop onto. It can also be used against enemies like the Taurus and Capra Demon.

Asylum Demon isn't super hard until you expose a weakpoint by plunging into it. It's hard at first because you don't have a weapon. You could skip the plunging attack and still easily kill it. The plunging attack in that context is meant to be an introduction to the concept of the plunging...

I feel like my solution just be to not include bosses that require smacking them in the eye or in any other specific weak point. I'm a fan of the Dark Souls method: hit them until they fall down, with it being up to the player to judge when it is safe to smack said boss.

That's what I've seen commonly referred to as soft gatekeeping: locks that you can bypass by smacking them hard and skillfully enough. That's the sort of progression system I prefer, since it incentivizes player skill and disincentivizes finding a bow and saying, "Woah, I guess I am for the...

I suppose it's sort of the opposite for me. If I'm given a specific item designed only to unlock specific doors, I don't feel any accomplishment from that. Rather than using my skills to solve a problem, it feels more like the game has given me permission to advance. I can't count the number of...

I just worry about dis-empowering the player. One of BotW's shining characteristics was how it let you run for the final boss right away, but surrounded it with enemies who would kill you by breathing in your general direction. It makes it incredibly hard, but also makes it so that the player's...

I guess I'm just not a fan of the dungeon item design. If an item is intended to help when defeating a boss, then the boss should be beatable without the item. Just make the encounter more difficult.

So, regarding villages. If you had to design the gating method, how would you keep someone from, in this example, going to a village before the story intended them to? Assuming you have all the climbing abilities from the first game.

Let's hope not. Linearity to the extent that Skyward Sword used it would effectively kill any change Breath of the Wild brought to the series. There wouldn't be any exploration left. I know I harp on it a lot, but BotW is the best the series has ever been. The last thing I want in a game about...

That sounds like an instant turn-off for me. Gated progression via items and artificial gate-keeping is the big thing that made other Zelda games lose their appeal to me. I like exploring and discovering things, not being given permission to visit things.