Skyward Sword Basic Ways Skyward Sword Could Have Been Improved

[HylianHero]

The Legend of Zelda series hasn't had great exploration since the early 2D games. Most of the 3D games (OoT,TP,SS) haven't stressed exploration too much and it wasn't really a problem because for the most part those games were great. So I don't know why everyone still holds exploration as one of the great zelda ideals.

 

[JuicieJ]

The Legend of Zelda series hasn't had great exploration since the early 2D games. Most of the 3D games (OoT,TP,SS) haven't stressed exploration too much and it wasn't really a problem because for the most part those games were great. So I don't know why everyone still holds exploration as one of the great zelda ideals.

Because it's one of the series' foundations. We want it to come back. What's wrong with that?

 

[HylianHero]

Because it's one of the series' foundations. We want it to come back. What's wrong with that?

Nothing, its just something that the lack of was never a big problem in the 3D games.

 

[ihateghirahim]

By "good" exploration do you mean things you have to find to beat the game.

TP still had great exploration. I played the first LOZ and it wasn't much different. The only difference is that in newer games there is usually at least a small crack or other marker to tell you where a blastable wall is. LOZ simply had you blast every freaking wall in the game. It was most repetitive.

 

[JuicieJ]

By "good" exploration do you mean things you have to find to beat the game.

By "good" I mean fulfilling and engaging. None of the modern 3D Zelda games provide this very well, although The Wind Waker and Twilight Princess have this problem significantly worse. They either don't provide enough open space to freely roam or provide too much space without any substance. That's poor overworld design, which results in poor exploration.

TP still had great exploration. I played the first LOZ and it wasn't much different. The only difference is that in newer games there is usually at least a small crack or other marker to tell you where a blastable wall is. LOZ simply had you blast every freaking wall in the game. It was most repetitive.

I agree on the repetitive thing, but what do you mean TP had great exploration? The entire game is a straight shot. You go where the game tells you to go when it tells you to. You're guided by the hand the entire way. (Skyward Sword has the same problem of going where the game tells you to, yes, but you go where it tells you to and figure it out from there. The guiding stops once you reach the entrance to your destination.) And, again, it has the issues of not having enough space and having too much space with no substance. That's bad exploration. Really bad.

Skyward Sword didn't do too much better, but it still did better. That's all I'm saying.

 

[ihateghirahim]

TP: I seem to recall having to track scents all over Hyrule; across monster-ridden fields and a difficult climb up a mountain. Let's not forget finding plot-related things like the rock to free Zora's Domain, the bridge in the desert, and the wooden statue thing. Then let us recall all those caves, bugs, poes, and heart pieces that are littered all over the vast world of TP. There were mini-games and sidequests to have fun with, and some simply fun things to do. I'm sure 2d games would have been more like this if they had had the technical capabilities. TP exploration was fun and engaging.

The game also didn't hold you by the hand. There were numerous puzzles and challenges you had to navigate to get through the game. OoT, MM, and WW were the same way (although I found WW rather lacking in overall performance)

 

[HylianHero]

Good exploration needs a balance of open, empty space with content-rich condensed space. TP and WW, while both great games, had too much open, empty space with not enough to do. Skyward Sword's ground areas were so compact there wasn't much to actually explore. Meanwhile the sky areas had the emptyspace-nothingtodo problem. But these were all great games and changing the amount of exploration in the game fundamentally changes the gamer's experience in the world and is not (let me stress the title of this thread) a basic way to improve the game. The games were fantastic anyway, but if you were to make basic changes to make it better it should be in content, not abstracts like exploration.

 

[Random Person]

Since the thread is currently talking about exploration, I'll participate. The problem with SS's exploration is, as it's been said, it is along the path exploration, also known as "hallway" exploration. What's the difference between this and TP? Well, lets take the first non mandatory cave you run into in both games.

In TP, the first non mandatory cave is the cave in the Eldin province. You will pass this cave atleast three times before you actually have the means to enter it. However, even though you pass it, it is a decent ways away from the trail, meaning if you don't take the time to look around, you will not know it exists. TP's cave has a bolder in front of it, meaning you can't access it until after the Goron mines when you get the bombs. Inside the cave is a long twist of caves that still must be traversed in order to receive the multiple prizes within. The cave is dark, meaning one must also have a lantern and oil.

In SS, you pass the first cave (there's actually two) who knows how many times when traversing through the forest. Because SS demands that you look around the entirety of the woods AND the cave is right next to a trail, it is very difficult to miss the cave. There is a boulder, which means you cannot access the cave until after atleast entering the Earth Temple. Once you open the cave, there lies your treasure at the entrance.

Let's break this down.

TP
Pass by 3 times
Away from trail
Cannot be accessed upon first finding
Requires multiple materials
Treasure is given after challenge

SS
Pass by n times
Right next to trail
Cannot be accessed upon first finding
Requires bombs
Treasure is given immediately

Now this is an early part of the game and exploration does increase in both, but the point is this. SS tells you where treasure is, requires little effort to get the treasure, and gives you treasure almost immediately. It's a step down from exploration when compared to TP. (I haven't even done WW.)

All in all, if SS's exploration methods were more like TP (or WW's), I'd say that would be an improvement.

 

[DarkestLink]

Other way around. There's seriously little to no searching required in The Wind Waker and Twilight Princess

I'm curious...how did you know you had to take down Cyclos, get the Fire and Ice arrows, go to the two islands, get the treasures, and then use those to enter the dungeon? Also, who told you what part of the island the Outset Triforce Chart was, that you needed to speak to Ms. Marie to get the Cabana Triforce Chart and that you could only enter the ghost ship with a chart that as found on the A6 island. While I agree with your other statement that the exploration wasn't GOOD...it's still exploration whether we like it or not.

But I agree with TP.

Skyward Sword, while a very linear game, fixed that issue.

By removing exploration completely. Now Nintendo will never endure hate mail from parents complaining that their kids had trouble with the sidequests.

but the difference is, at least for the surface portions, there was more than enough content, both in obstacles and in well-hidden secrets.

...That's like burying a watch in a sand box and claiming it's well hidden after giving you a metal detector.

 

[JuicieJ]

So you're going to use one example out of the entirety of both games to determine which game had better exploration, RP? I'm sorry, but that's not a fair assessment at all. That's like judging two different races of people based on one person out of both respective races. It's a biased and closed-minded approach.

 

[Random Person]

So you're going to use one example out of the entirety of both games to determine which game had better exploration, RP? I'm sorry, but that's not a fair assessment at all. That's like judging two different races of people based on one person out of both respective races. It's a biased and closed-minded approach.

ellipsis

Now this is an early part of the game and exploration does increase in both, but the point is this.

 

[JuicieJ]

That's still only using one example. The entirety of both games don't play out like that. Most of what you'll find in TP is actually along the beaten path, which I don't see why you don't recognize. Not everything in SS is necessarily out of the way, as the surface portions are very much corridors, but there are many obstacles along the way blocking the path to the secrets, whereas TP... just has you walk up to them.

 

[Random Person]

That's still only using one example. The entirety of both games don't play out like that. Most of what you'll find in TP is actually along the beaten path, which I don't see why you don't recognize. Not everything in SS is necessarily out of the way, as the surface portions are very much corridors, but there are many obstacles along the way blocking the path, whereas TP... just has you walk up to them.

If you want me to point out every flaw in every example of SS and compare it to every secret in TP, I can. I can sit here and write a ridiculously long post explaining thoroughly why TP's secrets are not along the path and why SS's are, thoroughly pointing out every aspect to make sure that absolutely nothing is missed. It's not hard and believe it or not, I do things like that on my spare time. (Not even joking) But you know something, I'm not gonna do that. Why? Because ridiculously long posts that repeat the same point over and over accomplish the same point as saying those points once. I thought I could make my point by taking a similar situation in both games and comparing them. I thought taking similar situations from both games could put them on equal footing while demonstrating my point. I thought that by mentioning that these were but one situation to demonstrate my overall point would be enough to make people consider it. But apparently doing this makes me...

biased and closed-minded

I considered every secret in SS and every secret in TP, I just used this one to put them on equal footing. That's why I said "the point is this." If you nit pick every aspect of every argument, you're going to find flaws, inconsistencies, and anything else your mind can conjure. I'm not saying ignore the details, but try looking at the jist of what a Person is saying before you start throwing words like "closed-minded" and "biased" around. And since it wasn't clear, the jist of my last post was this...

"SS's exploration is not as good as TP's. The first cave is one example."

 

[JuicieJ]

I can sit here and write a ridiculously long post explaining thoroughly why TP's secrets are not along the path and why SS's are, thoroughly pointing out every aspect to make sure that absolutely nothing is missed.

Oddly enough, I could do the exact opposite. (Or, more accurately, why SS's secrets aren't nearly as close to the path as TP's are.)

Needless to say, we seem to be at an impasse.

 

[HatredHazard]

-Remove treasure notices
-Remove load time after you jump off of Skyloft and onto your bird (seriously depreciated the epicness)
-Time of day/weather cycles both in the Sky and in the Surface worlds (the game was seriously lacking in atmosphere as a result of this "minor" negligence)

Probably not a "basic" change, but in a perfect world the Sky World would've had appetizing content, and the Crimson Loftwing would be used to at least half its potential.
The game made some notable good tweaks, though, like the real-time harp playing. I also thought the cutscene animations were very fluid, so that's a point towards storytelling.