So, what if, in Zelda, instead of always using the Sword and Shield, you could, say, have two swords, or an axe, or lance, etc.?
Different Weapon Types in Zelda?
- Thread starter RegalBryant
- Start date
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2011
Zelda via Soul Calibur. I'd welcome it, having a lance AND the Pegasus Boots in the same game would be an awesome combo, or an axe with the hover boots to score some sweet death from above... I'm all for Link prioritising with his hunks of metal, i can see the choices being a lot of fun. we can also take 'another step in the right direction' (>.>) with having more focus on weapon range, sharpness and weight a little bit like Monster Hunter which could definitely give Zelda some more depth.
Dragoncat
Twilit wildcat: Aerofelis
Different weapons obviously exist. The Hylian guards in TP and OoT have lances, and the guards in LttP have a variety of weapons like swords, bows, throwing spears, etc. The only time I've seen axes, they've been wielded by enemy races. Lizalfos, bokoblin, etc. Same with clubs and maces.
I wouldnt be against it, but storywise, it's logical for Link to have a sword since that's what kind of weapon the master sword is. I don't think Nintendo will change that. There can't be another sacred weapon blessed/created by the gods...well, I guess there's the bow of light, but meh. What I'm saying is, say you could have an axe. Get to the part of the game where you have to use the master sword, and that axe becomes useless.
I wouldnt be against it, but storywise, it's logical for Link to have a sword since that's what kind of weapon the master sword is. I don't think Nintendo will change that. There can't be another sacred weapon blessed/created by the gods...well, I guess there's the bow of light, but meh. What I'm saying is, say you could have an axe. Get to the part of the game where you have to use the master sword, and that axe becomes useless.
Erm, Four Sword, for one. 2., If they can make the master sword, I'm sure it wouldn't be too much trouble to make a master axe. 3., they could always break the master sword. Then take the metal and reforge it, stronger. possibly even stronger and axe shaped.
Dual wielding in Zelda is a facet of combat I don't think we will ever see, but is a wondrous dream. I love the notion of dual wielding anything--sword and sword, sword and mace, sword and lance, sword and dagger--but let's be real: the image most people have in their mind of Link (or Zelda, whatever you call the girl in the green garb 
)is a guy/girl with sword and shield in hand, voiceless. They might be able to picture a two handed sword in his hand momentarily, but the image of Link is sword + shield with the occasional item. I don't think it's impossible to see enemy items such as a mace or a hachet or whatever being used, but for it to be a contemporary item is highly unlikely the way I see it.
)is a guy/girl with sword and shield in hand, voiceless. They might be able to picture a two handed sword in his hand momentarily, but the image of Link is sword + shield with the occasional item. I don't think it's impossible to see enemy items such as a mace or a hachet or whatever being used, but for it to be a contemporary item is highly unlikely the way I see it.
Dragoncat
Twilit wildcat: Aerofelis
Yeah, but why? Why would somebody randomly be all "hey guys, let's take the master sword and turn it into an axe! It'll be the exact same thing, only not a sword anymore!" Doesnt make any sense at all. And I forgot about the four sword...anyway, too many sacred weapons, and sacred weapons arent that special anymore, because everybody and their dog would have them.
But like Ventus said, when people think Link, they think sword and shield.
Because Link had a higher aptitude for utilizing an axe at the time.
No, only Link has them. It's just he's got multiple. And that's only 3 sacred weapons. Not that huge a number.
And people used to think brown hair. perceptions can change over time.
I'm opposed to the different weapon types traditionally seen in strategy games like the axe, lance, or dual wield swords appearing in Zelda. Dragoncat raises the valid issue of problems from a story perspective. There are only two traditional weapons throughout series history which carry some special force with them: the Master Sword and Bow of Light. Introducing more mundane armament could be interpreted as a lack of innovation or laziness on Nintendo's part.
Additionally, the joy of gear in the Zelda series stems from rarely knowing what you're going to pick up next. Yes, there are traditional swords, shields, bows and arrows, bombs but the snooze list largely ends there. Nintendo's developers have always been phenomenal at incorporating the surreal. What I want to see more of is apparatus resembling the Dominion Rod, Sand Wand, or Beetle. These unique arsenal are the center point of Zelda, an integral part of what differentiates one game from another. The foundation is already in place. The larger question is how Nintendo can expand creativity's usefulness and evolve Zelda's gameplay like never before.
Additionally, the joy of gear in the Zelda series stems from rarely knowing what you're going to pick up next. Yes, there are traditional swords, shields, bows and arrows, bombs but the snooze list largely ends there. Nintendo's developers have always been phenomenal at incorporating the surreal. What I want to see more of is apparatus resembling the Dominion Rod, Sand Wand, or Beetle. These unique arsenal are the center point of Zelda, an integral part of what differentiates one game from another. The foundation is already in place. The larger question is how Nintendo can expand creativity's usefulness and evolve Zelda's gameplay like never before.
Zorth
#Scoundrel
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2011
Have this huge wall of text in my own thread about this.. but hey, looks like people cba to read threads with walls of text so I'll try to be as short as I can!
Yes, I would like to have different combat styles. because.. y'know, it wouldn't make the combat so boring.
That short enough? :O
Yes, I would like to have different combat styles. because.. y'know, it wouldn't make the combat so boring.
That short enough? :O
Dragoncat
Twilit wildcat: Aerofelis
Wow you just shot down all my arguments *headdesk*
I guess if they really wanted to, they could make a master axe or whatever...but meh.
I guess if they really wanted to, they could make a master axe or whatever...but meh.
Zorth
#Scoundrel
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2011
this sounds familiar.. I wonder why??
Castle
Ch!ld0fV!si0n
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2012
- Location
- Crisis? What Crisis?
- Gender
- Pan-decepticon-transdeliberate-selfidentifying-sodiumbased-extraexistential-temporal anomaly
The sword/shield dynamic serves the series too well. Attacking with two weapons is just redundant. Striking with a sword while simultaneously defending with a shield is what makes Zelda combat more strategic beyond mere hack n' slash.
Besides, Zelda combat is more true to form. Most depictions of swordplay in film is unrealistic. Nobody banged the sharp edges of two iron rods together because that tended to make them not sharp anymore. If the edge of a blade was deflected off of anything it was a shield. Parrying didn't happen. Shieldplay was more common. Mostly because learning how to fence properly took time and money only the aristocracy had for such frivolous pursuits. Anyone can heft a shield. And while duel wielding may look cool and show off impressive skills, it takes considerable talent to do anything other than get yourself killed by doing so and is highly impractical in melee combat. And by that I mean useless. If anything is held in the off hand it is for whatever few opportunistic jabs might present themselves or the occasional parry, but this was mostly for fencing with light weapons. Constant flourishes like you see in films with both arms swinging wildly like a circ de soleil dancer just never happened. Blunt weapons work alright with both hands, but their nature is clumsy and focus on brute force over finesse anyway.
The Wind Waker had a few alternate weapons available, such as the Deku Sticks and the large swords the big armored guys would drop. If future Zelda games did more of that then it would present a bit more variety to the weapons combat. Basically what it did was replace Links sword and prohibit the use of the shield in return for additional attack power. I'd just simply add more weapons, such as axes and spears. I would even allow players to throw them at enemies, although far less haphazardly than is done in WW. Players also can't sheath such weapons and carry them around with them or switch them out with other weapons. They must be carried in Link's hands. This further limits their effectiveness and doesn't undermine the importance of Link's main blade.
Besides, Zelda combat is more true to form. Most depictions of swordplay in film is unrealistic. Nobody banged the sharp edges of two iron rods together because that tended to make them not sharp anymore. If the edge of a blade was deflected off of anything it was a shield. Parrying didn't happen. Shieldplay was more common. Mostly because learning how to fence properly took time and money only the aristocracy had for such frivolous pursuits. Anyone can heft a shield. And while duel wielding may look cool and show off impressive skills, it takes considerable talent to do anything other than get yourself killed by doing so and is highly impractical in melee combat. And by that I mean useless. If anything is held in the off hand it is for whatever few opportunistic jabs might present themselves or the occasional parry, but this was mostly for fencing with light weapons. Constant flourishes like you see in films with both arms swinging wildly like a circ de soleil dancer just never happened. Blunt weapons work alright with both hands, but their nature is clumsy and focus on brute force over finesse anyway.
The Wind Waker had a few alternate weapons available, such as the Deku Sticks and the large swords the big armored guys would drop. If future Zelda games did more of that then it would present a bit more variety to the weapons combat. Basically what it did was replace Links sword and prohibit the use of the shield in return for additional attack power. I'd just simply add more weapons, such as axes and spears. I would even allow players to throw them at enemies, although far less haphazardly than is done in WW. Players also can't sheath such weapons and carry them around with them or switch them out with other weapons. They must be carried in Link's hands. This further limits their effectiveness and doesn't undermine the importance of Link's main blade.
Last edited:
Zorth
#Scoundrel
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2011
It wouldn't turn into the Elder Scrolls, Combat is only one out of MANY things that keeps the two games apart. Having the option to choose our weapon wouldn't change that.
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2012
- Location
- yggdrasil
Why cannot we have dual wielding..... I would love it. You do not need more sacred weapons the master sword is fine. BUT There are strategy weapons out there. Has anyone hear of a Swordbreaker. It is an axe with a notch in it to catch (and possibly break) you opponents swords. Instead of shield bashing and deflecting blows you could now try to disarm opponents with an off handed weapon.