Breath of the Wild I Don't Want Hyrule

[Sir Quaffler]

Hyrule is Zelda's principal trademark land but I wouldn't mind Nintendo putting it to rest for a bit as they did with Ganondorf. The effect of returning will be augmented by pent up nostalgia and the urge to see what's new.

Multiple continents to explore is something I've wanted to see for awhile. Classics like Chrono Trigger implemented the idea generations ago. Why has Nintendo been slow to adapt? The Wii U's added horsepower is an opportunity for a significantly larger overworld.

I support this. I like Hyrule, I really do, but I also want to see how Hyrule fits into the world at large. We already know Hyrule isn't all there is to the world, I'd like to see the surrounding regions and other continents as well. Now that we know the origins of Hyrule with SS, now I want to see how other regions interact with Hyrule, if at all.

If we were given the option to roam the entire world and not just Hyrule, like the golden-age JRPG's like CT and FF6, that'll be dope.

 

[Drahsid]

I support this. I like Hyrule, I really do, but I also want to see how Hyrule fits into the world at large. We already know Hyrule isn't all there is to the world, I'd like to see the surrounding regions and other continents as well. Now that we know the origins of Hyrule with SS, now I want to see how other regions interact with Hyrule, if at all.

If we were given the option to roam the entire world and not just Hyrule, like the golden-age JRPG's like CT and FF6, that'll be dope.

Exactly, its not like hyrule is the ONLY place in the ZELDA world.

 

[Mellow Ezlo]

I like Hyrule, it's a staple of the Zelda series. It's been 3 games since we saw Hyrule (SS doesn't count because it wasn't known as Hyrule yet), which to my knowledge is the longest we've gone without seeing it! One thing Nintendo could do is take the ideas of Pokemon G/S/C/HG/SS, and be able to explore a different land after the first one is complete, even if just for a few minor quests. That has not been done yet, and I think it would be cool. Of course, it'd have to be done well, but Nintendo has yet to disappoint me!

 

[Justac00lguy]

Well the world is commonly referred to as Hyrule but I guess the idea of having multiple worlds or I would say lands wouldn't be necessarily bad. We have seen the likes of Holdrum, Termina Etc. So why not explore more outside of Hyrule?

I think I made a thread I while back pondering what is outside of Hyrule as we are usually just trapped within this bubble of Hyrule. It would certainly open up to new ideas, new land formations and I think it would be a fresh addition much like Termian was. However the only problem I see with exploring new worlds or lands is that would they take away from the familiarity of Hyrule. I mean we pretty much know the heritage and forming of Hyrule itself and it is a big part in the grand scheme of Zelda. The lands, the provinces, the races and points of interest all bring back a sense of familiarity that we all know and love.

I think that the variety of different versions of Hyrule has made each one feel fresh but also it still feels like Hyrule. So I think the best option would be to have the game still within Hyrule but to have it appear much differently. Nintendo can easily do this with the flexibility of the Timeline, so maybe we could see newer versions of familiar places combined with new lands and provinces.

 

[Din Akera]

I don't have a problem with it. The thing about Hyrule is that it is different in every game that we have visited it. TP's Hyrule is different from OoT's which is different that the original. Yes some of the names of places are similar (Hyrule Field, Castle Town, Kakariko Villiage, etc.) but they have a different layout, different people, and different puzzles/challenges/secrets in each version. So I don't think there is any problem with calling it the same thing. The only issue is the timeline and people trying to string the geography together; which is totally outside of what Nintendo is concerned with when making a map for a new game.

Now, if it had a different name or was set in a different country like Termina or Holodrum would I be disappointed? No. I think that both options are valid and exciting. I just want another new game, because I'm greedy. I think it would also be cool to see something completely new that has never been seen before.

The point you brought up about having two 'countries' and being able to cross their boarder is a neat idea. I think it would be very interesting if it was done right. I like the idea of their being distinct differences between the two places, not just geographically but in customs or culture. They could be connected by land or by sea (as long as the sailing didn't take to long, lol) and Link would have to go back and forth. If the were fairly similar though, I would not see the point of calling them different countries. To me they should then be part of the same country and just be considered different regions. That is something that we see in every Zelda game. Snowpeak was very different than Kakariko (in TP) but they were still part of Hyrule. There would have to be something significant about the culture or religion so to speak (I'm referencing the belief in the goddesses) that would distinctly separate the two for it to be a successful mechanic, imo.

 

[Drahsid]

I don't have a problem with it. The thing about Hyrule is that it is different in every game that we have visited it. TP's Hyrule is different from OoT's which is different that the original. Yes some of the names of places are similar (Hyrule Field, Castle Town, Kakariko Villiage, etc.) but they have a different layout, different people, and different puzzles/challenges/secrets in each version. So I don't think there is any problem with calling it the same thing. The only issue is the timeline and people trying to string the geography together; which is totally outside of what Nintendo is concerned with when making a map for a new game.

Now, if it had a different name or was set in a different country like Termina or Holodrum would I be disappointed? No. I think that both options are valid and exciting. I just want another new game, because I'm greedy. I think it would also be cool to see something completely new that has never been seen before.

The point you brought up about having two 'countries' and being able to cross their boarder is a neat idea. I think it would be very interesting if it was done right. I like the idea of their being distinct differences between the two places, not just geographically but in customs or culture. They could be connected by land or by sea (as long as the sailing didn't take to long, lol) and Link would have to go back and forth. If the were fairly similar though, I would not see the point of calling them different countries. To me they should then be part of the same country and just be considered different regions. That is something that we see in every Zelda game. Snowpeak was very different than Kakariko (in TP) but they were still part of Hyrule. There would have to be something significant about the culture or religion so to speak (I'm referencing the belief in the goddesses) that would distinctly separate the two for it to be a successful mechanic, imo.

You have a great point here. I wasn't even thingking bout' diferent cultures. :p
One idea I had was link would be a young knight, gannon would be a warlord, and in a diferant country, and you learned he was planning to attack hyrule, and you have to save him. (That sorta' sounds like a MMORPG that you get too choose a legion in :p)

 

[Kupsacker]

I want Hyrule, but that doesn't necessarily have to be the only place in the game, though. Hyrule is the staple of the Zelda series as much as Princess Zelda. Games without them are almost not Zelda games. (Almost) In a way, Termina was an anti-Hyrule, so that was close enough for me. Labrynna and Holodrum were neighboring lands I assume, that was kind of cool. Ordona was a neat addition in Twilight Princess, having a province outside of Hyrule itself. I guess I prefer a Zelda game with a major emphasis on, but not limited to, mainland Hyrule.

 

[Night Owl]

Hyrule is Zelda's principal trademark land but I wouldn't mind Nintendo putting it to rest for a bit as they did with Ganondorf. The effect of returning will be augmented by pent up nostalgia and the urge to see what's new.

Multiple continents to explore is something I've wanted to see for awhile. Classics like Chrono Trigger implemented the idea generations ago. Why has Nintendo been slow to adapt? The Wii U's added horsepower is an opportunity for a significantly larger overworld.

^this.

I want Zelda to return to non-linearity and exploration. I feel like that is what is really missing from Hyrule.
I loved the other lands because secrets abound, where Hyrule feels like you've been there done that.