General Zelda I Prefer Small Overworlds

[Salem]

Having large overworlds would mean having a lot of large empty areas that are only there to traverse from one place to another.

There's no reason to have large areas and not have a lot of content to much it.

Having smaller overworlds means taking less time to get from one place to another, it even helps in exploration if you want to, because everything is more likely to be nearby main gameplay areas.

 

[Ocarina_Player]

That is a fair point. However having to traverse large overworlds only sucks when you are doing it on foot. Warping, transportation, and specialty items can make it faster and fun. My favorite character after Link is Epona, because I love running and jumping her around the field, and there's something about being on horseback that seems so much more heroic.

On that note, when there isn't much in the overworld in terms of hidden items, mini games, or monsters, it can get a pretty dull. My ideal combination is a large, interesting and varied overworld with lots of little secrets and things to do along with a faster method of transportation, like Epona, the bunny hood, the sail upgrade, and of course warp points.

 

[Spiritual Mask Salesman]

Your right but still if a large over world were to be made with lots of stuff to do in it I would totally be up for it.

 

[Mangachick14]

Totally agree with you. I'd much prefer to see a smaller, detailed world to a large, empty one. If the world is desolate, the only thing making the world large will do is make travel more tedious.

 

[Tatltael]

I prefer overworlds that are akin to Termina. Yes, the overworld can be big, but I feel that if enough detail and cultural/historical diverseness is put into an overworld, then the largeness of it doesn't seem so big.

For example, I actually don't care for Twilight Princess's overworld, because it is mostly just Hyrule Field. Yes, there are areas to explore and holes to dig up, but that overworld felt a little too desolate. Of course, that desolate feeling felt in line with the rest of the game's tone, but I think that the developers could have used the whole "historic/lost culture" aspect a little more than they did with regards to the overworld.

I think that an effective overworld would be one where the cultures and the terrain come together in very detailed ways. Give us caves to explore, but make them culturally/historically diverse caves. Don't have the caves be similar to every other cave.

 

[DJ Twitch]

You make a good point, I didn't like OoT's large overworlds with little of interest. TP had this problem too, but at least there were some more things to do outside of the main story. A compact world without all the running is the best way to go; imagine how much even better WW's world would have been if the islands were a little closer together.

 

[Salem]

My ideal combination is a large, interesting and varied overworld with lots of little secrets and things to do along with a faster method of transportation, like Epona, the bunny hood, the sail upgrade, and of course warp points.

Your right but still if a large over world were to be made with lots of stuff to do in it I would totally be up for it.

That might seem like the best idea, enlarge the overworld AND add content to match.

I don't think Nintendo is capable of doing that. It's because the Zelda series in general doesn't have whole lot of things to collect, if there's only so much heart pieces, upgrade materials, trade sequences and side-quests they can add, I highly doubt all those things are enough for a large and expansive overworld.

 

[Sir Quaffler]

My issue with overworlds isn't so much large-vs-small as much as it is compact-vs-sparse. Most of the larger overworlds are too sparse for my taste, there just isn't a lot to actually do except walk (or sail, as be the case) in these overworlds. On the other hand, making overworlds that might not be all that big as far as strict size goes but makes up for it with tons of enemies, obstacles, etc. in your way (ALttP, SS, etc.) makes things much more interesting in the long run.

 

[Mercedes]

Depends on content, really. Don't want a uselessly padded out over-world. But at the same time, I think a huge over-world adds to the 'epicness' of a game, and Zelda's definitely a franchise I'd consider 'epic'. I think a tiny world wouldn't really have that same feels.

 

[Salem]

My issue with overworlds isn't so much large-vs-small as much as it is compact-vs-sparse. Most of the larger overworlds are too sparse for my taste, there just isn't a lot to actually do except walk (or sail, as be the case) in these overworlds. On the other hand, making overworlds that might not be all that big as far as strict size goes but makes up for it with tons of enemies, obstacles, etc. in your way (ALttP, SS, etc.) makes things much more interesting in the long run.

That may not be enough, eventually there will be warp points and that may eliminate the need to run back and forth and thus miss most of the obstacles and enemies.

Unless you mean keeping the world small and add all these obstacles, well, I think that should come naturally.

Depends on content, really. Don't want a uselessly padded out over-world. But at the same time, I think a huge over-world adds to the 'epicness' of a game, and Zelda's definitely a franchise I'd consider 'epic'. I think a tiny world wouldn't really have that same feels.

I dunno, I find "epicness" to be subjective, I was mostly talking about practicality when I advocated small worlds.

 

[mαrkαsscoρ]

thats only b/c every large zelda overworld is always empty,obviously you would like them more if there was more things to do in them

 

[Jamie]

If they made the big overworlds more full, then they wouldn't be a problem, and would be better than small ones.

 

[Salem]

thats only b/c every large zelda overworld is always empty,obviously you would like them more if there was more things to do in them

If they made the big overworlds more full, then they wouldn't be a problem, and would be better than small ones.

Like I said in a previous post, it's nearly impossible, the Zelda series doesn't have enough content for a large overworld.

 

[Beauts]

I agree in overworlds like Twilight Princess, which was huge but a whole lot of nothing
However I think they did a better job of it in Skyward Sword as there was plenty to do in between places, different islands in the sky to visit and so on. It still wasn't perfect but I think Nintendo are getting there with the balance

 

[Beauts]

I can see why people prefer smaller overworlds, but I don't subscribe to the convenience of them. Series like Zelda are all about adventure and one of the big aspects of that for me is having to journey from place to place instead of simply stepping outside of one completed zone and immediately being in another uncompleted one.

To this day WW still holds my favourite overworld. Yes it's method of travel could have been improved with simple things like a more substantive wind physics system, but I really felt like travelling to point A to point B was an experience in of itself. Especially when I took the time to engage with the various sideshows along the way. You walk a fine line when it comes to the method of travel though. Too simple and you get people complaining of being bored like with WW, but too engaging (for little reward) and you end up with the farce that was Skyward Sword's Loftwing travel. I think the key is to hit the right balance.

To bypass all of this with simply making a smaller overworld solves the problem for sure. But I'd rather a larger overworld be done right than simply make do with a smaller one. Otherwise I feel too distanced from the trials and tribulations that Link is supposed to be facing.

I think that's a bit harsh to to the SS overworld; all it did was use the WW model and apply it to the sky instead of the sea. Plus flying is way cooler than sailing. I felt WW had too much space between and it just became tedious. SS tried to straddle the line between WW and TP. Obviously a much easier way to do that would be to look at a prime example of an overworld that isn't too empty, like OoT, and just made it bigger and more epic. I know people get bored of all the harkening back to OoT, especially in SS, but you always felt OoT's overworld was bigger than it really was. Maybe because time flowed as you traversed the larger landscapes like Hyrule Field, so it gave the illusion of being big but it didn't get boring like in TP, in which they wasted a lot of space.