General Zelda If the Game is Linear, Should It NOT Have an Overworld?

[Salem]

We have linear Zelda games recently, despite being linear, they give you an overworld that you can freely explore, well on the areas the game ALLOWS you to explore at the time.

Some people call SS' overworld a glorified level select, here's my suggestion, make into an ACTUAL level select.

The modern Zelda games ONLY let you progress if you complete a certain portion of the game, a dungeon usually, so how about instead we are given a world map where we chose the area we want to go to, just like classic Mario games like Super Mario Bros 3, World and recently, Galaxy 2, in fact this was already implemented in Zelda, FS and FSA are like this, oddly I think they utilised their linearity better than the main console games.

So to sum it up, if you complete a dungeon, the world map will open up the next region and so on and so forth.

Here's why I think this style is better for a linear Zelda, it takes out the needless walking from one province or region to another, it might make the games faster paced since the distance from one region to another is now minuscule. It doesn't change much from the linear Zelda other than reducing the tine it takes to get to the next area.

What do you guys think?

 

[JuicieJ]

This is an idea that would actually work well for a spin-off (OWAIT, FOUR SWORDS GAMES). Otherwise, I'll pass.

 

[Justac00lguy]

I bet some may like this idea, me? Well I wouldn't like it whatsoever but that's just my view.

Even though a lot of Zelda games don't encourage large exploration and an endless adventure I still do enjoy those aspects. My favourite thing about this series in general is that feeling of an adventure and that does mainly come from an interconnected overworld. One of my main gripes with Skyward Sword is that it felt like a typical platformer game - A central hub (Skyloft), and a series of levels (Faron, Eldin and Lanayru). I like the idea of one world that is fully exploreable; however I am in no way content with what this series has done thus far, I want more.

So for me, no, I'm sure others may warm to it but that's just not the way I'd like to see the series go. Linearity doesn't have to be a limitation in my opinion, I would like to see more nonlinearity but linearity as a whole isn't necessarily bad.

 

[Salem]

One of my main gripes with Skyward Sword is that it felt like a typical platformer game - A central hub (Skyloft), and a series of levels (Faron, Eldin and Lanayru). I like the idea of one world that is fully exploreable; however I am in no way content with what this series has done thus far, I want more.

This trait isn't specific to platformer, unless you're mainly talking about the N64 ones, right?

So for me, no, I'm sure others may warm to it but that's just not the way I'd like to see the series go. Linearity doesn't have to be a limitation in my opinion, I would like to see more nonlinearity but linearity as a whole isn't necessarily bad.

I never said linearity is bad, I simply suggested what I think is a better way to utilise it.

Honestly, my main problem with modern Zelda games not just that they're linear, they don't use the strengths of linear gameplay. The method of overworld I suggested would simply streamline the game if it were linear, however I realise my point is kinda moot because the new Zelda games are said to be non-linear.

 

[Salem]

Skyward Sword already does this. You can't go damn near anywhere until you do certain things. Literally portions of the map become available.

You still have to go through the loftwing's portion to get from area to area.

An actual level select SCREEN is Un-Zelda. Level Select =/= linear. KH has a level select and it's not linear. Level Select = a way to get around. An un-zelda way to get around.

I know, I simply suggested level select because it might make the linear games faster passed, sense the transportation overworld are largely empty, why not reduce the needless transportation to get to the point faster?

 

[Justac00lguy]

This trait isn't specific to platformer, unless you're mainly talking about the N64 ones, right?

Yes and the Playstaion ones alike, they just seem to have a similar trait in terms of levels.

I never said linearity is bad, I simply suggested what I think is a better way to utilise it.

Honestly, my main problem with modern Zelda games not just that they're linear, they don't use the strengths of linear gameplay. The method of overworld I suggested would simply streamline the game if it were linear, however I realise my point is kinda moot because the new Zelda games are said to be non-linear.

I didn't really interpret your OP to be against linearity as a whole I just thing it's a common misconception among a lot of fans in general. I do see where you're coming from an all but I think a lot of people enjoy the open-like world in a typical Zelda game, taking that out could potentially harm the game itself.

 

[Ventus]

Yes, I think the overworld should be eliminated if the game is linear.

 

[MW7]

It's an interesting idea. I don't know if I'd like this more than the status quo though. I feel like Skyward Sword had mostly linear segments, but they were certainly interesting. Having said that I do feel like I feel pretty lukewarm about most of the overworlds in the series except ALttP, MM, and TWW. I wouldn't mind if Nintendo scaled back the overworld to deliver a few more dungeons. Actually that's kind of what Skyward Sword did since you revisit areas to get the most out of the areas.

 

[JuicieJ]

Skyward Sword already does this. You can't go damn near anywhere until you do certain things. Literally portions of the map become available.

Except you still have to travel through the Sky to get to the different provinces. It has a level-select vibe to it, much like in Metroid Prime 3, but it's not what's described in the OP.

Nearly every other modern Zelda also blocks off areas until a designated point in the quest, so...

 

[ihateghirahim]

Why shoulnd't it? Overworlds are fun to explore and traverse. They add depth to basically any game, even to games that fall under a broad definition of "linear".

 

[DarkestLink]

No. The overworld is what makes the game feel real...and anyway, we need a balance of linearity.

 

[Salem]

Yes and the Playstaion ones alike, they just seem to have a similar trait in terms of levels.

Right, I forgot about those, like Crash series, Croc, Spyro, etc.

I didn't really interpret your OP to be against linearity as a whole I just thing it's a common misconception among a lot of fans in general. I do see where you're coming from an all but I think a lot of people enjoy the open-like world in a typical Zelda game, taking that out could potentially harm the game itself.

I mostly suggested the level select to remove the tedious transportation system and make the segmented over world make more sense.

Yes, I think the overworld should be eliminated if the game is linear.

Key thing is if it was linear.

It's an interesting idea. I don't know if I'd like this more than the status quo though. I feel like Skyward Sword had mostly linear segments, but they were certainly interesting. Having said that I do feel like I feel pretty lukewarm about most of the overworlds in the series except ALttP, MM, and TWW. I wouldn't mind if Nintendo scaled back the overworld to deliver a few more dungeons. Actually that's kind of what Skyward Sword did since you revisit areas to get the most out of the areas.

I would like the area revisit more of the game was non-linear. That's just me.

Nearly every other modern Zelda also blocks off areas until a designated point in the quest, so...

Exactly, that's why I suggested a level select, it might make the linearity make more sense.

Why shoulnd't it? Overworlds are fun to explore and traverse. They add depth to basically any game, even to games that fall under a broad definition of "linear".

Not so much as traverse,

No. The overworld is what makes the game feel real...and anyway, we need a balance of linearity.

What do you mean by balance?

 

[DarkestLink]

What do you mean by balance?

We need order, but not a rigid solid line of a hallway. That's the issue I always had with SMG and SMG2.

 

[r2d93]

First off, lets just stick with non-linearity and make the world a nicer place.

IF however a Zelda game is very linear, in my brutally honest opinion, I think a level select would be an absolutely terrible idea. It's an adventure game. Selecting your levels entirely defeats the purpose of a Zelda games. The only reason I'll let the Four Swords games pass is because they are meant to be less series dedicated and are meant to be played by multiple people

 

[Salem]

First off, lets just stick with non-linearity and make the world a nicer place.

Discussions of linear vs. non-linear is a different topic altogether.

IF however a Zelda game is very linear, in my brutally honest opinion, I think a level select would be an absolutely terrible idea. It's an adventure game. Selecting your levels entirely defeats the purpose of a Zelda games. The only reason I'll let the Four Swords games pass is because they are meant to be less series dedicated and are meant to be played by multiple people

Adventure means no level select?

What IS the purpose of a Zelda game to you?

We need order, but not a rigid solid line of a hallway. That's the issue I always had with SMG and SMG2.

They're not that linear, Super Mario Sunshine is even more linear.