If the Next Zelda's Gameplay Style Was Completely Overhauled?

[Ventus]

This is more of a theoretical thread than a "it's going to happen" type.

For 25 years, the Zelda series has had the same core gameplay (aside from the second entry, Adventure of Link, but that's to be forgiven) among other things. Always, the game has been the adventure type where one button/motion/touch corresponds to one action (with a few exceptions for the Action Icon Button). However, the style is noticeably old, with many fans wishing the series would just drastically change for better or for worse. So, I was wondering, if the next Zelda's gameplay style, from animations to how you play the game, was changed to the point where it is nothing like old school Zelda:
a) What would you like the gameplay to be like?
b) How would you react?
c) Would you think Nintendo had reason to change one of the core aspects of Zelda or not? Why?

Go wild.

 

[Spirit]

As far as animations go I'd like to see Link be a bit more uncertain on his feet, make it look like some actions are actual efforts, even the running. For example i HATE the way Link runs in TP, its a silly complaint but it just doesn't look right and his back doesn't ever seem to bend no matter what he is doing, it kind of bigs me. To remedy this i'd like to see a couple of animations like in Shadow of the Colossus, where the characters would run and stumble when reacting to tremors on the ground, or lose his balance when landing a jump etc etc, I'd like to see some nice touches like that.

Also, if you decide not to use your shield for whatever reason, i'd like to see Link take a double handed swing every so often, maybe at the end of a shieldless combo or something, just a few things to make him seem a bit more believable and life like, since aside form MM, i've never really felt like i was controlling a character as far as his field actions were concerned.

As for an entire gameplay refit I'd really like to have a Bayonetta type engine. I love the way Bayonetta plays (and DMC to a degree), with dodging and rolling being assigned to a button and being able to be used whether you're moving or not, better than a target-side jump-combo.
I would also like to see a combo system in Zelda, not only would this mean enemies could take more damage and be more fun to dispose of. For combo rewards, the more linked moves you land on an enemy the rarer the treasure they drop could be, etc.

I think a wholly new engine is what Zelda needs really, it wouldnt impact the story or design it'd just be a fresher and perhaps deeper experience.

Changing the gameplay is something that i'd be happy for nintendo to do regardless if it is like Bayonetta or not, i think Zelda needs to have a fundamental change. Nintendo are using the Zelda franchise to experiment with HOW you play a game (which is a damn shame) rather than what you play, so to me, an avenue that they could take with this is to completely change the core gameplay entirely and begin building again.

 

[Sinharvest]

I really hope they can improve upon the combat, the last two main Zelda games SS and TP has had glaringly easy combat. Also, I think they can do away with the stamina bar, and bring back the magic meter. I think the combat should be tighter, with better thought out enemy encounters. Also, they need to encourage more exploration, by having more secret stuff to find.

But to completely re-haul the game and change the "style" of the game, I really wouldn't want that.

 

[JuicieJ]

a) I don't think the gameplay needs to change at all. There's nothing inherently wrong with the core formula, so why mess with it? There's nothing wrong with some tweaks, mind you -- like the DS games' touch screen controls and Skyward Sword's MotionPlus and Stamina Gauge -- but there's no need for a complete overhaul. Don't fix what isn't broken.

b) Most likely, "Why?"

c) No. See "a" for reasons why.

 

[JuicieJ]

Despite recent attempts to modernise the combat it still seems somewhat lacking even in respects of taking down enemies. For example, SS did a lot to change the combat. But it still boiled down to repeatedly slashing at your opponent.

Um... Isn't that what pretty much every sword-based combat system boils down to?

Some enemies provided us with defences to get around, which was great. But I'd like to see some intuition in this regard. Instead of programming enemies to have a certain period of "shielding" followed by an attack phase, I'd like them to design the AI so the enemy attacked and defended when it saw fit. This would also require an overhaul of exactly how Link goes about attacking. One which would likely benefit from taking inspiration from TP's hidden skills.

This is exactly what Skyward Sword's enemies did. This was especially the case when flailing wildly against multiple enemies. The comrade of the enemy being attacked would catch on to what the player was doing and attack in an attempt to punish the player for being so reckless. I find it very odd that the kind of combat system you want has already been given to you and you completely missed it.

 

[MattMVS7]

1.) Have a useful sidekick for Link that fights alongside him (such as Nabooru, Impa, or Sheik).

2.) I think another good idea to add would be to have upbeat modern-like dungeon music (that still feels like Zelda). An example would be a piece of music with funk-like screaming "OW" (that sounds like Michael Jackson) combined with dungeon-like banging that sounds like a heavy metal instrument combined with an enchanting woman witch.

 

[Midna's Sister]

1.) Have a useful sidekick for Link that fights alongside him (such as Nabooru, Impa, or Sheik).

2.) I think another good idea to add would be to have upbeat modern-like dungeon music (that still feels like Zelda). An example would be a piece of music with funk-like screaming (that sounds like Michael Jackson) combined with dungeon-like banging that sounds like a heavy metal instrument combined with an enchanting woman witch.

I'm really sorry when I say this, and I do not mean to offend, but....
It truly would not be Zelda at all this was dungeon music. It just... Wouldn't.

 

[MattMVS7]

I'm really sorry when I say this, and I do not mean to offend, but....
It truly would not be Zelda at all this was dungeon music. It just... Wouldn't.

Or maybe for perhaps a really really awesome upbeat dungeon (like walking on magnetic ceilings and walls as in Twilight Princess combined with other awesome elements such as this). In my view, that is in fact a dungeon music, but perhaps not for a dungeon in a Zelda game.

 

[JuicieJ]

Yes, but what I mean is there was nothing else to it. I wasn't even required to move around much at all with only the odd boss requiring my continually revised footwork. Most, if not all non-boss enemies where a simply case of stop, stand still, continue when vanquished for me. In fact, the only time I can remember doing a sidestep was when faced with a Lizalfos fire-breath. It made the game feel very stop-start in my experience. It was a system that worked, but has great room for improvement in my eyes.

You're describing every Zelda game's combat. Literally every one of them.

The "punishment" you are referring to is simply the result of many enemies switching between the defence and offence stages at various times. Some enemies, like the stalfos, would punish you for a mistake. However this was still simply the result of being coded to launch an immediate attack after the player lands a shaky blow. This is great, I appreciated that. But it needs to be built on. Enemies need to use their own intuition on when to attack and when not to rather than simply waiting it out and attacking when a certain time-frame has elapsed. I'd be interested to see the coding for such enemies actually. Their actions were very transparent and sometimes it was like I could see the various lines that they were acting on.

This isn't a new problem either. Think of Iron Knuckles from OoT which were clearly operating under a stop-start kind of coding. Or even bokoblins from WW in which they were evidently told to undergo a few seconds of prancing about between each attack. Even when such actions would clearly lead to their immediate demise. There's nothing wrong with this system, when it's done right. But I feel the series would benefit greatly from giving enemies their own minds and allowing them to act as they saw fit.

Could it be improved on the future? Absolutely. But I don't see why that registers a complaint. It was a huge step up from an already functional combat system. To be quite honest, it's one of the most impressive and fleshed-out combat systems I've seen in any video game. Why would you not complain about past games' combat, but then complain when said combat gets an upgrade?

 

[JuicieJ]

Yeah... and the point of this thread is to explain what changes the series needs to make...

My point is I don't see what's wrong with the system. It's very similar to a real-time RPG style of combat. And it works. It works well. There are multiple styles that could be used for Zelda, yes, but there's nothing broken or unpolished about its core combat system. The only things that need to be done to it are refinements and polishes (i.e. what Skyward Sword did). No overhaul to the combat is necessary.

I was using SS as an example. Being the most recent game it seems only logical to bring out the most recent example of the change I wish to be made. And I think you've hit the nail on the head there. It's "functional". But I want more than that. It may be an outstanding display of combat design to you, but it's still lacking a lot in my eyes. If something is improvable, then it should be improved on at the nearest available opportunity.

While I agree that it's capable of being improved, that doesn't mean that it's in dire need of it. The way you're talking, you're implying that Zelda's combat system is unpolished and needs a reboot. That's... not true. Nowhere near true. I think what you're saying was the case for The Wind Waker and Twilight Princess, but Skyward Sword did the sort of thing you're asking for. All it needs is minor improvements from here. Just some touch-ups is all.

SS did a little more with the combat system, but they still could have done a lot more. Plus, in my opinion, they took one hell of a step back with the removal of a hidden skills type of system that TP incorporated. Given that Link was much more athletic it opened up a whole new realm of possibilities. Yet they instead chose to focus on what such athletics could add to puzzle solving and fobbed us off a little with combat enhancements. We could hop over moblin shields, jump without attacking, and already I'm stuck for how they enhanced combat through athletics. My problem with SS in this regard isn't because it's worse than previous games, but because it had the opportunity to really revolutionise it yet couldn't quite get there.

The Hidden Skills were a cool CONCEPT, but their execution was relatively ineffective. A good combat system would have taken advantage of those skills and brought in enemies that were otherwise extremely tough to take down without them. The only enemy that did that in Twilight Princess was the Darknut, and even then, they weren't that hard to begin with. Skyward Sword took advantage of its motion controls by integrating them into nearly every combat sequence, requiring different tactics to take down different foes. That's a much better scheme as a result. I would like to see the Hidden Skills return in the future, but the idea that Skyward Sword took a step back by not using them is a flawed concept.

 

[JuicieJ]

This of course relies on the idea that a given person is fond of the execution of the motion controls. I thought they were... ok... Others think they are downright terrible.

I've seen the arguments to down on the motion controls, and none of them ever hold any water. If you think they weren't great, well... okay, there's nothing I can do about that. But I know that I can say with 100% accuracy that they flowed seamlessly with the rest of the design. That doesn't mean they were perfect. It just means their implementation was flawless.

I'd like to see a mixture of the two. A combination of the mental requirements that SS enemies demanded, and the athletic potential that TP tried to accomplish.

Yeah, that would be nice.

 

[Ventus]

a) What would you like the gameplay to be like?
I personally would like to see the gameplay be more akin to the skills-based combat featured in Star Ocean: Till the End of Time.
[video=youtube;zs97q5UGg1c]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zs97q5UGg1c[/video]
"What?! You're asking for a radical departure!! That is SO un-Zelda like!" is basically what you're saying, I know. But the point of the thread is, what would you, the poster in question, like for the gameplay to be like in a future Zelda that is very clearly different from previous Zeldas. I myself would like to see if Nintendo could artfully apply themselves in a JRPG sort of fashion, all while keeping the Zelda feel to things. Now, I don't want the camera angles to be the isometric top-down sort; I still want a three dimensional third person point of view camera angle, but I want to see skills become part of the gameplay. Many Zelda games already introduced skills in a variety of formats, but there wasn't any system of ups and downs for most of the skills; nearly every skill came at your benefit and the enemy's loss. This isn't what I really want, as it doesn't feel good spamming Back Slice at my own leisure.

How would I reinvent the skills system? Well, firstly introduce more of them. Button and even motion commands can get limited, but that is precisely why I want a skills menu where you can select whatever skill you have and apply it to a certain motion/button sequence (or button command; sometimes to do a shield bash we should only have to press R lol) much in the same way you do in most JRPGs. Secondly, I would implement some sort of drawback system. The Stamina Gauge as much as I may complain about its implementation in Skyward Sword is actually similar to what I would use. I don't know about a full on MP bar with "hitpoints", but the Magic Meter is definitely up for grabs. Other things would be a cooldown system (this cooldown system wouldn't apply to the Spin Attack, though ;p ) but not with the drawback of stamina warmup if you use the skill too much, I'm still trying to work out the odds for that; lack of invincibility frames; longer start-up times and other nifty little bonuses.

Also, yes, enemies will most definitely have hitpoints, or at the very least they will show fatigue when they're closer to death. I'm not into what the Zelda series does currently (bar TWW with a certain pickup), I like to be able to tell without having to memorize how many hits the enemy will die. But yeah, that's it ;p

b) How would you react?
I would be absolutely ecstatic!

c) Would you think Nintendo had reason to change one of the core aspects of Zelda or not? Why?
I do think that Nintendo would have a reason to change the core aspects of our series dearest. For 25 years the series has held onto, more or less, the same sort of gameplay. The transition to 3D did little; we still attack enemies in the same general way and basically just play swordfighting. I think Zelda should try something radically different, even if for only one game. :>

 

[rock]

a) What would you like the gameplay to be like?

The problem with these changes in the Zelda franchise at least is that, when they make them, most notably the alterations to Wii installments, and perhaps every other console jump, they literally change the game play. Sure, Zelda fans can still get used to it and even remember the logistics to gaming, but the core is somewhat altered. I use SS because that was extremely different to me. Sure, puzzles and dungeons were solved in the same manner, but playing took on a whole new feel. I had to "practice" my Wii Remote aiming so that I could get my enemies perfectly. It was nifty, but obviously gimmicky.

My best example for what I'm trying to get at is the transition from OoT to MM. Essentially, the two of them are very much the same game, but they were on to something more so in this comparison that any other new installment. The game play was, in some small ways, revised as if Nintendo said, "hey, let's not completely change how the player plays the game, but what the player USES to play the game." Ala masks, and a track record on time, and a lot of other mechanics that demanded a smarter player to come along and manage everything. ***I say this because children aren't great time managers, so stepping into the 3-day span is like being given a homework assignment- they don't know how to handle that; older gamers figure out ways to procrastinate or otherwise manage the task with ease and coordination***
I owned both games when I was younger, but never fully got through MM because of the difficulty. And mind you, it wasn't hard, but the concept was so beyond me, and it forced me (eventually) to rise to the challenge; however, I was still comfortable enough to play it because of what OoT presented me. And you better believe I beat OoT on multiple occasions because I found it easier.

So in regards to the gameplay and "overhauling" I feel Nintendo should look at what they had set up for TP (not SS because the gimmicky mechanics wouldn't make for a good fit to the Wii U- unless the Wii U Pro controller isn't of use) and improve that. Don't change it. Add on to it. Strip down the aspects of the game that don't fit well, or that could fit better, and create a story that is a game that people want to PLAY, not watch. Unless I'm nostalgic for some Zelda fun, I hardly do reruns through games for the hell of it, because after a week of play, I've found all there is to find. Nintendo needs to evaluate the existing elements of its games before trying to reinvent the wheel. Take Mario Galaxy for example. Sure, it used a bit of motion control, but at its core it was essentially Super Mario 64, with an improved gameplay. And Nintendo found how motion controls could fit well.

b) How would you react?

If this were to happen, I'd be anxious. I'd hope Nintendo would be smart enough to critique itself heavily enough to warrant some serious changes to what the gamer uses to play the basic core of Zelda. I would almost hope for Nintendo to create new positions within their company just for that purpose. Perhaps they already have them, but I don't think they're thinking hard enough. I'd probably seek out such a position, if the off-chance of its addition happened, just so that I could contribute worthwhile thought put into how the game is played. Sure there's mechanics, story, and graphics. But on top of that the game needs presentability and favorability- it has to sell itself on the idea that he adventure is completely new, and it's got to keep gamers coming back (with friends) because that's how the gaming community should be.

I'm not sure if any of you have had this experience, but when TP came out, I was able to convince a lot of my friends to get the game and/or play it. But when SS came out, I did the same campaigning and it resulted in far less "conversions." Why? I have no idea, but presentability and favorability seem without question, key to developing mechanics and story.

c) Would you think Nintendo had reason to change one of the core aspects of Zelda or not? Why?

They're bound to change up the formula somewhat again. Nintendo does a great job with sales, but it seems to me they are missing a demographic, whatever that may be. And they are trying to encompass all audiences the same way OoT managed to become one of the greatest games of all time (totally non-biased, haha). They'll try and reevaluate their production of game elements, but in the end they'll always feel that what they have is great, they're just not sure how it can be any better. I feel Nintendo would see its history and try and chart its future, creating the next change. Whether it's for the best or not, well that's a whole other question.