Innovating the Zelda formula

[Ambitious]

As great as the franchise is, the one thing Zelda has never done is catch me by surprise.

(except maybe OOT's water temple complexity)

Of course the temples/items formula is tried and tested and acts as one of the key reasons the games have been so successful, but I wish they'd show the courage to trip the player up - throwing something at them to stop the standard routine progression.

For all its flaws I think SS had some of the best designed puzzles in the later temples, and puzzles are great - but the problems everyone solved as 8 year olds are still being thrown at 30+ players today. Now that's a little self-centered, because the games are designed for all ages. However I don't think kids are as incapable as the game industry assumes them to be these days.

The puzzles never pose themselves as: "here's something you'll need to show intelligence to be able to solve", instead it's always: "this will take you a moment or two to figure out, apologies if it takes longer and stops your progression".

I still remember, as no doubt many here do, getting relentlessly stuck on the old 80s/90s adventure games etc. Surprisingly it's always something I enjoyed and learned from, and the experiences stick in your head for decades (may just be nostalgia, but more notable than others).

Playing these now would most likely get annoying very quickly and I doubt most modern minds would tolerate it, but I'd argue everything didn't have to be so dumbed down as a lot of titles are now. 'Clever' aspects now consist of: here you have to align some blocks, here you rotate this object until it fits in the key hole, here you need to activate two switches to make the water start pumping.

Not sure if others will agree, but I'd love to see some more challenging obstacles thrown in, or at least unexpected twists on the formula (not limited to narrative). Maybe a well hidden cave with a unique item as a reward? Hopefully BotW will offer this and not consist of just temples featuring a toy/puzzle per room. Each to their own though, understandably some may hate the idea of having to use their head after work/school!

If none of that made sense, this video illustrates the point further: https://youtu.be/G59Iwi7_Cp0

 

[Spirit]

Breath of the Wild seems to be really changing things up and Aonuma seems to be wanting the same for the 2D side of things too.

Once we play BotW we'll know just how much of a change up it will be. A little familiarity with the puzzles is nice but i would like to see more than sliding boxes.

10 days and we'll know.

 

[Jamie]

I hope the formula hasn't changed too much, I love the go to a dungeon get an item and use that item in that dungeon formula.

 

[Dio]

There is not going to be much to catch you by surprise. We as gamers have seen it all pretty much. BoTW may be doing things no Zelda has done before but they are all things we have seen in other games just in one place.

 

[Ventus]

Try playing the Witness its like zeldor sialef up to 11. You can due it bro~ XD

 

[Dogzilla]

Ambitious, that's a particularly interesting question. I agree with every word of your thoughts. Not sure what you're actually looking for - specific innovations for Zelda or general ideas about innovation?

Anyway, some thoughts of my own.

I'm a huge Zelda II fan, in large part because of its combat difficulty, and although your main point seems to concern puzzle-solving, I think A shared issue with ZII is the willingness of players to perserve through the frustration of unsuccessful attempts. If the puzzle is too easy, there's no frustration and thus little-to-zero satisfaction. Too difficult makes for too much frustration and possibly player abandonment. To increase the difficulty without losing the player, I think there needs to be either a worthwhile payoff or the frustration of wasted investment in the game thus far, or a combination of both.

If Mike Tyson in Punchout had been the first boss, my guess is that most (including maximally skilled) players would've abandoned play. But as he was the last, my guess is that players had worked hard to get to him, so were more willing to fight through frustration even if they didn't ultimately beat him - after all, we all know Tyson was as close to f**kin impossible as a boss can get.

Regarding payoffs, the suggested promise of, say, an exciting new item may push a player to keep going. So, my guess is that sufficiently-appealing payoffs and/or fear of wasting effort investment are the factors involved in whether or not players push through the frustration of difficult challenges. But to push through potentially brings with it the enormous satisfaction of player growth. THAT'S the missing gold in today's dumbed-down games.

To add, I think there may be a tipping point among fans between those overcome high difficultly to then feel resentful and those who overcome high difficulty to then report satisfaction. The dominant fan mood regarding high difficulty may well determine the difficulty levels that game makers set in subsequent games.

P.s. Out of curiosity, which 80/90s games were you thinking of?