General Zelda Instead of Giving Hints to Puzzles, the Puzzle Should Have Been Removed or Replaced

[Salem]

People, I'm NOT saying remove very puzzle, just the ones that needed hints.

 

[JuicieJ]

People, I'm NOT saying remove very puzzle, just the ones that needed hints.

Which is saying remove all puzzles by default, because all of them have hints.

 

[Fig]

Ok, before this thread gets any derailed, what Salim is saying that even though throughout the play-through of a Zelda title, they shouldn't be there at all or at least not as noticeable. The puzzles are always going to be there in Zelda, that's a fact. I understand from where he is getting this concept, and I have to say I agree with him. See, Zelda should be a series where you don't need someone or hints as you play the games. He's stating that maybe Nintendo doesn't fully believe in their fans to complete the game without any assistance (granted their target audience is family-oriented so they mean to focus on the casual side of the argument), and thus is the reasoning behind the implementation of the hints system.

When I first saw this thread, I knew exactly what he meant. I believe game developers are starting to have a mind set that gamers are unable to understand what may be going on . Interesting enough, I just finished watching Sequelitis (for the hundredth time. ). The Mega Man vs Mega Man X Sequelitis episode is a perfect example of this argument. The video does a better explanation of what Salim and I are trying to discuss about and goes even more in-depth that via the gameplay alone, you can learn everything about the game without any hints. I do have to warn you that there is language throughout the episode. I personally believe that the gameplay of the game should tell you what to do as you play the game, thus you don't need a hint or anything in the game and the in game text is perfectly enough for players as they journey across the Zelda multiverse.

[video=youtube;8FpigqfcvlM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8FpigqfcvlM&oref=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D8 FpigqfcvlM&has_verified=1[/video]​

Which is saying remove all puzzles by default, because all of them have hints.

That's not what he is saying. Remember the original Zelda, Zelda II, the new A Link Between Worlds? Name one time that there was hints while you were playing those games? What Salim and I are saying is that the hint system should be scrapped because let's face it, the puzzles are not hard to overcome. In fact, the in game text found in the picket signs should be well enough for everyone as it tells you vaguely what to do from time to time. I'm talk about these signs down below:

Spoiler

Sure you may argue about ALBW and it's hint system with the Hint Glasses, but it mainly focused on hidden secrets or collection of unnecessary upgrades such as hearts and quest items. Hell, I didn't know the Hint Glasses existed until I was already done with Hero Mode. Sure, not everyone may be as quick to realize what to do in certain puzzle or dungeon, but those random picket signs are well enough for anyone to understand what is that you have to do in order to solve a puzzle or two.

I'm in no way trying to hurt your opinion, but rather provide a sense of understand on why is that Salim and I are discussing about removing the hint system in the Zelda games, not the puzzles themselves.

 

[Cfrock]

My point was the fact that sheikah stones exist, that's a sign that Nintendo does not even think too highly of their audience.

I don't see how Sheikah Stones show that Nintendo don't think highly of their audience. Shiekah Stones are not forced on the player at any point in the games. This means that they are an optional resource for those who feel they need them, without imposing even slightly on the experience of those who don't. Your disdain for them suggests you didn't use them. I know I never did. But not once did I feel like I was being condescended to by their mere existence, and I would be greatly surprised (and a little worried) if you did. The Sheikah Stones merely exist to make the games more accessible for younger players. That's all. Nobody is making you use them and nobody is designing really easy, or "dumb", puzzles because of them. Easy puzzles wouldn't require them at all.

See that's the main issue. I don't think Nintendo should be dumbing down their games.

Another issue that will occur is reliance... those who are playing for the first time and get stuck in, say, the first dungeon (which can happen, mind you). What are they gonna do? Use the Sheikah stone.

I have noticed... that they are really trying to dumb down their games for a broader audience.

The existence of the Sheikah Stones doesn't demonstrate a "dumbing down" of anything. The fact that this optional hint system even exists proves that puzzle design is not dumb, because if they were as dumb as you seem to be suggesting there would be no need for hints at all; the puzzles would be too simple. Furthermore, this idea of "reliance", that players would end up relying on the hint system, also goes against your assertion that these games have been dumbed down because a dumb game wouldn't need to rely on constant hand-holding since it would be too easy by design. You're also assuming a lot about the way people play games. Most people, when stuck in a game, spend time trying to figure things out for themselves. Walkthroughs and hints are usually only sought out once personal investigation has yeilded no results.

This "dumbing down" you talk about doesn't apply to Zelda just because the Sheikah Stones exist. The games are designed and structured in the way they always have been, nothing about that has changed at all. The only difference is that, if you are stuck, you can travel to some secluded corner and ask for a hint. A hint, mind, not the answer; the Sheikah Stones guide you in the right direction, they don't just tell you outright what to do. The Sheikah Stones don't have any impact on the design of the game's puzzles. The very fact that they exist at all shows that the puzzles are challenging enough for some to warrant an optional helping hand for players who are left stumped by them.

It ruins the experience for those who haven't already experienced it yet.

What about Skyward Sword? None of us in the world had experienced that yet and there was a Shiekah Stone present from the start. I didn't know the answers to the puzzles that first time and a couple of times I had to think about things before I could progress. I never went running to the Sheikah Stone. I'd be willing to bet that most people never went running to the Sheikah Stone at the first sign of an obstacle. That Sheikah Stone didn't impact my experience in any way whatsoever. Why would someone suddenly use them all the time in Ocarina of Time 3D just because it's older?

---

Moving away from Sheikah Stones, I think the OP is mainly referring to the puzzles which are very obvious right from the off. For example, in Twilight Princess's Forest Temple, there is a puzzle that involves turning four fans in a specific order. On the floor is a large mark which looks like the letter Z, giving the answer without any trace of subtlety at all. What's the point of that? Why make a puzzle if the answer is going to be made clear the second you reach it? It would have been better to have the order be explained by some other means somewhere else in the dungeon. Like how the order of defeating Deku Scrubs in Ocarina of Time's first dungeon is learnt through remembering a simple riddle from earlier on, and not through a big neon sign over their heads numbering them 1–3.

This is what I think the OP is referring to most of all (correct me if I'm wrong), puzzles that very nearly just give their own answers away. And I agree that they are not very good. However, rather than remove such puzzles, I would much prefer if they were simply altered so that they weren't as blatantly obvious. Like that fan puzzle I mentioned before, remove the Z mark on the floor and instead have a slightly cryptic riddle on a plaque elsewhere in the dungeon. Or have the monkeys you rescue stand in a square, with the first in the bottom left corner, the second in the bottom right, and so on. Or have vines hanging over the fans, with the longest vine over the last fan, the shortest over the first, etc. I don't know, I'm just brain-storming here, but the point is, there are ways to indicate solutions that are not just directly the answer. Altering the obvious puzzles so that they aren't quite so obvious anymore is the action I would suggest should be taken, not outright removal. I like it when a game challenges my intellect and I have to figure things out. It's why Zelda features puzzles at all. I advocate making them a little harder, rather than getting rid of them.

 

[Random Person]

I must say I disagree. The point of the puzzle is to attract puzzle solvers. The point of the hints is to make the game more attractive to those who aren't as good at solving puzzles. The problem is, there is a line between "hints" and "answers." When a game begins giving the answer to a player, it defeats the purpose of the game and simply becomes a series of chores. If a hint begins to give the answer to a puzzle, it is what should be replaced/removed, not the puzzle. A puzzle can indeed be too hard, but a sign that it needs a hint is not a sign that it should be removed, because in reality almost all puzzles require SOME kind of hint or the player is just guessing and not solving.

In short, if a hint is too obvious, think about the hint first before instantly blaming the puzzle.

 

[Ocarina_Player]

If you don't like the sheikah stones, don't use them. Why is that so hard? If a player is playing for the first time and wants to use them, that is their prerogative. They chose to have the game spoiled, the game designers didn't do it for them.

The puzzles are there for someone like me to figure out. The sheikah stones are there for my younger cousins who just started growing out of the mindless bashing games like Mario. This way I don't have to get a call at work from them begging for me to walk them through a tricky part. XP

 

[mαrkαsscoρ]

If you don't like the sheikah stones, don't use them. Why is that so hard? If a player is playing for the first time and wants to use them, that is their prerogative. They chose to have the game spoiled, the game designers didn't do it for them.

again,it goes back to that fact that they're even there in the first place
if i would compare this to something to better understand it,i guess i'll go w/ this
[video=youtube;DKiBTMbJU2k]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DKiBTMbJU2k[/video]

 

[KylpeWelpert]

This reply is directed to the user Cfrock.

What Salem was suggesting was that puzzles are too easy. And they indeed are too easy for some people, which indicates that there must be some scale of intelligence with the group of players finding the puzzles to be too easy occupying a higher position on said scale. If you cannot understand this concept, then you must study intelligence theory and the ramifications thereof.

 

[Ocarina_Player]

So the fact that they are there is an insult to you. Do you honestly think they were put there because they think you specifically are stupid? No. They are for people who want them. You don't have to use them, you can pretend they are not even there. I did.

I can't watch the video for some reason. But the idea that they put them there because they think they made the puzzles too hard is preposterous. They are not necessary to complete the game at all and they're easy to ignore. Why does it bother you so much when it doesn't interfere with the game at all? I'm much more bothered by lengthy explanations, people straight up telling me where I have to go or do, and obvious markers on maps. THAT makes me feel like they think I'm an idiot.

 

[Random Person]

If you don't like the sheikah stones, don't use them. Why is that so hard? If a player is playing for the first time and wants to use them, that is their prerogative. They chose to have the game spoiled, the game designers didn't do it for them.

The question is... why put something in a game that would spoil it? Why put a "kill everyone" button in an FPS? Why make an insta-kill, easy to pull off move in a fighting game? Why allow access to answers that solve a puzzle-solving game? Even if they're optional, what's the point of putting anything in a game that plays the game for you?

The question is... why put something in a challenge that completely takes away the challenge?

 

[Ocarina_Player]

Okay, the hints given by the sheikah stones are hardly "playing the game" for you. They're visual hints that show you where you need to go.

They are there for players who get really stuck and don't feel like looking up a walkthrough. Not everyone is as smart as you are. I don't understand why everyone feels so insulted by hints that they can easily ignore.

 

[mαrkαsscoρ]

I can't watch the video for some reason.

there were points made on that,i would prefer if you watch it,and if you still feel the same way,provide some points to counter the ones he made

 

[BoxTar]

Shiekah Stones are not forced on the player at any point in the games. This means that they are an optional resource for those who feel they need them, without imposing even slightly on the experience of those who don't.

Hmm...the whole optional argument irks me just a bit...

I suppose I am just yearning for retro gaming, where the challenge was based upon a puzzle in front of you. You have no way of figuring it out, just the evidence at hand that are included within the puzzle. No answer or added hints, just...whatever the designers decide to give you. But this is just me, of course, and I suppose it does not apply for the entirety of gamers.

But not once did I feel like I was being condescended to by their mere existence, and I would be greatly surprised (and a little worried) if you did. The Sheikah Stones merely exist to make the games more accessible for younger players. That's all.

Of course I wasn't angered or condescended by them. Just a bit...off put. And not by the fact that they just plopped them into this classic to help. The fact that they're a shortcut that isn't really necessary (I'll expound on that in a moment).

The existence of the Sheikah Stones doesn't demonstrate a "dumbing down" of anything. The fact that this optional hint system even exists proves that puzzle design is not dumb, because if they were as dumb as you seem to be suggesting there would be no need for hints at all; the puzzles would be too simple.

I believe I may have worded that all wrong, still coming down off of some other rage I was having. OoT 3D did not "dumb it down". They shoehorned in a helping system that was not at all needed. Which I suppose is where my confusion lies: why have it? The internet exists, like, everywhere these days. If anyone REALLY wanted to know how to get past a certain puzzle, they can look it up online if need be.

But I suppose there are benefits to the Sheikah Stone system. The prevention of story and game spoilers for one. And a little less effort into...essentially having an answer handed to you. Also, not everyone who owns a 3DS may have an internet connection. I know I didn't have the internet when I got stuck back when I was a kid playing it on the N64, and I needed help from a friend of mine to get past some earlier puzzles.

The only difference is that, if you are stuck, you can travel to some secluded corner and ask for a hint. A hint, mind, not the answer;

Hmm...I didn't use them often, (only once or twice to see their function) but I do recall the Sheikah Stones basically acting out exactly what you need to do in a puzzle in order to complete it. Now, whether or not it becomes more and more vague in later puzzles, I do not know. I'll make sure to do more research next time before spouting my mouth off. :bleh:

What about Skyward Sword?

What about it? :? (Only kidding of course, I can clearly see the point you are making and I'm being a smart arse. =P)

I suppose now that I think about it a bit more, Sheikah Stones are indeed not a big issue. It seemed a bit odd to have them in a classic game like OoT, and I'm not arguing about adding things to classics-my main worry was experiencing that feeling of joy and accomplishment when you figure out a puzzle on your own. But, as you have said, those who wanna feel that will not break down and will most likely stick it out to the very end. These are optional hints and don't really hinder the game as much as, say, Navi blabbing to you all the answers, or all key words being in bright red text. Or a guide online. So I suppose that's the end of my little argument. Thanks for the other side of the coin.

 

[Salem]

Which is saying remove all puzzles by default, because all of them have hints.

No, not all of them do.

I don't see how Sheikah Stones show that Nintendo don't think highly of their audience. Shiekah Stones are not forced on the player at any point in the games. This means that they are an optional resource for those who feel they need them, without imposing even slightly on the experience of those who don't. Your disdain for them suggests you didn't use them. I know I never did. But not once did I feel like I was being condescended to by their mere existence, and I would be greatly surprised (and a little worried) if you did. The Sheikah Stones merely exist to make the games more accessible for younger players. That's all. Nobody is making you use them and nobody is designing really easy, or "dumb", puzzles because of them. Easy puzzles wouldn't require them at all.

No, the fact that they're optional is NOT the issue, it was never the the point that I was making at all.

Ok, maybe the wording I used was wrong, maybe it shows a lack of confidence from Nintendo'a part rather than a lack of trust.

Moving away from Sheikah Stones, I think the OP is mainly referring to the puzzles which are very obvious right from the off. For example, in Twilight Princess's Forest Temple, there is a puzzle that involves turning four fans in a specific order. On the floor is a large mark which looks like the letter Z, giving the answer without any trace of subtlety at all. What's the point of that? Why make a puzzle if the answer is going to be made clear the second you reach it? It would have been better to have the order be explained by some other means somewhere else in the dungeon. Like how the order of defeating Deku Scrubs in Ocarina of Time's first dungeon is learnt through remembering a simple riddle from earlier on, and not through a big neon sign over their heads numbering them 1–3.

This is what I think the OP is referring to most of all (correct me if I'm wrong), puzzles that very nearly just give their own answers away. And I agree that they are not very good. However, rather than remove such puzzles, I would much prefer if they were simply altered so that they weren't as blatantly obvious. Like that fan puzzle I mentioned before, remove the Z mark on the floor and instead have a slightly cryptic riddle on a plaque elsewhere in the dungeon. Or have the monkeys you rescue stand in a square, with the first in the bottom left corner, the second in the bottom right, and so on. Or have vines hanging over the fans, with the longest vine over the last fan, the shortest over the first, etc. I don't know, I'm just brain-storming here, but the point is, there are ways to indicate solutions that are not just directly the answer. Altering the obvious puzzles so that they aren't quite so obvious anymore is the action I would suggest should be taken, not outright removal. I like it when a game challenges my intellect and I have to figure things out. It's why Zelda features puzzles at all. I advocate making them a little harder, rather than getting rid of them.

Ok, this is kind of what I was talking about, the too obvious puzzles that basically solve themselves, because if the hint is too obvious, why have them in the first place?

Although the fan puzzle wasn't exactly what I had in mind when I stared this thread, because you see, there NO TEXT that tells you the order exactly, you just figure it out by looking at the environment, ruining that puzzle in the way I meant in the OP was if Midna told us to look at the floor when we come across the puzzle or something.

I must say I disagree. The point of the puzzle is to attract puzzle solvers. The point of the hints is to make the game more attractive to those who aren't as good at solving puzzles. The problem is, there is a line between "hints" and "answers." When a game begins giving the answer to a player, it defeats the purpose of the game and simply becomes a series of chores. If a hint begins to give the answer to a puzzle, it is what should be replaced/removed, not the puzzle. A puzzle can indeed be too hard, but a sign that it needs a hint is not a sign that it should be removed, because in reality almost all puzzles require SOME kind of hint or the player is just guessing and not solving.

In short, if a hint is too obvious, think about the hint first before instantly blaming the puzzle.

Ok, if the hint needs to be replaced and not the puzzle, here's the thing about that, how obvious is too obvious?

If the hint is too obvious, then that defeats the purpose of the puzzle, BUT if it's not obvious enough and too vague, then the player will end up using a guide or something, and that defeats the purpose of the HINT!

If you don't like the sheikah stones, don't use them. Why is that so hard? If a player is playing for the first time and wants to use them, that is their prerogative. They chose to have the game spoiled, the game designers didn't do it for them.

The puzzles are there for someone like me to figure out. The sheikah stones are there for my younger cousins who just started growing out of the mindless bashing games like Mario. This way I don't have to get a call at work from them begging for me to walk them through a tricky part. XP

Like I've been trying to say, I'm NOT complaining about the existence of the sheikhah stones. All I'm suggesting is an alternative method to get low-skilled players to bypass puzzled instead of using the stones, because if they solve the puzzle for, isn't having the puzzle kinda pointless?

This reply is directed to the user Cfrock.

What Salem was suggesting was that puzzles are too easy. And they indeed are too easy for some people, which indicates that there must be some scale of intelligence with the group of players finding the puzzles to be too easy occupying a higher position on said scale. If you cannot understand this concept, then you must study intelligence theory and the ramifications thereof.

What?

The question is... why put something in a game that would spoil it? Why put a "kill everyone" button in an FPS? Why make an insta-kill, easy to pull off move in a fighting game? Why allow access to answers that solve a puzzle-solving game? Even if they're optional, what's the point of putting anything in a game that plays the game for you?

The question is... why put something in a challenge that completely takes away the challenge?

That's pretty much what I was trying to say for all these centuries.

---

Ok, maybe I need to rephrase what I said.

Nintendo makes a Zelda game, then then add a puzzle to the game, they think the puzzle might be too hard.

What should they do?

1. Add a vague hint(The problem is the player might end up using a guide and defeat the purpose of the hint)
2. add an obvious hint(defeat the purpose of the puzzle)
3. add a good middle ground hint(that's a good one but it's a usually hard balance to achieve, Miyamoto said they struggled with it since alttp, so I'm not basing it out of nothing)
4. make an environment hint rather than text(another good one but hard)
5. scrap the puzzle(that's what I wanna talk about)

The last solution is something not many people are talking about, a lot are saying remove the sheikah stones, remove the hints in general, make the puzzle harder, but not many people are saying "maybe the puzzle is not worth the trouble to implement in the game"

 

[Cfrock]

not many people are saying "maybe the puzzle is not worth the trouble to implement in the game"

I won't speak for anyone but myself, but I just don't see that as an appropriate solution to such a problem. I would generally prefer if the game designers made those puzzles a bit more difficult, or a little less obvious, than just scrapping them altogether.

Zelda, not matter how much many of us might grumble about it, is intended for a young audience. I don't mean little kids of about 5–8, I mean young people of about 12–16. Puzzles in Zelda, particularly more recent Zelda, are generally easier than puzzles in older games. A lot of that will be that many who play Zelda games are much older than when they began playing in the 80s or 90s, yes, but even newcomers to the series tend to find games like The Wind Waker, Twilight Princess, Skyward Sword, or Phantom Hourglass to be quite easy. I would agree, I think the more recent games are easier. Puzzles in these games aren't as hard or as cryptic as those in older games; I couldn't even imagine something like Stone Tower Temple appearing in an original Zelda game today. But if puzzles as a whole are getting easier, then when do you determine them to be too easy to even bother with? If the fan puzzle I mentioned from Twilight Princess is fine as it is, how much easier would it need to be in order to qualify as too easy and fit for removal?

Getting rid of them as the way to, for want of a better word, 'fix' that problem raises the question: what do you put in their place? Say a dungeon is designed for the next Zelda game. There are puzzles in it, a couple of which are really easy, or the companion character provides an unneccesarily obvious hint (basically gives you the answer outright). There are two general ways to remedy that: 1) alter the nature of the hint (as you said, either make it more cryptic, make it environmental in nature, try to find a middle ground between vague and direct) or, 2) remove the puzzle. Even an easy puzzle is a bit of content so by removing it you leave a space, however small, that calls out to be filled. What do you fill it with?

I think the most obvious replacement would be what you suggested in the OP, an action segment. Maybe the puzzle is replaced by a room with a few tough enemies, or one enemy that provides a decent challenge (like the Dark Nuts or Iron Knuckles). I think that would be fine, up to a point. Too many of those would feel a bit repetetive after a while, and players might find themselves wanting some puzzles to break up the combat sections. What else would you suggest to replace easy puzzles besides combat?