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

[Salem]

I apologise for my role in distracting the thread. Let's get to the main point, then.

If the topic is what to replace a pointless puzzle with, the answer of combat came up, but I have been thinking about it a little. Could the puzzle be replaced by another puzzle? Maybe not in every case of replacement, sure, but in some to ward off the spectre of repetition. For example, let's go back to that fan puzzle in Twilight Princess that I love/hate so much. The puzzle as it is involves turning four fans in a specific order to open a gate. The order is indicated by an obvious pattern on the floor, which I think makes the puzzle too easy. Rather than remove it or put a tough enemy in front of the gate, what about changing it to a different type of puzzle?

The Forest Temple has vines everywhere and Link swings on them throughout. What if the fans were replaced by a pulley system that uses vines, and the player must manage the weight on either side to pull the gate open, either by grabbing it themselves or arranging the dungeon's monkey on them? That would require the player to think more about how to open the gate, but also wouldn't require any blatant hint, just a quick indication that weight on the vines affects the gate.

Of course, changing the puzzles leaves you in the position of having to manage a new hint, but an example like the one above would seem to deftly avoid making such a hint too obvious, merely indicating the nature of the puzzle and leaving you to solve it in peace. For puzzles which couldn't be replaced so easily by a different one, then the option of combat still remains.

Here's the thing, I actually think that puzzle is supposed to be easy, it's meant to tell you to looks at your soundings to solve it in an indirect way, I think it supposed to teach the player to look at everything in the room, so that in the future when the player does get stuck, they would look at walls, floors to get a clue on how to solve future puzzles.

Actually I think "clue" is an appropriate term for these kind of things.

It meant to clue you in what needs to be done without stating it in text, or showing a cutscene.

 

[Random Person]

Ugh, they are not there for YOU. Nobody is asking YOU if you need a handicap! Why do you think they are there specifically for you? They are there for anyone who wants to use them, nobody expects anyone who knows what they're doing or looking for a challenge to use them! I know they weren't for me, I played the game so many times I can do the Shadow Temple without the Lens of Truth. I know they're for my kid cousins who are used to easy platform games.

So what you're saying is...

"Do you need a handicap? Oh, I ask that to everyone I play against. It doesn't mean I think you need one, but just in case someone does, I ask them."

This doesn't change it that much for me.

Other people who responsed

From a lot of people's comments, I'm seeing a pattern. Many are associating my example with the basketball player in a way I am not, so let me further explain.

The opponent asking do you need a handicap = placing the gossip stone in the game

You accepting the handicap = the player going up to the gossip stone and using it

The opponent asking do you need the handicap =/= going up to the gossip stone and using it


Many people seem to think that in my example, the opposing team offering the handicap is synonymous with a game forcing the hint upon the player, which it was never meant to be.

 

[Cfrock]

Here's the thing, I actually think that puzzle is supposed to be easy, it's meant to tell you to looks at your soundings to solve it in an indirect way, I think it supposed to teach the player to look at everything in the room, so that in the future when the player does get stuck, they would look at walls, floors to get a clue on how to solve future puzzles.

Yeah, I can understand that. I guess I've just never looked at it that way.

There's one puzzle that I found too obvious in the late game of The Wind Waker. When you are in Ganon's Tower near the end, there is a puzzle involving two rooms. One has a bunch of switches on the wall you have to hit in a specific order, the other has a bunch of switches which light up in a certain order when you step on a button. The puzzle is simply to note the order in which the switches light up in one room and then repeat it in the other. It's by no means a difficult puzzle, but when you step on that button,. the camera zooms in on each of the switches in turn, giving you a close-up and leaving you in absolutely no doubt which switch goes first, second, etc.

While the puzzle would still be easy without this camera movement, I find it sucks any difficulty from the puzzle entirely. It's pretty overt in how it handles it, like it wants to make absolutely sure that you got the order before you run off. I always felt it was unneccsary and made the puzzle fall flat. I didn't feel like I solved anything. It was particularly disappointing seeing how late in the game it was, too. That's a puzzle that I feel could have been replaced, rather than giving the blatant hint. Changing it so that it was less obvious, or making it a different puzzle that better reflected it being in the late stage of the game, would have been preferable to me.

 

[Salem]

Yeah, I can understand that. I guess I've just never looked at it that way.

There's one puzzle that I found too obvious in the late game of The Wind Waker. When you are in Ganon's Tower near the end, there is a puzzle involving two rooms. One has a bunch of switches on the wall you have to hit in a specific order, the other has a bunch of switches which light up in a certain order when you step on a button. The puzzle is simply to note the order in which the switches light up in one room and then repeat it in the other. It's by no means a difficult puzzle, but when you step on that button,. the camera zooms in on each of the switches in turn, giving you a close-up and leaving you in absolutely no doubt which switch goes first, second, etc.

While the puzzle would still be easy without this camera movement, I find it sucks any difficulty from the puzzle entirely. It's pretty overt in how it handles it, like it wants to make absolutely sure that you got the order before you run off. I always felt it was unneccsary and made the puzzle fall flat. I didn't feel like I solved anything. It was particularly disappointing seeing how late in the game it was, too. That's a puzzle that I feel could have been replaced, rather than giving the blatant hint. Changing it so that it was less obvious, or making it a different puzzle that better reflected it being in the late stage of the game, would have been preferable to me.

Perhaps it should have been relegated to an earlier dungeon rather than removed? And it would have been better if they didn't pan the camera, I agree with you there, the "cutscenes" solves the puzzle for you.

 

[Justac00lguy]

I think it's quite simple, by allowing optional hints to be available for those who need them (Sheikah Stones for example) you can essentially make the puzzles harder while still catering towards those who may be new to the series.

Zelda is a rather simple series; there is nothing overly confusing about it's challenges and they're presented in quite a friendly way. So in my opinion, Nintendo doesn't need to expand in terms of incorporating overly complex puzzles, but they do need to inject some fresh and, certainly, more difficult ones. However Nintendo need to first consider what fanbase they're aiming the game at and, truth be told, it's largely--and I hate using this term--casual gamers.

The thing is, a game can easily appeal to two different sets of games without dumbing down the game to fit in between the two. Nintendo actually already do this funnily enough. Like I mentioned earlier on, they do this with hint systems, such as the Sheikah Stones, and then you have things like the Hint Glasses in A Link Between Worlds and the Fortune Teller in Skyward Sword. Nintendo should stick to this, but then they need to really put some more effort into making some really fresh, mind-boggling puzzles. In my mind a puzzle should make you think for an extended period of time, a Dungeon should be like one big rubix cube (not literally, lol), and a Boss should be very much tactical as it should be action-based. The thing is, as we play more and more, and as we get more familiar, puzzles that once made us think now seem like mere obstacles as we've become somehow accustom to them. This is why fresh ideas should be the first priority before challenge in my opinion.

---

Basically keep away the smaller hints when encountering a puzzle, make usage of hint based systems such as the Sheikah Stones, and focus on fresh new ideas before targeting on making puzzles more challenging to fit the more experienced Zelda gamer.

 

[JuicieJ]

Nintendo should stick to this, but then they need to really put some more effort into making some really fresh, mind-boggling puzzles. In my mind a puzzle should make you think for an extended period of time, a Dungeon should be like one big rubix cube (not literally, lol), and a Boss should be very much tactical as it should be action-based. The thing is, as we play more and more, and as we get more familiar, puzzles that once made us think now seem like mere obstacles as we've become somehow accustom to them. This is why fresh ideas should be the first priority before challenge in my opinion.

I think both SS and ALBW did this pretty well. They got me stopping and thinking about how to solve a decent amount of puzzles for a couple minutes at a time, and that's pretty impressive, given that I've been avidly playing the series since I was 7. The bosses were also insanely awesome in both games.

 

[Ocarina_Player]

So what you're saying is...

"Do you need a handicap? Oh, I ask that to everyone I play against. It doesn't mean I think you need one, but just in case someone does, I ask them."

This doesn't change it that much for me.

Other people who responsed

From a lot of people's comments, I'm seeing a pattern. Many are associating my example with the basketball player in a way I am not, so let me further explain.

The opponent asking do you need a handicap = placing the gossip stone in the game

You accepting the handicap = the player going up to the gossip stone and using it

The opponent asking do you need the handicap =/= going up to the gossip stone and using it


Many people seem to think that in my example, the opposing team offering the handicap is synonymous with a game forcing the hint upon the player, which it was never meant to be.

Wait, you think just because they are there it means the game is asking if you need a handicap? That's ridiculous. Nobody tells you to use the sheikah stones, nobody directs your attention to them, they are just there for someone to crawl inside and THEN they see what they are for. You can quite easily miss them entirely.

 

[Random Person]

Wait, you think just because they are there it means the game is asking if you need a handicap? That's ridiculous. Nobody tells you to use the sheikah stones, nobody directs your attention to them, they are just there for someone to crawl inside and THEN they see what they are for. You can quite easily miss them entirely.

...except for the part where there's a cut scene that is automatically played after first getting your sword with the gossip stone saying "I'm here if you need me."

 

[JuicieJ]

...except for the part where there's a cut scene that is automatically played after first getting your sword with the gossip stone saying "I'm here if you need me."

Key words "if you need me".

 

[Ocarina_Player]

...except for the part where there's a cut scene that is automatically played after first getting your sword with the gossip stone saying "I'm here if you need me."

I was thinking of OoT3D. They are even less conspicuous in that one. And so what if SS draws attention to itself for five seconds. You still don't have to use it, it is just there if you want a hint. I don't see how that is insulting to you.

 

[Random Person]

I was thinking of OoT3D. They are even less conspicuous in that one. And so what if SS draws attention to itself for five seconds. You still don't have to use it, it is just there if you want a hint. I don't see how that is insulting to you.

I've never play OoT 3D, so I can't really comment on that.

I've explained why this is insulting several times. At this point I can only say it wasn't insulting to you, but to others it was.

And AGAIN, the Gossip Stones themselves were not insulting to me Personally. I'm just looking at them objectively and saying that even though I wasn't insulted, they are insulting. I understand where the people who are upset are coming from.

 

[DeletedUser9]

Are those hints there because Nintendo doesn't trust the average player to be able to figure out the solution themselves?

My suggestion is that if they think a particular puzzles needs more obvious hints to be solved by players, then that puzzle should not even be in the game, instead it should be replaced by more action segments or something.

What do you guys think?

You're misunderstanding the nature of the inclusion of things like hint systems. The point isn't that the puzzle can't be figured out by the average person, but that you shouldn't be restricted from enjoying the game if you can't figure a puzzle out; the option to be given a hint as to how to progress past a puzzle that "beat" you is a good one for those who want to play the game more casually. This is almost the stated goal of Nintendo, if I recall, although I can't cite it. It's not an uncommon agreement, either, and we shouldn't apply some kind of different rule for video games that doesn't exist in other modes of entertainment; when people play riddle games and one person gives a riddle for the others to solve, the others often get stumped and ask for a hint so they can have another try without outright giving up.

Anyway the very nature of puzzles requires that hints of some kind exist even if they're not hint systems of the sort you see in Zelda, because a "puzzle" that has no trail, as it were, to follow towards its solution isn't a puzzle. It's just an abstract obstacle you can only pass with a guide, trial and error, or luck. Well-designed puzzles hint towards their own solution in subtle ways. So in that way, no, hints can't ruin puzzles; hints are inherent to puzzles. Every puzzle needs hints, or "clues" as you called them later in the thread.

More obvious hints like those in Zelda hint systems are a bit different, sure, but at the end of the day, again, all they are is a system to make the game easier so getting stumped by a puzzle doesn't ruin the whole experience by barring your path. If they bother you, then you don't have to use them, in the same way that you don't have to use a strategy guide or a walkthrough just because it exists.

"Do you need a handicap? Oh, I ask that to everyone I play against. It doesn't mean I think you need one, but just in case someone does, I ask them."

This doesn't change it that much for me.

I've never play OoT 3D, so I can't really comment on that.

I've explained why this is insulting several times. At this point I can only say it wasn't insulting to you, but to others it was.

And AGAIN, the Gossip Stones themselves were not insulting to me Personally. I'm just looking at them objectively and saying that even though I wasn't insulted, they are insulting. I understand where the people who are upset are coming from.

The game is not a person and they are not addressing you directly. Saying it's insulting to offer the option to people -- no matter how explicitly the question is stated -- and likening it to a real-life situation is not a viable comparison. A more relevant one would be to likening it to a difficulty level option, or the idea of different leagues or weight categories in sports. So then I ask you:

Do you think a game is insulting you by offering you a choice between Easy/Normal/Hard modes?

(I have not read the entire thread and don't really intend to, so if I missed something and misunderstood, let me know; this reply is based on these two quotes only.)

 

[Random Person]

The game is not a person and they are not addressing you directly. Saying it's insulting to offer the option to people -- no matter how explicitly the question is stated -- and likening it to a real-life situation is not a viable comparison. A more relevant one would be to likening it to a difficulty level option, or the idea of different leagues or weight categories in sports. So then I ask you:

Do you think a game is insulting you by offering you a choice between Easy/Normal/Hard modes?

(I have not read the entire thread and don't really intend to, so if I missed something and misunderstood, let me know; this reply is based on these two quotes only.)

Yeah, I explained the concept of using it in different video games as well, but the concept wasn't getting through to some, so I tried to apply the concept to games in general, which I believe does work despite your rebuttal.

Also, no, I don't feel the game is insulting the player by offering a difficulty level because the game is segmenting players, distinguishing who might need help and who help won't be given to, at the beginning of the game. (I went into detail in a previous post, so I won't here)

When you choose to ignore an asset given to you by a game, you are placing a challenge on yourself, not the game. Its similar to choosing not to use an overpowered weapon in an FPS because that makes the game more challenging/fun for you. But that means such an asset shouldn't be placed in the game in the first place. If a clue in a puzzle solving game, be it optional or not, solves a puzzle for you, even if you choose to ignore said hint, that hint is diminishing the value of winning, especially to those who are used to their game not containing such easily acquirable hints.

The value of saying "I beat this puzzle solving, action/adventure game" is diminished. If you can think of a hard game where help was hard to find inside the game, then you understand how much more valuable that is than a game with similar difficulty where help is easily available to the player.

 

[Ocarina_Player]

Oh no, it's getting through, we just don't agree with you.

It is not insulting to provide help to those who ask for it if it is in no way intrusive to the game play.

 

[mαrkαsscoρ]

Oh no, it's getting through, we just don't agree with you.

It is not insulting to provide help to those who ask for it if it is in no way intrusive to the game play.

the reason i don't like it is b/c i know,if say my little brother were to play it,he'll just blindly use it w/o even trying to think for himself for once [knowing his intelligence,he won't get it anyway]