General Zelda Is the Story an Unnecessary Distraction in Zelda?

[The Wanderer]

The title is going to mislead only too many people if I don't elaborate, so let me elaborate. I got into a discussion with someone in GaroXicon's How Zelda Has Dropped Out of Mainstream Conversation article about the importance of developing story and gameplay side-by-side with equal attention to both. His point of view essentially seemed to be that story more or less interferes with gameplay and should always take a backseat to gameplay. I made a good many other points, but I'll summarize it in saying that games still have the capacity to be wildly engaging in both story and gameplay, and that many players (including me) deeply appreciate a fire under their seats - plot motivation - to keep going with the game.

My question to you is, which category do you fall under? Is story an important part of the game to you, or would you rather play a Zelda game with little story to let the gameplay shine? Note that this is not a "Should gameplay come before story?" question - I'm merely asking how important the story is to you in a Zelda game.

I've thought about it, though, and I've come to realize something: the point of video games is not always the gameplay. It usually is, but not always. That's a very common misconception. Gameplay is what defines video games apart from other entertainment mediums like movies and literature. Even so, take a game like Heavy Rain, something light on actual gameplay but very impacting with its freedom of choice and story. In spite of having very simple gameplay, it was critically acclaimed for being so highly entertaining with the sum of its parts. It's kind of like how motion controls kind of set the Wii apart from its competitors, yet some of its high-quality titles (Xenoblade Chronicles, The Last Story, Fire Emblem: Radiant Dawn, even Super Smash Bros. Brawl to an extent) didn't use motion controls. Additionally, Japan is pretty big on "visual novels," video games which basically unveil like books or manga and include freedom of choice.

Gameplay is highly important and is usually what people get into a video game for, but games are a form of entertainment like so many other things, and similarly, can take many shapes. Which is why I conclude this post by saying, at least for me, a story is very important in quite a few games, particularly The Legend of Zelda, since I view it as aiding the entertainment value rather than interfering with gameplay. Even a minimalist, interpretive story like Shadow of the Colossus can be powerful, but quite often there must be an attempt first.

 

[Big Octo]

Zelda has always been a gameplay-driven series with less of a focus on story, and it has excelled in that regard. You mentioned how not every game has gameplay as its strongest point, and how it's made up for by plot, but the Zelda series does not represent those games. It has always shined through engaging and addicting gameplay. The story has always been a nice extra touch, and it should remain that way. A lack of story really hasn't been a hindrance to the Zelda franchise.

Though, some extra story would be nice at times. Some games have it more heavily than others, which aids in the experience. I believe that some games could have benefited from more story, such as Skyward Sword, the supposed "back story" game. If this game had more amounts of story about Hyrule's history, it would have been great.

Looking back to Skyward Sword, however, the amounts of story that could have been potentially be filled in can be done so by more games. This is a potential benefit of having more simple story lines, allowing for my freedom in terms of setting and not having only tight spaces to fit into due to expansive story elements. Fitting in a new game in a series with such a wide range of story would be hard to do without acts like retconning. Good thing the stories aren't too insane, I guess.

To sum up, I want to say that Zelda could benefit from more amounts of story, but it should still bot outshine the gameplay. In the end, story can go second in a Zelda title.

 

[Ventus]

I used to see Zelda as its own tier when rating video games. However, I've crawled out of that shell recently. Let's face it: Zelda just isn't in its own sphere anymore. It's a video game like any other, and will be judged on those same standards. Zelda has decent story, but its narrative is what is severely lacking. Who doesn't like a good ol' story about a guy who runs to save his girl, only to learn of a greater destiny? But it needs to be structured correctly, and relayed in a manner that captivates not just Zelda fans, but gamers alike. Look at The Last of Us for a very recent example. The story is like any other: the typical "hnng gotta survive from zombie epidemic". However, the way it is told - through just the right characters, actions, and sequence of events - is what gave it those 10/10 scores.

I could comment about gameplay but I'll save myself from looking like an idiot.

What I want to push is that Zelda's story isn't lacking perse, but the narrative and overall plots of the recent games are. They do need to step up. Zelda is no longer that immortal thing we used to think it was, but this doesn't mean Nintendo can't reattain that status.

 

[tketle]

For me, 2D Zeldas are gameplay driven and 3D Zeldas are more about exploration and world appreciation. I look to other series for a good story.

 

[ihateghirahim]

The story can be interesting, and it is really required to get us to the gameplay. COD can get away without one, but the grand fantasy of Zelda requires one, and I really do enjoy the myth and adventure a lot.

As for that article, I disagree with his analysis wholeheartedly. Bioshock and the Last of Us may be interesting, but they are far fro representative. Look at other big franchises these days. You got COD, Battlefield, Halo, Mortal Kombat and other fighters. These games feature little to no story asides from the campaigns few play, but they sell like hotcakes. MGS may have a great story, but its really a unique franchise that seeks to parallel movies. Let's also not forget that Nintendo's games and franchises all get rave reviews upon release. Mario Kart, Smash bros., Mario, Pokemon, DK, LoZ, and others are all loved by those who play them. Much of gaming culture has lost its touch with true quality, but Nintendo should continue to be steadfast in its commitment to quality and tradition.

 

[DarkestLink]

It's not that important, but it takes so little effort and it's welcome.

 

[Ventus]

It's not that important, but it takes so little effort and it's welcome.

You'd be surprised on how much effort a story takes - especially for a prestigious writer. It takes years to come up with the stuff you see in books. Not just two or three, but ten. :/

A mediocre story isn't hard to fix up, but Zelda needs to stop with the mediocre and bring in some stuff closer to prestige-grade writing.

 

[The Wanderer]

The story can be interesting, and it is really required to get us to the gameplay. COD can get away without one, but the grand fantasy of Zelda requires one, and I really do enjoy the myth and adventure a lot.

As for that article, I disagree with his analysis wholeheartedly. Bioshock and the Last of Us may be interesting, but they are far fro representative. Look at other big franchises these days. You got COD, Battlefield, Halo, Mortal Kombat and other fighters. These games feature little to no story asides from the campaigns few play, but they sell like hotcakes. MGS may have a great story, but its really a unique franchise that seeks to parallel movies. Let's also not forget that Nintendo's games and franchises all get rave reviews upon release. Mario Kart, Smash bros., Mario, Pokemon, DK, LoZ, and others are all loved by those who play them. Much of gaming culture has lost its touch with true quality, but Nintendo should continue to be steadfast in its commitment to quality and tradition.

Arguably, I think part of the reason Call of Duty, Battlefield, etc. sell so well is not particularly because of game quality, but simply the "hardcore" feeling of it all. I obviously can't speak for all of these gamers, but think how many "squeakers" (a.k.a. prepubescent, short-tempered M-rated game players) invade online gaming and try so hard to sound like adults that, ironically, they sound even more like children. My own brother and the brother of my sister-in-law fall under a different but similar category, those who play "hardcore" games more for the prestige than the advancements in gameplay or story. Almost without exception, every time I get a new game, my brother's first question to me is, "How are the graphics?" Not that he doesn't care for the gameplay, but it kind of shows where his priorities are. So to some extent, the Call of Duties, Battlefields, Halos, and Mortal Kombats (speaking in general terms) may attribute a fair portion of their success to those playing it to acquire a "tough" image rather than those looking for quality gaming.

Otherwise, I agree with you. And I would never disparage or downplay the importance of gameplay; it is, after all, the primary reason we play most video games. My point (and GaroXicon's, I believe) was that neither should be neglected because of the other. Zelda has entertaining stories, and I know Nintendo cares for those stories and puts some good thought into them, but they do seem kind of slapped on. I believe somewhere, one of the Nintendo higher-ups (Miyamoto or Aonuma or someone) mentioned how they solidify the gameplay first and think of a story to suit the gameplay later. This makes for engaging and successful video games, but what I'd like to see is Nintendo, right from the beginning of a new Zelda game, saying, "Alright, we're thinking of doing this for the gameplay and this for the story," not just developing one a fair bit and then getting to the other eventually.

 

[Salem]

When people ask for more story in Zelda, what exactly do you mean?

 

[BlitzPlum]

The gameplay is always key, and should always be more important than the story. The game's wouldn't be half as successful without the iconic gameplay that's so polished.

However, I do feel that story is important as it is the driving force for the game, and it's always good fun to see how the characters develop and, ultimately, what happens in the end.

 

[Snow Queen]

I don't think story is what people play Zelda for. People play Zelda to experience the lush and colourful worlds that Link must constantly traverse though in search of treasures and powerful items. If the story was absent, then it wouldn't hinder players from simply exploring the world of Hyrule, Termina, Holodrum, Subrosia, etc. As a loyal Zelda player, I can say that the one thing that gives me the thrill in a Zelda game is the adventure, not the story. The Zelda storylines rarely make sense anyway, so ditching them would be no problem.

 

[Zorth]

To me, the main focus of a video game should be the gameplay, not the story. I've never really understood completely story based games that have become quite popular these past few years. Games where you can't really do anything except for choosing what your character will say. It's not a game anymore to me it's just an animated movie with multiple outcomes at this point. Even though Zelda is far away from this type of game I still find it sad that it pretty much ends after you beat the final boss, after you've seen the main story. There is tons of gameplay during the story, but the way their tied together makes it almost disappear once the game is "beaten". The easiest way to change this would be to just add more content after the player finished with the main plot.

 

[Salem]

The story should compliment the gameplay, not supersede it.

What I mean is, the story should feel not disconnected from the gameplay, for example of the disconnect is, the main character doing something in the cutscene like fighting when the player should have done it, or NOT fighting for that matter, the cutscenes shouldn't give a character MORE power or make the character weaker, for example a bash on the head in a cutscenes makes the character faint while it doesn't in gameplay.... boy have I gone off-track.

 

[Wolf Sage]

The story should compliment the gameplay, not supersede it.

So this. However, this tends to be one of the fundamental qualities of RPGs, and not The Legend of Zelda…

---

In addition, adventure titles NEED a story to justify the actions of its characters and such. What kind of epic adventure would a sword-wielding hero be having with absolutely NO story? Without at least a basic story, Zelda would no longer be an adventure but would instead be an good, old-fashioned hack n' slash/beat 'em up (ew). Fortunately, Zelda has always done well with providing a basic plot and putting most emphasis on gameplay.

 

[Salem]

So this. However, this tends to be one of the fundamental qualities of RPGs, and not The Legend of Zelda…

What quality?

In addition, adventure titles NEED a story to justify the actions of its characters and such. What kind of epic adventure would a sword-wielding hero be having with absolutely NO story? Without at least a basic story, Zelda would no longer be an adventure but would instead be an good, old-fashioned hack n' slash/beat 'em up (ew). Fortunately, Zelda has always done well with providing a basic plot and putting most emphasis on gameplay.

Yeah, all Zelda games had at least a basic objective to have context for the game.