Breath of the Wild Less Structure, More Unexpected Stuff

[TimeforTavel]

I think that Zelda has become too predictable. The games are too structured in my opinion, and the tricks are getting way too old. In Twilight Princess you do three dungeons, then Zant appears in a plot twist and you do the rest of the temples. The same applied for Skyward Sword and the recent A Link Between Worlds. In every Zelda game you need to collect pendants, or stones, or paintings. And every time, they lie at the end of a dungeon. In my opinion, Zelda needs to have way less structure. The open worlds and dungeons need to be intertwined more and the rules need to be thrown away:

- No boss battles at the end of a dungeon. Instead the bosses should appear at random throughout the game, in the overworld, AND in the dungeons, but not in every one of them and not necessarily at the end of the dungeon.
-Better yet: throw away the overworld and ungeon system. I think one large overworld is better. With caves and crazy rooms and some big dungeons. The key word is again: the unexpected.
- No predictable things like: after this dungeon I will unlock the desert region and after the next one, I will unlock the fire region. Skyward Sword, Phantom Hourglass and The Spirit Tracks are perfect examples of what they should NOT do. Twilight Princess has the best system so far I think, especially up until dungeon three.
- Throw away the collectables at the end of a dungeon. Each and every dungeon should be like, for example the first temple of Skyward Sword or the Arbiters Grounds in Twilight Princess and the Tower of the Gods in the Wind Waker: not knowing what will happen or be at the end of the dungeon.
- More plot twists. Lately the plot twists are often after dungeon three and close to the end of the game. Twilight Princess had a good example of what should be done: the kidnapping of Colin in Kakariko Village. That was quite an unexpected and therefore powerful moment.

These are just a few examples. There are more, like, getting an item in every dungeon, getting a heart container in every dungeon and more vague ones, like having puzzles in every dungeon etcetera. I'd prefer to not have the structured stuff anymore, I'd like to expect the unexpected in every second of the game.

What do you think?

 

[Dio]

I don't think boss battles should be done away with at the end of the dungeon. The reward for completing a dungeon is to fight a boss. The last 3D entry in the series SS, had great bosses. I don't think there were any that were not actually fun. Even more fun bosses in Zelda U would be great. I do agree with more over world bosses, bosses that can be found in mini dungeons and caves as well as random encounter bosses would be a great addition to the game.

A large expansive overworld would be good, especially one that you can explore all of it or most of it right away.

Dungeons need to be less like dungeons though. Of course if there are places designed to protect something important then they should be in the more traditional style. However I am thinking of places that seem more natural, like the Snowpeak mansion in TP.

The plot twists should be more elaborate and shocking, not simply the return of Ganon, or there is a higher power behind the guy we thought was a villain. Perhaps an ally could betray you and this person is someone who the game gets the player to really like and trust.

 

[BamaLynx]

I like all your thoughts, and I agree that the series needs to be tossed on its head. I'm sure you'll get some people that say without that stuff then you don't have a Zelda game....but for me, a Zelda game can be many different things and is whatever you make it (the first 4 games in the series all felt really different to me, so its not unprecedented to mix things up). As long as you have a Link character and a Zelda character, then I believe anything will work and will feel right as long as its done well.

Another idea to toss into your list of gamechanging thoughts (and this could be connected to Ganonking's idea of being betrayed by an ally)....instead of just being a solo gig, have Link run through the game as part of a "gang". The player would only control Link, but the game could incorporate your group through "Lead Quests", gathering information and bringing it back to Link at important moments, and general story-telling (for example...have a continuous day/night cycle, and a points during the game the gang gathers around the campfire at night and parts of the games backstory is told through cut scenes or some other form).

 

[Dio]

Another idea to toss into your list of gamechanging thoughts (and this could be connected to Ganonking's idea of being betrayed by an ally)....instead of just being a solo gig, have Link run through the game as part of a "gang". The player would only control Link, but the game could incorporate your group through "Lead Quests", gathering information and bringing it back to Link at important moments, and general story-telling (for example...have a continuous day/night cycle, and a points during the game the gang gathers around the campfire at night and parts of the games backstory is told through cut scenes or some other form).

The gang thing is kind of what I have in mind for my ideal Zelda game for Wii U. I also would have the entire group killed at some stage as a consequence of the betrayal.

 

[TimeforTavel]

The gang thing is kind of what I have in mind for my ideal Zelda game for Wii U. I also would have the entire group killed at some stage as a consequence of the betrayal.

I like the idea. Also a faithful ally could be killed at some point by a bad guy. It happens all the time in 12+ rated tv-series, so why not in Zelda?

 

[Terminus]

- More plot twists. Lately the plot twists are often after dungeon three and close to the end of the game. Twilight Princess had a good example of what should be done: the kidnapping of Colin in Kakariko Village. That was quite an unexpected and therefore powerful moment.

The same game also had one of the most controversial plot twists in recent Zelda memory. The unexpected reveal of Ganondorf as the mastermind was abrupt and jarring, and not necessarily in a pleasant way. It trivialized Zant and turned him into a weak, psychotic character, while having an end-of-story that felt mildly tacked on.

Don't get me wrong, I love the game, I just thing adding Ganon into the story was the wrong thing to do (especially with no buildup).

 

[TimeforTavel]

The same game also had one of the most controversial plot twists in recent Zelda memory. The unexpected reveal of Ganondorf as the mastermind was abrupt and jarring, and not necessarily in a pleasant way. It trivialized Zant and turned him into a weak, psychotic character, while having an end-of-story that felt mildly tacked on.

Don't get me wrong, I love the game, I just thing adding Ganon into the story was the wrong thing to do (especially with no buildup).

I thought it was awesome. But that's because TP was my first Zelda game (my first adventure game/rpg even) and is now the holy grail for me. I had never heard of Ganondorf. But I'm aware of the criticism and didn't mention this specific twist for that reason.

 

[A Link In Time]

I believe the current dungeon and overworld schema is solid overall. Experimentation is never a bad thing, but if you tinker with an established formula too much, you're bound to form a large group of naysayers. Resident Evil is a perfect example of this identity crisis. The creators are straying away from the survival horror they pioneered to a more action focused series, and this change has produced many mixed reviews.

Skyward Sword tried to blur the distinction between dungeon and overworld by adding more enemies and puzzles to the latter. In the end, this made the dungeons feel "cheaper" because they were glorified romps of areas already traveled through. Another major issue is that Skyward Sword's overworld felt unnecessarily linear because it followed a dungeon schematic. I preferred what A Link Between Worlds did by calling upon the classics. Dungeons were traditional advancement from Point A to Point B, whereas the overworld was completely open to exploration (barring item requirements).

Bosses aren't a big issue. They're an integral part of the franchise that Nintendo has proven adept at evolving. Compare the relatively simple NES fight against Ganon to the more elaborate duels against Ganondorf or Ghirahim/Demise.

As for narrative, my complaint isn't the nature of the plot twist, but rather its timing. Every series veteran knows to expect a shake up after the third dungeon. Why not play to this pattern and surprise fans by reversing the game's structure? There could six or seven dungeons at the start, followed by a major story element, and three dungeons to round out the game.

 

[TimeforTavel]

I believe the current dungeon and overworld schema is solid overall. Experimentation is never a bad thing, but if you tinker with an established formula too much, you're bound to form a large group of naysayers. Resident Evil is a perfect example of this identity crisis. The creators are straying away from the survival horror they pioneered to a more action focused series, and this change has produced many mixed reviews.

Skyward Sword tried to blur the distinction between dungeon and overworld by adding more enemies and puzzles to the latter. In the end, this made the dungeons feel "cheaper" because they were glorified romps of areas already traveled through. Another major issue is that Skyward Sword's overworld felt unnecessarily linear because it followed a dungeon schematic. I preferred what A Link Between Worlds did by calling upon the classics. Dungeons were traditional advancement from Point A to Point B, whereas the overworld was completely open to exploration (barring item requirements).

Bosses aren't a big issue. They're an integral part of the franchise that Nintendo has proven adept at evolving. Compare the relatively simple NES fight against Ganon to the more elaborate duels against Ganondorf or Ghirahim/Demise.

As for narrative, my complaint isn't the nature of the plot twist, but rather its timing. Every series veteran knows to expect a shake up after the third dungeon. Why not play to this pattern and surprise fans by reversing the game's structure? There could six or seven dungeons at the start, followed by a major story element, and three dungeons to round out the game.

So you mean the major plot twist gets moved to another point in the game? Well, sorry but that's not enough for me. I think it's time for Nintendo to redefine Zelda alltogether. Ocarina of Time did it, and everyone loves it. The new Zelda should be like GTA V and Skyrim: a small revolution, a huge step for the series, but in a way that is fitting in a Zelda game. A new gimmick and small one-time changes are not going to cut it for me. The sea, the bird, the painting thing, these were all one-time changes. I love each and every Zelda game (well, almost) but if there are no big and redefining improvements coming I think I'll be less and less motivated to play any new installments. Nintendo is hanging in the past, at least up until the development of Zelda Wii-U started. If people want a new Ocarina of Time, it's time to redefine the series again. In my opinion, Zelda is in dire need of it.

And with redefining, I'm not afraid of having solid voice acting, making Link talk, making Zelda a hero, removing the classic overworld-dungeon structure etcetera. As long as it stays an action adventure, I'm fine with everything that's new. Resident Evil changed it genre, but Zelda does not have to do that (please!) I'm just done with the old-fashioned ways after having played all the Zelda games since Ocarina of Time.

 

[Larsi130]

In Twilight Princess, the first King Bulblin Battle at the bridge of Eldin, is really unexpected. It would be cool to see more of that. Also, I think it would be really fun to have more Places like the gerudo fortress in Ocarina, just bigger.

 

[Skunk]

Originally Posted by TimeforTravel

The new Zelda should be like GTA V and Skyrim

I've never played a GTA game, but anyone who plays Skyrim(or any TES game, for that matter) knows that no one plays through the main quest. The main quests are always very simple(minus Arena, simply because of it's weird enemy speeds and complex dungeons that were far too ambitious for the DOS), and there are always better quests in the game. I think that if Nintendo did decide to make an open world or even WRPG Zelda then they should make every side quest in the game differ depending on whether or not the main story has been completed fully, partially, barely, or not at all. This would not only increase replay value(in making it so that you could play through the story differently every time), and probably make for a stronger title that feels more connected within its world.