Johnny Sooshi
Just a sleepy guy
The other day I was playing a few games and found myself changing from game to game about every couple hours or so. Among two that I went through, I kept coming back to Skyward Sword and Metroid Prime 2. Playing them both, I noticed there was a difference in the games (besides the obvious genre difference) in terms of world exploration. Skyward Sword is somewhat open, but ultimately has itself down to a limited linear setup. The sky is your most open space where your many basic sidequests are. Furthermore these sidequests don't make much of an impact in the total outcome of the game, and don't become true moments of exploration. Metroid Prime 2 on the other hand, along with the other Metroid Prime games, has a much more open setup. You need certain equipment to access other areas in the game, some that are part of the story and progressing story-wise, others there to offer items, lore, and upgrades. Despite the fact that the game has a defined ending when you beat it, I find that the ability to go looking for items in various areas a great luxury. It affords the player time to power up before pressing on to harder areas in the game. In addition, it may unlock shortcuts that get you from area to area faster than you could before.
Now here is my question: Which of the play styles would you rather see in Zelda? Would you like the tried and true method of linearity, that may take the game and close of exploration, but helps deliver a coherent story, or would you like to see a more open world design, the likes of which are in Metroid Prime games?
Now here is my question: Which of the play styles would you rather see in Zelda? Would you like the tried and true method of linearity, that may take the game and close of exploration, but helps deliver a coherent story, or would you like to see a more open world design, the likes of which are in Metroid Prime games?