Breath of the Wild Motion Controls

[youpster900]

What do all these enemies do when I target one enemy? Wait politely? I honestly don't remember, I haven't played these two in ages.

Maybe it's the whole Z-targeting system that needs to go, and they should focus their efforts on combat with multiple enemies at one, I know this happens sometimes in the sometimes, I mean they need to focus on multi enemy combat rather than single target.

Welcome to Hyrule warriors!

 

[JuicieJ]

What do all these enemies do when I target one enemy? Wait politely? I honestly don't remember, I haven't played these two in ages.

Maybe it's the whole Z-targeting system that needs to go, and they should focus their efforts on combat with multiple enemies at one, I know this happens sometimes in the sometimes, I mean they need to focus on multi enemy combat rather than single target.

So, basically, you want Zelda to turn into a hack-and-slash just for the sake of camera control.

I'm sorry, but no.

 

[Justac00lguy]

I've already said my stance on this matter quite a few times, so to save time I'll just stay brief. I don't think this game will utilise the Wii motion controls, I believe it will take full advantage of the Gamepad and the game, while having a big focus on the Gamepad's uniqueness, will try to deviate away from putting too much emphasis (especially marketing) on the control scheme and make the gameplay do the taking this time around.

 

[Deleted member 14134]

The more like the combat is like that in twilight princess and the less it is like skyward sword the better.

 

[JuicieJ]

The more like the combat is like that in twilight princess and the less it is like skyward sword the better.

You mean where enemies are complete pushovers and Link has access to countless broken-as-hell weapons? No thanks, I'd rather have a combat system that requires a certain level of skill.

 

[Deleted member 14134]

You mean where enemies are complete pushovers and Link has access to countless broken-as-hell weapons? No thanks, I'd rather have a combat system that requires a certain level of skill.

No I'd just rather sit back and play a game holding a controller I didn't have to swing around all the time especially since the motion controls were far from perfect. Also I miss the hidden moves from TP they added variety to combat, unlike Skyward Sword where the only variety was if you'd swing vertically or horizontally.

Also I've never heard the one about the broken as hell weapons. Can you elaborate on that further dear?

 

[JuicieJ]

No I'd just rather sit back and play a game holding a controller I didn't have to swing around all the time especially since the motion controls were far from perfect. Also I miss the hidden moves from TP they added variety to combat, unlike Skyward Sword where the only variety was if you'd swing vertically or horizontally.

I've already gone over how problems with Skyward Sword's controls lie with the player countless times, so I'll spare you that. Surely you must be aware that it doesn't take motion controls for a combat system like that of SS's to come about, though... right? Or is that wrong, since you don't seem to be acknowledging it?

The Hidden Skills were also absolutely worthless. The only enemies in the entirety of Twilight Princess that actually took advantage of them were the Darknuts. Literally every other enemy made no attempt to make them useful beyond faster kills, which already took barely any time due to how weak they were. I would certainly like more special moves aside from the Ending/Fatal Blow and the Shield Bash to return in future games, but the only reason to justify their return would be multiple enemies designed with them in mind, like how many of SS's enemies were with precision swinging.

Also, if you think the only variety in SS's combat is the direction you can swing, then there's no way you experimented with the game. There are an exponentially larger amount of ways you can approach situations in SS than in any previous game -- just about every time I've played through the game, I've discovered at least one new method, and I've replayed it quite a bit.

Also I've never heard the one about the broken as hell weapons. Can you elaborate on that further dear?

• The Bow (the quick draw is ridiculous)
• Bomb Arrows (further magnifies the Bow's broken status, and can even blow armor off of Darknuts)
• The Ball & Chain (do I need to explain?)
• The Sword (Hidden Skills)
  • The Helm Splitter
  • The Mortal Draw
  • The Jump Strike
  • The Great Spin

I suppose I should have said "countless broken-as-hell methods at your disposal", or something, but whatever.

 

[Deleted member 14134]

I've already gone over how problems with Skyward Sword's controls lie with the player countless times, so I'll spare you that. Surely you must be aware that it doesn't take motion controls for a combat system like that of SS's to come about, though... right? Or is that wrong, since you don't seem to be acknowledging it?

Did me proving how dense you were a few days ago hurt you that bad that you feel the need to compensate by trying to question my intelligence. All the enemies in Skyward Sword could be beaten by flailing your arms around. I want a combat system with different moves that have to be smartly executed to defeat enemies rather than spamming attack, whether that be swinging your arms or mashing a button.

Also the motion controls were not sharp enough to differentiate between a swing and requisitioning your arm into another position. A real sword would only be limited by how fast the swordsman is, not by how accurately the sword itself can respond to the movements. If there is a discrepancy then it shouldn't be used as it takes away from the experience. Motion controls will advance in technology and we'll see new gimmicks and devices but at the end of the day gamers will prefer a physical controller with buttons as a form of control over motion controls. Most people would agree with me. Anyways I await your disagreement of my opinion, I'm sorry it means so much to you that I don't agree with you.

 

[JuicieJ]

Did me proving how dense you were a few days ago hurt you that bad that you feel the need to compensate by trying to question my intelligence.

Oh, dear Lord, you weren't trolling me, were you...

I also wasn't questioning your intelligence. Are you actively trying to seek out potential attacks in my posts...?

All the enemies in Skyward Sword could be beaten by flailing your arms around

Not true. First off, Skyward Sword outright discourages flailing, both by enemies in swarms designed to react to it and by Link's swings taking a certain time to complete -- spamming the air is going to deliberately make the controls not be able to keep up, making them get out of line, which is immediate incentive to not do such.

Second, the vast majority of enemies also didn't require use of the sword, not to mention didn't guard themselves the way Bokoblins did. (I know you didn't exactly bring this up, but I feel this is a proper time to get it out of the way, as I've never really discussed it before.) For proof of this, here's a list of the enemies that take advantage of precision swinging:

• Bokoblin
• Deku/Quadro Baba
• ChuChu (red, green, yellow)
• Stalfos/Stalfos Warrior
• Lizalfos
• Beamos
• Armos
• Staldra

Out of all these enemies, the only one that legitimately requires the use of the sword is the Armos, and that only has to do with stabbing, which is in every other 3D Zelda, so it barely counts. All the others can be defeated in multiple ways other than the sword, and the only one that you can somewhat get away with flailing is the Bokoblin -- I say "somewhat" because it'll only work about half the time, which is actually impressive, considering they're the grunts.

Now here's a list of enemies that don't take advantage of precision swinging:

• Ampilus
• Bokoblin Archer
• Cursed Bokoblin
• Moblins
• Keese
• Oktorok
• ChuChu (blue)
• Skulltula
• Walltula
• Froak
• Hrok
• Guay
• Furnix
• Cranioc
• Aracha
• Spume

Of course, some of these can be DEFEATED with the sword, but they aren't designed in such a way as to utilize the 1:1 mechanics -- and, as I think you can say, they basically double the amount of the ones that are. This is so that the game wasn't oversaturated with those kinds of enemies, and the developers did a great job at ensuring it wasn't.

I want a combat system with different moves that have to be smartly executed to defeat enemies rather than spamming attack, whether that be swinging your arms or mashing a button.

Then why are you asking for a combat system like that of Twilight Princess's? It's the complete opposite of what you just described.

Also the motion controls were not sharp enough to differentiate between a swing and requisitioning your arm into another position. A real sword would only be limited by how fast the swordsman is, not by how accurately the sword itself can respond to the movements. If there is a discrepancy then it shouldn't be used as it takes away from the experience.

Pretty sure you can't requisition your arm.

Anyway, again, not true. This is an instance of player error, as the controls merely require you to not move your arm at a specific speed for a swing not to register. It takes getting used to, but I got it down pretty quickly, and I've never had an issue with it since. If they weren't "sharp enough", this would not be possible. I really don't get how you can't understand this concept regarding the core design of SS's controls.

Also, you're comparing a real life sword to a device that sends commands wirelessly to a machine that then registers said commands -- not to mention a device that isn't technologically capable of sending commands advanced enough to perform true 1:1 movements. Do you realize how illogical that is?

Motion controls will advance in technology and we'll see new gimmicks and devices but at the end of the day gamers will prefer a physical controller with buttons as a form of control over motion controls.

I know, and that's why I'm glad Nintendo has realized this with the Wii U. The Pro Controller is allowed for virtually every game available on the system, even when it's an inferior method, because they now know forcing people to use a method that they don't want to is bad for business. It's one of the few decisions they made early on with the Wii U that wasn't facepalm-worthy.

Anyways I await your disagreement of my opinion, I'm sorry it means so much to you that I don't agree with you.

It's one thing to have an opinion. It's entirely another to make false claims.

 

[Mercedes]

I'm not sure they'll even use motion controls, but they might put the option in I guess. It's not exactly far-fetched they'd give control choices which they commonly do with their other games. The issue is, if they do, I think it'll be a disappointment to some people. The main control method is going to be the Wii U Gamepad, that's pretty much a given; if motion controls were to be the main method of controlling Link then Zelda U would need to come bundled with a Wii Remote and Nunchuk, which I don't really see happening, nor do I see them nerfing the experience of the Gamepad to cater for motion controls. Plus Nintendo is going to want to show off the Gamepad's capabilities, and because of that gameplay will be primarily designed around the Gamepad. That means utilising the touchpad, twin anologue sticks, etc.

Motion controls work out of the box, as evidenced in Twilight Princess, but they didn't really bring anything to the table. They need to be specifically catered for to be anything more than an alternative way of pressing the B-Button. And so unless Nintendo has every single enemy have 2 different forms of AI depending on your control method, one of the control methods is going to be worse off for it. And since the Gamepad is the Wii U's selling point, the motion controls would logically be the one to suffer, and so people expecting an even better variation of Skyward Sword's motion control combat, or even expecting the same, may be disappointed with the result.

 

[Salem]

Welcome to Hyrule warriors!

It doesn't have to be exactly like Hyrule Warriors

So, basically, you want Zelda to turn into a hack-and-slash just for the sake of camera control.

I'm sorry, but no.

No, not for the sake of camera controls, for the sake of more fun, for the sake of Zelda's evolution of it's combat system.

 

[JuicieJ]

No, not for the sake of camera controls, for the sake of more fun, for the sake of Zelda's evolution of it's combat system.

I can't even understand why you'd want Zelda's combat to become that of a hack-and-slash to begin with, really -- that's just not what Zelda is. Could you please explain so I can see where you're coming from?

 

[Seth]

I can't even understand why you'd want Zelda's combat to become that of a hack-and-slash to begin with, really -- that's just not what Zelda is. Could you please explain so I can see where you're coming from?

Zelda has always been a fusion of puzzle solving and action adventure. As a series it has made good use of unique items to defeat enemies in unique ways from time to time, nevertheless the series mechanics at it's core has always been fairly hack-and-slash.

 

[Salem]

I can't even understand why you'd want Zelda's combat to become that of a hack-and-slash to begin with, really -- that's just not what Zelda is. Could you please explain so I can see where you're coming from?

Actually, reading what I said again, hack and slash isn't exactly what I had in mind, so I'll explain.

Like compare the combat of the old 2D Zelda with the modern 3D Zelda games , OoT and beyond, like almost all mini-boss battles involve one and one fight, even if you fight multiple enemies, you usually don't have to fight more than 2 or 3 at the same time at most, mostly because of the Z-targeting system.

The changed the system from Oot because they struggled with the new 3D game design on the N64, but now the technology has evolved but the combat barely did. Ya know, except with motion controls and stuff....

I'm not saying the 3D games has to be exactly like the old games, I mean people have been saying Zelda should become non-linear because that's how it was in the old games and it should take ideas from the old games, that's all well and good, but what about the combat? The non-lineraty wasn't the only thing changed throughout the Zelda series, the combat's focus was changed from a focus on fighting lots of enemies to fight mostly(but, I know, not always) one on one battles, because like I said before, Nintendo struggled with the 3D during the early stages of the N64, but technology has evolved, so can they bring back another old-school influence from old games(the combat style) in addition to the non-linearity?

 

[JuicieJ]

Zelda has always been a fusion of puzzle solving and action adventure. As a series it has made good use of unique items to defeat enemies in unique ways from time to time, nevertheless the series mechanics at it's core has always been fairly hack-and-slash.

I'm not convinced you understand what the hack-and-slash genre is. Hack-and-slashers revolve around having loads of moves at one's disposal -- each determined by what weapon is currently equipped, the spacing in which the attack button is pressed, and directional inputs with the left analog stick -- allowing the player to perform a wide variety of combos, and in GOOD hack-and-slashers, enemies always have large amounts of health, are very aggressive, and come in huge waves. Advanced enemies also have a wide variety of attacks -- not bosses, just higher-ranking enemies (bosses have absurd amounts of attacks).

Does that sound like Zelda to you? Because it's about the farthest thing from it, really. If you want real hack-and-slashers, try out games like Devil May Cry, Bayonetta, and Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance.

Actually, reading what I said again, hack and slash isn't exactly what I had in mind, so I'll explain.

Like compare the combat of the old 2D Zelda with the modern 3D Zelda games , OoT and beyond, like almost all mini-boss battles involve one and one fight, even if you fight multiple enemies, you usually don't have to fight more than 2 or 3 at the same time at most, mostly because of the Z-targeting system.

The changed the system from Oot because they struggled with the new 3D game design on the N64, but now the technology has evolved but the combat barely did. Ya know, except with motion controls and stuff....

I'm not saying the 3D games has to be exactly like the old games, I mean people have been saying Zelda should become non-linear because that's how it was in the old games and it should take ideas from the old games, that's all well and good, but what about the combat? The non-lineraty wasn't the only thing changed throughout the Zelda series, the combat's focus was changed from a focus on fighting lots of enemies to fight mostly(but, I know, not always) one on one battles, because like I said before, Nintendo struggled with the 3D during the early stages of the N64, but technology has evolved, so can they bring back another old-school influence from old games(the combat style) in addition to the non-linearity?

Twilight Princess & Skyward Sword basically already brought that old style back by having multiple enemies on screen at once, though.