WW-Wii U One of the Worst Final Bosses in the Series

[Ver-go-a-go-go]

I'm pretty sure Majora's Mask and Skyward Sword's bosses are remarkably diverse.

I can't recall all of SS's off the top of my head, because the last time I played it was at launch, and I have very little interest in doing it again. I do remember, however, that they all followed the same "use the item you got in the dungeon" formula, like a vast majority of 3D Zelda bosses, often just varying the methods in which you use said item throughout the battle.

For MM, however, it's very reminiscent of OoT, for obvious reasons. Odolwa is the basic hit-with-arrow then attack scheme, Goht is spinning around the same room constantly with the Goron form, but with the same method just becoming more difficult because there's more obstacles to avoid, Gyorg is another hit-with-arrow or Zora boomerang then attack scheme, and Twinmold is a hack-n-slash with your sword, or yet another hit-with-arrow boss if you ran out of magic. I'll grant you that Majora had varying methods and degrees.

Also, look at nearly every 3D Zelda boss in existence. OoT nefariously sticks to the use-the-dungeon-item formula, with Barinade requiring almost exclusively the boomerang in a tedious fashion, Volvagia being all about the Megaton Hammer, and Twinrova being all about the mirror shield. WW does the same thing from the beginning with Gohma and the Grappling Hook, and the Helmaroc King with the hammer again. TP is even more obvious about it, almost sickeningly so, especially the incredibly redundant Morpheel.

I don't know if you follow GameGrumps on YouTube or not, but Egoraptor makes some REALLY good points during their ALttP run on what the 3D Zeldas do wrong, and predictable bosses are one of them. It's really interesting to listen to.

EDIT:

I actually started thinking about them all when writing that, and I do remember something I liked - TP Zant battle. The varying ways you use the weapons, and how you have to use almost all of them, was a nice breath of fresh air, especially after TP had been so bad about it throughout the rest of the game.

 

[Garo]

This is exactly my problem with it; people let all of this cloud what is ultimately an incredibly flawed and easy boss battle. Look at what Oot pulled off -

OoT has Ganondorf defeated, his entire castle destroyed. In one last effort of desperation, he transforms into his monstrous form, Ganon. No subtitle. Ganon. He knocks the Master Sword, what you know you MUST HAVE to defeat him, away from you. And you're forced to go toe-to-toe with this massive beast that you can't possibly beat. An incredibly fitting soundtrack follows this - I don't have to link to it, because everyone has heard it. The weather is terrible and dark, you're constantly being trampled by Ganon, and Zelda screams in horror each time it happens because she's locked out and can't do a single thing about it. You're constantly strapped for magic as you desperately try to make good use of the only thing that helps, the Light Arrows, which drain your magic an unbelievable amount.

MM is also a good example that I could outline, but I feel that OoT would hammer the point the best.

So what is my point? Yes, presentation and mood can do a lot. But it was proven with OoT and MM that you could have exactly that, on top of an exciting and challenging boss battle. Hell, MM is probably MORE challenging that OoT's, but it retains an incredibly strange and foreboding mood as Majora transforms into an even more demonic and sadistic form throughout the battle.

So having a good mood/atmosphere shouldn't give WW brownie points for some reason. Atmosphere/mood should be a given in a Zelda final battle, not something on its own to praise, because nearly ALL of the 3D titles, and even some of the 2D ones, pull it off nicely. It needs to be judged also on the merits of challenge and design, which WW unfortunately fails on both fronts with.

No, it's only part of the equation. If something has great presentation, but lacks substance, then it's only halfway fulfilling. This perfectly describes the Ganondorf fight in The Wind Waker, with its remarkably impressive and over-the-top style, but one-dimensional and overly-easy gameplay. It's a very poor boss fight from a gameplay perspective, making it half-baked.

While I do agree that the Majora's Mask finale is a far greater one than the Wind Waker one, it is for entirely different reasons (namely that the content and form of the boss fight reflects the chaotic nature of Majora in a rather anticlimactic and decidedly bizarre final boss encounter that eschews traditional predilections of the "grand finale" in favor of a thematically fitting encounter), and I would very much say that the finale of Wind Waker is considerably more emotionally resonant than any of the other titles.

It ultimately boils down to the idea that I don't think challenge or gameplay is particularly important for boss encounters, particularly final boss encounters. The scope, scale, and emotional gravity of the encounter is paramount to its success in my eyes. A supremely difficult and well designed (from a gameplay perspective) boss battle devoid of emotional context - think the bulk of battles in Dark Souls with enemies beyond the named ones like Nito and Seath - is ultimately hollow, I find. It might be fun, but toppling it is not nearly as meaningful as toppling the villain that has been built up all game and culminated in a grand clash with atmosphere and mood and this outstanding spectacle. Whereas a comparatively simplistic fight - Ganon, for instance - that has that spectacle, that has that fantastic sense of emotional potency? That's a meaningful fight right there, and it feels amazing.

For my money, no fight in the series has managed to be that spectacular. I love it for the same reason I love the latter games in the God of War series - it knows how to give you a spectacle.

 

[Ver-go-a-go-go]

While I do agree that the Majora's Mask finale is a far greater one than the Wind Waker one, it is for entirely different reasons (namely that the content and form of the boss fight reflects the chaotic nature of Majora in a rather anticlimactic and decidedly bizarre final boss encounter that eschews traditional predilections of the "grand finale" in favor of a thematically fitting encounter), and I would very much say that the finale of Wind Waker is considerably more emotionally resonant than any of the other titles.

It ultimately boils down to the idea that I don't think challenge or gameplay is particularly important for boss encounters, particularly final boss encounters. The scope, scale, and emotional gravity of the encounter is paramount to its success in my eyes. A supremely difficult and well designed (from a gameplay perspective) boss battle devoid of emotional context - think the bulk of battles in Dark Souls with enemies beyond the named ones like Nito and Seath - is ultimately hollow, I find. It might be fun, but toppling it is not nearly as meaningful as toppling the villain that has been built up all game and culminated in a grand clash with atmosphere and mood and this outstanding spectacle. Whereas a comparatively simplistic fight - Ganon, for instance - that has that spectacle, that has that fantastic sense of emotional potency? That's a meaningful fight right there, and it feels amazing.

For my money, no fight in the series has managed to be that spectacular. I love it for the same reason I love the latter games in the God of War series - it knows how to give you a spectacle.

That's a very interesting point of view, one that I can greatly sympathize with. Being emotionally moving, or just being climatic in general, is certainly very important for an medium of entertainment that hopes the breach the barrier of "art" and become something more than it was meant to be. In fact, I can say with great certainty that some of the most epic final encounters I've ever had in video games were very much in part because of mood, atmosphere, and emotion. Final Fantasy has managed to do this or me, and one of my personal favorite games, Castelvania: Lords of Shadow, does it absolutely spectacularly. Game series that have become know for these types of things generally pull it off quite well, even if things are lacking in the actual gameplay department, such as Final Fantasy XIII. It has a very moving finish, which is somewhat deeply philosophical and emotional because of all the hours you've poured into the characters getting to know them. The gameplay, as it is already well documented, is rather.... flawed. But that doesn't detract from the more emotional experience that I have come to expect from a Final Fantasy game.

However, that being said..... I have to strongly disagree with your opinion that final boss encounters should discount challenge or gameplay when it comes to putting on a show. Now, don't misunderstand me; the point above is 100% agreeing with you that, in other series especially, that kind of thing has become somewhat of an expectation. But Zelda as a series has always had its roots very deeply into revolutionary gameplay, always pushing the envelop in the department. When you compare to the like of other series, the story has always been rather simplistic, and the emotion rather low. This isn't a bad thing, because that's never been what Zelda is all about. I can give Zelda a pass when it lacks in story and emotion, because my expectations for it are completely different - I want interesting gameplay that will, at some point, hopefully pose a challenge to me. These expectations are exacerbated by the final boss encounter, which is why WW is such a let down for me; it amps up its presentation, but discounts what I really want from a Zelda game in particular.

 

[JuicieJ]

I can't recall all of SS's off the top of my head, because the last time I played it was at launch, and I have very little interest in doing it again.

Your loss, I suppose.

I do remember, however, that they all followed the same "use the item you got in the dungeon" formula, like a vast majority of 3D Zelda bosses, often just varying the methods in which you use said item throughout the battle.

Lol, no they didn't. Only Tentalus legitimately revolved around a single item, and even it had other mechanics involved. All three Ghirahim and Imprisoned fights, Levias and Bilocyte, the Horde Battle, and Demise never required a single item, and each one needed very different methods of approach.

Then there's the bosses that had items involved, but weren't the sole means of triumph.

Scaldera's main mechanics were running up the slope and avoiding potential fireballs. The tried-and-true "throw the bomb in the boss's mouth" mechanic was used, but even then you had to run to the bottom of the slope after doing so and slash in different directions according to the position of his eye, as well as consistently chip away at his rock armor. There's even a second phase where you have to avoid his roll down the entire slope.

Moldarach hardly requires the Gust Bellows at all, only needing it to be brought out to uncover the giant scorpion after he burrows under the sand. The main mechanic of that fight is destroying his claws via directional slices, followed by stabbing his middle eye.

Kolotos admittedly uses the Whip more than the previous two used their respective items, but there's still a variety of tricky attacks to avoid as opposed to slow and easy-to-dodge smashes and fiery breath attacks (*ahem* GameCube games*), and the second phase has you using his own weapons to dismantle him and wail away at his weak point, which is ridiculously satisfying.

So, in other words, your analysis applies to only one boss in the entire game.

For MM, however, it's very reminiscent of OoT, for obvious reasons. Odolwa is the basic hit-with-arrow then attack scheme, Goht is spinning around the same room constantly with the Goron form, but with the same method just becoming more difficult because there's more obstacles to avoid, Gyorg is another hit-with-arrow or Zora boomerang then attack scheme, and Twinmold is a hack-n-slash with your sword, or yet another hit-with-arrow boss if you ran out of magic. I'll grant you that Majora had varying methods and degrees.

Gyorg and Twinmold are admittedly less compelling fights, but Odolwa is probably the most diverse boss in the entire series with a plethora of heavily varying attacks and a truckload of methods of approach. The Bow is just the most obvious one. Goht has a lot of different attacks, as well, all of which you have to avoid while rolling at high speeds. It's not exactly a cakewalk of a fight.

 

[Ventus]

I agree that TWW Ganondorf as a fight is really poor and second-to-worst final boss. But, as Garo noted, presentation and mood are incredibly important as well. The battle's presentation is decidedly above par, with a circular ring leaving a "nowhere left to run" feeling, and of course pouring rain to clear any doubts that this IS the end whether for dearest Link and Zelda, or for the G-man himself.

Mood is everywhere.

I've no regrets.

 

[Ver-go-a-go-go]

Your loss, I suppose.

Well, I found the game less than compelling, and have no desire to return to it. I don't like wasting my time with games that I deem to be below standard.

Lol, no they didn't. Only Tentalus legitimately revolved around a single item, and even it had other mechanics involved. All three Ghirahim and Imprisoned fights, Levias and Bilocyte, the Horde Battle, and Demise never required a single item, and each one needed very different methods of approach.
Then there's the bosses that had items involved, but weren't the sole means of triumph.
Scaldera's main mechanics were running up the slope and avoiding potential fireballs. The tried-and-true "throw the bomb in the boss's mouth" mechanic was used, but even then you had to run to the bottom of the slope after doing so and slash in different directions according to the position of his eye, as well as consistently chip away at his rock armor. There's even a second phase where you have to avoid his roll down the entire slope.
Moldarach hardly requires the Gust Bellows at all, only needing it to be brought out to uncover the giant scorpion after he burrows under the sand. The main mechanic of that fight is destroying his claws via directional slices, followed by stabbing his middle eye.
Kolotos admittedly uses the Whip more than the previous two used their respective items, but there's still a variety of tricky attacks to avoid as opposed to slow and easy-to-dodge smashes and fiery breath attacks (*ahem* GameCube games*), and the second phase has you using his own weapons to dismantle him and wail away at his weak point, which is ridiculously satisfying.
So, in other words, your analysis applies to only one boss in the entire game.

It seems that our conversation went from me talking about how the final boss encounter in WW is sub-standard compared to the rest of the series, to you analyzing how the motion controls in Skyward Sword made the boss encounters pretty cool. Fairly off topic, but I guess I can humor the points by steering back into the point I was originally trying to make by comparing the final encounter of WW to the likes of Oot and MM. I was fast to point out that the simplicity and hollowness of the gameplay in WW's final boss paled greatly next to Ganon in OoT and Majora in MM. You agreed with me when it came to WW, but pointed out you thought OoT did it far worse. I replied saying 1.) OoT actually does a lot of good things in the final fight, one of which you outline in your in-depth analysis of SS normal bosses and 2.) 3D Zelda is nefarious for having bosses that follow a cookie cutter formula. You didn't replay to point number one, so Ill grant myself that, but you responded that at least two 3D games had various methods of improving boss gameplay. First off, just SS isn't the majority here - even if SS does a better job, that doesn't refute the fact that a vast majority of the Zelda games do follow the set-formula of get-the-item and beat the boss. This is fact. I'll refute MM below, but we need to look at the merits that we were actually comparing in the first place. I said that Zelda bosses are mostly predictable because it's true - I even gave examples from the majority of the 3D games, except the most recent one which is indeed, a minority. When you look at all of the battles throughout the history of the Zelda series, in particular the 3D ones, the formula is nearly always the same. This is why that in particular is what warrants that statement to be the most accurate when used for comparison to the topic at hand, ESPECIALLY since it's WW, and the best way to compare it is to put it up against the likes of the games which were closest to it, MM and TP, which is exactly what I did.

But let's assume that SS was just amazing on the boss battle front, and that it somehow just completely makes my point about most Zelda bosses being predictable irrelevant, and somehow even affects my other points about WW's final boss. Let's actually look at what you SHOULD be using in comparison because of the title of the thread, which is the final boss encounter of SS, Demise. I was always quick to say that I like the Demise fight, especially the atmosphere it had and the build-up that Demise had. Demise can easily be defeated in under a minute, and you need no additional items other than your sword and shield. In fact, Demise could very well suffer from final boss WW syndrome, as it is incredibly formulaic in what you have to do. Now, I'm not saying it's as bad, or worse. In fact, I consider just about all of the 3D final boss fights to be superior, with SS being no exception at all. But you have to give weight to the fact that the one-on-one swordfight is again, as per rather unfortunate standards set by WW and TP, just downright predictable. It follows WW to a T in the fact that the battle starts off with you defending with your shield, and slicing when there's a opening. No addition need for ways to utilize your items, and absolutely no need for them. The battle then takes another WW turn by introducing the lighting that you need to use for a skyward strike, making the entire fight one-dimensional in the way that you have to win - skyward strike, then finishing move. If you get this down, it can be done in EASILY under a minute, and even under 45 seconds, which, especially from a gameplay perspective, is very underwhelming in a 2011 Wii game. It's not even a speedrunning technique, but just being able to very easily determine what you need to do and how to do it. This alone is a testament to why Demise is at just as much fault as Ganondorf from MM and TP.

I would like to think that my analysis holds true to what Zelda has been giving us for almost its entire existence as a game franchise. If you don't believe so, that's fine, I respect your opinion.

Gyorg and Twinmold are admittedly less compelling fights, but Odolwa is probably the most diverse boss in the entire series with a plethora of heavily varying attacks and a truckload of methods of approach. The Bow is just the most obvious one. Goht has a lot of different attacks, as well, all of which you have to avoid while rolling at high speeds. It's not exactly a cakewalk of a fight.

A boss having many ways to attack you does not mean that the methods to defeat it become more varied and interesting. You get the bow in Odolwa's temple, and it's the most efficient way to beat him.That's not a coincidence. I addressed Goht in my post above, of how you're doing the exact same thing throughout the entirety of the fight, just with more things to avoid. I certainly agree with you that it's not a cakewalk, but that doesn't change the fact that there's no variation during the fight at all. Yes, I know you can use arrows and bombs to defeat him... But that method is just so impractical that it can barely be utilized. Plus, the entire arena in which you fight is very clearly designed so that the primary method you use is the Goron Mask's rolling power. In fact, I don't believe the other methods are ever given to you, making it more like the bottle against Ganondorf in OoT and the Bug Net against Demise in SS.

I'm glad we agree on Gyorg and Twinmold.

 

[JuicieJ]

I never even brought up motion controls once (at least not directly), so I'm really not sure what compelled you to think that was part of my main intent. You also seem to be completely oblivious to the fact that all I said was that you were incorrect in saying that SS's bosses all relied solely on using the dungeons' items to defeat them, which has resulted in you reading way too far into what was actually there.

I also really can't understand you finding patterns of MM and SS's bosses to not be interesting. They're all pretty creative and require a pretty decent level of skill to execute.

 

[Ver-go-a-go-go]

I never even brought up motion controls once (at least not directly), so I'm really not sure what compelled you to think that was part of my main intent. You also seem to be completely oblivious to the fact that all I said was that you were incorrect in saying that SS's bosses all relied solely on using the dungeons' items to defeat them, which has resulted in you reading way too far into what was actually there.

Well, two of your main points were the Ghirahim fights and Moldarach. Both are centered around precision based controls, and since those were some of your examples, assuming might be acceptable. But you know what they say about assuming.

I guess you'll have to forgive me for reading into something too much, haha. Serious conversation about the not-so-serious topic of video games has always interested me, and I always look for a deep level of it.

I also really can't understand you finding patterns of MM and SS's bosses to not be interesting. They're all pretty creative and require a pretty decent level of skill to execute.

I find the bosses of MM to be very interesting in design and actual methods of disposal. I had a blast with Goht the first time, and I still do emulating MM today. But that doesn't change the fact that said bosses are still one-dimensional in how they're defeated.

 

[JuicieJ]

bosses are still one-dimensional in how they're defeated.

I really couldn't disagree more. :/

 

[Ventus]

Curiousity is getting the better of me, but how exactly would the GDorf fight be made any more difficult than it already is? I can't see it being, well, hard in any capacity.

 

[JuicieJ]

Curiousity is getting the better of me, but how exactly would the GDorf fight be made any more difficult than it already is? I can't see it being, well, hard in any capacity.

Making it not be a parry fest?

 

[Mellow Ezlo]

Curiousity is getting the better of me, but how exactly would the GDorf fight be made any more difficult than it already is? I can't see it being, well, hard in any capacity.

My thoughts exactly. This is one of the coolest final boss fights in the series, but it's not difficult by any means. Ganondorf's attacks to little damage, they're easy to dodge, and getting around his defenses shouldn't be much of a problem to anybody. Even deflecting Tetra's light arrows, though a cool idea, was incredibly easy.

Making it not be a parry fest?

But that wouldn't really change much. There's other ways to get around his defenses than parrying; parrying is only required to finish him off. But none of the other methods are particularly difficult anyway. No matter which way it's done, this boss is fairly easy to take down. I wouldn't call it the easiest (that prize for me goes to Twilight Princess's final boss), but it isn't hard.

That being said, though, this is still my favourite final boss in the series.

 

[JuicieJ]

I'm aware you can roll under his legs, but that's not the intended method. Even when doing so, though, it doesn't matter because there's a pillar that you can get Ganon to destroy which contains a crapload of magic jars.

 

[Mellow Ezlo]

OOT's Ganon is easy, but I actually have a lot of trouble with him, even now.

Can we get back on topic soon plz?

 

[CynicalSquid]

I have to agree. I love The Wind Waker. It's one of the best games in the series, but I have to agree that the final boss isn't that good. It was very bland and it was very easy for a final boss. The only part that is difficult is trying to hit him. It's like the Zant battle because it's more annoying than difficult. Spamming attacks and freaking out doesn't make a boss hard. It just makes it annoying. I think the only final boss in the series that was good (from the games I played) is Ganon from Twilight Princess and Veran from Oracle of Ages. Those bosses actually test the skills that you've mastered throughout the game. It's not just "hit the ball of light back at him, shoot light arrows, slash him, repeat", or "wait for Zelda to shoot the light arrow and attack". Even though those things were in the Ganon battle in Twilight Princess, it wasn't just the entire battle.

That's just my opinion. I don't even find Ocarina's final boss good and I adore that game.