• Welcome to ZD Forums! You must create an account and log in to see and participate in the Shoutbox chat on this main index page.

Quanity is DEFINITLY Better Than Quality

The minority of us hope that Zelda: Skyward Sword will heavily focus on quantity. Like in Majora's mask I would personaly appreciate a bunch of new items used once, than a few items used a lot. Some people out there are getting their tomatoes ready to throw at me and are prepared to deREP me, but quanity could for the better also. One example would be SS (Kirby: Super Star, Kirby's Fun Pack in europe). It contained 8 different games that were very short and did not have too much backstory, but the game itself was good because it utilised the Quantity is better than Quality concept. It even earned its own remake on the NDS called SSU (Kirby: Super Star Ultra, same name in europe). It contained a few extra games and was perfectly executed and succusful. Not only that, but each of kirby's abilities had not one but atleast 3 different moves (excluding crash and mike). The most moves an ability can have is nine I beleive. Not only that, but Kirby can make an AI helper that uses identicle moves. Also, kirby had twenty two different abilities in that game. It was a HUGE succuss. Now before you come up with a big lecture to why quantity is worse than quality, is it better to have a bunch of different stupid world records, or have one big world record? It is better to have more because you are known better and you will be known as versatile. By saying I want more quanity than quality, I am not saying take out all the quality, but it can be more. Twiligt princess was a very good example of that.


Mrs. Austin
Dec 6, 2009
I personally think TP suffered for trying to cram too many things together. A great deal of the items were used only for one dungeon and then practically cast aside after a short time, such as the Spinner and Dominion Rod, which never held much function outside their dungeons and story elements, and then smaller items like the Horse Call, which was all but useless by the time you got it. There were so many of those items that beyond the few staples like the Bow and Clawshots and whatnot, a lot of them saw limited used and failed to live up to their full potential, which I found disappointing more than anything else.

I can see the virtue of games that function off of loads of minigames/quests like the Kirby example you provided, but that's not what Zelda is about. Zelda is an adventure game, which thrives on an interactive world with quality content. I'm not saying quantity is bad by any means, but to put the focus on quantity may detract from the overall quality, and I for one don't want anything to happen that may lower the quality. Will quantity lower quality? Not necessarily, but it happens a lot. MM had a great deal of sidequests but the main story itself was short and unimpressive. TP had a great deal of items but most failed to live up to their full potential. WW had a great quantity of space and number of islands, but the lengthy sailing that resulted was a major point of complaint. Again, not saying quality and quantity can't co-exist, but if I had to choose between the two I personally would prefer quality.


~Dancer in the Dark~
Jan 30, 2010
I disagree. I personally think that quality is better than quantity.

Think about it this way:
There is an absolutely brilliant game released that you really enjoy and it has many vallued qualities. It isn't the longest game ever but you love it because of how good it is.

Then there is another game released that doesn't have sufficent qualities but goes on for ages.

I would pick the first one because of the good quality, whereas the long but boring one would not get my vote. I hope my point has been put across sucessfully.


I'm not clear as to why you think quantity is better than quality. If you like it, that's fine, though.

I prefer quality. Having a bunch of dungeons and a bunch of one-time-use items reduces the whole game to busywork, as far as I'm concerned. It's cluttered and drawn-out for no apparent reason. The only redeeming factor a cluttered inventory would have is if the game had multiple solutions for its puzzles and dungeon progression. Otherwise, I'm not sold on quantity vs. quality.

And for the record, I'd much rather be known for one great thing, as opposed to a number of meaningless things.


The Young Drifter
Jun 16, 2010
Wasn't Aonuma going to try to 'condense' Skyward Sword more that Twilight Princess? He said himself that they had made TP 'too big' and wanted to make Skyward Sword more dense. Because of that, they are able to focus more on quality, which I am glad that they are able to.


The Meat Shield
Mar 9, 2010
What is this place?!?!?
Can I vote to have both?
No? Really? Are you sure? *sigh....* fine....

Alright, I'd prefer quality over quantity, but like I said before... I'd love to have BOTH! Thus you have lots of items, and many of them have either multiple uses or are just so good you never want to get rid of them.


I personally liked the amount of items in TP, but I was really disappointed at their lack of uses outside of their respective dungeons. I was so sad when the top of death suddenly became useless :( The rod of dominion also had a lot of unused potential.

So yea, I agree with Rishian. If SS really delivers on its promise of super-involved items though, I'll be completely satisfied.
Last edited by a moderator:

Master Kokiri 9

The Dungeon Master
Aug 19, 2009
My ship that sailed in the morning
I disagree. TP suffered from cramming in too much stuff like Xinammin said.

Also, would you rather have two or three really cool items that you get to use and abuse a lot, or would you rather have a ton of cool items that you almost never get to abuse? Also, would you rather have ten or eleven crappily done dungeons that you can just breeze right through without a care in the world, or would you rather have four or five very well dungeons that really make you think?

That's the way I see it at least. Quality should be prioritized over quantity.


Mother Hyrule
May 17, 2009
on a crumbling throne
Really? Quantity over quality? I can't really agree. What's the point of quanitity if it's quality is really horrible? Just makes a lot of junk that's not at all fun or interesting.

I have to agree with Xin in her examples of MM, TWW, and TP. Quality is very important. Without it, there's really nothing to interest the player. However, you need a balance of both to make the game a great one.


Mad haters lmao
May 26, 2010
Hylian Champion
Quantity, as everyone has said before me, really isn't great unless there is quality to it. As Xinnamin stated, TP had a lot of items, which was great, but they were hardly put to use. The Dominion Rod never functioned as anything but a puzzle solver, and even then, it was only used in one (or maybe two, if I'm wrong) dungeon(s). The amount of items baffled me, and their effects did the same. Also in TP , a red potion would heal EIGHT hearts I believe, which is obviously too much for the beginning of the game. The potions and fairies were never needed unless you were doing a Cave of Ordeals run. TP had some good quality in some areas, but the quantity overruled other areas. The dungeons were structured well, but the item use was so limited that you could probably beat the game using items only once or twice, besides bombs, arrows, and hook/clawshot. If ZSS has more items, they had better put a lot of quality into them, and I mean usage outside of dungeons, that won't be tiring until you've completed every sidequest in the game. That may be a bit too much to ask for, but I don't want stagnant items that I have no use for in my inventory.

EDIT: Also, from the looks of the E3 Demo, it seems it will be geared towards quality. I know the demo was meant to show the preciseness in the Wiimotion Plus, and that it was mainly an emphasis on the Sword, but the enemies seen thus far have mostly been defeated using the sword. The items will have more uses than before, if the Beetle is somewhat like the Gale Boomerang, and the bombs are used for much more than cracked-walls.


I disagree because one of the things that made Ocarina of Time so great was the quality of the items, dungeons, and the story.


To me (as Meego7 said) quality is better the quantity. Now, I understand your point using a item for a area then almost never using it again. But, I don't think that's going to happen in this game, based on what Miyamoto said about the game being more "dense" and not as big makes me think that you will be using ever item, in almost every area. I also think that the areas themselves will be used more. For example, instead of going to one area, getting a item, using it to finish the area, then never going back. I personaly think that it will be more like, go to area 1, get item 1, use item 1 to get to area 2, use item 1 to help get item 2, then go back to area 1, use item 2 to get to a part of area 1 you couldn't get to befor, then use both items so solve a puzzle or fight something. But this is just a thot.http://zeldadungeon.net/forum/member.php?3345-Meego7


Wild Card
Jun 14, 2010
Quality is better than quantity in my eyes. Xin does make a good point about MM. The game only has 4 main dungeons, but those dungeons are done very well. It wasn't a new item you found, but an arrow upgrade(fire, ice, light)that you used. TP had a ton of items but they were pretty much used in the dungeons they were found in.

I think it is a great idea that they are condensing the game into the smaller but more filled overworld. With this, they are taking quality over quantity, as they should. And I expect less items because I believe they said this game will focus a lot on swordplay.


Guy What's Angry Now
May 15, 2009
It's a secret to everybody.
Um, you guys? By the time of release, this game will have been in development for over five years, by a team so mind-bogglingly huge it makes the OoT dev team look like a guy in his parent's basement. This is going to be a bigger game than we've ever had before, regardless of the world-building direction. There's really no reason to think that they'll be condensing the world or loading us up with a ton of useless items. The problems that typically arise from not having the resources for both quality and quantity aren't the same here.

Otherwise, quality is obviously more important than quantity, but at the same time they have a multiplicative relationship. Portal had loads and loads of quality, but if they charged fifty dollars for it alone it'd be a ripoff. Then you have things like most JRPGs and the Mystery Dungeon series, which are successful for entirely different reasons.
But Skyward Sword? It's going to kick -ss, so stop freaking out.


Sep 20, 2008
I dare to disagree.

I personally prefer the overall quality aspects of a game rather than the quantity of in-game items...etc.

In other words, if a game only contained 4 levels and only one or two sidequests but the levels were exceptionally well designed and planned out to their full potential, I would prefer it to a game with 40 levels and 20 sidequests that were poorly designed and not very well thought out.

This may be the case for Skyward Sword. It could have 5 or 6 dungeons and two or three sidequests compared to Majora's Mask's multiple sidequests and A Link to the Past's 10 Dungeons.4

Skyward Sword's 5 or so Dungeons may be expansive and full of secret rooms and inacessable areas that add to the replay value of the area. (Get the item from the next dungeon, go back to the previous one and get the secret at the end of the previously inacessable area) The Dungeons may have two minibosses, followed by the main Boss of the dungeon.
(If this was the case, I would expect that there would be one or two overworld bosses)

In conclusion, I prefer quality over quantity. If Skyward Sword has 4 or 5 dungeons that are expansive and well thought out opposed to many dungeons that are easy and poorly thought out, I would prefer it.

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom