General Zelda Randomly Generated Dungeons - a Way to Aid in Non-linearity?

[Ventus]

People here seem to understand that fewer items = less complexity, but they don't seem to understand that MORE items = MORE complexity. I hate to say this, but I have to recommend you go try out Dungeoneering in the game RuneScape. Don't worry - the game is absolutely free and getting to the point where you can dungeoneer is not hard. It shows you just the very basics of what RNG is and what it is capable of.

Essentially, if you obatin the Bow, Hookshot, and Bombs...you WILL get more options for puzzles than if you run into the dungeon with just the Bow and Hookshot.

 

[JuicieJ]

Dungeon 1: Random generic dungeon.

Dungeon 2: ...Another random generic dungeon that we could have gotten in dungeon 1

So what's the point exactly? What's the difference between moving between dungeons and repeating the same dungeon when it's all completely random content.

What's the point? Having more than one dungeon, that's the point. I figured someone who constantly complains about some Zelda games having relatively small amounts of dungeons would understand this.

 

[Ventus]

What's the point? Having more than one dungeon, that's the point. I figured someone who constantly complains about some Zelda games having relatively small amounts of dungeons would understand this.

The idea is that with a constantly changing layout, you effectively have "more than one dungeon". As many dungeons as puzzles, enemy placement and textures can be arranged, really.

 

[JuicieJ]

The idea is that with a constantly changing layout, you effectively have "more than one dungeon". As many dungeons as puzzles, enemy placement and textures can be arranged, really.

Yes, but we wouldn't be returning to that one dungeon and that one dungeon only throughout the course of the game. ...Unless we did, which would be stupid.

 

[Trio the Punch]

I hate this idea for Zelda. Maybe if they have alternate dungeons that appear on different playthroughs, sure, but randomly generated dungeons will likely feel mismatched, stilted, and dreadfully samey. It just isn't the type of thing that works, that is if you want memorable dungeons. And I very much do. The dungeons and the bosses are the reason I play the games, and taking the personality out of that (don't argue that statement, it isn't opinion, it is fact; a programmer not working with a dungeon on a personal level will deter the personality of the level) would really hurt the value for me. If there was a Zelda game that had all of its dungeons randomly generated, I would not play it.

 

[DarkestLink]

Yes, but we wouldn't be returning to that one dungeon and that one dungeon only throughout the course of the game. ...Unless we did, which would be stupid.

Is there a reason not to? When it's completely random either way, why bother have several locations for what is effectively the same thing every time.

People here seem to understand that fewer items = less complexity, but they don't seem to understand that MORE items = MORE complexity. I hate to say this, but I have to recommend you go try out Dungeoneering in the game RuneScape. Don't worry - the game is absolutely free and getting to the point where you can dungeoneer is not hard. It shows you just the very basics of what RNG is and what it is capable of.

The problem is...dungeoneering is boring. REALLY boring. It's just a means to an end...that end being chaotic gear or a skillcape. Now don't get me wrong, it's not as bad as those other skills, and the lore is interesting. But whether it was in old school gameplay or current, it's just dull.

 

[JuicieJ]

Is there a reason not to? When it's completely random either way, why bother have several locations for what is effectively the same thing every time.

Because that would mean going back to the exact same location every time. Since we're going this route, what would be the point of other overworld sections existing if there were only to be one dungeon location? Oh, that's right, to prevent the feeling of repetition.

 

[Imprisoned]

Personally, I like the idea of randomly generated dungeons. No walkthroughs (wait, maybe that's a bad thing), new experiences replaying the game, more replay value in general, I believe that I like this idea. Nintendo should try it in at least one 3D Zelda game. Even if it is one or two dungeons out of the game.

 

[DarkestLink]

Because that would mean going back to the exact same location every time. Since we're going this route, what would be the point of other overworld sections existing if there were only to be one dungeon location? Oh, that's right, to prevent the feeling of repetition.

Overworld? We have a randomized dungeon...I think that's all we'd be getting. Why would Nintendo bother with an overworld when they have the dungeon already? Sure, it'd be nice to have the overworld area, but there would be no real reason for Nintendo to do it. Everything they want is right at the first dungeon. Am I saying they should do this? No. Both ideas are incredibly stupid. But I simply don't see them bothering with an overworld at this junction.

 

[JuicieJ]

Overworld? We have a randomized dungeon...I think that's all we'd be getting. Why would Nintendo bother with an overworld when they have the dungeon already? Sure, it'd be nice to have the overworld area, but there would be no real reason for Nintendo to do it. Everything they want is right at the first dungeon. Am I saying they should do this? No. Both ideas are incredibly stupid. But I simply don't see them bothering with an overworld at this junction.

...I'm done.

 

[DarkestLink]

...What? Do you even think before you say things?

No overworld? One dungeon? What? Just because they have a randomized dungeon doesn't mean no overworld,

What, you think after killing off dungeons with a cheap replacement that they are going to give a crap for the overwo

that doesn't even make sense.

So you think it's logical that they would get rid of the series bread and butter, but keep the overworld and just give this one dungeon multiple entrances for no reason?

You turn on the game, you complete one dungeon. Game over. No plot, just beat a boss.

Well it depends on how you define completing one dungeon...you might complete it several times. And since it's randomly generated, you may or may not get a boss.

This is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard of. You can have 5, 6, 7 maybe more random dungeons with DIFFERENT THEMES. So they aren't all the same.

...So basically like Runescape's Daemonheim?

 

[DarkestLink]

I've asked you to do this once, and I'd really like you to follow it to make things easier: Read the whole post before replying, I cover how the dungeons would be done later in my post, so saying they would give one dungeon multiple entrances is contrary to what I say later.

Yes, they would keep the overworld, and they would have several dungeons with different themes. I'm positive. Let's say your first 3 dungeons are forest, fire, and water. They have a forest themed dungeon generator, a fire themed one, and a water themed one. The boss room would stay the same and you would fight the same boss, but the rooms beforehand would be different and random. I don't think they should have randomly generated dungeons, I already said why I don't think this, too. But if they DID, then they wouldn't get rid of the ****ing overworld! That's ridiculous. They'd at least want to get some sales. Come on, now. I don't know if you are being satirical or actually serious.

You really make yourself look like a hypocrite at this point. XD

"READ THE WHOLE POST! I SAID THERE WOULD BE THEMED DUNGEONS!"

...Again...like Daemonheim. I don't know if you actually play so here's a spoiler: It doesn't really vary that much and it's still boring.

And no...no I am not being serious. We're debating over a video game for children. And we're discussing a world in which Nintendo abandons what is arguably the most important thing in the series. That's about as crazy as removing jumping from Mario.

EDIT: And before you say "But Zelda will be different and vary more!", no. No it won't. It won't vary between dungeons because the more you vary, the more content you keep separate from other dungeons, limiting the available variations between random dungeons until we're left with something so repetitive and pathetic that even Dungeoneering looks more exciting.

 

[Vanessa28]

Come on folks play it nicely. Don't make this another argument

 

[DarkestLink]

So are you being satirical? If so, that's fine. End of discussion.

I wouldn't say so...but I'm not really taking this seriously either. It's just a game, y'know?

Nope, I don't think they will, if you read what I said in earlier pages, I said it would be a bad idea to have random dungeons. But I don't think they'd get rid of the overworld even if they changed the dungeons. I mean, what kind of RPG doesn't have an overworld..?

Well you can't get rid of an overworld per se...but having only one dungeon location is quite plausible. Of course, it's all I've actually seen when implemented, so I could just be ignorant. But, really, Zelda isn't an RPG either, so that doesn't really make in impact over its need for an overworld.

 

[Vaati101]

For the way Dungeons progress in Zelda, I don't think randomly generated dungeons would work. A mini dungeon could easily benefit from this as it's a one time thing, but for a full on dungeon that's where it gets complicated. This would only work if the dungeon was vast and had many levels/territories, Similar to how Dark Cloud does it's dungeons. However because Zelda doesn't do that and focuses on set dungeons that have many traps and puzzles, I don't see how a randomly generated dungeon could work effectively.