Like the remote control bombs you get in MC? Or the fire/ice arrows in OoT that provide more damage?
Yes, because we had to collect spoils and spend rupees to upgrade those items. Come on, RP, it's completely different and much more evolved. It needs to be further evolved in the future, as it's quite simple, but it's most definitely better than it was in the past, as it was virtually non-existent in the past.
I still feel that finding a way to upgrade the items by traversing the land, rather than being told directly how to do it, is more what we Zelda fans are looking for. We tend to hate being given answers.
Only we kinda
did have to traverse the land in SS. The spoils and rupees weren't given to us magically. We had to collect them out of our own will.
I'm not against puzzle-oriented lands. I'm against the puzzles in that land being like dungeons in which exploration is very limited. In SS, I was dissapointed in the world because I kept feeling like all I was doing was going forward. I couldn't stop and say "oh hey, whats that over there?" too many times, because the land was centered around that almost everything was SUPPOSED to be explored. And as far as the bold statement, in any entertainment, the majority fan opinion is used to determine the formula because how humans determine if something is "good" from any art point of view is if alot of people think its good. If alot of fans are saying it, then its probably a good idea. (Though I Personally don't think baron lands are too good of an idea, but I've never seen fans say that its good)
Again, having a central hub area that allows for exploration would create a balance with this. Much like the Sky, only with things to do.
There are alot of things that many fans complain about is overused as well. You make some good points here, but all in all I was really saying that this could go either way. I'm not against it, but if Nintendo never does it again, I won't complain.
Good. I hate complainers.
Oh, well in that case, I'll say what I always say. MM had the best style of boss fights. The bosses in MM all had formulas where you had to figure out the best way to defeat and defend yourself from the boss. But the best part was, with the exception of Goht, there were multiple good ways of defeating a boss. The SS bosses were okay and really fun, but they all had singular ways of winning. Sure they were action oriented, but the fun of Zelda is figuring things out. LOTS of things, even little things like how to beat a boss. Most average games probably find this annoying, but Zelda fans tend to love it.
There were lots of different ways to go about defeating SS's bosses. You could be quick, you could be slow, you could take advantage of certain situations... The bosses went back to the ALttP and MM kind of bosses. Not sure how you can't see that.
XD
I still don't see much of a difference only that in SS it was more "in your face" about it. And if that's the case, I wouldn't want to see that in future Zeldas porque anyway you make a player feel like his freedom is taken away is bad design for a Zelda game. We want to be free! We want to explore!
I don't see the logic in this. You act like it's impossible to be free when backtracking is involved like this. Have you played any of the Metroid games? I think you'll find that Super Metroid and Metroid Prime execute this exquisitely. Zelda could do the same thing.
In response to the last sentence, I wasn't arguing the story (but I will gladly do so) I was arguing the storytelling. As to the rest, Zelda has done a great job thus far interesting the player with their story in the way that they told it. SS style of storytelling is forceful onto the player. While they do give you choices to speak, you feel more like a slave to SS's story than most other Zelda games. SS tells you all the important information you need to know, up close and Personal, whereas other Zelda games, you found yourself wondering if you spoke to the right Person. It goes with what I've been saying this whole reply, SS is less free and keeps you on its own path which is not good for a game series whose fans love exploration and puzzle solving.
Can't say I agree. :/
That's amusing. Everything comes down to personal preference in this discussion. I prefer rolling. That's completely valid.
No. It's valid for saying what you prefer. It's not valid as an argument to say sprinting should be nuked.
It is overly punishing though. As a person who repeatedly fell off vines in Ocarina of Time due to inconsistencies with the texture and the actual climbable surface, I am incredibly precise with my vine climbing. As a result, there were several puzzles throughout the game which resulted in falling off the vines because the gauge ran out - simply by moving along the vines. No indiscriminate spin attacks, no unnecessary sprinting (I ran everywhere, actually, almost never sprinting), nothing but climbing the damn vines. Further, limitation of movement is hardly a new dimension of puzzle solving; it's an impediment. When the only entirely new feature offered by the Stamina Gauge was sprinting is a feature that I don't recall ever being used in a puzzle solution, I don't think it qualifies as "adding a new dimension to [...] puzzles".
Sounds more like a personal problem rather than a flaw in the gameplay.
This is a problem. Inconsistencies with placement of Stamina Fruit result in either overly punishing segments or entirely non-punishing segments. The extremes are bad, and a happy medium needs to be reached. Nintendo instead opted to either place too many, rendering the Stamina Gauge superfluous, or too few, creating an impediment.
Inconsistencies? What? The Stamina Fruits were always placed in the ideal spots. I seriously can't understand how you can't see that.
As I mentioned above, it IS punishing you. "Planning out my tactics" when climbing vines is absolutely ridiculous. Further, sure, you can pay attention to it - but there is absolutely nothing you can do to stop its depletion other than to stop moving/holding onto the vines. So let's say you've got a moving block puzzle. You move a block - the meter is about to run out. Better stop and sit there while it regenerates! Isn't that engaging?
Yep, sure is. Again, strategy. Gotta make sure you don't just rush in there willy nilly. Great puzzle element, which is a major aspect of the series.
No. It interrupts puzzle solving rather than enhancing it. "Planning out tactics" translates to "stopping when it's almost depleted so you don't have to slug around for 20 seconds". That doesn't aid gameplay. It impedes it. Hence, it's a bad idea.
It doesn't interrupt puzzles at all. It creates more puzzle aspects. Seriously can't see where you're coming from with this.
I could go on and on about how everything the Stamina Gauge accomplishes could be accomplished by adding a standalone sprint function and setting a timer/cooldown on a spin attack, but that's unnecessary at this point.
Obviously I disagree with this.
