Breath of the Wild What You Could Go Without in ZeldaU

[Cfrock]

- The Lack of a Magic Meter and an Emphasis on Magic Itself

I was trying quite hard to come up with an idea for this thread besides just repeating "motion controls" but I agree with this. Magic has been absent from the series for far too long and it should come back. I personally think A Link to the Past was the series' best use of magic and it has left something of a hole over the past decade. Magic gives us extra options in comabt and travel, depending on the items, as well as providing a few extra side-quests for extending the Magic Meter. I could definatly go without no magic in future.

 

[JuicieJ]

Here's what Nintendo probably did....

-Motion + gets released...
-They see how good the sword mechanics worked in Wii sports resort
-Nintendo decide for Motion + to be the way forward for Zelda
-They came up with the sword gameplay mechanics
-Realise that because sword gameplay is so big in the game that they decide to base the story around a sword
-They realise that the origins of the master sword have never been touched upon, so they base the story around that
-And Skyward Sword is born

This seems pretty backwards to me! Sure control's our important but they are NOT the most important aspect of a game! In my opinion games should come from an inspiration. The LoZ series was born from an inspiration itself! I would easily put Gameplay, story, graphics before controls anyday...

One, you have no proof that this is what went down, and I'm pretty sure it wasn't. Two, even if it was how it went down... is that really a problem? You haven't provided a legitimate reason as to why that's an issue.

Controls are also most definitely the most important thing of a game. They, well, control the actions our characters perform, making certain gameplay decisions possible and not possible. Without controls, a video game can't be played, and if a control scheme doesn't work, the game becomes unplayable.

OoT, MM, tWW, TP. The controls were built around the game. Not the other way around. OoT 3DS is proof of this.

OoT 3D's controls were merely an emulation of a control scheme designed with the N64 controller's layout in mind, which can be done with pretty much any game. The entirety of the game isn't built around the controls, no, but neither is SS.

 

[DarkestLink]

OoT 3D's controls were merely an emulation of a control scheme designed with the N64 controller's layout in mind, which can be done with pretty much any game. The entirety of the game isn't built around the controls, no, but neither is SS.

Entirety would be overdramatic, but the bulk of the game was built around the controls in SS. I'm not saying this is a bad thing. I like the M+. But it was built around the Wii remote. All of the combat, most of the items, and a fair amount of the movement was based around motion controls. Whereas in games like SMG, "waggle" was just another button, and we had the pointer.

Some games like OoT, Okami, and SMG are made with controls merely used as a way to make ends meet. Others like SS and WSR focus entirely on the controls. It would be hard to make these games play on anything else. It's not a bad thing if it's done right. I feel SS did it right. Others feel it did it wrong.

 

[JuicieJ]

Entirety would be overdramatic, but the bulk of the game was built around the controls in SS. I'm not saying this is a bad thing. I like the M+. But it was built around the Wii remote. All of the combat, most of the items, and a fair amount of the movement was based around motion controls. Whereas in games like SMG, "waggle" was just another button, and we had the pointer.

Yes. Just like a game with button controls has attacks based around button-pushing (which was most of what SMG was). You're under the misconception that because the game used motion controls that the game is built around them more than other games are built around their respective control schemes, probably because we're used to button controls and not motion. I can understand the mindset, but that doesn't mean it's accurate.

 

[Justac00lguy]

One, you have no proof that this is what went down, and I'm pretty sure it wasn't. Two, even if it was how it went down... is that really a problem? You haven't provided a legitimate reason as to why that's an issue.

Controls are also most definitely the most important thing of a game. They, well, control the actions our characters perform, making certain gameplay decisions possible and not possible. Without controls, a video game can't be played, and if a control scheme doesn't work, the game becomes unplayable.



OoT 3D's controls were merely an emulation of a control scheme designed with the N64 controller's layout in mind, which can be done with pretty much any game. The entirety of the game isn't built around the controls, no, but neither is SS.

I didn't say this is how Nintendo did it! I said this is what Nintendo probably did and for one am not sure which member of the Zelda project it was...but they did reveal that Skyward Sword was based around the creation of Wii Motion +

Plus you stated that Every Zelda is based around its control scheme and I posted earlier about this....

Games like The Legend of Zelda are not solely used to show off a control scheme:

-The original 3 games were never based off a control scheme, they were based largely of an inspiration
-LA*was based around the GB, as it was the first handeld Zelda
-OoT*and*MM*were the first games to introduce a 3D layout, so the gameplay was based around the manynmechanics that came with a 3D game
-The Oracles were based around the new Gameboy handheld and it was the first handeld Zelda game to have a coloured scheme
-The WW was the first GC game and I would say WW was mainly based around the Cel-Shaded graphics
-Minish Cap is a tough one....
-The 4 Swords games were based around the multiplayer system
-TP was originally meant for the GC so I would say it was based around being the spiritual successor to OoT
-PHandSTto an extent you could say where based around the Controls but itcould also be argurpes that they were based around the WW
-As I mentioned SS imo was based around the Wii Motion +

Sure Controls are important but a game series as important and influential as Zelda, imo should never be based most importantly around a contol Gimmick!

 

[JuicieJ]

Plus you stated that Every Zelda is based around its control scheme and I posted earlier about this....

They are. Actions are dictated through specific buttons, and choices had to be made as to what buttons were going to do what. It's simply a case of the Wii MotionPlus having a ridiculous amount of more capabilities than past Nintendo controllers did.

Sure Controls are important but a game series as important and influential as Zelda, imo should never be based most importantly around a contol Gimmick!

This is something that really pisses me off. What makes SS's Wii MotionPlus a gimmick? That statement doesn't make any sense. It's never forced into the gameplay and functions smoothly, just like every other control scheme in Zelda. Gimmicky is when something is shoehorned in just so it can be in, like when movie directors make movies in 3D just so they can have **** fly at the screen (Resident Evil Retribution, Texas Chainsaw 3D, etc.), not when a perfectly legitimate option is taken advantage of.

 

[Justac00lguy]

They are. Actions are dictated through specific buttons, and choices had to be made as to what buttons were going to do what. It's simply a case of the Wii MotionPlus having a ridiculous amount of more capabilities than past Nintendo controllers did.



This is something that really pisses me off. What makes SS's Wii MotionPlus a gimmick? That statement doesn't make any sense. It's never forced into the gameplay and functions smoothly, just like every other control scheme in Zelda. Gimmicky is when something is shoehorned in just so it can be in, like when movie directors make movies in 3D just so they can have **** fly at the screen (Resident Evil Retribution, Texas Chainsaw 3D, etc.), not when a perfectly legitimate option is taken advantage of.

So what you are basically saying that the original Zelda game....was based off the Nes Control scheme? How could a game be based around such a simple control scheme?.....OoT was clearly based around the 3D design....Sure new control features were added such as Z targeting Ect. But imo analogue sticks and Z targeting didn't make me go...Wow! I love OoT because of these amazing control's :/ I loved OoT for its Story, music and gameplay!

I think you are basically saying that Control's are the most important factor in a game, I wont argue with your opinion but to say that every single game was mostly based around the control's is just wrong!

 

[JuicieJ]

So what you are basically saying that the original Zelda game....was based off the Nes Control scheme? How could a game be based around such a simple control scheme?.....OoT was clearly based around the 3D design....Sure new control features were added such as Z targeting Ect. But imo analogue sticks and Z targeting didn't make me go...Wow! I love OoT becusee of these amazing control's :/ I loved OoT for its Story, music and gameplay!

Are you saying it's impossible for a game to be made with a simple control scheme in mind?

You seem to be under the impression that I'm saying controls are the only thing games are built around. I'm not. They're the basis of the gameplay, though. They're the CONTROLS. The things we use to CONTROL whatever collection of pixels we've been designated to CONTROL. This can be buttons, motion, mind... really anything that can be used. Without the controls, you wouldn't have been able to enjoy OoT's gameplay.

 

[Ventus]

Are you saying it's impossible for a game to be made with a simple control scheme in mind?

You seem to be under the impression that I'm saying controls are the only thing games are built around. I'm not. They're the basis of the gameplay, though. They're the CONTROLS. The things we use to CONTROL whatever collection of pixels we've been designated to CONTROL. This can be buttons, motion, mind... really anything that can be used. Without the controls, you wouldn't have been able to enjoy OoT's gameplay.

Hmm...I think what JC is trying to say is that, although controls are important, they're only a stepping stone. In regards to ZeldaU, Mastering the controls -- knowing how to run and walk, swing the sword, etc -- shouldn't be emphasized on every enemy and every instance of the game. Instead there should be an extra four to five layers of complexity slapped onto the game so that, when dealing with an enemy, we aren't thinking subconsciously "Oh I need to move the Wiimote this way" but instead "damn I need this or that item to defeat him! crud he slashed at me!". I know, it's hard to understand the way I stated it. Sorry about that

 

[Justac00lguy]

Are you saying it's impossible for a game to be made with a simple control scheme in mind?

You seem to be under the impression that I'm saying controls are the only thing games are built around. I'm not. They're the basis of the gameplay, though. They're the CONTROLS. The things we use to CONTROL whatever collection of pixels we've been designated to CONTROL. This can be buttons, motion, mind... really anything that can be used. Without the controls, you wouldn't have been able to enjoy OoT's gameplay.

I think your misunderstanding what am saying....

I am simply saying that every Zelda game is not mainly based around the control scheme, there are different aspects for each game, for example the original game was born from an inspiration, OoT was based around the capabilities of 3D design, WW was based around the Cel-Shaded graphics and I would actually say that PH, ST and SS were actually based around the control scheme.

Point I am making is that not every Zelda game is based off a control scheme....Some are, for example SS but others like OoT were based off other elements. Plus ofc without a good control scheme gameplay wouldn't be good but I could just say that what if a Zelda game didn't have any music Ect. A Zelda game is made up of many important components such as Gameplay, Graphics, Music, Controls ect. Its your opinion on what the most important aspect of a Zelda game is and am not going to argue that! But imo I think that Gameplay, Story, Music and Graphics come before controls....

 

[JuicieJ]

Hmm...I think what JC is trying to say is that, although controls are important, they're only a stepping stone.

They're much more than a stepping stone. They're a cornerstone. I've said it multiple times in this very thread. Without the controls, we can't play the game. There are more things that go into being able to play a game, of course, but in terms of gameplay (when you take hardware and the like out of the picture), they're the groundwork of it all. Every game has to take its control scheme into mind. It's entirely possible to develop a portion of the game that doesn't correspond to the control scheme, making it impossible to advance forward. The limitations and benefits of a control scheme ALWAYS must be taken into account when making a great game, and every Zelda game has done this. Skyward Sword's controls simply had a lot more benefits than past Zelda games' did, allowing developers to do more with it. It's not that the game is built around the controls more than any other Zelda game. It's that more was done with the controls than in any other Zelda game (even the two on the DS).

I think your misunderstanding what am saying....

I am simply saying that every Zelda game is not mainly based around the control scheme, there are different aspects for each game, for example the original game was born from an inspiration, OoT was based around the capabilities of 3D design, WW was based around the Cel-Shaded graphics and I would actually say that PH, ST and SS were actually based around the control scheme.

Point I am making is that not every Zelda game is based off a control scheme....Some are, for example SS but others like OoT were based off other elements. Plus ofc without a good control scheme gameplay wouldn't be good but I could just say that what if a Zelda game didn't have any music Ect. A Zelda game is made up of many important components such as Gameplay, Graphics, Music, Controls ect. Its your opinion on what the most important aspect of a Zelda game is and am not going to argue that! But imo I think that Gameplay, Story, Music and Graphics come before controls....

Read what I said to Ventus.

In regards to ZeldaU, Mastering the controls -- knowing how to run and walk, swing the sword, etc -- shouldn't be emphasized on every enemy and every instance of the game. Instead there should be an extra four to five layers of complexity slapped onto the game so that, when dealing with an enemy, we aren't thinking subconsciously "Oh I need to move the Wiimote this way" but instead "damn I need this or that item to defeat him! crud he slashed at me!". I know, it's hard to understand the way I stated it. Sorry about that

Needing a specific item to defeat an enemy is effectively the same concept as having to swing the Wii Remote a specific way. Both involve the player having to perform a specific action.

 

[DarkestLink]

What's with the whole "I could go without the lack of *" posts? That's not doing without something, that's asking for something more.

 

[Igos du Ikana]

I'd like to not have 20 minute cutscenes or a partner who tells you what you just picked up, even after you've picked it up 50 times(Fi). I mean, they were okay the first time, but after awhile it just gets boring; I'm at the point where I can only play Skyward Sword for a few minutes at a time. I got the game on launch day, and I've only beaten it 3 times.

 

[TatlTails]

THINGS I DON'T WANT:

Shiekah Stones

No Magic Meter

Any Pairing Hinted Too Heavily

Partners That State Things NPCs Just Said (coughFicough)

Partners That Don't Have a Bestiary

Goddess Chests

Treasure System (It was fun while it lasted, but I don't want it anymore.)

Stamina Meter (innovative, but a pain in the buns.)

Link Mouthing Things

A World Where Things Are Unevenly Distributed (All sidequests on Skyloft, almost all collectibles in GCs, all puzzles in seperated provinces.)

I'm probably droning on and on by now. But those are my ideas. I might even have more buried in my subcranium.

 

[Tearbender]

Here's what Nintendo probably did....

-Motion + gets released...
-They see how good the sword mechanics worked in Wii sports resort
-Nintendo decide for Motion + to be the way forward for Zelda
-They came up with the sword gameplay mechanics
-Realise that because sword gameplay is so big in the game that they decide to base the story around a sword
-They realise that the origins of the master sword have never been touched upon, so they base the story around that
-And Skyward Sword is born

This seems pretty backwards to me! Sure control's our important but they are NOT the most important aspect of a game! In my opinion games should come from an inspiration. The LoZ series was born from an inspiration itself! I would easily put Gameplay, story, graphics before controls anyday...

I'm pretty sure controls are a part of gameplay.