And that is why they fail.
Nintendo doesn't do "stories"Originally Posted by diffusionx
![]()
Quick zephyrs blow, vexing daft Jim.
And that is why they fail.
I'm all for an open-ended Zelda. The formula needs to be mixed up in some way and I think that's a good direction. I don't think it would "cease to be Zelda" either as they could retain the overall Zelda universe feel and still have dungeons and other series staples. Miyamoto in interviews often talks about letting players create their own experience. I think open-endedness fits fine with his game design philosophies.
Yes, because GTA:SA sold millions because of its story. No, they fail because they are "stuck". They're so fixated on the era in which they were No. 1, that they believe the only way to get back, is to do what they did back then. Instead of moving on.Originally Posted by diffusionx
It's possible to keep the structure of Zelda and move on, it's all in the content.
Quick zephyrs blow, vexing daft Jim.
YOU'RE WRONGOriginally Posted by Opaque
YOU'RE ALSO WRONGOriginally Posted by Wolffen
Originally Posted by rezo
YOUR STUPID!
Quick zephyrs blow, vexing daft Jim.
YOU'RE ESPECIALLY WRONG.Originally Posted by Gibbits
YOU SPELT YOU'RE WRONG WHICH DIMINISHES YOUR POINT, BUT I GOT THE MESSAGEOriginally Posted by AstroBlue
Last edited by Drewbacca; 24 Nov 2004 at 11:33 PM.
Originally Posted by rezo
Spiderman 2 is a pretty good example since it takes superhero freedom to a whole new level but it was still flawed in story and in repetetive quests/crime. It seems more like the developers fault for not putting in more variety but there's some things that still bug me.Originally Posted by diffusionx
*sigh* Begins numbered list...
1) If almost every game used the GTA type formula wouldn't it water down it's use and not make it as great?
I admit to saying saying lately that I hope the new Zelda is like GTA SA in the way that you can build up your character which will reflect on the actual player model and his handling like CJ. Also hoping that the areas are huge but it can be tricky if they can't do it right.
2) Link never talks. He generally just screams or grunts and the basic stuff. I guess he could do sort of the same thing as the GTA 3 dude did and not really need to but making him talk would be kind of weird. One one hand it breaks the character's tradition of not speaking but then again if he has a voice, why not use it?
3) You're on a fucking horse and on foot most of the time so the same stuff you do in the GTA games could become more boring and tedious in the Zelda game since it would take twice as much time to get there. I suppose there are different ways of fixing this but Zelda doesn't usually fall on what I would call modern times.
4) They would have to program more NPC's to talk and have better A.I. which they probably won't do since they seem to dislike doing anything like that with Zelda games.
Zelda definitely needs an overhaul, but I don't think making it more open-ended is the right way to go. The strength of the series is its carefully structured puzzles (like 'em or not) and dungeons, and these are largely possible because the designers know what you're going to have when you enter each dungeon.
I also don't want "serious" stories. These are storybook plots, and everything in the design of the series exists to back this up. The execution of said stories could definitely be improved, though... Link shouldn't talk, but everyone else needs to be voice-acted already.
What the games really need more than anything is an improved overworld. Hyrule Field and the ocean in WW just weren't interesting, and were too artificial. The series needs to get back to the design style of ALttP and the GBC Zeldas, where things weren't all connected by a hub but were instead big flowing worlds.
This is where they really spice it up by adding Teh EXTREME furutistic hoverboard!! Fuck Epona who i have ridden already! Damn that would make Zelda so AWESOME!Originally Posted by Will
ps. i heart Bazookas! Link needs one!
Bookmarks