205 replies to this topic

[Radien]

So after my recent decision to take a hiatus from staffing, it's now obvious that my routine has kinda changed here with regards to this hobby. I'm taking steps to ease back into things, but while that's happening, I need to take things a little easy. With that in mind, there's something that I've actually thought of doing on multiple occasions, and now I figure it is becoming a just a bit more relevant. The idea is to use the New BS tileset to make a new quest.

This one wouldn't be another simple 3rd Quest to the original Zelda. Been there, done that. It would have to be something that requires a lot of new maps and areas to be created. Something short on story, without too many sneaky ZQuest tricks used to do things ZC wasn't entirely designed for. A quest that simply uses BS and ZQuest for what they were designed to handle easily.

Now, my specific idea isn't exactly one that hasn't been done before, but I have been quite tempted to take the blueprints of Zelda II and to create an overhead-perspective version of the game. Very little could be carried over directly, mind you, but it would be a great opportunity to reimagine the game in a new light.

I realize that side-view jumping is now possible in ZC, but we are still very far from seeing a complete Zelda 2 in ZC. The closest we've gotten was a custom quest that used buttloads of scripting to fill in the sizable gap between ZC's current capabilities and the specific requirements of Zelda 2.

Meanwhile, there haven't been any really good Zelda 2 overhead-perspective remakes, and the few that are out there are really old (like, "made in v1.90" old).

So just so you all know, I'm considering that for a side project to get me back on my feet.

[Sheik]

I'm digging it. I've never played ZII because I always thought the sideview concept runis the Zelda feeling (and for me it does). But I will definately play a top-down version of the game made by anyone with skills like yours.
So, does what you wrote mean that you don't want any scripting at all or does it mean that you want as little scripting as needed?

[SpacemanDan]

This idea seems nifty. I personally loved the sidescroller aspect of AoL, but I always thought it would be interesting to see it in a traditional overhead view. I've played one or two of similar nature, but like you mentioned, they were old. Breathing some new life would be very interesting indeed and something simpler too, which is what you seem to be going for. I'd go for it; great way to take a break while not 'leaving' (for lack of a better word) the hobby entirely, and it sounds like fun.

Actually, I'm doing the same thing myself with someone else's quest. (Fort Knights, actually) I decided it would be fun to remake as well as get myself back into ZQuest. (Of course, I realize the circumstances are vastly different here) I can say for sure that it was a good move for myself; it was fun, not overwhelming at all and a nice break from the bigger, more complex tasks I set myself for my major work.

[Radien]

I'm digging it. I've never played ZII because I always thought the sideview concept runis the Zelda feeling (and for me it does). But I will definately play a top-down version of the game made by anyone with skills like yours.
So, does what you wrote mean that you don't want any scripting at all or does it mean that you want as little scripting as needed?

Thanks.

No scripting at all. Scripting is meant for people who want ZC to do more than it does and are willing to program it themselves. It's not the main purpose of ZC.

...Well... okay, it's POSSIBLE I might use some scripting for the overworld map, but only if I retained the "location to location" travel system. But it would be more in line with ZC's capabilities to just map out those areas in much more detail and make them play like Zelda 1 and LTTP. And regardless, I wouldn't have "wandering encounters."

This idea seems nifty. I personally loved the sidescroller aspect of AoL, but I always thought it would be interesting to see it in a traditional overhead view. I've played one or two of similar nature, but like you mentioned, they were old. Breathing some new life would be very interesting indeed and something simpler too, which is what you seem to be going for. I'd go for it; great way to take a break while not 'leaving' (for lack of a better word) the hobby entirely, and it sounds like fun.

Actually, I'm doing the same thing myself with someone else's quest. (Fort Knights, actually) I decided it would be fun to remake as well as get myself back into ZQuest. (Of course, I realize the circumstances are vastly different here) I can say for sure that it was a good move for myself; it was fun, not overwhelming at all and a nice break from the bigger, more complex tasks I set myself for my major work.

Great, I'm glad you like the idea. The nice thing about it is that I'd have an entire game's worth of content to plan around. Using ZC's capabilities as of 2.5, I could explore quite a few new possibilities. For instance, imagine Saria, the water town: you'd have the ability to wander around the town in four-directional view, and the place where you cross the bridge would look quite different. So much visual design freedom to be had!

Also, it's okay to compare to your own situation. There may be more similarity than you think. I mostly just feel really rusty. More than I feel like I should.

[Old-Skool]

A Zelda II quest done in the BS Tileset, eh?

[Radien]

A Zelda II quest done in the BS Tileset, eh?

Have you actually TRIED that quest?...

I have, and.... er... yyeeaahhh... Let's just say that being first isn't always everything.


P.S. -

I would like more feedback on this, if anyone cares to share their thoughts or questions.

[Twilight Knight]

I'm not sure you should do a Zelda II remake, but I would definitely like to see a(nother) BS quest from you. It could be your "comeback" in ZC.

[Radien]

Thanks, TK.

Right now I am looking at the Z2 overworld... Hmmm...

http://faqsmedia.ign...yvgm_zelda2.gif

The problem is that it's really BIG. I don't mean the scale (size as compared to Link himself). I mean the number of defined areas. The western mainland, the eastern continent, Death Mt., and Maze Island could EACH take up an entire 8x8 overworld map, or more. I'm not sure what route to take toward creating this. Any suggestions? My main worry is fitting everything in on the north/south axis, even with multiple maps....

[Twilight Knight]

No problem.

So, I get that what you are looking for, is just a medium sized project... You could let out some areas you like less personally. But I don't still get the style you want to have that overworld in. The same kind of small overworld like ZII had, or the same overworld, but made bigger to give it more realism?

I suggest you jump into Zquest for a moment and make a few screens of what you have in mind.

[Radien]

No problem.

So, I get that what you are looking for, is just a medium sized project... You could let out some areas you like less personally. But I don't still get the style you want to have that overworld in. The same kind of small overworld like ZII had, or the same overworld, but made bigger to give it more realism?

I suggest you jump into Zquest for a moment and make a few screens of what you have in mind.

Calling Z2's overworld "small" is a little... confusing. It was small in that the sprites were small, the tiles were simple, and it was very zoomed-out... but it was very BIG in that the terrain it represented was much vaster.

As for what I want, I'd like an overworld that fits on one ZQuest overworld map, but I know that isn't gonna happen unless I change a LOT. The Z2 overworld is very big, and if I want to render it with greater detail so you can move around it in a manner similar to the Z1 overworld, I'm going to need to spread it across multiple overworld maps.

This isn't SO bad since there is a natural dividing line between the mainland and the eastern continent, but each continent is longer (N/S) than it is wide (E/W), and the ZQuest overworld map is the opposite: twice as wide as it is long.

I suppose I could turn Maze Island into a miniature maze rather than an 8x8 screen maze. And, conceivably, Death Mt. could be turned into a dungeon of sorts. But either way, each continent is divided by mountain ranges into three vertical sections. It's difficult to stack three areas together when you only have 8 screens of (literal) latitude.

[Tree]

A Zelda II quest done in the BS Tileset, eh?

Radien will actually make a good version. That one kinda sucked. Not for its time I guess.

[Twilight Knight]

No problem.

So, I get that what you are looking for, is just a medium sized project... You could let out some areas you like less personally. But I don't still get the style you want to have that overworld in. The same kind of small overworld like ZII had, or the same overworld, but made bigger to give it more realism?

I suggest you jump into Zquest for a moment and make a few screens of what you have in mind.

Calling Z2's overworld "small" is a little... confusing. It was small in that the sprites were small, the tiles were simple, and it was very zoomed-out... but it was very BIG in that the terrain it represented was much vaster.

As for what I want, I'd like an overworld that fits on one ZQuest overworld map, but I know that isn't gonna happen unless I change a LOT. The Z2 overworld is very big, and if I want to render it with greater detail so you can move around it in a manner similar to the Z1 overworld, I'm going to need to spread it across multiple overworld maps.

This isn't SO bad since there is a natural dividing line between the mainland and the eastern continent, but each continent is longer (N/S) than it is wide (E/W), and the ZQuest overworld map is the opposite: twice as wide as it is long.

I suppose I could turn Maze Island into a miniature maze rather than an 8x8 screen maze. And, conceivably, Death Mt. could be turned into a dungeon of sorts. But either way, each continent is divided by mountain ranges into three vertical sections. It's difficult to stack three areas together when you only have 8 screens of (literal) latitude.

Small as in, how ZII's overworld was something "small" representing a bigger overworld.

[Sheik]

As for what I want, I'd like an overworld that fits on one ZQuest overworld map, but I know that isn't gonna happen unless I change a LOT. The Z2 overworld is very big, and if I want to render it with greater detail so you can move around it in a manner similar to the Z1 overworld, I'm going to need to spread it across multiple overworld maps.

Why do you want to make it one ZQ overworld exactly? I can see why you don't want two or three fulls maps, but I don't quite understand why you want it to be one square overworld. You can just make the overworld any shape that suits the ZII terrain and than draw a custom map for the whole thing.
It would be nice and organized if it would fit into one ZQ ow but I wouldn't limit myself for such reasons. Dunno, doesn't seem right to me.

Edit: I forgot to ask this. So without any scripts, are you working around speaking NPCs and bosses (which would obviously have to be custom) the traditional way? I'd say things like the signpost-script and such wouldn't 'hurt' the quest ('hurt' as in make it seem/feel to complex/"shiny" etc).

Edited by Sheik91, 27 February 2011 - 08:07 AM.

[Radien]

Small as in, how ZII's overworld was something "small" representing a bigger overworld.

Ahh, okay. Yes, I'd agree with that.

Why do you want to make it one ZQ overworld exactly? I can see why you don't want two or three fulls maps, but I don't quite understand why you want it to be one square overworld. You can just make the overworld any shape that suits the ZII terrain and than draw a custom map for the whole thing.
It would be nice and organized if it would fit into one ZQ ow but I wouldn't limit myself for such reasons. Dunno, doesn't seem right to me.

Why a square overworld? Because it would be hard to adapt it to a rectangular overworld map. That IS the shape that suits Z2 terrain the best.

Yes, I could extend it to more than one overworld map. But I've always thought having an overworld larger than one map is unnecessary and doesn't "flow" well unless you have a natural division of multiple areas. Z2 does have at least one natural division, if not more, but you're still left with an utterly huge overworld map. I don't know... we'll see. Overworlds are harder than dungeons, but I don't want to skimp on it.

Edit: I forgot to ask this. So without any scripts, are you working around speaking NPCs and bosses (which would obviously have to be custom) the traditional way? I'd say things like the signpost-script and such wouldn't 'hurt' the quest ('hurt' as in make it seem/feel to complex/"shiny" etc).

Look at the Z2 town structure. Most of the NPCs are inside houses. That could be accomplished easily with the standard cave/guy setup. I would probably either nix the passersby or use a simple "strike to warp" setup for passersby and signs. A little bit more work, but still doesn't require scripts. Just a simple slash combo, an auto-warp combo, and a nearly identical map with subscreens turned off. I've done it many times in DoR.


P.S. -

I also wanted to point out: I'd probably do this in version 2.5. Actually, the newer versions of ZQuest have a lot of features that could be useful for a Z2 remake. Not the least of which are the Roc's Feather, the Mirror Shield, and the enemy and item editors.

[Old-Skool]

A Zelda II quest done in the BS Tileset, eh?

Have you actually TRIED that quest?...

Yes, it's a good quest. Why?