856 replies to this topic

[Shane]

Honestly having a 3DS game on the Wii is kinda silly and the lack of a 3DS isn't a justified reason personally. I mean, the purpose of the game is to take advantage of the 3D effect, not motion controls. It's like SS without the WM+, even if I don't like it (or can't handle 3DS's 3D system) I still understand the purpose of why it's on this console and not that. Not to mention the Wii is now pretty dated and Nintendo has moved on.

Edited by Shane, 07 August 2013 - 08:50 PM.

[Koh]

A break of linearity would be extremely welcome in my book.  I'm sick of games locking the player down on a set path the entire time.  Give us some freedom and let us explore.  Why can't it be like the first Zelda, where you can get to any dungeon right away, and finish a few of them without having had to finish any other?

[Jared]

A break of linearity would be extremely welcome in my book.  I'm sick of games locking the player down on a set path the entire time.  Give us some freedom and let us explore.  Why can't it be like the first Zelda, where you can get to any dungeon right away, and finish a few of them without having had to finish any other?

Because that could possibly lead to a break in a possible story. I personally love game focused on story. I'm sure I'm not the only one.

[Orithan]

Alas. Linearity is not necessarily bad. Think of great games like Terranimga and Secret of Mana. Those were linear as heck for the most part but did that detract from your experience? That didn't detract from mine, neither did the linearity Skyward Sword and Pokemon B/W, even though they didn't handle it as well.

[The Satellite]

Nintendo being more story-heavy lately would probably give it a higher likelihood it's linear, but they did recently make some sort of stressing on how they might go back to nonlinearity, and honestly, you can still have a good story without being linear. ALttP did it, OoT did it. I get the feeling they won't be too cutscene-heavy in this game, or else we'd have seen hints of it; every new Zelda has shown us cutscene footage often in trailers, and we've seen zero of that with this game. So who knows? I'm fine either way, honestly, so long as the dungeons are hella fun.

[Koh]

Nintendo being more story-heavy lately would probably give it a higher likelihood it's linear, but they did recently make some sort of stressing on how they might go back to nonlinearity, and honestly, you can still have a good story without being linear. ALttP did it, OoT did it. I get the feeling they won't be too cutscene-heavy in this game, or else we'd have seen hints of it; every new Zelda has shown us cutscene footage often in trailers, and we've seen zero of that with this game. So who knows? I'm fine either way, honestly, so long as the dungeons are hella fun.

This.  You can easily have a non-linear game with good story, it just takes BETTER GAME DESIGN.  When people are railroaded the entire time (Pokemon Black and White, and their sequels for example), it's pretty darn clear the developers didn't know how to make it off the rails while also developing the story.  You can get the best of both worlds when you know what you're doing.

 

Think about Skyrim.  Sure it's more of a sandbox, but there is still a main story.  You can still go about and do other things, or skip around other quests while the main story is going on.  It's not JUST the main story the entire time, with no ability to go anywhere else but where it wants you to go, or where you've been.  They've been having way too much fun with this sort of thing lately too...IIRC, a route on Pokemon BW2 is literally closed off by a line of dancing men until you do what the game wants you to do.  What kind of bullshit is that?

 

A game can't be about exploration without the ability to explore.  One could argue that, since you'd be playing a game for the first time, you're exploring the world, since it's all fresh to you, but that's not quite true, because after all, when you're exploring, you have CHOICES on where you want to visit, and what places you want to check out.  "I want to check out those ruins; I want to climb that mountain, I want to raid this temple."  Too bad in linear games, it's like "Sorry, the ruins are off limits because some old guy won't move his ass."

 

This is why it's imperative I develop my own games with this setup to prove it's not as hard as these companies are making it look.  I already have plans for some areas you can explore while heading to your next destination, if you so desire, on the World of Chaos games.  I'd also rather players find out for themselves "I can't be here yet; the stuff is way to strong" or "Enemies are really strong here, but I'll just attempt it anyway," rather than being completely denied because I don't want them there yet.

Edited by Koh, 08 August 2013 - 05:19 AM.

[Orithan]

You are missing my point. My point is that you are making linearity sound as if it is a bad thing when it really isn't. Case in point: Terranigma. That game practically railroaded you until near the end where you had to collect the Star Pieces to advance to the endgame which, to be honest, felt like complete filler (IIRC you were forced to do each of the towers in the Underworld in order and get the scarf from Ellie at the start). Granted, there was a bit of exploration before the end but it wasn't really enough to shake off its linearity.
Secret of Mana had a similar amount of linearity, except this time was more tied to the story and the spirits you obtain and you don't really get much freedom in exploration at all. Arguably more justified than that of Terranigma, but it was still extremely linear.
You get roughly the same amount of linearity in Pokemon B/W (I would say that Secret of Mana is even more linear!). Admittedly, some of the things they used to block off some routes weren't really intuitive, but they still serve the same purpose as the devices used to stop player as they did in Secret of Mana and Terranigma. Pokemon G/S/C were just as linear, particularly early on. Why couldn't you have used your pokemon to scare off that Sudowoodo before getting the watering can? I know! Wouldn't that have broken the storyline? Using the argument about the dancing men in B/W2, I would say that the Sudowoodo part was ridiculous.

My point is that linearity isn't bad, particularly when there is an engaging story to go with it. The one thing that Terranigma, Secret of Mana and Pokemon B/W (and 2) had (aside from being RPGs) was that they had in-depth stories.

...I think we are going off track here.

[Koh]

Linearity IS a bad thing when it's put in games that are supposed to be about exploration, because you can't explore.  Secret of Mana and Terranigma aren't about exploration; they're about telling a story.  Pokemon is about exploring the world, searching high and low for all types of creatures to put into your box on a computer...it's the NPCs who force the badge thing on you.  Too bad you can't actually explore, because they want you to do the Gyms in a certain order.  G/S/C were linear up into Ecruteak City, where you get a branching path, and when you got to Kanto, you could to to ANY place in the region you wanted right off the bat if you worked your way there.  You didn't have to start at Vermillion and go straight to Saffron, you could pick and choose which places you wanted to visit, and which Gyms you wanted to tackle next, with there still being some plot over there regarding the region itself, the gymleaders, and a little bit more Team Rocket.  THAT'S what I'm talking about; there's absolutely no reason NOT to have a game about exploration set up that way, and just have the events happen as you go along.

 

Not really off topic, because we're discussing how linearity affects gameplay, and if it would be for better or for worse with this game, which would definitely be worse, considering it's predecessor was far more open than any other Zelda game, excluding the first one.  You could explore the majority of Hyrule right off the bat, and get up to 5 Heart Containers and 2 Heart Pieces before entering the first dungeon, as well as some new equipment.  The Dark World Dungeons could be done in relatively any order after the first one...I usually go straight to Thieve's Town to get the Titan's Mitt and then the Tempered Sword.  That then allows you to explore even more of the Dark World before realizing you need the Hookshot for the Ice Palace and Misery Mire, as well as the Fire Rod for the Ice Palace to advance past the first room, and the Cane of Somaria to advance past the first room of Turtle Rock.

 

One could say Zelda is about telling a story, but it's also about exploration.  "Go and find these 8 things."  FIND the 8 things.  In other words, search high and low across the lands looking for another temple that can have what you're looking for.  Not be told "Go here, then go there, next go there."

Edited by Koh, 08 August 2013 - 09:03 AM.

[Avaro]

Linearity IS a bad thing when it's put in games that are supposed to be about exploration, because you can't explore.  Secret of Mana and Terranigma aren't about exploration; they're about telling a story.  Pokemon is about exploring the world, searching high and low for all types of creatures to put into your box on a computer...it's the NPCs who force the badge thing on you.  Too bad you can't actually explore, because they want you to do the Gyms in a certain order.  G/S/C were linear up into Ecruteak City, where you get a branching path, and when you got to Kanto, you could to to ANY place in the region you wanted right off the bat if you worked your way there.  You didn't have to start at Vermillion and go straight to Saffron, you could pick and choose which places you wanted to visit, and which Gyms you wanted to tackle next, with there still being some plot over there regarding the region itself, the gymleaders, and a little bit more Team Rocket.  THAT'S what I'm talking about; there's absolutely no reason NOT to have a game about exploration set up that way, and just have the events happen as you go along.

 

Not really off topic, because we're discussing how linearity affects gameplay, and if it would be for better or for worse with this game, which would definitely be worse, considering it's predecessor was far more open than any other Zelda game, excluding the first one.  You could explore the majority of Hyrule right off the bat, and get up to 5 Heart Containers and 2 Heart Pieces before entering the first dungeon, as well as some new equipment.  The Dark World Dungeons could be done in relatively any order after the first one...I usually go straight to Thieve's Town to get the Titan's Mitt and then the Tempered Sword.  That then allows you to explore even more of the Dark World before realizing you need the Hookshot for the Ice Palace and Misery Mire, as well as the Fire Rod for the Ice Palace to advance past the first room, and the Cane of Somaria to advance past the first room of Turtle Rock.

 

One could say Zelda is about telling a story, but it's also about exploration.  "Go and find these 8 things."  FIND the 8 things.  In other words, search high and low across the lands looking for another temple that can have what you're looking for.  Not be told "Go here, then go there, next go there."

 

Just like in OoT, when I played a link to the past the first time I did the dungeons in the 'right' order without knowing that the game was unlinear. They could as well have blocked off a few wrong paths so you don't accidently go the wrong way.

[Koh]

Why block it off? Why not let the players find out for themselves?  Blocking it off completely destroys the immersion in the game and feels far more unrealistic than the game itself.  In what world would one live in where some random person standing on a wide open path saying "You can't pass >=C!" actually serve as a blockade?  There's construction workers, which is totally believeable.  But when it's just a plain old dirt path or sidewalk, and some random asshat says you can't go by, what do you do?  Walk past them and give them the evil eye.

Edited by Koh, 08 August 2013 - 09:22 AM.

[Ventus]

You know when Nintendo put a real release date with a day in mind I'm going to get this on preorder.

I love my ALttP world and I just don't care if its linear or not as long as the game is fun and the dungeons are fun I'll enjoy it.

[Moonbread]

It makes sense that it was linear the first time you played it because they put the numbered crystals on the map.  But ALttP does a bang-up job even if you do it in order, because you still have to explore and find things *on your own*.  The game doesn't have NPCs that tell you where secret magic items like the cape and the medallions are, you have to find them on your own, without the game ever telling you that they exist.  It's a fantastic way to build upon a game that's basically already non-linear and focused on exploration.  A lot of other Zelda games, to me, have suffered more from having too many hints and clues about where you need to go next.  Like in OoT, when Navi will consistently bother you about where you should inspect, when you really just want to go to the Ice Cave before the Forest Temple without anyone bugging you.

 

Also I'm gonna go ahead and say that linear works for some things, non-linear works for other things, it's all about preference because both have worked in the Zelda series, stop getting upset over your opinion of what you think is better

[Shane]

I believe Zelda didn't make linear poor since with the exception of the First Zelda you're given the task to "Find A in B, then find Y in X" and so forth not "Find all X" and have a fixed order. OoT allowed you to do most temples in any order because you weren't given a task but had freedom instead. The only reason why you had to do the Forest Temple first is because Sheik instructed you to IIRC. So I think Zelda is more story depth than rather exploration depth or a mix of both with story being a bigger aspect. But Nintendo did say Wii U Zelda will be considering to have no dungeon order.

Edited by Shane, 08 August 2013 - 10:09 AM.

[Koh]

It makes sense that it was linear the first time you played it because they put the numbered crystals on the map.  But ALttP does a bang-up job even if you do it in order, because you still have to explore and find things *on your own*.  The game doesn't have NPCs that tell you where secret magic items like the cape and the medallions are, you have to find them on your own, without the game ever telling you that they exist.  It's a fantastic way to build upon a game that's basically already non-linear and focused on exploration.  A lot of other Zelda games, to me, have suffered more from having too many hints and clues about where you need to go next.  Like in OoT, when Navi will consistently bother you about where you should inspect, when you really just want to go to the Ice Cave before the Forest Temple without anyone bugging you.

 

Also I'm gonna go ahead and say that linear works for some things, non-linear works for other things, it's all about preference because both have worked in the Zelda series, stop getting upset over your opinion of what you think is better

I agree, though I doubt anyone was getting upset.  We were having a healthy discussion~  It works for somethings like the aforementioned Secret of Mana and Terranigma, because it's not about Find 8 things or whatever, so it doesn't feel like you're being railroaded in that regard.

[coolgamer012345]

But Nintendo did say Wii U Zelda will be considering to have no dungeon order.

what is this?