Slashdot Mirror
More Details on Zelda Emerge
Cube.IGN has more details on the upcoming Legend of Zelda title, gleaned from Spanish gaming publication Hobby Consolas. From the article: "From screens printed in the magazine, the new outfit looks to blend peasant clothes of different cultures to achieve an altogether unique style. These same screens show the Triforce emblazoned on Link's left hand. Cool indeed. Link himself looks different from any other Zelda title. Eiji Aonuma wanted Link to sport a manga-inspired look, partly because the Link shown in the Space World 2000 looked like a lifeless puppet." Commentary on the single-mindedness of the fanboi rumormill available on Press the Buttons.
Link gets some pussy!
This is awesome! I've been desperate to get a werewolf-vegetable farming game ever since they dropped that feature from Harvest Moon!
Dear diary: Today I stuffed some dolls full of dead rats I put in the blender.
I think Zonk needs to either pick up a dictionary and/or stop listening to Avril Lavigne ...
Oh and new Zelda game, kickass!
"Our opponent is an alien starship packed with atomic bombs. We have a protractor."
at GamesAreFun.
Let's just hope the game meets them. I want WW's climactic ending, but with less fetch-quests (they can be added as side-quests, whatever. I just don't want to search for triforce pieces again), and more dugeons. Eiji Aonuma looks like the kind of guy with a new vision that could accomplish this quite well.
We've always had the cartoony Link... now there's a Link that looks like he belongs in a deep adventure/roleplaying game. It's a good look for him.
Personally, I think it would be cool to see them create a "bonus" world where you could play through the ORIGINAL game with the new graphics and stuff... kinda like an Easter Egg.
Windows isn't the answer... it's the question. NO is the answer!
Huh? Did you actually play the Wind Waker? It isn't Z-Targeting anymore. You still target with the button that is (relatively) in the same place. Namely, the L button. It is the one that is where your left index finger would be, just like the Z trigger was on the N64 controller.
Also, the Z button is actually a "C" button now. You assign swappable items to it, like the bow, bombs, etc.
Also also, you should know that the Wind Waker is considerably larger than the Ocarina of Time. Though there aren't nearly as many dungeons in the Wind Waker, they are all of very high quality. (Which I would contend, the OOT later levels weren't. The Shadow level and the level where you get the lens of truth felt last minute, and I hate to say it, but so did the Desert level).
Jumping in Ocarina of Time wasn't totally automatic. You could use Z-targeting to backflip, jump to either side, and jump attack forward. That was enough to get to a few places you shouldn't have. For instance, you can get onto the roof in Kakariko and talk to the guy who gives you a piece of heart without a hookshot -- or the Master Sword, for that matter -- by climbing the watchtower at night (when no one's there) and side-jumping to the left.
I take it from your Z-targeting comment that you don't know much about Wind Waker. Aside from changing to "L-targeting," that game fixed what was most annoying about auto-jumping from ledges by making it harder to do on accident. (Actually, they switched to L-targeting with the rereleases of OoT and Majora's Mask, but that's beside the point).
Honestly, it wouldn't make much sense for Link to jump much. He really shouldn't be able to jump very high at all with all the equipment he lugs around (speaking of which, does it amuse anyone else that the iron boots weigh less in his pack than they do on his feet?). Let's face it, a button that just makes him hop a few inches off the ground wouldn't be any use. If they did make him jump higher, then we'd have a Zelda game full of Mario-style jumping puzzles. Nuts to that.
We haven't always had a cartoony Link.
:) Though I'd like to see him use a broader range of sword attacks instead of the standard horizontal swipe and chargey-circlular-swipey thing. However, I guess it kind of works, since Link doesn't really know he's special until it's time for him to be the Hero.
In Zelda II, Link was 15 and had the Triforce on his left hand (the first occurance of this "branding"). That was the first adult-like Link there was. Then Ocarina of Time had Link at around the same age.
I was personally rather disappointed when Wind Waker was first shown. However, I grew to love the game while I played it, because no Zelda yet has let me down in terms of fun (let's not count the stuff on the CD-i).
I'm a fan of this more adult look. I always wanted the Zelda series to take a more serious/adult turn. Link just screams "badass" to me, even in tights.
"Apparently so, but suppose you throw a coin enough times. Suppose one day, it lands on its edge."
Personally I found the Wind Waker's dungeons to be far easier though. I didn't have much trouble with Ocarina, but the puzzles in Wind Waker just didn't see as good. I hope some more complex puzzles will make their return with the new game...
10 PRINT "LOOK AROUND YOU ";
20 GOTO 10
Saying FFX-2 is as good as the Wind Waker shows exactly how much your gaming opinion is worth.
Jade Empire being better than Wind Waker maybe, but Kingdom Hearts is miles behind even Zelda 2. The real-time battle system of both Jade Empire and Kingdom Hearts still do not compare to any Zelda. All mentioned games are still not as majestic as Ocarina of Time though.
By the way, never compare anything Square Enix to anything Nintendo. Square Enix is the equivalent to Dell in the video game world. They've got their blindly loyal fanboys, but everyone else knows they make crap (even though their old stuff use to be good).
And why would this be?
What exactly is all the fuss over Wind Walker about? I'm not going to make the usual cheap shots at it. I have no problems with the visual style, I don't howl in torment for the lack of a jump key and I'll even put up with the lack of voicing. However, I've played it through from start to finish and I still fail to see what makes in any any way better than the average action/platformer.
Basically, you go around from town to town. In each town, you talk to a few NPCs, do a few fed-ex quests and maybe play a minigame. You then play through a dungeon which is a mixture of combat and puzzles. Most of the puzzles are, in reality, jump puzzles, although there's no actual jump key. You fight the boss at the end of the dungeon, then you rinse and repeat. Eventually, you win the game. I fail to see what's so staggeringly innovative about this. The combat gets old *real* fast, the utilities such as the grappling hook are fun for 5 minutes, then get tired and the whole "Wind Walker" thing that the game's named after is generally pretty gimmicky.
Kingdom Hearts was by no means a perfect game, but at least the whole skills/magic system added a depth to the combat (and in a few of the battles, a real twitch-skill requirement) that puts it far ahead of Zelda in terms of depth.
Final Fantasy X-2 is in some ways a disappointing installment in the series, but... again... it has a fun combat system (once you work out how to not-die after 30 seconds in every fight). It also creates a fairly convincing and fleshed-out game-world, which is something Zelda singularly failed to do for me.
Of course, this being slashdot, I don't actually expect a sensible reply to this, but if somebody wants to enlighten me as to what exactly is so fantastic about the game that I was persuaded to shell out £100 for my Gamecube on (and which these days only ever gets use for Resident Evil 4 and the occasional blast of Mario Kart when I have friends over), I'd be most grateful.
Doh, typo
Rather than "Perfect Dark", I clearly meant "Eternal Darkness". My bad.
it appears as though the upcomming Zelda DS game will be a four swords type game, and ONLINE!
True genius is grasping a situation like a peice of fruit, and peircing it just right so that it drains dry.
You're absolutely right. FFX-2 is not as good as Wind Waker, it's better.
Rob
You lost me at "miles behind Zelda 2". If you say there is nothing majestic about Kingdom Hearts, then I know you haven't played it through until the end. The inclusion of Disney characters makes the game just so much more charming. Probably Squarenix's best game this generation.
I wish more game developers, especially PC game developers, would take a good hard look at Zelda monsters from the 1st game to the latest, and notice that each of them are radically different from one another in terms of logic and kill strategy. In fact, check out the boss monsters and you will notice the player is required to devise unique strategy for each of them in order to win.
Most (almost all) PC RPGs use a cookie-cutter approach to populating the game with critters. (Diablo, Dungeon Seige, etc. etc.)
The Zelda designers have been extremely successful at selling thier games because they stay true to the core design features.
- Each monster is unique in term of kill strategy and movement etc.
- The gameworld is provides the player with lots of rewards for exploration.
- Give the player plenty to do while minimizing the repetition.
-Oy Vey
To start, I doubt you played the game from start to finish. It is the Wind WAKER not "Walker."
Basically, you go around from town to town. In each town, you talk to a few NPCs, do a few fed-ex quests and maybe play a minigame. You then play through a dungeon which is a mixture of combat and puzzles. Most of the puzzles are, in reality, jump puzzles, although there's no actual jump key. You fight the boss at the end of the dungeon, then you rinse and repeat. Eventually, you win the game.
In partial response to this I will use your own words: "I don't howl in torment for the lack of a jump key." Abandoned that one real quick.
What you describe is typical of many games of the genre, but that's like describing War and Peace as "a book about war and Russian nobles." While true, it is an oversimplification. Most games, like most stories, follow a formula that has been used before, but what separates a great work from a mediocre or bad work is execution.
Every action, every ability, every movement is fluid and flawless. You are never hampered by controls or the camera. The Wind Waker achieves a level of polish that is rarely seen even in supposed "AAA" games.
When you fly, you feel like you are flying. When you sail, you feel like you are sailing. One of the best things about the Wind Waker is the sense of freedom.
I could go on, but I don't need to.
When using the word "gimmick" in an argument about video games it most often means "something new that I don't like." Most of Square's RPGs are straight cookie-cutter affairs with some new tweak of the battle scheme that could be called "gimmicks" as well.
I haven't played Kingdom Hearts so I won't comment on it, but the only traditional RPG I've ever finished had the best combat system I've ever seen. That was Grandia for the PS1. All others are redundant and very boring. Grandia was extremely refreshing, because I didn't loathe battles, and I didn't have to spend too much time in inventory and skills screens.
I have NO IDEA why people love this game so much. Calling Wind Waker nothing more than fetch quests and fedex missions, but then mentioning KH? You HAVE to be kidding.
EVERY damn level in KH was the same. Get to area A. Find character B. Talk to character B. Character B moves to new location. You have to fucking find him AGAIN. Then he tells you to meet his friend C, so, omg, is under attack by...demonic monkeys and fat balloon clowns. Sonuvabitch it was boring. By the time I got to Tarzanland and had to go from the forest to the treehouse to the cliff outskirts BACK to the treehouse BACK to the campsite and BACK to the cliff outskirts and BACK TO THE DAMN TREEHOUSE, I'd had it. The entire game functioned on this principle of finding some character, having some dialogue, and then finding them again down the road.
The animation, the settings, the graphics, even the music. It was all top notch. And the battle system itself was fun, if a bit random in terms of an attack working or not.
But GOD was the actual "game" itself nothing more than a lot of random encounters all leading up to a boss, and then moving on to a new area and doing it all over again. The NPCs were terrible at pointing you at exactly where you needed to go, so most of the time you just wondered around aimlessly until you found another door or some character to talk to or some enemy to fight.
I respect the game and I hope to get KH2 when it comes out, but not if I find out it's little more than an upgraded Secret of Mana, minus a lot of the things that made SoM great. I had better find out the gameplay is more engaging than some weak puzzles and a lot of hide and seek.
In fact, that's pretty much how any Squaresoft game has been lately - a weak attempt to live up to past greats, but by doing so by stripping away vital elements and upping the graphics to try and make up for it.
I'm not scared of anonymous cowards.
I agree with you about Square Enix.
However, you missed a game that managed to out-Zelda, well, Zelda. Beyond Good and Evil. Amazing graphics, an excellent plot, companions that could actually fight and do useful things, and tons of minigames made the game a lot more enjoyable than Wind Waker.
Yeah, it's better. As a freesbee.
As a game, WW is leagues ahead of FFX-2.
Yeah, because Wario Ware and Pikmin and Metroid Prime and Donkey Kong Jungle Beat and Superstar Saga and Zelda Four Swords and a lot of other things, are totally rehashes of old stuff.
Look at what Square Enix has produced this gen.
*2 Single player Final Fantasies for PS2. One is the explotation sequel of the other.
*1 MMORPG that, while successful, is a ripoff of everquest. In fact, I doubt it could have any success at all if it wasn't named Final Fantasy.
*1 Dragon Quest game. Nothing new here.
*lots of rehashes. Anthologies, Chronicles, etc. Ports of old games, whatever.
*Front Mission games (nothing new).
*Unlimited Saga. Another sequel.
That would be it. Nintendo inovates a lot. Idiots cannot see it, because they mostly use well known IP, so they sell better, by simple brand recongnition.
Most fanboys, when asked about some innovative game, will say "Katamary Damacy". Yeah, it's innovative, but, can they name something else?
I agree. Beyond Good and Evil is probably the most underrated game this generation. It deserved far more exposure and recognition than it received. Like you said, an excellent story with characters you actually care about, top notch visuals, lenghty and well designed dungeons, and some unique gameplay elements. I paticuarly enjoyed how they worked the stealth gameplay in there. It's sad that the game probably wont ever spawn a sequel. BGAE was easliy one of the best games I've ever played and I encourage everyone to go pick it up (it was released for every platform including PC, so you should be okay no matter what your gaming prefrence is). I'm not sure if it "out-Zeldas Zelda", but it is excellent in its own right.
"..does it amuse anyone else that the iron boots weigh less in his pack than they do on his feet?)"
:(
Not anymore than the fact that I can carry a bazillion items in said pack and still move swiftly along. I wish more games had a little more 'realism' that way. Not Zelda, it's not that type of game. But other games would benefit if more things were limited. These days, everything, including lives, are essentially unlimited. Games lose something this way. That 'fear' you had of dying, back in the day.
In most new games, I find myself never using the 'cool' stuff till I know I'm near the end of the game. I just have this mindset that everything is scarce, but it isn't.
-- I have fans? Wow.
Ok, nice rabid response here which doesn't actually address any of the points I made in a coherent manner.
Sorry about the typo. It was pretty late when I typed this. If you don't believe I played the game, feel free to ask me any question about the content that anybody's who did a reasonable playthrough (but didn't get obsessive over subquests) should know the answer to.
You completely misunderstand my points about the jumping thing. I say I don't have a problem with the lack of a jump button. I then say that most of the puzzles are jump puzzles, even though there isn't a jump button. I'm not attacking the control system here; like I say, I have no problem with having the game decide when to jump for me. I just don't like jump puzzles.
I still fail to see anything about the execution of Zelda that sets it apart in any way. The combat system is shallow and doesn't really require either tactics or twitch-skill. Hell, I'm no great gamer, but I completed the game without any real difficulties, other than a couple of annoying jump sections. The game-world isn't as well fleshed out as it is in other games and I never felt immersed in it, or even intruiged by it at any point. Plus, you spend an annoyingly large amount of time travelling around the map on that tedious boat. It doesn't feel like you're sailing... it feels like you're playing an annoying minigame with an indifferent control system which is allowed to go on far too long. Sure, you can wander around the map if you want to, but you still basically have to go from A to B to C to complete the game. No real sense of freedom there; it's the same as KOTOR, Final Fantasy X-2 and many other games.
Incidentally, Grandia 2's combat system is virtually identical to FFX-2's. Not saying it's good or bad, just pointing it out.
Well, except that the system went from semi-turn-based ATB in FFIX to fully turn-based in FFX, then to a near-real-time system in FFX-2 and is apparently going fully-real-time in FFXII. Also, ability names do indeed often stay the same, but their effects and the game balance are usually changed beyond recognition. The limit break system came in, went through several iterations and then left again, having changed beyond recognition.
Then there's the changes to the character system. There's very little consistency to the series moves here; in FF2, FF7 and FF8, we've had generic characters who the player could build up in any way he wanted. In FF1, FF9 and a few of the others, we've had characters put into very specific classes. Then we've had a few which fall in between, such as FFX and FFX-2.
Right, I'm not going to confine myself to the January 2004 limit, because of the 4 Gamecube games I mentioned, 3 of them were released before this point. I should know, I bought my Gamecube in November 2003 and got 3 of them within a month and that's here in the UK, where Nintendo always stiff us for releases. However, from mid-2003 (probably a fairer estimation), we've had Final Fantasy XI (in the territories accessible to me), Final Fantasy X-2 and Kingdom Hearts: Chain of Memories. I know that's only three, but hell, of the 4 Gamecube games I've mentioned, only 1 was an actual Nintendo title. If you want me to name 4 good games in that period, or indeed since the start of *2005* on the PS2 or X-Box, I'll be happy to. It'll be keeping the list down to 4 that I'll find hard.
The Mario DS vs FF: Origins etc argument is kind of valid, but at least the Final Fantasy handheld remakes weren't allegedly wonderful platform-launching titles.
See, thing is, you call me an SE fanboy, but this just puzzles me. Read my other posts in this thread. I point to games by Bioware, Lucasarts and others as *good* games. I don't necessarily put SE above these (well, I'd put them above Lucasarts these days), they're just another good developer. You, on the other hand, seem to have a serious difficulty with the idea that Nintendo games might be compared to *any* other developer. I think we can see who the real rabid, moronic fanboy here is.
Actually, the game was by no means the prettiest of this generation. Wind Waker looked better. However, Kingdom Hearts *did* have a better combat system. If you really played into it and got past the first few worlds (where things could be a bit button-mashy), you really started to notice how the combat needed both twitch reactions and tactics.
Voicing was erratic, I admit, particularly on the Final Fantasy characters (although casting Angel as Squall was a great idea). However, the Disney voicing was very, very well done.
Wrong.
I play FFXI. I'd say that, at a rough guess, the play-base is probably splut 40/40/20 between the US, Japan and Europe.
All of the games you mention aside from Metroid basically fall into the "fun for an hour then tedious" category. Zelda Four Swords particularly grated because it had the "multiple GBAs and link cables compulsory for multiplayer" scam. If this had been optional, it would have been cool. As a compulsory mechanism, it's basically exploitation. Not everybody owns or wants a GBA. Oh, and if you traded in your GBA for a DS? So sorry...
Metroid Prime was slightly more interesting, but even this is basically just an exploration/combat fps with a poor control system. I mean, I appreciate the attempt at open-endedness, but all it translated to in practice was "wander around for ages until you find the next obscure switch or item to let you progress".
With the Square Enix games, I'll admit that the last year has been dry for them (as it has for Nintendo). However, remember that Square Enix sequels are usually a long way from being just plain old sequels. For example, FFX-2 completely reinvents the game's combat mechanics. Aside from location and character names, there's basically nothing carried over from FFX.
Most real fanboy idiots, when asked about some innovative game, will say "" and then fail to explain to any kind of intelligent audience exactly what is so innovative about rehashing 10 year old concepts.
Zelda Four Swords basically a gimmick to screw you into buying a GBA imo. Jungle Beat, not really my cup of tea, kinda along the lines of DDR without the excercise. Metroid Prime - I don't get it, I played both and disliked both of them. Poor controls, dull gameplay, how is it innovative? The only FPS on gamecube? Dunno about Wario Ware or Pikmin, haven't played either.
Have you seen the Eyetoy? That is atleast as innovative as jungle beat if not more. Is Revolutions going to be innovative because they added internet support? I doubt you'll find much innovation on any console that hasn't been done or atleast similar before. Also innovation doesn't mean good.
Not defending SquareSoft, I really don't care for their stuff after FF6. Well excluding Kingdom Hearts. I just hate when people always spout Nintendo innovation makes them king.
I believe that the two most important improvements in WW over OoT, were the augmented range of Z-targeting, and the ability to manipulate the camera freely.
After WW, OoT feels a little unwieldly. You have to do strange things to position the camera as you wish.
First off I have to wonder why FF-X2 would enter into an argument with Zelda, considering one is pretty princess dress up maker and the other is a 3D adventure game.
Absurdities aside, you're comparing a menu-based RPG versus a 3D adventure game. I don't know if that has escaped you or not but you might as well compare Zelda to Madden.
I swear I have no idea where this "jump puzzles" idea comes from. The only jump puzzle area I can even think of was in the tree and using those plants to propel you higher and higher up.
After that, the rest of the dungeons functioned with far more emphasis on puzzle solving, and not just block pushing or key finding, which populates so many other games. I confess it has been a long while since I played the game but all I could remember at the time was "This is far more engaging than Ocarina was," because the dungeons felt so fresh. The Earth Temple, especially, had this absolutely amazing old school flavor to it - dark, mysterious, menacing, a real sense of solitude that the original Zeldas pioneered. I remember having to use companions, activate triggers/switches in obscure locations, reflecting light, etc. All the things, you know, that every other game immediately utilizes? That Nintendo through up first? We're all getting sick of the "light the torch" idea too but guess where it came from?
I can't speak for FF-X2 or KOTOR because on the former I don't care to play another Square rpg in my life, as they've become abyssmal shells of their former glory back on the SNES. KOTOR I wanted to play, but I'm still having a problem with the fact that you are comparing two separate genres of games and trying to say the second one doesn't compare to the first, when they both accomplish different things. True, KOTOR does have the whole allignment thing, which is pretty nice, but even that gets downgraded because everyone either goes all bad or all good. There's not a damn player in the world that acts like "Oh man, I want to be soooo like, 90% good and 10% evil."
As for the sailing thing, it was tedious at times, which is why they GAVE YOU A WARP FUNCTION. And don't say that's evidence of a flawed system, it's evidence of the fact that ANY game, in general, where there are several hubs of activity function on that. I can't think of any off hand, but I know more than one game has the option to just bring up a map and select a city and be there instantly, eliminating all the travel.
As for Kingdom Hearts's so called depth in battle system, my response to that is the same one I use for every Square game - did you honestly use more than a set few commands? In every Square game they give you 50-60 skills/spells, and you end up using maybe 4-5 of them repeatedly. Some might come into play at certain times, and others are fun to use maybe initially, but you realize that more than half of the time they don't work, so you go back to your brute force attacks. For example, any FF game? Just keep using blizzard until you get it's successor. Why waste time with stop/confuse/poison/stone/warp/death/slow/blind, and all the other endless has-been-in-roughly-every-rpg-ever-made-spell when you could just do some massive summon, or throw meteors at them? Even with techniques, who the hell uses anything outside of steal and maybe some form of a heal spell, like...group hug or whatever the hell it is Square games incorporate now?
So don't talk to me about this supposed "depth" when it's really not there. If you give me 100 skills and I only use 4-5, then you haven't accomplished anything. The only game I can even think of off hand that might utilize something even remotely close to that amount of customization would be Pokemon, and even then you can brute force your way through it, or just rely on using a few specialized cross breeds (e.g. a leaf/dark type, etc).
In essence you keep talking about all these features in other games and calling them candy, then saying they aren't found in Zelda, which hurts Zelda's credibility. But the
I'm not scared of anonymous cowards.
Stop with the bullshit argument "scam to buy a GBA." It's ludicrious for several reasons. 1. Nintendo was banking on the fact that the GBA has and incredibly large user base installed in the world. They were trying to tap that by bringing them into the console arena. The fact is that if person A bought it, they probably knew more than several people who had a GBA. There was no "scam" to be made here - it was simple rule of averages at play. This is one of the most retarded comments I've ever seen in my whole life because people KNOW its a weak and stupid argument. 2. Let's assume it WAS a scam. Can you think of a better one to be a part of? The GBA has a huge base of games and tons of AAA titles. It's not like you're getting tricked into an ass raping. It's like "OMFG, You mean I have to buy a system that has a ton of awesome games on it, excellent battery life, and multiplayer capabilities? God Nintendo, you suck ASS." It's so utterly retarded that people didn't even give the goddamn game a chance. 3. IF, and I'm speaking to every idiot saying this, you'd even PLAYED the game, you'd realize it was vital to the gameplay experience. Absolutely VITAL. And it was a hugely innovative form of gameplay. Same with FF:CC. But you're too busy crying like a baby about idiotic things like "omG ITS SKAMZ!!!!!!!!111" that you didn't even for once try the game. 4. Penny Arcade said it best. http://www.penny-arcade.com/view.php3?date=2003-08 -25&res=l
5. Shut up now, useless argument. "Zelda doesn't have a jump button!" BECAUSE ITS NOT A PLATFORM GAME EITHER YOU SHITS.
I'm not scared of anonymous cowards.
You mean like
# emerge zelda
Cool!
When are we going to get a Zelda-based MMORPG?
$8.95/mo web hosting
"The Mario DS vs FF: Origins etc argument is kind of valid, but at least the Final Fantasy handheld remakes weren't allegedly wonderful platform-launching titles."
Wonderswan Color, anyone?
By the way: No, I didn't make a typo. I fully meant what I said about Square Enix. And double what I said about its fans. You just proved that point.