----Side Note: A Link Between Worlds Is The Future Zelda Might Have Had
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 21 сен 2024
- A few viewers have asked me since the Link to the Past video came out how I feel about Nintendo's quirky spiritual sequel to A Link to the Past, the 2013 3DS game The Legend of Zelda: A Link Between Worlds. In particular, I've been asked whether I liked A Link Between Worlds or not, and how I felt about the developers' choice to remove puzzle-solving items from dungeons and add a hefty dose of nonlinearity to the typical 2D Zelda formula.
Well, wonder no longer! In this side note, we'll explore the history of portable Zelda games as they've grown up alongside the more mainstream home console entries, and see whether A Link Between Worlds deserves its place at the end of that distinguished lineage.
Spoiler Alert: The answer is yes, it does. I'm not 100% in love with it, but A Link Between Worlds is a really good game and the last Zelda experience of its kind. Play it if you like Zelda, and if you don't like Zelda...what's wrong with you?
This video has 🤍 *199* likes and 🖤 *5* dislikes.
I love this game. My B button broke on my 3ds so I have been killing everything with bushes and arrows. That wall fusing mechanic is one of the most creative ideas I wish they would bring back. The puzzles were excellent.
Wow. That's pretty impressive. I would struggle to think of any game I would be willing to learn how to play without using the primary combat mechanic.
that must've been quite the challenge run!
can you BEAT TRIFORCE THE GODS 2 WITHOUT PRESSING THE B BUTTON??????
@@davebob4973 💀💀💀
@@davebob4973 Probably. Yuga and Margomill can both be fought with the Bow, and Stalblind and Zaganaga probably can be too, not to mention that even if Zaganaga can't be beaten without the sword, the 'Desert Palace skip' trick also skips the boss fight so any problem Zaganaga might cause with this challenge would be a non-issue. Arrghus can probably be fought with just the Hookshot, especially if you upgrade it to the Nice Hookshot, but even if not you can probably fight its second phase with the Bow. Dharkstare can be fought entirely with the Fire Rod, Grinexx can be fought entirely with the Ice Rod, Gemasaur King can be fought entirely with bombs, and Moldorm probably can be too.
Yuganon can be fought entirely with the Bow for the first phase, and for the second phase the Net can be used to play Dead Man's Volley and the Bow to damage him. The only boss I'm completely unsure about is Knucklemaster, and that's mainly because I'm not sure if the weakspot is just the eye, or if the entire boss is a weakspot when the eye is exposed. If it's the former, how would arrows interact with that? Bombs might work regardless, but I'm not sure if they'd explode in time. However, even if Knucklemaster can't be beaten without the sword, the 'Knucklemaster skip' trick makes any problem Knucklemaster might cause with this challenge a non-issue. All in all, I'd be surprised to learn that there was a part of the game that couldn't be passed without pressing B...and I just now remembered the barrier around Hyrule Castle.
In short: we need a new top-down Zelda.
So, I am hopeful that they don’t completely abandon old styles of Zelda.
I don’t have a ton of nostalgia for 2D Zelda, but I grew up on Ocarina of Time, and I really hope we get something more in that style again someday.
Relatively open world with areas closed off by needing an item from another area.
We can only hope!
Item rental with upgrades is great and better than the botw system that gives you all of the core tools up front.
You are legitimately the only channel that puts out solid critical analysis of the Zelda franchise every time. Unfortunately, zoomers brains are so fried from short form video and bright colors that there's no way they'll take the time to watch any of your great videos and see that there were better things about Zelda before breath of the wild.
I appreciate the praise, but I hope and trust you're just being hyperbolic about zoomers and blowing off some steam. I'm pretty sure a lot of the people who've watched and complimented my videos are zoomers, and if short, quickly-edited videos are capable of frying anybody's brains, then the same has probably happened to me because I watch a lot of them.
Honestly, I think people put too much stock in the idea of generational cohorts. The Internet has done a number on everybody's attention span, not just young people's. There are lots of millennials around my age who are dumber and shallower than any zoomer I've ever met, and the same goes for Gen X and the Baby Boomers. We could all stand to be a little smarter.
Thanks for watching, and I hope this didn't come across as too preachy.
@@cinnamonnoir2487 not too preachy, but I do think you're being too nice to that generation haha. I can't shake the feeling that Nintendo ruined my favorite video game franchise of all time just to appeal to Gen Z.
@@JohnM-cd4ouif anything, BOTW appeals to the older fans more than anything, considering Zelda was open world to begin with back in the 80s. A ton of older fans wanted a game more like Zelda 1 or at least less linear than Skyward Sword which is why they went back to the open wild formula.
One thing I must absolutely applaud ALBW for is having a kick ass overworld theme. Specifically the one that plays after you get the Master Sword. It's easily my favorite rendition of the classic Zelda theme! About 2 months ago I played LBW and ALTTP simultaneously as it has been years since I played that game and I hadn't actually beaten Link to the Past up to that point yet. Was very fun :)
Absolutely agree. The only song I don't like is the final Lorule overworld theme at the end of the game, and that's only because it takes away the absolutely bomb Lorule/Dark World theme.
@@magnawaves yeah definitely like the Lorule 1 theme better than 2👏🏾
The only thing I don't like about a Link Between Worlds is the item rental system, but the puzzles and the story were so good that it's still my second favorite Zelda game.
I think this is an excellent point about how to keep items in the series. One of my favorite thoughts to muse over for the future of Zelda is that the randomizer is the future of Zelda. I know that will never happen, Nintendo hates modders, they wouldn't take inspiration from them, but... Zelda Randomizer I can only describe as puzzles within an even bigger puzzle. Unraveling the map and getting access to different items at different times turns the most linear games in existence into open world games with mini checklists scattered around waiting to be eaten away at as best you can with the items you've already found. Having the map open but keeping linear progression in dungeons and the use of progression items is entirely possible, Nintendo just chooses not to embrace this.
Zelda randomizers are pretty cool, and they work surprisingly well for A Link to the Past. But yeah, I wouldn't hold my breath on Nintendo embracing it as a basic design concept.
Cadence of Hyrule is the closest you'll get in the series
9:13 That's me, baby! I was honestly expecting my comment to pop up on screen. XD
I will say I don't mind the first part, since I don't really care about immersion. I don't need my dungeon to be a believable, living, breathing world. I just need it to have interesting puzzles, obstacles and enemies. It's more the effect having the dungeon item already has on gameplay, which I mentioned before. The better dungeons imo are the ones that rely on a central gimmick, and not just the item and the wall-merging. The Swamp Palace's water level mechanic requiring more thought than just spamming the hookshot everywhere.
Since you mentioned the dark palace, one thing I do prefer about this game over LttP is the sections before the dungeons in general. Especially the desert one where you have to bounce back and forth between worlds. LttP is a more simple, retro-style game with more of an excuse plot, so I get that. But it really felt like the story just... stops once you get to the dark world, and it's just rapid fire dungeon after dungeon until you beat the game. Unless you count the exposition from each of the maidens as story. I don't. I could just get that information from a book in the game's library.
Yes, I agree about the story point. That's why I prefer A Link Between World's story slightly over A Link to the Past's, because there's more of a sense that the story keeps happening throughout the game rather than being concentrated in the first half and petering out during the second. I actually do like the little speeches the maidens give, though...and at least each of them has a different one, unlike in some games I could mention.
I also agree that the best dungeons are more than a bunch of dungeon item puzzles, whether or not the game has a big central mechanic like A Link Between Worlds. Good dungeons feel like they have a whole _set_ of integrated design elements, both aesthetic and mechanical, only some of which are item-related. Using the Hookshot in the Lakebed Temple is cool, but it's directing the water through the sluices that really sells its personality, and most of my favorite dungeons have a similar overall theme that I could point to, of which the puzzles are a crucial part but far from the only one.
Thank you for doing another Zelda video, they are always very interesting
Thanks for watching!
Its a little bit ironic you say "eyeballs" to say how Grezzo's philosophy is different from Nintendo when the addition of malice eyeballs to MM3D was something Nintendo dictated to Grezzo
I mean, technically I was just saying that games made by Grezzo under Nintendo's direction are noticeably different from games made by Nintendo alone, but I suppose it's not entirely fair of me to imply that Grezzo made that change (which I dislike, as I'm sure everyone picked up on) when it was apparently Eiji Aonuma's idea.
So no, Grezzo isn't really the problem here, as you noted. I love what they did with Ocarina of Time. They're like Bluepoint Games, who made a port of Shadow of the Colossus I loved and then a port of Demon's Souls that I hate, and that difference has more to do with what the publisher asked for than what their own designing vision is. I appreciate your point.
@@cinnamonnoir2487 i guess to clarify, it was specifically Aonuma and Koizumi's input with possible (though not entirely certain) involvement from Fujibayashi. Most specifically, the core concept of the eyeballs was primarily a story-based concern on part of Aonuma and Koizumi (though admittedly, I don't know who precisely suggested the changes with the Gyorg and Twinmold fights being transformed into a two phase system- it does feel like an Aonuma thing though).
It has been noted before that the core concept behind the inception of both Ocarina of Time 3D and Twilight Princess HD was to "clean up" certain aspects of the game to make them fit better both with each other and the wider narrative of the series (for instance, the temple of time in OoT3D has Hylian writing in it on the red carpet detailing a sort of warning of the return of Demise from SS and other such details) and most of the changes across the 3D remakes are either in service of addressing an issue or criticism of the original game, making the game more accessible to a newer audience, or (and this is a surprisingly common change) the aforementioned narrative or lore related change; Wind Waker HD was conceived primarily as a lighting engine test and while attention was given, it was not as necessary on Wind Waker due to it being "more disconnected from the broader series". Majora's Mask 3D is somewhat in a similar boat as Wind Waker in this regard, so most of the adjustments to story elements in MM3D are more to make the self contained story of MM less self contradictory/more cohesive.
The eyeballs are actually one of the very rare instances where something was added to MM3D for story purposes relating to the broader series, particularly with the fact they wanted to further explore the narrative elements of the eyes in Breath of the Wild and so wanted to make the aspects relating to the eyes' lore more apparent.
The other reason was they wanted to clarify that the four bosses are creations of Majora, which is also why the purple smoke from each of the bosses' death animation takes the shape of Majora's Mask which they didn't in the original, since they found that most players assumed that they were going around facing unrelated creatures allied with Majora rather than specific blights Majora personally created and placed on the temple (which is probably a result of the Majora's Mask manga portraying several of them as vengeful and wicked deities unrelated to Majora), thus them having the eyes and the detail with the smoke makes it more clear they are literally birthed from Majora, thus essentially trying to reinforce the idea that you're fighting Majora constantly throughout the game rather than solving unrelated or partially related issues.
Without bloating this comment more with describing in detail what exactly was going on (unless you want me to, lol), this did end up going on to be a very central aspect of Breath and Tears's demonology.
It is worth noting that it has been said several times by Nintendo staff that while the story isn't the focus they start on with developing Zelda, towards the latter half of development the project heads come together and pour "quite a lot of work" into fitting each game into the wider narrative, with Miyamoto even being quoted as saying while he has no involvement with the series story he considers it an essential part of the series and the primary difference between Zelda and the Mario series in terms of audience appeal (Zelda having a broader narrative depths). So making a decision purely based on trying to flesh out the demonology of the series a bit more does make sense for Nintendo's staff.
@@JacobNintendoNerd99 I appreciate your pointing out all this information about why they made these changes to various Zelda remakes. It makes sense, I can see why they did it, and I still think these changes are terrible.
The four mask creatures in the original Majora's Mask _do_ come across as if they were only tangentially related to Majora, and I like that they do. I always assumed that they were actually the four giants, twisted into a cursed form by the mask's magic, and that's why you encounter the giants right after defeating them. These changes are essentially Nintendo putting its foot down and saying "No, your theory is _incorrect_ and we're going to spell out exactly what's going on here." It sucks all the mystery and subtlety out of a game for which those were the primary selling points.
Majora's Mask was not designed to fit into a broader Zelda timeline. It barely even works as a sequel to the game it canonically takes place right after. Bending plot points and adding a pile of new details to it so it fits better with the other games is disrespectful to the game's original vision; in Aonuma's case he's devaluing his own work. If it conveys the impression that all these games work together as one extended saga, that impression is fake; they don't work that way, and trying to force it cheapens them as individual stories. If Nintendo is spending months trying to preserve the canon for each new Zelda game, I think their priorities are profoundly misguided, and that might help to explain why I don't like the way they make these games any more.
I realize I'm getting quite vehement here, but I hate the eyeballs in MM3D and everything they stand for. Not everything needs to be part of an enormous saga comprising dozens of games with shared lore. Zelda was at its best when each game was allowed to have its own personality, not twisted to make it more like all the others.
Seriously, though, that's not Grezzo's fault at all and I don't blame them for it, just like I don't blame Team Ninja for how Metroid: Other M turned out. This is valuable information you're sharing and I do thank you for it.
@@cinnamonnoir2487 well, I guess I do need to clarify it a bit more, Miyamoto was not talking in reference to the modern games having a great deal of effort spent on making sure they fit in, but the older games, particularly starting with Ocarina of Time.
If anything, while they do have a very obvious implied sequence of events that got from Point A to Point B with their comments (alluding to a destroyed Hyrule), Breath and Tears are on the simpler side of things where they mostly did away with timeline constraints and did a more standalone, mostly self contained story like you're proposing. It was very quickly settled during early production of Breath of the Wild, in essence, "We are going to throw this game at the very end of the timeline with a new Ganondorf and a new Hyrule, the older Hyrule was destroyed and founded again" (in essence, an in-universe soft reboot). There was hammering out the finer details, I'm sure, especially during the production of Tears with how they incorporated a new Twinrova into the game (and never utilized beyond two cutscenes; I still think they planned for them to be DLC antagonists, as that seems the obvious use for them), but if anything Breath seemed to have one of the less messy/drawn out processes with sorting out the storyline.
Majora's Mask (because they more or less BS'd that it was an alternate universe at the start of development to sidestep the issue due to Miyamoto imposing a brutal 1 year crunch) and Skyward Sword (because it was the one rare exception where they started the game based around the story, since the start of development was them immediately knowing they wanted to do a game explaining the origin of the series and the gameplay of Skyward Sword was based around that rather than the usual reverse order) are the other two exceptions besides BotW/Tears that aren't a direct sequel game in the same setting/time period such as Link's Awakening or Phantom Hourglass.
A Link Between Worlds is actually one such notable case on the "this game had its fate decided early on so there wasn't a lot of effort"; what it mostly boiled down to was once it was decided for the project to be based around ALttP, they immediately knew they wanted to make the game based around explaining how the Triforce got into the hands of the Royal Family and became the heirloom it is in the NES games, which was a process that ALttP's ending merely implied would eventually happen between itself and LoZ1. This is why the ending has Zelda touch the Triforce and the very end of the credits shows the Royal Family is ruling over Hyrule using the Triforce again, as the intro of the game showed when recounting the events that occurred after Skyward Sword.
Ocarina of Time, Twilight Princess, Wind Waker, and Four Swords Adventures are some of the big notable titles we know had a very brutal and drawn out focus on trying to get the narrative to fit the larger series, with the final story of Twilight Princess in particular mostly being made as a very drawn out excuse to kill Ganondorf to explain Four Swords Adventures (TP and FSA had notable overlap in the same writing team).
The saga being intended to be one cohesive saga with shared lore was... More or less always the intention. The entire purpose of Wind Waker was to set up new storylines that branched off and ignored everything else except OoT, with new antagonists like Bellum, but the absolute vitriol from the west and Nintendo more or less capitulating to the western fan demand for a sequel to OoT/MM with a "darker tone" seems to have more or less put the kabash on the idea of a dedicated "standalone story without a lot of broader lore cohesion" timeline like Aonuma wanted the Adult Timeline to be when developing Wind Waker in 2001.
Aonuma seems to have been sort of half able to return to the premise of the AT with the Switch games, and making them a largely standalone story with its own Ganondorf who hadn't featured in any other Zelda games with the start and end of his story being in the Switch games' era alone, but clearly the presence of Ganon, the Triforce, etc are stipulations that the Wind Waker sequels didn't have and were intended to lack.
The games were more or less always developed to be one cohesive saga prior to that (with the exception of the Wind Waker trilogy and the odd exception like MM) which is where most of the effort and care Miyamoto alludes to came from. I think the fact that essentially every game takes place either directly before or directly after a different game and they are not subtle about how things connect does help this; I also think NoA mistranslating or removing details from the English games like Goddess Hylia being discussed in ALttP, OoT, and Wind Waker does hurt the perception of cohesion, though being a Japanese company Nintendo broadly doesn't care about the West losing out.
And I guess in the specific case of the eyes, as I noted MOST of the additions to MM are for the *self contained* story of Termina and the eyes are the exception to the rule; it is also less of a "timeline" thing and more of a "worldbuilding" thing as since ALttP, pustules with ocular tissue forming on demons and creatures transformed into demons is a common physical side effect shown in the series and the purpose was more to just make the way Demons work in that respect to be a bit less subtle because it was apparently too subtle for people to notice prior to BotW, where it became an actually significant detail.
Though lastly, I do think the idea that MM's primary selling point is "mystery and subtlety" is a bit of an odd assertion; I always felt the primary selling point was instead the characterization of the NPCs throughout the world, their interplay, the relation between NPCs, and the ability to temporally explore the world and interfere with their daily routines, etc, which is implemented both in the narrative and the gameplay; ultimately, that MM is a character study, one that largely deals with how these many people react to their certain death, but also with Link being able to affect their lives and discovering how their routines intersect and interconnect, and mastering the Groundhog Day loop he finds himself in by mastering his knowledge of their actions throughout the cycle to prevent the apocalypse.
I never particularly felt mystery or subtlety was a big part of MM outside of the backstory with Ikana and its two nations, and arguably the Happy Mask Salesman himself (the latter of whom remains entirely unexplained even in the remake and the former of which by contrast still gets pretty well explained even in the original by dialogue throughout Ikana, such as from Pamela's father), and I don't really think I'm comfortable saying Ikana is the entire selling point of the game when it's barely even a quarter of it; I also don't think peoples' reactions to their impending death, even during the final hours, are particularly subtle as much as they are a deep character study, with character study being more the focus of MM (the dojo master being reduced to crying in the back of his shop screaming that he's not ready to die and the Postman being paralyzed by duty aren't really *subtle*, but they are very deep statements on them as people).
In that sense, I do personally think that at least conceptually Aonuma wanting to make sure that it was clearly conveyed that the four creatures were created by Majora in opposition to the giants (since the original intended this but apparently did not clearly convey it for players enough, even though I personally thought it was pretty obvious already) does strengthen this core "selling point" of there being connected struggles and helps to flesh out Skull Kid's arc; the early game is very heavy on emphasizing how almost everything going wrong in Clock Town is a result of Skull Kid's pranks and meddling, and they escalate in severity.
If you assume the bosses are unconnected this makes a pretty jarring transition in Skull Kid's character arc (a focal point of the game that gets explicitly spelled out for you by a side quest explaining the history of Termina) where he goes from mean spirited pranks up to trying to just completely destroy the world with the moon, but with the context that the bosses are created by Skull Kid via Majora this serves the effect of both A: making the interconnection that's so central to the game extend beyond Clock Town and make the game feel more cohesive and interconnected by contextualizing the game as a constant struggle against these "pranks"/Majora rather than a plotline that ends with Clock Town, and B: helping you mentally make a character progression for Skull Kid that flows a bit better than just going from pranks to world crushing; now, it seems that Skull Kid went from harmless pranks, to more serious things such as disfigurement and robbery, to outright murder by proxy, to starting to destroy and condemn entire sections of the world (which is where we start off at the beginning of the 3 day cycle with his arc), which then culminates in his destruction of the world via the moon. In the self contained sense, I do think being able to more clearly convey the four bosses strengthens the central selling point of MM on multiple levels in a narrative sense, even if it could have been done with something other than the eyes and even though altering the gameplay of half of the bosses is unnecessary to that purpose. The bosses of the original weren't really meant to be something speculated on to begin with and I guess Nintendo wrongly assumed it was already clear that Majora made them since they were evil masks in the original, only to find most of the playerbase didn't get the context they tried to provide.
Very ultimately though, I did find it especially odd that the eyeballs were pinned on Grezzo so I'm glad that's cleared up.
I love A Link Between Worlds, is one of my top 3 zelda games. I think we will eventually get more 2D Zelda similar to how there’s still 2D Mario games, considering how long the development for 3D Zelda games are going for, other than remakes and ports, the best way to supplement the waiting is with a new 2D Zelda just like they have been doing in the past. We did get Cadence of Hyrule which is a game nobody expected to exist so the chances are high.
unfotunately, because every 2d zelda after alttp was a handheld game, they never achieved the level of grandeur and complexity of the snes dungeons again, despite the fact that i really like the oracle dungeons and links awakening
I would love to find core Items in Caves with mini Puzzles (NO SHRINE ÄSTHETICS)
And then use them to reach dungeons who require these Items
Kinda like a handcrafted Randomizer
4:51 - Going back and analyzing it, I'd say that the Forsaken Fortress is an excellent playspace. It only sucks because of how it mechanically railroads you into clunkily implemented, progress killing stealth sections, and the worst possible pacing in when it shows up. With some slight adjustments, it could make for a fantastic mini-dungeon in the mid-game, a la Ocarina's Ice Cavern.
I agree. The structure itself is good, and I would enjoy being in it if the way you interacted with it was a bit different.
babe wake up teacup posted a new zelda vid
HAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHWHAHHW HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHA
I LOVE YOUR ORIGINAL JOKE AND SUPER CUTE SENSE OF HUMOR!!!!!!!!!!!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Did we just become best friends?
I have A link between worlds poster on my wall 😎
9:44 incorrect
the actual eastern palace dungeon is dedicated to the bow and how items work
along with general gameplay stuff
the boss of the eastern palace is yuga and you flat out cant hit him without a projectile item
beating him awards the wall merge mechanic
and leaves you to escape the boss room back to the dungeon entrance with the wall merge
theres only 2 real sections that require the merge
the outside section to the left which is the only way to get back to the entrance from the boss room
and the outside section to the right which leads to an optional chest
the outside section is definitely dedicated to using the merge
but to say the entire dungeon is is false
Fair enough. Personally I blew through the part before the boss fairly quickly and spent more time outside, so it felt more like the meat of the dungeon was wall-merging, but you're right that it does revolve around a puzzle-solving item.
My mistake.
It should be said that anyone who complains about wanting to be in the timeline where albw was the future of zelda (which is a growing amount of people) should just feck right off, because the only people that bought that game were me, cinnamon, and about three other people. As usual the game came out, people like me loved it, and the "fans" tore it apart for "reusing the map" "its just a worse alttp remake" "why would I but this instead of emulating alttp" "this is a gimmick to sell people on 3d" "the dungeons are too complicated" "the dungeons are too simple" "the story is a boring re-tread" and dozens of other excuses that essentially prove the person had never even played the game, which pans out because it sold like dogwater especially considering the popularity of the 3ds.
This game is such a classic that it NEEDS a second chance as a switch port, but it, like spirit tracks and adventure of link will likely never see its deserved credit because people decided the game wasn't worth trying in the first place.
I loved this game. I'm a big fan of the 2D Zeldas, and even prefer [most] of them, until BotW.
I do think ALBW outdid ALTP for me. It's one of my favorite Zelda games but you had very good points and explained them well. I wish Nintendo would take what worlds did and expand upon it much further
Hey, maybe they will. If they ever do make another original 2D Zelda, building on what ALBW started would be a pretty natural choice, just like how ALBW was inspired by ALTTP.
What's so wrong with forsaken fortress? Am I the only one who likes it? back in 2003 having to navigate a dungeon without a sword was pretty innovative. True having to visit it twice in the game was a bit overkill but is one of the less linear dungeons in early 3d zelda.
Okay, I have to admit that the Forsaken Fortress is more of a running joke for me at this point than something I consider _objectively_ bad. I find it to be annoying on repeat playthroughs, but the _design_ of its layout is actually quite good. Mostly what I find bothersome is how easy it is for Moblins to spot your movements inside the barrels, and that's not the designer's fault.
I doubt you're the only one who likes Forsaken Fortress, especially considering I half-enjoy it myself. I really like the fight against the Helmaroc King, if that makes you feel any better.
its actually not possible to progress the game without speaking to all of the sages before hand
gulley wakes you up at the start
oren gives you the flippers you need to access the house of gales
impa lets you into the castle
rosso gives you the gloves needed to lift rocks
Irene is the games fast travel system
you meet osfala at the eastern palace
you speak with seres at the start and is what kicks off the whole adventure
ill agree that the game doesnt give you much to get attached to them
they get more to them then the sages in alttp did though
Rosso is the one I was thinking of. I guess I forgot that you have to get the Power Glove from him, probably because he can disappear from his house really quickly once the plot starts advancing. Osfala is also a bit flat as a character.
The only sages I really like are Gulley and Irene, and even then I like Maple from the Oracle games a lot more than Irene. The characters I tend to enjoy in A Link Between Worlds are the minor ones like Thief Girl and the turtles outside Turtle Rock...and the Maiamais.
Thanks for setting me straight on this point.
@@cinnamonnoir2487 sorry to run you through the wringer.
its just that i love albws so much so that im a little nuts about it
@@tylerherr4288 I don't think of this kind of thing as being put through the wringer. When I make factual mistakes I'm willing to acknowledge that; it doesn't hurt my ego to let those go.
The irritating thing is when people claim I'm wrong with absolutely no evidence, or accuse me of having a bad personality because they disagree with me about video games. Your comments aren't even close to the bad side of what I've received on RUclips.
Thanks for commenting.
i love how albws is everything that botw took too far lol
120 poorly polished minidungeons?
bring it down to a handful of well polished rupee dungeons
900 korok seeds that ends in a useless reward?
being it down to a sane number like 100 and put a decent reward for people that collect them all
etcetc
Pretty much, yeah. A Link Between Worlds is restrained where Breath of the Wild is excessive.
What if instead of having signs indicating the exact key item that the game requires you to use in that dungeon, design the entrance to the dungeon in such a way that it is only possible with the required key item in place?
Technically A Link Between World already does that. It uses obstacles to prevent you from entering a dungeon in which you couldn't make any progress. It happens to _also_ have signs indicating which key item is necessary, but I don't think that's a serious problem, even if it is a bit "game-y".
The thing is, even if there were no signs it would still be anticlimactic to have the dungeon item already equipped before the dungeon begins. That's why many Zelda fans, including me, would like to go back to the pattern of finding items inside dungeons. Not having the signs would make things more realistic, but it wouldn't help with the disappointment.
I enjoyed a link between worlds but the kitten rental mechanic killed a lot of the intrigue dungeons had. They could never assume you had any given item so most puzzles were limited to just one item. The dungeons all felt too short and too easy. The overworld was way too similar to alttp and it gave me the same feeling of 'oh, I've been here and done that already' that revisiting Hyrule in Tears gave me.
I wish they had done something more original with the world. Changed it more. Made it feel unique.
I don't want another classic Zelda game with this sort of item rental thing. Very much not a fan.
I can understand that, and you're not the only person I've heard this sentiment from. Personally I would much rather have a sequence of items found in dungeons too, but like I said in the video, if linearity _has_ to be thrown out the window I prefer the way A Link Between Worlds did it to the way Breath of the Wild did it.
Apologies for repeat commenting, but it's also very worth noting that I think Triforce Heroes is completely unplayable thanks to the 3DS server shutdown, unless you're in the same room as your friends, even if you have friends who want to play, you better live near them 😂
I don't know what they were thinking with Triforce Heroes. The whole premise is really goofy, along the lines of things they used to only publish in Japan like Tingle's Freshly-Picked Rosy Rupeeland, and the importance of multiplayer to the game feeling remotely enjoyable was certain to date the whole thing fairly quickly.
Nintendo seems to have felt that Triforce Heroes _was_ a proper sequel to A Link Between Worlds, and that makes no sense to me. It's clearly a spin-off with almost none of the appeal of its predecessor.
P.S. By the way, you don't need to apologize to me for repeat commenting if you have more than one thing worth saying. I like it when people care enough to keep talking.
I think this guy liked the newest direct.
Let Capcom do some magic again if youre not gonna give me old Zelda :/
God, I wish someone would let Capcom make a Zelda game again. Even if Flagship's not around any more, Capcom is still a great company. If only Shinji Mikami could be convinced to participate...
There are many great Zelda games. But aLttP and aLBW are the only 2 truly perfect ones
nah ALTTP > ALBW
Good video
Oh Binnamon Soir, I wish I could join you in heaven
I'm not gonna lie, Binnamon Soir took me a minute to come up with and he's still probably a better design than my actual avatar.
I personally think Nintendo has wisely left the realm of '2D' behind for smaller studios to fill in. Why compete in a market you have already conquered when you can set the tone in a new frontier.
I disagree with all criticisms of this game and I'd like a 3D game as perfect as this 2D one.
14:55 What about Cadence of Hyrule?
Cadence of Hyrule has completely different gameplay from a typical Zelda game and wasn't developed by Nintendo. I honestly don't think it counts as a new original Zelda game; it's a Zelda-themed expansion to Crypt of the Necrodancer, like how Hyrule Warriors is a Zelda-themed Dynasty Warriors game.
Why did they slant all the vertical walls etc by 45° instead of slanting the camera by 45°???
It's easier to see the motion of Link and other models along the ground when you have a top-down view. If they oriented the camera 45 degrees down from overhead, that would force them to show you the world's horizon and a lot of other details that I believe they would consider distracting.
Tilting the models back actually does make it resemble the isometric visuals from A Link to the Past and other games like it. It seems crazy when you just say it, but this is basically the closest they can get to a 2D feel while using 3D-rendered models.
@@cinnamonnoir2487 I think they could have used a slanted camera with orthogonal projection because that is essentially what isometric games approximate.
I mean orthographic projection
@@cube2fox I know what you mean. Obviously I can't say for sure why they went with the choice they did, because while they explained part of their reason for doing it they never explained why they _didn't_ do other things that would have achieved a similar result. It just seems to me from their decisions that having the camera pointed at the ground was important to them.
I also imagine that tilting all the models wasn't actually as complicated from a coding perspective as it seems from the end result. It may have been easier or required fewer lines of code to tilt the models instead of reorienting the camera. That's just a guess, though.
@@cinnamonnoir2487 Yeah I think it was easier because orthographic projection likely isn't trivial to implement at the engine level and just tilting the camera 45° with ordinary projection would lead to e.g. seeing more of the floor in the upper part of the screen than in the lower part.
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree with the dungeons. With the exception of Lorule Castle, literally the final stage of the game, none of them felt particularly challenging nor interesting to me, design wise. Even those in the Lorule section felt to me to reach just the level of complexity of, say, Lord Jabu-Jabu in OOT. Just one or two steps above an introductory dungeon in any other Zelda game, and that's only because those dungeons are gated until you beat the first batch in Hyrule.
Now, of course, they were far better than any of the dungeons in BotW and TotK, but that bar is so freaking low it's barely worth mentioning. The main issue of the dungeons suffering from having simplify their design and puzzles because every dungeon can potentially be a first (something highlighted by the fact that the only jump in complexity are seen by the only two instances of unlocking gated content, by the way) is still pretty much present. Not to mention that the rental system also puts a magnifying glass on the issue of key items being on a fundamentally opposite direction of an open world design philosophy.
As for the story, that was also a bit of a disappointment. It's true that it has some cool ideas and characters, and it deals with morally grey subjects that aren't that common in Zelda. But the problem is that 95% of it are only really explored in the last hour or so of the game. The game doesn't really explore its strong points outside of a few and far in between foreshadowing moments. This is something that can be blamed on the open world design, but that's not all of it. Reusing the same map is also partly to blame. Now, gameplay-wise the reused map was far, FAR more successful than TotK, but narrative-wise, it also suffered since it limited greatly the amount of environmental storytelling they could do.
Not to mention that ALBW was also a dark omen of what the series would do with the idea of continuity as a whole, drawing attention to it by marketing the game as a sequel to "A Link to the Past"*, but when they actually recap the story of ALTTP in the game, they recap the story of OOT instead.
No, really, go back to it. The backstory of ALBW just doesn't add up with ALTTP. Ganon was down straight KILLED at the end of ALTTP, and the Triforce was a single piece. But in ALBW, Ganon is just sealed and the Triforced is split into its three parts. However, this does add up if you think about it as the story of OOT, minus the mention of time travel.
My guess is that Nintendo kind of hoped for Zelda fans haven't really played ALTTP recently, if at all (it had been over two decades at that point, after all) and/or haven't really paid much attention to its story. And honestly, seeing that even the most lore-obssessed part of the Zelda community apparently didn't notice these inconsistencies... looks like they hoped right. Which is kind of sad for ALTTP, honestly.
So, in a way, ALBW DID in fact become the future of the Zelda series.
* If you are going to say that it's supposed to be a spiritual sequel, not a regular sequel... Well, that's just not true. Go back to the presentation of the game, and you'll see they were very explicit about it. Not to mention that in Japan the game is literally titled "Kamigami No Triforce 2" (for those who don't know "Kamigami No Triforce", or "Triforce of the Gods" was the original Japanese title of "A Link to the Past").
I could see key items still working in an open world game if implemented properly. I think as long as you limit the areas and questlines gated behind some key item requirement and keep most of the world open it should work fine.
Example would be something like access to an area being cut of to villagers by a landslide, requiring bombs to clear it for them. Sure Link can climb over the landslide, but that doesn't exactly help the village get to that area.
Or you could redo the whole blue flame thing for the Sheikah furnaces and maybe expand when they might be used. Make that type of flame only able to be carried by an ancient Sheikah lantern and they give you some hints on some old Sheikah ruins that has become a hideout.
I don't think it's antithetical to open world to not have every problem be solvable by sticking some logs together with glue. Nothing wrong with somebody telling Link they just need a fucking wrench.
I agree with you that the dungeons aren't particularly challenging, but I still thought they were fun. I enjoyed the "puzzle-box" nature of a lot of the rooms, with walls swinging around and holes opening up in the floor to create new pathways, kind of like how the Captain Toad levels in some Mario games work. It's certainly more contrived than most other Zelda games, but you have to remember that I _am_ comparing this to the recent Zelda titles and other portable entries, and I think at least half of the dungeons in A Link Between Worlds are above average for that specific category.
I also can't deny that the game is light on story until the very end, but I _really_ like that ending and I think they get a lot of good emotion out of it. Hilda and Ravio are fun characters, and Yuga isn't any worse as a villain than Ghirahim from Skyward Sword or Ganon in the last two games. I also enjoy Hilda's comments about the various parts of Lorule that you travel to; it isn't as scary or mysterious as the Dark World from A Link to the Past, but again I consider that a high bar for setting design. I still think ALBW does a good job with its setting and I enjoyed exploring it on my recent playthrough, even though I'd already completed the game once before.
And finally, with regards to the confusion about which canon A Link Between Worlds is following, Nintendo may have promised that this would be a canonical sequel to A Link to the Past, but I don't consider it to be that and I don't care that it isn't. My personal opinion is that the whole idea of three branching timelines that contain the entire Zelda franchise is fundamentally flawed and doesn't make sense, and it's not how the best games in the series were originally conceived. Zelda games have mostly turned out to be spiritual successors to each other rather than proper sequels, and I prefer them that way. In my opinion, A Link Between Worlds works best as its own game, not as a sequel to any previous Zelda game, no matter what Nintendo's official position on this is.
Sick of this ai generated content
You think it's bad or you dislike it because you think it's ai?
I know it's you narrating, but either the script was generated in chat gpt, or is so weirdly worded that it sounds like it was. I'm sitting here trying to determine what the actual substance of this video is, but your lexicon is so off-putting to me. Might just be me, like I said - i'm sick of videos like this
@@unOrigiNikI'm not getting that impression from this video. I don't even know what you're talking about. Super rude of you.