Это видео недоступно.
Сожалеем об этом.
Discovering the Heart of Zelda 1
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 17 авг 2024
- In the last video, we discussed The Legend of Zelda's overworld. This time around, we're taking a look at its dungeons, their design, and just how much focus they have in the game...and not only that, we'll talk about the secret sauce that made that original game so great and why it still holds sway almost 40 years later.
00:00 Intro
00:37 Origins
02:16 Dungeons
03:30 Objective
04:37 Interplay
07:18 To Know Gaming
Music:
Extended Overworld and Dungeon Themes as composed by Koji Kondo
• overworld zelda theme ...
• Legend of Zelda, The (...
Intro to Finale and Closing composed by Bruce Faulconer
• Intro To Finale And Cl...
Stock Clips from:
www.vecteezy.c...
www.vecteezy.c...
All rights belong to their respective owners
The dungeons in zelda 1 have a certain magic to them. I love the labrynthian aspect of it. I love how some rooms are literally hell on earth with darknuts everywhereeeee. No z target or flurry rush or back flip. Just maneuvering and stabbing. Like a puzzle of it's own in a way. You really have to manage your bombs because if you run out in a dungeon you may not be able to progress or beat the boss
I love how the combat challenges force you to push the limits of the controls with how reactive you have to play to weave through enemies and projectiles while also quickly getting stabs in
all the more reason not to play it with a switch controller hahahahaha
This is where learning how the item drops work becomes essential.
@@jonothanthrace1530 yessssss 😂 when I first hopped on the wiki and saw that spread sheet it changed my life. Before I understood the drops I struggled hard
@@lmnt66 very well put
A Link to the Past feels to me like the closest to interconnecting overworld and dungeons the way Zelda 1 did, with items necessary for beating certain bosses hidden in caves you need to find off the beaten path, making the exploration of its overworld feel similarly necessary and thus rewarding. Even if there are no in-dungeon hints pointing to overworld locations, only Sahasrahla and the sages hinting through the telepathy tiles that an items with a certain functions are needed to progress.
Also I just realized that Skyward Sword has its own… interesting way of interconnecting the two by making the whole overworld feel like a level but also completely linear and handholdy so… yeah, a very twisted special sauce in that one lol.
well, Metroid and "metroidvanias" are what perfected the interconnection and merging of overworld and "dungeons". the main difference between Zelda and Metroid is that Zelda games have a separate overworld while Metroid games have everything as essentially one big "dungeon".
Yeah I'll have something to say about SS in the next video about BotW - I haven't played either SS or ALttP in some time and I could use a refresher.
These two videos have definitely made me want to play through Zelda 1 myself!
Do it! Let me know what you think!
Another great video and it goes into why I personally hate the notion that BotW returned Zelda to it's roots or is the first "true Zelda" in a long while. It's at best 50% of the Zelda formula, focusing so much on the overworld and free exploration that it comes at the cost of everything else that made Zelda great. In many ways it's the opposite of SS, which concentrated so much on the dungeon-/ puzzle-esque navigation at the cost of freedom.
It's such a shame that the Zelda team reduces their own franchise into just one aspect of itself recently (SS trending hard to the linear dungeon experience and every title after that being very non-linear exploration), when obviously both are needed for the "true" Zelda experience. I don't need every future game to be OoT revamped, I just want Zelda games that stay in a healthy range of that spectrum of exploration, but we might not get that in a long while since Aonuma caught the "more freedom = better game" and "conventions = bad" viruses.
Well said - the botw connection is definitely a hot topic I'm going to discuss in the next video.
You can say that, sure.
But what is the deal with people who prefer the first two titles over the middle entries liking botw?
In the same vein, why do people who hate botw list zelda games starting with oot, or on occasion alttp?
No shit the NES games dont have puzzles, and of course they have some progression gates, how does that suddenly make the comparisons that are literally made by the developers invalid? If the first game was made today, It would not look like LoZ because nobody would play that except me, It would look like botw because it is tapping into a consumer desire.
Do any of you actually stop to think about why you feel the need to craft ridiculous narratives around the development and mechanics of these games? Is it the idea to somehow influence the universe to push Nintendo to just make ocarina again? Help me understand.
I know these videos are pretty consistently "I am going to skew everything as hard as I can to make my points" and I presume the reason why is to recruit people to hate Zelda, but why? Do you and the two thousand other people who watch the videos think you're going to devastate Nintendo's wallet and force them to go back to making video games that don't sell?
This has happened since Majoras mask was released and I have never found out why, why do "zelda fans" in particular feel so entitled? Why do you think Nintendo owes you? Why do you treat this like politics? Why do you all act like boomers?
this is what i want from the series tbh. a balance of freedom and progression like z1. botw is too open and lacks that labyrinthian style
2:30 "What they lack in sophistication, they make up for in _claustrophobia!_ "
~truly~
1. Did you know that Oracle of Seasons was originally meant to be a full-blown remake of the original Zelda? That is until they made the game link gimmick to make the sister title relevant. However, despite the different settings and stories, pretty much all Zelda 1 bosses were present in Oracle of Seasons.
2. A common norm for NES era games is the “rage-inducing” difficulty. Regardless of what you play or how you master it, everything in the screen wants your character dead. And frankly, this was one of many reasons why Kirby was made. Of course, things began to soften up between the SNES and N64 eras. Nowadays, you have audiences who want to play to relax, play for fun, and others… WHO JUST WANT THE GAMES TO F-(CENSORED) THEM UNTIL THEY LOVE THEM!
3. The objective was to save Princess Zelda. If it was then… Why bother? She’s so screwed… And at a time when fleshing out characters wasn’t a priority until narrative-driven turned-based strategies like whatever Square Soft made started taking the crown for that, it’s hard to grow an attachment to characters, especially when they’re just pixels… Once the SNES and the 3D era started to take this approach, it gets easier to become immersed into characters feelings and emotions. Even when you play as the character without a specific fleshed-out sequence, you get the sense of attachment. (Sorry, Master Yoda, but I don’t follow the Jedi code.) Super Smash Bros. wasn’t known for having fleshed-out characters (the adventure modes don’t really count…), but I still end up liking the characters more. What’s more bizarre is that I found myself choosing my favorite incarnation of Princess Zelda NOT from the mainline Zelda canon. Now say all what you want about Ultimate Zelda being one or both, to me, she’s neither from ALTTP nor ALBW. She’s a from-the-ground-up iteration MADE for Smash using the aforementioned two Zeldas as the basis for her character. Prior to this Zelda though, TP Zelda was my favorite, and I was glad she made her way into Smash twice. She was the most mature and the most womanly, and her actions in TP gave her more of a distinct personality than her fellow iterations. When Ultimate came with this cheerful princess, she just whammed most others out of the park, including Fake British-, er- I mean, Whiner-, er, bagh… WILD Zelda. Now if we can just GIVE HER her own standalone game NOT Echoes of Wisdom, I’ll be in pure satisfaction.
4. Would you rather Smash 4 Zelda to be given the same chance as I would give to Ultimate Zelda? Not that I blame you, she was just as fine in Brawl… *except the tripping…*
2 is where the souls games took over.
No way, she's not screwed - that's why I saved her!
i swear oracle of seasons also had that "repair my door" guy too
@@Excalibur5k IT DID!
I've watched a lot of think pieces about Zelda, but I had no idea that Zelda 1 started as a labyrinth creator!
Turns out the Zelda team doesn't really let go of many ideas even if it means implementing them in a remake for the switch ala Link's Awakenings's dungeon creator.
Zelda 1 is definitely a game that has a good flow when you engage with it on its terms. And you're right that the experience comes down to figuring out what its terms are and that 30+ years of video game experience give you a leg up on that. However, I think the second quest can capture what it would have felt like to play the first quest for the first time without any prior experience. The second quest's design has not really been aped in a Zelda game since, it's bizarre enough where you will be at its mercy. But I also think the second quest's dungeons are impeccable. They anticipate the complex navigation that would be seen in LttP, LA, and MM. While those games have a tight key and lock system, the second quest still has a resource-based progression to its dungeons, so structurally they're a lot more wild.
Hm interesting take. I've never played the second quest. I think you've convinced me.
I don't see what you mean, what games are like LoZ that would give you a leg up? Its not like playing through the 3d zeldas and knowing the answer to every puzzle before you see it, its the opposite, its more likely a confusing experience for experienced-but-new players because they are used to the "yellow paint" design or other more modern conventions.
Of course I wouldn't know, I played LoZ the moment it came out on GCN, so I was still fresh, having only played oot - ww before (as far as adventure games) so perhaps this is a blind spot.
@@daniel8181 Odds are you knew how keys work, screen transitions and the structure of the environments, and you had some sense of how items would gate progression. Unless you read the manual, these were not at all gaming conventions at the time of Zelda NES's release. Unless you were playing Tower of Druaga and Ultima and imagined what a fusion of those games would be, you wouldn't have a reference point for the kind of game Zelda was, especially on consoles.
@@coolguychecker7329 Ah, I see what you mean, but I take issue still.
For example, odds are anyone knows how the keys work, you'd be hard-pressed to find someone unfamiliar with a lock-and-key mechanism, so the design is reasonable an intuitive (more so than early 3d "puzzles" like shooting an eye, which is intuitive, but less reasonable).
And to your other point, people DID read the manuals. I didn't have that experience but my older cousin recounted that the manuals were analog tutorials, and so unless someone had taught you how to play, you read the manual. It is reasonable to assume even if a player didnt consult it before starting, if they were confused they would simply read the manual - I did as much in my playthough, consulting Nintendo's digital manual to understand what items did.
So the the extent that any gate now is passed more easily with experience with game or zelda logic its only because you play the game out of its intended context and instead in the context of a world of video games that found great inspiration from it.
Really though, I think a lot of those minor progression gates (like boss weakness) were intended to be experimental and social. When you look at the context of Nintendo's other works, especially with modern context and examples like BS Zelda, Miiverse (rip), the Wii itself, WW's tingle features, the more recent mario games, botw, totk, etc, they are quite interested in "collaborative" gaming. Zelda keeping information from you encouraged people to experiment and socialize about it, which is something that did not occur with the mid-series games, and really only returned in force with botw.
I think this is a major reason why people fail to understand just how close LoZ and botw/totk are, I did not experience it in the same way as people did in the 80s, but when viewing the game in its time and with the lens of a designer under these limitations, things like totk's "solve it how you want" approach become obvious as natural evolutions. If every boss had the oot style "hit it in the shiny spot with the weapon you just got" then there would be nothing to talk about, the first time you see it, you may believe it coincidence, but by the third time you understand this is how the games work. If you instead allow players to question why they are ineffective some will resolve the issue with testing, and others will seek knowledge from them on how to progress.
@@daniel8181 I think I more or less agree with you. I would just maybe reframe the original argument and say that all that social collaboration among Zelda players has been continuous since the first game. Somebody who showed you OoT or LttP or whatever your first Zelda either played a previous Zelda themselves or was introduced by somebody who did. That social knowledge has persisted and is much further along now than Zelda NES was at its release.
A similar example would be BotW, people are now playing the game first time using windbombs and minecart hovercrafts. That's easily accessible social knowledge that those of us who played at release didn't have.
The usage of "desperately" to mean "dramatically" is new to me
Well I was using desperately to mean desperately.
Great video! The way the overworld and dungeons are intertwined in Zelda 1 is special sauce indeed, and it's something missing from BotW and TotK. Those games are more about preparing to beat Ganon/Ganondorf rather than the dungeons themselves. The dungeons in BotW/TotK can help you reach that goal, but they're non-essential pieces to the puzzle and they aren't necessarily tough challenges you need to prepare for. The bosses might require some upgrades but the dungeons themselves are quite easy. Unlike the dungeons in Zelda 1, they're not such a tough ordeal to overcome that you're thinking about how to beat them while exploring the overworld. Doing the dungeons in the BotW duology to me has always felt like an optional thing you do just because you want to experience all the game's content. If you really want to beat BotW/TotK then you can just find most of the equipment you need in the final dungeon.
Which is kind of lame - to me dungeons are an essential part of the experience and I love the unraveling the more complex dungeons in the later 3D games. Imagine if your exploration led you to a hidden, full-fledged dungeon. Now THAT'S worth exploring.
I think before BotW came out everyone was expecting to randomly find full-fledged dungeons from exploration. I wish we finally got the game we imagined.
I do have to applaud the structure of the first game despite it's non-linear aspects. But It is interesting to look at the things this game does that modern games in the series wouldn't dream of.
The dungeon format of modern games MAKES SURE you have the dungeon item before you fight the boss. Zelda 1 can leave you fighting Gohma without a way to kill it because the bow was way back in lv1 and you missed it.
I'll never harp on modern Zelda for providing... say... bombs at places where you would use them, cause the alternative = Zelda 1 making you leave the dungeon to go fill your meager 8 bombs because you had to fight 3 dodongos with only 2 chances to make mistakes.
Yes, surely the idea of running out of things or not having them is terrible (I had the bow but no arrows and didn't even know you could upgrade your bomb bag til after I beat the game...), but it's also terrible when modern Zeldas give you an item in a room and it's just spoiled the puzzle.
@@LittleBeanGreen Yea I can see that. If the puzzle was more "How do you apply this tool?" instead of "what tool do you need" it would be better.
And of course, as much as I have... many issues with ALBW, the items running off of an energy meter solves this specific problem entirely.
@@thelastwindwaker7948 Still a game I've got to play!
i think its interesting that it achieves non-linearity without sacrificing (mandatory) dungeon items as a concept like the most recent games do. botw does everything it can to make sure you have everything you need before leaving the great plateau, and important tools are usually pretty close to where you need them. in zelda 1, it couldnt give less of a damn if you miss the cave in the beginning with the wooden sword, you can still go really far without it. going to later areas "under-itemed" was part of the fun in playing them non-linearly. like doing the oot water temple before getting the bow.
"the things this game does that modern games in the series wouldn't dream of."
Dungeon 3
IYK,YK
As a kid I got to play with the manual, which is a gem all by itself. It is interesting to think of playing without it and how common that may be. It’s like the 2nd quest from the get go
yeah I often wonder about not playing with the manual too...it's on Nintendo's website!
I wish we had another zelda game with the same feeling as Zelda 1 been really enjoying playing it again lately
I've just stumbled into the second quest and I imagine this is what playing through the original game all those years ago was like...
@@LittleBeanGreen Yeah I had the same experience. I know the first quest too well but actually had to explore and figure things out to beat the second quest. Was a lot of fun though the 4th dungeon was a massive pain to find haha
@@Katie-hj5eb I just found it by accident ha
Try playing Dragon Warrior on NES if you haven't already, no manual, no walkthroughs, no map, no external materials whatsoever, just you and the game, see what you think. Maybe you'll be surprised!
Is it on NSO?
@@LittleBeanGreen Nope, sadly it's lost to time barrng used copies and emulation...
@@LittleBeanGreen Oh but the mobile remake is on Switch, (Dragon Quest 1), and it's getting another remake on all modern platforms next year, but I specifically bring up the original NES version (before they could call it Dragon Quest in the west), to see whether you think that original NES experience holds up. Personally I think it does, but don't let that influence your opinion should you try it...
@@Michirin9801 dang.
@@Michirin9801 if i ever get my hands on it...
Dude your videos are so cool I thought you would have like 100k subs! :333 so cool
Thanks! Maybe one day :)
3:27 It's ironic that you used the clip of a beating heart from Indiana Jones: Temple of Doom. That series inspired the game. 💔
As mentioned in an interview from 2016...
"*Sao:* ...why did you decide to make The Legend of Zelda, which came out 30 years ago for the Family Computer Disk System?
*Miyamoto:* The Indiana Jones movies were out around that time.
*Sao:* Adventure films were popular in the ‘80s.
*Miyamoto:* Right, I wanted to bring that sense of adventure to a video game. And people playing computer RPGs back then were bragging about how strong their swordsmen had become, and were calling each other at night to exchange information. When I noticed that, I thought it was an interesting scene."
(Nintendo Classic Mini: NES special interview - Volume 4: The Legend of Zelda 2016)
Huh. The coincidence is strong with this one. Didn't even know that - the script called for a beating heart and what better clip than Temple of Doom?
Currently replaying LoZ, and I appreciate the series roots. I’ve been playing these games since I can remember starting with LoZ, but man. I think BoTW tried to capture that lightning in the bottle again, but there’s a certain magic to Zelda 1.
do you feel botw was anywhere near loz?
@@LittleBeanGreen In a lot of ways I think BoTW was its own type of Zelda game. And because of that I have nostalgia for the first time I played that game, in a good way! I don’t think it’s necessary to recapture LoZ as it is cemented in history the way it is. BoTW is the same in that manner, but it left its own mark. I do feel, however, that it captures a lot of Miyamoto’s original imagination of exploration.
@@prestonrcasey Thanks for sharing!
@@prestonrcasey 100%, The NES tied the series down, Miyamoto's design was INCREDIBLE and you still today can understand what he was going for, but the technology wasnt there to really show that vision until more recently.
LoZ was my favorite entry for a long time, and since I played it (and AoL) on GCN I wanted more, so botw finally gave me what I was looking for and funny enough, my biggest complaint with botw (no caves) was remedied in totk (so many caves).
I think the best part was that I was always jealous of all those people (I assume because you mention nostalgia, this includes you) that were able to participate in the collaborative riddle-solving and secret-finding the first game promoted, but with botw/totk I got to experience this meta design for myself.
People don't appreciate this first one enough. I personally think Zelda 1 is the best in the series.
It certainly has its moments. I'm not sure it's the best, but it certainly set a high bar.
What made Zelda 1 really shine for me was playing through BS The Legend of Zelda. The version I played retainer broadcast features like randomly giving you infite bombs or unlimited sword beams. In that context, occasionally having my shackles lifted, the game clicked and the exploration finally made up for the combat which felt so clunky on the NES version (which, of course, I played on the gamecube, with an analog stick. So I was bound to get frustrated woth it). Additionally, playing BS Zelda ended up really highlighting that Zelda 1 wasn't so different from the rest lf the series. The similarities between it and Zelda 3 really highlighted themselves
IDK what BS Legend of Zelda is but I feel like Zelda 3 is the closest to the original, at least from what I can remember of it.
@@LittleBeanGreen BS The Legend of Zelda was a SNES reimagining of the original game, released on the Satelliview. It had 16-bit graphics, smoother movement, L and R item switching, and the aforementioned timed power-ups (it game originally released in hour long timed broadcasts).
After that exposure, Zelda 3 definitely felt like a more natural evolution, and it was clear to see how Zelda 1 related to the rest of the series, rather than seeing it as this radically different thing that was completely dissimilar from everything else
@@OtakuNoShitpost interesting - never knew!
@@LittleBeanGreen Not surprising you didn't know, Most newcomers dont.
"played with the analogue stick"
Yeah as crappy as that d-pad was on GCN, it was waaaay better than the stick, you made a big mistake there, haha.
If we went back in time I'd tell you to get that cheapo madcatz mini controller, the d-pad was a lot better on it because it was "clicky", which was probably just because of the low quality but hey, it worked.
as someone who has been into romhacking, my goal is to see if the other games can emulate an experience that evolves from z1 but also includes modern mechanics. having a balanace of item progression barriers, freedom, and giving player choice in terms of how to be strategic or taking a risk vs. reward approach depending on the path. difficulty though needs adjustments and how puzzles are handled also needs to be worked around as well. z1 had this good balance for its structure despite some flaws like the door placement, poor translations while some hints were useless and how some bosses and items were designed like gohma in d6 needing the bow from d1 and the arrows from a shop. ironically this is a trap you can avoid more easily in q2 if you played q1 first. the reason i don't like the linear structure is that it robs the player of discovering new paths while giving a pre-determined experience most of the time outside of self imposed challenges through side content. this is why i think lowly of TP. while the game itself has a lot of polish, the poor pacing in the first act and chunk by chunk progression on that locked path with most exclusive rewards (outside of heart pieces) are easily signposted, it makes the experience less rewarding. SS has the opposite problem botw and totk had. good puzzles and 2 outstanding dungeons but also had a too restrictive nature to it. botw/totk become too cheesable and have the copy/paste design formulae. totk though does allow improvising such as a no paraglider run being possible.
If they combined the overworld of botw/totk with the dungeons of tp/ss and massaged them a bit so they fit together cohesively, I think that's what a lot of people are asking for.
@@LittleBeanGreen tbh i rather see dungeon design that works more like a cohesive whole instead of chunk by chunk, use item in the latter half like a tutorial. TP and SS did have some dungeons that did have a cohesive layout like temple of time, sandship, and sky keep while snowpeak ruins was well interconnected but still had that chunk by chunk pre-determined route. i rather have dungeon design more like that majora's mask handled especially how stray fairies fixed the red herring problem for chests and encouraged finding them all. TP and SS however did have nice dimensional sizes for their dungeons. i would also add the structural variety that z3 and albw had while including several hidden dungeons. i had the idea where you have massive story based dungeons like what the botw/totk did for the regions but have the more standard lock and key design while adventure dungeons work like z1 and discovered like shrines.
@@chaosprime1629 I think Zelda needs to take a stand and hide large swathes of content...and if you find it, you find it.
@@LittleBeanGreen that is the foundation of secrets. oot, mm and tp did have hidden grottos but the quantity of content varied.
@@chaosprime1629 Those grottos rarely lead to anything interesting.
(Warning: long text ahead lol)
These two videos have been really good and honestly kind of vindicating. I still remember the discourse around the time when BotW came out and the years following it. It seemed to me like there was a sort of revisionist take about Zelda 1 with lots of people arguing that BotW was the closest to the original Zelda since basically the inception of the series.
I could never really get on board with that assertion.
I wasn't a fan of Zelda since the first hour like a lot of the people who made these claims supposedly were. I had started with Link's Awakening on the GB and only got the chance to finally play Zelda 1 when it was ported to the GBA. When it came out I had already played most other games in the series released by that point (the first two being the only exception), but I felt like, even if a bit primitive (or maybe "primordial" if you will), Zelda 1 did essentially the same thing as the others.
Zelda 1 very obviously had an intended sequence and while it didn't go out of its way to enforce it like some of the later games did, it felt like that was not necessarily a design choice and more of an artifact of it being the first of its kind (as in: the designers not giving much thought to what it would mean for the players if they deviated from the intended path). Other games early in the series similarly (even if not to the same degree) allowed you to sequence break. Most dungeons were gated by the aquisition of items and not by story progression. It was totally possible in many cases to get the item from dungeon x and immediatly proceed to dungeon y without finishing the former (putting aside why you would want to do that in the first place). Sometimes not even that was necessary and you could do some dungeons out of order (Spirit and Shadow Temple in OoT come to mind).
But the most important thing in all of this is that - sequence or not - none of it was optional.
The dungeons were the main highlights of the games and the overworld was the connective tissue - not unimportant by any means, but moreso the potatoes to the dungeon's meat.
Everyone likes to bring out that quote by Miyamoto about him exploring the forests near his hometown in his childhood, but the clear proof that Zelda started out with a focus on dungeons even in its original design phase, as laid out here, shows that there's something wrong with this narrative that BotW was Zelda going back to its roots instead of a completely different direction.
I've long wondered where this was coming from.
I had considered that maybe starting out with subsequent games in the series (at which point a clear pattern had already been established) sort of colored my perception of the original Zelda, making me think that it was more about the dungeons than it really was.
In hindsight though, maybe the people making those claims that Zelda was about the overworld were simply kids back then who goofed around in the overworld in the same way that 20-30 years later, kids were goofing around in GTA while ignoring the story missions - not exactly indicative of what the game was actually aiming for.
Taking a a bit of a step back, it seems that both fans and detractors of the "open-air" direction are sort of arguing that they are really the only legitimate fans. Even this video and my comment could be taken to say that *we* are right after all, it's those others (those "posers"?) who are wrong.
But I think the real lesson that we should take from it is that apparently there is something about the original Zelda that can draw in both crowds. And maybe it is worth *actually* going back to Zelda 1 for inspiration and create a game that is satisfying to both.
Well said and I think you'll enjoy my latest video if you're interested in where that perception of BotW came from.
I will say that I have begun playing the second quest in Zelda 1 for the first time and am using no hints or guides. I find that I am spending A TON of time in the overworld not because it's interested or fun but because I need to find the dungeons to progress further and it turns out they are pretty well hidden. That sense of exploring the overworld is a complete 180 to BotW where no matter where you go you'll find something. I find that in most instances in the second quest, I find nothing, and have to continue to bumble around to find where to go next.
@@LittleBeanGreen Thanks for reading and replying to my comment lol
I've actually binge-watched several of your videos and what I can say is that not only do I really enjoy your style and the way you're able to make a point in a concise manner, but also how you actively engage with your audience in the comment section. You've earned yourself a sub hahaha
I'll also check out that other video you mentioned.
I 100% agree with you on what you say about the second quest and how it relates to BotW (or rather how it's a 180 of it). I think the more the series progressed, the less confident the devs became in the players' abilities to handle getting lost and confused, and consequently they built in more and more "guard rails", which ultimately culminated in SS's very linear and often hand-holdy approach that many people criticized.
It was, after all, the seemingly hands-off approach of BotW that many people praised about it, how BotW simply let you play the game and trusted in your ability to figure things out.
In hindsight, I vehemently disagree with this take though. BotW is still built with the same mindset that player's shouldn't get overwhelmed, lost or confused. That's precisely why there's a shrine or Korok seed behind every corner, it's why nothing is mandatory and completely optional. It's why every challenge is over so quickly and why you're constantly getting drowned in "rewards" (which also explains the weapon system).
If SS is like a guided tour through a theme park, then BotW is more like a very big playground, where everything has been padded for safety.
I recently started replaying WW, this time in hero mode, and I was surprised at how brutal that section with the Moblins and Darknuts in Hyrule castle was. It took me several attempts till I finally succeeded. I don't think I've ever died that many times in a Zelda game. Granted, that's not the regular first-time playing experience you would have with this game, but in BotW (and any game following its philosophy) that wouldn't even be possible in an optional mode - there simply couldn't be any point where you just have to grit your teeth to get trough. Even in things like master mode you can just skip any combat encounter that you can't handle and here's no consequence to skipping it.
Honestly, I just want to have the same experience of randomly stumbling upon a massive dungeon after hours of aimlessly wandering around and then getting my ass kicked once I'm inside, just like in the original Zelda, but in a 3D game. Is that too much to ask? lol
@@playtypus4592 Thanks for checking out the rest of the channel - I'm glad it resonates with you.
What I like to say is that: in the old games, you get lost. In the new games, you get distracted. The games keep you from your goal not because you have to figure out the right path, but because there are so many mini-paths right in front of you that you could just finish really quickly before doing that long arduous task.
I think you're right about wanting to wander and get your ass kicked. I just found the second dungeon in the second quest and I went through most of it with a heart and a half and got my ass kicked by the Gleeok about 100 times.
@@LittleBeanGreen "in the old games, you get lost. In the new games, you get distracted" - I think that is accurate. Although I would probably say that only the first two games were truly comfortable with letting you get lost. Of course even the very first Zelda had hints (as you pointed out in your other video), but those hints could've been missed. Subsequent games made sure that you didn't miss hints on where to go next. And as the series progressed, the hints became more and more overt (probably the most egregious example that is usually cited is Phi spoiling the puzzle in the sand ship in SS).
What I find so interesting is if you look at BotW from that lens, it simply continued this "evolution". You had literal quest markers pinpointing the exact locations of your main quest, much like games such as GTA. So yes, the only reason why you might not simply beeline to your next destination is that you got distracted along the way.
What's so frustrating to me is that a lot of the places in the game become utterly meaningless as a result. I remember when I first arrived in Akkala. That was kind of a breath-taking moment (no pun intended). After wandering around there for a bit, you may see the Akkala fortress, rising high above the ground. You ask yourself: what is that? But ultimately it's just set-dressing. If this was a different Zelda, the Akkala fortress might've been a dungeon.
I think this unwillingness to let you get lost is born out of a desire to not frustrate players, but ironically it's exactly that unwillingness which frustrates other players like me.
@@playtypus4592 I played through the Oracle games recently - which feel like very fitting nods to the original, and even after each dungeon, there is a hint of where to go next, but I would still find myself stuck in situations, only to eventually puzzle it out. I had a vague clue of where to go, but once I got there, I had to figure out all by myself how to move forward. I think that could be one of the ways to best balance between a complete hands-off approach and being too hand-holdy.
43, been playing zelda 1 since i was like five... probably run through both quests every other week or so on my Miyoo Mini 👍
Second quest aint no joke though, aint no shame in bugging out on that unless youre crazy hehe
I have started the second quest, played through the first two dungeons, and I am getting my ass HANDED to me.
@@LittleBeanGreen first time through there's a hard ass wall you slam into about level 2... because it's basically level 5 from the first quest, enemies wise (plus treasure is the whistle). If you're up on where the heart containers are in first quest you can be equipped with the magical sword by level 5... and have bow+ arrows for the Pols Voices. But second quest? Fuggeddaboutit.
You can nab one freebie heart container in the graveyard before starting level 1, then once clearing level 1 you'll have five hearts and can nab the white sword... Then you just have to worry about figuring out the passwalls. And figure out where all the whistle-required secrets are. Oh, and live- that's rough too 😂
Pro tip: immediately upon getting the whistle out of level 2 (and I guess clearing the dungeon etc, whatev) head for the transporter sorta by where the Lost Hills are- there's a heart in the desert (need whistle), there's another heart on the screen before where level 9 was in first quest (also need whistle) and then you'll be at eight hearts, maybe with some medicine left on ya... cause you might need it after we Leroy Jenkins into Level 6 right fast to get the stepladder 😂
It's like four or five rooms in, but they're full of wizzrobes and dark AF and there are red/blue bubbles and like likes... once you're good at doing it it's easy as stealing the magic book out of Level 8 in first quest. Ok, not really... fighting a manhandla and half a dozen dark nuts isn't anywhere near as hard as getting through the wizzrobe bukkake while everything that isn't them tries to steal your sword and/or shield 😂
Oh, and heads up- the raft is hidden in the meanest place ever in Level 4...
@@thepolarphantasm2319 I haven't found any items in any of the dungeons........oops.
@@LittleBeanGreen iirc it's crappy boomerang in 1, whistle in 2, magic boomerang in 3, book + raft in 4, bow in 5, ladder in 6, red candle in 7 as usual, rod + key in 8 and red ring + silver arrows in 9
Oh and the dudes who increase your bomb capacity for 100 rupees are in 4 and 8 and there's hungry goriya in 3 and 8 so keep your bait handy 👍
@@thepolarphantasm2319 Oh I got the boomerang...but maybe from a nobody, not a hidden room.
The Wizzrobes.... the cruelest zelda 1 enemy. The hoard of them should have been a dungeon boss! As someone said in a different video comment.. Bwooooh Bwoooooh Bwoooooh....DEAD! ....UGH
I see wizzrobes in my nightmares.
@@LittleBeanGreen Lmao! Bro they catch me by surprise every freakin time in Level 6 8 and 9
@@fluoriteheals They killed me more than anything else in my playthrough...especially when the orange and blue are in the same room GEEZUSSSSSSSSSS
@@LittleBeanGreen The Wizzrobes go straight up gangsta.
It's no longer the secret sauce since it isn't a secret anymore
It was a secret to me. It's a secret to everybody.
This video sounds like a conversation from 1988 where you explain video games to your grandmother.
You’re the only one who hasn’t played this game so why…are you explaining it to us?
People like the game and several of the comments are mentioning wanting to play Zelda 1 for the first time?