linear opens the door to give Zelda a stronger narrative maybe get world more flushed out, learn more about link this point of time or adventure, zelda, and cool side characters that help you out the way. Most Turn base RPG's are linear
Seeing that in the time it took to make ocarina of time up to skyward sword they only made 2 open world zeldas and no new 3d one only remasters, no way we are getting both types
Open ended design can be extremely limiting in and of itself. There's a reason why the Divine Beasts/Temples and Shrines in BotW and TotK all look, feel, and play the same. If at any point any player can just waltz their way into any scenario from any direction at any point in a game's progression, then that scenario has to be designed in a way that's simple to understand and isn't building off of anything that was previously taught unless it was part of the mandatory tutorial. Your first beast/temple and/or shrine could be somebody else's last, so they all have to play like they're the first and never expand beyond a single concept. That freedom of being able to go wherever, whenever tends to just come at the cost of meaningful discovery, challenge, and reward. Having some level of barriers of entry and sequence of events that need to be experienced in a certain order would go a long way in mending those issues while still preserving an open-ended design philosophy, just not so open-ended that it's almost impossible to meaningfully test players beyond the scope of the tutorial.
Not to mention the story beats themselves. Every sage has to tell us they served the first king of Hyrule against the Demon King, yadda, yadda, Imprisoning War, Zelda asking for help for Link in the future, because they have to assume someone landed on the surface, got the paraglider and went STRAIGHT to a temple. The only unique info a sage of the past gives is that the Demon King was a Gerudo. Just a little bit more linearity, just constraining us to following a specific order in the temples (and placing the first Dragon's Tear as a mandatory quest at some point) would open up the (admittedly cool) story for SO MUCH MORE DEPTH!
@@Rodriguez-ib8oiNot true. Many people were dissatisfied with the simple dungeon design of both the divine beasts and the shrines. We got quantity over quality and the shrines themselves are almost shovelware. Sure there are some highlights but when I have to do the nth test of strength you get pretty annoyed. Or as this RUclipsr pointed out you can just ignore the actual problem you are meant to solve and OP the shrine.
But they DO have barriers. It's just that you don't need to beat/enter a temple in order to even get access to another one. If you're not actively seeking out unintended ways to get around the story barriers, you still need to do stuff. The only thing that's different is the order is not given. And really, not having access to an item that gives you access to a dungeon is the only limit. Its not like in OoT you couldn't enter every dungeon and beat it just the same. I'm not even sure right now what's keeping you from entering water temple as the first one. You don't need a bow nor the hammer to enter icy cavern. And you get the items for the dungeon right before the dungeon or in the dungeon. Just like you get sage's ability and some gear in the area. Electro arrows and Sidon as way to even enter the beast etc
@@borstenpinsel Story triggers don't constitute a meaningful barrier of entry or sequence of events since they're rarely presenting any sort of mechanical challenge, at least none that is unique to said story triggers. And even when they do, they're still structured in a way that can't stray too far from tutorial land because one person's first Divine Beast/Temple story quest could be somebody else's last. It's still the exact same problem, even down to the fact that the different stories for each Divine Beast/Temple are following the same structure in presentation and delivery. It can't be known which will be anybody's first, or how many a player will complete, or if they'll even complete any at all, because it's all optional and can be experienced in any order, so the solution is to just constrain them to the same structure in the same way that the Divine Beasts/Temples themselves are all solved using the same tools and set of solutions presented to the player at the tutorial.
One of the advantages of linear/classic Zelda to me is how much weight is given to new items & weapons. When you get the Hookshot in Ocarina of Time, your freedom of movement & range in combat are permanently improved. When you get the Gilded Sword in Majora's Mask, you feel a permanent, significant power increase. I could write another paragraph on the transformation masks alone. They're all meaningful moments for the player.
@@al3220 That's true! And the Master Sword as well. I guess the main difference is none of the Champions'/Sages' powers are necessary to complete the game/most puzzles, and like the Master Sword, they have kind of long cooldowns. I think it's just the Sheikah Slate abilities that you get early on that have short cooldowns and are necessary for a lot of puzzles (but not to complete the game/defeat Ganon).
@@MachFiveFalcon that's what makes BOTW and TOTK so enjoyable. I'm not confined to playing in any particular sequence. I agree the story telling can be improved but I do not want information gated away from me just because I didn't beat this certain boss, etc. Let me be the detective and uncover the story my way.
@@al3220 I can respect that. The more you put it like that, I really did enjoy getting fragments of the story from Memories in the world. It just needs to be fleshed out more. As far as puzzles go, I did enjoy puzzles crafted for a specific way of using items in older Zeldas, but I still have fun with the open design like Arlo - so it's definitely a tradeoff for me in that department.
And there's no reason why this couldn't be combined with an open world, like they did in the original game. As a NES Zelda fan, I feel like there's *more* reason to dislike the current games.
What’s kept ringing in my mind is how Aonuma phrased the desire to return to the linear format as just “nostalgia” just really misses everything on why people liked classic Zelda. Breath of the Wild was my first game in the series back when I played it in 2020 and as the years went by I dived into the older games and with that I found Wind Waker and Twilight Princess to be my favourite games in the series as I played the both of them a year ago. In my case, nostalgia oppositely applies to why I love the linear format. Linearity just allows for the story to be better paced without interference and the dungeons feel empowering to finish since you solved this huge series of trials that had one fixed solution. Aonuma I feel at this point just misinterpreted everything on what people would like, it’s honestly disappointing and I slightly worry what could come later on for the series.
I dont think he meant to imply that the older/more linear games were just liked because of nostalgia. I think its just one reason that now that the format has changed, people are asking for things more like the older games. The later question where he mentions more structured dungeons shows that he does understand the desire for more linearly designed segments of the game. While i do disagree that tears of the kingdoms dungeons have cleared that gap and brought some of that liniar design back, i do think they were an improvement on botws overall and are a step in the right direction. Its hard to get everything you're thinking out in just a few sentences, lets not write Aonuma off just yet
@@ultamatemememan2584 Yeahh I’m aware, I’m not trying to write off Aonuma as someone that lacks understanding of the games he made in the past yet I overall have to say with how the interview questions were phrased weren’t the best in regards to comprehending the full picture of Aonuma’s vision. And granted, he made the big changes to Zelda’s structure when the fan base just held a lot of discontent over Skyward Sword. I’d like to think Aonuma can take some criticism to heart and find a way to please both audiences. What could be good for the story I’d imagine is that for memories you actually have to unlock them in a specified order instead of them being laid out at random points on the map. And for dungeons alternatively, for example if the amount of them are about 6 dungeons then 3 of them could be non-linear akin to TOTK’s ones and the other 3 are highly close to the classic format. Overall, sorry if my comment was a bit confusing. It’s just I have some mixed feelings on the matter of the potential for the next game lol.
@@Navii_ yea, no worries! I agree his comments in the interview definitely weren't phrased the best. But I'm also sure it can be hard when you're talking off the cuff like he was. I definitely understand everyone's worries about the direction Zelda going in. Just like you mentioned at the end of the comment there, while it is true that linear Zelda and open world Zelda are incredibly differnt, there are many ways you can mix them together and experiment. And I do hope the next mainline 3d game does more to bring some of the tight sequences linear Zelda has back in some ways, even though truely finding the right balance is going to be somewhat difficult to piece together. I just think arlo and some people have taken these interview bits and extrapolating a bit more doom and gloom then is realistic. At least from what we've seen so far. Obviously it's important for these criticisms to be on the table, but it's also good to temper ourselves and try not to get into too much a tizzy over it imo. I don't think this is going to be like the recent paper Mario's, I think its pretty clear nintendo is listening, the main question is just how far they want to go in adding back more linear elements for the next project. But who knows what their cooking, the next game could be wildly differnt from tears and botw. Well just have to wait and see to a certian extent
A Link Between Worlds already managed to balance linear progression and open world exploration 10 years ago. It's definitely possible to get sprawling dungeons and a present story in an open world game.
Not really. ALBW still suffered from many of the same problems BotW and TotK had, particularly in the balance and design complexity fronts. It had better dungeons, yes, but that bar is practically underground, so that's not saying much. At the end of the day, the dungeons in ALBW are still quite weak when compared to the rest of the series. I'd go as far as to say it has the second weakest dungeon roster out of all handheld entries ("Phantom Hourglass" being the weakest overall).
While for me they did, many still complained about “lack of progression” and “no backtracking cuz no item in dungeon”. You absolutely cannot please everyone. That I wholeheartedly disagree with Arlo. ALBW only sold over 4 million and still had a decent amount of complaints about the dungeons or scaling. While we can strike BETTER balances than we have now, we can’t have everyone happy. Even if we made dungeons linear or having more linearity, you have no idea how many people would complain about that on the other side of the coin. “Why am I just boringly walking through dungeons with no room for own solutions?”. Many would say that, you’d be surprised. How do I know this? Because this is how we got BOTW. Some people complained a lot about dungeons in Zelda being boring or too linear, and are now happy that they’re smaller, have less focus or have many solutions now. The focus right now in the community is on old dungeons coming back only because we don’t have that now, but as SOON as we go back, those complaints will return. Fucking watch. Again, you cannot please everyone, no matter how much Arlo repeats it. People will bitch about apples and ask for oranges, and then others will bitch about oranges and ask for apples. Give them half and orange and half an apple, and both will bitch that they don’t have a full apple/orange. Give them both FULL apples and oranges, and they’ll both bitch that they could’ve had more apples/oranges if the other didn’t exist. You can never please everyone. Ever. Not just in gaming, but life in general. You always need to choose who you’re going to disappoint. It’s all valid, mind you. No one is wrong for liking one or the other for something like this, on that I fully agree. But no, not everyone can be pleased.
Why might we prefer more linearity? Linearity allows for PROGRESSIONS in items and plot! Item progressions allow for recontextualised puzzles and plot progressions allow for an interesting story
Progression, both with items & story, is easily what's lacking most in BotW/TotK. It's cool to have every tool at the start, but I wish dungeon unlocks were more meaningful again.
That's with me with most 3D platforming. Having an open world like game is cool and all. But I prefer going to point A to Point B where the levels and missions are easy & unique and keeps the pace going. Something like Crash Bandicoot, Super Mario Galaxy 1 & 2, 3D Land & 3D World and Kirby and the Forgotten Land.
@@kodyarocho4618You mean like a Zelda game lol? I think what people are trying to say is linear Zelda was more tightly designed and they prefer it, so if Zelda becomes JUST big open world and they don't care for it then they lose a series that they've loved for years
An open map with several dungeons or quests tied to linear progression could absolutely work. They could even integrate dungeon items into progression, it doesn’t have to be all or nothing.
Yes! 7:41 echoes your point really well. There's a special satisfaction for me when I get the "right" solution. (Although I still have fun with the newer open-designed puzzles.) Permanent, gameplay-changing items like the Hookshot really complement the design of well-made, closed-ended puzzles when implemented properly.
@@RuuyG Then most people never actually liked the Zelda series, a series _known_ and _praised_ for it's puzzle driven dungeons. That was it's unique niche in the world of adventure games.
It seems like Aonuma views the transition from linear zelda to open world zelda like how people viewed the transition from 2d to 3d. Once Mario 64 came out, "why would anyone go back to a 2d game it would be a step backwards technologically." Now we know the advantages of 2d and 3d games, they're different genres not a linear progression of technology.
Open world is easier/lazier. You can have AI populate it and then use staff to hammer out any inconsistencies. Linear is very driven, by comparison. Nothing exists except what is explicitly made to exist by the programmer.
I mean I loved and grew up with Mario Bros 2D on NES and SNES. But let's be real here for a second. Mario 64 opened our eyes to all the possibilities and freedoms we always dreamed of when we imagined the future of gaming to be when we grew up. And I dont believe the new 2D Mario Wonder will outperform the 3D games. And why would they in an era of Unreal Engine 5 setting new norms in gaming? Let's be real, it's a lot of nostalgia loving old timers out here, which isnt to say that they arent worth taking into consideration when bringing these games out. I just think remakes and remasters of their teenage favourites would be a better investment. Linear gaming elements in an open world is a whole other topic however, and I agree with Arlo on that one. Also, I would love me some open worlds on Nintento that dont feel empty like they do in most games today. Some AI-driven NPCs populating the world with more background would really be a refreshing element here and there, but the Switch is obviously too low-performance for that sort of thing.
@@Icemario87maybe he’ll swallow his pride and just go back. There was a space world demo in 2001 (realistic zelda) and he went up to press and said he hated it. But after windwaker, twilight princess came out. We will see with time.
Zelda has always been very much like a Metroidvania. I miss using newly gained items and abilities to solve puzzles and the feeling of progression that comes with that
Maybe you can explain something to me. It really irks me when someone says Zelda is like a Metroidvania, because Zelda had that formula first. So, shouldn't it be that Metroid is like a Zeldavania?
Sorta yeah. Metroid is actually more like a crossbreed between Mario and Zelda having platforming elements while also being about exploration and finding new items to progress. @@kingdaniel3519
@@kingdaniel3519 Metroid was much more tightly designed as a Metroidvania. It had revolutionary ideas like forcing you to learn how your new powers work before advancing, the map being divided in very different zones with unique designs etc. Zelda 1 is more "try random stuff until it works"
Honestly..... I don't see why they still couldn't make a metroidvania system while in open world. You have a big giant open world. You have main quest chains, real dungeons and a key item that unlocks new travel methods, and as you finish these quests it opens up new ways of exploring the vast open world.
I don't even want it to be 'linear' necessarily, just return to some of the core elements to the series like key items/equipment and traditional dungeons.
I really don't want those to return, hated walking into a puzzle room i cant solve because i haven't found the key item yet. Then once attaining it basically going through the motions rather than actually yknow... solving a puzzle. Get the hookshot > Shoot the VERY specific hookshot points > Use hookshot on the boss. wow such a thrilling dungeon experience
@@Zezinizzle 100% I think they can bring back dungeon items but maybe only a few dungeons have a new item which makes them more interesting and then these items could actually be useful instead of thrown in the trash sans a couple heart container locations.
@@Zezinizzle As opposed to: 1.) Get introduced to companion, 2.) Go to pre-marked point on map, 3.) overcome very easy obstacle, 4.) use VERY specific companion power, 5.) Go to next location on map, 5. ) rinse and repeat 2 -5 until map locations cleared, 6.) fight boss using companion power. Not to mention that each of the 4 "dungeons" had this EXACT same formula. The Water Temple was ABSURDLY easy! I spent longer getting to the damned thing than solving the temple itself. Same with the Wind Temple. In most Zelda titles from the past, there was at least 1 mini-boss per dungeon too and several enemies. In TotK? Maybe a few constructs if you're lucky. There was no challenge to solving anything with the TotK Temples.
Yeah, most people do not understand that those games aren't good because they are linear. They are well designed and have some key points that open-world Zelda games didn’t have. Arguing that older Zelda games are better because they are linear makes no sense at all, every Zelda game have pros and cons.
I think the thing I miss most about older titles, especially the 2D games, is all the cool items you get. Stuff like the magnet gloves, gust jar, hookshot/clawshot, grappling hook, and beetle are super cool but its just not there in the open world games. An issue that really hits hard with the BOTW/TOTK is there really isn't a progression system. You start the game, get all your gizmos right away, and told to explore with the only hurdle in your way is health and stamina. There's no revisiting an old area with a cool item you got from a dungeon or seeing a heart piece in the distance but wondering how you can get it since you don't have the right tool. Progression systems work because it's nice to see an improvement in your character and build up to a huge climax. However BOTW/TOTK go the direction of making 90% of the game surface level but have a ton of it.
I miss that, too! One of the main complaints I've seen regarding dungeon items in past Zelda games is that they usually don't see much use outside the dungeon they're obtained in...... Personally, I didn't really care about that. I had a lot of fun using the Spinner in the Arbiter's Grounds in TP. I understood that this was this dungeon's item, and it was for that reason that I didn't really mind it very much if it didn't have much use outside of it. Would it be welcome? Of course, but it was never a sore point to me.
I definitely miss the Metroidvania aspect of seeing bombable walls, hookshot targets, etc. that I can't access yet, wandering what's there, then coming back with the necessary items to pick up a heart piece. It's a very effective gameplay loop.
@@John6-40I wouldn't say empty. But it's just a different experience. Thinking that it's just empty is the same exact thinking that leads to Aonuma saying that there's no point in making a linear game. Because "it's not as free"
Another issue with designs this open is that it removes all mystery. Take Wind Waker for example. Once you learn how to control the wind, the world opens up heavily. You start to wander around and see all sorts of cool islands. Small islands where you play golf with a Deku Nut, coral reefs designed like dice blocks, a sunken submarine, an aquatic landing pad. But, as your going along admiring the world, you see some other things, a volcanic island you can't interact with, a giant glacial reef that freezes you on touch, what looks to be a giant plateau where the queen of fairies resides. All of these thing prevent you from seeing whats inside them, so you can only wonder for now. As you continue on with the game, these inaccessible areas are always in the back of your mind. As a player, you keep thinking about them and wondering what they are like on the inside. Then later when you finally gain a power that allows you access to the plateau, you get really exited, because now you can finally see that place you could only dream about for so long. You go back to the plateau, use the power, and become shocked to learn that it isn't a plateau at all, it's a water filled valley where fairy's reside. It brings new contextualization to not only that location, but the world it inhabits. If Wind Waker had Breath of the Wild physics, link would grab a nearby tree and catapult himself right into the fairies house. There is no build up or wonder about the area, and as such the area becomes forgettable.
yeah no screw that. let me go over and see whats up. I mean its right there clear as day for me to go over and explore. Needing a hammer to stomp some pegs is stupid and represents everything i hate about arbritrary item locked progression in classic zelda, i say this as someone who liked Wind waker
@@Zezinizzle as some one who hates wind waker(its not about the art if you're wondering that's the only bit I like) I agree these are adventure games built on a sense of player freedom they don't need to be metroidvania lights(as some one who would list metroidvania as there favorite genre)
@@Zezinizzle I'll grant that your strawman example of the pegs has been done before in Zelda, and when it's done like that it's lazy and uninspired, but that's not what OP is talking about. They're talking about well designed barriers that fit naturally into the world. It's about giving you a sense of accomplishment when you've earned the right to explore them. In the real world, you'll encounter some amount of resistance when you pursue anything worthwhile, and sometimes you'll be turned away because you're not ready for that thing yet - and once you've built the strength to overcome those obstacles, you can return and recognize how your growth got you to where you are. Smart game designers find clever and subtle ways to integrate that into their games, because they want their game to have meaning. If you take those challenges away from exploration, then you reducing the significance of those places you're exploring. It makes the game feel less like a thrilling and awe-inspiring world and more like a theme park or a playground. If you're the kind of player that gets frustrated at any kind of locked progression, then I don't think you really understand what made Zelda such a successful and beloved series. Maybe you're the kind of player that likes the more sandbox/theme park feel. That's fine, you're entitled to that - but you're not entitled to every game being like that. As someone who grew up with Zelda games and loves them dearly, I'd very much like to see the series return to what made them so special and timeless.
@@gamerskingdom4897 These are adventure games built on exploration and discovery, not necessarily "player freedom". You're free in the sense that you can begin exploring in any direction, but not necessarily in the sense that you'll be able to go anywhere you please. Older Zelda titles didn't introduce obstacles to the player because of technical limitations or archaic design principles. It was done quite intentionally, to inspire you and to draw you deeper into the world.
@matthewcummings5067 here's the thing I like zelda for a dithrent reason then you I understand that the devolepers did those thing intentionally but I disagree with there vision an find them counterintuitive to why I like zelda
I honestly don’t care at all how big the overworld is because imo it should mainly just be a way of getting from point A to point B with maybe some scenery and occasional collectibles to find. The focus of the game should be on the dungeons and main story content, not the map that connects it all together.
Open world add 100 choices for the players, but not all of them are equally good. Linear worlds limit your choices to 2-3, but you can be sure they spent alot of time to make these option as good as they can be. Its like choosing from a 100 items restaurant menu vs 3 hand picked dishes by the chef.
I mean that's the nature of a lot of choices, the more choices you have in any given situation the less each individual choice matters. There's a good reason why we're probably not gonna remember how we solved a lot of the puzzles in botw and totk, if you can literally do anything, even cheese the puzzle, what does any of those options ultimately mean.
@@eclecticmuso It means that for a change, playing the game again can feel like a new experience altogether. Screw playinng older zelda games multiple times. Once you figure out the game and their honestly very clunky mechanics, it's over.
I used to think this... then I realized that after putting in 40+ hours and realizing that there's actually only one overarching plot with random different tiny branches that change only the minor details.. I replay games because they're fun, not because they're open world. Replaying an open world game does not feel like a 'new experience' to me. It feels like the same story, except I now don't have all the skills and abilities that I unlocked previously along the way and gotta unlock yet again... at which point, let's stop pretending and just curate the experience from the start.
Portal is a great example of meticulously planned, supposedly linear puzzles that sometimes can be solved in unique ways by thinking outside of the box, and when you do so you don't feel like cheesing
You mean like the TOTK shrines? Where there is meticulous design and solution, but you can also solve them anyway you can because you are allowed to do it?
I was thinking about Portal in Aonuma's quote about freedom being better. In a puzzle game, that's usually not true. Imagine Portal but every surface in every room is portalable. You have so much more freedom to solve the puzzle any way you want, so why is it not fun anymore? Freedom has its place for sure, but its place is not in puzzle design.
I know for a fact that nostalgia is not the only reason because Breath of the Wild was my *first* Zelda game, and yet I still absolutely adore the older games I went back and played afterward, like Twilight Princess, Ocarina of Time, and Majora's Mask. I have zero nostalgia for any of those titles, but they were all an absolute joy to play.
IMO TP was a true successor to OoT in the way that OoT was a successor to LttP: It took the core gameplay experience (linear story, dungeons, item-based progression) and brought it into the new generation with upgraded graphics and mechanics, and in the case of TP, a darker tone. MM and WW were great in their own right, but they sought to do their own thing instead of keeping to the core formula. I get that we don't want the series to stagnate, but I feel like there is merit to evolution on something that worked well and bringing that experience into the new era, instead of completely reinventing the wheel and scrapping everything that came before that people liked. So what I really want is another linear, dungeon-focused game that evolves on the LttP/OoT/TP formula.
Nostalgia shaming is exactly the same sin Blizzard committed before giving in and releasing World of Warcraft Classic. Boy did they eat that humble pie. Sooooo many new players who never played the original game fell in love with it, some more than the modern game even. Old and new designs are not a matter of good vs bad, it's just different. And different people like different things no matter how old or young or where in the world they are.
@@madrox1989 New generation, new tastes, I get that. But that doesn't mean you completely abandon what your core audience loved about the legacy games in the series. Sure, they have plenty of new fans, but by abandoning what made the series great, they've really alienated a big portion of their existing fanbase.
@@TheRealPSKilla502 Lol, I'm not disagreeing with you. My comment illustrates an example of this arrogance that was carried out by a different developer. Their famous line "you think you do, but you don't" really aged poorly when they saw fans flock to their old game when they made it available. Given its success, the developer is slowly trying to stitch together elements of old design with elements of new design, even experimenting with new servers that literally merge both designs together and it's been wildly successful.
I love BOTW and TOTK so much, but yes I would like to see them try to combine open world with linear dungeons/story progression. Ironically, TOTK has a side quest in Hateno Village where everyone's arguing between the old ways and the new, with the solution being to just have both lol.
@chaosprime1629 I hated that I couldn't side with Mayor Reed and get that mushroom fashion crap out of Hateno lol Honestly, it ruined the town for me, which was a shame as Hateno was the closest to a traditional Zelda town we've had on the Switch. I miss the quaintness of Kakariko Village in OoT.
@@hanburgundy4317 Now you want traditional towns? Just let the developers come up with some new designs. Cece stuff isn't bad because it is new, it was bad because it lacks quality, nothing more.
@@aaaaaaaaaa190 I didn't say it was bad because it was new - I guess I didn't specify, but the mushroom fashion stuff is not my preferred aesthetic lmao I was hoping the game would let you side with EITHER Reed or Cece to have some affect on the game and the appearance of the village. Would've been more dynamic.
I miss going into a dungeon, finding the map and the compass, defeating a mini boss, receiving the dungeon specific item, finding the boss key and finally clobbering that boss with my new found item. I miss it so much you guys have no idea.
Probably the most concise explanation I've heard. It's easy to dismiss that sentiment as just us old-school fans yearning for it, but I honestly think kids who grew up only playing Minecraft can still appreciate what linear Zelda uniquely offers.
The sad thing is that this can also exist in open world zelda games. They can just not allow us to climb walls and give us keys like they did in some shrines and then give us an item that can unlock some things in the open world
My biggest issue is that NOTHING else in gaming is like Zelda. There were some Sega Genesis and PS2 era games that tried and they’re all 6/10 at best. And when lever you bring this up people go right for Skyward Sword and EVERYONE knows that’s not what we’re talking about. I want my 2D Zeldas, my OOTs and WWs. Like why can’t a secondary team make at least 2D Zelda every 4-5 years while the main team makes these games. It’s actually the saddest I’ve ever been about a game developer.
I remember back in the day Twilight Princess was criticized for being the same old thing as the previous Zelda. That the Zelda after that was the same old thing. And so on. What’s funny is that TotK is the first Zelda I’ve played where I’ve felt “wow, this feels like I’m playing the same game again.” Not to mention that A Link Between Worlds felt like a proof of concept for an open world/tight dungeon design Zelda. I loved ALBW.
I totally agree on link between worlds! Imagine a big open world with Gameplay from link between worlds and the graphics of the links awakening remake!
I agree mostly, but I could never understand how people could like ALBW that much. The fact that you were not surprised by a new item you would get in the dungeons totally destroyed it for me. (Don't get me wrong, I still liked it but that's what made it a 6/10 instead of a 9/10 for me
@@mikereisert2803 this is exactly a big reason why I liked it so much. Gone is the extremely linear path, here is a 2D Open World. You can almost do any dungeon in any order and you get a sense of progression because you can buy items instead of renting and even upgrade them. Also during progression you receive multiple items that open new paths for you, like in the old zelda (for example the fins).
yeah i had fun with TOTK but nothing makes me want to play it again. I still replay BOTW every year though, its honestly kind of the better game of the two. TOTK just feels like a bloated BOTW.
Something I was hoping that you would mention but you didn't, and I rarely see anyone else mention, is how the older dungeons in previous Zelda games usually had a story unfold within that dungeon itself. The dungeon told a story of its own. For example, in Twilight Princess the first dungeon was about you rescuing the monkeys and freeing their leader from a curse. The Fire Temple in Ocarina of Tme was about you freeing the goron prisoners and their leader is going after the dragon himself whom you encounter at the beginning of the dungeon. The Spirit Temple in Ocarina of Time you learn about that Gerudo lady who is killed by the two witches before you fight them. Skyward Sword dungeons often unfolded the story with Ghirahim and Zelda and Impa, usually near the end of the dungeons before the boss battle. another thing is how the dungeons usually introduced their own unique quality or gimmick to make them stand out from the other dungeons from a gameplay perspective. For example working with the sages in Wind Waker in the latter dungeons. Or, how one of the dungeons in Majora's Mask turns upside down. or how the Geat Bay Temple in Majora's Mask was mostly traversed via swimming, and I actually really love this dungeon. Another great one is the timeshift stones in the Sandship. None of the dungeons in BOTW or TOTK do this. They are all just a static, still, non-dynamic maps that just have 3 to 5 buttons and you simply press the buttons within the exact same gameplay mechanics that you have encountered throughout the rest of the game with no unique twist whatsoever.
This will become even more relevant as so many boring empty open worlds with filler content have become so common. With AI content generation on the horizon this will be even more obvious. Stories written by humans are simply unbeatable as a form of motivation.
@@cattysplat I won't be surprised if Nintendo starts using AI to write their stories. I DO believe there is a niche for AI: improving procedural generation such as for creating random planets in a space game or radiant quests in a Bethesda game, but not for anything handcrafted like a Zelda game. But given Nintendo's desire to not write a full proper story, and instead just give unfinished pieces of a story through "memories" with many characters not fleshed out whatsoever (past sages), then they clearly don't care anymore so it would seem natural for them to decide to use AI to just quickly fill in the huge gaps.
Honestly I feel like the TotK dungeons are almost worse than the BotW divine beasts, at least those had an ability that could be used to make the layout more dynamic. TotK is the exact same terminal system but without anything further than that, it feels like an afterthought.
I disagree. The Lightning Temple literally has a LINEAR design. It starts off with a linear part with Traps and then transitions into a more Open-Air style that ALSO doesn’t have the Open-Air of BOTW. The Passageways are all blocked by something and it just can’t be cheesed or anything. It also has multiple puzzles in a room. I feel like it’s a PERFECT balance between LINEAR and OPEN-AIR. Still, it is very linear. The other dungeons as well. (AND STOP CRITICISING HYRULE CASTLE IT’S NOT THE FINALE ANYMORE YOU GUYS DON’T EVEN REALISE THAT?
An open world Zelda game (with a smaller world than BOTW/TOTK) that also has a good story and traditional dungeons (with dungeon items like the old games) would be the perfect hybrid for the future of Zelda.
I resent that this Aunoma fellow would say Ocarina of Time is restricted. by no means! just because you can't parry in that game or climb anything with a vertical axis, doesn't mean it was restrictive. It had the perfect progression (and I would say the same for Twilight Princess). You start off in a limited space where you can run around, talk to Kokiri, get your sword and your shield, and then bam. First dungeon. After you beat the dungeon, you get an item that allows you to hit enemies from a little farther away, but then you're also given access to Hyrule field. as the game progresses and you gain more items from dungeons, all of sudden an area that was once blocked behind rocks can now be opened up to you with a bomb. You can now get to new places with the hookshot, and after you free your horse, you've unlocked a couple of new sections on the map. Ocarina of Time had such a perfect progression of opening the world up to you in stages and after each dungeon, you always left feeling like you've accomplished something. Also, Ocarina of Time's dungeon design, while sure might have been limited in how you solved puzzles, but was at least tricky enough to where you couldn't game the dungeon by, i dunno, climbing the wall of the building to get to where you needed to be. Literally in TOTK, it felt like I cheesed the game because I could just climb the walls of the fire temple to unlock those gates instead of doing the actual dungeon.
I think my whole issue is that I never felt that Zelda games like Ocarina of Time or Majora's Mask were super cloistered or linear. The world was still so vast, and even if you had your next objective, you had plenty of things to do or explore. Majora's Mask was a great example of combining "linear" and the more open world sense; you could obtain masks in a relatively flexible order (though for others you obviously needed certain masks before progressing to other points, like the Stone mask for the pirate fortress) as you charted towards which temple you wanted to beat. Was Breath of the Wild fun? Yeah, I enjoyed it a lot. But it didn't really have that Zelda feel, in fact I haven't even brought myself to buy Tears of the Kingdom because I'm just not feeling it. I miss the direction of N64 series onward, I understand Aonuma is baffled by people wanting "restriction", but it's more like we want structure and guidance. Especially when the story from BotW was boiled down to a very bare-bones construction.
Majora’s Mask is top tier Zelda. But I would also consider it an anomaly in the early 3D formula. Funnily enough, despite using stuff from its predecessor, it did put a bigger spin on things than any game between it and BotW. No “Early dungeons” to get your feet wet, the story is something for you to discover through exploration instead of it all being forcefully spoonfed and front-loaded, a lot of objectives are left up to the player in ways that feel less restrictive, yet because the character writing is so good, even side quests are fulfilling in a dramatic sense.
Majora's Mask managed to give the illusion of an open world by giving you all the freedom in the world to explore the three day timeline and things would change based on what time it was before the moon fell. Obviously, once you get to a certain point, you'll have an exact route to do, but there isn't always an immediate point towards your next objective or how to achieve it.
Bingo. The old games had plenty to explore, as well as big maps with plenty of upgrades and things to find. Only the story was linear, and we need that. We also need more of the little things that make Zelda "Zelda". Such as heart pieces in the open world. Fishing. The "DA NA NA NA" music when you open a chest. I'm not sure why they did away with all of the old stuff. That's like Mario doing away with mushrooms.
The ironic part being that Totk lost GOTY to a linear turn based CRPG (Baldurs gate) in which the Genre it was apart of was viewed as "outdated" game design.
Nintendo, like many other Japanese developers, TGA plays little role, while Japan has its own awards, Famitsu, the largest journalist in Japan, did not add games from Western developers to their top list, including BG3. They are mainly focused on their market
@@sarahd.8303 why the hell would you all want to be restricted and limited in a linear Zelda game, I’m disappointed it lost to an outdated game in terms of design but then the game awards at least in my opinion is anti Nintendo anyway.
TGA is some nonsense award. it's 3 hours of advertisement with some awards sprinkled in it. Baldurs gate 3 developers were rushed off the stage after just 2 mins while advertisers were given all the time they paid for. going on and on advertising. Personally I could care less about the garbage called the games award. BG3 and all award winners deserved better.
@@Adamtendo_player_1 a highly curated, very tightly designed game will always offer a more satisfying experience than anything possible in an open world game.
It's just really clear by the past two games the narrative really struggles in open world. I miss strong narrative linear Zelda games with an emphasis on puzzling dungeons.
People are so quick to blame the open world but have you even considered that maybe a narrative just isn’t something the developers are concerned with? Like Aonuma has made it very clear that the story is secondary in the Zelda games. Also this whole puzzling dungeon thing is stupid. No one is forcing you to complete the dungeons in an easy way. If you want to make it hard for yourself go ahead. Having a game where it’s always just an unnecessarily complicated dungeon is not good. In any situation in life you’re always going to want to take the path of least resistance. If you want that much of a challenge play a game solely based on puzzles because at least you get whatever it is you’re looking for there. People are severely misunderstanding these games because of nostalgia. Not to say they’re perfect, but a lot of the criticisms are just nostalgia rooted.
There were never strong narrative for Zelda games. Since you played these games as kind/teenager you think that the narrative were strong. It was always shallow.
Yeah, going into a dungeon in the more linear Zeldas was exciting 'cuz you knew you were gonna get some kind of new item/tool Even if some ended up being used less than others they all felt kinda special in their own ways When I open a chest in BotW and TotK, it's less exciting 'cuz I know that 98% of the time it's gonna be an RNG item I could've gotten from any other chest in the game The other 2% is unique stuff that's more interesting/fun to get, but the majority of it is just generic items to keep the RPG/survival gameplay loop running, rather than stuff with specialized applications like in the old linear Zeldas
@@higurashikai09 And that's where the exploration part should kick in. Most items in Zelda games had applications outside of their respective dungeons to get to a chest / heartpiece, or were needed for some sidequest. And getting to those small sections was still very exciting, once you noticed that they exist. I can't say I am excited at all about any weapon/item in BotW / TotK at all, with the exception of the iconic Master Sword. I'd rather have short-lived excitement with a bunch of toys I still get to use whenever, whereever, than to not have any at all. I suppose, in a sense, the "Shrine Abilities" served as a replacement, but I don't think they work as well.
It's funny - when I was first playing Tears of the Kingdom, though I was enjoying it, I couldn't escape this sinking feeling that, as a fan of linear Zelda, there wasn't a place for me in current Zelda anymore. So to hear Aonuma pretty much say as much is honestly a little heartbreaking
Right? I know that things shouldn’t stay the same forever, but I fell in love with the legend of Zelda games for specific reasons, and most of those reasons are absent or in less focus in the two recent games
@@starscythe2099 ...This just doesn't apply to art though lmao. Imagine telling someone who likes rock music that "it's 2023, music changes, listen to new music". Some people will like it, sure, and it's great to stay open minded but maybe the music of 2023 just doesn't sit right with em and they'll try again later and would rather see what new rock is doing? That's 100% fine. Genres exist for a reason. Both can exist. Superbly weird take ngl.
@@schl0ckTbh, would anyone even consider OoT and Majora's Mask to be "the same"? How about Wind Waker and Twilight Princess? The games have always been different while maintaining core aspects such as linearity with the story and some of the progression, fairies being a great heal item, the "DA NA NA NA" when you open a chest, etc. I just don't see why Nintendo decided that ALL (well, most) traditional Zelda elements had to be thrown out. We can have change without destroying the entire formula just for the sake of more freedom. The question people need to ask is this: is doing temples in any order really worth all that we've lost? Imo, the easy answer is no.
I think a good example of the type of linear/open balance in Zelda is Majora’s Mask, ie my favorite video game of all time. It is pretty linear in terms of how you unlock different areas in succession depending on getting items from previous areas, but growing up, I always felt like I could just fuck around and do whatever I want and just explore the world, which is what I think the BotW/TotK devs were going for. I’ve heard people say that the 3 day time limit was stressful, but as a kid it was liberating, because it gave me the freedom to do whatever I wanted. I could just run around Termina doing nothing, just watching what the NPCs do if I really wanted to and then reset the timeline. The scope of the game was obviously a lot less intense, especially since BotW and TotK got delayed multiple times whereas MM was very famously given just a year to complete the entire game, but that smaller world honestly made it so much more special to me. If I do a side quest for someone at one of the stables in totk, I don’t really think much of it, because there’s just so many side quests and there’s rarely any reason for me to actually remember them, unless it’s something really bizarre like those guys who said that Zelda told them to strip. But in MM, I felt a much deeper connection to the NPCs, not only because there were less of them and my attention wasn’t split between as many characters, but also because I felt more like I actually had an impact on the lives of the characters, especially since the time loop meant that I could see what happened without my intervention. I feel like saying “make a smaller game” isn’t going to mean much when BotW and Totk were so successful, but the point I’m trying to make is that the storytelling really shines in the previous LoZ entries, but that I don’t think you need to sacrifice having an open world in order to create a game that feels nostalgic
The thing about Majoras Mask was it made all those "side quests" feel important. Saving lon lon ranch from the aliens, and preventing them from getting robbed taking milk to castle town, or the whole Anju questline. It really made it feel like you're in a real world at the time despite how limited it was. Limitation can be a great thing, and that's what zelda fans not just BOTW/TOTK fans, really enjoyed about the series. That classic zelda theme, skyward sword admittedly was too linear, but Twilight princess honestly was fairly linear as well it just had a much more impactful story and world building.
Soooo true about the 3 day limit being liberating. You really could just run the cycle so you can find out what might happen and then come back on the next cycle to interrupt it or engage with it. Epic game.
I love open world Zelda and don’t want it to go anywhere but it’s kinda crazy hearing him calling the desire for more linear ones to be nostalgia. I think I even prefer open world Zelda but I don’t see why we can’t do both or at least balance the aspects better.
Ghost of Tsushima and Eldin Ring prove that a better balance between open world and structured gameplay is more than possible. Maybe throw in some Link to the Past magic in that blend and people would be much happier about 3D Zelda.
@@Redpoppy80 Everything is always me me me with you guys clearly eonuma is burned out of the classic formula why would you want him to work on something he’s no longer passionate about His heart wouldn’t be in it
@@dorian6021 Everything is always me me me with you guys clearly eonuma is burned out of the classic formula why would you want him to work on something he’s no longer passionate about His heart wouldn’t be in it
@@madnessarcade7447 True. Aonuma has clearly lost his passion for Zelda. As an artist that will more or less happen to everyone, but Zelda is more than Aonuma and it is NOT WRONG for fans to have our wants met or lose interest if something that we once consumed was changed and we don't like the change. If Aonuma has lost his spark for anything regarding the core Zelda formula than it is time for someone new to take over. And if that doesn't happen, I have every right to say, "screw you game, I will not buy it". I have long ago abandoned Paper Mario and Pokemon for said reasons.
I finished A Link Between Worlds recently and the dungeon design was so satisfying, the meter for weapons was really intuitive also. You didn't have weapons breaking and you didn't have to collect arrows to use the bow, everything just recharges. Great game and it even had a very open world design. Maybe the loss of Satoru Iwata changed things; Aonuma and Miyamoto frequently consulted with Iwata prior to his passing
Yes! Such an underrated title, felt like the last "true" Zelda game but had a huge world to explore! If they made a sequel to it with the open world scale of Botw it could be the greatest Zelda ever
A Link Between Worlds is probably my favourite Zelda game. It's so tightly designed and deliberatly crafted. I still think it has the best dungeons in the series by a mile (even though they are a bit easy).
A Link Between Worlds was amazing. It, along with Link's Awakening, are the only two Zelda games I can replay over and over and never get tired of them. I think what amazes me most about ALBW is the atmosphere, it really pulls you into the world which as Arlo notes the 3D games have historically been better at. If they ever do a ALBW remake for the Switch (or Switch 2) I'll buy it in a heartbeat.
I would have had a hard time getting into zelda without the linearity. Twilight Princess wasn't just a game for me, but a story. And it affected my young self in a way that would love stories forever. While open world zelda may have much to offer story wise, the linear stories of the previous 3d games can't tell those stories if they were open world. Enjoying a story isnt about choosing how it turns out, but surrendering yourself to someone elses creativity
I'd agree with this if any of the 3d zeldas actually used their linear progression to tell better stories. But that's not the case. Even with TP most of the narrative reasons for why you go to each dungeon in order is to barely justify the mechanical order the devs chose to build the game in.
@@KitCloud1I loved the stories in OoT and WW. Lots of people love the stories of the other classics. I guess the point is more that those stories, even if they weren't amazing, they were cohesive.
@@John6-40 Except that cohesion doesn't exist. What changes for Link, Zelda or any of the sages if you could do the shadow temple first? Not subtext, hyrule historia or you're personal head cannon, based souly on dialog & cutscenes in the game: what would change? Same goes for WW. Other than the island you failed to save, what changes if you could do dragon roost & head straight to the wind temple?
Twilight Princess also had a lot of free-roaming involved, in case you wanted to slow the pace down a little, some combat encounters, mostly eploration and minigames. The issue I have with open worlds that still try to have a traditional story is the game is basically Twilight Princess "but what if the side activities were never-ending and the story is far less engrossing?" I constantly get lost doing shrines and running around on my own, and only when I exhaust everything I care to walk my character toward to, I get aound going forward with the story which just scrolls past me because I'm aleady well settled in my couch and can't summon myself to pay much attention. Personally, I want to be urged to run to the castle and be paced in the breaks I take with side content, go on even a slightly long-winded story and experience some side tales that break up the tone a little. There's just no pacing in most stories within most open world games and I know pacing can exist.
It's not only nostalgia Eiji, limitations are good for having fun, they challenge you to improve your skills, your creativity, your critical thinking, and a lot more things. It's kind of a myth that a game where you can do whatever you want is better just because of that.
Linear Zeldas usually have more restrictions in movement, more restrictions in movement mean that puzzles can be more creative since the environment can work around specific limitations and be more unique. Most of the TOTK Dungeons revolve around an arbitrary mechanic that feels like they could have just been an already existing item such as electric arrows, bombs, water fruits, etc. I think traditional Zeldas are so fun because there is a level of progression where you acquire new tools which lets you interact with the world differently. You don't really see that in ToTK where the same 4 tools can solve most problems. That is great for traversal but bad for dungeon and puzzle design, since puzzles are usually based around your limitations more often than not. Love both styles of games, but they are also very different games. I also feel like one thing linear Zelda does better is a sense of progression and mastery over the mechanics. When traditional Zelda introduces a mechanic, it forces you to use it in tens of different ways so you can apply it in more ways for the future even after the dungeon. In TOTK, if a new mechanic is introduced for a dungeon, you use it to activate a switch and then it becomes a subpar combat option later. It doesn't push your expectations and make you rethink the world and your options in the same way.
Their lack of understanding on this matter is both mind-boggling and concerning. Classic Zelda was largely linear despite its open world. It had item progression. BotW and TotK have less in common with "traditional" Zelda than the linear games do.
@vanyadolly This! It genuinely frustrates me when people peddle the "BotW is a return to the first Zelda game" Kool-Aid. No, it is not! Freedom to explore is great, but absolute, untethered exploration is just too much. There is very little to really "wow" you with that format. Instead of working your way through challenging puzzles or combat, you can climb over it. And as we all ought to know, if the player *can* optimize the fun out of a game, then they will.
@@vanyadolly I think the core identity of LOZ started with LttP, which was in many ways a dungeon crawler with action, exploration, and story mixed in. OoT brought the series to 3D, and subsequent games evolved certain aspects of the game, whilst maintaining this balance, and never losing sight of the series core identity. BotW then came along and prioritized “unlimited freedom” at the expense of everything else and upset this balance.
I would want a mix really. Open areas but with more to see and do but not being the shrines (their boring after a while) and having the dungeons be proper dungeons.
It felt super good to completely cheese a tough dungeon using the fuse mechanic for the first 2-3 times.. then after it felt like I was cheating myself
To this day, I literally have no idea how you were supposed to defeat Ganondorf's final sword-fighting form. I just dropped spicy peppers on the ground to make updrafts, then went into slow-mo while gliding to hit him with a billion bomb arrows. It certainly was not as satisfying as it would've been to solve it in a linear fashion, though it was kinda hilarious.
Agreed. I've read some arguements online that "Hey you can also choose to just not use those mechanics to make it more difficult", saying that we could just handicap ourselves to make it more challenging, but that would also be like cheating the purpose of why those things were added in the first place.
@@avon_c6199 It is a game about finding your own style mate. That is the whole point. So creating your own challenge is a part of the game. If you don't like that it is not the fault of the game. It is just not for you. It's like the story of Soul Games. Those games gives you story with lore. You might not like that and can say that it is bad for you but you can't say that it is bad. Because it is not design flaw it is a choise that some people prefer. If you are not one of them then it is a you problem.
@@erkantiryaki5542 I hate this copout so much. The comparison to the way Souls games deliver lore falls flat when you realize that BOTW and TOTK represent a huge departure for Zelda in general. Zelda has NEVER been about "finding your own meta" until these games existed. Sure, there was alternate ways to beat bosses but nothing like the spicy pepper + bomb arrow strat and other dumb shit that you can do in these games. This would be like if souls games had a direct, straightforward narrative for their entire existence and then Elden Ring suddenly changed the way the story was delivered. Elden Ring also shows how you can have an open world style in your game without sacrificing the core of what your game is. BOTW and TOTK don't feel like Zelda games. It feels like they had drastically new ideas but wanted to attach it to a known IP so it would sell. And be defended tooth and nail by fanboys like you when old fans end up not liking it as much as older Zelda titles. They're not bad games, but they're not good Zelda games either.
I'd rather have a grand total of four dungeons rather than hundreds of copy pasted Shrines if that means the dungeons are as well thought out and designed as the Temples in Majora's Mask or Wind Waker.
Imo, the MAIN four temples should return to the traditional 3D zelda formula, puzzle rush dungeon, get the special item, use special item to solve remaining puzzles that unlock the boss key, use special item in the fight against the boss. The temples in BoTW and ToTK both suffer from the feeling of just being a slightly bigger shrine puzzle. I liked them a little better in ToTK but they were still a little too easy. I really like the open world zelda formula, it’s just little things like that that make me go “Yeah, but it COULD be better”
Better temples (I'm fine with your idea of 4), more rewarding progression with items from temples, better and more memorable music and more key elements from past Zelda's, such as a Master Sword and Hylian Shield as part of the story, fairies actually mattering, fishing, heart pieces, big chests with music, etc. That's what the game needs. We can have true open world with all of those things. That said, the story will always have to be broken up if you can do temples in any order.
Why only 4? IMO for a world as big as BOTW/TOTK, there should be at least 10-13 uniquely themed dungeons, and they should all take about 1-2 hours to complete and consist of Metroidvania lock-and-key or puzzle box gameplay.
@@TheRealPSKilla502 I guess. Regardless how many there are, it doesn’t matter if they don’t improve the quality of them. Make them longer and more “puzzle box”-like
Ensuring the long term success of the franchise is his job. Whether as a director or a producer. More fans equals better situation for the franchise and you bet that is going to be the direction the development team follows.
@@Ryan-Petre Nintendo is a business, not a starving artist. When it come to franchises in particular it is always about doing what is best for longevity at all cost. You go where the fans are. So, you would be happy to see Zelda slowly go down the route of Metroid? or even worse Star Fox? F-Zero? Sorry this demand for artistic awareness (aka purity) does not apply here.
I think its mostly about wanting to funnel all of their fans towards one path for the sake of getting bigger sales numbers for each product, thats my immediate guess
That could explain why they no longer see value in making 2D Zelda. They don't want to put in the resources or have people buy the 2D games when they want more resources and money going towards the big open world titles.
The direction for future entries? That's been stated in dev interviews. They basically want to take the TotK formula and work with it for future games like with what OOT was for the series. As for the 2D games thing, it just seems like the team no longer cares about 2D zelda and wants to put their eggs all into one basket.@@NuiYabuko
You can still have your linear prgression with an open world format. Games have been doing it for a while. You complete the story in a specific order then go back for objectives with items you didnt have before. You can have your big expansive dungeons but you need to fill it with things that are actually interesting
"Why would you want less freedom?" Because limitations in games, when implemented properly, create challenge and, at the end of the day, overcoming a good, well-designed challenge is a big part of why we play video games. How does Aonuma not get this?!
@@blakelandry9313 and red dead redemption 2 is brain dead easy. And people also love mc Donalds so there is that. Red dead redemption 2 has a huge problem were the open world trys to be a huge open world sandbox but the mission are those uncharted type games were you have 0 freedom of doing things on your own. Red dead redemption 1 is way better anyway.
I think merging the old and new formulas would actually work incredibly well. You could have a big open world with traditional dungeons and smaller challenges scattered throughout. Each dungeon grants you a new item, which can then be used to access the next dungeon in the progression of the story. The smaller challenges could be accessible at any time to give the player something to do in between major sections. There could even be sections of the open world that aren’t accessible until a certain item has been obtained. That’s what I wish they would do anyway
Absolutely possible. In fact, this is basically what Wind Waker did. It was a big open world that you could explore, but not get everywhere right off the bat. There were some islands that you needed a special item to access, like if the island had a rock wall around it and the only entrance was covered by an ice boulder that you needed fire arrows to melt. There were even smaller challenges, like little holes you’d fall into where you’d maybe have to fight a gauntlet of enemies in order to get a chest with a silver rupee or a bottle.
Link to the past was sort of like this too. The item gating that it uses hasn't aged perfectly, but you could do many of the dungeons in any order, the side quests got you ahead in the game, and just wandering and exploring led you to some cool areas that might help you later on. It's probably still my favorite Zelda game because of this.
@@Road_to_Dawn It's funny, I love Wind Waker and have played it a ton, but my first thought of this description of a good mix of open world and linearity was actually Majora's Mask. Just thinking about how, once you have the Ocarina of Time back, and you've learned the Song of Healing, you're pretty much able to do a lot of the game's sidequests already. Dungeons follow a linear path, each new one unlocking (albeit indirectly sometimes) because of an item gained either during before or just after a dungeon, and/or a mask.
And no copy/pasting! Give us a handful of tight, well-written and directed linear segments and not a zillion shrines and korok seeds! I wanna finish the game in under 40 hours, 100% under 60.
@@glitchy000 Yeah, more content ≠ a better game. I would rather be able to 100% a carefully crafted game with less content than have a bazillion korok seeds to collect that all feel the same.
the biggest problem with both botw's divine beasts and totk's temples (outside of the last one) is repetition, ultimately with both games you're doing the same thing in every beast/temple, there's more variety in how you do it in totk, but it's still interacting with 5 of a thing to unlock some boss area and it just feels like so much more could have been done in both games edit: while yes the dungeons in other zelda games had repetitive elements (repeated use of small keys for instance) there was still more variety in how you traversed through the dungeon and solved its puzzles, like forest temple having the poes, water temple having its water, spirit temple requiring the use of both adult AND child, snowhead having the large pillar in the center, stone tower with flipping the ENTIRE dungeon over botw and totk feel like they have lite versions of this variety, the elements are somewhat present, but not in a way that makes the solving of those puzzles nearly as satisfying also, the beasts/temples in botw/totk are MAIN quests and are important to both the plot and the world building of both games, so why wouldnt they give a major amount of focus to them?
By that logic, every Zelda dungeon in every Zelda game is the game. Instead of key to door puzzles, the locks or terminals serve those exact same purposes. It’s all still repetitive. Solve puzzle, get key and open door or activate terminal, move to the next one, repeat until you reach the boss, and defeat said boss.
tbf, old dungeons weren't a lot better goal wise. "find small key to open door, to then find small key, to open door, to find small key, to open door to midboss and get dungeon item, find big key, fight boss". Some dungeons had better designs and layouts, but apart from the dungeon item puzzles they all play just about the same mission wise. The divine beasts were fine objectives with good puzzles, they were just all thematically the exact same and had 0 identity. totk is better, but apart from the storm ark rito dungeon (one of the best in the series I'd argue), they also have little identity. water is floating platforms with bubbles, and barely any actual water. fire has lava but you're mostly just riding rails (its fun, but it doesn't leave much of an impression), and desert temple has light puzzles... and traps I guess. Getting to each dungeon, however, was amazing (apart from water which just felt like a worse sky temple). the tower defense gerudo mission was genuinely amazing to see since we saw soldiers actually fighting. and then bouncy sky boats was just a lot of fun. goron wasn't as fun, but visually the volcano boss was a spectacle and the bomber plane fighting was unique.
Somehow the dungeons in totk ended up being even more repetitive than botw. At least in botw, each dungeon had a unique mechanic, they all moved in a different way that opened up interesting possibilities. Totk literally just went "ok here's your 4 isolated puzzles with no connection whatsoever, enjoy them for the 20 minutes it takes you to solve them". I honestly can't comprehend how he thought they solved the dungeon issue. They were some of the most shallow dungeons of the entire franchise, despite the game having less dungeons than almost any other Zelda. I'm still wrapping my head around how they spent 6 years developing the sequel to one of the largest, most beloved games of all time, took away the dungeon issue as one of the main criticisms, and came back with this as their offering. It feels like almost all of their resources went into perfecting the building mechanic and they just kind of forgot about the rest of the game.
@@LinkMountaineer the difference in older Zeldas came from the linear progression. The puzzles were meant to be more complex with each dungeon as you gained more and more tools to piece them together, each combat encounter was meant to challenge you more than the last, and failing that you'd at least get some rising action in the story. With Tears of the Kingdom the dungeons are so repetitive that they quite literally repeat the same cutscene 4 times.
@@squiddler7731 Of course the cutscenes are going to be somewhat similar to get the new Sages filled in on what’s going on, but to say they’ll literally the same cutscene every time is objectively false. Plus, you’re relating two separate aspects as if one correlates to the other when they don’t.
BOTW and TOTK fall prey to one of the biggest potential problems of game design today; the locust concept. A player picks the game up, gets all their tools, then goes out into the world. At every step of the way, they consume a piece of content, then move on to the next piece of content, consume it, and move on, never needing to return in most cases. (Shrines are a great example) It creates a game design that’s not only nearly absent of tangible progression, but also gives a very modern outlook on society. I see BOTW and TOTK as the TikTok of Zelda. Go, consume, go, consume, go, consume more of these bit-sized pieces of content. At the end of it, I’m not really feeling satisfied. Like I did something difficult, or something that took real thought, or the dreaded, “I’m wasting my time.” And of course, the reductive people will go, “Games are a waste of time.” When that’s not true if you’re enjoying the experience. Bringing yourself joy is not a waste of time, but being distracted from your lack of enjoyment with content that’s specifically curated to keep you consuming is. Just my 2 cents.
never had that problem (btw tiktok of zelda lol liked that) i actually found myself exploring the world further each time i play and experiment more with botw and totk. i dont return to shrines or dungeons but camps and areas i do many times. i find the linear zeldas are more like the locust concept, you progress and consume the content and story, but do you truly go back? no you keep going til the end, unless theres secrets you wanna find, otherwise its a straight line, while botw/totk is like a web, theres many paths but they are all connected, you always have a main goal, more content to experience (e.g. caves or nooks and crannys in a region), more secrets to find, every battle can be fought differently, totk expands this ten fold. in botw/totk, that sense of progression is heightened, in linear games you gain more hearts, the mastaaaa sword and some cool gizmos, botw/totk you gain weapons and hearts the same but you evolve physically with clothing, abilites/ vows, the world changes once you complete things (the same as linear but its very noticeable as well in botw/totk), you went from fusing a rock to a stick to fusing the horn of a lynel to a better stick, you can build a house, in botw you can build tarrey town. the one thing i hate about the new games is the shitty story, the lame combat (i mean like mashing a button unlike the flourishes in TP, like actual sword combat) and the imposing sandbox, i do want a more grounded zelda like TP but with the mechanics and complexity of botw/totk.
To me, it’s not just about having better dungeons, but having a more thought out world. My main issue with both games is I search every inch of one section and the next just feels more of the same. Why explore when you’re satisfied with your inventory and some of the most worthy things of note can be seen from a distance? (Even caves in TOTK when you offer a fire fruit under a cherry blossom tree). I kinda miss Wind Waker where every island had something worth finding. Even A Link Between World felt like a good compromise
I was disappointed when I played that Goron strength test game. Really tried to come up with creative solutions given it’s one of few unique ultrahand puzzles/tests. Not only was the most basic idea the best (just strap a ton of rockets to a metal rock), but the 1st place prize was just… a different ore that you can easily get in a cave or a stone talus. Not something rare like a dragon scale or even an armour piece (returning or new). They have some great mechanics and the controls are really intuitive, but it’s marred by having the most barebone puzzles. “You can come up with any solution” is pointless when the “puzzle” is as simple as “get over this gap” or the solution could be easily solved with just a car/boat/flying machine. There’s no advantage and no fun in thinking outside the box, because the puzzles never push you beyond the basics, and there’s no rewards/incentives for it. I played a bit of Nuts & Bolts at a friend’s house and while the physics are janky, and the build controls aren’t as good, it was infinitely more fun creating and implementing my ideas. Because even though I wasn’t playing to get rewards, the progress was more tangible. You can’t just add X to a vehicle and automatically win, or get the best record. It _requires_ iteration and innovation to improve. TotK can be cheesed so much and so easily that you have to stop yourself because otherwise you’ll realize there’s no value to doing it. Shrines can’t be cheesed as easily because you can’t pull from your inventory, but they also provide exactly what you need. And yes they need that, but there’s never anything _more._ If the shrine alls for a vehicle to solve it, you’ll get a platform, control stick, 4 wheels, and nothing else. No room to experiment there. They basically solve the thinking behind the puzzle for you.
Personally, I think that the open world killed the difficulty aspect. Since every shrine can be ones first shrine, they must all be, more or less, the same level of difficult. You cant build puzzles that gradually get harder and harder. Same with the dungeons. You cant build puzzles off new dungeon items or past items because they don't exist. As a result, dungeons never get any more difficult until you enter Ganondorfs Sealing Place. Honestly, I think that is what most people are feeling put off with on BOTW/TOTK. that and the sheer lack of any real in game story. Zelda has never been even good at story, save TP, but this was disappointing .
i think they should replace the shrines with optional mini dungeons and just give a whole heart container or stamina vessel and just have there be less that are longer
I think more than it being open world, it's more a matter of accessibility, just look at Zelda 1, it is almost completely open, but some areas and such are clearly designed to be end-game areas, and dungeons are marked with a number to tell the player how easy or hard one is, I think a similar approach could work on a modern Zelda, but apealing to the common denominator, aka, playing it safe, is what actually hurts the organic feel of the game.
Oddly enough, Joseph Anderson, in his review of BotW way back when observed the same problem and suggested a pretty viable solution. Since the shrines were separate loading zones, they could be designed with different levels of intensity or sequential orders and then swapped out based on what shrines a player had already done or not done. Seemed like a pretty good idea.
When I first saw BOTW footage in 2015, the first thing I dreamed about in the open world setting was wandering around and stumbling into a forest temple and just being able to give it my best shot, regardless of my skill level. That never happened. I don’t know why or who decided that we can’t have well designed, linear dungeons in an open world game. It’s absolutely ridiculous.
Because that's dumb? Red dead redemption 2 has linear mission and a open world but it has a identity crisis because of it. On the other hand red dead 2 trys to be this sand box open world game but on the other had its a cinematic uncharted type game were you have 0 freedom.
elden ring literally has the same problem of having extremely repetitive everything, from enemies to bosses to "puzzles" to areas. It's even worse than totk about it actually. The quality drop from sekiro to make a "giant" world is insane. unreasonably large aaa open world games are a cancer that needs to be terminated
Elden ring is linear af. It looks like an open world, but once you actually explore it for yourself, it becomes clear that you’re will explore the world in a straight line. Limgrave -> Liurnia -> Altus -> Mountaintops | Caelid (anytime you want)
The main benefits of linear design are better difficulty curve, better puzzles (because powers meant to be earned later in the game won't be able to be used to break through the puzzles), a more cohesive story, and the fact that overall it is easier to design. While having an open world where you can explore the whole map is very cool, ironically it is very limiting. if you play video games for story or GAMEPLAY, linear design (at least to the extent of a link to the past) is superior
I disagree. The gameplay of Breath of the Wild is much more immersive, flexible and fun than anything on any other 3D Zelda, just for how free you are to tackle each challenge and the world itself. Linear is just weak in comparison
@@tumultuousv Eh, I dunno. I feel like at least in the older 3D Zeldas I played like OoT and TP, dungeons did gradually grow more complicated and enemies more threatening as you progressed through the game. Heck my favorite enemy in all of TP wasn't a boss at all, but the freaking Iron Knuckle you fought in the Temple of Time. It was just such an excellent test of all the battle mechanics you had learned up until that point and was easily my favorite enemy to fight.
@@lonecom685 I'd love to see you cross a border or climb any mountain. You'd need tools, a passport, major story events in your life to do it. All while the ultimate evil wouldn't be waiting. Real life isn't truly open, even going hiking you have strict limits. What you claim immersion is far from reality. Then you'd learn that open worlds aren't immersive because like going on a car trip you make a route for a reason.
Those comments were shockingly tone deaf. I enjoy the new formula a ton, but to chalk up anyone else's preference to nostalgia is stupid. There are clear advantages to linear design.
Hearing this for the first time made me legitimately angry. It's so incredibly dismissive and straight up admitting to not understanding or caring about what fans want.
I like open world but they've pretty much done all they can for this timeline in Hyrule. The only other option is to go to a new land or create yet another timeline.
Provided I was disappointed by TOTK as a "sequel", I am hoping the next TLOZ game is open-world because I am hoping for an open-world TLOZ game that feels like a true sequel to BOTW.
@@Wackaz Funny since for me tht BotW disappointed me bc it lacked alot of wht I luved about Zelda, and TotK fixed a good portion of wht I disliked; Ended up satisified.
@@noahginnett900The Legend of Zelda. It's open world. Go anywhere, do anything, but you're gonna have to beat all 8 dungeons plus Hyrule Castle. On top of all the dungeons being extremely linear in progression. The only way to make it non linear would be going to the 7th or 8th dungeon first. Grabbing the skeleton key, the dungeon item from that one, and using it to cheese the rest of the game.
Literally the very first game on the NES! 😂 The first one already got the structure right, yet afterwards, folks have been going strongly on either side of the spectrum for all of the games, that's kinda funny to think about.
I mean, I still would like a little bit of linearity in the overworld too as unlocking different parts of the world is a great feeling and paces the game more properly
I just want complexity and deeper interconnected challenges. I don't necessarily want to have linearity, I just want the dungeons to feel like more stuff is happening in them in GENERAL and it to take more thought and be more engaging. If they don't want to make em how the did, thats totally cool! lots of the dungeons in each game have different motivations. Idk tho, if they aren't gonna make em big linear puzzle boxes, why not make them.....more interesting and full? put more story in there. Give me a reason to come back. make some of them really dangerous. let me discover ancient text and have it recontextualize my understanding of the region. put unique flora and fauna in there. have puzzles that just....take longer to figure out. Have it change as I progress in more significant ways. have it respond and push back to certain solutions every so often. Make them more rollercoastery. Idk! just don't treat em like a single megashrine with 4 checkpoints again. Some Shrines that have 3 challenge iterations deep run dangerously close to the complexity of the temples. That should maaaayyybe not happen.
You can have a feeling of increasing power with linear dungeons. With the item and how you managed to get the item. If you found the solution to a hard puzzle, you can feel clever and it motivates you. It improves your mind and can allow you to have more combat tactics.
Leaning so far into the open world model inherently feels less designed and ultimately less interesting the more it's iterated on. There can be great worlds and exploration in linear Zeldas, but without the unnecessary inconveniences that ultimately demanded this change in the series
You're totally confusing or even worse, purposely construing ''designed'' with - ''oh We don't want Link to jump this 2 foot high fence right here, oh no no no - let's put Darth Vader's mighty Invisible Wall of gaming there - that'll stop his logical freedom.''
This already happens in the shrines, where the logical thing would be to allow Link to climb the walls, or use the zonai devices freely. Instead, its arbitrarily taken away from Link these basic capabilities for the same of tight game design. Even then, they just make trash puzzles that are not satisfying. They traded linearity for the sake of freedom, while still limiting the player in dumb and contrived ways, and somehow still fail to craft interesting dungeons.@@netweed09
@@netweed09 People seem to push the linear meaning well-designed argument hard it seems. Open air Zelda is just as much hand-designed like those linear games, perhaps even more so.
@@Korobooshii Exploration, really? Well, not _really_ - you're just pushing forwards down a glamorised Corridor the game wants you to play. Granted, Wind Waker was an exception but it had a _lot_ of filler, was _way_ too easy and also had barely 5 Dungeons that TOTK has. And you couldn't do them out of Order (so there goes any point in 'exploration'.) And I feel the Rito's were done _far_ better in Tears anyway: I enjoyed Tulin's Quest way more. valoo was too goofy for me to take seriously.
That fact that Aonuma of all people used the "that's just nostalgia talking" argument is kinda disturbing. It's not nostalgia, it's a preference. And if anyone should see why people want more linear dungeons and puzzle solving, it's him. He designed those games and he should know how well they sold. I hope we do get a Zelda game that blends both styles at least really well someday, but if they just can't, then why not keep giving us games with one or the other? Clearly both styles sell.
@@watershipup7101because the entire staff working on 2d Zelda now works on 3d Zelda as they need everyone to be able to develop those games. That's very obvious
Agreed. I have never loved an open world game. There's been a few I liked, but every game I've really loved has been linear or, I'm not sure what to call it, but "open in confined areas" like Mario Odyssey and Monster Hunter Rise.
It’d be one thing if he understood those players’ desires and decided to stick with the current direction as that’s what he wants, but here it just seems like he has no desire to figure out WHY those players desire that in the first place so he just… throws them under the bus.
I just like the level design of the more linear games more. Felt like the world and characters had more personality to them too, but that may just be me.
Im someone who got into this series through botw. I am a raving botw fan but I ended up trying out twilight princess and wind waker. I enjoyed them both so fucking much and while I struggled a little with being put into a restricted linear environment from the absolute freedom I had in botw, I enjoyed the dungeons so much. It wasn't even nostalgia for me as I didn't know that those games existed. I still adore botw a little more than totk because things felt a bit more sensible and meaningful than that.
@@hichaelhyers Here to second this but also add Majora's Mask to the pile. And considering you liked the freedom and figuring things out on your own of BotW, I'd recommend getting an old copy of the N64 version. They made the bosses have insultingly obvious weak points in the remake for 3DS.
As an old man who grew up with Zelda, that’s really cool to hear. All games are limited by the engineering of tech and design available at the time, and it’s good to know older Zelda games can hold up for new players.
The dungeon designs aren't the only thing people miss from the old formula, it's also the various items you could get and magical musical instruments. Like, nearly every mainstream Zelda game had a musical instrument that allowed you to effect the world in some way, and the music that came from those songs were soooo iconic. Modern Zelda could EASILY implement this. And as far as items go, one of the reasons I loved exploring dungeons is because I knew I'd get a new item that would change the way I interacted with the world.
Personally I'm hoping that the linear Ocarina of Time style of Zelda can coexist with the more open ended Breath of the Wild style of Zelda sort of like how 2D and 3D Mario platformers can coexist.
In the same time frame it took to release Ocarina of Time and Skyward Sword, they only released 2 open world Zeldas. Its impossible to coexist with the current way they are doing games.
It's kinda tricky to do that for how much dev time and money they spent on the 3D games now. Maybe they can get an external dev team for that, but that would still be a huge game that would require a ton of work, supervision and budget that maybe they would be better spent in something different instead of another Zelda when they already have one, plus it would be very easy to get a lesser game if they treat it as a "side game" with smaller budget. A 2D Zelda is more likely since the dev time and budget would be way smaller, the same way we had Dread and Wonder alongside Odyssey and (hopefully) Prime 4.
It can happen, but my guess is that Aonuma doesn't want to make linear games. So if a linear Zelda game were to exist in the future, it's going to be made by a different dev team than the primary one that Aonuma leads. It's an apt comparison with 2d and 3d Mario games (and Paper Mario, Mario Kart, and other spin offs), aren't those all made with different studios? It's all under the same Nintendo name, but they aren't all made by the same people.
What I heard was "We have been collecting data for years, and this generic open world formula with less actual Zelda elements is what will sell the most. Hard-core fans will complain, but still buy, plus we picked up a ton of casuals who otherwise wouldn't care about Zelda. So shut your mouths and see you again in 7 years for BotW 3."
@@John6-40 I mean... so what? It's old fans' fault for not supporting the linear games enough. And, due to BOTW and TOTK's resounding success, the series is in a healthier place than it has ever been
@@John6-40 Eh, I don't know about that. I'm seeing more and more people - both long-time fans and newfound fans alike, expressing their discontent with ToTK each and every passing day. The statistical data on Google Trends suggests that this game had a very, very short shelf life on social media, as far as relevance and discussion goes. I won't be surprised if the next one underperforms in sales, especially if it's more of the same with little to-no-improvements to the core gameplay loop (such as the removal of durability, for example.)
@@orlando5789 I've bought every Zelda and Nintendo systems, minus the WiiU. I love the open world but got excited about the glyphs so spoiled the story for myself so following the main quest line lost its luster because all the characters were acting brand new when I already knew the big reveal from almost the beginning. I love exploring, but if this was more linear or restricted, I wouldn't have spoiled the main story plot line less than 10 hours in to my playtime.
i played botw for a little while (like one hour) and totk i’ve played for around 15 hours so far; anyway i just beat oot and mm for the very first time in my entire life over the past few months consecutively and i just. really really enjoyed them a lot. i may even consider those two to be my favorite video games of All Time. i never even grew up with oot nor mm and yet they hooked me a lot quicker than the former. i do plan to eventually beat totk, but i struggle w staying on track much more than the older titles. and i don’t think its because of nostalgia whatsoever lmao
The idea is to have a big open world with linear sections for the *dungeons, you mean. Preferably with items in the dungeon that improve how much you can explore the open world.
I'm liking how Genshin Impact does it (though they are more Persona 5-style switch based dungeons than Zelda-style physics based dungeons), where you unlock hidden areas and themed puzzle dungeons in the open world by doing mandatory and optional quests that have tons of character and story content, as well as being filled to the gills with tons of lore.
i think a major issue here is Aonuma for some reason thinking the choice is a binary, between complete linearity and directionless freedom. which i think is just an insane take. Look at elden ring: a completely open world, with very slight structure to it that guides the player through the game, while letting them go where ever they want to go, with dungeons that, while linear, interconnect and allow the player to explore. at their core, nintendos biggest problem is they dont take lessons from other games and automatically assume the way they do things is best.
@Redpoppy80 I think you’re misunderstanding Aonuma and missing context and translation if you think his take is devoid of critical thinking. Jumping to such a black and white take yourself is…well, your words. Also consider translation issues…….
He said he doesn’t want to make the traditional games, so I think he’s saying this to justify it to himself. That and I think he wanted to surpass OoT, which (depends how you argue) one could say he did (or he feels he did) with BotW. So by backtracking, he might feel like he didn’t actually meet that milestone.
I prefer the fact that I have to make some progression in a game. I like to see areas that appear unreachable unless I come across something that will let me reach them. It leaves things to explore as you get ahead in-game. I liked dungeons that had many rooms and puzzles designed to keep you thinking. Small keys to unlock branching paths because a dungeon isn't entirely linear. I missed all that. A Link Between Worlds was where I felt things were moving in an entirely different direction when you were allowed to get items outside of dungeons. Before you used the item you found within to help progress past the second half of a dungeon and use it on the boss later. They can still strike a careful balance between linearity and open world, just don't give it all to us off the bat!!
I can see from an artistic perspective he may simply be having more fun creating these new types of Zelda's. He could potentially be burnt out on the old development methods. In my mind it would make more sense for someone else to take the helm on 2d Zelda's while he continues pursuing his vision for 3D Zelda's.
Most reasonable comment in a sea of nonsense. He is the artist, respect his vision, he clearly knows what's good, as his success proves. Let someone else waste their time making boring, outdated, short games with little substance and puzzles that can only be considered tricky by a 4 year old.
@@Gatitasecsii games with little substance and easy puzzles (ignoring the fact that puzzles in zelda have *never* been anything remotely resembling difficult)? You mean like BotW and TotK, right? ...right?
@@rhael42 You guys think that's a huge gotcha don't you? That's cute I never claimed botw and totk had hard puzzles, I said the old games have nothing to offer in the modern day. And I have really tried playing them again after all these years, they just don't hold up
The key feature lost in the open-air Zeldas is progression. It isn't about restriction OR freedom but restriction AND THEN freedom. A game that I think perfected progression (for its genre) is Hollow Knight. I've never heard anyone say "I would have preferred if you started the game with already all the abilities by the end of the tutorial section and the only rewards throughout the rest of the game were geo (money), mask shards (life points) and soul vessels (magic meter)." Sure you're restricted at the beginning but at the end of the game you're basically free to move around in any direction, and it's fun. Similarly with older Zeldas and the hookshot for example. Sure ultrahand is fun but it doesn't feel earned and allows you to cheese the game in some (or even most) parts. We're not saying "remove the abilities from TotK!" we're asking to move them further into the game so that we can feel the difference. Sure you can decide to not use the abilities, but it just doesn't feel right, because they aren't designed for that and because then you fall into the "just restriction, no freedom" category. Champion/sage abilities don't count because they're never necessary to solve anything outside of the dungeon. tl;dr: Put items back in dungeons and create puzzles around them! Preferably with a progression in difficulty for puzzles so the challenge grows with our understanding of the abilities.
Lightning Temple in TotK felt pretty good to me. The first half definitely feels a bit more linear and and the light puzzle was fun. It still just wasn't at the level of old Zelda temples though. Even in a game like SS that most people say is pretty rough, the dungeon design was incredible. They can't have just gotten rid of all of their dungeon designers, right?
Skyward sword is probably my favourite Zelda game. It has some of the strongest dungeons in the franchise. But it's main problem is it never gets out of "dungoen mode". the entire overworld is made of sequential puzzles so it gets a bit tiresome. The game really needed a stronger open area to explore. The sky is a bit tedious to fly through. The fact that's its still my favourite despite all this just shows how strong the dungeons and story are.
There are a lot of good games that are story driven even if they aren't Zelda games! Just the Witcher games for example. My favorite is the 1st one with its great music/atmosphere. Witcher 2 is shorter but a little bit like the 3rd. 3 is open world but still keeps similarities with its prequels.
I absolutely agree. I started playing The Witcher 3 this year and the writing has absolutely blown me away so far, and I really don't feel like it being an open world game kills the pacing at all. I love ToTK as an open world for entirely different reasons, so I don't compare the two, but I just wish a little more care was put into its story. I know Nintendo is about gameplay over everything else, but strong characters and a plot that gets you invested can dramatically elevate gameplay, and lead to more memorable moments.
Part of what makes me dislike TotK so much is that the sense of wonder for the world is largely absent. It was my favorite part of BotW; not knowing what was around the corner, discovering the dragons for the first time, fighting a Lynel for the first time, using powers that Link never had before, the mystery of why Ganon had become a blight instead of his traditional Gerudo thief incarnation, what happened to Zelda, why Link lost his memory... I felt that most of that sense of discovery was simply absent, or done to a much less effective degree. I had massive expectations for TotK and it just didn't meet my expectations and standards for how long this game spent in development. I felt the wait was not worth it, and part of what makes this situation suck is we could have had 2 or 3 smaller Zelda titles in between TotK and BotW, but for some unfathomable reason they seem to have forsaken old Zelda entirely just to blow their money on one game at a time. It doesn't make sense to me.
@@hubblebublumbubwub5215I mean yeah but luckily being greedy is still seen as a bad thing in society. Also, there are simply more people playing video games nowadays and these titles still play off the popularity and success that Zelda built with the old titles.
@@hichaelhyers The public isn't going to revolt against games that most of them enjoy. The boost in sales is so big it can't just be attributed to more people being gamers. I don't like it either but there's nothing I can do about it. Maybe if I get filthy rich somehow I'll make a game similar to the old ones. By the way, did you happen to see the latest thegamingbrit video?
I genuinely think that when they heard people complaining about the dungeon "design" in BOTW, they thought people were just talking about the appearance of the dungeons themselves. So when making the dungeons in TOTK, they gave each of them unique appearances but didn't change anything mechanically about them.
The real problem with the Open World formula, no matter the title, is that it is in tension with narrative and plot development. All story is linear. It has to be "This happens, therefore this happens" or "That happened, but this complication occurred, and therefore this happened." It can't just be a series of "This and then this and then this" with no cause and effect, but the only way to achieve that sense of one event impacting another is for them to be linear.
To be fair, there are open world games with drawn out, linear stories, like GTA 5, but I like the narrative feel of certain areas being gated off until important moments in the story, like how the trek through Gerudo Desert and the enemy camp in TP builds up to the Arbiter's Grounds and the mirror. It would spoil the narrative feel if you could just randomly wander into the Arbiter's Grounds before the Midna's Desperate Hour sequence.
Your logic assumes that 1.) Story is the most important part of a game, which it's not. And 2.) That tension only comes from story, i.e dialogue. Which is also not the case.
Yeah plenty of open world games have solved this story problem. Zelda just chose, twice, to stuff all its story beats into flashbacks so that Link has no agency and little importance to the story he's in
@@raveoreynolds6049 Nobody said story is the most important part of a game. The problem is open world games with no semblance of a linear progression have a very difficult time telling a compelling story in an engaging narrative format, which is definitely something BotW and TotK struggled with.
Reading what Aonuma said, that broke my heart. Now, I really do think we'll never get a linear Zelda game ever again. Unfortunately, it seems it’s gonna be open world all the way.
The only hope I have is Link's Awakening remake for Switch. At the very least, some smaller budget linear Zelda games would make the sting less intense and provide opportunities for the market to show demand for bigger budget ones.
Eh, forever is a long time, and people get tired of repetition quickly, especially these days. Sooner or later the open formula is what people will be seeing as outdated, heck, this is already happening to franchises other than Zelda.
Just one thing, Aonuma only said “more designed” not more tightly designed, which I interpret as a response to the criticism of the repeated sheikah aesthetic from breath of the wild, rather than the puzzle quality.
@@MachFiveFalconI am Japanese and I can clarify. This video is crap. It is deliberately reading an ambiguous translation badly for clicks. Seeing inflammatory headlines from journalists is disappointing but video like Arlo should be ashamed too for stretching their interpretation so far. Aonuma said nothing so disrespectful as this video pretends. It made me angry to watch it.
@@gogongagis3395 Idk I think his description of how the dungeons got worse is pretty accurate, regardless of what Aonuma said. And even if there are some minor ambiguous translations I don't think Arlos interpretation is far off. Why didn't you just clarify what Aonuma meant instead of bashing this video?
That quote you keep going back to about player freedom is baffling. I remember realizing when I was really young that sometimes art rises from limitations. And likewise, sometimes good design rises from limitations. The fact the player can't do everything and isn't omnipotent means they need to truly work. It's odd to think that someone so successful and talented has such a simplistic view about what is good and bad in game design.
It makes no sense too. The guy worked under Miyamoto, who was all about linear-design so he would have a great understanding of its strengths AND weaknesses. Yet here he is acting like it only weaknesses, and that his new style doesn't have weaknesses! So much hubris and disrespect to his mentor and their past work, which is very un-Japanese like. This coupled with his absolute butchery of Majora's Mask 3D has me pretty upset with modern Aonuma.
As a former kid who remembers tons of free time in school, BoTW is fantastic for that crowd. As an adult with very little free time, linear storytelling is just so much easier to get a satisfying experience from.
Exactly! As an adult with limited time for gaming, I would love to have a more linear game as well. For this reason, I actually enjoyed Mario Galaxy 1 and 2 much better than Mario Oddessy. And by the way, when is Mario Galaxy 3 coming out! Waiting for that game for ages!
Idk even when I'm working full time botw didn't feel overwhelming. You could easily get an hour or two every other day out of it no problem imo. But I don't oppose classic linear Zelda either.
I wish I had tons of free time as a kid, my teachers felt like it was their civic duty to load us up with enough homework to prevent that. But yes, as an adult these large open world games take me months or over a year to finish. I am really starting to appreciate shorter, more focused linear games.
I just hate how so much of odyssey's objectives are filler garbage. galaxy had a couple of stinker stars (clearing the garbage islands was hell), but MOST of odyssey's moons are either out in the open, way too easy to get by like groundpounding a glowy spot, or have some mobile game inspired mission like "do jump rope 100 times". 120 well designed moons/stars/whatever was a fantastic number, no clue why they changed it to 900 bad-mediocre ones with a few well thought out ones. Gameplay was phenomenal though, mario controlled like a dream.@@topstorekorea
Neither game is that long. Skip the most of the horrible side quests and you could beat it. Wish I did that with tears. Short short games in the grand scheme of things.
Crazy that he sees a game like bg3 win and doesn’t think to look to that for inspiration. That game is obviously telling a story while still having open world elements
I think the question of "dungeon design" got lost in translation somewhere. It may have been interpreted that the problem with Breath of the Wild was that all of the Divine Beasts looked alike in their design assets. So they may have thought the solution was to give each area's dungeon a unique look. And without a doubt, they all do look very distinct from each other. But far too much of the conversation may have revolved around the looks, that the layout aspect of design got lost. So, in that, I feel the Tears of the Kingdom dungeons are indeed a vast improvement, they didn't solve ALL the problems. That is up to the next iteration to solve.
True, in fairness to the devs they definitely did listen to the main complaint regarding dungeons in BOTW. Hopefully whatever the next game ends up being they once again listen. Because maybe it's just me, but i feel this palpable sense that the vast majority of people are begging for the return of traditional dungeons and linear story.
There are way too few dungeons for a game of TotK’s size, they’re too short, they lack any real combat except for the boss, and they all follow the same “activate 5 switches” thing. They don’t even have keys!
@@TheRealPSKilla502 this is definitely a key part in the problem. So much of what the dungeons did previously has now been allocated to the shrines which are also rather boring and repetitive in the grand scheme of things, even if there are great ones sprinkled in. The reward for completing a shrine is also relatively tiny because there's so many of them. Also in previous games all the dungeons had some enemy types unique to only that dungeon or area with their own challenges to beat, creating greater variance in the experience. The shrines all practically spam the same enemy type. Sure, they also work as fast travel points and that's increasingly useful with the sky islands included, but I think I'd much rather have unlockable fast travel points without the shrines and either just more dungeons and get the heart/stamina progress from those or more dungeons, and much less shrines than currently in the game but much larger and complicated ones with a scaled-up reward. For example, we could only have a quarter of the shrines but the orbs you get as a reward from them would be able to buy you the heart/stamina upgrade outright instead of needing to get 4 of them. I really enjoy all the shrines that have an overworld puzzle (especially the unique ones) involved to even access the shrine, but the inside of those is usually only a corridor giving you a chest and the orb. Instead of that they could combine the overworld puzzle ones with the best inside puzzle ones that use the same mechanics to a much larger and complete experience. They could also disjoint the shrines from the fast travel point system entirely, other than unlock a travel point for the purpose of revisiting like in the full dungeons, so that unlocking them would also be entirely optional and part of the wider free exploration experience instead of it being practically mandatory to at least unlock the shrines for their fast travel points.
The weird thing is, Zelda has always been both open world AND linear - all the way back in Link to the Past, the over world was completely open and you could do any dungeon in any order, but when you got IN those dungeons, they were linear and intricately designed - THIS is what we need 😂😂
Especially 2D Zeldas did such a great job to make the entire overworld feel like a puzzlebox that you have to open up over time to explore new areas and find new things in already known areas. These games also were open world but the open world were the reward and earned while playing the game. I love this Metroidvania approach and always thought this was the future of 3D Zelda when it once goes fully seemless open world but sadly it didn't.
BOTW and TOTK are so successful exactly because they aren't that. You traditional Zelda guys just fail to realize that most people don't like that. A world where you have zero idea what to do, and unlocking anything is a puzzle where you have to do something you might never find out if you don't look at guides. Believe me, most people don't like that, there is a reason why BOTW sold three times more than the previously best selling Zelda.
@@RuuyG "You guys". Why is it always tribal with people? Jesus fucking christ, people like different things. Nobody wants BOTW/TOTK style games to just...Disappear. They're crazy successful and many love them. Why can't there be an occasional linear zelda too? Stop antagonizing people.
@@RuuyGI'd say the reason it sold so much is because 1) the Switch is an amazingly sold console, and 2) there was a lot of hype around the "open world" component, since that was the current trend. There is no real proof that the removal of dungeons had any impact, because we don't have a hypothetical "BotW, but where they kept traditional dungeons" to compare to.
@@thatnerdygaywerewolf9559 1) think for two seconds before you write, the Wii sold more than a 100 million and SS sold just 4 million. If you don't admit this argument is total bullshit and you just didn't think about it, you're just stubborn and not willing to have a discussion. SS sold less than games release to smaller install bases, why? It's the most linear Zelda, where basically the whole world is a giant puzzle, with stupid motion controls on top. 2) exactly, people like open world. Why weren't previous Zeldas hyped that much? Because most people don't like puzzles and dungeons 😂😂😂😂😂 Dude, it's obvious, just look at most mainstream games, they don't have those elements, I wonder why... you guys are just denying reality, just based on your own opinion, although all evidence speak against you.
@@RuuyG 1) Skyward Sword got a lot of bad press due to its motion control gimmick and linearity (more specifically: the segmented nature of the areas and all the preamble between dungeons, which people conflated as "linearity"). Its actual dungeons are considered some of the best in the series if you can get past those two aspects, but many people couldn't. Also, as someone brought up in another thread, it was also made during the end of the Wii's lifespan, which had an effect as well. 2) Why does everything have to have mainstream appeal and hype? Having multiple different niches is a good thing to give the medium variety, rather than everything following whatever trend is going on. Sometimes the niche then breaks into the mainstream (like Balder's Gate 3 did), but its also fine if it doesn't.
I wonder if he had the free, open world Zelda games as a goal/dream for years but always had hardware limitations and so now that there are less hardware limitations and people are asking for the old style, he's thinking "but we can finally make what we've always wanted..."
"Look at these numbers!" Nailed it there man. I think Nintendo believe they've cracked the code to sell 10x more Zeldas as they used to, thanks to the open-world formula and assume that the linear structure is what was keeping the series from reaching a much wider audience. I believe Aonuma thinks the two different formulas don't mix, or at least that the much larger '"open world" audience they brought to the series actively dislikes the linear progression formula and that bringing that back into the series could scare off that new, larger audience. And well... I'm not sure he would be entirely wrong about that. I can only speak from my personal experience, but I've seen a lot of people around me and in the larger video games discourse (as in not the Nintendo hardcore fanbase) that knew about the Zelda series but had just zero interest in it before BotW. They saw Zelda as some sort of samey, childish puzzle game for 10 years old. I don't think bringing back a linear progression and more puzzley dungeons would *drive away* that audience from the series, but it would probably not make the game any better for them. So why would Nintendo take that risk or invest the time and resources to do that, when the major part of the audience just doesn't care about it in their eyes? My wishes are a 100% percent aligned with Arlo's and what I assume is the majority of the long-time Zelda fanbase but I really don't have much of an idea where the series is headed to next. But a return to the OoT formula is certainly not what I'm expecting. Aonuma is *done* with that, and that's what remasters are for anyway :D
Breath of the Wild and Tears of the Kingdom are the only two Zelda games that I've played a lot of, and the only two I've beaten, so you could possibly say I'm part of that section of the audience. I wouldn't be hugely against more "puzzle-y" dungeons, as long as they're done right, but I really don't want anything too far from the core feeling of botw/totk.
I think people also miss, that although the puzzles in BotW and TotK aren't contextualized the way they used to be in older games, the puzzles themselves are designed better in the open world games. There isn't a single dungeon room in any of the past games as beautifully designed as the central rotating chamber in Vah Naboris. The building puzzles throughout TotK are next level creative -- miles beyond "Light torch -- get key". Less creative fans will always moan about the loss of linearity and the availability of multiple paths. The fact is, you can never experience two playthroughs of OoT or TP that are as radically different as two full speed runs of the open world games each focussed on different goals. The open world games simply offer more.
One of the best parts of the older zelda dungeons, was that each one had a unique tool, weapon or upgrade to your current equipment, that you could get. The problem in death of the wild and tears of the kingdom, is that most of those tools are available almost right away and are used for every dungeon. There's nothing new along the way. I feel that the claw shot and double claw shot from twilight princess would have been a great late game unlockable in tears of the kingdom. You have the ability to build things to reach basically anywhere from the very beginning of the game, but it can take a while and the constructs have limited time and energy. Claw shot would make moving around much faster and would be acceptable to unlock near the end of the main story. Bringing back the magic meter and upgrades for your equipment that uses magic would be great too. Also the greatest zelda mechanic, playable musical instruments that have special effects.
We already had a lot of this with the stamina meter, armor upgrades, zonai batteries, schematics, purah pad upgrades, getting to the towers for map data, etc. It just.. wasn't very interesting how they did it. The most fun I had was actually in the starting area, the Great Sky Island, where you needed to figure out how to get from one shrine to the next in a semi-linear way.
Also, link between worlds does as well. You can tackle any of the dungeons in any order, but the story is linear and the dungeons are linear oh yeah, and the games pretty much open world in 2-D
as someone who is not a particularly big WW fan (I prefer TP), this is arguably the best thing about the game. It absolutely NAILS the exploration and freedom while still providing progression and structure
the major downfall of wind waker was the triforce quest which unfortunately bloated the game a lot. it's still probably my favorite zelda, but it's not without its issues that could be fixed. any time i go back to play it again i always skip that part. it takes you to some cool and unique locations at least, but it still felt a little long and digging around in the ocean for some of them was a pain. otherwise, yeah, i think it still has a sense of progression to it while also having that feeling of "what's in the distance beyond the horizon? let's go check it out!" and unique things happening in the world that fill you with intrigue.
Honestly, The Wind Waker's linearity was often frustratingly arbitrary. You couldn't just sail wherever you wanted until after the Forbidden Woods, and you had to do the Earth Temple before the Wind Temple even though neither the plot nor the gameplay should require it. Though I did like coming back to islands with new items to access something new
Some part of me is still hoping that the translation isn’t completely accurate, but yeah my heart also broke a little bit when reading that interview. You can absolutely have an open world game with more traditional, linear dungeons. Whenever I figured out rooms or puzzles in previous Zelda games it felt great. In ToTK the only time I got close to that feeling was with the mirror puzzles (The lightning temple ended up being my favorite). Everything else just felt like going through the motions.
“Open world” is somewhat of a vague term, and could honestly just mean an insanely big overworld, which I would be totally fine with. There just has to be substance to back it up. The overworld is imo primarily a way of getting from point A to point B with some scenery to set the mood, and while exploring it is cool, and should be rewarded with some collectibles, it shouldn’t be the sole focus of the game.
@@TheRealPSKilla502 Open world just means that the entire map is open for the player to do what they want in whichever order they want. If “insanely big overworld” was the only requirement then I’d argue that previous Zelda games should be considered open world by this logic but they really aren’t. Previous Zelda games had areas of the map and events locked behind specific story events and the game led you to one destination. The thing is that dungeons are inherently separate from the overworld and I honestly see no reason why they couldn’t make the dungeons more tightly and traditionally designed while still having the big open world. Sure there’d still be a few sacrifices like item based progression wouldn’t be possible, but it would strike a much better balance and it would satisfy a lot of people.
I’m not much of a FromSoft guy, but I do think Elden Ring proved you can break away from a more linear series tradition and still include tight dungeons within an open world that feel like the old games.
Restriction is good. It provides challenge. It makes you think. In BotW and TotK there are limitless options which allow your imagination to go crazy but not as many "eureka" moments where you discover THE solution. I liked not being able to jump on command. I don't like just being able to climb a mountain the size of Everest with the greatest of ease. Bigger is not better. And yea, although they're very good, the new games have lost track of a lot of what makes Zelda Zelda.
That “no more linear Zelda” take of Aonuma is what made me think of him like Zelda’s Yoshi-P… they just don’t seem to understand what made the old system good, and that is not only nostalgia, but game style. It’s not that the older styles weren’t inferior, they were different, and a lot of us loved them. It’s why we old FF fans moved to trails, DQ, etc, and were so happy to get the octopath games and live a live, amongst other stuff… Likewise we crave the old zelda games. I’m not being throughout, you’ve explained way better what’s lost, what we miss, and I hope that Nintendo still gives us some of that sweet complex puzzle dungeons and a good linear and fun experience in future zeldas; but if not… maybe someone else will… I couldn’t answer Aonuma’s question any better than you did, it is a beautiful, and very detailed response that mirrors exactly my feelings on the matter. Thank you for giving voice to us old school Zelda fans, Arlo~
I like your FF comparison. FF XV really was inferior to VII and VI. I lost any interest in FF XVI when I heard they basically turned it into Metal Gear Rising Revengance. That game was fine I guess, but that’s not what I want from Final Fantasy.
I stopped at Final Fantasy 12, and tbh, I say 10 was the last great Final Fantasy, despite it's reputation. I very much used to appreciate the 2D Final Fantasy's, especially 6, though. In my old age, I lost interest in those types of games for all of the things you have to pay attention to, and all the things you can miss if you don't have a guide. Also, I agree with you on Arlo. He really explained our feelings in a mature and thorough manner. Crazy that a puppet has the most mature, real and intelligent videos on RUclips. Love this guy. 👍
Dragon Quest is an perfect example of evolving the series, while staying true to it's traditions. I'm worried about Dragon Quest 12 because of the rumor approach that it might go on an different route.
Sadly no one will do it. You need lots of budget and experience to make such dungeons, and only TLoZ does this properly. There's no real way of replicating this, and that's why it's such a lost that TLoZ becomes more generic.
They actually have done this before. Let’s see her link between worlds where you can do any dungeon in any order you want a linear story linear dungeons and an open world now imagine if they did this with a 3d Zelda game
I like Arlo's idea where the prior design is relegated to the 2D Zeldas. I've personally felt that formula works much better there anyways. LttP, LBW, LA and Oracles are all bangers.
I strongly believe that the nostalgia is not only the dungeons, but the beginning of the game being held in a place that feels like home, Ocarina of times Kokiri forest, Wind wakers first island & Twilight princesses first village was immersive and felt like home. a home where you made valuable friendships but ultimately forced to leave to basically become an adult. i think that linear process is subconsciously relatable to us humans in a real sort of way. i would like an adventurous open world that leads you to linear complex dungeons with difficult & interesting bosses. Basically, how OCARINA OF TIME DID IT! BRING BACK THE MUSIC TOO! JEEZ!
I never played Zelda as a kid and botw was my first Zelda game I finished. I loved it but after playing the link's awakening remake, it just has a different place in my heart. I'd love more games like that too.
If you wonna try another game to keep the tradition going and still go on an easy side, I highly recommend both Link to the Past and/or Link Between Worlds.
@@omegalilbchass8270 as a kid I always wanted to play a link between worlds but I never got the game on my 3ds back then. Now I got a new one recently, might just play it
@@user-fk2xg8nq6r that was my actual first game but I only played it a little bit lol. I borrowed the game from our library. Sadly don't have a Wii anymore as it's broken.
The dungeons were all disappointing in Tears. They didn't even try to maintain an illusion of exploration, instead giving us a list of chores to tick off. They were a worse version of the divine beasts for this reason imo, which were similar but more interesting in form.
Also the concept of having controls to modify the whole dungeon layout was interesting and completely new to Zelda, but just not fully utilized. Something that Totk just scrapped for no apparent reason.
@@viktorthevictor6240 This is such a wild take lmao. You like evil goo calamity four times better than four unique bosses like Zelda games of old? Give me a break lmao
I mostly agree. To add to that, the Divine Beasts, for all their faults, had the interesting idea of manipulating the whole dungeon and they really gave the sense of being inside something within the overworld while still being isolated within a dungeon. While the Sky, Fire and Desert temples in Tears felt isolated enough, the Water temple just seemed like another set of sky islands; not a dungeon.
Arlo, you are totally right. I went into TOTK with a lot of enthusiasm as they said dungeons are back. I did the first dungeon and that enthusiasm went out the window. Then I thought, maybe the other dungeons will be better. They weren't. Nintendo are NOT listening. They lied, dungeons are NOT back. With TOTK, the physics was impressive although way over used. Side missions were totally uninspiring. Breakable weapons remain, you can't climb when it's raining (they are not listening). Hyrule and the sky islands looked absolutely gorgeous, but the sky islands were extremely repetitive and boring. No community or villages there. Don't get me started on the depths, boring, empty, dark, ugly, repetitive, yuk! Who designed that? No fun to be had there at all. Open world does not always mean better. I'm fine with open world, but why can't you make a traditional game and plank it into the middle of an open world? Make something like twilight princess and make it open world. It's not that hard! This has not been done yet, I don't get it. I've been waiting for tomb raider to do this also. If you put dungeons/puzzles in the horizon games, playstation would have it's own version of Zelda. Why is nobody seeing that to do this would be simple and groundbreaking?
I think what Aonuma is saying with that quote is coming from someone who remembers the last big Zelda game that used the formula was Skyward Sword and how it wasn't received all that well. So he may see and here those who wants the formula back and might be getting a little confused because Skyward Sword wasn't received all that well. I think the HD version was some what of a test to see if that formula could still work in a post Breath of the Wild world.
So if that were the case, maybe it wasn't much of a good idea to port Skyward Sword, a game that (while I personally enjoyed) isn't so well liked by fans, over to the Switch and instead choose a more popular and beloved title like Twilight Princess or Wind Waker. With games like those, games that were basically the BOTW/TOTK of the Gamecube and Wii eras, they would have been better used to gauge popularity of linear Zelda compared to open world Zelda. And then, when releasing games, try to mix it up every once in awhile. Make one or two games linear, and then swap over to open world for the next few and try to appease both fans as much as possible.
He went way too linear with Skyward Sword, then when he was criticized swung hard the opposite direction. I'm starting to think he's just an idiot with a fantastic dev team.
Agreed@@TheBrianMSnyder. In my experience, Skyward Sword wasn't criticised for being linear by most people, it was criticised for being *too* linear. Which it was, the vast majority of it (except the sky) was basically one linear dungeon after another, even if some of them are disguised as overworld areas. It feels like there's barely any time to breathe. I feel like Aonuma might've missed the "too" part of "too linear". Now we have games that are so free-form that I feel like I'm achieving almost nothing, because almost everything, including even the story, is designed to be accessible at almost any time, or downright skippable. Not to mention that Nintendo just seems to struggle with figuring out how to make an open-world feel populated. I'm worried will get BotW 3 next, even if it's not in the same world, because I'm not sure how they managed to even get two games' worth out the formula.
He's just mad no one likes his games, and rather than accepting that he just made games that people don't love, decides the only reason people like the older games more MUST be nostalgia. It's big 'it's not me, it's them who's wrong' energy.
7:04 Thank you! As Joseph Anderson once put it "A boring puzzle with three boring solutions instead of one boring solution is still a boring puzzle." The looseness of the mechanics and freedom often feels like a detriment to the game. The openendedness even affects the enemy design. Enemy encounters feel samey since they have to use the same weapons you can take from them. They can also be fought using anything, so there's no point where one weapon is more ideal than another. You can make do just fine with only broadswords, or in my case, a glitched, unbreakable Master Sword in TOTK. An earlier interview had Aonuma say something similar, where he questioned the concept of seeing something you can't interact with and that players wouldn't want to come back to it later, and one comment I saw summed it up beautifully. "Has this man never played a metroidvania?"
@@CaptainTitforce Yea, but with now much those games love waypoint markers and quest logs it would actually be LESS of a problem. BOTW/TOTK already make you to fetch materials for some npc half the time, I don’t see why you can’t mark a rock you’re unable to pick up until later. Reminds me of when Arlo said he had to run away from a stone talus, and that it was satisfying to come back and beat it later.
@@thelastwindwaker7948 It's not about the fact of marking it. It's just that if you actually mark every single thing in a world of this size (or even a portion of them), at some point, many players would just go, "Well I don't really feel like getting this thing too anymore, it's all the way over here and I have this and this and that to get too."
You’re 100% right man. We love Zelda for a reason, solving puzzles that were intricately designed to be solved in a specific way, and exploring. More choices does not equal inherently better. While the open world design was a nice breath of fresh air, I think it took away so much of what the fans loved about the series in many regards. I have never felt less compelled to finish a Zelda game than I have with BotW and TotK. Hopefully the creators will reconsider their stance and take the feedback we’ve given into stronger consideration.
I can't imagine the next game's sole focus will be limitless freedom, since you can't take that much further than Tears of the Kingdom did. I think what they'll do is keep evolving the format based on what people wanted from the last game, just like they did with the old 3D games. They already said they're not bringing Ultrahand back.
I like both ways. However, freedom is great and all, but it needs contrast. I'm not a super fan or anything, but I learned recently that there's a mask in Majora's mask that makes you unseen by everyone, and you can use it to get through puzzles where you try not to get detected, or else you get kicked out. I thought "wow, that's so cool." In BOTW and TOTK theres several masks that make enemies not attack you, but there's never such a strong need for them, so they don't stand out as useful. Not to mention you can't upgrade them, and you don't need to hide when you're as powerful and full of options as Link in the new games. This is what I mean when I say the game needs contrast. Here's another example. The freedom to cheese the shrines is fun and amazing. But personally, I tend to see how they want me to do them before I potentially use my cheese strats. And if it looks more fun, I skip the cheese. Doing all that stuff is cool, but it's not even as fun when you're not really cheating the game, but doing something they were okay with you doing anyway. Because then it's not really cheesing. Freedom is great, but when there's limits, you gotta be creative, or actually solve puzzles. I wanna see something like open world Ocarina of Time. The shrines would have been fine if the dungeons were more linear and difficult. The dungeons just feel like big shrines. I wanna struggle to figure out some large scale puzzles piece by piece. Contrast. Lots of NPC's and monsters, but less of them stand out. Ofc TOTK is a lot of copying from BOTW, so it doesn't stand out as much in general.
I don't know why we need to pick between one or the other, let's have future open AND linear Zeldas
linear opens the door to give Zelda a stronger narrative maybe get world more flushed out, learn more about link this point of time or adventure, zelda, and cool side characters that help you out the way. Most Turn base RPG's are linear
kinda like 2d and 3d mario
I enjoy all Zelda.
Seeing that in the time it took to make ocarina of time up to skyward sword they only made 2 open world zeldas and no new 3d one only remasters, no way we are getting both types
@@kyotheman69 Nintendo doesn't really like strong narratives. If they do, it always feels by accident or something.
Open ended design can be extremely limiting in and of itself. There's a reason why the Divine Beasts/Temples and Shrines in BotW and TotK all look, feel, and play the same. If at any point any player can just waltz their way into any scenario from any direction at any point in a game's progression, then that scenario has to be designed in a way that's simple to understand and isn't building off of anything that was previously taught unless it was part of the mandatory tutorial. Your first beast/temple and/or shrine could be somebody else's last, so they all have to play like they're the first and never expand beyond a single concept. That freedom of being able to go wherever, whenever tends to just come at the cost of meaningful discovery, challenge, and reward. Having some level of barriers of entry and sequence of events that need to be experienced in a certain order would go a long way in mending those issues while still preserving an open-ended design philosophy, just not so open-ended that it's almost impossible to meaningfully test players beyond the scope of the tutorial.
Not to mention the story beats themselves. Every sage has to tell us they served the first king of Hyrule against the Demon King, yadda, yadda, Imprisoning War, Zelda asking for help for Link in the future, because they have to assume someone landed on the surface, got the paraglider and went STRAIGHT to a temple. The only unique info a sage of the past gives is that the Demon King was a Gerudo.
Just a little bit more linearity, just constraining us to following a specific order in the temples (and placing the first Dragon's Tear as a mandatory quest at some point) would open up the (admittedly cool) story for SO MUCH MORE DEPTH!
People were saying the OPPOSITE about Zelda BOTW a couple years ago. I guess everyone on the internet has a narrative or agenda
@@Rodriguez-ib8oiNot true. Many people were dissatisfied with the simple dungeon design of both the divine beasts and the shrines. We got quantity over quality and the shrines themselves are almost shovelware. Sure there are some highlights but when I have to do the nth test of strength you get pretty annoyed. Or as this RUclipsr pointed out you can just ignore the actual problem you are meant to solve and OP the shrine.
But they DO have barriers. It's just that you don't need to beat/enter a temple in order to even get access to another one.
If you're not actively seeking out unintended ways to get around the story barriers, you still need to do stuff. The only thing that's different is the order is not given. And really, not having access to an item that gives you access to a dungeon is the only limit. Its not like in OoT you couldn't enter every dungeon and beat it just the same.
I'm not even sure right now what's keeping you from entering water temple as the first one. You don't need a bow nor the hammer to enter icy cavern.
And you get the items for the dungeon right before the dungeon or in the dungeon.
Just like you get sage's ability and some gear in the area. Electro arrows and Sidon as way to even enter the beast etc
@@borstenpinsel Story triggers don't constitute a meaningful barrier of entry or sequence of events since they're rarely presenting any sort of mechanical challenge, at least none that is unique to said story triggers. And even when they do, they're still structured in a way that can't stray too far from tutorial land because one person's first Divine Beast/Temple story quest could be somebody else's last. It's still the exact same problem, even down to the fact that the different stories for each Divine Beast/Temple are following the same structure in presentation and delivery. It can't be known which will be anybody's first, or how many a player will complete, or if they'll even complete any at all, because it's all optional and can be experienced in any order, so the solution is to just constrain them to the same structure in the same way that the Divine Beasts/Temples themselves are all solved using the same tools and set of solutions presented to the player at the tutorial.
One of the advantages of linear/classic Zelda to me is how much weight is given to new items & weapons. When you get the Hookshot in Ocarina of Time, your freedom of movement & range in combat are permanently improved. When you get the Gilded Sword in Majora's Mask, you feel a permanent, significant power increase. I could write another paragraph on the transformation masks alone. They're all meaningful moments for the player.
Isn't that the case with the Champions' and Sages' powers though?
@@al3220 That's true! And the Master Sword as well. I guess the main difference is none of the Champions'/Sages' powers are necessary to complete the game/most puzzles, and like the Master Sword, they have kind of long cooldowns. I think it's just the Sheikah Slate abilities that you get early on that have short cooldowns and are necessary for a lot of puzzles (but not to complete the game/defeat Ganon).
@@MachFiveFalcon that's what makes BOTW and TOTK so enjoyable. I'm not confined to playing in any particular sequence. I agree the story telling can be improved but I do not want information gated away from me just because I didn't beat this certain boss, etc. Let me be the detective and uncover the story my way.
@@al3220 I can respect that. The more you put it like that, I really did enjoy getting fragments of the story from Memories in the world. It just needs to be fleshed out more. As far as puzzles go, I did enjoy puzzles crafted for a specific way of using items in older Zeldas, but I still have fun with the open design like Arlo - so it's definitely a tradeoff for me in that department.
And there's no reason why this couldn't be combined with an open world, like they did in the original game. As a NES Zelda fan, I feel like there's *more* reason to dislike the current games.
What’s kept ringing in my mind is how Aonuma phrased the desire to return to the linear format as just “nostalgia” just really misses everything on why people liked classic Zelda. Breath of the Wild was my first game in the series back when I played it in 2020 and as the years went by I dived into the older games and with that I found Wind Waker and Twilight Princess to be my favourite games in the series as I played the both of them a year ago. In my case, nostalgia oppositely applies to why I love the linear format. Linearity just allows for the story to be better paced without interference and the dungeons feel empowering to finish since you solved this huge series of trials that had one fixed solution.
Aonuma I feel at this point just misinterpreted everything on what people would like, it’s honestly disappointing and I slightly worry what could come later on for the series.
I dont think he meant to imply that the older/more linear games were just liked because of nostalgia. I think its just one reason that now that the format has changed, people are asking for things more like the older games.
The later question where he mentions more structured dungeons shows that he does understand the desire for more linearly designed segments of the game.
While i do disagree that tears of the kingdoms dungeons have cleared that gap and brought some of that liniar design back, i do think they were an improvement on botws overall and are a step in the right direction.
Its hard to get everything you're thinking out in just a few sentences, lets not write Aonuma off just yet
@@ultamatemememan2584 Yeahh I’m aware, I’m not trying to write off Aonuma as someone that lacks understanding of the games he made in the past yet I overall have to say with how the interview questions were phrased weren’t the best in regards to comprehending the full picture of Aonuma’s vision. And granted, he made the big changes to Zelda’s structure when the fan base just held a lot of discontent over Skyward Sword. I’d like to think Aonuma can take some criticism to heart and find a way to please both audiences. What could be good for the story I’d imagine is that for memories you actually have to unlock them in a specified order instead of them being laid out at random points on the map. And for dungeons alternatively, for example if the amount of them are about 6 dungeons then 3 of them could be non-linear akin to TOTK’s ones and the other 3 are highly close to the classic format.
Overall, sorry if my comment was a bit confusing. It’s just I have some mixed feelings on the matter of the potential for the next game lol.
@@Navii_ yea, no worries! I agree his comments in the interview definitely weren't phrased the best. But I'm also sure it can be hard when you're talking off the cuff like he was.
I definitely understand everyone's worries about the direction Zelda going in. Just like you mentioned at the end of the comment there, while it is true that linear Zelda and open world Zelda are incredibly differnt, there are many ways you can mix them together and experiment. And I do hope the next mainline 3d game does more to bring some of the tight sequences linear Zelda has back in some ways, even though truely finding the right balance is going to be somewhat difficult to piece together.
I just think arlo and some people have taken these interview bits and extrapolating a bit more doom and gloom then is realistic. At least from what we've seen so far. Obviously it's important for these criticisms to be on the table, but it's also good to temper ourselves and try not to get into too much a tizzy over it imo. I don't think this is going to be like the recent paper Mario's, I think its pretty clear nintendo is listening, the main question is just how far they want to go in adding back more linear elements for the next project. But who knows what their cooking, the next game could be wildly differnt from tears and botw. Well just have to wait and see to a certian extent
It was super insulting for him to say that to be honest.
@@ultamatemememan2584I never asked for open world I was perfectly happy with it being linear
A Link Between Worlds already managed to balance linear progression and open world exploration 10 years ago. It's definitely possible to get sprawling dungeons and a present story in an open world game.
Yes! A game like ALBW would be a decent balance gameplay wise
Not really.
ALBW still suffered from many of the same problems BotW and TotK had, particularly in the balance and design complexity fronts. It had better dungeons, yes, but that bar is practically underground, so that's not saying much.
At the end of the day, the dungeons in ALBW are still quite weak when compared to the rest of the series. I'd go as far as to say it has the second weakest dungeon roster out of all handheld entries ("Phantom Hourglass" being the weakest overall).
@@XanderVJI disagree I thought the dungeons in that game were excellent, on par with minish cap and link to the past dungeons
@@XanderVJthe dungeons in A Link Between Worlds slap every 3D Zelda dungeon...
While for me they did, many still complained about “lack of progression” and “no backtracking cuz no item in dungeon”.
You absolutely cannot please everyone. That I wholeheartedly disagree with Arlo. ALBW only sold over 4 million and still had a decent amount of complaints about the dungeons or scaling. While we can strike BETTER balances than we have now, we can’t have everyone happy. Even if we made dungeons linear or having more linearity, you have no idea how many people would complain about that on the other side of the coin. “Why am I just boringly walking through dungeons with no room for own solutions?”. Many would say that, you’d be surprised.
How do I know this? Because this is how we got BOTW. Some people complained a lot about dungeons in Zelda being boring or too linear, and are now happy that they’re smaller, have less focus or have many solutions now. The focus right now in the community is on old dungeons coming back only because we don’t have that now, but as SOON as we go back, those complaints will return. Fucking watch. Again, you cannot please everyone, no matter how much Arlo repeats it.
People will bitch about apples and ask for oranges, and then others will bitch about oranges and ask for apples. Give them half and orange and half an apple, and both will bitch that they don’t have a full apple/orange. Give them both FULL apples and oranges, and they’ll both bitch that they could’ve had more apples/oranges if the other didn’t exist.
You can never please everyone. Ever. Not just in gaming, but life in general. You always need to choose who you’re going to disappoint. It’s all valid, mind you. No one is wrong for liking one or the other for something like this, on that I fully agree. But no, not everyone can be pleased.
Why might we prefer more linearity? Linearity allows for PROGRESSIONS in items and plot! Item progressions allow for recontextualised puzzles and plot progressions allow for an interesting story
So go find and play a Linear game.
Progression, both with items & story, is easily what's lacking most in BotW/TotK. It's cool to have every tool at the start, but I wish dungeon unlocks were more meaningful again.
There isn't one, that's the problem. Nobody does games like the classic Zelda's anymore.@@kodyarocho4618
That's with me with most 3D platforming. Having an open world like game is cool and all. But I prefer going to point A to Point B where the levels and missions are easy & unique and keeps the pace going. Something like Crash Bandicoot, Super Mario Galaxy 1 & 2, 3D Land & 3D World and Kirby and the Forgotten Land.
@@kodyarocho4618You mean like a Zelda game lol? I think what people are trying to say is linear Zelda was more tightly designed and they prefer it, so if Zelda becomes JUST big open world and they don't care for it then they lose a series that they've loved for years
An open map with several dungeons or quests tied to linear progression could absolutely work. They could even integrate dungeon items into progression, it doesn’t have to be all or nothing.
Agreed. The reason the dungeons in the open world games dont work is that theres no sense of progression
Yes! 7:41 echoes your point really well. There's a special satisfaction for me when I get the "right" solution. (Although I still have fun with the newer open-designed puzzles.) Permanent, gameplay-changing items like the Hookshot really complement the design of well-made, closed-ended puzzles when implemented properly.
Most. People. Do. Not. Like. Dungeons.
Why you guys don't understand that? Not everyone is like you.
@lucashen9686 I'd very much argue against that, though I can't know for sure, since I only speak for myself and these people above.
@@RuuyG Then most people never actually liked the Zelda series, a series _known_ and _praised_ for it's puzzle driven dungeons. That was it's unique niche in the world of adventure games.
It seems like Aonuma views the transition from linear zelda to open world zelda like how people viewed the transition from 2d to 3d. Once Mario 64 came out, "why would anyone go back to a 2d game it would be a step backwards technologically." Now we know the advantages of 2d and 3d games, they're different genres not a linear progression of technology.
Open world is easier/lazier. You can have AI populate it and then use staff to hammer out any inconsistencies.
Linear is very driven, by comparison. Nothing exists except what is explicitly made to exist by the programmer.
@@Icemario87 GiantThumbGuy.jpg
I mean I loved and grew up with Mario Bros 2D on NES and SNES. But let's be real here for a second. Mario 64 opened our eyes to all the possibilities and freedoms we always dreamed of when we imagined the future of gaming to be when we grew up. And I dont believe the new 2D Mario Wonder will outperform the 3D games. And why would they in an era of Unreal Engine 5 setting new norms in gaming? Let's be real, it's a lot of nostalgia loving old timers out here, which isnt to say that they arent worth taking into consideration when bringing these games out. I just think remakes and remasters of their teenage favourites would be a better investment.
Linear gaming elements in an open world is a whole other topic however, and I agree with Arlo on that one. Also, I would love me some open worlds on Nintento that dont feel empty like they do in most games today. Some AI-driven NPCs populating the world with more background would really be a refreshing element here and there, but the Switch is obviously too low-performance for that sort of thing.
@@Icemario87maybe he’ll swallow his pride and just go back. There was a space world demo in 2001 (realistic zelda) and he went up to press and said he hated it. But after windwaker, twilight princess came out. We will see with time.
@@Icemario87 "Nothing exists except what is explicitly made to exist by the programmer."
Tell that to Super Meat Boy Forever
Zelda has always been very much like a Metroidvania. I miss using newly gained items and abilities to solve puzzles and the feeling of progression that comes with that
Maybe you can explain something to me. It really irks me when someone says Zelda is like a Metroidvania, because Zelda had that formula first. So, shouldn't it be that Metroid is like a Zeldavania?
@@kingdaniel3519 yes but the genre name was made later because meroidvania is a bit different to olde zelda (like a smidge)
Sorta yeah. Metroid is actually more like a crossbreed between Mario and Zelda having platforming elements while also being about exploration and finding new items to progress. @@kingdaniel3519
@@kingdaniel3519 Metroid was much more tightly designed as a Metroidvania. It had revolutionary ideas like forcing you to learn how your new powers work before advancing, the map being divided in very different zones with unique designs etc. Zelda 1 is more "try random stuff until it works"
Honestly..... I don't see why they still couldn't make a metroidvania system while in open world. You have a big giant open world. You have main quest chains, real dungeons and a key item that unlocks new travel methods, and as you finish these quests it opens up new ways of exploring the vast open world.
I don't even want it to be 'linear' necessarily, just return to some of the core elements to the series like key items/equipment and traditional dungeons.
I really don't want those to return, hated walking into a puzzle room i cant solve because i haven't found the key item yet. Then once attaining it basically going through the motions rather than actually yknow... solving a puzzle. Get the hookshot > Shoot the VERY specific hookshot points > Use hookshot on the boss. wow such a thrilling dungeon experience
Get good @@Zezinizzle
@@Zezinizzle 100%
I think they can bring back dungeon items but maybe only a few dungeons have a new item which makes them more interesting and then these items could actually be useful instead of thrown in the trash sans a couple heart container locations.
@@Zezinizzle As opposed to:
1.) Get introduced to companion,
2.) Go to pre-marked point on map,
3.) overcome very easy obstacle,
4.) use VERY specific companion power,
5.) Go to next location on map,
5. ) rinse and repeat 2 -5 until map locations cleared,
6.) fight boss using companion power.
Not to mention that each of the 4 "dungeons" had this EXACT same formula.
The Water Temple was ABSURDLY easy! I spent longer getting to the damned thing than solving the temple itself. Same with the Wind Temple.
In most Zelda titles from the past, there was at least 1 mini-boss per dungeon too and several enemies. In TotK? Maybe a few constructs if you're lucky. There was no challenge to solving anything with the TotK Temples.
Yeah, most people do not understand that those games aren't good because they are linear. They are well designed and have some key points that open-world Zelda games didn’t have. Arguing that older Zelda games are better because they are linear makes no sense at all, every Zelda game have pros and cons.
I think the thing I miss most about older titles, especially the 2D games, is all the cool items you get. Stuff like the magnet gloves, gust jar, hookshot/clawshot, grappling hook, and beetle are super cool but its just not there in the open world games. An issue that really hits hard with the BOTW/TOTK is there really isn't a progression system. You start the game, get all your gizmos right away, and told to explore with the only hurdle in your way is health and stamina. There's no revisiting an old area with a cool item you got from a dungeon or seeing a heart piece in the distance but wondering how you can get it since you don't have the right tool. Progression systems work because it's nice to see an improvement in your character and build up to a huge climax. However BOTW/TOTK go the direction of making 90% of the game surface level but have a ton of it.
Fantastic post. The lack of rewarding progression really makes the game feel like an empty experience.
yep, and now there’s no anticipation loop except for tough overworld bosses
I miss that, too! One of the main complaints I've seen regarding dungeon items in past Zelda games is that they usually don't see much use outside the dungeon they're obtained in...... Personally, I didn't really care about that. I had a lot of fun using the Spinner in the Arbiter's Grounds in TP. I understood that this was this dungeon's item, and it was for that reason that I didn't really mind it very much if it didn't have much use outside of it. Would it be welcome? Of course, but it was never a sore point to me.
I definitely miss the Metroidvania aspect of seeing bombable walls, hookshot targets, etc. that I can't access yet, wandering what's there, then coming back with the necessary items to pick up a heart piece. It's a very effective gameplay loop.
@@John6-40I wouldn't say empty. But it's just a different experience. Thinking that it's just empty is the same exact thinking that leads to Aonuma saying that there's no point in making a linear game. Because "it's not as free"
Another issue with designs this open is that it removes all mystery. Take Wind Waker for example. Once you learn how to control the wind, the world opens up heavily. You start to wander around and see all sorts of cool islands. Small islands where you play golf with a Deku Nut, coral reefs designed like dice blocks, a sunken submarine, an aquatic landing pad. But, as your going along admiring the world, you see some other things, a volcanic island you can't interact with, a giant glacial reef that freezes you on touch, what looks to be a giant plateau where the queen of fairies resides. All of these thing prevent you from seeing whats inside them, so you can only wonder for now. As you continue on with the game, these inaccessible areas are always in the back of your mind. As a player, you keep thinking about them and wondering what they are like on the inside. Then later when you finally gain a power that allows you access to the plateau, you get really exited, because now you can finally see that place you could only dream about for so long. You go back to the plateau, use the power, and become shocked to learn that it isn't a plateau at all, it's a water filled valley where fairy's reside. It brings new contextualization to not only that location, but the world it inhabits.
If Wind Waker had Breath of the Wild physics, link would grab a nearby tree and catapult himself right into the fairies house. There is no build up or wonder about the area, and as such the area becomes forgettable.
yeah no screw that. let me go over and see whats up. I mean its right there clear as day for me to go over and explore. Needing a hammer to stomp some pegs is stupid and represents everything i hate about arbritrary item locked progression in classic zelda, i say this as someone who liked Wind waker
@@Zezinizzle as some one who hates wind waker(its not about the art if you're wondering that's the only bit I like) I agree these are adventure games built on a sense of player freedom they don't need to be metroidvania lights(as some one who would list metroidvania as there favorite genre)
@@Zezinizzle I'll grant that your strawman example of the pegs has been done before in Zelda, and when it's done like that it's lazy and uninspired, but that's not what OP is talking about. They're talking about well designed barriers that fit naturally into the world. It's about giving you a sense of accomplishment when you've earned the right to explore them. In the real world, you'll encounter some amount of resistance when you pursue anything worthwhile, and sometimes you'll be turned away because you're not ready for that thing yet - and once you've built the strength to overcome those obstacles, you can return and recognize how your growth got you to where you are.
Smart game designers find clever and subtle ways to integrate that into their games, because they want their game to have meaning. If you take those challenges away from exploration, then you reducing the significance of those places you're exploring. It makes the game feel less like a thrilling and awe-inspiring world and more like a theme park or a playground.
If you're the kind of player that gets frustrated at any kind of locked progression, then I don't think you really understand what made Zelda such a successful and beloved series. Maybe you're the kind of player that likes the more sandbox/theme park feel. That's fine, you're entitled to that - but you're not entitled to every game being like that. As someone who grew up with Zelda games and loves them dearly, I'd very much like to see the series return to what made them so special and timeless.
@@gamerskingdom4897 These are adventure games built on exploration and discovery, not necessarily "player freedom". You're free in the sense that you can begin exploring in any direction, but not necessarily in the sense that you'll be able to go anywhere you please. Older Zelda titles didn't introduce obstacles to the player because of technical limitations or archaic design principles. It was done quite intentionally, to inspire you and to draw you deeper into the world.
@matthewcummings5067 here's the thing I like zelda for a dithrent reason then you I understand that the devolepers did those thing intentionally but I disagree with there vision an find them counterintuitive to why I like zelda
I would love to have a Zelda with a smaller open world that includes some large, linear dungeons. It would literally be the best of both worlds.
I honestly don’t care at all how big the overworld is because imo it should mainly just be a way of getting from point A to point B with maybe some scenery and occasional collectibles to find. The focus of the game should be on the dungeons and main story content, not the map that connects it all together.
So, divine beasts in a smaller Botw overworld, only where the items gained in each are used to unlock their paths within
so Ocarina of Time. count me in!!
pikmin 4
So basically Elden RIng
Open world add 100 choices for the players, but not all of them are equally good. Linear worlds limit your choices to 2-3, but you can be sure they spent alot of time to make these option as good as they can be.
Its like choosing from a 100 items restaurant menu vs 3 hand picked dishes by the chef.
That's not at all how that works.
I mean that's the nature of a lot of choices, the more choices you have in any given situation the less each individual choice matters. There's a good reason why we're probably not gonna remember how we solved a lot of the puzzles in botw and totk, if you can literally do anything, even cheese the puzzle, what does any of those options ultimately mean.
@@eclecticmuso
It means that for a change, playing the game again can feel like a new experience altogether. Screw playinng older zelda games multiple times. Once you figure out the game and their honestly very clunky mechanics, it's over.
I used to think this... then I realized that after putting in 40+ hours and realizing that there's actually only one overarching plot with random different tiny branches that change only the minor details.. I replay games because they're fun, not because they're open world. Replaying an open world game does not feel like a 'new experience' to me. It feels like the same story, except I now don't have all the skills and abilities that I unlocked previously along the way and gotta unlock yet again... at which point, let's stop pretending and just curate the experience from the start.
@@Gatitasecsii A game does not have to have "multiple options" to be replayable. It just has to be a good game.
Portal is a great example of meticulously planned, supposedly linear puzzles that sometimes can be solved in unique ways by thinking outside of the box, and when you do so you don't feel like cheesing
Those take effort to design.
Portal is an incredibly linear game with defined solutions.
You mean like the TOTK shrines? Where there is meticulous design and solution, but you can also solve them anyway you can because you are allowed to do it?
Funny you bring that up. I find botw and totk shrines to be essentially like the spiritual successors to portal in a way
I was thinking about Portal in Aonuma's quote about freedom being better. In a puzzle game, that's usually not true. Imagine Portal but every surface in every room is portalable. You have so much more freedom to solve the puzzle any way you want, so why is it not fun anymore? Freedom has its place for sure, but its place is not in puzzle design.
I know for a fact that nostalgia is not the only reason because Breath of the Wild was my *first* Zelda game, and yet I still absolutely adore the older games I went back and played afterward, like Twilight Princess, Ocarina of Time, and Majora's Mask. I have zero nostalgia for any of those titles, but they were all an absolute joy to play.
Exactly, thats because those games were great. Just because a new idea works does not mean you forget the old idea.
IMO TP was a true successor to OoT in the way that OoT was a successor to LttP: It took the core gameplay experience (linear story, dungeons, item-based progression) and brought it into the new generation with upgraded graphics and mechanics, and in the case of TP, a darker tone. MM and WW were great in their own right, but they sought to do their own thing instead of keeping to the core formula. I get that we don't want the series to stagnate, but I feel like there is merit to evolution on something that worked well and bringing that experience into the new era, instead of completely reinventing the wheel and scrapping everything that came before that people liked. So what I really want is another linear, dungeon-focused game that evolves on the LttP/OoT/TP formula.
Nostalgia shaming is exactly the same sin Blizzard committed before giving in and releasing World of Warcraft Classic. Boy did they eat that humble pie. Sooooo many new players who never played the original game fell in love with it, some more than the modern game even. Old and new designs are not a matter of good vs bad, it's just different. And different people like different things no matter how old or young or where in the world they are.
@@madrox1989 New generation, new tastes, I get that. But that doesn't mean you completely abandon what your core audience loved about the legacy games in the series. Sure, they have plenty of new fans, but by abandoning what made the series great, they've really alienated a big portion of their existing fanbase.
@@TheRealPSKilla502 Lol, I'm not disagreeing with you. My comment illustrates an example of this arrogance that was carried out by a different developer. Their famous line "you think you do, but you don't" really aged poorly when they saw fans flock to their old game when they made it available. Given its success, the developer is slowly trying to stitch together elements of old design with elements of new design, even experimenting with new servers that literally merge both designs together and it's been wildly successful.
I love BOTW and TOTK so much, but yes I would like to see them try to combine open world with linear dungeons/story progression. Ironically, TOTK has a side quest in Hateno Village where everyone's arguing between the old ways and the new, with the solution being to just have both lol.
what if that was the dev team acknowledging the disputes among the fandom?
That's a good point. I could definitely see that as a possibility. @@chaosprime1629
@chaosprime1629
I hated that I couldn't side with Mayor Reed and get that mushroom fashion crap out of Hateno lol Honestly, it ruined the town for me, which was a shame as Hateno was the closest to a traditional Zelda town we've had on the Switch. I miss the quaintness of Kakariko Village in OoT.
@@hanburgundy4317 Now you want traditional towns? Just let the developers come up with some new designs. Cece stuff isn't bad because it is new, it was bad because it lacks quality, nothing more.
@@aaaaaaaaaa190
I didn't say it was bad because it was new - I guess I didn't specify, but the mushroom fashion stuff is not my preferred aesthetic lmao I was hoping the game would let you side with EITHER Reed or Cece to have some affect on the game and the appearance of the village. Would've been more dynamic.
I miss going into a dungeon, finding the map and the compass, defeating a mini boss, receiving the dungeon specific item, finding the boss key and finally clobbering that boss with my new found item. I miss it so much you guys have no idea.
Probably the most concise explanation I've heard. It's easy to dismiss that sentiment as just us old-school fans yearning for it, but I honestly think kids who grew up only playing Minecraft can still appreciate what linear Zelda uniquely offers.
The sad thing is that this can also exist in open world zelda games. They can just not allow us to climb walls and give us keys like they did in some shrines and then give us an item that can unlock some things in the open world
My biggest issue is that NOTHING else in gaming is like Zelda. There were some Sega Genesis and PS2 era games that tried and they’re all 6/10 at best.
And when lever you bring this up people go right for Skyward Sword and EVERYONE knows that’s not what we’re talking about. I want my 2D Zeldas, my OOTs and WWs.
Like why can’t a secondary team make at least 2D Zelda every 4-5 years while the main team makes these games. It’s actually the saddest I’ve ever been about a game developer.
I miss having more than a handful of dungeons.
@@JamienautMark2what about Tunic or metroidvanias
I remember back in the day Twilight Princess was criticized for being the same old thing as the previous Zelda. That the Zelda after that was the same old thing. And so on. What’s funny is that TotK is the first Zelda I’ve played where I’ve felt “wow, this feels like I’m playing the same game again.” Not to mention that A Link Between Worlds felt like a proof of concept for an open world/tight dungeon design Zelda. I loved ALBW.
I totally agree on link between worlds! Imagine a big open world with Gameplay from link between worlds and the graphics of the links awakening remake!
I agree mostly, but I could never understand how people could like ALBW that much. The fact that you were not surprised by a new item you would get in the dungeons totally destroyed it for me. (Don't get me wrong, I still liked it but that's what made it a 6/10 instead of a 9/10 for me
@@mikereisert2803 this is exactly a big reason why I liked it so much. Gone is the extremely linear path, here is a 2D Open World. You can almost do any dungeon in any order and you get a sense of progression because you can buy items instead of renting and even upgrade them.
Also during progression you receive multiple items that open new paths for you, like in the old zelda (for example the fins).
@@mikereisert2803 I found that acceptable, and the fact that money was finally useful made up for it in spades
yeah i had fun with TOTK but nothing makes me want to play it again. I still replay BOTW every year though, its honestly kind of the better game of the two. TOTK just feels like a bloated BOTW.
Something I was hoping that you would mention but you didn't, and I rarely see anyone else mention, is how the older dungeons in previous Zelda games usually had a story unfold within that dungeon itself. The dungeon told a story of its own. For example, in Twilight Princess the first dungeon was about you rescuing the monkeys and freeing their leader from a curse. The Fire Temple in Ocarina of Tme was about you freeing the goron prisoners and their leader is going after the dragon himself whom you encounter at the beginning of the dungeon. The Spirit Temple in Ocarina of Time you learn about that Gerudo lady who is killed by the two witches before you fight them. Skyward Sword dungeons often unfolded the story with Ghirahim and Zelda and Impa, usually near the end of the dungeons before the boss battle.
another thing is how the dungeons usually introduced their own unique quality or gimmick to make them stand out from the other dungeons from a gameplay perspective. For example working with the sages in Wind Waker in the latter dungeons. Or, how one of the dungeons in Majora's Mask turns upside down. or how the Geat Bay Temple in Majora's Mask was mostly traversed via swimming, and I actually really love this dungeon. Another great one is the timeshift stones in the Sandship. None of the dungeons in BOTW or TOTK do this. They are all just a static, still, non-dynamic maps that just have 3 to 5 buttons and you simply press the buttons within the exact same gameplay mechanics that you have encountered throughout the rest of the game with no unique twist whatsoever.
This will become even more relevant as so many boring empty open worlds with filler content have become so common. With AI content generation on the horizon this will be even more obvious. Stories written by humans are simply unbeatable as a form of motivation.
@@cattysplat I won't be surprised if Nintendo starts using AI to write their stories. I DO believe there is a niche for AI: improving procedural generation such as for creating random planets in a space game or radiant quests in a Bethesda game, but not for anything handcrafted like a Zelda game. But given Nintendo's desire to not write a full proper story, and instead just give unfinished pieces of a story through "memories" with many characters not fleshed out whatsoever (past sages), then they clearly don't care anymore so it would seem natural for them to decide to use AI to just quickly fill in the huge gaps.
Honestly I feel like the TotK dungeons are almost worse than the BotW divine beasts, at least those had an ability that could be used to make the layout more dynamic. TotK is the exact same terminal system but without anything further than that, it feels like an afterthought.
I disagree. The Lightning Temple literally has a LINEAR design. It starts off with a linear part with Traps and then transitions into a more Open-Air style that ALSO doesn’t have the Open-Air of BOTW. The Passageways are all blocked by something and it just can’t be cheesed or anything. It also has multiple puzzles in a room. I feel like it’s a PERFECT balance between LINEAR and OPEN-AIR. Still, it is very linear. The other dungeons as well. (AND STOP CRITICISING HYRULE CASTLE IT’S NOT THE FINALE ANYMORE YOU GUYS DON’T EVEN REALISE THAT?
having to collect soup ingredients for the Snowpeak boss in twilight princess was awesome
An open world Zelda game (with a smaller world than BOTW/TOTK) that also has a good story and traditional dungeons (with dungeon items like the old games) would be the perfect hybrid for the future of Zelda.
I would throw all my money at Nintendo if this game was real
Just as long as the open world doesn’t get in the way of story and dungeons, which seems all too likely a possibility
If you wanna a good story, you gotta close the world or the actions of the player
Hybrid would be the worst option. In that case you can just make a linear game.
Sounds like pretty much every singleplayer Zelda before BotW came and ruined the franchise.
I'd certainly throw my money at a game like that.
I resent that this Aunoma fellow would say Ocarina of Time is restricted. by no means! just because you can't parry in that game or climb anything with a vertical axis, doesn't mean it was restrictive. It had the perfect progression (and I would say the same for Twilight Princess). You start off in a limited space where you can run around, talk to Kokiri, get your sword and your shield, and then bam. First dungeon. After you beat the dungeon, you get an item that allows you to hit enemies from a little farther away, but then you're also given access to Hyrule field. as the game progresses and you gain more items from dungeons, all of sudden an area that was once blocked behind rocks can now be opened up to you with a bomb. You can now get to new places with the hookshot, and after you free your horse, you've unlocked a couple of new sections on the map.
Ocarina of Time had such a perfect progression of opening the world up to you in stages and after each dungeon, you always left feeling like you've accomplished something. Also, Ocarina of Time's dungeon design, while sure might have been limited in how you solved puzzles, but was at least tricky enough to where you couldn't game the dungeon by, i dunno, climbing the wall of the building to get to where you needed to be. Literally in TOTK, it felt like I cheesed the game because I could just climb the walls of the fire temple to unlock those gates instead of doing the actual dungeon.
Agreed. By the way, Aonuma is one of the directors of Ocarina of Time haha
I think my whole issue is that I never felt that Zelda games like Ocarina of Time or Majora's Mask were super cloistered or linear. The world was still so vast, and even if you had your next objective, you had plenty of things to do or explore. Majora's Mask was a great example of combining "linear" and the more open world sense; you could obtain masks in a relatively flexible order (though for others you obviously needed certain masks before progressing to other points, like the Stone mask for the pirate fortress) as you charted towards which temple you wanted to beat. Was Breath of the Wild fun? Yeah, I enjoyed it a lot. But it didn't really have that Zelda feel, in fact I haven't even brought myself to buy Tears of the Kingdom because I'm just not feeling it. I miss the direction of N64 series onward, I understand Aonuma is baffled by people wanting "restriction", but it's more like we want structure and guidance. Especially when the story from BotW was boiled down to a very bare-bones construction.
Majora's Mask is heavenly
Majora’s Mask is top tier Zelda. But I would also consider it an anomaly in the early 3D formula. Funnily enough, despite using stuff from its predecessor, it did put a bigger spin on things than any game between it and BotW. No “Early dungeons” to get your feet wet, the story is something for you to discover through exploration instead of it all being forcefully spoonfed and front-loaded, a lot of objectives are left up to the player in ways that feel less restrictive, yet because the character writing is so good, even side quests are fulfilling in a dramatic sense.
Majora's Mask managed to give the illusion of an open world by giving you all the freedom in the world to explore the three day timeline and things would change based on what time it was before the moon fell. Obviously, once you get to a certain point, you'll have an exact route to do, but there isn't always an immediate point towards your next objective or how to achieve it.
Bingo. The old games had plenty to explore, as well as big maps with plenty of upgrades and things to find. Only the story was linear, and we need that.
We also need more of the little things that make Zelda "Zelda". Such as heart pieces in the open world. Fishing. The "DA NA NA NA" music when you open a chest.
I'm not sure why they did away with all of the old stuff. That's like Mario doing away with mushrooms.
Limitations breed creativity
The ironic part being that Totk lost GOTY to a linear turn based CRPG (Baldurs gate) in which the Genre it was apart of was viewed as "outdated" game design.
I say that as a lifelong Zelda fan: I am so glad it lost GotY.
Nintendo, like many other Japanese developers, TGA plays little role, while Japan has its own awards, Famitsu, the largest journalist in Japan, did not add games from Western developers to their top list, including BG3.
They are mainly focused on their market
@@sarahd.8303 why the hell would you all want to be restricted and limited in a linear Zelda game, I’m disappointed it lost to an outdated game in terms of design but then the game awards at least in my opinion is anti Nintendo anyway.
TGA is some nonsense award. it's 3 hours of advertisement with some awards sprinkled in it. Baldurs gate 3 developers were rushed off the stage after just 2 mins while advertisers were given all the time they paid for. going on and on advertising. Personally I could care less about the garbage called the games award. BG3 and all award winners deserved better.
@@Adamtendo_player_1 a highly curated, very tightly designed game will always offer a more satisfying experience than anything possible in an open world game.
It's just really clear by the past two games the narrative really struggles in open world. I miss strong narrative linear Zelda games with an emphasis on puzzling dungeons.
The open world ain’t the problem. It’s the writer’s struggle to adapt with it and overall balance of it.
People are so quick to blame the open world but have you even considered that maybe a narrative just isn’t something the developers are concerned with? Like Aonuma has made it very clear that the story is secondary in the Zelda games. Also this whole puzzling dungeon thing is stupid. No one is forcing you to complete the dungeons in an easy way. If you want to make it hard for yourself go ahead. Having a game where it’s always just an unnecessarily complicated dungeon is not good. In any situation in life you’re always going to want to take the path of least resistance. If you want that much of a challenge play a game solely based on puzzles because at least you get whatever it is you’re looking for there. People are severely misunderstanding these games because of nostalgia. Not to say they’re perfect, but a lot of the criticisms are just nostalgia rooted.
@@PyroPuffs777it should never be on the player to impose limitations on themselves to make the game more fun
@PyroPuffs777 The content of what you said is irrelevant, becuase all I got from it was one big Professor Layton ad. Which I approve of.
There were never strong narrative for Zelda games. Since you played these games as kind/teenager you think that the narrative were strong. It was always shallow.
The unique dungeon items felt like true treasure, unlocking new areas and abilities
Yeah, going into a dungeon in the more linear Zeldas was exciting 'cuz you knew you were gonna get some kind of new item/tool
Even if some ended up being used less than others they all felt kinda special in their own ways
When I open a chest in BotW and TotK, it's less exciting 'cuz I know that 98% of the time it's gonna be an RNG item I could've gotten from any other chest in the game
The other 2% is unique stuff that's more interesting/fun to get, but the majority of it is just generic items to keep the RPG/survival gameplay loop running, rather than stuff with specialized applications like in the old linear Zeldas
And then the excitement of revisiting old places that were at one time teases of new powers yet unknown.
It was exciting until you leave and never touch that item again
@@higurashikai09 And that's where the exploration part should kick in. Most items in Zelda games had applications outside of their respective dungeons to get to a chest / heartpiece, or were needed for some sidequest. And getting to those small sections was still very exciting, once you noticed that they exist.
I can't say I am excited at all about any weapon/item in BotW / TotK at all, with the exception of the iconic Master Sword. I'd rather have short-lived excitement with a bunch of toys I still get to use whenever, whereever, than to not have any at all. I suppose, in a sense, the "Shrine Abilities" served as a replacement, but I don't think they work as well.
@@sydklem1023 *Opens a cool, hidden chest you found underwater behind a waterfall*
*Receives 10 Rupees~*
It's funny - when I was first playing Tears of the Kingdom, though I was enjoying it, I couldn't escape this sinking feeling that, as a fan of linear Zelda, there wasn't a place for me in current Zelda anymore. So to hear Aonuma pretty much say as much is honestly a little heartbreaking
Right? I know that things shouldn’t stay the same forever, but I fell in love with the legend of Zelda games for specific reasons, and most of those reasons are absent or in less focus in the two recent games
Reject tradition. Embrace change. It feels good man.
@@starscythe2099wrong traditions become that for a reason it works
@@starscythe2099 ...This just doesn't apply to art though lmao. Imagine telling someone who likes rock music that "it's 2023, music changes, listen to new music". Some people will like it, sure, and it's great to stay open minded but maybe the music of 2023 just doesn't sit right with em and they'll try again later and would rather see what new rock is doing? That's 100% fine. Genres exist for a reason. Both can exist. Superbly weird take ngl.
@@schl0ckTbh, would anyone even consider OoT and Majora's Mask to be "the same"? How about Wind Waker and Twilight Princess?
The games have always been different while maintaining core aspects such as linearity with the story and some of the progression, fairies being a great heal item, the "DA NA NA NA" when you open a chest, etc.
I just don't see why Nintendo decided that ALL (well, most) traditional Zelda elements had to be thrown out.
We can have change without destroying the entire formula just for the sake of more freedom.
The question people need to ask is this: is doing temples in any order really worth all that we've lost?
Imo, the easy answer is no.
I think a good example of the type of linear/open balance in Zelda is Majora’s Mask, ie my favorite video game of all time. It is pretty linear in terms of how you unlock different areas in succession depending on getting items from previous areas, but growing up, I always felt like I could just fuck around and do whatever I want and just explore the world, which is what I think the BotW/TotK devs were going for. I’ve heard people say that the 3 day time limit was stressful, but as a kid it was liberating, because it gave me the freedom to do whatever I wanted. I could just run around Termina doing nothing, just watching what the NPCs do if I really wanted to and then reset the timeline.
The scope of the game was obviously a lot less intense, especially since BotW and TotK got delayed multiple times whereas MM was very famously given just a year to complete the entire game, but that smaller world honestly made it so much more special to me. If I do a side quest for someone at one of the stables in totk, I don’t really think much of it, because there’s just so many side quests and there’s rarely any reason for me to actually remember them, unless it’s something really bizarre like those guys who said that Zelda told them to strip. But in MM, I felt a much deeper connection to the NPCs, not only because there were less of them and my attention wasn’t split between as many characters, but also because I felt more like I actually had an impact on the lives of the characters, especially since the time loop meant that I could see what happened without my intervention.
I feel like saying “make a smaller game” isn’t going to mean much when BotW and Totk were so successful, but the point I’m trying to make is that the storytelling really shines in the previous LoZ entries, but that I don’t think you need to sacrifice having an open world in order to create a game that feels nostalgic
The thing about Majoras Mask was it made all those "side quests" feel important. Saving lon lon ranch from the aliens, and preventing them from getting robbed taking milk to castle town, or the whole Anju questline. It really made it feel like you're in a real world at the time despite how limited it was. Limitation can be a great thing, and that's what zelda fans not just BOTW/TOTK fans, really enjoyed about the series. That classic zelda theme, skyward sword admittedly was too linear, but Twilight princess honestly was fairly linear as well it just had a much more impactful story and world building.
Soooo true about the 3 day limit being liberating. You really could just run the cycle so you can find out what might happen and then come back on the next cycle to interrupt it or engage with it. Epic game.
And the craziest part is that it was the first game shepherded by Eiji Aonuma, the same person who now hates linear games.
I love open world Zelda and don’t want it to go anywhere but it’s kinda crazy hearing him calling the desire for more linear ones to be nostalgia. I think I even prefer open world Zelda but I don’t see why we can’t do both or at least balance the aspects better.
Isn't that exactly what happened in wind waker
Ghost of Tsushima and Eldin Ring prove that a better balance between open world and structured gameplay is more than possible. Maybe throw in some Link to the Past magic in that blend and people would be much happier about 3D Zelda.
@@Redpoppy80 Everything is always me me me with you guys clearly eonuma is burned out of the classic formula why would you want him to work on something he’s no longer passionate about
His heart wouldn’t be in it
@@dorian6021 Everything is always me me me with you guys clearly eonuma is burned out of the classic formula why would you want him to work on something he’s no longer passionate about
His heart wouldn’t be in it
@@madnessarcade7447 True. Aonuma has clearly lost his passion for Zelda. As an artist that will more or less happen to everyone, but Zelda is more than Aonuma and it is NOT WRONG for fans to have our wants met or lose interest if something that we once consumed was changed and we don't like the change. If Aonuma has lost his spark for anything regarding the core Zelda formula than it is time for someone new to take over. And if that doesn't happen, I have every right to say, "screw you game, I will not buy it". I have long ago abandoned Paper Mario and Pokemon for said reasons.
I finished A Link Between Worlds recently and the dungeon design was so satisfying, the meter for weapons was really intuitive also. You didn't have weapons breaking and you didn't have to collect arrows to use the bow, everything just recharges. Great game and it even had a very open world design. Maybe the loss of Satoru Iwata changed things; Aonuma and Miyamoto frequently consulted with Iwata prior to his passing
Yes! Such an underrated title, felt like the last "true" Zelda game but had a huge world to explore! If they made a sequel to it with the open world scale of Botw it could be the greatest Zelda ever
Agreed. Link Between Worlds is an great game. Easily one of my top 3 favorite Zelda games.
I bought it on the eshop before it shut down I still have to play it
A Link Between Worlds is probably my favourite Zelda game. It's so tightly designed and deliberatly crafted. I still think it has the best dungeons in the series by a mile (even though they are a bit easy).
A Link Between Worlds was amazing. It, along with Link's Awakening, are the only two Zelda games I can replay over and over and never get tired of them. I think what amazes me most about ALBW is the atmosphere, it really pulls you into the world which as Arlo notes the 3D games have historically been better at. If they ever do a ALBW remake for the Switch (or Switch 2) I'll buy it in a heartbeat.
I would have had a hard time getting into zelda without the linearity. Twilight Princess wasn't just a game for me, but a story. And it affected my young self in a way that would love stories forever. While open world zelda may have much to offer story wise, the linear stories of the previous 3d games can't tell those stories if they were open world.
Enjoying a story isnt about choosing how it turns out, but surrendering yourself to someone elses creativity
I'd agree with this if any of the 3d zeldas actually used their linear progression to tell better stories. But that's not the case. Even with TP most of the narrative reasons for why you go to each dungeon in order is to barely justify the mechanical order the devs chose to build the game in.
@@KitCloud1I loved the stories in OoT and WW. Lots of people love the stories of the other classics. I guess the point is more that those stories, even if they weren't amazing, they were cohesive.
@@John6-40 Except that cohesion doesn't exist.
What changes for Link, Zelda or any of the sages if you could do the shadow temple first? Not subtext, hyrule historia or you're personal head cannon, based souly on dialog & cutscenes in the game: what would change?
Same goes for WW. Other than the island you failed to save, what changes if you could do dragon roost & head straight to the wind temple?
Twilight Princess also had a lot of free-roaming involved, in case you wanted to slow the pace down a little, some combat encounters, mostly eploration and minigames. The issue I have with open worlds that still try to have a traditional story is the game is basically Twilight Princess "but what if the side activities were never-ending and the story is far less engrossing?" I constantly get lost doing shrines and running around on my own, and only when I exhaust everything I care to walk my character toward to, I get aound going forward with the story which just scrolls past me because I'm aleady well settled in my couch and can't summon myself to pay much attention.
Personally, I want to be urged to run to the castle and be paced in the breaks I take with side content, go on even a slightly long-winded story and experience some side tales that break up the tone a little. There's just no pacing in most stories within most open world games and I know pacing can exist.
Me too.
It's not only nostalgia Eiji, limitations are good for having fun, they challenge you to improve your skills, your creativity, your critical thinking, and a lot more things. It's kind of a myth that a game where you can do whatever you want is better just because of that.
Linear Zeldas usually have more restrictions in movement, more restrictions in movement mean that puzzles can be more creative since the environment can work around specific limitations and be more unique. Most of the TOTK Dungeons revolve around an arbitrary mechanic that feels like they could have just been an already existing item such as electric arrows, bombs, water fruits, etc.
I think traditional Zeldas are so fun because there is a level of progression where you acquire new tools which lets you interact with the world differently. You don't really see that in ToTK where the same 4 tools can solve most problems. That is great for traversal but bad for dungeon and puzzle design, since puzzles are usually based around your limitations more often than not.
Love both styles of games, but they are also very different games.
I also feel like one thing linear Zelda does better is a sense of progression and mastery over the mechanics. When traditional Zelda introduces a mechanic, it forces you to use it in tens of different ways so you can apply it in more ways for the future even after the dungeon. In TOTK, if a new mechanic is introduced for a dungeon, you use it to activate a switch and then it becomes a subpar combat option later. It doesn't push your expectations and make you rethink the world and your options in the same way.
Their lack of understanding on this matter is both mind-boggling and concerning. Classic Zelda was largely linear despite its open world. It had item progression. BotW and TotK have less in common with "traditional" Zelda than the linear games do.
@vanyadolly This! It genuinely frustrates me when people peddle the "BotW is a return to the first Zelda game" Kool-Aid. No, it is not! Freedom to explore is great, but absolute, untethered exploration is just too much. There is very little to really "wow" you with that format.
Instead of working your way through challenging puzzles or combat, you can climb over it. And as we all ought to know, if the player *can* optimize the fun out of a game, then they will.
It’s classic Metroidvania game design!
@@Draezeth As someone who's primarily into the series for NES Zelda, it drives me insane 😂
@@vanyadolly I think the core identity of LOZ started with LttP, which was in many ways a dungeon crawler with action, exploration, and story mixed in. OoT brought the series to 3D, and subsequent games evolved certain aspects of the game, whilst maintaining this balance, and never losing sight of the series core identity. BotW then came along and prioritized “unlimited freedom” at the expense of everything else and upset this balance.
I would want a mix really. Open areas but with more to see and do but not being the shrines (their boring after a while) and having the dungeons be proper dungeons.
Yes - and I'd love certain spots in the open world to only be accessible with special, permanent items found in the dungeons.
yup!! proper dungeons, and maybe a select area to explore with each one.
It felt super good to completely cheese a tough dungeon using the fuse mechanic for the first 2-3 times.. then after it felt like I was cheating myself
To this day, I literally have no idea how you were supposed to defeat Ganondorf's final sword-fighting form. I just dropped spicy peppers on the ground to make updrafts, then went into slow-mo while gliding to hit him with a billion bomb arrows. It certainly was not as satisfying as it would've been to solve it in a linear fashion, though it was kinda hilarious.
Agreed.
I've read some arguements online that "Hey you can also choose to just not use those mechanics to make it more difficult", saying that we could just handicap ourselves to make it more challenging, but that would also be like cheating the purpose of why those things were added in the first place.
I have this opinion about elden rings balancing as well, there's no reward for taking a more difficult route. Skill deserves to be special.
@@avon_c6199 It is a game about finding your own style mate. That is the whole point. So creating your own challenge is a part of the game. If you don't like that it is not the fault of the game. It is just not for you. It's like the story of Soul Games. Those games gives you story with lore. You might not like that and can say that it is bad for you but you can't say that it is bad. Because it is not design flaw it is a choise that some people prefer. If you are not one of them then it is a you problem.
@@erkantiryaki5542 I hate this copout so much. The comparison to the way Souls games deliver lore falls flat when you realize that BOTW and TOTK represent a huge departure for Zelda in general. Zelda has NEVER been about "finding your own meta" until these games existed. Sure, there was alternate ways to beat bosses but nothing like the spicy pepper + bomb arrow strat and other dumb shit that you can do in these games. This would be like if souls games had a direct, straightforward narrative for their entire existence and then Elden Ring suddenly changed the way the story was delivered.
Elden Ring also shows how you can have an open world style in your game without sacrificing the core of what your game is. BOTW and TOTK don't feel like Zelda games. It feels like they had drastically new ideas but wanted to attach it to a known IP so it would sell. And be defended tooth and nail by fanboys like you when old fans end up not liking it as much as older Zelda titles. They're not bad games, but they're not good Zelda games either.
They should approach it like Elden Ring. Keep the open overworld and let us have proper “ legacy dungeons “
That's essentially what Zelda 1's formula is too. Big open world, stumble across traditional dungeons.
And if You can reach a difficult one
Elden Ring has a TON of literal copy pasted dungeons. This is a bad example.
@@theremix54 Those are standard dungeons. Legacy dungeon refers to places like stormwind castle and raya lucaria.
I'd rather have a grand total of four dungeons rather than hundreds of copy pasted Shrines if that means the dungeons are as well thought out and designed as the Temples in Majora's Mask or Wind Waker.
Imo, the MAIN four temples should return to the traditional 3D zelda formula, puzzle rush dungeon, get the special item, use special item to solve remaining puzzles that unlock the boss key, use special item in the fight against the boss.
The temples in BoTW and ToTK both suffer from the feeling of just being a slightly bigger shrine puzzle. I liked them a little better in ToTK but they were still a little too easy. I really like the open world zelda formula, it’s just little things like that that make me go “Yeah, but it COULD be better”
Better temples (I'm fine with your idea of 4), more rewarding progression with items from temples, better and more memorable music and more key elements from past Zelda's, such as a Master Sword and Hylian Shield as part of the story, fairies actually mattering, fishing, heart pieces, big chests with music, etc.
That's what the game needs. We can have true open world with all of those things. That said, the story will always have to be broken up if you can do temples in any order.
Why only 4? IMO for a world as big as BOTW/TOTK, there should be at least 10-13 uniquely themed dungeons, and they should all take about 1-2 hours to complete and consist of Metroidvania lock-and-key or puzzle box gameplay.
@@TheRealPSKilla502Yes. Yes. Yes. I like this comment. 10-13 sounds like too many though, I think 7 is a good number.
@@dpackerman4203 OoT and TP set the record with 9 dungeons, why not break it?
@@TheRealPSKilla502 I guess. Regardless how many there are, it doesn’t matter if they don’t improve the quality of them. Make them longer and more “puzzle box”-like
I think Aonuma is thinking with his producer brain and is seeing the sales numbers of BotW/TotK compared to the older games.
Thats not the responsibility of a producer even more in japan.
@@ausgod538 His responsibility or not it's probably heavily influencing his thinking.
Ensuring the long term success of the franchise is his job. Whether as a director or a producer. More fans equals better situation for the franchise and you bet that is going to be the direction the development team follows.
@@Shinjiduo That shouldn't come at the cost of creative awareness.
@@Ryan-Petre Nintendo is a business, not a starving artist. When it come to franchises in particular it is always about doing what is best for longevity at all cost. You go where the fans are. So, you would be happy to see Zelda slowly go down the route of Metroid? or even worse Star Fox? F-Zero? Sorry this demand for artistic awareness (aka purity) does not apply here.
I think its mostly about wanting to funnel all of their fans towards one path for the sake of getting bigger sales numbers for each product, thats my immediate guess
That could explain why they no longer see value in making 2D Zelda. They don't want to put in the resources or have people buy the 2D games when they want more resources and money going towards the big open world titles.
Maybe..... It genuinely sounded kinda like the game designer just flat it doesn't WANT to make a linear Zelda tbh
@@Hydraina To me, it sounds more like they just don't want to make a Zelda with any ounce of linearity. Sandbox is the future in their eyes.
@@voidoflight2420 Where does that come from?
The direction for future entries? That's been stated in dev interviews. They basically want to take the TotK formula and work with it for future games like with what OOT was for the series. As for the 2D games thing, it just seems like the team no longer cares about 2D zelda and wants to put their eggs all into one basket.@@NuiYabuko
You can still have your linear prgression with an open world format. Games have been doing it for a while. You complete the story in a specific order then go back for objectives with items you didnt have before. You can have your big expansive dungeons but you need to fill it with things that are actually interesting
"Why would you want less freedom?" Because limitations in games, when implemented properly, create challenge and, at the end of the day, overcoming a good, well-designed challenge is a big part of why we play video games. How does Aonuma not get this?!
Red dead redemption was one of the best selling games and oh my God it had a linear story and linear side quest and people love that
@@blakelandry9313
The Switch 2 won't have the power or memory to pull off a system exclusive Red Dead.
@@blakelandry9313 Can't argue with you, I am a people and I do love me some good linear in-game story-telling.
@@blakelandry9313 and red dead redemption 2 is brain dead easy. And people also love mc Donalds so there is that. Red dead redemption 2 has a huge problem were the open world trys to be a huge open world sandbox but the mission are those uncharted type games were you have 0 freedom of doing things on your own. Red dead redemption 1 is way better anyway.
@@Geats-IXthat wasn’t even the point of blakelandry’s comment.
I think merging the old and new formulas would actually work incredibly well. You could have a big open world with traditional dungeons and smaller challenges scattered throughout. Each dungeon grants you a new item, which can then be used to access the next dungeon in the progression of the story. The smaller challenges could be accessible at any time to give the player something to do in between major sections. There could even be sections of the open world that aren’t accessible until a certain item has been obtained. That’s what I wish they would do anyway
Absolutely possible. In fact, this is basically what Wind Waker did. It was a big open world that you could explore, but not get everywhere right off the bat. There were some islands that you needed a special item to access, like if the island had a rock wall around it and the only entrance was covered by an ice boulder that you needed fire arrows to melt. There were even smaller challenges, like little holes you’d fall into where you’d maybe have to fight a gauntlet of enemies in order to get a chest with a silver rupee or a bottle.
Link to the past was sort of like this too. The item gating that it uses hasn't aged perfectly, but you could do many of the dungeons in any order, the side quests got you ahead in the game, and just wandering and exploring led you to some cool areas that might help you later on. It's probably still my favorite Zelda game because of this.
@@Road_to_Dawn It's funny, I love Wind Waker and have played it a ton, but my first thought of this description of a good mix of open world and linearity was actually Majora's Mask.
Just thinking about how, once you have the Ocarina of Time back, and you've learned the Song of Healing, you're pretty much able to do a lot of the game's sidequests already. Dungeons follow a linear path, each new one unlocking (albeit indirectly sometimes) because of an item gained either during before or just after a dungeon, and/or a mask.
And no copy/pasting! Give us a handful of tight, well-written and directed linear segments and not a zillion shrines and korok seeds! I wanna finish the game in under 40 hours, 100% under 60.
@@glitchy000 Yeah, more content ≠ a better game. I would rather be able to 100% a carefully crafted game with less content than have a bazillion korok seeds to collect that all feel the same.
the biggest problem with both botw's divine beasts and totk's temples (outside of the last one) is repetition, ultimately with both games you're doing the same thing in every beast/temple, there's more variety in how you do it in totk, but it's still interacting with 5 of a thing to unlock some boss area and it just feels like so much more could have been done in both games
edit: while yes the dungeons in other zelda games had repetitive elements (repeated use of small keys for instance) there was still more variety in how you traversed through the dungeon and solved its puzzles, like forest temple having the poes, water temple having its water, spirit temple requiring the use of both adult AND child, snowhead having the large pillar in the center, stone tower with flipping the ENTIRE dungeon over
botw and totk feel like they have lite versions of this variety, the elements are somewhat present, but not in a way that makes the solving of those puzzles nearly as satisfying
also, the beasts/temples in botw/totk are MAIN quests and are important to both the plot and the world building of both games, so why wouldnt they give a major amount of focus to them?
By that logic, every Zelda dungeon in every Zelda game is the game. Instead of key to door puzzles, the locks or terminals serve those exact same purposes. It’s all still repetitive. Solve puzzle, get key and open door or activate terminal, move to the next one, repeat until you reach the boss, and defeat said boss.
tbf, old dungeons weren't a lot better goal wise. "find small key to open door, to then find small key, to open door, to find small key, to open door to midboss and get dungeon item, find big key, fight boss". Some dungeons had better designs and layouts, but apart from the dungeon item puzzles they all play just about the same mission wise. The divine beasts were fine objectives with good puzzles, they were just all thematically the exact same and had 0 identity.
totk is better, but apart from the storm ark rito dungeon (one of the best in the series I'd argue), they also have little identity. water is floating platforms with bubbles, and barely any actual water. fire has lava but you're mostly just riding rails (its fun, but it doesn't leave much of an impression), and desert temple has light puzzles... and traps I guess. Getting to each dungeon, however, was amazing (apart from water which just felt like a worse sky temple). the tower defense gerudo mission was genuinely amazing to see since we saw soldiers actually fighting. and then bouncy sky boats was just a lot of fun. goron wasn't as fun, but visually the volcano boss was a spectacle and the bomber plane fighting was unique.
Somehow the dungeons in totk ended up being even more repetitive than botw. At least in botw, each dungeon had a unique mechanic, they all moved in a different way that opened up interesting possibilities. Totk literally just went "ok here's your 4 isolated puzzles with no connection whatsoever, enjoy them for the 20 minutes it takes you to solve them".
I honestly can't comprehend how he thought they solved the dungeon issue. They were some of the most shallow dungeons of the entire franchise, despite the game having less dungeons than almost any other Zelda. I'm still wrapping my head around how they spent 6 years developing the sequel to one of the largest, most beloved games of all time, took away the dungeon issue as one of the main criticisms, and came back with this as their offering. It feels like almost all of their resources went into perfecting the building mechanic and they just kind of forgot about the rest of the game.
@@LinkMountaineer the difference in older Zeldas came from the linear progression. The puzzles were meant to be more complex with each dungeon as you gained more and more tools to piece them together, each combat encounter was meant to challenge you more than the last, and failing that you'd at least get some rising action in the story. With Tears of the Kingdom the dungeons are so repetitive that they quite literally repeat the same cutscene 4 times.
@@squiddler7731 Of course the cutscenes are going to be somewhat similar to get the new Sages filled in on what’s going on, but to say they’ll literally the same cutscene every time is objectively false. Plus, you’re relating two separate aspects as if one correlates to the other when they don’t.
BOTW and TOTK fall prey to one of the biggest potential problems of game design today; the locust concept.
A player picks the game up, gets all their tools, then goes out into the world. At every step of the way, they consume a piece of content, then move on to the next piece of content, consume it, and move on, never needing to return in most cases. (Shrines are a great example)
It creates a game design that’s not only nearly absent of tangible progression, but also gives a very modern outlook on society. I see BOTW and TOTK as the TikTok of Zelda. Go, consume, go, consume, go, consume more of these bit-sized pieces of content. At the end of it, I’m not really feeling satisfied. Like I did something difficult, or something that took real thought, or the dreaded, “I’m wasting my time.”
And of course, the reductive people will go, “Games are a waste of time.” When that’s not true if you’re enjoying the experience. Bringing yourself joy is not a waste of time, but being distracted from your lack of enjoyment with content that’s specifically curated to keep you consuming is.
Just my 2 cents.
never had that problem (btw tiktok of zelda lol liked that) i actually found myself exploring the world further each time i play and experiment more with botw and totk. i dont return to shrines or dungeons but camps and areas i do many times. i find the linear zeldas are more like the locust concept, you progress and consume the content and story, but do you truly go back? no you keep going til the end, unless theres secrets you wanna find, otherwise its a straight line, while botw/totk is like a web, theres many paths but they are all connected, you always have a main goal, more content to experience (e.g. caves or nooks and crannys in a region), more secrets to find, every battle can be fought differently, totk expands this ten fold. in botw/totk, that sense of progression is heightened, in linear games you gain more hearts, the mastaaaa sword and some cool gizmos, botw/totk you gain weapons and hearts the same but you evolve physically with clothing, abilites/ vows, the world changes once you complete things (the same as linear but its very noticeable as well in botw/totk), you went from fusing a rock to a stick to fusing the horn of a lynel to a better stick, you can build a house, in botw you can build tarrey town. the one thing i hate about the new games is the shitty story, the lame combat (i mean like mashing a button unlike the flourishes in TP, like actual sword combat) and the imposing sandbox, i do want a more grounded zelda like TP but with the mechanics and complexity of botw/totk.
Twilight Princess and Majora's Mask are 100% the opposite.
@@saricubra2867those are my favourite
To me, it’s not just about having better dungeons, but having a more thought out world. My main issue with both games is I search every inch of one section and the next just feels more of the same. Why explore when you’re satisfied with your inventory and some of the most worthy things of note can be seen from a distance? (Even caves in TOTK when you offer a fire fruit under a cherry blossom tree). I kinda miss Wind Waker where every island had something worth finding. Even A Link Between World felt like a good compromise
eh...not every Island was interesting in Wind Waker tbh
I was disappointed when I played that Goron strength test game. Really tried to come up with creative solutions given it’s one of few unique ultrahand puzzles/tests. Not only was the most basic idea the best (just strap a ton of rockets to a metal rock), but the 1st place prize was just… a different ore that you can easily get in a cave or a stone talus. Not something rare like a dragon scale or even an armour piece (returning or new).
They have some great mechanics and the controls are really intuitive, but it’s marred by having the most barebone puzzles. “You can come up with any solution” is pointless when the “puzzle” is as simple as “get over this gap” or the solution could be easily solved with just a car/boat/flying machine. There’s no advantage and no fun in thinking outside the box, because the puzzles never push you beyond the basics, and there’s no rewards/incentives for it. I played a bit of Nuts & Bolts at a friend’s house and while the physics are janky, and the build controls aren’t as good, it was infinitely more fun creating and implementing my ideas. Because even though I wasn’t playing to get rewards, the progress was more tangible. You can’t just add X to a vehicle and automatically win, or get the best record. It _requires_ iteration and innovation to improve. TotK can be cheesed so much and so easily that you have to stop yourself because otherwise you’ll realize there’s no value to doing it. Shrines can’t be cheesed as easily because you can’t pull from your inventory, but they also provide exactly what you need. And yes they need that, but there’s never anything _more._ If the shrine alls for a vehicle to solve it, you’ll get a platform, control stick, 4 wheels, and nothing else. No room to experiment there. They basically solve the thinking behind the puzzle for you.
@@Jdudec367 I could of sworn you could at least find a piece of heart
@@mrshmuga9Good post. Agree 100%. 👍
@@Antasma1 you could...but not in all of them.
Personally, I think that the open world killed the difficulty aspect. Since every shrine can be ones first shrine, they must all be, more or less, the same level of difficult. You cant build puzzles that gradually get harder and harder. Same with the dungeons. You cant build puzzles off new dungeon items or past items because they don't exist. As a result, dungeons never get any more difficult until you enter Ganondorfs Sealing Place. Honestly, I think that is what most people are feeling put off with on BOTW/TOTK. that and the sheer lack of any real in game story. Zelda has never been even good at story, save TP, but this was disappointing .
i think they should replace the shrines with optional mini dungeons and just give a whole heart container or stamina vessel and just have there be less that are longer
I think more than it being open world, it's more a matter of accessibility, just look at Zelda 1, it is almost completely open, but some areas and such are clearly designed to be end-game areas, and dungeons are marked with a number to tell the player how easy or hard one is, I think a similar approach could work on a modern Zelda, but apealing to the common denominator, aka, playing it safe, is what actually hurts the organic feel of the game.
Except for the fact of that shrines further from the start are more difficult than those closer to the start.
Looks like you want nostalgia after all
Oddly enough, Joseph Anderson, in his review of BotW way back when observed the same problem and suggested a pretty viable solution. Since the shrines were separate loading zones, they could be designed with different levels of intensity or sequential orders and then swapped out based on what shrines a player had already done or not done. Seemed like a pretty good idea.
When I first saw BOTW footage in 2015, the first thing I dreamed about in the open world setting was wandering around and stumbling into a forest temple and just being able to give it my best shot, regardless of my skill level. That never happened. I don’t know why or who decided that we can’t have well designed, linear dungeons in an open world game. It’s absolutely ridiculous.
This is so relatable. I grew up with OoT, so when I heard about BotW, I had dreams about exploring the inside of the deku tree
That literally does happen. BotW can be tackled in any order you want.
I'm talking about real dungeons@@lukeshioshio
Because that's dumb? Red dead redemption 2 has linear mission and a open world but it has a identity crisis because of it. On the other hand red dead 2 trys to be this sand box open world game but on the other had its a cinematic uncharted type game were you have 0 freedom.
@@artemis_studios6555 I'm not talking directly to you
Elden Ring proved you can have an open world and *still* have tightly designed linear experiences meshed together perfectly.
Yeah exactly. We just need stronger activities within the open world. Tightly designed dungeons that we can get lost in. They are all too short etc.
elden ring literally has the same problem of having extremely repetitive everything, from enemies to bosses to "puzzles" to areas. It's even worse than totk about it actually. The quality drop from sekiro to make a "giant" world is insane.
unreasonably large aaa open world games are a cancer that needs to be terminated
Elden ring is linear af. It looks like an open world, but once you actually explore it for yourself, it becomes clear that you’re will explore the world in a straight line. Limgrave -> Liurnia -> Altus -> Mountaintops | Caelid (anytime you want)
Zelda is not a soulslike bro
@@lemmy154 No offense but I don’t think you read what he said.
The main benefits of linear design are better difficulty curve, better puzzles (because powers meant to be earned later in the game won't be able to be used to break through the puzzles), a more cohesive story, and the fact that overall it is easier to design. While having an open world where you can explore the whole map is very cool, ironically it is very limiting. if you play video games for story or GAMEPLAY, linear design (at least to the extent of a link to the past) is superior
Linear Zelda never really had difficulty curves tho. Except the dungeons.
@@tumultuousv that's kind of irrelevant to the point of whether or not the formula is good though, but you are (mostly) right
I disagree. The gameplay of Breath of the Wild is much more immersive, flexible and fun than anything on any other 3D Zelda, just for how free you are to tackle each challenge and the world itself.
Linear is just weak in comparison
@@tumultuousv Eh, I dunno. I feel like at least in the older 3D Zeldas I played like OoT and TP, dungeons did gradually grow more complicated and enemies more threatening as you progressed through the game. Heck my favorite enemy in all of TP wasn't a boss at all, but the freaking Iron Knuckle you fought in the Temple of Time. It was just such an excellent test of all the battle mechanics you had learned up until that point and was easily my favorite enemy to fight.
@@lonecom685 I'd love to see you cross a border or climb any mountain. You'd need tools, a passport, major story events in your life to do it. All while the ultimate evil wouldn't be waiting. Real life isn't truly open, even going hiking you have strict limits. What you claim immersion is far from reality. Then you'd learn that open worlds aren't immersive because like going on a car trip you make a route for a reason.
Those comments were shockingly tone deaf. I enjoy the new formula a ton, but to chalk up anyone else's preference to nostalgia is stupid. There are clear advantages to linear design.
Hearing this for the first time made me legitimately angry. It's so incredibly dismissive and straight up admitting to not understanding or caring about what fans want.
I like open world but they've pretty much done all they can for this timeline in Hyrule. The only other option is to go to a new land or create yet another timeline.
Provided I was disappointed by TOTK as a "sequel", I am hoping the next TLOZ game is open-world because I am hoping for an open-world TLOZ game that feels like a true sequel to BOTW.
@@Wackaz Funny since for me tht BotW disappointed me bc it lacked alot of wht I luved about Zelda, and TotK fixed a good portion of wht I disliked; Ended up satisified.
Facts af
Here’s a crazy idea - A Zelda game with an an open overworld and linear traditional dungeons.
Sounds like what the first game actually was instead of what the revisionists say.
@@amandaslough125 by first game you mean the literal first game, or botw?
@@noahginnett900The Legend of Zelda. It's open world. Go anywhere, do anything, but you're gonna have to beat all 8 dungeons plus Hyrule Castle. On top of all the dungeons being extremely linear in progression. The only way to make it non linear would be going to the 7th or 8th dungeon first. Grabbing the skeleton key, the dungeon item from that one, and using it to cheese the rest of the game.
Literally the very first game on the NES! 😂 The first one already got the structure right, yet afterwards, folks have been going strongly on either side of the spectrum for all of the games, that's kinda funny to think about.
I mean, I still would like a little bit of linearity in the overworld too as unlocking different parts of the world is a great feeling and paces the game more properly
I just want complexity and deeper interconnected challenges. I don't necessarily want to have linearity, I just want the dungeons to feel like more stuff is happening in them in GENERAL and it to take more thought and be more engaging. If they don't want to make em how the did, thats totally cool! lots of the dungeons in each game have different motivations. Idk tho, if they aren't gonna make em big linear puzzle boxes, why not make them.....more interesting and full? put more story in there. Give me a reason to come back. make some of them really dangerous. let me discover ancient text and have it recontextualize my understanding of the region. put unique flora and fauna in there. have puzzles that just....take longer to figure out. Have it change as I progress in more significant ways. have it respond and push back to certain solutions every so often. Make them more rollercoastery. Idk! just don't treat em like a single megashrine with 4 checkpoints again. Some Shrines that have 3 challenge iterations deep run dangerously close to the complexity of the temples. That should maaaayyybe not happen.
You can have a feeling of increasing power with linear dungeons. With the item and how you managed to get the item. If you found the solution to a hard puzzle, you can feel clever and it motivates you. It improves your mind and can allow you to have more combat tactics.
Leaning so far into the open world model inherently feels less designed and ultimately less interesting the more it's iterated on. There can be great worlds and exploration in linear Zeldas, but without the unnecessary inconveniences that ultimately demanded this change in the series
You're totally confusing or even worse, purposely construing ''designed'' with - ''oh We don't want Link to jump this 2 foot high fence right here, oh no no no - let's put Darth Vader's mighty Invisible Wall of gaming there - that'll stop his logical freedom.''
This already happens in the shrines, where the logical thing would be to allow Link to climb the walls, or use the zonai devices freely. Instead, its arbitrarily taken away from Link these basic capabilities for the same of tight game design. Even then, they just make trash puzzles that are not satisfying. They traded linearity for the sake of freedom, while still limiting the player in dumb and contrived ways, and somehow still fail to craft interesting dungeons.@@netweed09
@@netweed09 People seem to push the linear meaning well-designed argument hard it seems. Open air Zelda is just as much hand-designed like those linear games, perhaps even more so.
There have been great worlds and exploration in Linear Zeldas*
@@Korobooshii Exploration, really? Well, not _really_ - you're just pushing forwards down a glamorised Corridor the game wants you to play. Granted, Wind Waker was an exception but it had a _lot_ of filler, was _way_ too easy and also had barely 5 Dungeons that TOTK has. And you couldn't do them out of Order (so there goes any point in 'exploration'.) And I feel the Rito's were done _far_ better in Tears anyway: I enjoyed Tulin's Quest way more. valoo was too goofy for me to take seriously.
That fact that Aonuma of all people used the "that's just nostalgia talking" argument is kinda disturbing. It's not nostalgia, it's a preference. And if anyone should see why people want more linear dungeons and puzzle solving, it's him. He designed those games and he should know how well they sold. I hope we do get a Zelda game that blends both styles at least really well someday, but if they just can't, then why not keep giving us games with one or the other? Clearly both styles sell.
Agreed
@@watershipup7101because the entire staff working on 2d Zelda now works on 3d Zelda as they need everyone to be able to develop those games. That's very obvious
linear games limits the creativity as well since you can't really do much with it and it's still repetitive.
Agreed. I have never loved an open world game. There's been a few I liked, but every game I've really loved has been linear or, I'm not sure what to call it, but "open in confined areas" like Mario Odyssey and Monster Hunter Rise.
It’d be one thing if he understood those players’ desires and decided to stick with the current direction as that’s what he wants, but here it just seems like he has no desire to figure out WHY those players desire that in the first place so he just… throws them under the bus.
I just like the level design of the more linear games more. Felt like the world and characters had more personality to them too, but that may just be me.
It's not just you...
Also more challenging
You’re 100% right.
Im someone who got into this series through botw. I am a raving botw fan but I ended up trying out twilight princess and wind waker.
I enjoyed them both so fucking much and while I struggled a little with being put into a restricted linear environment from the absolute freedom I had in botw, I enjoyed the dungeons so much. It wasn't even nostalgia for me as I didn't know that those games existed.
I still adore botw a little more than totk because things felt a bit more sensible and meaningful than that.
Be sure to check out Ocarina of Time and Skyward Sword HD!
@@hichaelhyers Here to second this but also add Majora's Mask to the pile. And considering you liked the freedom and figuring things out on your own of BotW, I'd recommend getting an old copy of the N64 version. They made the bosses have insultingly obvious weak points in the remake for 3DS.
Aw man! Love to hear that! Outta curiosity, what made you want to try the older games?
@@animeartist888 Also Link's Awakening and A Link Between Worlds
As an old man who grew up with Zelda, that’s really cool to hear. All games are limited by the engineering of tech and design available at the time, and it’s good to know older Zelda games can hold up for new players.
The dungeon designs aren't the only thing people miss from the old formula, it's also the various items you could get and magical musical instruments.
Like, nearly every mainstream Zelda game had a musical instrument that allowed you to effect the world in some way, and the music that came from those songs were soooo iconic. Modern Zelda could EASILY implement this.
And as far as items go, one of the reasons I loved exploring dungeons is because I knew I'd get a new item that would change the way I interacted with the world.
Personally I'm hoping that the linear Ocarina of Time style of Zelda can coexist with the more open ended Breath of the Wild style of Zelda sort of like how 2D and 3D Mario platformers can coexist.
This. I don't see why they can't just rotate between the two styles.
@@ElvenRaptor easier said than done
In the same time frame it took to release Ocarina of Time and Skyward Sword, they only released 2 open world Zeldas.
Its impossible to coexist with the current way they are doing games.
It's kinda tricky to do that for how much dev time and money they spent on the 3D games now. Maybe they can get an external dev team for that, but that would still be a huge game that would require a ton of work, supervision and budget that maybe they would be better spent in something different instead of another Zelda when they already have one, plus it would be very easy to get a lesser game if they treat it as a "side game" with smaller budget. A 2D Zelda is more likely since the dev time and budget would be way smaller, the same way we had Dread and Wonder alongside Odyssey and (hopefully) Prime 4.
It can happen, but my guess is that Aonuma doesn't want to make linear games. So if a linear Zelda game were to exist in the future, it's going to be made by a different dev team than the primary one that Aonuma leads. It's an apt comparison with 2d and 3d Mario games (and Paper Mario, Mario Kart, and other spin offs), aren't those all made with different studios? It's all under the same Nintendo name, but they aren't all made by the same people.
When Aonuma said that, all i heard was, "I can't think of a way to combine linear and open-ended, so we will just go with what is making us money."
What I heard was "We have been collecting data for years, and this generic open world formula with less actual Zelda elements is what will sell the most. Hard-core fans will complain, but still buy, plus we picked up a ton of casuals who otherwise wouldn't care about Zelda. So shut your mouths and see you again in 7 years for BotW 3."
@@John6-40 I mean... so what? It's old fans' fault for not supporting the linear games enough. And, due to BOTW and TOTK's resounding success, the series is in a healthier place than it has ever been
@@John6-40 Eh, I don't know about that. I'm seeing more and more people - both long-time fans and newfound fans alike, expressing their discontent with ToTK each and every passing day. The statistical data on Google Trends suggests that this game had a very, very short shelf life on social media, as far as relevance and discussion goes.
I won't be surprised if the next one underperforms in sales, especially if it's more of the same with little to-no-improvements to the core gameplay loop (such as the removal of durability, for example.)
@@orlando5789 I've bought every Zelda and Nintendo systems, minus the WiiU. I love the open world but got excited about the glyphs so spoiled the story for myself so following the main quest line lost its luster because all the characters were acting brand new when I already knew the big reveal from almost the beginning.
I love exploring, but if this was more linear or restricted, I wouldn't have spoiled the main story plot line less than 10 hours in to my playtime.
@@alexs29 This is factually, objectively incorrect
i played botw for a little while (like one hour) and totk i’ve played for around 15 hours so far; anyway i just beat oot and mm for the very first time in my entire life over the past few months consecutively and i just. really really enjoyed them a lot. i may even consider those two to be my favorite video games of All Time. i never even grew up with oot nor mm and yet they hooked me a lot quicker than the former. i do plan to eventually beat totk, but i struggle w staying on track much more than the older titles. and i don’t think its because of nostalgia whatsoever lmao
Another Nintenfanboy blinded by nostalgia. Maybe learn to play a real game and stop whining like you're still 12. In short, grow up.
The idea is to have a big open world with linear sections for the main story.
No. The absolutely worst option.
The idea is to have a big open world with linear sections for the *dungeons, you mean. Preferably with items in the dungeon that improve how much you can explore the open world.
I'm liking how Genshin Impact does it (though they are more Persona 5-style switch based dungeons than Zelda-style physics based dungeons), where you unlock hidden areas and themed puzzle dungeons in the open world by doing mandatory and optional quests that have tons of character and story content, as well as being filled to the gills with tons of lore.
Like Elden Ring
@@NuiYabukoshut up
"Limited" and "restricted" are not the words I'd use to describe linear Zelda. "Focused" and "deliberate" are more suitable.
Wholeheartedly agree
i think a major issue here is Aonuma for some reason thinking the choice is a binary, between complete linearity and directionless freedom. which i think is just an insane take. Look at elden ring: a completely open world, with very slight structure to it that guides the player through the game, while letting them go where ever they want to go, with dungeons that, while linear, interconnect and allow the player to explore.
at their core, nintendos biggest problem is they dont take lessons from other games and automatically assume the way they do things is best.
That's because most people keep asking for fully linear / like the old games
Aonuma's whole take was devoid of and critical thinking skills as he spoke a fallacy for every point he made.
@Redpoppy80 I think you’re misunderstanding Aonuma and missing context and translation if you think his take is devoid of critical thinking. Jumping to such a black and white take yourself is…well, your words. Also consider translation issues…….
@Cyynapse your take is pretty binary and reductionist tbh
He said he doesn’t want to make the traditional games, so I think he’s saying this to justify it to himself. That and I think he wanted to surpass OoT, which (depends how you argue) one could say he did (or he feels he did) with BotW. So by backtracking, he might feel like he didn’t actually meet that milestone.
for me, the appeal of zelda was always the puzzle box/escape room type of scenarios. having challenges presented to you and trying to solve them
that is what Zelda IS at its core.... everything else is dressing
I prefer the fact that I have to make some progression in a game. I like to see areas that appear unreachable unless I come across something that will let me reach them. It leaves things to explore as you get ahead in-game. I liked dungeons that had many rooms and puzzles designed to keep you thinking. Small keys to unlock branching paths because a dungeon isn't entirely linear. I missed all that. A Link Between Worlds was where I felt things were moving in an entirely different direction when you were allowed to get items outside of dungeons. Before you used the item you found within to help progress past the second half of a dungeon and use it on the boss later. They can still strike a careful balance between linearity and open world, just don't give it all to us off the bat!!
I can see from an artistic perspective he may simply be having more fun creating these new types of Zelda's. He could potentially be burnt out on the old development methods. In my mind it would make more sense for someone else to take the helm on 2d Zelda's while he continues pursuing his vision for 3D Zelda's.
Most reasonable comment in a sea of nonsense. He is the artist, respect his vision, he clearly knows what's good, as his success proves.
Let someone else waste their time making boring, outdated, short games with little substance and puzzles that can only be considered tricky by a 4 year old.
@@Gatitasecsii like botw and totk?
@@stashallemagne4488XD
@@Gatitasecsii games with little substance and easy puzzles (ignoring the fact that puzzles in zelda have *never* been anything remotely resembling difficult)? You mean like BotW and TotK, right? ...right?
@@rhael42
You guys think that's a huge gotcha don't you? That's cute
I never claimed botw and totk had hard puzzles, I said the old games have nothing to offer in the modern day.
And I have really tried playing them again after all these years, they just don't hold up
The key feature lost in the open-air Zeldas is progression. It isn't about restriction OR freedom but restriction AND THEN freedom.
A game that I think perfected progression (for its genre) is Hollow Knight. I've never heard anyone say "I would have preferred if you started the game with already all the abilities by the end of the tutorial section and the only rewards throughout the rest of the game were geo (money), mask shards (life points) and soul vessels (magic meter)."
Sure you're restricted at the beginning but at the end of the game you're basically free to move around in any direction, and it's fun.
Similarly with older Zeldas and the hookshot for example. Sure ultrahand is fun but it doesn't feel earned and allows you to cheese the game in some (or even most) parts.
We're not saying "remove the abilities from TotK!" we're asking to move them further into the game so that we can feel the difference.
Sure you can decide to not use the abilities, but it just doesn't feel right, because they aren't designed for that and because then you fall into the "just restriction, no freedom" category. Champion/sage abilities don't count because they're never necessary to solve anything outside of the dungeon.
tl;dr: Put items back in dungeons and create puzzles around them! Preferably with a progression in difficulty for puzzles so the challenge grows with our understanding of the abilities.
Lightning Temple in TotK felt pretty good to me. The first half definitely feels a bit more linear and and the light puzzle was fun. It still just wasn't at the level of old Zelda temples though. Even in a game like SS that most people say is pretty rough, the dungeon design was incredible. They can't have just gotten rid of all of their dungeon designers, right?
Skyward sword is probably my favourite Zelda game. It has some of the strongest dungeons in the franchise. But it's main problem is it never gets out of "dungoen mode". the entire overworld is made of sequential puzzles so it gets a bit tiresome. The game really needed a stronger open area to explore. The sky is a bit tedious to fly through. The fact that's its still my favourite despite all this just shows how strong the dungeons and story are.
Personally. My beef is that I wish Zelda would be more story driven or have more epic set up’s but maybe I’m a minority.
There are a lot of good games that are story driven even if they aren't Zelda games! Just the Witcher games for example. My favorite is the 1st one with its great music/atmosphere. Witcher 2 is shorter but a little bit like the 3rd. 3 is open world but still keeps similarities with its prequels.
I absolutely agree. I started playing The Witcher 3 this year and the writing has absolutely blown me away so far, and I really don't feel like it being an open world game kills the pacing at all.
I love ToTK as an open world for entirely different reasons, so I don't compare the two, but I just wish a little more care was put into its story. I know Nintendo is about gameplay over everything else, but strong characters and a plot that gets you invested can dramatically elevate gameplay, and lead to more memorable moments.
Part of what makes me dislike TotK so much is that the sense of wonder for the world is largely absent. It was my favorite part of BotW; not knowing what was around the corner, discovering the dragons for the first time, fighting a Lynel for the first time, using powers that Link never had before, the mystery of why Ganon had become a blight instead of his traditional Gerudo thief incarnation, what happened to Zelda, why Link lost his memory... I felt that most of that sense of discovery was simply absent, or done to a much less effective degree. I had massive expectations for TotK and it just didn't meet my expectations and standards for how long this game spent in development.
I felt the wait was not worth it, and part of what makes this situation suck is we could have had 2 or 3 smaller Zelda titles in between TotK and BotW, but for some unfathomable reason they seem to have forsaken old Zelda entirely just to blow their money on one game at a time. It doesn't make sense to me.
It makes sense when you see the sales numbers
I agree with you 100%, for me BotW is a 9/10 game and TotK a 6/10 game - and pretty much for the reasons you stated
@@hubblebublumbubwub5215I mean yeah but luckily being greedy is still seen as a bad thing in society.
Also, there are simply more people playing video games nowadays and these titles still play off the popularity and success that Zelda built with the old titles.
@@hichaelhyers The public isn't going to revolt against games that most of them enjoy. The boost in sales is so big it can't just be attributed to more people being gamers. I don't like it either but there's nothing I can do about it. Maybe if I get filthy rich somehow I'll make a game similar to the old ones.
By the way, did you happen to see the latest thegamingbrit video?
@@hubblebublumbubwub5215 No I haven't, will check it out, thanks.
I genuinely think that when they heard people complaining about the dungeon "design" in BOTW, they thought people were just talking about the appearance of the dungeons themselves. So when making the dungeons in TOTK, they gave each of them unique appearances but didn't change anything mechanically about them.
Thank you for vocalizing exactly how I felt when I heard that interview.
The real problem with the Open World formula, no matter the title, is that it is in tension with narrative and plot development. All story is linear. It has to be "This happens, therefore this happens" or "That happened, but this complication occurred, and therefore this happened." It can't just be a series of "This and then this and then this" with no cause and effect, but the only way to achieve that sense of one event impacting another is for them to be linear.
Counterexample: Outer Wilds.
To be fair, there are open world games with drawn out, linear stories, like GTA 5, but I like the narrative feel of certain areas being gated off until important moments in the story, like how the trek through Gerudo Desert and the enemy camp in TP builds up to the Arbiter's Grounds and the mirror. It would spoil the narrative feel if you could just randomly wander into the Arbiter's Grounds before the Midna's Desperate Hour sequence.
Your logic assumes that 1.) Story is the most important part of a game, which it's not. And 2.) That tension only comes from story, i.e dialogue. Which is also not the case.
Yeah plenty of open world games have solved this story problem. Zelda just chose, twice, to stuff all its story beats into flashbacks so that Link has no agency and little importance to the story he's in
@@raveoreynolds6049 Nobody said story is the most important part of a game. The problem is open world games with no semblance of a linear progression have a very difficult time telling a compelling story in an engaging narrative format, which is definitely something BotW and TotK struggled with.
Reading what Aonuma said, that broke my heart. Now, I really do think we'll never get a linear Zelda game ever again. Unfortunately, it seems it’s gonna be open world all the way.
Cry me a river, Jesus
@@Reubs-o5mWhen I'm in a "write the least constructive comment possible" competition and my opponent is user-mo1cu6rx4i.
The only hope I have is Link's Awakening remake for Switch. At the very least, some smaller budget linear Zelda games would make the sting less intense and provide opportunities for the market to show demand for bigger budget ones.
Eh, forever is a long time, and people get tired of repetition quickly, especially these days. Sooner or later the open formula is what people will be seeing as outdated, heck, this is already happening to franchises other than Zelda.
You speak as if people can never change their minds.
Just one thing, Aonuma only said “more designed” not more tightly designed, which I interpret as a response to the criticism of the repeated sheikah aesthetic from breath of the wild, rather than the puzzle quality.
That's a good point - a lot can get lost in translation. If only I knew Japanese and could personally ask for clarification lol
@@MachFiveFalconI am Japanese and I can clarify. This video is crap. It is deliberately reading an ambiguous translation badly for clicks. Seeing inflammatory headlines from journalists is disappointing but video like Arlo should be ashamed too for stretching their interpretation so far. Aonuma said nothing so disrespectful as this video pretends. It made me angry to watch it.
@@gogongagis3395 Idk I think his description of how the dungeons got worse is pretty accurate, regardless of what Aonuma said. And even if there are some minor ambiguous translations I don't think Arlos interpretation is far off. Why didn't you just clarify what Aonuma meant instead of bashing this video?
That quote you keep going back to about player freedom is baffling. I remember realizing when I was really young that sometimes art rises from limitations. And likewise, sometimes good design rises from limitations. The fact the player can't do everything and isn't omnipotent means they need to truly work. It's odd to think that someone so successful and talented has such a simplistic view about what is good and bad in game design.
It makes no sense too. The guy worked under Miyamoto, who was all about linear-design so he would have a great understanding of its strengths AND weaknesses.
Yet here he is acting like it only weaknesses, and that his new style doesn't have weaknesses!
So much hubris and disrespect to his mentor and their past work, which is very un-Japanese like.
This coupled with his absolute butchery of Majora's Mask 3D has me pretty upset with modern Aonuma.
As a former kid who remembers tons of free time in school, BoTW is fantastic for that crowd. As an adult with very little free time, linear storytelling is just so much easier to get a satisfying experience from.
Exactly! As an adult with limited time for gaming, I would love to have a more linear game as well. For this reason, I actually enjoyed Mario Galaxy 1 and 2 much better than Mario Oddessy. And by the way, when is Mario Galaxy 3 coming out! Waiting for that game for ages!
Idk even when I'm working full time botw didn't feel overwhelming. You could easily get an hour or two every other day out of it no problem imo.
But I don't oppose classic linear Zelda either.
I wish I had tons of free time as a kid, my teachers felt like it was their civic duty to load us up with enough homework to prevent that. But yes, as an adult these large open world games take me months or over a year to finish. I am really starting to appreciate shorter, more focused linear games.
I just hate how so much of odyssey's objectives are filler garbage. galaxy had a couple of stinker stars (clearing the garbage islands was hell), but MOST of odyssey's moons are either out in the open, way too easy to get by like groundpounding a glowy spot, or have some mobile game inspired mission like "do jump rope 100 times". 120 well designed moons/stars/whatever was a fantastic number, no clue why they changed it to 900 bad-mediocre ones with a few well thought out ones. Gameplay was phenomenal though, mario controlled like a dream.@@topstorekorea
Neither game is that long. Skip the most of the horrible side quests and you could beat it. Wish I did that with tears. Short short games in the grand scheme of things.
Crazy that he sees a game like bg3 win and doesn’t think to look to that for inspiration. That game is obviously telling a story while still having open world elements
Balders gate 3 is garbage
@@moritakaishida7963 BG3 blows TOTK out of the water
I think the question of "dungeon design" got lost in translation somewhere. It may have been interpreted that the problem with Breath of the Wild was that all of the Divine Beasts looked alike in their design assets. So they may have thought the solution was to give each area's dungeon a unique look. And without a doubt, they all do look very distinct from each other. But far too much of the conversation may have revolved around the looks, that the layout aspect of design got lost.
So, in that, I feel the Tears of the Kingdom dungeons are indeed a vast improvement, they didn't solve ALL the problems. That is up to the next iteration to solve.
True, in fairness to the devs they definitely did listen to the main complaint regarding dungeons in BOTW. Hopefully whatever the next game ends up being they once again listen. Because maybe it's just me, but i feel this palpable sense that the vast majority of people are begging for the return of traditional dungeons and linear story.
There are way too few dungeons for a game of TotK’s size, they’re too short, they lack any real combat except for the boss, and they all follow the same “activate 5 switches” thing. They don’t even have keys!
Come on, that's so unfair to consumers, wtf. Lost in translation, my ass.
@@hichaelhyers Sounds more like “I don’t give a rat’s ass”
@@TheRealPSKilla502 this is definitely a key part in the problem. So much of what the dungeons did previously has now been allocated to the shrines which are also rather boring and repetitive in the grand scheme of things, even if there are great ones sprinkled in. The reward for completing a shrine is also relatively tiny because there's so many of them. Also in previous games all the dungeons had some enemy types unique to only that dungeon or area with their own challenges to beat, creating greater variance in the experience. The shrines all practically spam the same enemy type.
Sure, they also work as fast travel points and that's increasingly useful with the sky islands included, but I think I'd much rather have unlockable fast travel points without the shrines and either just more dungeons and get the heart/stamina progress from those or more dungeons, and much less shrines than currently in the game but much larger and complicated ones with a scaled-up reward. For example, we could only have a quarter of the shrines but the orbs you get as a reward from them would be able to buy you the heart/stamina upgrade outright instead of needing to get 4 of them.
I really enjoy all the shrines that have an overworld puzzle (especially the unique ones) involved to even access the shrine, but the inside of those is usually only a corridor giving you a chest and the orb. Instead of that they could combine the overworld puzzle ones with the best inside puzzle ones that use the same mechanics to a much larger and complete experience. They could also disjoint the shrines from the fast travel point system entirely, other than unlock a travel point for the purpose of revisiting like in the full dungeons, so that unlocking them would also be entirely optional and part of the wider free exploration experience instead of it being practically mandatory to at least unlock the shrines for their fast travel points.
The weird thing is, Zelda has always been both open world AND linear - all the way back in Link to the Past, the over world was completely open and you could do any dungeon in any order, but when you got IN those dungeons, they were linear and intricately designed - THIS is what we need 😂😂
Especially 2D Zeldas did such a great job to make the entire overworld feel like a puzzlebox that you have to open up over time to explore new areas and find new things in already known areas. These games also were open world but the open world were the reward and earned while playing the game. I love this Metroidvania approach and always thought this was the future of 3D Zelda when it once goes fully seemless open world but sadly it didn't.
BOTW and TOTK are so successful exactly because they aren't that.
You traditional Zelda guys just fail to realize that most people don't like that. A world where you have zero idea what to do, and unlocking anything is a puzzle where you have to do something you might never find out if you don't look at guides.
Believe me, most people don't like that, there is a reason why BOTW sold three times more than the previously best selling Zelda.
@@RuuyG "You guys". Why is it always tribal with people? Jesus fucking christ, people like different things. Nobody wants BOTW/TOTK style games to just...Disappear. They're crazy successful and many love them. Why can't there be an occasional linear zelda too? Stop antagonizing people.
@@RuuyGI'd say the reason it sold so much is because 1) the Switch is an amazingly sold console, and 2) there was a lot of hype around the "open world" component, since that was the current trend. There is no real proof that the removal of dungeons had any impact, because we don't have a hypothetical "BotW, but where they kept traditional dungeons" to compare to.
@@thatnerdygaywerewolf9559 1) think for two seconds before you write, the Wii sold more than a 100 million and SS sold just 4 million. If you don't admit this argument is total bullshit and you just didn't think about it, you're just stubborn and not willing to have a discussion. SS sold less than games release to smaller install bases, why? It's the most linear Zelda, where basically the whole world is a giant puzzle, with stupid motion controls on top.
2) exactly, people like open world. Why weren't previous Zeldas hyped that much? Because most people don't like puzzles and dungeons 😂😂😂😂😂 Dude, it's obvious, just look at most mainstream games, they don't have those elements, I wonder why... you guys are just denying reality, just based on your own opinion, although all evidence speak against you.
@@RuuyG 1) Skyward Sword got a lot of bad press due to its motion control gimmick and linearity (more specifically: the segmented nature of the areas and all the preamble between dungeons, which people conflated as "linearity"). Its actual dungeons are considered some of the best in the series if you can get past those two aspects, but many people couldn't. Also, as someone brought up in another thread, it was also made during the end of the Wii's lifespan, which had an effect as well.
2) Why does everything have to have mainstream appeal and hype? Having multiple different niches is a good thing to give the medium variety, rather than everything following whatever trend is going on. Sometimes the niche then breaks into the mainstream (like Balder's Gate 3 did), but its also fine if it doesn't.
I wonder if he had the free, open world Zelda games as a goal/dream for years but always had hardware limitations and so now that there are less hardware limitations and people are asking for the old style, he's thinking "but we can finally make what we've always wanted..."
Thats an interesting perspective
I could believe that
He said this. this is true. aonuma said it. that is what he wanted for zelda
@@DukeTheDukeTheDukeTheDuke That makes no sense. The handholding in Skyward Sword wasn't a "hardware limitation."
I can definitely see that being a possibility.
@@Pebphiz aonuma said it not me
"Look at these numbers!" Nailed it there man. I think Nintendo believe they've cracked the code to sell 10x more Zeldas as they used to, thanks to the open-world formula and assume that the linear structure is what was keeping the series from reaching a much wider audience. I believe Aonuma thinks the two different formulas don't mix, or at least that the much larger '"open world" audience they brought to the series actively dislikes the linear progression formula and that bringing that back into the series could scare off that new, larger audience.
And well... I'm not sure he would be entirely wrong about that. I can only speak from my personal experience, but I've seen a lot of people around me and in the larger video games discourse (as in not the Nintendo hardcore fanbase) that knew about the Zelda series but had just zero interest in it before BotW. They saw Zelda as some sort of samey, childish puzzle game for 10 years old. I don't think bringing back a linear progression and more puzzley dungeons would *drive away* that audience from the series, but it would probably not make the game any better for them. So why would Nintendo take that risk or invest the time and resources to do that, when the major part of the audience just doesn't care about it in their eyes?
My wishes are a 100% percent aligned with Arlo's and what I assume is the majority of the long-time Zelda fanbase but I really don't have much of an idea where the series is headed to next. But a return to the OoT formula is certainly not what I'm expecting. Aonuma is *done* with that, and that's what remasters are for anyway :D
Giving us another ALBW wouldn't hurt anyone though.
Breath of the Wild and Tears of the Kingdom are the only two Zelda games that I've played a lot of, and the only two I've beaten, so you could possibly say I'm part of that section of the audience.
I wouldn't be hugely against more "puzzle-y" dungeons, as long as they're done right, but I really don't want anything too far from the core feeling of botw/totk.
I think people also miss, that although the puzzles in BotW and TotK aren't contextualized the way they used to be in older games, the puzzles themselves are designed better in the open world games.
There isn't a single dungeon room in any of the past games as beautifully designed as the central rotating chamber in Vah Naboris.
The building puzzles throughout TotK are next level creative -- miles beyond "Light torch -- get key".
Less creative fans will always moan about the loss of linearity and the availability of multiple paths.
The fact is, you can never experience two playthroughs of OoT or TP that are as radically different as two full speed runs of the open world games each focussed on different goals.
The open world games simply offer more.
One of the best parts of the older zelda dungeons, was that each one had a unique tool, weapon or upgrade to your current equipment, that you could get. The problem in death of the wild and tears of the kingdom, is that most of those tools are available almost right away and are used for every dungeon. There's nothing new along the way. I feel that the claw shot and double claw shot from twilight princess would have been a great late game unlockable in tears of the kingdom. You have the ability to build things to reach basically anywhere from the very beginning of the game, but it can take a while and the constructs have limited time and energy. Claw shot would make moving around much faster and would be acceptable to unlock near the end of the main story. Bringing back the magic meter and upgrades for your equipment that uses magic would be great too. Also the greatest zelda mechanic, playable musical instruments that have special effects.
We already had a lot of this with the stamina meter, armor upgrades, zonai batteries, schematics, purah pad upgrades, getting to the towers for map data, etc.
It just.. wasn't very interesting how they did it.
The most fun I had was actually in the starting area, the Great Sky Island, where you needed to figure out how to get from one shrine to the next in a semi-linear way.
Wind waker strikes the perfect balance of a sort of open world with a good story. Need more of that 👍
AND you can't just access all islands right away because some require specific items.
Also, link between worlds does as well. You can tackle any of the dungeons in any order, but the story is linear and the dungeons are linear oh yeah, and the games pretty much open world in 2-D
as someone who is not a particularly big WW fan (I prefer TP), this is arguably the best thing about the game. It absolutely NAILS the exploration and freedom while still providing progression and structure
the major downfall of wind waker was the triforce quest which unfortunately bloated the game a lot. it's still probably my favorite zelda, but it's not without its issues that could be fixed. any time i go back to play it again i always skip that part. it takes you to some cool and unique locations at least, but it still felt a little long and digging around in the ocean for some of them was a pain.
otherwise, yeah, i think it still has a sense of progression to it while also having that feeling of "what's in the distance beyond the horizon? let's go check it out!" and unique things happening in the world that fill you with intrigue.
Honestly, The Wind Waker's linearity was often frustratingly arbitrary. You couldn't just sail wherever you wanted until after the Forbidden Woods, and you had to do the Earth Temple before the Wind Temple even though neither the plot nor the gameplay should require it. Though I did like coming back to islands with new items to access something new
Some part of me is still hoping that the translation isn’t completely accurate, but yeah my heart also broke a little bit when reading that interview. You can absolutely have an open world game with more traditional, linear dungeons. Whenever I figured out rooms or puzzles in previous Zelda games it felt great. In ToTK the only time I got close to that feeling was with the mirror puzzles (The lightning temple ended up being my favorite). Everything else just felt like going through the motions.
The sentiment expressed in the original Japanese is practically the same unfortunately.
I just want traditional dungeons tbh. If we have an open world game with better dungeons that would satisfy me.
“Open world” is somewhat of a vague term, and could honestly just mean an insanely big overworld, which I would be totally fine with. There just has to be substance to back it up. The overworld is imo primarily a way of getting from point A to point B with some scenery to set the mood, and while exploring it is cool, and should be rewarded with some collectibles, it shouldn’t be the sole focus of the game.
@@TheRealPSKilla502 Open world just means that the entire map is open for the player to do what they want in whichever order they want. If “insanely big overworld” was the only requirement then I’d argue that previous Zelda games should be considered open world by this logic but they really aren’t. Previous Zelda games had areas of the map and events locked behind specific story events and the game led you to one destination. The thing is that dungeons are inherently separate from the overworld and I honestly see no reason why they couldn’t make the dungeons more tightly and traditionally designed while still having the big open world. Sure there’d still be a few sacrifices like item based progression wouldn’t be possible, but it would strike a much better balance and it would satisfy a lot of people.
I’m not much of a FromSoft guy, but I do think Elden Ring proved you can break away from a more linear series tradition and still include tight dungeons within an open world that feel like the old games.
Restriction is good. It provides challenge. It makes you think. In BotW and TotK there are limitless options which allow your imagination to go crazy but not as many "eureka" moments where you discover THE solution. I liked not being able to jump on command. I don't like just being able to climb a mountain the size of Everest with the greatest of ease. Bigger is not better. And yea, although they're very good, the new games have lost track of a lot of what makes Zelda Zelda.
That “no more linear Zelda” take of Aonuma is what made me think of him like Zelda’s Yoshi-P… they just don’t seem to understand what made the old system good, and that is not only nostalgia, but game style. It’s not that the older styles weren’t inferior, they were different, and a lot of us loved them. It’s why we old FF fans moved to trails, DQ, etc, and were so happy to get the octopath games and live a live, amongst other stuff… Likewise we crave the old zelda games. I’m not being throughout, you’ve explained way better what’s lost, what we miss, and I hope that Nintendo still gives us some of that sweet complex puzzle dungeons and a good linear and fun experience in future zeldas; but if not… maybe someone else will… I couldn’t answer Aonuma’s question any better than you did, it is a beautiful, and very detailed response that mirrors exactly my feelings on the matter. Thank you for giving voice to us old school Zelda fans, Arlo~
I like your FF comparison. FF XV really was inferior to VII and VI. I lost any interest in FF XVI when I heard they basically turned it into Metal Gear Rising Revengance. That game was fine I guess, but that’s not what I want from Final Fantasy.
I stopped at Final Fantasy 12, and tbh, I say 10 was the last great Final Fantasy, despite it's reputation. I very much used to appreciate the 2D Final Fantasy's, especially 6, though.
In my old age, I lost interest in those types of games for all of the things you have to pay attention to, and all the things you can miss if you don't have a guide.
Also, I agree with you on Arlo. He really explained our feelings in a mature and thorough manner. Crazy that a puppet has the most mature, real and intelligent videos on RUclips.
Love this guy. 👍
Dragon Quest is an perfect example of evolving the series, while staying true to it's traditions. I'm worried about Dragon Quest 12 because of the rumor approach that it might go on an different route.
Sadly no one will do it. You need lots of budget and experience to make such dungeons, and only TLoZ does this properly. There's no real way of replicating this, and that's why it's such a lost that TLoZ becomes more generic.
I personally can see the appeal for both styles and think alternating styles could be beneficial for the series.
They actually have done this before. Let’s see her link between worlds where you can do any dungeon in any order you want a linear story linear dungeons and an open world now imagine if they did this with a 3d Zelda game
I like Arlo's idea where the prior design is relegated to the 2D Zeldas. I've personally felt that formula works much better there anyways. LttP, LBW, LA and Oracles are all bangers.
I strongly believe that the nostalgia is not only the dungeons, but the beginning of the game being held in a place that feels like home, Ocarina of times Kokiri forest, Wind wakers first island & Twilight princesses first village was immersive and felt like home. a home where you made valuable friendships but ultimately forced to leave to basically become an adult. i think that linear process is subconsciously relatable to us humans in a real sort of way. i would like an adventurous open world that leads you to linear complex dungeons with difficult & interesting bosses. Basically, how OCARINA OF TIME DID IT! BRING BACK THE MUSIC TOO! JEEZ!
I never played Zelda as a kid and botw was my first Zelda game I finished. I loved it but after playing the link's awakening remake, it just has a different place in my heart. I'd love more games like that too.
Plenty of them for you to play bro, I recommend a link between worlds.
Please give wind waker a try if you haven't
If you wonna try another game to keep the tradition going and still go on an easy side, I highly recommend both Link to the Past and/or Link Between Worlds.
@@omegalilbchass8270 as a kid I always wanted to play a link between worlds but I never got the game on my 3ds back then. Now I got a new one recently, might just play it
@@user-fk2xg8nq6r that was my actual first game but I only played it a little bit lol. I borrowed the game from our library. Sadly don't have a Wii anymore as it's broken.
In a world of live service content and endless open world slop. A contained, linear experience will become more and more worthwhile.
The dungeons were all disappointing in Tears. They didn't even try to maintain an illusion of exploration, instead giving us a list of chores to tick off. They were a worse version of the divine beasts for this reason imo, which were similar but more interesting in form.
Yep took me about 15 to 20 min each in TotK...
Can't believe I'm saying this, but they made me like the divine beasts. I appreciate them so much more now, even the bosses
Also the concept of having controls to modify the whole dungeon layout was interesting and completely new to Zelda, but just not fully utilized. Something that Totk just scrapped for no apparent reason.
@@viktorthevictor6240 This is such a wild take lmao. You like evil goo calamity four times better than four unique bosses like Zelda games of old? Give me a break lmao
I mostly agree. To add to that, the Divine Beasts, for all their faults, had the interesting idea of manipulating the whole dungeon and they really gave the sense of being inside something within the overworld while still being isolated within a dungeon. While the Sky, Fire and Desert temples in Tears felt isolated enough, the Water temple just seemed like another set of sky islands; not a dungeon.
Arlo, you are totally right. I went into TOTK with a lot of enthusiasm as they said dungeons are back. I did the first dungeon and that enthusiasm went out the window. Then I thought, maybe the other dungeons will be better. They weren't. Nintendo are NOT listening. They lied, dungeons are NOT back.
With TOTK, the physics was impressive although way over used. Side missions were totally uninspiring. Breakable weapons remain, you can't climb when it's raining (they are not listening). Hyrule and the sky islands looked absolutely gorgeous, but the sky islands were extremely repetitive and boring. No community or villages there. Don't get me started on the depths, boring, empty, dark, ugly, repetitive, yuk! Who designed that? No fun to be had there at all.
Open world does not always mean better. I'm fine with open world, but why can't you make a traditional game and plank it into the middle of an open world? Make something like twilight princess and make it open world. It's not that hard! This has not been done yet, I don't get it. I've been waiting for tomb raider to do this also. If you put dungeons/puzzles in the horizon games, playstation would have it's own version of Zelda. Why is nobody seeing that to do this would be simple and groundbreaking?
I think what Aonuma is saying with that quote is coming from someone who remembers the last big Zelda game that used the formula was Skyward Sword and how it wasn't received all that well. So he may see and here those who wants the formula back and might be getting a little confused because Skyward Sword wasn't received all that well. I think the HD version was some what of a test to see if that formula could still work in a post Breath of the Wild world.
So if that were the case, maybe it wasn't much of a good idea to port Skyward Sword, a game that (while I personally enjoyed) isn't so well liked by fans, over to the Switch and instead choose a more popular and beloved title like Twilight Princess or Wind Waker. With games like those, games that were basically the BOTW/TOTK of the Gamecube and Wii eras, they would have been better used to gauge popularity of linear Zelda compared to open world Zelda. And then, when releasing games, try to mix it up every once in awhile. Make one or two games linear, and then swap over to open world for the next few and try to appease both fans as much as possible.
Learned the wrong lesson then. Thought everyone hated linearity, truth is everyone hated wagglan.
He went way too linear with Skyward Sword, then when he was criticized swung hard the opposite direction. I'm starting to think he's just an idiot with a fantastic dev team.
Agreed@@TheBrianMSnyder. In my experience, Skyward Sword wasn't criticised for being linear by most people, it was criticised for being *too* linear. Which it was, the vast majority of it (except the sky) was basically one linear dungeon after another, even if some of them are disguised as overworld areas. It feels like there's barely any time to breathe.
I feel like Aonuma might've missed the "too" part of "too linear". Now we have games that are so free-form that I feel like I'm achieving almost nothing, because almost everything, including even the story, is designed to be accessible at almost any time, or downright skippable. Not to mention that Nintendo just seems to struggle with figuring out how to make an open-world feel populated. I'm worried will get BotW 3 next, even if it's not in the same world, because I'm not sure how they managed to even get two games' worth out the formula.
He's just mad no one likes his games, and rather than accepting that he just made games that people don't love, decides the only reason people like the older games more MUST be nostalgia.
It's big 'it's not me, it's them who's wrong' energy.
7:04 Thank you! As Joseph Anderson once put it "A boring puzzle with three boring solutions instead of one boring solution is still a boring puzzle." The looseness of the mechanics and freedom often feels like a detriment to the game.
The openendedness even affects the enemy design. Enemy encounters feel samey since they have to use the same weapons you can take from them. They can also be fought using anything, so there's no point where one weapon is more ideal than another. You can make do just fine with only broadswords, or in my case, a glitched, unbreakable Master Sword in TOTK.
An earlier interview had Aonuma say something similar, where he questioned the concept of seeing something you can't interact with and that players wouldn't want to come back to it later, and one comment I saw summed it up beautifully. "Has this man never played a metroidvania?"
To be fair, when we talk about a massive open world, this might be more true. At least metroidvanias are very tightly connected and smaller maps.
@@CaptainTitforce Yea, but with now much those games love waypoint markers and quest logs it would actually be LESS of a problem.
BOTW/TOTK already make you to fetch materials for some npc half the time, I don’t see why you can’t mark a rock you’re unable to pick up until later.
Reminds me of when Arlo said he had to run away from a stone talus, and that it was satisfying to come back and beat it later.
@@thelastwindwaker7948 It's not about the fact of marking it. It's just that if you actually mark every single thing in a world of this size (or even a portion of them), at some point, many players would just go, "Well I don't really feel like getting this thing too anymore, it's all the way over here and I have this and this and that to get too."
You’re 100% right man. We love Zelda for a reason, solving puzzles that were intricately designed to be solved in a specific way, and exploring. More choices does not equal inherently better. While the open world design was a nice breath of fresh air, I think it took away so much of what the fans loved about the series in many regards. I have never felt less compelled to finish a Zelda game than I have with BotW and TotK. Hopefully the creators will reconsider their stance and take the feedback we’ve given into stronger consideration.
I can't imagine the next game's sole focus will be limitless freedom, since you can't take that much further than Tears of the Kingdom did. I think what they'll do is keep evolving the format based on what people wanted from the last game, just like they did with the old 3D games. They already said they're not bringing Ultrahand back.
I like both ways. However, freedom is great and all, but it needs contrast. I'm not a super fan or anything, but I learned recently that there's a mask in Majora's mask that makes you unseen by everyone, and you can use it to get through puzzles where you try not to get detected, or else you get kicked out. I thought "wow, that's so cool." In BOTW and TOTK theres several masks that make enemies not attack you, but there's never such a strong need for them, so they don't stand out as useful. Not to mention you can't upgrade them, and you don't need to hide when you're as powerful and full of options as Link in the new games. This is what I mean when I say the game needs contrast. Here's another example. The freedom to cheese the shrines is fun and amazing. But personally, I tend to see how they want me to do them before I potentially use my cheese strats. And if it looks more fun, I skip the cheese. Doing all that stuff is cool, but it's not even as fun when you're not really cheating the game, but doing something they were okay with you doing anyway. Because then it's not really cheesing. Freedom is great, but when there's limits, you gotta be creative, or actually solve puzzles. I wanna see something like open world Ocarina of Time. The shrines would have been fine if the dungeons were more linear and difficult. The dungeons just feel like big shrines. I wanna struggle to figure out some large scale puzzles piece by piece. Contrast. Lots of NPC's and monsters, but less of them stand out. Ofc TOTK is a lot of copying from BOTW, so it doesn't stand out as much in general.
You can sneak into the Yiga clan hideout with their outfit, its not like they didnt incorporate some disguises that npcs acknowledge/ignore