ไม่สามารถเล่นวิดีโอนี้
ขออภัยในความไม่สะดวก
The Best of Both Worlds
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 5 ก.ค. 2024
- (Note: Unlike most of my videos which are based on research, this is primarily a theory video. If that's not your thing, I hope to see you again next time!)
Also - this was recorded prior to the Echoes of Wisdom announcement!
Zelda Tears of the Kingdom showed how open a game could be. Skyward Sword and Ocarina of Time showed how linear experiences could work. But are these two styles forever going to be opposed? Is it possible to imagine a game that is both open and linear?
![[UNCUT] หวั่นขาดความเชื่อมั่น ศาล รธน. วินิจฉัยคดีถอนถอนนายกฯ เศรษฐา | คนดังนั่งเคลียร์ | 14 ส.ค. 67](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/8hKvQe_vh3o/mqdefault.jpg)
People don't mention enough how the 3D Mario team already managed to accomplished exactly this in Bowser's Fury. They combined the best aspects of the sandbox and linear 3D Mario titles to make a game that's both open like 64 or Odyssey and has precise platforming like 3D world.
Exactly. Even odyssey does this well i think with the sub-areas.
Exactly! You had a linear world and story progression but every area felt open to explore. And the cat shines, even though for every section of the unlocked islands where linear, you could always go to whatever island you want to gather the required amount. Bowser's Fury was a pretty fun prototype that many of us enjoyed it and I can't wait to see what's next for 3D Mario!
Mario Sunshines entire World was built as one Big platformer!
It's how mario would navagate a cartoon tropical world, every world having vertical design with jumps and jetpack in mind.
And on top of that there were all the Hidden stages with extreme platforming.
The game was dope
Hence why Bowser’s Fury is still inferior to Odyssey. You guys don’t know what is best. Open world made Odyssey and Tears the best games of their respective franchises.
Shoutout to the bird in the thumbnail that put the accent on "Liñear".
Looking at a game like Skyward Sword, you only need two checkpoints for story and progression. The first is in the middle where Zelda goes into the past and your goal becomes forging the Master Sword. The second is right before the endgame where she sleeps to imprison Demise and your goal is to find the Triforce.
Progression is easy to envision in the second checkpoint since you're in the endgame, so it would require simply having a penultimate and final dungeon to beat. The first checkpoint is more interesting since it could be solved by creating a second overworld (or something similar) to traverse. Think about how in A Link Between Worlds, most of the dungeons can be tackled in any order once you enter Lorule.
As a pokemon/metroid player, ive always said that the design of the environments is a lot more impactful to the gameplay than the linearity of the progression. Multiple small enclosed environments can be fun to explore if they are designed well.
I swear 90 percent of the fandom would be happy if the totk dungeons weren't such pushovers.
And they made the new areas more substantial
And they integrated the story with more subtlety and progression
Which all revolves around that need of managing the scope and the ability to tune what's found in it.
Wait so you're eluding that 90% of the playerbase was unhappy with the game.. Coz that's a cap imho.
New art style, new map, and longer dungeons and I think most people would be as happy as they were with BOTW. This is someone that defends TOTK and loves it. But I’m just trying to be real. If it had those 3 things, the other things would seem minor. Still a super impressive game. I want the game to be remembered for its great gameplay and combat loop and not for the poor dungeons. I’m a little worried it could be the latter.
Mm no, the best new dungeons are much better than the average “traditional” dungeon. Overall the quality has improved a lot
@@56ty_ what are the best new dungeons you use as reference?
I think the best way of marrying the two styles lies in Nintendo letting players go just about everywhere, but not being scared to design a fair few places where the player will have a hard time without certain equipment.
We have shades of this already. You probably shouldn't explore Faron in BotW without either the Zora Armor or Revali's Gale to bypass the waterfalls while its raining, but you can do it. Same for Hyrule Castle, without the Master Sword or Daruk's Protection it's not going to be an easy time.
By having more of these moments and having dungeon items focus on significant Quality of Life improvements they can still have dungeons with cool rewards that the dungeon itself explores well, without imparing the player's freedom and honestly probably enhancing it. Clearing out some challenge you "weren't meant to" always feels really rewarding.
This might be at the cost of some features that are on armor or food being made into permanent upgrades, which imo is fine, as both systems are excessive in their scope.
The other big thing that needs to be solved is dungeons. I think the problem with the current style is almost solely about size. The dungeons end where most traditional zeldas would put the miniboss--and no, the trek up to the dungeon is no excuse as older Zeldas had big segments prior to the dungeons too.
One can even keep the current terminal-based gameplay. Make dungeons have anywhere from 8 to 12 terminals, let the player explore freely and easily an area with around half of them, which would unlock a miniboss and then the dungeon item. The dungeon item would theoretically allow the player to access the rest of the terminals BUT if the player is crafty enough and/or has dungeon items from other dungeons, they may find some ways up to that hidden second half of the dungeon and possibly even fully clear it without the dungeon item.
Or have no dungeon item at all. This isn't unique to Botw/Totk: we've had great classic dungeons with basically no dungeon item like Link's Awakening and the Eagle Tower. And many old dungeons were more about an item you got just before entering rather than what was inside (Majora's Mask in particular has this on all 4 of its amazing dungeons).
I know Nintendo designed these new dungeons in this manner because they wanted a game focused around quick bursts of playtime, like a portable game. But even those Zeldas made use of teleport systems to split the dungeon into digestible chunks. Or we had things like Arbiter's Ground with two distinct halves. You can design stopping points and ways of the player quickly getting back into action.
I have no comment on the story aspect. Nintendo is great at making cool worlds with nice lore and characters, etc, but the stories themselves are almost... the raw going-ons of the game, these are always pretty underwhelming and linearity isn't going to fix it.
But having the whole story play out in the present is definitively the way to go. The player should be in the moment. Botw was so bad about it they had to make a spin off for you to live out the significantly more interesting backstory, and they intentionally kept Totk's bland just so they weren't forced to do it again.
"scared to design a fair few places where the player will have a hard time without certain equipment."
They did that in TOTK.
@@_sparrowhawkCool! Where?
@@guedesbrawl so much this
@@Ianmar1 In BotW, it was definitely Death Mountain. Without the proper equipment Death Mountain was basically impossible to explore without taking lots of damage. This applies to the Hebra region and a subsection of the Gerudo mountains in both games, as without the proper cold resistance, level 1 for most areas, level 2 for specific subsections, you start to slowly take cold damage. As for TotK specifically, a lot of stuff in the 4 major regions were locked off until you completed the temples, and there was a 5th temple that you either had to complete the 4 other temples first to open up, or could discover early and power through the blinding storm to complete early (doing the 4 other temples first opens up a quest line that will clear the storm, making it much easier). Those are the ones just off the top of my head. I think you were also required to do the 4 temples before confronting Ganon in TotK, not sure though.
i played a lot of that game and nothing comes to mind besides the sky gatekeeping you based on your battery or stamina, but nothing in the sky is actually hard to do once you land.
Totk is huge. maybe you have a point, but it doesn't apply to most of the game in any significant way.
You covered the player's feeling of progression, but one important thing that the player is missing from older Zelda is the bevy of unique tools. BotW has more item types than any Zelda game that came before it by a country mile, but not a single one of those items feels anywhere close to as empowering as even the worst key items from previous games. Even the boomerang was downgraded from a puzzle-solving tool that also had battle uses to a slightly difficult to use weapon that has no particular use outside of battle.
I don't think they need to completely change the open air they had for BOTW/TOTK. Here's how the next game could still have more linear gameplay and more traditional aspects:
1. Before the final boss, bring back a linear dungeon like old games. You're in the villains territory.
2. More dungeons. However, if you're going to keep shrine like puzzles, then have each one themed based on the region. I'm talking look, music, and style of puzzles.
3. Dungeons need have special enemies. Not copy and pasted Zonai Constructs.
4. Have the villain present throughout the game, TOTK had more of this but we didn't get his physical presence, just a puppet and his malice. It needs to have moments like Ghirahim in Skyward Sword. Again, this would be still entirely optional, but if Link is trying to get stronger or help people, the villain should be trying to prevent that.
5. The most realistic way I see having active story while also being open air, is having the villain attacking civilizations, and if you don't help, they are destroyed. Zelda games always have day cycles, so let's say whatever trigger they set is activated, you have x amount of days to take down the villain. Maybe he is setting up a weapon, sending an army, or stealing something, and you have to intervene.
6. Have the hero use musical instruments throughout his journey.
There's been quite a bit missing from botw and totk compared to the older games, not just linearity.
"have more linear gameplay and more traditional aspects"
Why are you combining these two ideas to begin with?
@@_sparrowhawk It's from older Zelda games.
A… real… critic? I don’t believe it. Someone that doesn’t just whine, but speaks on things that are factually proven to make people more happy. It’s impossible. It’s been over a year and I haven’t seen one yet, where have you been this whole time?
@@minecrafter3448they appear when we need them most, just like Link lol
I reread this and it was just as good the second time. Number 5 especially is an excellent suggestion for how to have a “more present” villain
Next Zelda game should allow you to pet anything. Imagine sneaking behind an enemy, and instead of killing it, you pat it on the head!
and then it one-shots you
* video capture sound *
What a stoopid@$$ idea.
😂😂😂
I think using Zelda’s classic two worlds trope (think light/dark world in ALTP or child/adult timeline in OOT) could solve this issue.
Imagine a game, let’s say called, A Link Through Dimensions, where the core gameplay gimmick is that the player can swap between two worlds: a 3D open world and a top-down 2D linear world.
Exploring the top-down 2D linear world unlocks items that can make exploration easier in the 3D world (hookshot, Roc’s feather, etc).
Exploring the 3D open world increases your heart and stamina meter that makes combat easier in the 2D world.
You have to beat four BOTW style dungeons in the 3D world and four traditional dungeons in the 2D world.
That's a really cool idea! While I don't think it will ever happen, it's nice to fantasize.
i don’t think they'd want to mesh 2 gameplay styles in one game, it could be polarizing for many players as some might like one, but not the other
@@tsp184It worked for Sonic in Sonic Generations
@@user-mz4im2xj5e that's a different case, modern and classic sonic are still very similar at their core
I wouldn't be surprised if you could beat all of modern's levels as classic, with minimal changes
But for zelda, so many things in 3d just cannot be executed in 2d the same way, stuff like wall climbing, camera control, z targeting, dodging, bow aiming, arrow physics, and so forth
The whole swapping between 2D and 3D idea reminds me of the plucky squire game, and honestly it sounds cool
What makes me mad is that nintendo allready made a zelda game that is the best of both worlds in a link between worlds. It just needs some polishing up and tweaking and boom you make everybody happy
As much as I dislike how far Totk went away from traditional Zelda, (My first game was Botw/Oot btw so no bias) I think there’s only 5 things they have to do to make most traditional fans happy
1. Actual dungeons, no more of that 4 terminal bs
2. A story that actually takes place during the game, no more plot being in out of order memories, let me actually participate in the plot
3. Not the exact same formula as Botw (complete four shrines in starting area where you get four abilities, then go to four corners of the world to help the 4 races with a specific problem, do four dungeons, receive champion/sage ability, etc)
4. Give us a way to repair weapons, I can understand breaking, but at least give me a way to repair my late game sword with a high attack power
5. Actual progression. Give us items in each dungeon that actually help in the open world, like after a dungeon I get the hook shot, and all of the hook shot blocks around the world can be accessed and let me reach new areas
These 5 changes would make a Zelda game that isn’t just Botw for the third time, but a perfect fusion of the old and new formula of Zelda. If they are permanently killing off old Zelda, the best they can do is mix both together, make an actual ZELDA game
The first two of your point isn't a combination of anything, it's a linear game. That's what Nintendo was doing in the 90s.
@@_sparrowhawk That’s the point? Breaking up the open world with linear dungeons, and going to certain places in the open world to progress the story would be a nice contrast from the openness of the game. You can completely ignore the story and explore like Totk, but you can go to those places to progress the story. Though your comment holds no merit as you throw hate at almost every comment here that thinks the next Zelda should be more linear
I can agree with the first 4 points, but the 5 one would actually harm the game. The thing that makes BOTW/TOTK special is the fact that after the tutorial you get all your abilities and are let go. With items you limit that freedom. Items in previous Zelda games were pretty one note and had few uses outside the dungeons. The abilities in open-air Zelda have way more depth and are way more useful.
@@alecamp5369 That I can understand, my thinking was you get most of the open world at the start, but after getting a dungeon item you can access a set of armor or a new mini boss. That’s the one point I support the least though, you’re right in that the abilities from Botw and Totk being a lot better than dungeon items
@@alecamp5369BotW had Revali's gale and the Zora armor which had the effect of helping the player in the open world.
If I could redesign the game I wold have made the parry, flurry rush and bullet time unlockable from champions memories rather than the overpowered champions abilities we got.
I could totally see the Zelda team wanting to do an open world map similar to Wind Waker or Skyward Sword. Imagine travelling to different lands on a boat, bird, or both.
I'm really hoping that they do this, if not the very next game, but eventually. It feels like a no-brainer in a way. I've always wanted them to give another go at WW, but with more dev time and the type of expansive world current technology more easily permits. Being able to sail between continents with several towns and major temples on them, and various smaller islands acting as the "replacement" for shrines perhaps. They might have to remove aerial movement in order for this to work though. The idea is the limit is based on what you can reach by foot or boat.
"I could totally see the Zelda team wanting to do an open world map similar to Wind Waker or Skyward Sword"
They made Skyward Sword precisely because they didn't have the tech to do a real open world game, so no.
@@_sparrowhawk Yes, because one open world was too big, they divided it into small areas to load and connected them by sea or sky.
I thought the brilliance of the sky in Totk even from the first trailer was that because you could go anywhere on the land the only place you couldn't go was the sky! This left a perfect and logical methodology of how you could keep open world but also scale areas which were unobtainable and unreachable until you had the right item or ability. Imagine if each of the temples held a specific zonai item that meant you couldn't build the craft required to reach the highest area of the sky - or an area behind a shield you couldn't penetrate, etc. Imagine the spirit temple, but the items where spread across the world and rather than an unusable mech we got an incredible vehicle to break the shield or fly higher.
Instead, the sky held nothing, and nowhere was inaccessible with enough batteries and thought. Why wasn't there a huge Zonai city floating in the sky you couldn't access until late game!!! It was almost so obvious I was hugely disappointed that there was nothing up there!
I always thought even on BotW you could easily have areas of the map covered in malice/gloom which needed to be cleared before you could access, but everywhere else was open from the start. Kind of like Twilight Princess with the areas of twilight, but the rest of the world is open.
There area so many ways to do it, even have the Depths not open up until a specific point in the story, where a part of the world changes to reveal a whole new area not accessible until the story had been fulfilled.
I love the ideas you put forward as well, so many ideas! I'd love the entire world to change half way through. Multiplicative game play is brilliant, but you don't need a multiplicative and open storyline to be told in any order, just the game mechanics, but with linear progression.
I think there is no conflict between depth and open world. The issue is Nintendo decided to make everything into bite sized peaces and the puzzles are cheese able with the same easy method all the time. We don't need to see it as a mix, but more just doing open world more meaningful. Best example is Majoras Mask. That game is considered with a strong story, but even if you could do all 4 dungeons in any order, it would still be the same in this regard. (Edit: Saw the video, good ideas, but some sound like too much development work.)
They are competing with mobile live service games for their audience. These games are free to play and highly addictive. With the current market, Nintendo cannot allow players to get stuck, or feel unsure of what to do next, or even feel the need to sink into a play session to make substantial progress.
@@Ianmar1 bro, what the hell you talking about, since when nintendo been competing with live service games, especially on mobile ?
@@Ianmar1 Looks like Nintendo thinks like that.
My dream mechanic in a 3D Zelda for many, many years has been a full adaptation of the Rod of Seasons. But listening to this video really expanded my imagination.
There are many ways to create a world with real dungeons that isn't so linear. A link between worlds was doing it well. I personally prefer more linearity though.
I imagine ToTK took more like 3.5 years to develop, they didn't start till very late 2017, covid certainly delayed the game by at least 6 months, and they needed to do more or less a year of optimization and polish to get it to function well on the aging Switch.
This is more or less what I think is really the case. TotK likely didn't even start early development until 2018 after all of the BotW DLC was out and they could get a bunch of staff from Monolith back who probably immediately left to finish Xenoblade 2. TotK was likely planned for a 2021 release, before the pandemic happened which likely hit a company like Nintendo very hard as I doubt they had any sort of remote work infrastructure or experience with it. Having a bunch of people unable to collaborate with each other would result in a slower development process as well as an increased number of bugs which would need to be fixed causing the game to need to be pushed back. Aonuma even said they could've released it in 2022 but spent a year just polishing the game.
We know from interviews that BotW began development in late 2013 after WWHD and ALBtW released, there is no way that TotK took twice as long. The pandemic likely caused TotK to take 12-18 months longer than it should've.
Considering the reused engine and assets TotK took 11 years to make. I recall portions of the community stating "BotW was just a tech demo for TotK".
Covid is not an excuse. The lockdown blew up their player base. Developers don't actually need to come into the factory floor.
Have a look at what FromSoftware did in the same interval: basically the entire soulsborne genre since Demon's Souls to see what was possible.
The development time went into the physics engine.
Sounds right but even so I don't think we should separate "polishing" from the development time. It's an integral part of the process albeit one that some devs seem content to compress, to their games' detriment.
The game was content complete by early 2022, so you would be right. That’s 4.5 years, and the pandemic undoubtedly set them back a year.
@@Ianmar1 "Developers don't actually need to come into the factory floor."
hahaha, you are certainly not a game developer. File transfers alone become abysmal time sinks.
Also item specific dungeons! And blocked areas that can’t be accessed without those items
No that stuff is awful and slows down the game terribly
Yes
What’s the point? It neuters exploration and simply forces a whole lot of backtracking on the player.
@@vadoslink446 if you can access anything at any moment (especially if it is empty fields as in the last two games) feels less of an accomplishment so there is no reward for getting a weapon in the game. I can't be the only one who thinks the boomerang had cooler mechanics in other TLOZ being part of boss battles, puzzles, etc..
@@LuisMorales-gr2rs Thinking that the worlds of BotW and TotK can be described as "empty fields" is already pretty stupid, but thinking that weapons should function like glorified keys that access new areas in a world that's designed around exploration, is just asinine. This design is part of the reason why items in old zelda games are so shallow and useless outside of the small amount of situations that are designed for them.
A game that Nintendo should honestly take a good long look at in terms of drawing some inspiration for incorporating more classic style dungeons into an open world Zelda is Elden Ring.
The massive, sprawling areas with multiple long interlinking pathways in the dungeons in Elden Ring honestly put most Zelda dungeons to shame in terms of raw exploration. Even though it doesn't use items for progression, you repeatedly unlock doors and shortcuts to make traversal easier as you make your way to the boss as despite there being multiple paths, the dungeons are still largely linear but have plenty of side areas that are worth exploring and getting lost in, trying to find what is the correct path is half the fun.
One of the things that Elden Ring does with it's dungeons that Zelda should do is have tons of side areas and paths in the dungeons which lead to optional content, loot and side-quests. The fact one of the possible endings in Elden Ring which changes the rest of the story, requires you find a hidden mini-dungeon, inside of an optional bigger dungeon that you have to find the entrance too, which itself is accessed by an even bigger dungeon is a testament to the game's desire to have you explore and stumble upon things in it's dungeons. There is no reason the next 3D Zelda couldn't have something where in order to complete a side quest or get an upgrade, you have to find a secret area within a dungeon which might require you to use an item you either get later or in a different dungeon altogether.
In terms of world design, open world Zelda can copy both Elden Ring and Xenoblade 1/3 which let you explore massive areas but keep it somewhat linear as the points where the areas connect are typically choked off until you do some kind of progression. Another thing Elden Ring does that Zelda could take notes from is that you don't have to go the obvious way to make progress.
They could have had this buy having ganondorf's area being a puzzle ruined dungeon complex that sort of depowers you with gloom magic after you drop after defeating phantom ganon and you have to solve puzzles, regain gear and fight mini bosses before finally reaching ganondorf.
The world design that you talk about is very similar to Elden Ring. If you haven’t played it yet, then you’ll see what I mean as you progress through the game.
Man, your idea for a biology, overhauled seasons, and time travel centered Zelda is bonkers, but I really like it. I’d love to see you helm a game of your own, I think you have the perfect mind for it.
If he built a game with all these ideas he suggested it would take decades before he ever finished it. Even the biggest most efficient dev teams in the world would never be able to incorporate even half of what he suggested in 10 years. There's a reason why a lot of games don't have all these systems together or only focus on specific things because otherwise the game would never get finished.
@@ADreamingTraveler Sounds like you’ve forgotten how to dream, traveler.
Recently found myself going back to the classics and realise, although there isn’t nearly the same amount of possibility as offered in the new editions, the real sense of progression and reward given in the classic games keeps me playing. I never appreciated the amount of thought that must’ve gone into the dungeons on top of the personality characterising the stories making these games timeless
The short-answer solution: LttP/OoT in the BotW/TotK engine.
More specifically, put all of the major abilities, including the ability to climb walls, locked inside dungeons. Real dungeons, like grandma Wind Waker used to make.
Imagine if freeclimbing was the last thing you unlocked in BotW? The "Double-Clawshots" of that game? Wouldn't that be something?
That would be absolutely horrible. The world was built to have a lot of stuff to climb, so locking that ability away until much later just makes the game up to that points absurdly tedious, only for the backtracking afterwards to be incredibly obnoxious.
@@vadoslink446 Well, the idea is to design the game world with the equipment and ability progression in mind. Also, most of the backtracking in BotW (as well as most Zeldas) is done by warping, which this doesn't affect. I mainly say it should be one of the last items because of how much access it gives. Freeclimbing can easily bypass obstacles meant for other items. Why do you even need a Hookshot if you can just climb any wall, or climb something tall and hang-glide across a gap? Rather than spending lots of effort designing puzzles and rooms that can't just be skipped by freeclimbing or UltraHand, just put the more mobile abilities last. In just about every Zelda, there's a point where you can't warp or ride a horse or sail, and a point where you can, and unlocking that is a key part of the classic Zelda experience.
When talking about "the Best of Both Worlds", this is the best way I can think of to have a Zelda in the BotW/TotK engine, but have it play like a traditional Zelda.
Nintendo literally just needs to play a Megaman game and they’ll understand what to do with progression.
I think both worlds can be accomplish, I just played Horizon Forbidden West and it provides both. This should be possible for the next 3D Zelda game
I feel like the word "linear" has lost all its meaning. Ocarina of Time was not a linear game. It's incorrect usage of the word. Mario 64 was not linear either. Super Mario World is linear... Super Mario 3D World is linear... I don't even think there is a linear Zelda game. Maybe Triforce Heroes. Skyward Sword is the most linear 3D Zelda.
I dont think you know what the word means. Oot isnt any less linear than ss. Linear = hit story/gameplay beats in particular order.
The new Zeldas are both non-linear and open world (and totk is also sandbox), the n64 games were designed exactly the same as SS, if skyloft was instead a central hub world like hyrule field you people would be singing a different tune.
Here is the opening of OoT:
Wake up > call to action > stopped by milo for arbitrary reason > run around village until you find hole in wall > run in a circle to get sword > leave to cut grass until you save up 40 rupees > buy shield > now you can get past milo and to the dungeon > finish dungeon, told to go find zelda > leave village, get stopped, get ocarina > leave woods, get stopped by exposition dumper who's dialogue box is designed to force you to restart the conversation if you try to skip through it > go to hyrule castle > oops its night time, wait > go to hyrule castle > sneak through > find sleeping guy > leave > find girl at entrance who gives you item to wake sleeping man > sneak in...again > use item to go to extended cutscene
This is immediately followed by a dozen fetch quests just to get the next dungeon started, the ONLY non-linear suggestion in the game is the guard not requiring a new shield, but recommending it. Everything else is a forced sequence of fetch quests to continue. To really put it in perspective, Banjo Kazooie and Mario 64 offer significantly more freedom to progress than oot.
I mean at least SS spends all that time establishing a network of personalities and relationships, and its fetch questing is pretty reserved by comparison.
"...or cheese ice cream would be a thing." Parmesan ice cream, good sir, exists/existed.
dynamic branching narratives with multiple endings could be solved if they wanted to - if larian can do it, Nintendo can do it - but this isnt that kind of rpg - a sandbox world instead of sandbox story - but i have to wonder if they and other rpg devs wont just turn to ai to achieve this - a historical note is that 'choose your own adventure' books managed this decades ago...along with ttrpgs... I wonder if Nintendo would ever allow the players to actually determine the outcome of a game...
I could imagine a game where part of the inciting incident is a Link in his mid-30s getting reduced to toddlerhood, then every dungeon (let's say 6 total) ages him back up by 5 years, unlocking his lost physical capabilities as you age back to your physical prime.
TotK Link is somewhere around his mid 20s, so seeing a Link in his 30s probably isn't too big of a stretch.
My man, have you heard of scope creep? xD
I love the idea of an evolving world, the concept of a Zelda with seasons is one I had in mind myself in the past. I also love the idea of a hero aging throughout the game. These long term changes really add to the sense of experiencing a big adventure. At the same time, I feel like this locks content behind chapters that can pass and that is something zelda really tries to avoid nowadays
There are... simpler ways to do it. Like ToTK didn't need to have the Zelda memories tied explicitly to each location. They could have just shown the memory in the order that you find them, rather than where you found them, so they'd play in the intended order no matter which ones you found first and last. They could design their dungeons to have two or three locks open at first, with the remaining locked away that are more complex. Or design an easy - medium - hard complexity challenges, but only requiring you to do a few of them, but if you manage to do the more complex ones, you get additional rewards (or make it so solving them without, say, Zonai devices is the "medium" way. Perhaps have a dungeon battery level that gets depleted with Zonai devices and if it runs out, you won't be able to use a super powerful weapon against the boss, or something).
Above all, though, they really needed to design the NPCs to have more things to say when you progressed the story further.
Wildlife and nature hopefully are at the center again, besides structural issues TOTK (understandably) focused a lot on devices and I missed the "authentic" feel of BOTW's world when first interacting with the fauna, flora and varied landscapes. You gave some really cool ideas, some overlap with stuff I've imagined.
I always found it funny how regions mostly had a static climate, and each would visually embody a season (Akkala is autumn, Hebra is winter, Hyrule Fields are spring...). A season cycle would mean they either keep it "simple" for each period and everywhere changes the same, or more interestingly "spring" places become summer, summer places becomes fall, etc. That would preserve the sense of a big world.
Also while playing more Elden Ring recently I reminded myself: it's weird how open worlds have a single climate active at a time, even at a distance, meaning from a rainy region you can see rain in the whole sky, but if you teleport far away it's sunny everywhere including where you came from. In BOTW the thundra plateau had a static thunder cloud tied to a quest, I guess that's more work but it looks doable. Then TOTK has an interesting transition ascending and diving through the cloud barrier, pragmatic but sometimes I wish it was less video gamey. Elden Ring does the same where the mood of a place affects the whole sky, but if you go to one of the rare places with blue sky, suddenly the ominous landmarks are seen against a pretty sky too which is weird.
PS: oh yes this video is about a balance in direction, I simply agree, open world is amazing but it would benefit from refinement and thoughtful restrictions 👍
Botw and totk open worlds were a mile wide but a inch deep. Felt big cause most open world games are big. Smaller and densely filled open worlds is something I believe are better.
For traditional Zelda to work they need to embrace limitations. Limiting the player is what makes dungeon great, limiting the overworld is what makes progression work. Botw type games are literally the antithesis of this philosophy and Aonuma was clear that he doesn't want to go back to limiting the players. Maybe I just gave up.
Let’s not forget about proper items!
The dungeon would have to have multiple entrances with different levels of difficulty when it comes to entering. But nothing bars you from entering outright
My ideal Zelda game, I think, would have a smaller map than BotW - Maybe the size of 1-2 of its regions - and center around a single city. From there NPCs would be in a weekly schedule (bonus points if I can document those schedules) and have a variety of side quests, some within the town others require me to do things out of the town, and by fulfilling those quests the town changes over time.
...Basically I want an open-air Majora's Mask without the time travel, with deeper town development than what Tarray Town provided, where side quests progress the town and lead to its development and NPC schedules being influenced by my actions (and possibly in contradictory ways - Make my decisions of what quests I do matter)
arboreally avant-garde
I’m getting tired of “breaking conventions”. I’m excited for echoes of wisdom, but not as much as I’d be if it was a traditional 2D Zelda
Traditional 2D Zelda would be pretty boring…like, half of the franchise is traditional 2D Zelda and they all play the exact same and even feature the same puzzles and items most of the time.
Breaking conventions is a good thing. Stagnation is poison for a long-running franchise like Zelda.
Unique linear dungeons and bring back unique characters (current ones feels like only humans fill up the whole world and other groups only stay in their regions) but also Zelda games used to have wacky characters with personality and interesting quests but now they all look very similar
Elden ring managed it. Very free open world but some stuff you have to do to progress
Honestly, the original Zelda had the best mix. It didn’t have the best gameplay and was still rough in some very NES ways, but its structure was almost perfect.
It had sort of an accordion design, granted, you could wander into some late-game areas, but generally you’d go back an area more suitable for your current upgrades and equipment.
Adding world changes wouldn’t make the progression 3 dimensional, though, unless you had choices with HOW it changes and have those changes change which dungeons and paths you have to take for progression and have that affect the conclusion/ending and even final boss
I think you either need to lock the player into not progressing until they do the thing or not. It's one or the other and there is no way to combine them. Elden Ring did some of the things this video talks about, it had the big open world with the thematic tightly designed "legacy dungeons". I skipped the first 2 because that's just how my playthrough went.
Great video; as someone who loved BotW and thinks that TotK was fine if a little messy in design, I definitely agree with you that mixing the two styles would be a great way to get the best out of both worlds. Some people say that areas of the map should open up as you progress, but in my mind, if all other dungeons prepare you for the final dungeon even if they can be done in any order, that solves the problem already.
About tear of the kingdon, the cut scene after defeating the sub boss (to get the shadow guardians), if each guardian tell us one part of history, I would love it, but they dare to repeat the same storie for times.
Unfortunately cheese ice cream is a thing…thank you Kraft
Playlist where, exactly?
OpenING air world. They should think of making the game as a recipe too much of one good thing can make it a bad thing. When we're near the end of the game the game should be completely open air world in fact if they ever remake ocarina time Twilight princess wind waker it'd be nice if they could make it so a late game reward is I have it a true open world for the edges of the areas turned into ways for exploring new areas. Opening air world would solve two problems the previous two Zelda games had, the other problem being the quality of rewards.
A simple way for overworld progression.. could be to have each area have a lot of malice.. when you beat the dungeon, the area becomes more clean, and the land becomes easier to explore.
Totk was the only game in the Zelda series i could not finish: i got bored so much that after 80 hours i stopped playing and disinstalled the game. If their main goal is to transform Zelda into a sandbox with bad dungeons, is time for me to stop playing this series
Shining force mention! I remember when i found out there's an underground tunnel from the last place to near the first town and that the map is a big loop, good times
I found the depths and the small amount of same-y sky islands boring
This is really great analysis and suggestion. What about items and their progression? That’s the other huge thing I think is needed.
interesting ideas. Thank you!
8:45 That analogy doesn't make sense. It's rather like this:
Linear: Start->1->2->3-->End
-> 1 ->
/ \
Open: Start ----> 2 ------> End
\ /
-> 3 ->
People were hating on skyward sword on its linearity.
this is god tier content - the best nintendo channel on youtube
I've seen cream cheese ice cream before
physics engine...chemistry engine...biology engine...crafting engine (food, gems, potions, weapons)...terraforming engine (cartography)...social engine (dialogue options, branching stories)....heart engine (dynamic relationships)...dream engine (go to sleep to change something in hyrule in zeldamaker mode where elements, locations, mechanics, etc. from past zelda games are available)..t i m e engine...(rewind, turn-based, hybrid)...link - the hero of time in the legend of zelda - a hyrule fantasy...
Only a matter of time before the engine engine.
#zeldamaker @@nintendoforecast
I don't get why dungeons have to be so open.. it does not look good for design.
So... Open-world Fable with Majora's Mask timekeeping?
why can't you just have the entire world open, minus the parts of the world directly affected by the main quest? This is what most open world game do and there's nothing wrong with it.
Because those aren't actually open world?
@@NuiYabuko I'm talking about games like red dead and Skyrim. They're not as open as zelda but that's a good thing in my view
There is something wrong with that. Skyrim is a flawed game compared with the masterpiece Tears of the King of the Jews.
I feel as if this new breed of Zelda could still satisfy and actually *be* an incarnation of that previous style if they just address the dungeons, enemy variety and storytelling.
I think there's a big difference between Oot and Skyward Sword linearity wise. Most people that complained a lot about how linear Skyward Sword feels were fine with Oot openness. The gap in openness between Zelda 1 and Oot is much smaller than Oot to Skyward Sword. Even though both main stories are told in a linear fashion.
I personally love both formulas, but I still think they should be separated. Maybe they could split the development staff into 2 teams. Veterans who can work on traditional games, and new comers who can work on newer titles. But still, the direction the series has been going in is stellar, and I can’t wait to see what’s next after Echoes of Wisdom 👸
I like how Elden Ring has both a giant World with plenty of areas that feels like the Souls more linear structure. A fusion is entirely possible. In the meantime give us an Ocarina of Time remake to show off the power of NX2!
They were not going for a fusion with the switch games. Elden ring does something that’s already been done a million times (but better). How is this so difficult to understand lol
But Elden Ring is less interesting than even BOTW was back in 2017. It's BOTW without the puzzles or really any climbing or weather system at all. Maybe next time. It's.. just combat with no story at all.
Yes, if Elden Ring can do it, Zelda can too. ALBW was the closest we got to that combination.
@@mandatorial Zelda’s been doing that for 20 years. You probably didn’t play many 3d Zeldas
@@_sparrowhawk exactly, there is really no reason to compare the two games except saying ER has been done time and time again while botw is a completely new concept
I haven’t played Oracle of Seasons, but isn’t the whole concept that you can cycle through the four seasons as many times as you want? The world wouldn’t be permanently changed but only temporarily.
Who is the boss keys channel?
See @gmtk
can we preorder your first game? you're a designer if you somehow don't know that yet #loveyourvideoessays
I actually think open air Zelda is mostly fine as is aside from its glaring problems like the dungeons and story. However, since it's so vastly different from linear Zelda it shouldn't be a replacement. My hope is that Echoes of Wisdom is able to take the open puzzle structure of the open world games and constrain them into something more linear.
EoW could do so much more with storytelling if it takes a more linear approach. In addition, I don't see shrine style dungeons working in a top-down format. I really do think EoW is the perfect combination of both styles, just looking at it from a different angle. Taking a top-down Zelda game and changing the way the player interacts with the world rather than seeing the world as a means to an end.
I feel like they could do something a bit like Half-Life or something, I mean that's a vague way of putting it but.. large areas with a linear goal, things to bother exploring for, but no ability to leave directly and connect to other areas at least _right away._ maybe later on, but I feel like warping is what made a completely connected open world unnecessary. I think that's what they were TRYING to do with skyward sword, but they went too far. warping too restricted, areas TOO linear, totally disconnected from each other without even secret doors, and far too few of them. and also so few towns with NPCs, man you GOTTA have towns.
and I don't want it to be too 'mission' based either, like the 4 swords games. even if you do eventually cover a decently large area, that's just not quite zelda.
But like, in a zelda game, you enter a dungeon, you PROBABLY plan to stay there til it's finished, right? I'd be okay with that "dungeon" being a relatively large but linear area, with some space to explore and traverse.. similar to SS's areas, or the lead-ups to each dungeon in TotK, but... that wouldn't be the whole game or be easily skipped.
Bringing up Dreaming Island only reminded me of the one most easily avoided error of TotK, which is that even the STORY is concurrent rather than sequential. every dungeon gives you the same piece of story, over and over.
One thing that comes to mind for me is the open zone formula of Sonic Frontiers. Having a fully open world has inherent downsides. Having a sequence of fully open areas provides a bit of a middle ground. It has its own downsides, but it could be interesting in a Zelda game. That being said, game development is tricky and small changes can have large consequences.
honestly I don't think they need to bridge the gap anymore, sure make these games for ppl who like them but make the quicker to make, much more linear ones on the side too. I don't think one answer puzzles were ever a problem, they were always pretty obvious
This is the next big challenge of the Zelda team. TOTK was a technical masterpiece, but it was very disappointing in the story even in comparison to other Zelda titles. There was hardly any connective tissue for a sequel, few characters directly referenced or seemed to remember your past heroics, Kass was nowhere to be found, the Divine Beasts and Sheikah technology disappeared with hardly an explanation when it could outright solve most of the environmental disasters...It hardly felt like a direct sequel at all! I honestly think I'll look back more fondly on BOTW because it gripped my heart even if it wasn't as technically polished as TOTK. Some of the best moments in TOTK were when the player's control was more limited like in the opening set-piece. I want the Zelda team to make a story as emotional and gripping as the recent God of War games or other AAA games out there because they've got the gameplay aspect down. They just need to work on the story much more.
Help me understand. Why do people hold story as such an important thing in a game? I'm an avid reader, so I love great writing, but it's not such a valuable thing for me in games.
I just want to play something that's fun. Cool cut scene give great motivation to do certain things in games, but it would be meaningless if the game wasn't fun to play. I do think the memories should be played in order, but I'm not sure if that's what you mean by story.
I do think that the importance of the sage abilities should have made them more valuable and easy to use like the champion abilities though.
Why do people keep talking about the story itself as if zelda always had a super deep one ?
It was pretty much always like mario, Link goes to save Zelda and the kingdom, and defeat Ganon or someone replacing him, compared to most zeldas, even if it was not super well written or executed well, the story we got with both botw and totk have way more than any other previous zelda (the only exceptions I could think of are probably skyward sword or twilight princess)
@BlackHand531
Different people would probably explain it different ways, but to me the story is what ties it all together to give me a reason to play the game. A story may be simple or plain or complicated and thought provoking, either way, but to me it should be well-executed and well-presented or there’s just no point. If a game doesn’t have a cohesive narrative, I feel like I’m wasting my time playing it. At that point it stops being good art and starts being a $60-70 toy. Obviously gameplay, controls, music and visuals, etc are important parts of the experience but to me I play Zelda because of the story and atmosphere that older games were capable of. I was a little disappointed when BOTW changed and got rid of a lot of the old style of Zelda (progression, new items that change how you play, different secrets, distinctly themed dungeons, weapons, etc) but my biggest disappointment was the story. I don’t like the memory structure because everything interesting happens when you can’t control Link. I spent years thinking TOTK would fix some of these things based on the first trailer, but instead it spits on the series legacy and lazily repeats BOTW’s story structure. It refuses to answer the questions asked by BOTW and adds more questions of its own, never to be meaningfully addressed .
@star-rock6466
I’m not going to try to convince you that every Zelda game was a deep masterpiece about the human experience, but several of the older games told compelling stories that worked well in the linear structure and remain classics today. Ocarina of Time can be read as a story about growing up, how the world seems more sinister as time passes, and how you can never truly go back to how you felt as a child. Majora’s Mask is almost a character piece, showing a fairly realistic rendering of a country on the brink of destruction. It’s genuinely incredible to watch how the people of Termina react to the impending coming of the moon. Majora’s Mask is about grief and kindness. Twilight Princess is about responsibility and doing whatever it takes for the ones you love. I could go on but the point is that the subtext of the older games is important and it’s disingenuous to say that all of them are “save the princess and beat the bad guy”. Not that there’s anything wrong with a Hero’s Journey structure, which people can’t seem to understand these days.
I much prefer the overall stories, voice-acted characters, and open world freedom (with side quests) that modern Zelda provides.
But like most people, I prefer the old dungeons & think there's no reason why they couldn't incorporate those into open Zelda.
I also like the puzzles from the older 3D games, though I felt the dungeons went a bit overboard by the time Skyward Sword came out (same with the backtracking).
For anyone who wants to know what an open ended *and* linear Zelda game would be, play: Unsighted
Link between worlds already did this in 2013 on 3ds hardware
I think you are straying a bit away from the “fun” element of Nintendo games. A lot of the stuff you are describing just sounds like a job to keep track of it all
Does anyone know where Nintendo Forecast found each games’ theme said at 7:00
Mostly the Nintendo developer interviews on the Nintendo site, sometimes GDC as well.
@@nintendoforecast thank you! Also cheers for replying to a question on an older video. Loving your work btw :)
Thank you!
Great spit-balling!
You're almost coming up with something like dwarf fortress but where you're an individual instead of a god managing the civilization
Cheese ice cream is actually pretty good!
Ocarina of Time dungeons + Tears of the Kingdom overworld would be incredible!
I think the reason why I think a lot of people feel like TOTK was disappointing precisely because Nintendo put so much effort into polishing the mechanics that other aspects like the story stick out like sore thumbs. With BOTW, you didn't get this sensation. Every aspect felt like it was just as good as each other. But with TOTK, it's clear that a lot of time was invested into the building and mechanics and it makes the weak story stand out very much.
Story is irrelevant, and if you think it contributes to a game’s quality you aren’t capable of properly critiquing a game
"I think the reason why I think a lot of people feel like TOTK was disappointing "
Prove to me that many people find it disappointing, and no Reddit doesn't count.
@@_sparrowhawkFacts, people just love to complain. The only arguments I can think of is it’s not original like the first game. Along with it not having the new console release hype that BOTW had.
@@_sparrowhawk apparently you’ve been living under a rock. The hate has been overwhelming, and all of it is unfair. The Zelda cycle is back and almost as bad as it was in its peak
@@minecrafter3448 The story CAN sell an aspect of the game. It gives players purpose to at least do something. In terms of Totk, fans that wanted best of both classic and modern were hoping for a more intricate story line that also evolved with bringing back clever dungeons designs.
EDIT:
There’s a whole lot more a ytber covers about the stance of this: “Totk: A Disappointing Masterpiece”
it sounds like the Zelda developers might need to play more games - these things that they are quoting as limitations don't really sound like limitations - I mean I know there are world-class professionals and they're busy building their game but maybe they don't have great exposure to that many other games as unbelievable as that might seem it might be equally as possible - I mean for example saying that interacting with a pet does an allow for multiplicative gameplay just seems ridiculous - I can't even imagine how many different ways of companion pet could add to the gameplay - just off the top of my head a pet could help in battle, help mapping an area and discovering secrets and sniffing out enemies, carrying items, sending on quests, helping with hunting, helping to solve puzzles - I don't know man it's just seems it might be out there but honestly I've heard other developers talk about not having time to play other games and I'm really wondering if that's the case here.. which is interesting because I remember Nintendo saying that they were inspired by Skyrim after skyward sword.
It doesn’t sound to me like you even know what multiplicative gameplay is
@@minecrafter3448 agree - i was just listing a bunch of different things they would have to design and develop for animals/pets...quite literally the opposite of multiplicative gameplay #lazyplayers
Ecology engine, not biology unless you want them to remake Spore.
I don’t mind linear games, at least is giving me a progression. It never bothers me
idk why it does for others I never understand that 🤷🏻♂️
It's mostly the lack of progression feeling
@@PlumpProductions-wj3jp yeah that’s how I feel about botw and totk
I prefer linear/traditional Zelda game
@@aricruz_ I like both, but I perfer a fusion of the 2 like Albw.
You guys, do yourself a favor and watch the trailer for Zelda Ultimate Trial, then go play it.
Are you just describing a Metroidvania?
OoT had best of both worlds.
TotK has worst of both worlds (at least there are some linear aspects, but you CAN miss them, like the paraglider and the central mine).
Closest to best of both worlds would be some kind of metroidvania, where you can get some powerups in different orders, but not all.
Witcher 3 Wild Hunt achieved the perfect format for open world with depth of story that leads to emotional engagement. Botw felt empty at times because the story content was less.
This is a very cool idea, I just wish nintendo would take these kinds of videos into consideration
I’m curious how echoes of wisdom may or may not handle that sense of progression
Traditional fans already gave up hope lol but I think at least the dungeons could be linear with sum sort of progression.
I could see more abilities be unlocked during a dungeon but I’m not expecting it.
Although idc too much cause I prefer the open air Zelda tbh
After looking at the comments, it's basically :
-Either people who are just not fans of open worlds complaining about a game that is just not for them
-Old fans who wanna keep the old formula forever and not innovate
-People who have a complete opposite opinion who refuse to see the flaws in the modern zelda games
-People who actually give good criticism without feeling the need to insult or downplay any zelda games from both eras
So basically, a fandom who don't know what they want.
Also, many of them bring up the story as if previous zelda games had good ones before, despite most of them being basically the "beat bad guy and save the princess/kingdom" formula. Sure, the world we explored was interesting, but the story itself ? It was basic as hell, TOTK and BOTW may have not present them super well in the games, but they have objectively way more stuffs than many other titles.
Earlier I replied to you that yes the audience is varied so obviously different people say different things, but reading that I guess you mean that what the developers hear is dissonant, and I agree it's hard to please everyone. But when people like me say "best of both worlds", sure it's idealistic, but the goal is that the big open setting include what the "traditionalists" want in a way that feels natural and satisfying. I'll mention Elden Ring here too, again with cautious comparison and it isn't perfect, but for a wealthy and competent studio it is absolutely feasible to better manage a complexe scope, properly using restrictions.
100% both can and should by done
They can easily just make dungeons like they used to make and stick them in the worlds they make now, but it isn't extremely likely because the dungeons you're referring to are incredibly unpopular, the two best selling games using that style sold entirely on either the novelty or in the case of TP, the art direction.
A majority of zelda dungeons are not interesting, zelda fanboys tolerate them because they are fanboys, but with rare exceptions they are terribly boring to people actually interested in puzzles. I recently started MM again and it quickly became obvious that the leadup to the temples were more complicated than the temples themselves, in woodfall I didnt stop to think even once, I just rolled from room to room, the second I entered them I knew exactly what to do because its painfully obvious, snowhead slightly complicates it with its central mechanic, but only slightly.
Skyward sword on the other hand worked to make these dungeons seem like they graduated from ages 3-5 puzzle boxes onto age 10 and up, and introduced consistent design that couldn't be immediately cracked upon viewing the room...and you all hated it with a passion. It sold like trash, it was treated like trash, and if botw/totk didnt exist youd still keep saying it was trash. What is Nintendo going to do with this information? You dont want real puzzles, you think ss is too linear, you also dont want to buy the games if they accidentally dont make ocarina, yet four times as many people will buy the game if they ignore you and just make the games they want to make.
In other words, congratulations zelda fanboys, you played yourself.
Thank you. Zelda fanboys are some of the most hypocritical gaming fandoms I have ever seen. So much contradictory feedback
@@hass556 Its easy to claim "the fanbase isnt one person" but having grown up with the series it is REMARKABLE how consistent they are from one release to the next. If individuals are changing their opinions over time, it effectively does not matter because they are quickly replaced by new people making the same complaints and bringing up the same arguments.
What is really shameful is seeing fanbases for metroid, donkey kong, starfox, metal gear, resident evil, assassins creed or any number of series which have either radically changed or stopped releasing entirely and noticing that it really is just a zelda problem, nobody else has this issue except maybe sonic fans.
As a game designer, i don’t understand the wish, many open world games have tried to marry the freed and linearity and all have failed, they are diametrically opposed. A linear story makes an open world feel completely unnecessary, often conflicting directly with the open world itself.
See the Witcher 3, see red dead redemption 2, neither of their stories take advantage of the open world.
Reality is, most people understand that. It’s just this obtuse and toxic minority of… Zelda haters.
My two cents is they can’t stand their childhood game being surpassed.
I think it doesn't have to be 100% open, it can have a set of phases that funnel into each other to mark main story beats, possibly world alterations, optional content with varying degrees of connection to the main stuff (leading for example to bonus lore or cool unique rewards). Each phase allows several main objectives out of order before moving the story forward significantly. That leaves a lot of openness on several levels while there's a stronger feeling of progression.
With BOTW as a baseline for extreme openness not worried about story "progression", I found Elden Ring to be a much better iteration than TOTK to convey linear events. Sure From Soft storytelling is vague and weird, but when it wants to it has set pieces and even world alterations with strong gameplay and lore implications. TOTK contradicts its clearly linear backstory with present characters and events that feel completely disconnected, until the main quest snaps into "endgame mode" and all tensions Link kept to himself are swept under the rug.
The Witcher 3 is great though
@@56ty_really stupid comment
@@mkjjoe elden ring is one of those old style “fake” open world games. Totk is on the other side of the spectrum. If anything, I wish it had a completely non linear story to tell.
In my opinion, TotK was too gated as is. That's fine for a direct sequel, but "the best of both worlds" doesn't exist. If you try to please everyone, you might please no one. TotK caters to those "traditional Zelda" fans, yet they keep complaining anyway. So I hope that Nintendo either make a game closer to BotW or just make a linear game.
Honestly, I'm tired of the constant complaints that haven't changed since BotW released, especially when people who never designed a game want to "fix it."