You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
  1. Boards
  2. The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild
  3. What do you want in the next Zelda?

User Info: Zanthion

Zanthion
1 week ago#61
MechaFlo posted...
What? I know the fanbase is divided but from what little research I've done it seems the game still got good reviews and sold well, even if it wasn't the best selling entry ever. Is there a source on the 'SS did so poorly that it killed the series?'

Breath of the Wild's very existence.

Pay no attention to "professional" reviews. Haven't we learned this lesson yet? The video game industry is horrible both at independent thinking and at self-evaluation. There's enormous pressure on the various outlets to give high marks to Zelda games, whether they should have them or not. Somebody, I think it was Gamespot, gave Twilight Princess an 8.8 when it came out, which was met with indignation online (by people who had not played the game yet, of course), even though it was probably a little more than what that game deserved. I remember when Final Fantasy 8 came out almost 20 years ago. The only magazine that reviewed it correctly was GameFan. All the others were tripping over themselves to proclaim how great it was. Professional reviews are quite possibly the least reliable metric of success for an IP like Zelda or Final Fantasy.

Here's a challenge for you (and anybody who thinks there's even the slightest bit of redeeming value in Skyward Sword): how, exactly, would Nintendo have followed up on it? What would a Skyward Sword 2 have been like? How does Nintendo make a game even more linear than SS? How does Nintendo make the handholding any worse? What more can be done to reduce the environments into being glorified jungle gyms? How much further could they have stripped any sense of exploration from the series? How much more annoying could they have made the AI sidekick? How much more intrusive could they have made the text pop-ups, or the AI dialog? How much more irritating could they have made the motion controls?

The answer is, they couldn't. Skyward Sword was a dead-end in game design. There's no way Nintendo could keep making games like it. For 20 years Zelda games had been putting tighter and tighter restrictions on players. The DS games were abysmal--Spirit Tracks in particular is not only not a "good Zelda game," it's a flat-out bad video game, period. SS was the worst it could possibly get. If they had doubled-down and made another game in the vein of Skyward Sword instead of BotW, I guarantee you the series would be dead today.

Skyward Sword was so bad they didn't even bother holding it off for a year and launching it with the Wii U, a trick they pulled with both the game that came right before it and the game that came right after. SS was not a system-seller, and even Nintendo tacitly acknowledged it as such.

Raditzisnotweak posted...
Well, have fun dropping the series if it doesn't fulfill the completely arbitrary requirement of having Zelda and Link traveling together! As for me, I don't want them traveling together unless it is something tied to gameplay, like Spirit Tracks or the fangame Panoply of Calatia. If there isn't a good gameplay reason, then no, Zelda should not be there.

It won't bother me a bit to drop the series. I've been prepared to do so for quite some time. I'm old, I've lived my life, and I have many other, far more interesting things to do with my time than worry about a video game. I've played every Zelda game and have had my complete fill of this series. I'm not interested in another "hunt for 3 items, get the Master Sword, hunt for 5 more items, finish the game" experience. Nor am I interested in another "every single room in every single area contains a puzzle that can only be solved by using an item" experience. There's only one experience yet I haven't gotten, so that's the only one I'm interested in.

Also, I didn't say that Zelda had to be with Link all the time. People who assume that's what I meant are assuming too much.

User Info: Zanthion

Zanthion
1 week ago#62
I ran out of space in my previous post, so I'll make one more comment here: when I say "traveling together," I don't mean that Zelda's an AI sidekick who follows you around all the time, like all those Western games that came out in the previous generation where you controlled a dude who had a lady companion that was with him constantly. We had a lot of those in the PS3/360 era, which is probably what people are thinking of when they hear me say "Link and Zelda traveling together," but that's not what I have in mind. Something like that could happen every once in a while, like the companion sections in Wind Waker, but that's not primarily what I meant. I meant that Zelda's actually part of the adventure rather than being relegated exclusively to flashbacks or telepathic communication, like in Breath of the Wild, or limited to only being around at the beginning and the end, like in every single other Zelda game--or worse, not even in the game at all, which has happened a few times now. Heck, I'm even ready for <gasp> a game in which she does not get kidnapped or go missing at all! We've never actually had a Zelda game before where Zelda plays an ongoing role in the game--it's never happened, ever (unless you count ST, which I suppose you could, but if that's what you're going to settle for, you are really scraping the bottom of the barrel). Zelda's always the goal, the object, the item pursued, never a part of the pursuit. If only Shigeru Miyamoto could re-orient his mind towards coming up with some other goal than saving the princess... It would be neat if she and Link shared a goal and both worked towards it for once. That's the one Zelda-related experience I've never had that I'm still interested in. And seeing as how the name of the game is "The Legend of Zelda," I don't see how that's too much to ask.

(I'm not quite ready for Zelda being a playable character, however. I'm not totally against it, but I'm still not really for it. But seeing as how Nintendo apparently still isn't ready for her to do anything but be absent for literally 100% of the game, I don't think we should expect them to make such a drastic leap with the very next game.)
(edited 1 week ago)

User Info: Zeveria

Zeveria
1 week ago#63
Zanthion posted...
MechaFlo posted...
What? I know the fanbase is divided but from what little research I've done it seems the game still got good reviews and sold well, even if it wasn't the best selling entry ever. Is there a source on the 'SS did so poorly that it killed the series?'

Breath of the Wild's very existence.


All BOTW did was continue the trend SS started.
TP > OoT = MM > ST = SS = tWW > TFH > ALBW = PH > BOTW = MC > OoA > OoS > LA > FSA > FS > LoZ > AoL >>> aLttP

User Info: MechaFlo

MechaFlo
1 week ago#64
i'm gonna need something a little more concrete than 'BOTW exists' to make me believe SS was such a commercial failure that the series was in jeopardy. Especially with LBW testing the waters on opening up the world to explore as you will first. They always experiment with Zelda games. Even Majora's Mask which was built from OOT's skeleton turned out to be a very different game.

I'm not saying that BOTW wasn't an intentional shake up to the formula and in part a response to SS's reception, but this isn't like Metroid Other M where it was plausible they just wouldn't make another Zelda game. Zelda isn't the kind of series that you stop just because one entry didn't do super great.

User Info: MrKoyemshi

MrKoyemshi
1 week ago#65
Zeveria posted...
Zanthion posted...
MechaFlo posted...
What? I know the fanbase is divided but from what little research I've done it seems the game still got good reviews and sold well, even if it wasn't the best selling entry ever. Is there a source on the 'SS did so poorly that it killed the series?'

Breath of the Wild's very existence.


All BOTW did was continue the trend SS started.

I'm trying to think of something they share besides stamina and a wide array of collectibles...

Nope, got nothing.
"You haven't span all across the animes." - donkeyjack
"It's not the calm before the storm that frightens me. It's the calm that follows."
BoTW but 10,000 years in the past so the sage temple, forgotten temple, lanayru prominade and obviously some other hidden temples would be up and ready to explore like in OoT not to mention castle town!? Maybe even fight some of those great skeletons. Have the option to fight with the champions maybe 2 player after you unlock the champion from completing there dungeon? That would be a dream come true

User Info: bsbalIa09

bsbalIa09
2 days ago#67
OoT + BotW = <3
[Chief Troll Assistant] - [TET]
http://www.tetclam.enjim.con

User Info: DiogenesKC

DiogenesKC
2 days ago#68
i wouldn't say that SS was bad enough that it risked killing the series, but i think it made clear that the rough formula that 3d zelda had been following was going stale, and if the series was going to keep up with its reputation it needed to evolve drastically.
Welcome to the world of idiots.

User Info: Zanthion

Zanthion
19 hours ago#69
MechaFlo posted...
i'm gonna need something a little more concrete than 'BOTW exists' to make me believe SS was such a commercial failure that the series was in jeopardy.

I will not engage in this discussion any further until someone accepts the challenge I laid out in post #61. It's not fair for me to have to do all the explaining and then have everyone else essentially ignore everything I said.

In short, can you, or anyone, design a sequel to Skyward Sword that continues its trend of increasingly linear and restrictive game design? And if this had happened and such a game had released on Wii U in 2015 or 2016, instead of BotW, where do you think the series would stand today?

I myself am a producer of entertainment content. It's what I do for a living. In order to make money, I have to produce content. To keep my content profitable, I have to keep thinking a step ahead of the consumers. I know what it is like to have to see beyond what's right in front of me (which is the consumer's way of thinking), as well as to get at the root of any issues that may come up. The Zelda series had no future following the path it had been on from about 2000 to 2011 (essentially, the Aonuma era). Why do you think they started reversing direction? Honestly. I need an answer to this question. Until I get one, I have nothing more to say.

By the way, I'm not saying there wouldn't have been a Zelda game after Skyward Sword. SS itself was not enough to kill the series (obviously, since we're still talking about Zelda today). I'm saying that if Nintendo had made another Zelda game like Skyward Sword instead of Breath of the Wild, the series would be dead today. Nintendo has shown plenty of times that it is willing to kill series that are longer functional or profitable; it won't keep an IP alive just for the heck of it. The Zelda IP wasn't at that point yet, but if they had continued going down the SS route, it would have gotten there by now.
(edited 19 hours ago)

User Info: Naruto_fan_42

Naruto_fan_42
18 hours ago#70
I want BotW with more dungeons.
Don't call it the Zelda series, call it the Zelda chain.
Because it has so many Links!
  1. Boards
  2. The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild
  3. What do you want in the next Zelda?