The Video Game Critic

I remember Mr. Miamyto (or however you spell it) said Twilight Princess would be the last "traditional" Zelda game.  I suppose it's possible all he meant was "the last one with standard controls", but seeing people's opinions of Twilight Princess has got me thinking.  Even fanatic Nintendo fans often say "it's really ,really great.  No Ocarana or Link to the Past, but it's really great".  Meanwhile, the non-Nintendo faithful are largely saying "yeah, it's good, but it's no Ocarana or Link's Awakening, so who cares".  I think the trend is to see it as great, but not a huge step forward. 

Given that the next Wii Zelda will likely not be a huge graphical improvement over Twilight Princess (I'm almost sure there'll be another Wii one) and that Zelda seems to have reached kind of the plateau as far as making better games goes (they've really perfected it and might become victims of huge expectations to improve), I'm wondering if a bigger change might not be in store for Zelda. 

I've been thinking (and worrying about actually) that the next Zelda might end up doing what (I believe) Castlevania and FF before it have done, and be set in some weird dystopian future/past hybrid (swords and flying ships and steam powered robot armour). 

Anyone else think Zelda might be in for a re-envisoning?

Well I hope we don't get cyber punk or futtristic stuff as you suggest. That wouldn't really fit zelda at all.

I think the future of zelda is quite easy to predict though, given the next one has already been revealed. I suspect Phantom Hourglass points the way the series is going to go for the time being

My suggestion :

Make Zelda more like Mario 64. Zelda just isn't fun enough, not as bad as Metroid, but not near as fun as Mario. If you are like me, than Zelda games have very little replay value, even after a few years break. They are too story driven, not enough action for the mere sake of itself. Those are my general terms.

[QUOTE=Steerforth]My suggestion :

Make Zelda more like Mario 64. Zelda just isn't fun enough, not as bad as Metroid, but not near as fun as Mario. If you are like me, than Zelda games have very little replay value, even after a few years break. They are too story driven, not enough action for the mere sake of itself. Those are my general terms.
[/QUOTE]

I am going to go ahead and say it before anyone else does:

Please God, DON'T let the developers involved hear or regard Steelforth at any time in which he communicates this suggestion in any way.

Zelda and Metroid are my two favorite gaming franchises EVER, and I don't want to see them change into Mario clones.  For God's sake, those of you wanting a Mario game, go play Mario.  Leave its superiors alone!

I was hoping Phantom Hourglass would be a perfect fusion between the 2D and 3D Zeldas.

Gameplay would use a top-down perspective, but for custcenes it would zoom in on the characters. The button layout would be like the 3D Zeldas- one button would be set for the sword, and the other three would have various assigned to them by the player. Rolling would be done by the R button, a la Minish Cap.

Then I found out it was controlled entirely by the touch screen.

I promptly removed it from my "games to look out for" list.

[QUOTE=m0zart]

[QUOTE=Steerforth]My suggestion :

Make Zelda more like Mario 64. Zelda just isn't fun enough, not as bad as Metroid, but not near as fun as Mario. If you are like me, than Zelda games have very little replay value, even after a few years break. They are too story driven, not enough action for the mere sake of itself. Those are my general terms.
[/QUOTE]

I am going to go ahead and say it before anyone else does:

Please God, DON'T let the developers involved hear or regard Steelforth at any time in which he communicates this suggestion in any way.

Zelda and Metroid are my two favorite gaming franchises EVER, and I don't want to see them change into Mario clones.  For God's sake, those of you wanting a Mario game, go play Mario.  Leave its superiors alone!
[/QUOTE]

I second that opinion. Fortunately, though, I have as much artistic trust in Miyamoto is I do my other favorite artist, British guitarist Jeff Beck. They always deliver compelling experiences time and time again. The only two living artists where I can pretty much buy everything they make without looking at a review. Wherever he takes Link, I'm more than willing to follow.

I don't think a dystopian future is in the cards, though. It just seems like such an obvious move to make, and Nintendo is pretty darn difficult when it comes to "obvious" moves. Some of the "future Zelda" fan art is quite interesting.

Zelda would work in a non-dystopian future concept, perhaps something like a Star Wars type world. I don't consider that world "dystopian," even though the evil Empire has taken control of everything in episode IV. There are clear moral lines drawn (at least in those early movies), which tends to be something that is eschewed in a dystopian setting.

Let me say this, however: if Zelda turns into some sort of handheld only series or otherwise makes bizarre changes we don't like, you can blame the Japanese for that. The sales weren't so hot over there, and that might prompt some unfortunate changes. I would be happier if they just decided Zelda is an American game series now, which at this point, it is.

-Rob

[QUOTE=feilong80]Let me say this, however: if Zelda turns into some sort of handheld only series or otherwise makes bizarre changes we don't like, you can blame the Japanese for that. The sales weren't so hot over there, and that might prompt some unfortunate changes.[/QUOTE]

I actually don't mind if it goes handheld.  I've thoroughly enjoyed all of the handheld Zelda games.  I also love the idea of the new control scheme for Zelda on the DS.  Well, let me backtrack a little, I would be at least a little upset if there never were a console Zelda again, but it wouldn't be the end of the world for me.

Zelda becoming a Mario clone -- yeah, that would pretty much be the end of the world.

[QUOTE=feilong80]I would be happier if they just decided Zelda is an American game series now, which at this point, it is.[/QUOTE]

Hey, it worked for Metroid.  Metroid was never a popular series in Japan, though Gunpei's masterpiece was literally consumed by Western audiences.

Not a CLONE Mozart, just a sister in spirit.

Mario 64 is a game about solving puzzles with a perfect game engine. I think Link should only have 3 or 4 basic items (boomerang, bombs, bow, lantern), and than design tons of different puzzles around them. No item collecting to open more parts of the map, and then never use again. Go where you want, when you want, at any time. Completely non-linear. Absolutely no cut scenes delving into the dull mythology of Hyrule. More humour, brighter colors, striking, whimsycal landscape. Get rid of Navi and give Link a pet dog, like Hondo. Give us a true forest feeling for part of the game, the Lost Woods in LTtP is still the most atmospheric Zelda area. Limit the scope and size of the game, but make everything in the game react and interact with  each other. Link could even hunt deer if he wanted to. More ghosts, several small castles, all ruled by small time knights. Draw on "The Once and Future King" for inspiration. Very random, but that is my next Zelda.

Don't write of Phantom Hourglass yet, at least wait until it comes out.

I am gald the Japanese didn't fall in love with TP, that almost guarantees a new direction for Zelda, I think it needs it. Orcarina of time is still the 3-d champ for Zelda games because it didn't get too big. 

you make a good point about limiting items in Zelda. I think Link should be able to collect hidden items in dungeons that open parts of the map (pegasus boots etc).
However in the last game it was a case of find the weapon half-way through the dungeon to kill the dungeon boss. Which sort of made the boss easy because you knew what weapon to use!

I also preferred the woodland areas. The forest temples of the past few zelda games have been fantastic. I found the futuristic and sci-fi ones dull as dishwater (the castle in the sky and the shadowy temple where you had to carry the sol through the shadows - eughh).

I don't think it should be too free roaming. It should give the impression of being free roaming, but not be so. I like to unlock hidden areas. You know - you are wandering around for ages, doing little tasks etc, trying to figure out where to go and suddenly - you realize and a whole new hidden world opens. I think in Ocarina this was perfect. Twilight not so much. In twilight I felt I was doing A then B then C in strict order (of course the same was happening in Ocarina, but it didn't feel so)

And those monsters that fell from the sky??? All it was, was a blatent signpost that youhad made it through to another stage in the game.

Maybe they could design a game in which you can tackle, say 3 or 4 dungeons in any order, but depending on what order you tackle them, different areas will open up or close, and the weapons found will be different! For example the water temple could freeze. Do you do the temple first whilst it is still wet? Or wait till it freezes? When wet, you can dive to the bottom of lakes to collect items, but frozen you can climb frozen waterfalls for different items and weapons.

Similar with forest temples. If you have a time warp - do you search the forest when it is young and easy to navigate, or later when the trees are ancient and possibly haunted?

Castles dungeons could become ruins. Temple bosses could die of old age and you have to deal with their ghosts. Different fight strategies.

No matter what, the game should be completable no matter what order you do the temples, but you will finish the game with different weapons and items which will change your strategy.

Now that would be a brilliant zelda game! With lots of replay value.