Regend of Zeruda Demo

[Oblivion]

  

[MCD]

looks barren and bloomy as the last two Zelda games.

[Cascade]

Am I meant to be impressed by sub-Oblivion level textures and an openworld that makes Shadow of the Colossus' look teeming with life?

[Cheddahz]

[kick51]

literally nothing happened

[tiesto]

I really hope they pack out that overworld with a bit more things to do.

Anyways, looking briefly at the map when they zoom out, it seems to resemble the first game's Hyrule a bit.

[Positive Touch]

and Zelda secures its place as kiddies first adventure game

[Van Cruncheon]

snoooore

[cool breeze]

miyamoto looked bored riding along speedtrees

[TakingBackSunday]

looks dumb but I'ma buy it

[Human Snorenado]

Well, thank god there's no reason for me to ever get a weeeeeooooo now.

[Beezy]

Show dungeons or fuck off.

[Barry Egan]

well, it will be better than the last console outing guaranteed, but that's not saying much.

[Himu]

Gaming is HILARIOUS right now. The amount of sour grapes these gamers are chu-chu-chewing on is comedy. The state the console industry is in is on every level.

[Great Rumbler]

Not sure what people are so up in arms about, there are good games out now and there are more good games coming out soon.

[Oblivion]

Why is everybody down on this? The terrain design looks way more complex than anything we've seen in a Zelda overworld so far. It actually looks like there's exploring-worthy areas. Plus there's tons of trees, bushes and other landforms, not to mention there's a bunch of enemies and animals and shit.

My only worry is that the scale is rather big, but seems to be big only for the sake of being big. Hopefully I'm wrong.

Oh and the rock textures. 

[Oblivion]

Look! How can you hate a game that now provides horsie friends for Epona?

[cool breeze]

if you compare it was other open world games it ain't doing much, and barren over worlds are arguably the worst parts of Zelda games, and it didn't do anything to dispel those concerns, and it looked way early.  I think it's a bad showing but who knows how much it speaks for the finished game.  I hope it's not another wind weaker where it's rushed to support a flipping console.

[Himu]

(Image removed from quote.)

Look! How can you hate a game that now provides horsie friends for Epona?

[Rahxephon91]

May be the first Zelda I play. Looks good.

[bachikarn]

Why is everybody down on this? The terrain design looks way more complex than anything we've seen in a Zelda overworld so far. It actually looks like there's exploring-worthy areas. Plus there's tons of trees, bushes and other landforms, not to mention there's a bunch of enemies and animals and shit.

My only worry is that the scale is rather big, but seems to be big only for the sake of being big. Hopefully I'm wrong.

Oh and the rock textures. 

Cos all they did was show off a boring over world. TP already had a large boring over world.

[Oblivion]

TP's overworld is nothing like this one though. Hyrule Field was just one giant flat, stretch of land. This one has way more complexity when it comes to terrain. It actually looks pretty fun to explore, imo.

[Himu]

Overworlds has been every 3d zelda's problem aside from majora's mask and yet they're willing to make a huge open ended game that looks boring as fuck. Imagine ocarina of time's boring ass over world applied to an open world like skyrim.

[Positive Touch]

open world action-adventure games have come a long way in the last decade, but Zelda is content to endlessly riff on a game that came out in 1998. call me when they get serious about shaking up the formula.

[TakingBackSunday]

how is this not shaking up the formula?  based on everything they've revealed, this is the very first open-world Zelda game.  Even the first Zelda and ALBW weren't this open.

I think the game looks great, just concerned with being bored while in the overworld.  But to be honest I have been bored by most of the overworlds in open world games, Skyrim included.  As long as the shit I find and explore is fun, I don't care.

[Fifstar]

Skyrim's overworld is gameplay wise also pretty barren. It's mainly fun to explore because it beautifully designed. Terrain here look samey though and I doubt the game is gonna be full of cities like Skyrim.

[bachikarn]

TP's overworld is nothing like this one though. Hyrule Field was just one giant flat, stretch of land. This one has way more complexity when it comes to terrain. It actually looks pretty fun to explore, imo.

I dunno, it didn't do much for me. I think the game will be good, and I'll probably buy a stupid fucking Wii U for it, but the video did nothing for me.

[Positive Touch]

Skyrim's overworld is gameplay wise also pretty barren.

no dude. just no.

[El Babua]

Skyrim's world was well designed. Too bad the game itself wasn't designed to fully take advantage of the THRILL of exploration.

Morrowind is the only game where I have fond memories of mapping out my journey to a destination prior to taking it. Usually that destination didn't have a fucking marker - and if it did, the objective itself didn't have a damn arrow pointing to it.

So yeah, depending on how they design this, it could scratch my exploration itch. More than likely they'll gimp something or have it not be "fully realized" and have the Zelda cycle start anew. But it's still gonna be better than Skyrim, you dicks.

[Great Rumbler]

Skyrim's overworld is gameplay wise also pretty barren. It's mainly fun to explore because it beautifully designed.

Skyrim's overworld is packed with stuff, though, and weird little random events scattered around, the kinds of things that I don't expect Nintendo to focus no here.

[Joe Molotov]

Brehs, we ain't gonna do some revisionist history shit here where Skyrim is on par with a demo where they spend 5 minutes just showing you how maps and waypoints work and that you can ride a horse. That stuff should just be taken as a given for a game like this, not a sign that this is OMG GOTY material. I'm not gonna dismiss Zelda U offhand, but I'll reserve judgement until I see more than that.

[demi]

"This looks ominous. Maybe thats a dungeon."

"Link can eat apples now"

[tiesto]

Yeah, I don't think Zelda really needed a huge open world just because its the trend in the west. The best Zelda games were pretty concise and dense with shit to do. Well if anything, at least this new Zelda is guaranteed to have better combat than those Bethesda games.

[Trent Dole]

Skyrim's boring, last console Zelda was too. Don't see how combining two boring things will result in something interesting really.

[Yulwei]

I don't like it. What Zelda needed was better focus, less hand holding and a better combat system + combat scenarios.

I can't see what an open world is going to add to this.

Game might end up being great by release but right now yeah, not feeling this in the slightest.

[bachikarn]

I don't like it. What Zelda needed was better focus, less hand holding and a better combat system + combat scenarios.

I can't see what an open world is going to add to this.

Game might end up being great by release but right now yeah, not feeling this in the slightest.

i wonder if nintendo was really listening to all those dorks that wanted zelda to turn into dark souls

[Bebpo]

Yeah, I don't think Zelda really needed a huge open world just because its the trend in the west. The best Zelda games were pretty concise and dense with shit to do. Well if anything, at least this new Zelda is guaranteed to have better combat than those Bethesda games.

Elder Scrolls games have shallow combat, but let's not make Zelda into some deep action game either.  Zelda combat is shallow as hell too.  The only part about Zelda that ever has any meat are the puzzles and secrets combined with exploration.  Combat is just passable.

[sarslip]

Am I meant to be impressed by sub-Oblivion level textures and an openworld that makes Shadow of the Colossus' look teeming with life?

i read this while wearing a monocle, with my hand in my vest pocket

[cool breeze]

Yeah, I don't think Zelda really needed a huge open world just because its the trend in the west. The best Zelda games were pretty concise and dense with shit to do. Well if anything, at least this new Zelda is guaranteed to have better combat than those Bethesda games.

yeah, it's not clear what makes open world a meaningful change in zelda.

like if you look at metal gear solid v, it's easy to see the value in going open world.  missions are now set in compounds and the open world nature lets you case and tackle them how you choose.

[D3RANG3D]

Yeah, I don't think Zelda really needed a huge open world just because its the trend in the west. The best Zelda games were pretty concise and dense with shit to do. Well if anything, at least this new Zelda is guaranteed to have better combat than those Bethesda games.

spoiler (click to show/hide)

[close]

[Oblivion]

You know I understand the fear of having a large overworld, but what is with the love everyone seems to have for MM's? Yeah, it was small and compact, and I guess that made for easier travel, but there wasn't shit to do there. Roughly 8-10 enemies total and unless I'm mistaken, there was NOTHING to actually explore or discover. The love for that game's OW has always been bizarre to me.

[Tasty]

Zero compelling textures, pass.

[Beezy]

You know I understand the fear of having a large overworld, but what is with the love everyone seems to have for MM's? Yeah, it was small and compact, and I guess that made for easier travel, but there wasn't shit to do there. Roughly 8-10 enemies total and unless I'm mistaken, there was NOTHING to actually explore or discover. The love for that game's OW has always been bizarre to me.

Collecting every single mask was one big sidequest that spanned that whole game from what I remember.

[Himu]

You know I understand the fear of having a large overworld, but what is with the love everyone seems to have for MM's? Yeah, it was small and compact, and I guess that made for easier travel, but there wasn't shit to do there. Roughly 8-10 enemies total and unless I'm mistaken, there was NOTHING to actually explore or discover. The love for that game's OW has always been bizarre to me.

MM has locations that are way out of your way like the ranch or the fairy dungeons that you must explore to even find. This includes getting masks. MM uses the overworld the best out of any Zelda barring the original because it has to do with the games ultimate goal: getting masks, and no place is wasted. compared to OoT or WW or TP where the rewards are often crap, there's tons of empty space and places are mostly there for one time things - such as Garudo Valley in OoT or the snow palace in TP.

[TakingBackSunday]

ALBW's overworld was fantastic.

[Oblivion]

You know I understand the fear of having a large overworld, but what is with the love everyone seems to have for MM's? Yeah, it was small and compact, and I guess that made for easier travel, but there wasn't shit to do there. Roughly 8-10 enemies total and unless I'm mistaken, there was NOTHING to actually explore or discover. The love for that game's OW has always been bizarre to me.

Collecting every single mask was one big sidequest that spanned that whole game from what I remember.

You know I understand the fear of having a large overworld, but what is with the love everyone seems to have for MM's? Yeah, it was small and compact, and I guess that made for easier travel, but there wasn't shit to do there. Roughly 8-10 enemies total and unless I'm mistaken, there was NOTHING to actually explore or discover. The love for that game's OW has always been bizarre to me.

MM has locations that are way out of your way like the ranch or the fairy dungeons that you must explore to even find. This includes getting masks. MM uses the overworld the best out of any Zelda barring the original because it has to do with the games ultimate goal: getting masks, and no place is wasted. compared to OoT or WW or TP where the rewards are often crap, there's tons of empty space and places are mostly there for one time things - such as Garudo Valley in OoT or the snow palace in TP.

So just like I thought. You guys are using "overworld" to mean the entire friggin game. By that definition, the situation changes dramatically.

edit: and hell, by using that definition, it makes the complaints about this new Zelda even weirder cause you haven't seen shit. No cities, no characters, no side quests, etc.

[Oblivion]

Do it, Wrath. You know you want to.

[Positive Touch]

let the special fellow flow

[Damian79]

Skyrim's overworld is gameplay wise also pretty barren. It's mainly fun to explore because it beautifully designed.

Skyrim's overworld is packed with stuff, though, and weird little random events scattered around, the kinds of things that I don't expect Nintendo to focus no here.

I think Zelda 1 was exactly like that.  I only have high hopes for Zelda because they are "trying to return Zelda to its Zelda 1 roots" or something like that.  I think they know that a huge world with nothing to do is a big nono considering what they did to the zelda remake on the 3ds.

[Himu]

ALBW's overworld was fantastic.

hmmm. Thinking on it, agreed.

[Himu]

You know I understand the fear of having a large overworld, but what is with the love everyone seems to have for MM's? Yeah, it was small and compact, and I guess that made for easier travel, but there wasn't shit to do there. Roughly 8-10 enemies total and unless I'm mistaken, there was NOTHING to actually explore or discover. The love for that game's OW has always been bizarre to me.

Collecting every single mask was one big sidequest that spanned that whole game from what I remember.

You know I understand the fear of having a large overworld, but what is with the love everyone seems to have for MM's? Yeah, it was small and compact, and I guess that made for easier travel, but there wasn't shit to do there. Roughly 8-10 enemies total and unless I'm mistaken, there was NOTHING to actually explore or discover. The love for that game's OW has always been bizarre to me.

MM has locations that are way out of your way like the ranch or the fairy dungeons that you must explore to even find. This includes getting masks. MM uses the overworld the best out of any Zelda barring the original because it has to do with the games ultimate goal: getting masks, and no place is wasted. compared to OoT or WW or TP where the rewards are often crap, there's tons of empty space and places are mostly there for one time things - such as Garudo Valley in OoT or the snow palace in TP.

So just like I thought. You guys are using "overworld" to mean the entire friggin game. By that definition, the situation changes dramatically.

edit: and hell, by using that definition, it makes the complaints about this new Zelda even weirder cause you haven't seen shit. No cities, no characters, no side quests, etc.

MM's over world was pretty great though. Small, more contained, with things to do and see. Compared to OoT and others that have so much wasted space. Look at hyrule field in OoT. Traveling from the kokiri forest to castle town is a complete chore of wasted space. Not only is MM's over world well designed, the central hub is one giant town and it all connects. Imagine traveling from kokiri forest to castle town as the basis of exploration for the entire new Zelda. Sounds like poop, but hey I could be wrong.

[Positive Touch]

dunno why people expect Zelda will become become a hardcore action-adventure game, because I can't see Nintendo ever trying to make a game like that. there's plenty of amazing games like that on the market anyway. like yulwei said earlier, the biggest problems with the series are the overly simplistic combat and the hand-holding and played-out puzzles. do something about those and you'll go a long way towards improving the brand.

[TakingBackSunday]

Does the brand really need improved though?

A console Zelda game will sell more than 3 million units.  That much is sure, it won't matter the kind of game it is.

[Bebpo]

Does the brand really need improved though?

A console Zelda game will sell more than 3 million units.  That much is sure, it won't matter the kind of game it is.

Sure.  A lot of people who grew up on Zelda have gotten burned over the years and don't buy it anymore.  That's even more sales if they can get their reputation for quality back.


I grew up loving Zelda, but really I think it's become Nintendo's weakest brand in the last decade.  Almost every other major franchise is consistent great quality.  Mario platformers, Mario Kart, Smash, Animal Crossing, even Metroid's never been as inconsistent as Zelda outside that whole outsourced Other M fiasco.  When I buy a Nintendo franchise I know what kind of game I'm getting and I know it's going to be good quality.

But Zelda?  The entries are all over the place, from great to shit to good to ok, from boring to creative, tedious to fun.  When I buy Zelda (if I buy Zelda) I don't know whether I'm going to end up with a game that hates me as a player or that's a grand ole' adventure.  It's why I waited almost a year to play ALBW; because I didn't have any faith in the Zelda brand quality anymore.  Only after a TON of positive word of mouth I picked it up and yeah, it was a great Zelda.  But that's one good one after so many being burned on. 

It'd do a lot for Nintendo to get the series to consistent quality.  Stop padding the shit with non-skippable tutorials, a million fetch quests & back-tracking, awful intrusive narrators, etc... get rid of the stuff people have been hating on for years and just improve on what people like.  Follow up on ALBW and make a quality console Zelda and maybe the games will start selling even more.

[Tasty]

The Problem With Zelda™ is that it's so many different things to so many people.

Some like the action-adventure, some like the puzzles, some like the mythos, some like the free-roaming and exploration while some find it boring. You'll never please 100% of the fanbase and thankfully Nintendo rarely tries to. For better or worse each entry tries something different (for the most part - TP was called "OoT 2" a lot but even that game is pretty different.) You look at "direct sequels" like Majora's Mask, Phantom Hourglass, or A Link Between Worlds and they're startlingly different.

Point is, there isn't a definitive "Zelda formula" that most fans would be happy with, unlike say Mario or Metroid. It's much more wide.

Anyways, just my two cents after being a lifelong series fan and seeing endless arguments about it online.

[Cerveza mas fina]

You are wrong Andrex, the problem with Zelda is that after OOT it stopped evolving.

They have been refining that formula ever since with the tiniest of changes.

Edit: by evolving I mean even the barest of minimum of getting with the times and fixing issues that have been there for a decade, and others have mentioned here, unstoppable shit, fetch quests, hand holding. Zelda doesn't need to go all grim dark.

[ToxicAdam]

This will be like every Zelda. It will contain moments of pure gaming greatness and long periods of agony and boredom.  Then fans will go on-line and endlessly compare and contrast all the games.

[BobFromPikeCreek]

All I want them to do is

A) Make the first hour of this game not agonizingly dull

and

B) Do none of the things they did in Skyward Sword

[Human Snorenado]

All I want is for them to do is

A) Make the first hour of this game not agonizingly dull

and

B) Do none of the things they did in Skyward Sword

Please Understand.

[Himu]

I'm not sure that will be true after ALBW.