Forums

Topic: The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild

Posts 4,421 to 4,440 of 15,161

Therad

Henmii wrote:

Speculation time: Zelda u could be connected to Twilight princess (prequel or sequel). After all, the Link on Epona footage from Twilight princess flowed nicely into the Link on Epona footage from Zelda u. And the wolf-Link Amiibo also transfers info to Zelda u (and I wouldn't be surprised if a Zelda u Amiibo transfers info to Twilight princess hd). I have a feeling that the Zelda HD experience demo from a few years back REALLY was from Zelda u. At a certain point they chose to change the artstyle I guess. Or there are still 2 artstyles, someone on youtube rumored there might be 2 artstyles in it. I sadly can't find the video anymore, if anyone would be interested.

I would say that the shared Amiibo functionality seems to suggest some sort of link (no pun intended) between the games.

[Edited by Therad]

Therad

Nicolai

arronishere wrote:

Nicolai wrote:

@kkslider5552000: I couldn't disagree more. I don't want Zelda to become mere chapters in a larger plot, when each main entry of the series takes 4-5 years to make. One of most charming aspects of the more recent Zelda games is that you're visiting a whole new world each time.

It already takes the home consoles games 4-5 years to make...generally only the direct sequels have had much shorter release span.

The only "direct sequel" home console 3D Zelda was Majora's Mask, and its short development period was mostly because it used the same assets as Ocarina of Time, as well as work they already started doing for the Ocarina of Time expansion. It still used a completely different set of characters.

If you're saying that you'd rather have each Zelda also the same graphics, physics, mechanics, and assets, then I guess I lied when I said that I couldn't disagree more.

[Edited by Nicolai]

Got married.
Nico-loggery! - || - Time Zone: CST (-6:00) - |...

Switch Friend Code: SW-7850-8250-1626 | My Nintendo: nicolai8bit

Nicolai

@Tsurii: But are development periods of NES games relevant anymore? Game development was so different back then, it's almost inapplicable. That's why I only covered other 3D Zeldas.

arronishere wrote:

Nicolai wrote:

arronishere wrote:

Nicolai wrote:

I couldn't disagree more. I don't want Zelda to become mere chapters in a larger plot, when each main entry of the series takes 4-5 years to make. One of most charming aspects of the more recent Zelda games is that you're visiting a whole new world each time.

It already takes the home consoles games 4-5 years to make...generally only the direct sequels have had much shorter release span.

The only "direct sequel" home console 3D Zelda was Majora's Mask, and its short development period was mostly because it used the same assets as Ocarina of Time, as well as work they already started doing for the Ocarina of Time expansion. It still used a completely different set of characters.

If you're saying that you'd rather have each Zelda also the same graphics, physics, mechanics, and assets, then I guess I lied when I said that I couldn't disagree more.

Where did I say that?

Well MM brought alot of new mechanics and Zelda to Zelda 2 was probably the most different Zelda game ever made but I was pointing out the "chapter" games don't actually have the 4-5 years wait unlike the brand spanking new ones which is what you were complaining about.

Okay, let's clear this up with a few isolated points:

  • In my opinion, story and characters have little to do with adding to development time.
  • In my opinion, Zelda II's development is too outdated. There aren't many examples of Zelda games with similar budgets and technological processes.
  • I was not complaining about long development time. I didn't mind waiting 4-5 years, but I would be disappointed, however, if I waited that long just for a continuation on what I've already seen.
  • If I had to choose between 4-5 years for a brand new adventure, and 1-2 years for a chapter, I'd choose the brand new adventure.

arronishere wrote:

Where did I say that?

  • Nowhere, but I was wondering if that was your opinion or not. It seems like it might be, but I don't know yet.
  • Just because I made these points does not mean that I am making assumptions about your opinions. I am just clarifying my own.

[Edited by Nicolai]

Got married.
Nico-loggery! - || - Time Zone: CST (-6:00) - |...

Switch Friend Code: SW-7850-8250-1626 | My Nintendo: nicolai8bit

Nicolai

Alright, I gotta stop getting into arguments with arronishere. Someone remind me next time.

[Edited by Nicolai]

Got married.
Nico-loggery! - || - Time Zone: CST (-6:00) - |...

Switch Friend Code: SW-7850-8250-1626 | My Nintendo: nicolai8bit

jump

Nicolai wrote:

Alright, I gotta stop getting into arguments with arronishere. Someone remind me next time.

Reminder: Don't argue with me. BOOM!

Nicolai wrote:

Alright, I gotta stop getting into arguments with jump. Someone remind me next time.

Switch Friend Code: SW-8051-9575-2812

Haru17

kkslider5552000 wrote:

SpookyMeths wrote:

Haru17 wrote:

That's the great thing about series that aren't stupid about their continuity. Zelda, Elder Scrolls? Those series allow new worlds and stories to be presented in each entry in a self-contained way.

It can get too convoluted / limiting otherwise.

It really is the best way to approach a long running series. Otherwise you get Kingdom Hearts or Metal Gear Solid, which practically require you to take notes in order to keep up with the convoluted plot.

I do agree, but I do wish the setting and more importantly characters were a little more consistent in Zelda. I'm sure I've said this before, but one of my biggest problems with Skyward Sword is that I am so sick of spending even more time establishing characters (among many other things) in every Zelda game instead of just having established characters considering its one universe. It's actually funny, people are annoyed at other reboots and another new movie Spiderman or whatever but we get a new Link and Zelda EVERY YEAR on average. If Zelda U just has the Skyward Sword cast or something, I think you just gained 2+ hours of story that doesn't need to involve exposition.

I'm not sure you agree exactly; the point of having reincarnations is to create an entirely new context and tone for those characters.

The only Link and Zeldas who are "free up" for a sequel are their Ocarina of Time and Twilight Princess versions. And that's only because they had no descript character development to begin with!

Don't hate me because I'm bnahabulous.

keife191

Haru17 wrote:

kkslider5552000 wrote:

SpookyMeths wrote:

Haru17 wrote:

That's the great thing about series that aren't stupid about their continuity. Zelda, Elder Scrolls? Those series allow new worlds and stories to be presented in each entry in a self-contained way.

It can get too convoluted / limiting otherwise.

It really is the best way to approach a long running series. Otherwise you get Kingdom Hearts or Metal Gear Solid, which practically require you to take notes in order to keep up with the convoluted plot.

I do agree, but I do wish the setting and more importantly characters were a little more consistent in Zelda. I'm sure I've said this before, but one of my biggest problems with Skyward Sword is that I am so sick of spending even more time establishing characters (among many other things) in every Zelda game instead of just having established characters considering its one universe. It's actually funny, people are annoyed at other reboots and another new movie Spiderman or whatever but we get a new Link and Zelda EVERY YEAR on average. If Zelda U just has the Skyward Sword cast or something, I think you just gained 2+ hours of story that doesn't need to involve exposition.

I'm not sure you agree exactly; the point of having reincarnations is to create an entirely new context and tone for those characters.

The only Link and Zeldas who are "free up" for a sequel are their Ocarina of Time and Twilight Princess versions. And that's only because they had no descript character development to begin with!

they could have a majoras mask sequal, throw in a couple hundred more masks, add some people with problems, put another global crisis, and its back to termina for some time traveling fun

keife191

CaviarMeths

Haru17 wrote:

The only Link and Zeldas who are "free up" for a sequel are their Ocarina of Time and Twilight Princess versions. And that's only because they had no descript character development to begin with!

Can you elaborate on that? Seems to me like pretty much all incarnations of the characters are free for sequels. Ocarina of Time already has a direct sequel.

Unless I'm misunderstanding you.

So Anakin kneels before Monster Mash and pledges his loyalty to the graveyard smash.

DefHalan

SpookyMeths wrote:

Haru17 wrote:

The only Link and Zeldas who are "free up" for a sequel are their Ocarina of Time and Twilight Princess versions. And that's only because they had no descript character development to begin with!

Can you elaborate on that? Seems to me like pretty much all incarnations of the characters are free for sequels. Ocarina of Time already has a direct sequel.

Unless I'm misunderstanding you.

Wind Waker had two sequels.

People keep saying the Xbox One doesn't have Backwards Compatibility.
I don't think they know what Backwards Compatibility means...

CaviarMeths

I was talking about direct sequels featuring the same specific incarnation of Link, as I think that's what Haru meant too.

Though ALttP -> OoA/S -> LA is still the longest direct continuity featuring the same Link.

So Anakin kneels before Monster Mash and pledges his loyalty to the graveyard smash.

CaviarMeths

rishisquid wrote:

Morpheel: Wait, wut?

Oracle of Ages, Oracle of Seasons, Link's Awakening, and Link Between Worlds all have direct continuity with Link to the Past, but that last one is a different incarnation of Link and Zelda, so I was excluding it.

So Anakin kneels before Monster Mash and pledges his loyalty to the graveyard smash.

Eel

Well, since you said Wind Waker had two, I assumed you included sequels with different links too.

About the other alttp sequel, it was a game that was broadcasted to an exclusive sfc service in Japan. It never came out again or in other territories.

[Edited by Eel]

Bloop.

<My slightly less dead youtube channel>

SMM2 Maker ID: 69R-F81-NLG

My Nintendo: Abgarok

DefHalan

Morpheel wrote:

Well, since you said Wind Waker had two, I assumed you included sequels with different links too.

I said Wind Waker had two. Having the added rule of it needing to be the same Link, removes Spirit Tracks.

People keep saying the Xbox One doesn't have Backwards Compatibility.
I don't think they know what Backwards Compatibility means...

Haru17

SpookyMeths wrote:

Haru17 wrote:

The only Link and Zeldas who are "free up" for a sequel are their Ocarina of Time and Twilight Princess versions. And that's only because they had no descript character development to begin with!

Can you elaborate on that? Seems to me like pretty much all incarnations of the characters are free for sequels. Ocarina of Time already has a direct sequel.

Unless I'm misunderstanding you.

I'm saying that the OoT & TP Link & Zeldas were undeveloped enough to fit into another game. Tetra, WW Link, SS Zelda, and SS Link were all too developed to fit into another game's theming. Hell, Tetra barely made it out of her own game without losing all of her character and defining traits.

It's best to start fresh with new characters (or incarnations) in a sequel. That way you can give them the personality traits best suited to that new game's concept, tone, and themes.

Don't hate me because I'm bnahabulous.

jump

Morpheel wrote:

ALttP has four, or five if you count that one Japan-only game.

Does that one count since you're not Link in it though?

Nicolai wrote:

Alright, I gotta stop getting into arguments with jump. Someone remind me next time.

Switch Friend Code: SW-8051-9575-2812

kkslider5552000

Nicolai wrote:

@kkslider5552000: I couldn't disagree more. I don't want Zelda to become mere chapters in a larger plot, when each main entry of the series takes 4-5 years to make. One of most charming aspects of the more recent Zelda games is that you're visiting a whole new world each time.

I do understand that, but I feel it is a waste in a number of ways at points. I certainly don't want them to NEVER change things up but almost every game has changed things up, so I feel it would be fairly easy to have direct sequels to some of these games while still keeping things fresh. And later Zelda games especially have really tried to make you invested, so all I see is that we'll have established characters more often. Literally the only difference I see is making the job of investing the player in the story easier.

It's less that I want them to change how they do storytelling and more that direct sequels and continuations of characters should be used as much as starting with a borderline clean slate.

Non-binary, demiguy, making LPs, still alive

Megaman Legends 2 Let's Play!:
LeT's PlAy MEGAMAN LEGENDS 2 < Link to LP

LzWinky

Triforce Heroes can use a sequel

Current games: Everything on Switch

Switch Friend Code: SW-5075-7879-0008 | My Nintendo: LzWinky

Please login or sign up to reply to this topic