Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
ImpAtom
May 24, 2007

Jellymouth posted:

So here's something that has me curious that I haven't seen many people speculate about :
In the very first gameplay demo that was shows at this year's E3, right after Link is finished talking to the old man for the first time, whoever is in control starts randomly flailing their weapon about, hitting the old man and causing him to jump back, change idle animations into a kind of fight-or-flight stance, and remark "easy there" or something like that.

Now, given the whole theme of "you can go anywhere and do anything right from the start," I took this to mean that maybe murdering some NPCs might be a mechanic, or at least murdering the old man for his sweet sweet sailcloth. It would be a HUGE and very unlikely departure from Zelda conventions, and even if its just regulated to randos in the wilderness and outside of towns it would probably require the game have a minimum of a T rating, but I can sort of see how it could be a possibility. Perhaps if you tried to attack NPCs in major towns and such, you would automatically be approached by a guard and thrown out of town/in jail as you would if you were caught sneaking about in other Zelda titles.

Am I crazy, or did anyone else get that from attacking the old man?

There is no way Nintendo is going to let Link murder an old man for his loot.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

ImpAtom
May 24, 2007

"Link pulls the Master Sword to defeat evil, makes everything worse" is also the plot of Hyrule Warriors.

ImpAtom
May 24, 2007

JOHN CENA posted:

If your control scheme is a stumbling block that becomes a point of contention for the player and lessens the amount of fun they're having, without any alternatives given to them, the control scheme is a problem.

You're right. All fighting games are terrible except for Smash Brothers.

Edit:
Also all games made after the NES as "this game has too many buttons" is a common enough complaint that the Wiimote in general was appealing to people due to the simplified controls that came with it.

ImpAtom
May 24, 2007

JOHN CENA posted:

If you're going to make a strawman, at least try.

You're the one who made a broad and frankly dumb comment. Many control schemes are a stumbling block to players for a variety of reasons. That isn't synonymous with being bad.

Fighting games rely on very specific movement and control schemes, some of which are mere legacy and some which are necessary for the game to function despite having a learning curve. Some people don't like playing non-Smash fighting games for exactly this reason and it was one of the design ideas behind Smash and its simplified control scheme.


Broseph Brostar posted:

Just because its easy to learn not to preswing doesn't make it any less dumb. What's the point of motion controls if its not emulating real motions?

The game does make use of the control scheme to emulate real motions in addition to doing attacks that follow the direction of your swipes. Doing a direct 1-for-1 swordplay would require something far more complex than we're able to do right now with anything.

ImpAtom
May 24, 2007

Neddy Seagoon posted:

It's probably because it didn't have major publicity until it was actually done and out the door.

Really? I saw a ton of news articles about AM2R, especially when they announced the release date.

ImpAtom
May 24, 2007

s.i.r.e. posted:

I'm curious, why does Nintendo act upon all this fan stuff when Valve never shuts down fan projects like this and you even see some of them released on Steam from time to time? Valve doesn't seem to care about things that use their IPs and they aren't losing their trademarks or anything.

Valve has a vested interest in supporting fan creators as mods are a big thing for them and are the owners of Steam and use those materials as promotions for both their IPs and their service. There's also a lot of other factors in play not in the least of which is that Nintendo is a Japanese company.

ImpAtom fucked around with this message at 17:27 on Aug 12, 2016

ImpAtom
May 24, 2007

s.i.r.e. posted:

So shouldn't Nintendo be snatching up the really good projects like AM2R and distributing them to make a buck? I mean, why not grow their IPs with such things rather than just shut them down?

Well, for one, Nintendo likes having extremely strong control over their IPs. It's a major factor in why they remain a console developer instead of going third party and it is only recently they've been willing to branch out to mobile.

Another is that it's impossible to tell the quality or viability of a project like AM2R at first blush or indeed until it's almost finished. "This project looks good" devolving into a giant messy clusterfuck is common enough that you only need to look at Kickstarter to get a feel for it. AM2R was in development for 10 years and was the work of novice developers who had the advantage of no timelines or budgets to work on. Snatch it up early enough and you risk it exploding. Snatch it up late and you look at PR troubles for taking a 'free' thing and making it cost money.

Third is that "snatching up a project' can be messy when it involves a bunch of fans creating a work together without contracts or previous authorization. Imagine if one guy who did spritework or music or something started making a fuss over it. It's super-easy for fan projects made for fun to implode if they go commercial and it can become a huge headache.

Fourth is that it can legitimately devalue the brand. If Nintendo makes Metroid Dread, a 2D sidescrolling callback to the classic Metroids, you'll now have people going "Well, someone made Metroid 2 Remake FOR FREE, why should I pay $20 for it?" If Nintendo grabs it and releases it for $5 you'll hear the same thing. People won't care that it is a 10-year project using recycled assets, just that they got it for free. If Nintendo isn't associated with it then you'll still hear that but it'll at least be "a fan did it" instead of "Nintendo did it."

ImpAtom fucked around with this message at 17:40 on Aug 12, 2016

ImpAtom
May 24, 2007

greatn posted:

Look at how much Capcom has done with the Mega Man property after they published the Mega Man vs Street Fighter fangame! They released an nes ROM collection another company begged to let them make!

There is literally a new Mega Man series starting later this year/early next year.

If you're asking why Capcom hasn't done more with it that is because Mega Man was not a series that was very healthy. Its sales numbers were in the toilet and it kept getting a push being Keiji Inafune was a higher up and it was his baby. The last time Mega Man was meaningfully successful was Mega Man Battle Network and MMBN4 killed that.

ImpAtom
May 24, 2007

greatn posted:

That everyone hates, and something like six years later.

Right, because the guy pushing Mega Man to continue despite poor sales left the company.

(and "everyone hates" is pretty silly considering there are exactly two pictures and a summary of it.)

ImpAtom
May 24, 2007

s.i.r.e. posted:

Seems like a waste of talent; maybe not even scoop up the project but the developers of said projects

IIRC they mostly have jobs already. The development lead talked about how his work on AM2R helped him get an actual programming job. It's also not really possible to easily translate "I made a thing in Game Maker" to creating a game for the Wii U/NX.

s.i.r.e. posted:

. Also, what would happen if someone's project was C&D'd, but they went back and replaced all of the art with original stuff so it wasn't just a Metroid game or something, would Nintendo have any grounds to stop the project now that it technically has nothing to do with Metroid?

Probably not but the game borrows a ton of assets from official Metroid games and redoing all of those would be incredibly difficult.

ImpAtom fucked around with this message at 17:53 on Aug 12, 2016

ImpAtom
May 24, 2007

greatn posted:

I think they may have made some attempt at scooping up Toby Keith or whatever, NoA members on twitter were trying to get him to contact them.

They were supposedly talking to him about getting Undertale on consoles but nothing seems to have come from it and Toby admitted himself that he'd basically need a ton of help porting Undertale to anything that wasn't a PC.

ImpAtom
May 24, 2007

greatn posted:

Oh of course. He's three so he didn't look anything up, but I DID read him the Link to the Past manga that was originally published in Nintendo power.

You are a good dad.

ImpAtom
May 24, 2007

The Zelda rule is, of course, that as long as I liked it then all of a Zelda's flaws are perfectly fine and justifiable or not really flaws and just people whining. If I dislike it then it's an unforgivably bad game that ruined Zelda forever.

See also: "Wind Waker's huge world is awesome because it feels like I'm exploring" vs "Wind Waker's huge empty world is terrible and thank god for the Swift Sail that made it barely tolerable."

ImpAtom
May 24, 2007

Waltzing Along posted:

WW is the best 3d zelda.

Plenty of people would disagree and in fact enough people complained about large parts of it that the HD remake specifically attempted to fix those parts.

Likewise we've had people in the Zelda thread talk about how Link Between Worlds is terrible because there's no fun in exploring dungeons because you get the items beforehand and because every dungeon is locked to a single item there's no clever combination of powers.

or people who say Majora's Mask time limit is uncomfortable and sours the entire experience and that it's a cheap rehash of ToOT with a ton of asset reuse.

The Majora's Mask time limit thing in particular was significant enough that "this game has a time limit" will continue to draw criticism that compares it to Majora's Mask to this day.

ImpAtom
May 24, 2007

Waltzing Along posted:

I think the big question is why Nintendo doesn't do more QA before making these things. Zelda was gold for years. Constantly improving on the initial ones. Then they seem to have hit a wall. It's been approximately 10 years now and only 5 games. 4 of which are plagued with problems and one which is close to the best in the series. The majority of those problems could have been resolved with some simple QA and the developers listening when people said: this isn't fun, it's needless change for the sake of change.

It looks like BotW is going to get back on track, but who knows. It's possible that it will be royally hosed up, too.

Because what is bad QA to you isn't inherently bad QA to everyone. Zelda games sell to extremely casual players. An ex-co-worker of mine played SS with his 70 year old mother and they only had time to play every other week and a lot of the problems that plague the hardcore gamer who can't stand being reminded of things is exactly what she was looking for. Zelda games have to design themselves to appeal to both casual players and more hardcore players and finding the right mix of "accessible' and 'not holding your hand' for an audience of literal children to people in their 70s is difficult.

You're making the mistake of going "People on the internet said this so it must be a universal opinion' but a major thing, especially with a lot of Nintendo games, is that they're not just going off the internet crowd. It's why something like Carnival Games can sell gangbusters on the Wii despite it being something anyone who posts here would objectively call poo poo.

It isn't just Zelda that suffers for this. Mario & Luigi Dream Team for example included an excess of tutorials because they got complaints that the previous game didn't explain enough and was inaccessible because of it. You can argue they overdid it (and Paper Jam tones back the tutorials or makes them optional instead of mandatory) but finding the right mix is hard. We'll see how Breath of the Wild does but I can say just based off what we've seen that it will certainly hold your hand plenty and have a bunch of overly-simplified mechanics that don't work well if you know how to break them.

I mean without having played it I will make two predictions:

A) The breaking armor/weapon mechanic is too restrictive and a lot of people complain it ruins the game. It makes people afraid to use equipment and items or makes it feel like you have to grind up good gear.
B) The breaking armor/weapon mechanic is not restrictive enough and you find ways to trivially circumvent it so it may as well not exist, thus rendering a lot of exploration boring and pointless because you just get more equippable stuff that you never use.

A or B will be true with an off chance of A *and* B being true.

ImpAtom fucked around with this message at 02:14 on Aug 17, 2016

ImpAtom
May 24, 2007

Waltzing Along posted:

The problem is they didn't do QA. It's obvious they didn't do QA because if they had, they would not have made games harder to play.

PH and ST both have worse control schemes than every other handheld Zelda. The funny thing about all those other handheld Zeldas? They used the same controls with additional buttons when they became available. They also didn't suffer from stupid overworld movement decisions. These are obviously bad design decisions that are apparent immediately.

As for SS and TP, that's even worse. They are gimmick controls. GC and Wii did not have dual analog sticks so the movement wasn't going to be perfect, of course. But forcing them on the player, rather than having them be an option, was a bad move. That's not my biggest complaint, though. It's the dialog boxes. I am guessing that those add a couple hours of nothing time to a play through. Again, obviously skimped on the QA..

Again, you're assuming that "the QA all had the exact same complaints as me and nobody listened." This isn't true of a lot of things. There are plenty of game developers who have talked about QA experiences where the end result is stuff you wouldn't expect or would think is the opposite of 'good design' or what people want. Epic Mickey (to use a bad game as an example) actually toned back a lot of things that people on MBs considered selling points because when they actually tested non-gamers about it they found them genuinely uncomfortable or upsetting. Valve has been pretty open about the fact that a lot of things people consider 'hand-holdy' or 'slow' are necessary so people who are not regular gamers don't get frustrated or lost.

Good QA may in fact add things you find annoying like additional tutorials, extra hand-holding or explanations. That doens't mean that some things aren't also forced gimmicks or whatever but the idea that everything is down to "the QA will agree with me that dialogue boxes are bad" is silly. The people who unironically go "Link to the Past has too much talking and dialogue" are not a majority among Zelda players. Finding a correct balance might not mean finding a balance you personally like and for a game which aims at casual players like Zelda will probably mean excessive hand-holding and guidance and a low difficulty level.

ImpAtom fucked around with this message at 02:26 on Aug 17, 2016

ImpAtom
May 24, 2007

Trent posted:

"Handholding is good for grandma" is a poo poo arguement because a simple toggle to turn off "YOU FOUND A BLUE RUPEE" would be piss simple to add

Yes, it is possible to include options in games to turn off mechanics people dislike. Short of full-on modding however no game has more than a fraction of these options both because it increases the risk of things that can break or be misunderstood or simply because figuring out a toggle for every single element people dislike is an excess amount of work for a feature used by a small amount of people.

It's perfectly viable to go "the game would be improved by this." It's also kind of silly to act like all but an incredibly small fraction of games have even an iota of those options.

ImpAtom
May 24, 2007

Trent posted:

Only an incredibly small fraction of games have the sort of intrusive handholding that SS had.

It's obvious that no game is perfect, and I don't think SS is a bad game, but the major "permanent tutorial" annoyances are real, and are glaringly so.

Are you kidding? There are like 5 non-indie games in the past few years I can think of that don't force slow-rear end hand-holding tutorials that utterly ruin the pacing of the opening of a game and they're almost all made by From Software and the other is DOOM.

SS is bad but so many games have incredibly tedious lengthy tutorials. I don't particularly need or enjoy them and they hurt the hell out of replay value but the ability to skip or disable them is rare as hell. At worst they continue to exist even in a NG+!

ImpAtom fucked around with this message at 18:28 on Aug 17, 2016

ImpAtom
May 24, 2007


gently caress even if the dungeons are no good I suspect this will be a fun 'just gently caress around' game.

ImpAtom
May 24, 2007

Die Laughing posted:

Is there any way to play it with the game pad?

No, SS requires motion controls.

ImpAtom
May 24, 2007

s.i.r.e. posted:

Have we seen Link wearing anything else? I'm assuming the game is going to have armor pieces so you can clownsuit poo poo together and dress Link up however. I'm really hoping there's throw-back outfits for Link so we can look like Link from any other Zelda. The LTTP/LA/LBW is the best.

Yeah, we saw different armor (or even hot hot shirtless Link) in the demo. You can bet that Classic Green Link will be the ultimate armor or something.

ImpAtom
May 24, 2007

Guy Goodbody posted:

Does Tri-Force Heroes have a singleplayer mode?

Yes but don't loving bother.

ImpAtom
May 24, 2007

Hedrigall posted:

Jesus christ that was terrifying.

I never really thought about it before but Majora's Mask is body-horror as fuckkk

Majora's Mask is super horrific in a lot of ways. It's pretty amazing what it does with lovely N64 graphics because the entire game is basically dripping with weird creepy horror elements.

ImpAtom
May 24, 2007

s.i.r.e. posted:

Majora's Mask is as dark as Zelda is ever going to get and everything about the world is beautiful but utterly loving miserable and depressing.

The best Zelda until the end.

To be honest I think it actually feel darker than a theoretical Bloodrape Angstdeath Zelda game would be. Yeah, Link ripping the heart out of his enemy and crushing it would be more violent and grim or whatever but Majora's Mask has this fundamentally 'nice' universe that is just so twisted and broken beneath the surface that it makes the entire thing more uncomfortable than if it was just explicit.

ImpAtom
May 24, 2007

Torquemadras posted:

Gotta be honest, I'm not sure why Nintendo never revisited the concept. Maybe it's the initial backlash? Whatever the reason, I'm not sure they could ever recreate that one-of-a-kind atmosphere.

Like, seriously. A rather dense overworld with NPC schedules, time travel and loving with those schedules through various ways. Crank that up to eleven and you might not even need dungeons to have an amazing game. (Please never stop having dungeons.) Hell, I could see an entire game playing out like this in nothing but a town! Where's my Manipulate NPC Timelines For My Nefarious Purposes Simulator?!

Hire me Nintendo

Majora's Mask got an absolutely insane backlash. It's a lot better received now but at the time it was a bit of a fiasco. It sold MUCH worse than OOT (which is at least partially to blame on the RAM pack to be fair) and "Majora's Mask Time System" because a curse word for like a decade afterwards. Being the followup to OOT already set high expectations but following it up with a weird experimental game that was also heavily recycled, 'only had 4 dungeons' and expected to repeat a bunch of content was (at the time) batshit crazy.

I'm glad it got made though because it owns.

ImpAtom
May 24, 2007

It is a pre-release video of a game still literally months from release. It may be a bit early to go "framerate doomed forever!!"

ImpAtom
May 24, 2007

s.i.r.e. posted:

Looks like the E3 demo did make it out into the wild.

Looking at it I think they just pieced it together from the various stream videos.

ImpAtom
May 24, 2007

The "ruined in the eyes of many" stuff tends to be referring to the extremely hardcore fanbase and not the casual fans who make up the vast majority of Zelda players. Their opinions are harder to grasp because they don't tend to post on internet forums (or at least large gaming forums.)

ImpAtom
May 24, 2007

BotW is clearly trying to evoke Zelda 1 but I doubt it's going to be a straight repeat, not in the least because Zelda 1 does have an existing backstory that doesn't match up with what we know of BotW.

ImpAtom
May 24, 2007

Yeah, LTTP has aged fantastically and while LBW is also great it isn't anywhere as good as LTTP, not in the least because the dungeon design isn't as good due to the extreme limitations they need to put on it due to the rental system. That doesn't mean LBW isn't also fantastic.

ImpAtom
May 24, 2007

Electromax posted:

I wonder how the Wii era will age into the retro/archival stage. Requires a bit more special handling than all the basic controller consoles if you wanna play SS or Wii Sports or whatever.

A lot of modern games are going to have a ton of problems between patches, online connectivity, specialized controllers, and so-on. It's going to be interesting to see how well they're recorded.

ImpAtom
May 24, 2007

Bean posted:

Like everyone else, I'm trying to get some Zelda played before Breath of the Wild, so I've got ALttP going right now.

Oh my god gently caress this game. This game is like getting your hand slammed in a car door over and over. It's so hard. Everything is aimed at you, everything slices off a whole heart, and nothing drops any hearts at all ever for any reason. Naturally the game doesn't give you back full hearts when you continue either. Just JFC, why do you have to be so stingy with health? Make every tenth enemy drop a heart or something, drat. I'm at the thief dungeon, whatever it's called, and it's gonna take a miracle from the Lord Jesus Christ Himself for me to get to that lady and get her outside.

I played this game as a kid too, so whatever argument about me not being an old isn't gonna hold water. I'm loving ancient and also this game sucks.

I beat OG NES Zelda but no, this game is what fucks me off.

Link to the Past is a genuinely super-easy game that gives you tons upon tons of easy-win options, at minimum carrying faeries around who regenerate tons of HP when you die. You are perhaps the only person in the world to go all "it's the HARDEST GAME EVER" for it.

ImpAtom
May 24, 2007

I am sort of sad we get another rad looking Zelda who appears to spend the entire game being useless and getting kidnapped. I mean she's Zelda, it's kind of in her job description, but still.

ImpAtom
May 24, 2007

thanks alot assbag posted:

I hope the blonde girl isn't Zelda at all.

This time, Link transforms into Zelda.

It says "Zelda" right below the Amiibo.

spit on my clit posted:

yeah if only we had a zelda that didn't do that...they should bring that Shiek guy back, he was cool

As long as she is named Zelda she can do stuff. As soon as she reveals herself as Zelda? Boom. Kidnapped.

ImpAtom
May 24, 2007

Rime posted:

Zelda weapons have never really been about DPS stats, so if they go that route it'd be kind of lovely TBQH.

Sure they have. Master -> Tempered -> Gold for example.

ImpAtom
May 24, 2007

PerrineClostermann posted:

Full voice acting is just another thing to get wrong, and is most commonly found in games that have clunky animations, laughable realism, and take themselves too seriously given how bad the former qualities are.

That's a really silly argument, especially because realism is not the be-all-end-all goal of a video game and "they shouldn't do something because they might get it wrong" would apply to literally everything in games.

ImpAtom
May 24, 2007

TFRazorsaw posted:

I love Twilight Princess.

And... I dunno. Personally, I think any gameplay concept that has Zelda basically subsuming and adopting Link's role diminishes her. Her getting the Master Sword instead, Link being the one kidnapped... that reduces her to Girl Link. Something focused on Zelda's unique abilities, like her magic and Sheikah training, would be far more appropriate.

That seems a silly thing to say as Link regularly absorbs Zelda's roles. He gets magic, he gets ancient Sheikah artifacts, he leans magical musical abilities, ect. Hell, it's a toss-up if Zelda or Link gets Light Arrows these days. Why would it diminish Zelda to get Link's stuff but it doesn't diminish her for Link to ger her stuff.

Hell, Zelda's attacks in Smash Brothers are all poo poo Link gets in Zelda 64.

ImpAtom
May 24, 2007

TFRazorsaw posted:

I guess I'm just still annoyed at that stupid Aaron Diaz concept and might be over projecting.

But I dunno. Link does get some of that stuff yeah, but his core concept is the adventuring knight, yeah? He never goes full on mage, and he's certainly never been a ninja. A stronger, more absolute emphasis on those qualities instead of just dabbling in it like Link does is more what I was thinking.

I guess a major difference there is that I *do* think Link goes full mage. Like in Link to the Past you get a huge collection of magic artifacts (and LBW adds even more). In fact in LBW you can effectively replace sword-swinging with giant walls of death and fire once you upgrade them. Hyrule Warriors even gives Link a full-on Fire Rod fighting style. In Zelda 2 he gets a bunch of magic spells including fireballs and turning into a fairy and whatnot. His sword is a big part of him but Link isn't just swordmans, he's frequently relying on both magic spells and magic artifacts.

ImpAtom
May 24, 2007

TFRazorsaw posted:

I guess you have a point.

But I'm gonna remain firm on the "Zelda is the adventurer and Link is the kidnapped one" is pretty lame. Zelda doesn't need to be turned into what Luigi is nearly every time he gets a solo game.

Well, I admit I'd be happier if "(X) got kidnapped" was just not a thing because it's boring and lazy as a motivation.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

ImpAtom
May 24, 2007

youcallthatatwist posted:

Every so often I remember how aonuma went on record stating that link couldn't be female because it would "imbalance the triforce", and I break down laughing for a bit. The real reason link can't be a woman is because link's only character traits are "brave" and "strong" and those are ~male traits~.

I'm still holding out a little help that zelda will be interesting and not a damsel in this game, but given her trailer scenes and the massive anime eyes they gave her....

The trailer literally has the king (presumably) asking Link to rescue his daughter so I wouldn't hold out a ton of hope there.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply