Is Nintendo still capable of making a 3D Zelda game on the level of Ocarina of Time.

[Drathnoxis]

Let's just talk about the major 3D console Zelda's here, the handhelds have some quality games too, but that's for another thread.

So Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask were both amazing games, full of charm, innovation, and as much content as the limitations of the hardware would allow. Wind Waker was a really good game with a new unique art style and setting, that unfortunately seems to have had about 1/3 of it's planned content cut. Twilight Princess was a pretty decent game let down by a tedious and poorly written story, obstructive tutorializing, and in my opinion just lacking a lot of the charm of the previous games. Skyward Sword was just a bad game, and the first Zelda game that actually felt like a chore to complete. The game was 50% fetch quest, 30% tutorial, and 20% flying through an empty sky.

So considering the trend, set by the last two games in particular, has left me doubting that is even capable of making another game with the same overall quality as they did in their prime.

I feel like as the size of the production teams have increased the games have become increasingly bland and disjointed. Twilight Princess and Skyward Sword just lack the charm of the earlier games and I feel this is the result of the creative process being filtered through so many more people.

Also, it may be the case that Nintendo has implemented company policies that are having detrimental impacts on their games. Namely, the excessive tutorialization that has infected the most recent games. The kind of tutorials that seem to have been designed for a brain dead imbecile with short-term memory loss. The kind of tutorials that feel compelled to stop the game to tell the player that a blue rupee is worth 5 every bloody time they boot the game up.

So will Nintendo ever make another Zelda that can match, if not surpass, the quality of the games it made in its prime? Is Nintendo even still capable of this? Explain your opinions on the the trends of quality in the Legend of Zelda series.

 

[[Kira Must Die]]

Well, I think Wind Waker is better than Ocarina, and I actually did really like Skyward Sword. I remember having a good time with Twilight Princess, but as time goes on I find it more forgettable, despite having played both the Gamecube and Wii versions. Also I see that game as more a game about Midna than I do Link or Zelda.

I admit, I get slightly annoyed with the constant descriptions that re-pop for items again after you stop playing. The "long" tutorials, though, never really felt all that long to me, at least compared to some JRPGs I've played, where it takes probably 10 hours to get the plot going. The tutorial for Skyward Sword probably only took me 15 or 20 minutes.

As for your question, I can't really say. I grew up playing Wind Waker, not Ocarina, so for me the question is whether or not they can make a new game as good as Wind Waker. Probably not, mostly because Wind Waker's my favorite game and it's hard for most games to top it for me. I am looking forward to the new Zelda coming up, though.

 

[WhiteFangofWhoa]

Short answer: Shyeah.

Long answer: Can't believe I'm saying this of all people, but ease up on the nostalgia. The 3D Zeldas are different enough that each one is someone's favourite, long tutorials and all. The entirety of the Kokiri Forest in OoT is tutorial, and it's the only one that actually makes you grind for money to advance to the first dungeon. The only one I would consider objectively bad is Skyward Sword (the Silent Realms were pretty much my least favourite thing about a Zelda game ever and the sky 'overworld' had nothing going on), but even it had some good dungeons on the ground. Majora's Mask would be my favourite, but it had the benefit of being a direct sequel to a classic and thus could assume most people knew the basics already, also giving it license to up the difficulty to something a bit more interesting.

Therein lies the root of your problem- Nintendo designs its games to be enjoyable for all ages. Meaning there has to be enough instruction for the five-year olds as well as the veterans. Adding to the problem is the way Zelda's health system is always structured- because you have 3 hearts to start with, the first dungeon is sometimes the toughest, and doubly so without lots of instruction. Aside from that it's just following the annoying trends nearly every game is following. At least they haven't included a Bomb danger indicator yet.

My ideal Zelda would have a dark Twilight Princess style plotline blending its new combat moves with Wind Waker's ability to steal and use weapons and parry, as well as take a page from Majora's Mask by giving Link a new McGuffin sword that can contain the wandering souls of dead heroes and allow him to switch to their personalities and gain their abilities, eye colour, and mannerisms (one thing Miyamoto has always talked about placing focus on is bringing emotion across in a silent protagonist through facial expressions and posture as seen in Wind Waker)... but that's not what the masses want.

 

[Hades]

I think Nintendo still has what it takes to make a fantastic Zelda game. No Zelda ever had me loss trust in their ability to do so.

I don't need to waste to much words on every game up to Wind Waker. Those are as good as games can get and any team capable of making those games gets at least the benefit of the doubt from me if they mess up.

The two games that did ''stain'' the brand to some fans are Twilight Princess and Skyward Sword.
Twilight princess was a solid game all around. Its biggest flaw was the lack of ambition to be anything other then a second Ocarina of time. There are worse things you can criticize a game for and considering the status of OOT I don't really blame Nintendo for aiming to have that lightning strike twice.

Skyward Sword is clearly a flawed game which is a shame because Skyward Sword too proves that the team behind it has what it takes to make a stunning Zelda. Skyward Sword can be a chore with its fetch quests which it overuses to the point the gameplay comes to a grinding halt. Skyward sword did not live up to my expectation but the game it was supposed to be is in there. We can see it in Ghirahim, in the ancient cistern, the sand ship and in my opinion at least the silent realm as well. It is easy and justified to criticize the game for its fetch quest, padding and the triple Imprisoned fights but I feel that those linger in people's mind to such an extend that they forget Skyward sword had a lot of high points as well. They, sadly were just drowned out by the padding.

If even the worst Zelda is one I respect then I can't be anything other then optimistic about the next game in the series.

 

[Drathnoxis]

Therein lies the root of your problem- Nintendo designs its games to be enjoyable for all ages. Meaning there has to be enough instruction for the five-year olds as well as the veterans.

All of the tutorial text in Skyward Sword really does feel like it was made to explain the game to a 4-5 year old, however, I think that there was a flaw in the logic here: 5 year olds can't read. What is the point of dragging down your game with repetitive explanations that nobody is going to find useful except for someone who won't understand it anyway.

Long answer: Can't believe I'm saying this of all people, but ease up on the nostalgia. The 3D Zeldas are different enough that each one is someone's favourite, long tutorials and all. The entirety of the Kokiri Forest in OoT is tutorial, and it's the only one that actually makes you grind for money to advance to the first dungeon.

I don't think that this is really fair to say. Grinding for rupees only takes a minute or two at the most. And it may be all be a tutorial, but it's not mandatory in any way so you can just run right past it. You can get to the first dungeon within 5 minutes of starting the game. This is compared to Skyward Sword that makes you sit through every character of tutorial text, and getting to the first dungeon takes upwards of 45 minutes.

 

[Hawki]

I'd argue that Twilight Princess and Wind Waker were both superior to Ocarina of Time. As much as OoT was an innovative game, and one I did (and still do) adore, in terms of overall quality, my belief is that the above two games have surpassed it for various reasons.

 

[Kotaro]

]Well, I think Wind Waker is better than Ocarina, and I actually did really like Skyward Sword. I remember having a good time with Twilight Princess, but as time goes on I find it more forgettable, despite having played both the Gamecube and Wii versions. Also I see that game as more a game about Midna than I do Link or Zelda.

I admit, I get slightly annoyed with the constant descriptions that re-pop for items again after you stop playing. The "long" tutorials, though, never really felt all that long to me, at least compared to some JRPGs I've played, where it takes probably 10 hours to get the plot going. The tutorial for Skyward Sword probably only took me 15 or 20 minutes.

As for your question, I can't really say. I grew up playing Wind Waker, not Ocarina, so for me the question is whether or not they can make a new game as good as Wind Waker. Probably not, mostly because Wind Waker's my favorite game and it's hard for most games to top it for me. I am looking forward to the new Zelda coming up, though.

I'd argue that Twilight Princess and Wind Waker were both superior to Ocarina of Time. As much as OoT was an innovative game, and one I did (and still do) adore, in terms of overall quality, my belief is that the above two games have surpassed it for various reasons.

I also feel that Wind Waker is better than OoT. I never actually finished Twilight Princess, and I only ever beat OoT once, but Wind Waker I've played through four times now (twice on the Gamecube and twice on Wii U). It's not only my favorite Zelda games, but one of my all-time favorite games.

 

[Aerosteam]

Twilight Princess is my favourite Zelda game. I know it's inconceivable but yeah, it's true.

You ask the question "Can they make a Zelda game as good as Ocarina?" but I ask "Can they make a Zelda game as good as Twilight?" What I'm saying is that no matter what the next Zelda will turn out to be, there will never be a definite answer for your or my question. Every game in the franchise has good and bad points to them.

 

[FillerDmon]

I think if anything, the bigger issue with Nintendo is that they've yet to figure out why the Final Boss from Yoshi's Island was the greatest boss fight they've ever had, and why their attempts at duplicating that fight 3 times now have fallen flat each time.

And no, I'm not speaking on Nostalgia. I had this conversation with a friend last night about how I'm not expecting Wooly World to be any better than Island was. He thought I was crazy, so I showed him WW's final boss, then loaded up my SNES and actually played Island again so he could see the experience properly.

For those not in the know; Wooly World: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wo2-7-R59i8

Meanwhile, Island: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anv1LZzX-Qw
As a bonus, the other bit that made Island's Final Boss even better: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfgHryDtqpA

So, while they may have improved on possibly everything else in the game (though given how the other platformers have been I doubt they'll do better; if they do as good that'd be nice), they still haven't done better than that Final Boss in a Yoshi's Island game.

------------------------------------------

I suppose if I should be respectful and actually talk about the subject brought up by the op, then yeah, I think Nintendo can make a Zelda game not only on the level of Ocarina of Time, but that they can do it better. In fact, they've done it twice. It's called Wind Waker and Twilight Princess. Haven't played Skyward Sword yet, and I know I need to. But I easily consider Wind Waker as good, only not being better because Triforce Collecting was Bullcrap on a stick and that overall it was shorter. Twilight Princess, on the other hand, I consider having taken a good game and added cool new items (double Clawshot is the item of my dreams), new characters (I actually didn't mind Navi, but Midna's easily a much grander improvement) better enemies (the Aquatic Boss is improved, and the fight against Ganondorf/Ganon is better), better visuals (you could count every pixel used in Ocarina of Time), a soundtrack that's just as good (Ocarina's are hard to beat still), and even the motion controls didn't get in the way of things (much). So yeah, the answer to the op is Yes.

The answer definitely just depends on the interpretation of the player in question, if we really feel like being mature. Though I'm still definitely hopeful for the 2016 Wii U (I hope it comes out on the Wii U, and not the NX) version to be Nigel Thornberry grade Smashing.

 

[Zaltys]

It's just nostalgia.
The first Zelda you play tends to be your favorite. I haven't seen many younger gamers say that Ocarina is good, but I've seen many say that the game is tedious and controls are bad. And objectively speaking, I'd be inclined to agree: Twilight Princess is a better game by today's standards.

 

[FillerDmon]

It's just nostalgia.
The first Zelda you play tends to be your favorite. I haven't seen many younger gamers say that Ocarina is good, but I've seen many say that the game is tedious and controls are bad. And objectively speaking, I'd be inclined to agree: Twilight Princess is a better game by today's standards.

I dunno, I was there for the original Zelda and I definitely prefer the modern versions to it. I definitely wouldn't bet someone would defend Zelda 1 or 2 over basically any of the solid console ones since...

 

[Nazulu]

I hope you were prepared for lots of people to disagree with your question, because the games all have their different strengths. But to be blunt, Ocarina of Time and Majoras Mask are easily at the top since their focus was on clever design and an effective atmosphere, which the later games didn't make up for with their average story's, characters and whimsical stylish worlds. Even Twilight Princess, which I didn't find challenging at all.

Anyway, my guess is no, because it seems every artist has a high point which they eventually fall very far from over time. Unless they get some new passionate people on board that actually have 'it', they will be doomed to repeat the same mistakes and make new ones at the same time. And that's what they are doing, making every game light and fluffy instead of experimenting. The new styles of these Zelda games will never make them as scary because they become more goofy as they go.

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

I love Midna, personally. So I rate TP as more or less on par with OoT. OoT was revolutionary + nostalgia material. So it's easy enough to not recall the many flaws that come with the first 3D Zelda. I rank Majora's Mask higher than OoT ... OoT was criminally short and light on any real characterization. OoT had its time travelling mechanic, but that's hardly as impressive as TP dual form mechanics, ad it's nothing compared to Majora's Mask.

As for Skyward Sword ... I love it? I think Zelda feels like an actual person, and the scenes she's involved in she really stands out. The story is tragic, and Link isn't seen as a necessarily heroic figure. Flawed, and vulnerable. I think Skyward Sword is a fantastic story and setting.

The flying mechanics are more than a little annoying though.

 

[Redryhno]

Short answer is yes. They've been doing it for years, about the only "bad" one was SS, and even that one had ideas in it that were new. I've seen that around here TP is about the only one that has a pretty clean split, personally I think it's great and about the only thing I didn't care for was how some areas were just never gone back to after you do one minor sidequest, but other than that, I really enjoyed everything in TW myself, especially Midna.

And let's not kid ourselves, most people that talk about OOT in glowing adulation haven't really played it these days. It had alot of bullshit padding in it. Mr.IWillNeverStopTalkingBitchOwl telling you everything and then having to listen to it again because the fast forward dialogue button was also the confirm action button. The Sapphire Dungeon in general, just fuck that place, combined water, random portals, a gravity mechanic, and escort mission all into one gigantic fuckery nuttery. Like-Likes being one of the most annoying enemies STILL to this day. Lock-on, while relatively new and VERY innovative for the time, didn't always convey that you weren't blocking at the same time due to animations and camera angles. It had a slew of problems, it was just one of the biggest successes on the market at the time.

It's still a very good game, but anyone that says the newer ones are objectively worse in anything but possibly originality or re-hashing are trying to also sell you life insurance. Everything became more refined, camera angles were better, animations more intuitive, less mandatory grinding, and taking away the needless running around because you didn't do the mini-quest to get Eponia before the time-skip(WW Dragon ship, Wolf in TW, the more steam-lined areas and larger variation of movement in MM, etc.).

 

[Hawki]

]Well, I think Wind Waker is better than Ocarina, and I actually did really like Skyward Sword. I remember having a good time with Twilight Princess, but as time goes on I find it more forgettable, despite having played both the Gamecube and Wii versions. Also I see that game as more a game about Midna than I do Link or Zelda.

I admit, I get slightly annoyed with the constant descriptions that re-pop for items again after you stop playing. The "long" tutorials, though, never really felt all that long to me, at least compared to some JRPGs I've played, where it takes probably 10 hours to get the plot going. The tutorial for Skyward Sword probably only took me 15 or 20 minutes.

As for your question, I can't really say. I grew up playing Wind Waker, not Ocarina, so for me the question is whether or not they can make a new game as good as Wind Waker. Probably not, mostly because Wind Waker's my favorite game and it's hard for most games to top it for me. I am looking forward to the new Zelda coming up, though.

I'd argue that Twilight Princess and Wind Waker were both superior to Ocarina of Time. As much as OoT was an innovative game, and one I did (and still do) adore, in terms of overall quality, my belief is that the above two games have surpassed it for various reasons.

I also feel that Wind Waker is better than OoT. I never actually finished Twilight Princess, and I only ever beat OoT once, but Wind Waker I've played through four times now (twice on the Gamecube and twice on Wii U). It's not only my favorite Zelda games, but one of my all-time favorite games.

Heh. Wind Waker is not only my favorite Zelda, but my favorite game of all time. Took me by surprise as well, since I only ever got round to finishing it a year ago.

For me, OoT, TP, and WW form a kind of trinity as the no. 3, 2, and 1 games of the series as I rank them (out of all the ones I've played at least). I feel TP has the best story of the three, WW the best exploration, and OoT has elements of both. Which is testament to WW in that usually I'm far more focused on story than exploration, but...well, I'll put it this way. In WW, when I got the ability to teleport between islands, I still remained sailing because of how immersive and, well, "fun" it was. It was at that moment of realization that I realized how much I really loved the game.

 

[Aiddon_v1legacy]

And this is what we call the "Zelda Effect." I'm just counting down to when the newest one comes out, people say it's trash, and then go on about how Skyward Sword was a hidden masterpiece that people hated for no reason and thus requires reexamination. Happens like clockwork.

 

[CrystalShadow]

If we're going to talk nostalgia, A link to the past will forever be my favourite.
To me, it does basically everything right.

Ocarina Of Time is great, but the start of a negative trend towards heavily forced linearity. It also hasn't aged that well. What seemed amasing at the time is kinda meh now.

Majora's mask is a genuine 'dark horse' kind of gem. It is the least like any other zelda game. Which makes it fascinating. It is also rough around the edges. More of this kind of risk-taking wouldn't hurt, even if it would no doubt confuse people.

Wind waker's art style is charming. What exists of the game (except the triforce hunting nonsense), Is amazingly well done.
However, it's hard to escape the fact that it feels like half the game is missing.

Twilight princess is impressive on many levels. Midna is the best companion in any zelda game as far as I'm concerned. It does retread the plots of older games so closely (a link to the past and ocarina of time specifically) that it comes across as something of a 'greatest hits' compilation.
Downsides include constant padding and stalling for time with stupid busywork. (complaining about 'fetch quests' and stuff in skyward sword? Did you people even play Twilight princess? Skyward Sword considerably toned down the stupid padding)
Padding aside, the end of the game also sucks. OK, the final boss fight is good, but the dungeons in the game were mostly quite inventive... Until the last two, where it feels like they just gave up.
You can also see the ongoing trend towards forcing the series to be ever more linear.

Skyward sword... I found the motion controls interesting, but I could see why they might annoy. The art style is a compromise between wind waker and twilight princess. feels weird, but on some level it works, because the characters have the most expressive and lively appearance of any of the games IMO. They just habe so much more life and character to them.
The sky realm was an interesting idea, but terrible execution that felt boring and empty.
While it has less blatant padding than twilight princess, it still has a lot of it. Not to mention environment recycling. Sure, those environments were well thought out, but you re-used the same areas HOW many times!?
The story and characters have lots of interesting elements. In that sense it's one of the best zelda games. Unfortunately, it's the gameplay that has suffered.
Great moments, but too much paddingl and linear to a fault. The culmination of a trend that got worse with each game since A link to the past started (but didn't really enforce) it. But now it's reached it's most rigid, forced form, and you literally can only do what the game tells you comes next. No deviation allowed. No exploring, nothing.

Anyway, do I think they can turn this around? Potrntially, yes. They do listen to people's complaints. Playing the games in order and noting their principal flaws shows this clearly enough.
Now they need to go back, look at the complaints against the last few games, and see if they can figure it all out.
The rumours of the next game being 'open world' suggest they may have taken the hint at last.
But going on recent trends, there is no saying how it will turn out, or what kind of flaws it will have this time around.

 

[NeutralDrow]

I liked Skyward Sword about the same as I liked Ocarina of Time (which is to say, I loved it), so yes, I'd still consider Nintendo capable to making a 3D Zelda game. I liked Majora's Mask most of all, but not to the extent that it would be meaningful to rate it against the other five entries and try to extrapolate a "trend." About the only other rebuttal I can offer is that I liked each of the later games at least slightly more than OoT (though in SS's case, it's mainly the last three to four hours that put it over the top; everything from finishing the song of the hero to the end was a helluva climax).

 

[renegade7]

So will Nintendo ever make another Zelda that can match, if not surpass, the quality of the games it made in its prime?
Is Nintendo even still capable of this? Explain your opinions on the the trends of quality in the Legend of Zelda series.

Nintendo has stated that Twilight Princess was most likely to be the last Zelda game to follow the traditional formula (put up with the exposition, do 3 "intro" dungeons, get magic sword, plot twist, do a few "real" dungeons, inadvertently become overpowered for the final battle by accidentally picking up too many Heart Pieces, fight Ganon, done) laid down by OoT and ALTTP. Their reasons given for this were that they have been looking to expand their IP base for a long time, and fans have very frequently complained that many Nintendo IPs do not evolve significantly over time.

Starting with Skyward Sword and continuing with Link Between Worlds and Hyrule Warriors, the design philosophy has been to stop following the traditional formula. Skyward Sword ditched the idea of a main overworld area, LBW introduced non-linear progression, Hyrule Warriors was the first time I can think of that Nintendo allowed a 3rd party to use their IPs in a completely different kind of game, and Zelda 2016 is allegedly going to follow something a little closer to the traditional formula but taken to a scale more reminiscent of the TES games.

So yes, I am quite confident that they will do so. Generally speaking, Nintendo has shown that they know what they're doing when it comes to designing their games, and even many of their more controversial decisions have turned out for the better.

The more pressing question, I think, is when the fuck are we getting Golden Sun 4?

 

[moggett88]

I think that there was a flaw in the logic here: 5 year olds can't read

Wait, what? Kids are in school by 5, of course they can read :s