The Legend Of Zelda - General Thread

The thing with the Koroks is easily explained. Regardless of timeline, the Great Deku Tree, the one Link grew up with is killed by Ganondorf's curse. The one who takes over is the sprout we only really see in the adult timeline, but it's highly likely that said sprout took over in other timelines, but may have closed off his section of the woods in the child and defeat timelines.

Unless Bot W is before Oo T, no matter what timeline, the Bot W's Great Deku Tree is the sprout of Oo T's GDT.

How do you know it's not OOT GDT's grandson, or great-grandson?

x3 True enough. I guess I meant more in the sense that wisdom and courage are harder to turn into something malicious, and the worst an over-emphasis on courage leads to is recklessness, while what's the worst thing an over-emphasis on wisdom leads to? I don't even know.

Power is a bit more nebulous, since relying purely on power generally leads down a path of tyranny.

Edited by ILikeRobots on Jan 30th 2019 at 10:16:09 AM

I would note that Ganondorf was powerful enough to make Hyrule a Bad Future because he possessed the Triforce of Power at that point, but that doesn't take away from your point.

So the Triforce of Power is like the One Ring, then? The stronger you are, the stronger it makes you? Or perhaps it's the One Ring in reverse—instead of being tempting to the powerful, it seeks out the most powerful itself.

That's what makes the most sense. I think that's how all the pieces of the Triforce work, at least in a universe where the Chosen Ones still exist. It's kind of an interesting thought. Seems to automatically seek out the hero's spirit, the princess, and the incarnation of Demise's curse (the only one of those who has consistently been the same person), because no person not them has been chosen through the eons.

Seems like not all pieces of the Triforce necessarily need to be active together as well. Adult timeline's Triforce of Courage lost its host after the Hero of Time was deleted from it and shattered, while the Triforce of Power was still active in Ganondorf. Even when a boy capable of being the hero was born, he had to earn it, even though Wind Waker's Zelda received hers automatically. So seems like it might be tied to these specific bloodlines/reincarnated spirits/supernatural curses, or they're just always destined to be the most representative of their virtues no matter what or when.

Daphnes had half of the Triforce of Wisdom and had the whole triangle before he split it in half and gave one half to his daughter which was eventually passed down to Tetra.

I've long wondered why DIC gave Ganon a high raspy voice for the Zelda cartoon (except for brief moments when Ganon's voice got low & creepy). Zelda II gave Ganon a deep booming laugh. Granted, DIC just meant the cartoon to be inspired by the NES Zelda games, they didn't intend the cartoon to be a direct adaptation of Zelda I and Zelda II.

Recently I've watched a few episodes of He-Man And The Masters Of The Universe. Skeletor's voice does somewhat resemble Ganon's high-pitched rasp (though Skeletor never lowered his voice like Ganon did). I remember Doug Walker (Channel Awesome.com) once joked that the villain in Gummy Bears was basically Skeletor with flesh. The villain in Rankin-Bass's 1981 special Leprechaun Christmas Gold also had a high raspy voice but that's a given since the villain was a really old woman.

I guess it was a slight trend in 80's cartoons to give villains a high pitched rasp and Ganon was inspired by that.

Aside from his strange voice, I was okay with DIC's cartoon adaptation of Ganon. I wished he could have a little more menacing but it is a kid's show so I cut DIC some slack. While DIC did incorporate Ganon's ability to teleport, I wished DIC used Ganon's ability in Zelda I to completely become invisible.

Interesting that DIC did not use the music from the final dungeon in Zelda I but instead Ganon's theme in the Zelda cartoon is the music from Zelda I's first 8 dungeons.

It's likely DIC just being DIC. They did a lot of weird things.

One thing I'm curious about is, are the Koroks the same Kokiri as in OOT? I hear people who say this, but there's too many that didn't exist in other games. I presumed all Koroks in WW and BOTW are "descendants" (in a loose sense, because Kokiri don't breed).

Breath of the Wild has spoiled me on the older Zelda games, I think.

I'm giving the Nintendo Online thing a try, and for gits and shiggles decided to play the first game via their NES emulator.

Even starting BotW from scratch I didn't die as much there as I am in Zelda 1.

This is why I haven't played the older games.

I know I'd suck at them...a lot.

That has nothing to do with Breath of the Wild and everything to do with it being a NES game.

Even Link to the Past is comparatively easy.

This is why I only do 3 heart challenges (or minimal as I can) with no potions or fairies, etc. just to spice things up every time I replay a Zelda now.

I can't imagine beating LTTP without walkthroughs. But the original two games? They're outright impossible. There's no direction in the first title. You're given fire, but aren't told what to do or where to go. It's a very 1980s-style "Trial and Error" type of title.

I don't know where the series will go next. I don't want a huge BOTW-style game. It's way too large and open for me. I don't even want to finish the game as it takes too much trouble. But going back to the older style would be a huge step backwards.

I feel like a balance is needed.

Give the game some direction, with the occasional option to go off the rails for a bit if you want, but keep the wide open world.

Even though I'm afraid of getting my ass whooped everywhere I got, I love how you can go nearly anywhere in BOTW, and am not sure if I want to lose that. But I need to know that when I go somewhere, I won't get annihilated because I'm too weak to fight the dudes there.

It goes back to what philosophy one thinks is crucial to a Zelda game. Early on, it was very much about exploration, feeling your way around, and a lot of trial and error.

More lately, things have gotten more linear and the focus has been on the dungeon design and puzzle solving. Breath of the Wild was hailed as a "return to form" of the exploration focus of the series.

There are boons and cons to both aspects. You can easily become directionless and lose interest in the former, but you could also feel restrained, forced, or hand-held in the latter. I've tried the first Zelda but dropped it (I didn't want to use a walkthrough since I wanted to beat it 'authentically,' but I just didn't have the time to sink in) and haven't touched Zelda II at all, but I think exploration moving forward is a good thing. Not NES-style "drop you in a field and say go," but Breath of the Wild style.

I like Breath of the Wild's approach for the most part, since while the world is open to you, there's always something to do in each place to occupy your attention and strengthen your arsenal and stats. The progression feels natural to me, since I took things slow and easy. Early Game Hell was definitely a thing, but I never felt like it was overbearing or that I was completely lost/directionless with it. On the flipside, the dungeons and dungeon bosses are less complex and interesting than in the more linear titles.

A perfect world would be the freedom of exploration, substantial content all over the map, plus the good dungeon design and interesting bosses, but one only has so much development and resource time.

Breath of the Wild has a clear map, obvious landmarks, and easy to use waypoints to ensure finding everything important is easy. It's far removed from the bomb and burn every tile aspect from the first game that's an exercise in tedium. Plus even if you think Breath of the Wild's combat is tough (still easier than the first two games) the wide open space makes avoiding the majority of overworld combat trivial. It's a very streamlined and modernized take on open exploration.

I think what a LOT of people forget is that these games were meant to be played with constant use of the manual, and the first Zelda game had a physical map of Hyrule included that you could mark your discoveries on. The game itself could throw you to the wolves (it had to, thanks to technical restraints), because you had a physical 50-page book to help you out if/when you needed it.

Edited by BadWolf21 on Feb 4th 2019 at 1:14:06 PM

Honestly the combat was the only thing I liked about Breath of the Wild and that wasn't enough to sustain the game for me. I found the shrines boring and I had little desire or drive to explore or do the main plot. I'd be happy if the next game kept the combat but went back to a more linear plot/less open world style of gameplay to be honest.

Breath of the Wild was the first time Zelda was a genuine pop cultural phenomenon in decades. Be prepared for this to be the new normal.

It’ll be adjusted somewhat because Nintendo doesn’t like to do the same thing for TOO along with the series, but it’ll be broadly very similar. Guaranteed.

So is Breath of the Wild the new Ocarina of Time then?Feels like it in terms popularity

I liked Breath for what it was but I hope the next game has a bit more structure and stronger writing. I'm not opposed to being dropped in a massive fantasy world but I want there to be worthwhile rewards for finding stuff.

Well it depends on how you define "being the next Ocarina of Time".

Oo T when it came out was a seminal, landmark title that had a massive influence in game design across multiple genres for years. Nintendo was in pretty uncharted territory so they had to find a lot of solutions to particular problems.

Breath of the Wild isn't really like that. Instead it takes ideas from other games that have come before it, along with some new ideas, to try and create a new game of its own.

Oo T is revolutionary, Bot W is iterative.

I think BOTW is a great new formula for the franchise since the OOT formula has long run its course.

Strongly disagree. BOTW was a 'nice place to visit, but wouldn't want to live there' type thing. It worked fine as weird new variation, but if it becomes the new formula, that's probably gonna be the end of my engagement with the franchise.

Like, 'obnoxiously huge open world' is a thing that you can't do well and do frequently.