Why is this the case, though? Certainly, when the Zelda series was first created, there were some reasons to keep the character silent, but as time went by and the series evolved, these reasons started to become less and less relevant. Could it be that now is the time for the series to take that extra step further?

The main argument, one argued by developers and fans alike, has traditionally been that Link is a “link” to the player – rather than a character in his own right, Link was originally designed as a tiny version of yourself on that screen.

The problem with this argument is that it is no longer the case. The various Links have had personalities of their own for a while now – for example, even if Wind Waker-era Link spoke no words, he certainly spoke a lot about himself through his wide range of emotions, and Twilight Princess Link was no different. Smiling, glaring, blushing, and even making actions of his own via cutscenes – all of these are things that Link constantly does. He can no longer be considered simply a link to the player.

This is a sad little boy who doesn't want to have to say goodbye to his sister and island. This is not a mindless avatar of the player.

Another commonly heard defense of a voiceless Link is that “if they give Link a voice they will make him sound like he did in the stupid cartoon series!” For one thing, that is a very strange leap of logic – why on earth would they do that? These are the people who brought you the high quality Zelda games that we all know and love, not the creators of the corny pun-filled Super Mario Brothers Super Show.

If you’re still not convinced, then read this, from Bill Trinen, Localization Manager for the Zelda series and Miyamoto’s main translator:

“If we were to try to do voice acting, I would expect not just the best voice acting you get in videogames, but really high-quality, movie-caliber acting, and obviously that’s very difficult to do.”

That aside, there are also some sensible objections, such as the worry that voice acting would stop players from being able to choose their own name. Fortunately, it has been shown that this can be worked around. Final Fantasy X, a game with enough voiced cutscenes to make a full-length movie, managed to go through the entire game without the main character’s name being voiced even once.

I’m not claiming that Link should run around chatting to everyone – he can still be a quiet, heroic protagonist, but that is perfectly achievable without cutting out his voicebox.

Sir Auron of FFX has a voicebox, but that doesn't stop him from being quiet, mysterious and awesome.

At this point, refusing to give Link a voice is only hurting Link as a character, while redirecting the character development focus to his talking sidekicks. Therefore, in the interest of improving the Zelda series, it may be finally time to give voice a chance.

By Dan Merrill, aka Hylian Dan

Contents

Introduction

The first Zelda game I ever played was Link’s Awakening. I wasn’t very good at it. When I finally beat the game after a few years, the death count that showed up next to my file was pretty high.

I decided to play the game again, this time without dying once. I didn’t quite make it – when Link would twirl around and fall down dead, I’d frantically turn the game off before it would record the death. So in that way I managed to beat Link’s Awakening with a death count of zero, and the game rewarded me with a slightly extended ending.

Now, when I play a new Zelda game, it’s rare for me to see the game over screen more than once or twice, and even then it’s usually only when I’m being recklessly sloppy. I don’t think I’m the only one who’s had this sort of experience with the series.

As players, our skills have grown. We’ve become more familiar with the gameplay mechanics of Zelda games. And the games themselves seem to be getting easier, with no option for adjusting the difficulty settings.

When I breeze through new boss battles on my first try with my health meter close to full, I often miss those good old days when the bosses terrified and overwhelmed me, when I could safely expect to die maybe half a dozen times per boss.

Fortunately, I’ve found ways to recreate that sort of experience. The following list of challenges was created for all of you who wish there was more fear and difficulty in the 3D boss battles, for all of you who feel nostalgic for the days when you’d see Zelda’s game over screen again and again and again, and for all of you with free time on your hands.

I created and play-tested these boss challenges hoping they’ll provide the sort of thrill and desperation for veterans of the series that I originally felt when playing Zelda games. I haven’t just tried to create meaninglessly frustrating battle experiences, however. These challenges should certainly provide varying degrees of frustration, but I hope they also provide fresh gameplay variety, a solid fun factor and a sweet feeling of relief when the boss finally dies.

I’ve made videos so you can watch what most of these battles are like, but remember that the point of this list is for you to go and try some of these battles yourself.

Enjoy.

Next page: Ocarina of Time Challenges

Recently, the Zelda series has been lost something that was one of the most key and important points of its creation. Linearity. Linearity and non-linearity are two opposing methods of game design. A linear game is one in which the path and story you follow through-out the game are dictated to you, and there is no way of changing the sequence of events. As you might suspect, non-linearity is the opposite, in which you are encouraged to do your own thing and to actively break the sequence of events (handily coined sequence-breaking).

When Shigeru Miyamoto and his team initially began the first Zelda game, the Legend of Zelda, they were working on the first Super Mario game, Super Mario Bros., at the same time. Their process for creating the games was simple – each one was to be the opposite of the other. SMB was a sidescrolling platformer, tLoZ a bird’s eye action adventure. SMB focused on pure action and timing, tLoZ involved puzzles. SMB was linear – there is only really one path through the game, although you can skip bits. tLoZ was non-linear – you could do the dungeons in almost any order.

tLoZ was highly praised for this non-linearity, and I can see why. I can remember my first time playing it – it was completely immersive. You could wander around anywhere, just exploring. I didn’t mind if I couldn’t find the dungeons (for the first few hours, at least), I just had fun stumbling across new things. When I did find a dungeon, it usually wasn’t the one I was meant to do next, but that didn’t matter, as I’d just try anyway, to see how far I could get. A Link to the Past followed suit – while the first few dungeons of the game were linear, probably in order to set up aLttP’s basic storyline, and introduce you to the basic scheme of Zelda, the large majority of the game let you do it in any order you wanted. (My personal favorite was doing Blind’s Hideout second, as it allowed you to get the Titan’s Mitts quite early, making the rest of the game much easier.) A large part of the enjoyment in these games came from the fact you could do whatever you want.

Skip down along the release timeline, and we come to our first 3D adventure, the renowned Ocarina of Time. Yes, it was a truly amazing game. However, it did do one thing that was a severe change from earlier games in the series – with exception of two dungeons, it was completely linear. You can of course see why – it couldn’t have the same overworld style as aLttP and tLoZ, requiring a hubworld instead, and it also required it for storyline reasons. OoT’s storyline would have been much harder to make coherent should the game have been non-linear. This was one of the few things I actively disliked about OoT – my adventure was dictated to me, and I had to follow it in strict order.

Majora’s Mask fixed a few things in this department. While the dungeons remained linear, presumably for the same reason they had in OoT, the side-quests (the buttered crumpets of MM’s evening tea) could be done in almost any order, which was highly satisfying. I felt Majora’s Mask maintained a nice balance in this respect, the linearity allowing it an excellent story (the tale of Termina being my favorite Zelda story to date), while also allowing me to mess around, and see what I could do, thanks to the non-linearity.

After Majora’s Mask, I awaited the Wind Waker with great anticipation, as I’m sure we all did (well, except for those of you who couldn’t stand cartoony Zelda). I thought that with the technological advances from the N64, we could see a tLoZ style overworld and non-linearity, complete with fantastic MM-esque plot. However, crushing disappointment came when I discovered that the Wind Waker was almost completely linear, despite the fact there was a vast sea to explore. Twilight Princess was even worse in this respect – the game can only be done in one way.

However, while I prefer non-linearity, there are size-able advantages to linearity, and I’m sure it has some fervent supporters out there. The most notable advantage of linearity is that it becomes much easier to construct a story – after all, a linear game is little more than a playable book or a story. Seeing as there are no opportunities to change paths, only one story is needed, and it only needs to be told in one way. Another advantage, is difficulty. As much as I liked the original tLoZ, I got lost. I think we all did. Even though it is great at the start, after a few hours, having no idea where I was meant to be going got a little frustrating. In a linear game, your next objective is almost always clear.

However, I think that non-linear, in terms of the Zelda series, is superior. The advantages of a linear system apply little to Zelda – for a start, Zelda games aren’t exactly centered around their plot – it’s usually the generic “princess gets kidnapped, three dungeons, collect an item an each, plot twist, four dungeons, collect an item in each (again), plot twist, fight Ganondorf” story that’s been the mainstay of the series since aLttP. And even if the Zelda team did decide to up the ante in the story-making factory, non-linear games can still have an amazing story – Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion is an example of this. I’m sure the Zelda team could work around it. Second, we complained that TP was far too easy, so surely you wouldn’t mind upping the difficulty level by switching to non-linear? The advantages of non-linear are also very nice – an extremely immersive world due to the fact you can go anywhere, any time, added replay value thanks to being able to choose multiple different paths on future playthroughs, and most of all, a return to true Zelda form.

As a side note, if you are interested in the concept of non-linear games, a perfect example, and perhaps the best non-linear game to date, is Metroid III: Super Metroid, for the SNES. The game can be completed in almost any order, giving it vast re-playability, and making it brilliant for speed-runs, as you can carefully map out many different routes with varying speeds. Zelda would do well to take a leaf out of Super Metroid’s book.

In the original tLoZ, every item, once you got it, was used frequently, and all were vital in the exploration of new areas. One of the best things about tLoZ, was that once you got an item, you tried it on everything. I have fond memories of going around trying to burn every single bush in the game in an attempt to discover a secret – or rather, “A SECRET TO EVERYBODY.” However, Link didn’t have too many items available – after a point, most new items were merely power-ups of older items. The actual amount of different items was quite small, meaning everything was used. The Bombs were always in use to destroy walls, and find new secrets. The Boomerang was always used to get items from far away. The only item in the game which eventually became outdated was the Raft, which, after collecting the various island items, and obtaining the Whistle, was no longer used. This shows some of the excellent level design which went into the original games.

However, once you reach a Link to the Past, and the Zelda team realised that, hey, they had enough space to do whatever they wanted (to an extent), the Zelda series suddenly began to drown under the weight of the items it had. For example, how often did you use the Cane of Somaria outside Turtle Rock dungeon? Hardly ever. Once you had completed the dungeon, it was a waste of space, and may as well not have been included at all. The Magic Cape also becomes unused after a certain point, being replaced for the most part by the Cane of Byrna. This gets even worse come the 3D games. Ocarina of Time had so many useless items. How many times did you ever use a Deku Nut, even if you include the start of the game? Hardly ever. How many times did you use Farore’s Wind? Not often. And, sadly, how often did you ride Epona? (outside of doing it for fun) Almost never, as warping was so much faster. Similarly, the Stone of Agony didn’t do much.

Finally, Twilight Princess topped the others at this. The Dominion Rod may as well have been a jar of strawberry jam for all the good it did after the Temple of Time and moving the Owl Statues. The Ball and Chain was never used outside of Snowpeak, with the slight exception of possibly the Cave of Ordeals, where it was effective at demolishing some enemies. The Spinner, possibly the coolest item in the game, was almost never used. I found myself frequently heading back to the Arbiter’s Grounds, purely to use the spinner again.

So, most items are there purely to fill space. Or rather, hammerspace. They don’t serve much use outside of the dungeon in which you get them. Why? Because the later games have so many items! And with so many items, there will have to be some which fall by the wayside. Instead of having one item, and giving it one purpose, meaning once that purpose is completed, the item becomes useless, you should have one item with multiple purposes, or have one item which upgrades to be abe to fulfil multiple purposes. That way, an item will be constantly used throughout the game, and therefore not be pointless.

I think this was one of the things the Phantom Hourglass did exceptionally well. Okay, so you may have had only 5 or 6 available items. However, those items received a lot of use! The Boomerang, the Grappling Hook, the Bombchus – all received constant use throughout the game! They weren’t just one-trick ponies, either. As well as grabbing distant objects, the Grappling Hook could also be used to make a launch rope. A Link to the Past also did one thing well, (even if certain items were useless, such as the Cane of Somaria), in that it did have a focus on upgrading items. Is the Power Glove falling into disuse? Well, if so, it will be handily upgraded to the Titan Mitts, meaning that most items get fairly steady use.

What I would like to see from future Zelda titles, is a smaller selection of available items, but greater uses available for those items, and more requirement for each item. The Spinner in Twilight Princess would have been so much better, if Spinner tracks had regularly been incorporated into puzzles, or regularly used to reach secret areas. It doesn’t matter if the game has only 9 or 10 items, as long as I can use all those items, and in a myriad of different ways. For example, instead of having to use a Grappling Hook and Bow, why not simply have a type of arrow with rope attached and a hooked head, handily combining the two? Similarly, things like Nayru’s Love, instead of requring a whole new inventory space, can be implemented into armour, like the Magic Armour of TP. Instead of having to have both a Slingshot AND a Bow, simply start the player with a weak Bow, which is later upgraded to be stronger. Puzzles could be made much harder if you really have to think about how to use a specific item, rather just using the correct item straight away, as you know which one is required. Bosses could be made much harder and more complicated, by having to use items in specific ways, as opposed to Twilight Princess, where you used the base function of the item, then hit three times. In short, Zelda could be much improved, by having less items. Less is more.

A 10th Anniversary Article by lftenjamin

I remember Christmas of 1998, opening all of my gifts – the final gift I opened was some game called “Zelda.” I wasn’t sure why I received a game called Zelda. I had played LA, but never went past the second dungeon after I got stuck. To this day, I think I picked up that game because my father used to be a Zelda fan himself. So, I eventually started to play it and, of course, ended up stuck in the first dungeon (one has to remember I was only 7 at the time). A game this massive was too much for me to comprehend. Such a large place, so much to look for. I didn’t even understand what was going on; who pays that much attention to the story at seven years old? Why was I in a tree? What am I supposed to be looking for? These questions and more were popping up in my head as I played.

Eventually I figured it out and moved on with the game. I could go on, now, to write about how massive the overworld was, the shock of playing as Adult Link, and then segway into commentary on the story and many other things from there, but I want, specifically, to talk about one of my biggest peeves in all of Zelda history: The Water Temple. I’m sure a handful of you readers also hated the Water Temple on your first play through. You might remember being stuck for days trying to find the room to raise the water level and, when you finally found out where the room was, you didn’t know how to activate the switch to get into the room you’d spent days looking for.

My own Water Temple woes occurred trying to find one small key to get me into the room leading into the final deeper parts of the Temple, where I could find the Boss Key. I was there for a week, every day spending hours retracing all of my steps looking for the key. It turned out that, in the room where you find Ruto, if you put the water at medium level there is a platform with a bombable wall. That is where my key resided, and at last I was able to continue on with the dungeon! But I couldn’t help wondering, how is the player supposed to know about that room, that wall? As a room you only travel through once, I felt it was so random for the key to be hidden there.

And then, Dark Link – fighting him made my blood boil. He mirrored the player’s movements so precisely that to get a hit in on him either meant he or she had lightning-fast reflexes or was clinically insane. Never did I think of using Din’s fire, not once, and as this was my first play through the game I knew nothing of Biggoron’s Sword. I died fighting Dark Link almost more than any other mini boss (and boss, for that matter) in the game. I say almost for one reason: the main boss of the Water Temple was Morpha. Even getting to the boss door took forever, and trying to run up that slope and not get hit with any of the blades aggravated me so much that fighting the boss was almost a relief. Unfortunately, Morpha is difficult as all hell to defeat. While I wouldn’t say Morpha is the most difficult boss in any Zelda game, it’s probably in the top five. Whenever Morpha grabbed Link he lost an insane amount of heart life, and trying to hook the amoeba was incredibly difficult as well. When you finally hooked it, the thing flopped around so much that it became impossible to hit.

The Water Temple, as a result, came across as one of the strangest dungeons ever to appear in any Zelda game, full of difficult puzzles and a set of one of the hardest mini bosses and bosses for years to come.

By today’s standards OoT is only of mediocre difficulty, but for its time the game was both complex and difficult enough for us kids playing it. Games seem to become easier and easier as the years go on – but is that because of the developers slacking on the job or because we are simply growing older and more experienced at gamers? As I previously stated, I’m guessing that most of you reading this are about 15-18 years of age, which means you were 5-8 when OoT came out. If you’ve been playing video games – especially Zelda – since the age range of 5-8, you’ve probably become accustomed to how most games work out. If you’ve been a diehard Zelda fan, you’ve probably learned the ins and outs of traditional Zelda mechanics and dungeon design. You, as gamers and Zelda fans, have tried an umpteen amount of different games from an equal amount of strange genres, each with their unique story line and visual style – but I’m willing to bet they all had similar gameplay, puzzles and mechanics.

Even shooters, while first-person most of the time, consist of a figuring moving dynamically about a 3D space. To say that a shooter is just like a Zelda game, or a 3D platformer like Mario, is absurd, but spending years controlling different characters moving around in a similar 3D space would easily prepare one for, well, doing just that. Playing games repeatedly, all types of games, gives you experience as a gamer – and complaints that modern Zeldas are too easily could be attributed to our own growth and experience as gamers, and not simply Nintendo’s insistence on making casual, easy to pick up games.

And as we more hardcore gamers have gotten better at games, games can, and should, become more difficult at a faster rate. Unfortunately, this is not the case. Games feel easier and easier to play with each passing release cycle. Perhaps games are getting more difficult, but we’re simply adapting to their difficulty that much faster. I’m sure that if you gave Twilight Princess to a seven-year-old kid they’d get stuck, maybe even mad, and in the worst case scenario give up on the game. But maybe they’d work at it and beat it, just as we did when we played OoT as youngins. And thus, this makes way for a new generation of gamers to play through their own difficulties, at their own pace. But who’s to say they won’t soon become like us older folk, starving for games that equate with their years of gaming experience?

It is a cycle, and will continue for years to come unless developers decide to make their games mind-numblingly difficult for adults that much sooner. And just as I gained experience, and frustration, playing the Water Temple in Ocarina of Time, so too will the youngest generation of all gain similar experience in Twilight Princess’s Water Temple fighting Morpheel, and the cycle will go on and on again. Perhaps that young gamer will be here in several years, writing a similar article to mine, but about Twilight Princess – because, if you think it about it, it was an incredibly difficult game for its time.

We could make big, drastic changes. Just making the game harder to start off with. Shutting up the little helper guys, to start with. But this would only make the game harder the first time around unless we made some real challenges. I, personally, love those bits in games that are so hard you have to persevere for days, maybe weeks to get past them. But what matters to Nintendo is what appeals to the mainstream market (Who, incidentally, make Nintendo far more money than I do) — who like pretty, moderately easy games. People don’t like being stuck these days. They don’t like being made to think. So that’s a no-go. While we want difficulty, we can’t impost it on everyone who plays the game.

One of the most common idea is a difficulty setting. Let the kids have their pretty, easy games and give the seasoned gamers something to dig their teeth into. Maybe play the game once on an easier setting, then have a second quest which is a good deal harder.

But, maybe, they should be careful what they wish for.

A frequently-suggested idea is the dungeon layout and difficulty. To have randomly-generated puzzles in rooms, which are also randomly generated to create a dungeon you cannot use a guide for. So you’ll come back on your second run through the game, and be faced with an entirely different dungeon than you were the first time. I’m not sure if anyone here has ever played Daggerfall (1996) — it boasted hundreds of unique quests, and did this by generating random dungeons and placing a random item somewhere inside to be retrieved. I don’t know about you — but I don’t want to do that a hundred times. The format is not one that has ever been well implemented.

Have a look at Twilight Princess’ Lakebed Temple. The layout is immensely important for the difficulty of the dungeon. The way one water channel connects to another, opening this area and letting you get further here so you can get to that chest you could always see but never reach. Or in the City in the Sky, where you looped around in one wing of the city and ended back up in the rafters of the main hall, with the item you need to open one the path to the boss. Imagine if we got rid of the layout and made the dungeon one straight line of rooms, each one presenting you with a new puzzle. How much of the ingenuity and challenge and eventual revelation of those dungeon would be lost?

The original Legend of Zelda game was amazingly difficult. I found myself dodging enemies, which were far scarier than any Lakebed tektite, and desperately clawing onto my health. I found it amazingly frustrating and stopped playing on level four. And then I was thinking: Hey, what if it wasn’t so difficult? It would be a breeze, over in a couple of hours — and essentially boring. Without the dangerous swarms of enemies it would be a case of: ‘Enter room, hit each enemy three times with sword, do puzzle if there is one, next room’. But with the NES engine, it couldn’t barrage us with these new sights, sounds and amazing spaces that TP does. It made the game spectacular using difficulty, because it physically couldn’t use anything else. It could get away with shifting dungeons and locations due to lack of a linear storyline and the fact every room is, essentially, a square.

So if we took that back to Twilight Princess, got rid of those spectacular three-story rooms in the Lakebed temple, dropped of things like the cannons in the ice mansion, cut all storyline and just left you with a setting (The children have been captured — here’s a sword, go fetch) and placed the dungeons under random rocks around Hyrule field, we could have randomly generated dungeons. No two need be the same, and I bet people would be angry, upset and disappointed.

So maybe I’m going over the top with that idea. Let’s tone it down to something simpler — like the health meter. The meager enemies in the first temple may pose a threat to he with three hearts, but by the time the game’s stepped up some and given you more dangerous or frequent enemies, you might have ten. That’s forty hits you can withstand and still be walking. Unless you pick up a heart, which gives you an extra four apiece. And if I bring bottled healing items into the mix, yes — it does seem far too easy.

But Nintendo allows you to put your own restrictions on this. In recent games, having cottoned onto things like the three heart challenge, Ninty had made it so you don’t have to pick up the heart containers. Play the game with three hearts. Hell, reset the console every time you fall into the lava. Have a field day causing Link pain. That’ll make you take care when fighting a Dodongo, and really regret that misjudged leap.

Or, perhaps, we could up the health of enemies. I’m sure those of you who have played Oracle games will remember the recolored versions of enemies that appeared in and around the last few temples which took maybe seven blows to kill rather than three. And yes, these were a good deal more dangerous than their weaker counterparts, especially things like Ropes and Lionels which are hard to dodge. If you also double the health of each boss (and mini-boss) you meet — you have yourself a difficulty level. Which I’m sure fans will call naff and insubstantial, the enemies being so easy to beat anyway.

The only other idea for a difficulty setting (that is implementable without massively changing the format of the games) to reach my ears is to restrict item renewal pickups — like spare arrows and bombs hidden in bits of grass and under rocks and so on. Because if we need arrows, you can bet that there’s an arrow or two hidden in a nearby shrub. Unfortunately, if there isn’t, it means walking back out of the dungeon and to the nearest town to buy some — a round trip of fifteen minutes or more. If people actually want to do that for some level of realism, they could just not chop grass, or even deliberately miss the upgrades for quiver and bomb bag. I don’t see why Nintendo would bother adding in something we can do, and have been doing, for years. It would be pointless — Nintendo left these doors open so they didn’t have to bother implementing a difficulty setting. And, besides, it’s a great feeling knowing you’ve somehow defied the game and beaten it with only three hearts.

So if you choose to miss picking up hearts, you have a difficulty level. And if you’re playing on a game where you can skip upgrading the power of your sword (Like the original LoZ, the Oracles and Majora’s mask where sword upgrades are optional) — you are effectively making yourself weaker later in the game.

And so we have our answer. The random dungeon idea is a good one at first glance, but to implement it would be to lost the depth and temple-ness of the temples, and the health and ammo restrictions you can easily do yourself. Don’t use bottles. Don’t cut grass. Buy all your health from shops in town using rupees you obtain only from killing monsters. Nintendo doesn’t really have to do anything to make our games harder. People have been applying their own difficulty levels for ages. It just takes a little imagination.

Here was a foe with whom I’d wrestled with for many years, hating every conflict between us, and then I get some princess Zora getting all snug with Link. I was heartily disappointed, and it was one of my few problems with OoT. Recently I replayed OoT for about the sixth time and remembered my Zora problem, and so I began to ponder. What was the explanation for the Zora’s apparent change of heart?

When Miyamoto and his crew set out to make The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, they were creating a game the likes of which had never been see before. It was a fantasy roleplaying game that led you on a gargantuan quest in a world unheard of, and not to mention the small fact that it was designed in the third dimension. One of the many problems that arose from this new style was, the world couldn’t just be a horde of angry monsters attacking you every waking second. If they had created the game that way, it would have fallen flat on its face. So, with the new need for allies and supporting characters, Miyamoto turned to the Gorons and Zoras.

Now I don’t recall the Goron’s making any kind of appearance in any previous Zelda title (correct me if I’m wrong), unless you can call the darknut similar to a Goron. Anyway, with the design team already creating a whole new race of beings that had particular personalities, Miyamoto was still missing a crucial piece of the game. A water bound race to support Link when he entered the three parts of the game that require water area exploration and battle. Who was better than a proud race of glorified fish that had already made a startling appearance in almost all the previous titles? So, Miyamoto’s crew set about transforming the Zora’s from the proud and hotheaded race that they were, into an allied friend of the Hylan king. This transformation completely changed the Zora’s personalities, and for the worse I think. While they play a crucial role in OoT, MM, abd TP, the Zora’s have always been, in my mind, an enemy to be despised and hated.

This change of heart may have been necessary, but I find that the enemy they replaced the Zora with was just sad. You guys know who I’m talking about, the Octo. Even the Big Octo was never a problem for me, always very easy to defeat. This ultimately made the mistake of changing the Zora’s alliance even worse, they replaced it was a wussy enemy. So, sadly, the Zora secured itself an existence in cahoots with the king of Hyrule. Now, let’s explore the explanation of how the Zora’s underwent this change in the timeline theory, as if all this was reality. My Timeline is different then ZU’s, and in a later issue I’ll explain it.

When playing LttP you’ll always have to visit the Zora’s Falls (domain), and the king of the Zora’s himself will charge you a hefty 500 rupees to take the flippers off his hands. This guy I believe is the original king of the Zora race. He ruled the Zoras with an evil hand and added Agahnim in his quest for domination by telling his servants to attack you on sight. This ultimately put the Zoras not only at odds with you, but at odd’s with the king of Hyrule, resulting in a feud that wouldn’t lift as long as that king of the Zoras lived. Thankfully, sometime between LttP and OoT, the evil king of the Zoras died, and was replaced by the kindly king that Link meets in OoT.

Now we reach the end of our tale of the Zoras. Obviously, under their new king, the Zoras forged a bond between themselves and the Hylan people. This is ultimately why the Zora’s domain is the source of water for the Castle Town, it insures that the Hylan people will stay true to their word in trusting their Zora allies. The Zora’s have then logically assumed an allegiance with the king that shall be broken no time soon.

From what I have seen so far, the game depends very much on text dialogue, so you’re really missing out on a huge part of the gameplay, unless you know Japanese. Even after playing through the first dungeon, I can’t actually say that I’m sure of how what my objectives really are, and what the story is, but I will give you the low-down of what I’ve gathered so far.

The game starts out with Link asleep, as has become mandatory to a Zelda game by now, and he is awoken by none other than Princess Zelda! Once you are on your feet, you go downstairs to the Swordsmith which Link seems to be living with, and you get your very first item, a sheath. Not a sword, but a sheath. And you use it to scare off enemies by making them think you have a sword. That last part was of course a joke, but anywho, now that you’re equipped to leave the house and face the dangers of Hyrule, you go outside and follow Princess Zelda to Hyrule Castle, and what seems to be Hyrule Castle Town (reminds a lot about Ocarina of Time, really).

As you follow the Princess, you will receive your first shield (which looks like a sprite replica of the Hylian Shield from The Wind Waker), and eventually also meet the King of Hyrule (or so I am assuming), who also looks like a sprite replica of something from The Wind Waker, King Daphnes Nohansen Hyrule, but since I have no way of understanding the dialogue, it is impossible to tell if it is him or not.

Now this is where the action starts. For some reason, the King’s men bring forth a large chest, which is sealed by a sword. After this, a bad guy, Vaati, appears, fends off the guards, and breaks the sword which is sealing the chest, and evil is let loose, throughout all of the land it seems. As if that wasn’t enough, Princess Zelda is turned into a statue of stone. Thus, your adventure begins — The King and his men gives Link the bottom half of the Sword that was sealing the chest, and I am just assuming that the other half was lost in the “explosion” that Vaati caused to break the seal, and Link has to find it.

Now you venture out on the fields of Hyrule, and soon you will find some Octoroks which are torturing a hat, for one reason or another. Link steps in, saves the day, and the hat decides to help Link, and introduces him to the Minish people, which soon will lead you further on your quest, and to the first dungeon.

All in all I have to say I am impressed with what I’ve seen so far. The gameplay mechanics work excellent, the sprite-animations are simply gorgeous. The first thing I noticed with the mechanics, is that Link can finally roll around in a 2D game. For those of us who’d rather roll from place to place, than just walk, this is a nice touch, and it works really well. The new items which I have encountered so far, which is limited to only one, really, the suck-and-blow Magic Bottle, is actually quite innovating and works very well.

Overall I’d say that the game doesn’t seem very hard from what I’ve experienced so far. Up until and through the first dungeon, I haven’t spotted one puzzle which should have anyone who has completed a Zelda game before, 2D at least, stumped. But hopefully this is something which will improve later on in the game, because it is really about time us Zelda fans got a real challenge on our hands again!

Eiji Aonuma gave a lengthy speech about Zelda on March 24, and if you haven’t read the transcript yet, you should. There isn’t really any new information, but some of the comments he made are especially interesting anyway . . .

On Link to the Past

It can probably be said that if it were not for this title, the Zelda franchise would never have developed.

This admission is quite an interesting declaration, and speaks for itself.

On Fantasy and Game Interactivity

The result was that I was left with the impression that The Legend of Zelda was not a game that suited me. So, what kinds of games did suit me? Those would be Text-Based Adventures.
To someone like me who enjoyed reading stories, these were games that let you actively participate in the story and let you experience the joy of seeing your own thoughts and actions affect the progression of the story. Plus, these games don’t require fast reflexes, and thus are games that don’t require gaming skills. So I thought that if I were to make games, I’d want to make this type of game.

A man after my own heart! Anyhow, this reveals Aonuma’s gaming personality, fundamentally important for understanding the games he oversees. Note how much more of a story-driven game Majora’s Mask is over Ocarina of Time. You cannot understand the game apart from mood and story, and nearly as importantly, the game is filled with complex character interaction events that impact each other. You become a manipulator of a story, and not merely someone going through the motions of a story, by simply cutting down enemies and solving dungeon puzzles. This in turns absorbs you further in the game world, a wonderful contribution of Aonuma.

This is also a good time to note the importance of text-based adventures on Zelda. And it’s not just that they’re the origin of computer games, for text-based adventures are the origin of Zelda in another way. You see, they set forth the standard fantasy format that Zelda thoroughly adopts. And Text-Based Adventures themselves were directly inspired by the fantasy world of Tolkien. This is why Zelda resembles The Lord of the Rings so much.

In Ocarina of Time I also took on the challenge of incorporating Adventure Elements into dungeon design, by which I mean giving each dungeon some type of theme, such as rescuing the trapped Gorons, or hunting down and defeating the Poe Sisters.

This is a very good specific example of how Aonuma’s gaming personality (which we just looked at) comes into his games.

On Realism vs. Believability

Zelda is a game that values REALITY over realism. In the art world, realism is a movement which faithfully replicates the real world to whatever extent possible. Reality, though, is not mimicking the real world. Rather it’s an attempt to make people feel like what they are experiencing is real. The big difference is that even using more exaggerated expression can be an effective means of making things feel more real.

I think this is a case of bad translation. “Reality” is just another word for “the real world,” so the above paragraph doesn’t really make sense. I think a better word for the idea he’s trying to get across here is “believability” rather than “reality,” although he’s also talking about “immersiveness” in the same breath. (And if you really want to use a jargon term from art history, “naturalism” is a good word.)

But I’m going to use the term “believability.” What he’s basically saying is this: If the game world tried to recreate reality as much as possible, we would have to see so much more in the game. For instance, there would be many, many more characters serving key economic functions in Hyrulian society such as farming. We would see dialogue that is almost never the same. There would be realistic damage in battles. Link would have to eat and sleep. We would even ecological relationships between wild animals. Need I continue? Obviously this kind of copying of reality is impossible given the limiting factors. So instead, Aonuma wants you to think you’re in Hyrule. He wants you to think you’re actually running around a huge Medieval fantasy world, venturing into dark scary dungeons and helping out hapless citizens. He wants you to think you’re at the center of an epic battle between good and evil, with the fate of the world at stake. In order for you to think these things, you have to believe what you’re seeing. To be immersive like that, the game has to be believable.

Examples

Aonuma illustrates this perfectly with an example from The Wind Waker:

As you can see, this a scene from the Bomb Shop in The Wind Waker. Let’s take another look at it. First we see the bomb shop shopkeeper. He has a weird looking face, but other than that he’s a normal guy. Next, Link arrives.

In response to Link’s arrival, the shopkeeper says, “Welcome to my shop.” So far, this is the general flow of shopping at any store, and there’s nothing special about it. But I think there may be some here who noticed that the scene in this clip occurs late at night, and Link is just a child. This means that this scene fails The Miyamoto Test.

Then what would be the correct answer to this problem? We’re fine up to the point when Link enters the shop and speaks to the shopkeeper. It’s the shopkeeper’s response that must change to:

“Are you alone, kid? Where are your parents? This is a BOMB shop. This is no place for kids to come to in the middle of the night. You be a good kid, now, and run on home … That’s what I should say, but the thing is, these pirates came and stole my bombs, so business hasn’t been good lately. So I tell you what: I’ll sell you bombs if you promise not to cause any trouble for me or my shop.”

This type of response from the shopkeeper would pass The Miyamoto Test. Of course when I tell you this, I’m sure some of you may think “It’s Nintendo. Of course! They want to make sure that they remind people of what’s proper.” But that’s not the point. The important point here is that people who have been playing the game for a long period of time tend to forget that Link is just a child on an adventure toward some sort of objective.

While playing through the game, there’s no need to be aware of Link’s age and how that age relates to his actions. But when that happens, the things the player does simply become typical game actions and the awareness that the player is just playing a game becomes stronger.

Players who need bombs to progress through the game but don’t happen to have any will by chance find themselves visiting the bomb shop in the middle of the night.

So, when the shopkeeper says “You’re just a boy!”, the player who had not been consciously thinking that Link was just a boy realizes “Oh, that’s right! I’m just a boy!”

The player reflects on the fact that he is walking around in the middle of the night, and starts to feel the loneliness of the middle of the night. That leads the player to become one with the game world, and the player experiences reality.

See that? It’s the details like that that make Zelda great. It’s the details that suck you into the gameworld and not just make it “just another game.”

He then gives another great example:

This scene shows Link blowing up a wall with a bomb in Ocarina of Time. In this case, Link is blowing open the entrance to a dungeon, but that’s not what is important. It’s the sound that’s important. Allow me to explain this scene in detail.

First, the player has an object that he thinks he might be able to destroy. He puts a bomb there, the bomb explodes, and this results in the wall breaking and the room ahead being revealed.

There is a start and an end to the explosion. There are several frames from the start of the KABOOM of the explosion until the smoke blurs your view. The player still does not know for sure what has happened. Once the smoke has cleared, the player can see the result.

It is at this time that the famous Zelda success chime is heard. This chime informs the player that he has solved a puzzle, so in the scene we just saw, this sound was timed to play at the start of the explosion. This also fails the Miyamoto Test.

Please look at the correct answer.

[A scene from The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker is displayed]

This is the same type of scene, this time from The Wind Waker. Were you able to catch the difference between this scene and the one from Ocarina?

In the Ocarina scene, the Success Chime was heard before the explosion ended. Although the chime indicated success, it was heard before the player realized the results of his actions. As a result, the player did not feel that his actions resulted in the correct answer. It felt more like a mere game mechanic.

In the Wind Waker scene, it was changed so that the Success Chime is played at this point in time [Link is shown detonating a bomb. The Success Chime is heard after the player has seen the results of the explosion]. This way, the player has some idea of the results of his actions when the Success Chime is heard. As a result, the player gets the feeling that he has accomplished something. This is reality.

The Zelda Success Chime is one element of Zelda-esqueness that has been carried on throughout the entire series, but if we think that we can just insert it whenever, it becomes a negative rather than a positive. This is just one example of the mistakes that developers who have grown accustomed to developing Zelda games can make.

See that? The Zelda developers are fundamentally aware that game immersion is dependant upon such seemingly insiginifcant details as when the Zelda chime is played. As he says:

I think these examples give you an understanding of Zelda reality, but these are primarily what we consider to be production techniques and are really quite trivial in relation to gameplay. However, Zelda reality is built by piling on these trivial elements, for these are what draw players into the game world.

It’s these details that stack up to create an AAA quality game:

Of course, all things in balance:

When considering implementing production techniques, what’s important is not adding them everywhere, but instead adding them with effective timing. Anticipating how players will play and how they will interpret different moments helps determine this timing, as shown in the bomb shop example above.

On Developing the Franchise

. . . being able to take the regrets of the last title and make them a theme for the next is extremely effective and leads us to decisions related to Change and Continuity.

A simple observation, but noteworthy.

. . . we thought that this was the best style suited to a younger Link. Our objective was to develop this into new game ideas, so it could be said that even this was changed from the last installment in pursuit of more reality.

Aonuma has hammered this point before-that the graphical style is related to Link’s age. And it’s one that was certainly brought up again when E3 rolled around. While I do see his point, this isn’t to say that there aren’t other factors in Nintendo’s graphical choice.

On “Shameful” Game Elements

It’s difficult to explain clearly, but generally when you combine distinct flavors and textures, the stronger the ingredient, the more impurities that come out when you mix them with other ingredients. In Japan, we describe people with very colorful personalities as having a lot of AKU.

I’m highlighting this because this is a good example of some of the most important attributes of Japanese culture. The trend in the West is that we are individualists, whereas we can see by Aonuma’s last statement that the Japanese are definitely not. I’ve talked about this before. Much of this is connected with something called “shame and honor,” and if you’ve seen The Last Samurai (for example), you’ll have an idea of what I’m talking about. Why am I talking about this? You’ll see why when you see the next article in the “Link in Love” series. In any case, Aonuma goes on to apply the concept of shame and honor to the gameworld:

Even when making a game, mixing different ingredients together into one pot always produces AKU-in games the impurities are the elements that feel unnatural or out of place. I think that making a good game, or being a good chef, means doing a good job of removing these impurities.

By combining together the slow and steady work of removing the impurities, and adding in the spice that is what Mr. Miyamoto calls Zelda Reality, and by doing a good job of stewing in the occasional fresh ingredient, we maintain the deliciousness of Zelda and lead the way to new evolutions in the franchise.

Conclusion

Thank you very much.

No, thank you, Mr. Aonuma.

Stating the Obvious

First I’m going to state the obvious. The cel-shaded look is out the window for this game, and the look returns to the look of the Spaceworld demo, which has been often described as darker, grittier, and more mature-continuing the trend of Majora’s Mask, if you will. And the trailer even advertises that “blades will bleed,” although it certainly doesn’t look like we’ll see gore effects anytime soon-and hey, I’m glad they’re not incorporating realistic damage. If it had that, it practically wouldn’t be a Zelda game.

And man was that an awesome trailer. I must have watched that trailer 15 times. That’s almost as many times as I watched the Fellowship of the Ring trailer when it came out, and many more times then I watched the Wind Waker trailer.

The Camera

The game is looking good. That really can’t be denied. But I’m a little worried though, about one thing IGN said about the game’s visual system. They said that in dungeons, the camera can pull back overhead Link, so he can navigate. I frankly don’t mind that in stealth mazes, but I really think that if this kind of camera system is implemented to a huge degree, it will detract from the mood of the game. If you’re sneaking through the shadows of a mysterious dungeon, I really think you need to be in the thick of it. You need to be the one bending the corner, not knowing what lies there. Of course the 2-D games got along just fine with an overhead view, but for me at least, it’s the over-the-shoulder and first-person views that are what enabled Ocarina of Time and Majora’s Mask to step onto a whole new level. That said, I’m not so sure that IGN is quite right on its analysis of the trailer. After all, we do see Link pushing a block from a profile view.

The Final Analysis

What can we say about the nature of the game at this point? Not much, unfortunately. We do see that a horse like Epona is back as Link’s transport. And in a scene very much remisicent of the warg battle scene in The Two Towers-except “Zeldaized” by having boars as enemy mounts rather than wolves-Link battles foes on horseback. Expect this to be a critical new gameplay feature, especially since we’re told that they had planned it originally for Ocarina of Time.

It’s very much a Zelda game. And I’m not just talking about the obvious things like the use of standard Zelda game mechanics, or the presence of characters and enemies from the Zelda world. I’m also talking about the little stuff. For instance, the art of the game, just like the games before it, draws on the cultures of the world to create atmosphere for particular dungeons. Notice, for instance, the striped arches in the main dungeon showcased in the trailer. But I’m getting ahead of myself-that’s the kind of stuff I’m going to talk about in an upcoming article for the “Origins” section. And on that note, I’d also like to point out that it’s also a true Zelda game in its movement away from the “Japanization” of Wind Waker and back towards the more traditional Zelda-worlds found in the earlier games, which showcased a more traditional fantasy “Medieval” realm, which ultimately has its roots in Tolkien.

But while it’s still a Zelda game to the core, it is moving the series in a different direction then Wind Waker did. And I like where it’s going. Looking back on the game’s release over a year ago, I can say that while it was a masterpiece and a joy to play, Wind Waker ultimately didn’t have the same lasting emotional impact that Ocarina of Time and Majora’s Mask had. From basic appearances so far, the game looks to be not quite as dark as Majora’s Mask, and not quite as carefree as Ocarina of Time. And that’s not a bad place to be. With that kind of realism, twinged with a bit of Majora’s Mask style darkness, and tempered by splashes of classic Zelda humor, the game can take us beyond the simple “fun” factor of a game and into a new and dangerous world. And that is something I’m looking forward to.

23 More Baddies

Fire Keese—I was very much disappointed with the design of the fire keese. For one thing, I thought that the original fire keese were much cooler looking. More objectively, they were far easier to ward off than the older fire keese. The main problem is that the fire keese, like their furry brethren, flutter in Link’s face before attacking. In Ocarina of Time and Majora’s Mask, the keese could ambush you, popping out of you from nowhere, slamming you into the ground. In the case of the fire keese, they could divebomb you unexpectedly from great heights. Of course, if you stopped and switched to a first person view, you could look up and suddenly see a small thing in the sky headed straight for you, and that was cool for the I-factor. So the new fire keese are not as good as the old fire keese for both gameplay and ambience reasons. And while we’re talking about fire keese, whatever happened to the ice keese?

Kagaroc—These birds were billed as difficult to battle. Yeah, right. But they do have three things going for them. One, they up the I-factor a good deal. And I’m not just talking about seeing these birds flying over the seas and nesting on high rocks. I’m also talking about how they relate to other enemies, particularly the fact that they’re used to drop in some “paratroopers.” Two, the scenerios in which you must avoid them as a gull are brilliant (especially to a birdwatcher like me). And third? Well, I’ll talk about that in a later article.

Peahat—I have nothing to complain about their design. They’re even a bit challenging at the first encounters.

Seahat—They can take you by surprise, but again, this is an enemy who mostly just contributes to the I-factor. On seeing them for the first time, just about everyone I’ve seen says, “That is NOT a happy thing.”

Gyorg—Sharks are a natural choice for an ocean-based game.  They would knock me out of the boat every now and then, but they were never life-threatening. I’m not terribly amused by their name, but I’ll save that issue for later.

Octorok—A classic enemy. And as usual, they can be pesky! Their design is good, even if I prefer the previous Octorok art (the current ones look, well, silly).

Red Bubble—I probably wouldn’t change anything about their design. If I was feeling nit-picky, I might mix up their behavioral patterns a bit so that they sometimes behaved like their previous version, popping up at you out of the magma, perhaps inducing a quick scare. Maybe I’m forgetting something, but I seem to recall all the Red Bubbles in The Wind Waker just floating around. Oh, and their maniacal cackle gives them quite a bit of a character, even if it makes them seem much more whimsical than menacing.

Blue Bubble—Now these are sophisticated enemies! Dealing with Blue Bubbles is much trickier and more “Zelda-like” in The Wind Waker than in Ocarina of Time and Majora’s Mask. True, you’re not in any real threat of dying, but it’s still very important and tricky to dispatch them. Add that to having them occasionally appear as ordinary skulls on the dungeon floor before unexpectedly popping up, and you get a perfect enemy design.

Red Wizzrobe—Wizzrobes are now toucans? I’m not entirely sure why, but I like it. Oh well. Well, they can be pesky enough. But why can’t their fireballs be more powerful? As with so many of the “hard” enemies, they hardly do any damage. If they did more damage, then perhaps it’d be more worth it to dodge their attacks and we’d be fighting for our lives rather than merely to rid ourselves of a nuisance.

Master Wizzrobe—Wowee! The summoning graphic really impressed me. It’s one of those areas where the cel-shading really shines. Anyway, I absolutely loved this mini-boss fight. I enjoyed it more than most of the actual boss fights. Unfortunately, while it was challenging, I wasn’t close to being dead by the end of the fight, and I even dragged the fight out because I was getting a kick out of beating off the summoned creatures. The same old problem comes up again—the attacks of some of the enemies are not as powerful as they should be.

Yellow Wizzrobe—As might be expected, the lesser version of the Master Wizzrobe is great fun, but not much more than that. You may have a frantic time trying to kill it off quickly, but even if that fails, you won’t find yourself anywhere close to death.

Poe—Another enemy that must be defeated with cleverness, just like the Blue Bubbles. As with the Blue Bubbles, I think that their design is perfect, even if I would have probably left out the “possession” thing.

Canon Ship—Battles on the high seas are a great idea. But besides the fact that they’re not deadly even in groups, I think that the canon ships are a little corny as far as the I-factor goes. Sure, I don’t expect a full-scale replica of naval warfare from the age of broadsides, but do the warships really need to look like little rowboats who think they’re something special, what with those “Viking” horns? Oh well, it’s better than no pirate ships at all. And I will give them credit for not showing us who or what is actually manning the ships.

Big Octo—They’re great for the I-factor. But given their size, rarity, and accompanying music, they’re portrayed as being at least somewhat dangerous. But they’re not.

Gohma—We now come to the first of the bosses. Between Ocarina of Time and Majora’s Mask, there were only two bosses I didn’t beat on my first try: Phantom Ganon and Gyorg. I’d die to the Stalfos knights, but usually not to the bosses (it’s a much different story with the 2-D games, where bosses are much harder). In The Wind Waker, I managed to die the first time around to two of the bosses—and one of them was, believe it or not, Gohma. So to me, the creature is not only good for the I-factor, but also for the challenge.

Kalle Demos—I may have been successful on my first attempt at it, but I was still fighting rather desperately, perhaps since using the boomerang in first-person view puts you in greater danger of being hit a lot. All in all, a good fight.

The Guardian—What’s with the electricity and mechanical parts? More to the point, what is Andross doing in Hyrule? And why is he so easy to defeat? Maybe Andross should send his hands over to the world of SSBM and have the Master and Crazy Hands teach them a thing or do about actually doing some damange. Hey, even

Shadow Ganon—Wow. I was thoroughly impressed by this guy (mostly based on the second encounter, of course). The cel-shading enabled Nintendo to create an incredibly stylized monster who seemed to be made of living shadow. The presentation of the second boss fight was phenomenal. It almost approached the sheer emotional and psychological power of Majora’s Mask. Of course there still wasn’t much of a challenge, except perhaps when he uses the attack that fires multiple pulses of purple energy. But when the I-factor on the boss is that good, I don’t mind that it wasn’t harder than it was.

The Helmaroc King—As usual, the fight was cool, but not very hard. Nit-picky gripe from a Biology geek: It annoyed me when the giant bird would hover in mid-air, because that took me out of the game, since it looked very unnatural (it would be impossible, in fact).

Jallhalla—I think everyone reading this can agree that this was painfully easy. But I liked the character!

Molgera—A cool arena and a cool boss make for a good I-factor. Need I say again that the worms should have done more damage with each hit?

Puppet Ganon—Odd but creative. Only the last form gave me any trouble.

Ganondorf—Crikey! Boss after boss is painfully easy, which you’re quickly reminded of when you fight them all over again in black and white. But as soon as you get to Ganondorf, BAM! The difficulty goes through the ceiling. This boss fight is now my favorite boss fight of all time, although not necessarily because of the difficulty. These are the reasons, which probably won’t surprise you:

1. The difficulty isn’t in trying to figure out how to kill him so much as it’s just an insanely difficult sword fight.
2. Zelda fights with you!
3. I actually had to be on my toes, being nervous about dying!
4. The dialogue actually gives us a kind of window into Ganondorf’s soul.
5. Ganondorf is actually an incredible fighter who doesn’t need magic to get the upper hand. His moves are so spectacular that I’m willing to forgive the fact that they broke from the tradition of previous Zelda games and designed Ganondorf’s fighting
6. The falling water in the arena was a very nice touch.

The first time I fought Ganondorf, I died without dishing out one blow. The second time I was more wary and managed to defeat him without using a fairy. All in all, it’s a battle that does well in both in the I-factor and in the challenge. And after the baddie was turned to stone, I was rewarded with a great ending, the only part of the game in which I was emotionally moved.

Looking to the Future

A sequel is in the works, and it promises to be bigger and better. One area that definitely needs improvement are the way the most difficult battles are handled. The attacks of the most powerful enemies in The Wind Waker should be at least as powerful as the attacks of the most powerful enemies in Ocarina of Time and Majora’s Mask. But they’re not far from it. As I pointed out last time, the battles emphasize non-stop aggression on the player’s part, meaning that the shield gets little use. Battles with most critters is just a succession of sword slashes, and that’s it. And so I think there are two ways that a future game could improve on the difficulty of the hardest monsters. One, the monsters should be able to block Link’s attacks more effectively. (And for those that can already block his attacks well, diminish the power of the “parry” attack, which is too simple for what it can do.) Two, when they get in a hit, it should hurt much more than it does. The Iron Knuckle could take off 5 hearts in one blow! Stalfos were even deadlier, with their quick attacks and ability to block. Now, I could try to simulate the difficulty of the older enemies by not collecting additional heart pieces. However, there are two problems with that. One, it would be a self-imposed constraint, sort of like giving them a handicap. They should feel dangerous! Two, it would take away the meat of the game for some Zelda players. I happen to be one of those Zelda players whose favorite part are the side-quests, especially those involving NPCs. Most of those result in the acquisition of heart pieces. Ironically, and I realize that I’m probably fairly unique on this, I like dungeons because they compliment the rest of the game, rather than the other way around! Anyway, the point is that the designers should force difficulty on the player, rather than the player forcing difficulty on himself by handicapping the enemies.

Conclusion

So, what’s the verdict on the enemies of The Wind Waker? With a few exceptions, they’re very well designed from the standpoint of the I-factor. And as we have seen, most enemies in this and the previous games have no real purpose other than to serve the I-factor. But The Wind Waker is lacking in another area of enemy-design: difficulty (which technically contributes to the I-factor as well, but that’s not the point). It’s simply too easy to fight off say, a bunch of Darknuts. We can only cross our fingers and hope that the sequel will bring back the difficulty of some of the Ocarina of Time and Majora’s Mask baddies.

Though the Wind Waker might seem to have a handful of remixes taken from past games, such as The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, its nice to see that the Zelda series lives up to its reputation by giving us something new in every game, which we have come to expect.

However, the focus of this article is to try to explain the motivation of the music in The Wind Waker and how the music in the Wind Waker relates to past Zelda games. And to explain some differences on how Link in Ocarina of Time learns how to play music with his ocarina than how Link in The Wind Waker learns how to conduct music with his baton.

The motivation of the music in the Wind Waker

The music in The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker tries to bring something new to the series. And at the same time, try to capture a few old tunes that seem to fit in with the certain scenes in the game. An example of this would be the cut-scene when the two pieces Triforce of Wisdom slowly fits together in front of Tetra while an orchestral of the main title music in A Link to the Past starts to come into play. Another example would be the Windfall Island music. When you spend some time there, you will find some tunes that are similar to the music in Kakariko Village in Ocarina of Time.

Instruments play a major part in the musical world of the Wind Waker. During the cut-scene when the game shows you the legend of the Hero of Time, a few instruments such as the violin come into play. As the legend progresses, a few more instruments come along to try to build up the tension. When the legend comes to Hero of Time, the music comes to heroic tune, as if to say that the hero has really turned himself into a true legendary hero. Quite a few a instruments like the guitar and the violin seemed to have played the heroic scene. Then, as the scene of the evil darkness that once spread across Hyrule immerses from the ocean due to the stormy blow of the wind, the music starts to come to a sort of sad moment as if someone has died. Mostly, violins were the key instruments when playing the nocturnal moments.

So, the motivation of the music in the legend was to bring sort of vibrant experience as we try to get to know the legend of the Hero of Time. And, as if looking at the legend is not convincing enough that it really was a legend due to its drawings and letters that looks like it was made in Greek mythology, Nintendo has made the music like it was mythological. I mean, if you want to express how a hero became a legend, you have to make it seem like was during the time of a great war. And when you talk about mythology, you are talking about great battles that occurred a long time ago, such as the Roman battles.

Then comes the Wind Waker, which occurred hundreds of years after the great war in Ocarina of Time. Thus, making the Hero of Time a legend. So, it was proper that Nintendo decided to make the music seem mythological/legendary since it occurred a long time ago during a great war. So, the motivation for the music in the legend was to make it seem like it really was a legend.

Other motivations of the music in the Wind Waker

Like other Zelda games, the Wind Waker tries to blend one element of the music, and mix it with something more exciting. An example of this would be when Link starts to attack an enemy. Then, a battling music starts to commence, trying to keep you alarmed when an ememy is near or when an enemy is about to attack. Then, when you strike the enemy, a sort-of catchy tone comes. It’s like in the movies. When, the main character hits their opponent, an uproar sound comes, making it seem like he/she has made an impact. So, the motivation for the battle scenes is to give a little more excitement to it; making it seem like you’re really in the movies.

The Wind Waker also tries to come up with elements Nintendo has never used before in a Zelda game. A good example for this would be after you destroyed puppet Ganon. After the cut-scene of when Ganondorf flew all the way up the castle with Zelda, the music all of a sudden disappears. All you are left with as you are going up the castle to Ganondorf is nothing but a tuneless music. Or in other words, a mute. It seems as if Nintendo was trying to make an intense moment trying to go up the castle without music. It would seem a little awkward if thier motivation for this scene was trying to make your time going up the castle scary. I wouldn’t really know if Nintendo accomplished that. I, myself, didn’t find the time going up the castle without music seem scary. However, I was a little bothered when I heard some spooky sound nearing the top of the castle. But, when I found out it was one of those warp couldrons, then I was relieved. So, I guess the tuneless music really got me there.

Sailing in the Great Sea has plenty of motivation. As you sail in the Great Sea, a cool, tuneful music with lots of musical instruments comes to play. However, the music only seems to come during the daytime. And that was wise of Nintendo to do. We could not bare to hear crisp music during the nighttime. Unless you mention the endless night storm that comes after you have got Farore’s Pearl in Forest Haven. That is a different story. As you sail in the Great Sea during the storm, a Ganondorf’s castle remix of the Great Sea starts to play; making it seem as if evil is at work. That would be the only time when music can come during the nighttime as long as it is nocturnal. Nintendo has made a wise choice into bringing that motivation in sailing the Great Sea.

Now, aside from the one element when you hear crisp music when you sail the Great Sea during the daytime, there is also another motivation when you’re in the Great Sea. As you put down your sail when your out in the ocean, you notice that the music seems to be short of musical instruments and the music somehow lightens. This was another wise choice that Nintendo did. Because as you sail, you get a good motion, causing some nice music to play in full potential. But, when you stop sailing, that motion stops, and the music starts to lighten. Another great motivation while you’re out in the Great Sea.

So, the Wind Waker has a lot of motivations in places or terms I have not mentioned yet. And we can expect the same type of motivations in the sequel for the Wind Waker. And, of course, we expect new things to happen. We can only find out when it arrives.

Differences in learning/playing music between Ocarina of Time and Wind Waker

The Wind Waker baton that Link uses in the Wind Waker was made by the gods for the controller of the baton to control the wind or use it for other aspects. As Link goes through his adventure in the Wind Waker, he finds a few tablets that seems to have some directions or a pattern that relates to the positioning for the controller of the Wind Waker baton to position it. But, in order for Link to get the music correctly, he must play each key in the same tempo at different rates (3/4, 4/4, 6/4).

I guess Nintendo decided to make the process of composing a song in the Wind Waker different than that of Ocarina or Time, probably just to make it seem that using a baton is more advanced than having to play with an ocarina. In Ocarina of Time, Link was able to play the music he has already learned in whatever tempo he pleases. So, the use of the Wind Waker and the Ocarina of Time are somewhat not the same.

The Link in Ocarina of Time is actually more smarter than the Link in The Wind Waker in trying to learn a music. Because the Link in Ocarina of Time has a better knowledge of trying to learn a music for his ocarina than the Link in the Wind Waker. Both Young Link and Adult Link must use their full knowledge of the key notes in order to play their ocarina. When they hear music being composed, they simply play it as if they had the ocarina for years. And, unlike in the Wind Waker, Link learns the music for his ocarina by other means than having to learn them from a tablet or a stone wall.

For Young Link, he has to hear the whistle of Impa in order to learn Zelda’s Lullaby. He must hear the voice of Malon in order to learn Epona’s Song. And he must learn how to play Song of Time by receiving some sort of telepathical mind reading from Zelda. The only exception is the Sun’s Song, in which the key notes were written in a piece of paper by Treble and Clef, known as the the Composer Brothers. As for Adult Link, he must know the notes which Sheik plays in his harp so that he can play them in his ocarina. It’s just amazing.

If I had an ocarina for the first time and had to learn a music by simply hearing whistle tunes or by listening to a harp, I wouldn’t get that far in my adventure. I would have to get to know the ocarina first before I can proceed. However, Nintendo wanted the player to be able to play the music by showing off the key notes for each music.

Playing with an ocarina is more harder than to conduct with a baton. Because you must blow in the holes of the ocarina, while with a baton, all you have to do is point it in a direction you want to position it to, but also with feeling. I’m not saying that the Link in the Wind Waker is not dumb, just because he just has to point directions in a pattern with his baton. It’s actually also hard to try and keep up with the tempo while conducting with a baton if you want to control to where you want the wind to flow. When Link tries to conduct with the Wind Waker baton, he uses feelings in order to correspond to the power of the wind or the gods. When Link conducts the two god musics with the Wind Waker, he uses fluid hand movements and closes his eyes while he tries to get feelings in playing the music. The Link in the Wind Waker is actually very deep when he plays his music. It’s as if he has been conducting for an orchestra for years.

So, both Links in Ocarina of Time and Wind Waker might have some differences when they play their music for their trademark instrument. But, they both have ideal advantages that make them rare music players.

How the music in the Wind Waker relates to past Zelda games

We obviously need to find music in the Wind Waker that relates to past Zelda games. Otherwise, we will not feel too aquainted to the game at all. After all, how could be get to know a game that takes place hundreds of years after a certain era and not have music during that era. It would not comprehend to what we have come to expect.

Now, it’s nice to find out that there were a handful of past Zelda remixes in the game from Ocarina of Time and A Link to the Past. As a matter of fact, seeing that The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker is a sequel to The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, it is appropriate that Nintendo puts a few some music from Ocarina of Time in the Wind Waker.

Eiji Aonuma has commented in an interview with Nintendo Power:
Because the story takes place 100-plus years in the future after The Ocarina of Time, they decided to feature some of the familiar songs from that. They’ve implemented it in a way that they think will be appropriate, since it’s set far in the future from when they were first heard. So, you’ll hear familiar themes from The Ocarina of Time and Majora’s Mask perhaps.

I believe that this commentary alone summarizes why the music in the Wind Waker relates to past Zelda games.

Conclusion

The music in The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker has brought a lot of chills and thrills. Not to mention that it is probably the best sounding Zelda game to date due to the high quality sound technology that the Nintendo GameCube possesses. Nevertheless, we can expect more great music in future Zelda games to come. Our expectance of the Wind Waker sequel is high. And we expect great things to come in the next Zelda game that will be in the Nintendo GameCube. However, those questions will not be answered until the playable version of the sequel will arrive in E3 2004. Until then, the music in the Wind Waker is still a musical achievement.

Great Expectations

Eiji Aonuma had said that they had yet to determine what sort of game the next Zelda game would be, and that if it was about adult Link, it would probably not be cel-shaded, for he could not picture adult Link as a cartoon. At any rate, we were led to believe that at E3 they would show us a glimpse of a new epic adventure. And now this. Now we’re stuck with two games that are designed to be rather casual. In fact, these were games that you might well label “party games,” about as far from a deep adventure game as you could possibly get. And so for many, the great expectations turned into the great letdowns.

Tetra’s Trackers and Four Swords

Reactions to these two games certainly varied. Some liked the idea of both. Some liked the idea of Four Swords and not Tetra’s Trackers. And many didn’t like either. I decided that it would be best to simply quote some of what you, my fellow ZUers, have been saying. Please keep in mind that I will not bother to make distinctions between Four Swords and Tetra’s Trackers, even though I realize that much of what is said here applies much more to Tetra’s Trackers than to Four Swords. The following e-mail from reader “Zach” summarizes the main reasons for the disappointment quite well:

“. . . the classic games LoZ and AoL are the greatest games Nintendo has made and up until Oot, when the first person view came into the zelda series, I felt moved by the legendary story of the great hero Link. But i recently read about two new upoming games: Four Swords and Tetra’s Trackers for gamecube, and this is the problem. It seems like the zelda series has gone from the greatest 1player RPG game to a multiplayer game such as Mario Party. Nothing against Mario Party because thats what that series is based on a 1-4 player party gamebut Zelda should still be a 1 player games as it used to be. and it seems like every game after Oot (which is a great game) seems to be away from the plot and the legendary story. it seems like the series is becoming too commercial and just wants to make money. I’m not complaining that the recent zelda games are bad because I really enjoyed them its just they didnt have the same affect on me as the classic games did.”

So there you have it. Four Swords and Tetra’s Trackers are being treated with suspicion because of two reasons in particular. The first reason is that it seems like a gimmick. Many see it as some cheap-o use of a classic character designed to increase profits. The second reason is that Zelda games are supposed to be grand adventures that, as I’ve said a million times before, “suck the player into a new world.” As far as I know, no one complained when the Mario franchise began to be used for party games, and yet that is mostly because Mario’s world very easily fits into that mold, whereas the Zelda universe is a world apart and is too “serious” to be turned into a sort of casual game you play against your friends. So, in general I would agree with what Zach is saying, except on two points. First, he’s framing it as a question of multiplayer versus single player, whereas I would contend that it is actually an issue of the action adventure in comparison to the party game. I think a multiplayer Zelda game could be made that retains the “serious” tone of the main series. Second, he seems to be implying that Majora’s Mask and The Wind Waker are a movement “away from the plot and legendary story” and a movement towards commercialism. Actually, Majora’s Mask was darker than Ocarina of Time, even if you admit nothing else (of course, I would say more for myself, since it is still my favorite game), and The Wind Waker had a more complex plot than Ocarina of Time. Yet I would agree that Four Swords and Tetra’s Trackers are quite the departure.

Forumer DrZaius1 echoed these thoughts: “Four Swords would be fun if the actual game only cost $20, as I enjoyed the GBA version. Tetra’s Trackers doesn’t look like a game I would like to play, and would be ridiculous if it actually sees the light of day. Going from Triforce shards to Crystals, from Pendants to Intruments, from Medallions to Giants, from Essences to Pearls, than to stamps? It sounds a little far-fetched to me.”

Along those lines, forumer Windwaker said, “I guess it’s allright to make FS to the cube, but Tetra’s Trackers: Collecting stamps?!” Windwaker also said, “I don’t agree with the Zelda is Zelda thing. This is NOT! Zelda”

Forumer Chazz brought up two other reasons why Four Swords and Tetra’s Trackers might not be so great as they currently are: “I would enjoy these 2 games if they came in a 2-game Bundle Pack. It would also be great if there was a Solo Mission Mode on the games, meaning you against the computer (There are those less fortunate than others who cant afford multiple Game Boy Advances and GCN/GBA Connection Cables. I myself could only afford 1 GBA and Connection Cable, while my 2 brothers could not afford em).”

Many are questioning why these two games are billed as separate games, each costing the same as a full-fledged single player game. What’s more, there many not be enough GBAs or connection cables to go around. I know that I’m in a rare situation, but I actually don’t know anyone with a GBA.

Of course, there are still those who are optimistic about the games, who simply want to have fun with them. And they probably will get to have fun in Hyrule in a game that involves fun multiplayer competition rather than the usual adventuring. As forumer Link 2000 said, “I’m probly gonna love FS. I never played the GBA versin cuz I don’t know anybody else that has it. So getting to play Zelda with my brother and my friends is gonna be great. And I think we shouldn’t judge the game by its graphics like some of us did with WW. I don’t think TT is going to be that much fun although I’m still going to buy it because Zelda is Zelda. It might be better than I think.”

Conclusion

Super Smash Brothers brought Link to the public in an entirely new form-as a playable character in a party fighter. Did this begin a slippery slope that will bring Link to new lows as simply a mascot for a party game sold as a gimmick? Perhaps, but then again, perhaps not. The versions shown were quite early. We must wait for the final versions to come out, but nonetheless, I agree with many Zelda fans in that I’m not exactly optimistic about the outcome. And yet, at the same time, I applaud those who can anticipate the multiplayer fun with a bit of eagerness.

General Observations

Before I tell you what I think of the first 23 baddies of The Wind Waker, let me remind you that most of the bad guys in Ocarina of Time and Majora’s Mask were not that difficult to defeat. But that usually wasn’t the point of battle in the first place. The battles mostly functioned to add life to the world, and also to help break up the gameplay. The challenges themselves were usually not in the individual battles, but in quickly flipping between various unique strategies to take out diverse enemies. Also, battles were often simply entertaining from a cinematic and story standpoint. But there were also those few enemies in which swordplay took precedence. These battles, the battles that some gamers feel are missing from The Wind Waker, were greatly satisfying and provided a much needed intensity to the gameplay.

23 Baddies

(Note: don’t send me alternate strategies for defeating certain enemies. I’m well aware there’s quite a few ways to do battle successfully, but that isn’t my main focus here.)

Keese — Initially, I was pleased with the keese design. But when I discovered that they hover in front of you for several seconds before attacking, I was greatly disappointed. “Hey! I’m here! Please hit me with a sharp impaling object!” Come on, keese were harder before.

Rat — Brilliant. I’m certainly glad they brought these creatures back from A Link to the Past. The stealth level at the beginning even brings rat behavior to the fore. The idea of scampering, thieving rats who will snatch rupees and store goods in their holes not only sucks you deeper into the Zelda world, but provides interesting gameplay as well.

Bombchu — Great comic relief. Hordes of rats throwing bombs at you-now that’s entertainment. Weirdly, the chaos that ensues put me at a greater risk than most battles with the supposedly “hard” enemies.

Magtail — I wouldn’t change a thing about these baddies! You must actually using timing to attack them properly, and their unique property of rolling up into a ball adds an interesting dynamic. They’re not the most challenging enemy in the world, but you wouldn’t expect that of them either.

Boku Baba — They may be bigger than your average Deku Baba, but they are quite easier than the giant ones found as an adult in Ocarina of Time. They pose no threat, for a simple hit from the boomerang will dispatch them. If you don’t have a boomerang, unrelenting swipes from the sword enables you to dispatch them without taking a hit yourself.

Mothula — Of all the enemies, the mothula is my favorite graphically. It truly shows the ability of the cel-shading to evoke that classic Zelda look. The Mothula does not provide much difficulty at all, but it sure is pretty to watch and battle.

Morth — I love morths. For one thing, they employ the classic emphasis on eyes in the Zelda series. But it’s their behavior that truly sets them apart. Once again, they don’t provide much of a challenge at all, but they do provide atmosphere to the game.

Red ChuChu — These are run-of-the mill enemies, so there really isn’t much to say about them. They’re not challenging, but they certainly aren’t supposed to be. This isn’t to say that I’d take them out of the game, of course. It is interesting that the villagers of Outset Island are terrified of them, by the way. Red potions are not very valuable at all, but the idea of harvesting them for the jelly is an interesting one. More importantly, they provide a good contrast to the yellow, blue, and dark varieties.

Green ChuChu — See above.

Yellow ChuChu — Neutralizing their electrical charges and then slashing them would normally not be difficult, but the changing water levels in the Tower of the Gods can create some interesting situations which prevents easy kills. I certainly got banged up a good bit by these baddies.

Blue ChuChu — These don’t really do very much other than add variety to the Zelda world. (Who needs blue potion when you have soup and fairies?)

Dark ChuChu — Again, a brilliantly designed enemy. For several minutes, I was baffled as to how to kill these. The challenge isn’t in defeating them, but rather in figuring out how to defeat them in the first place, and then later using them in puzzles.

Floormaster — These baddies really show of the stylized look of cel-shading. It can be easy to accidentally get caught by one, so in that sense they provide a decent bit of challenge. On the downside, they aren’t nearly as creepy as the Wallmasters were.

Beamos — This is actually a case in which the enemy is actually upgraded in difficulty from Majora’s Mask and Ocarina of Time. But unlike those games, The Wind Waker doesn’t put you in any situations in which killing them is truly critical.

Redeads — I have no complaints about the design of these baddies. They play mostly as they did in the older games.

Armos — I was quite pleased with the challenge these enemies provide. As usual, i’s always unnerving to have the statue pop to life. At first, I found it tricky to circle around and strike the mark without getting impaled on the spikes. Until I found out you could freeze them with arrows, that is. However, this special method of dispatching them is not a bad thing. Zelda games often have more hidden ways of killing enemies.

Armos Knight — These massive statues spooked me out the first time I saw them. Battle isn’t hard, but their challenge is supposed to be mostly in figuring out how to defeat them rather than in actually fighting them.

Miniblin — Many folks find these critters to be annoying. The first time I discovered these was when I was on Outset Island at night and ventured up towards the bridge. I was spooked out when one of these freaky little buggers jumped out at me! The idea of hordes of freaky little herd-critters piling on top of you from the walls, the ceiling, and the floor is a good thing in my book. However, I never really had any trouble with them. Supposedly the Skull Hammer works great against them, but that never worked well for me. I simply attack like crazy. And that, my friends, is what the game seems to emphasize too much of in the combat-unrelenting aggression as the answer to nearly everything. On the one hand, it is kind of cinematic, and it does make Link look rather like the kick-butt elf-boy he is. On the other hand, it means that you’re not afraid of dying because they’re so easy to defeat. But I frankly don’t think that’s the intended goal with the Miniblins. For one thing, hordes of weak enemies add the feeling of balance. What’s more, the graphical look of Miniblins, as well as their strange movements and sounds, suck you into the Zelda world all the more. You really do feel harried by countless mysterious antagonists of the shadows.

Bokoblin — These creatures are not really challenging at all. As with Miniblins, unrelenting sword swipes take care of them all too quickly. If you grapple hook them first, they’ll be taken back for a minute in surprise. That moment of surprise means that they don’t have a second to fight back. I really don’t have any problem with Bokoblins being easy, however. Early enemies like that aren’t supposed to be difficult. And someone who is nervous about them will likely be more timid and therefore defensive. Playing defensively means that the goblin will get a chance to attack, making the battles more interesting. I never had any trouble with them, and I would assume you didn’t either. Their function, as with Miniblins, is more to draw you into the Zelda world rather than to function as a gameplay mechanic.

Moblin — These spear-wielding baddies aren’t much more trouble than Bokoblins. Grapple hooking them from the start not only gives you a skull necklace, but their incredulous reaction gives you the chance to thrash them with the sword. Once again, unrelenting aggression enables you to destroy them quite quickly.

Stalfos — This is an enemy I’m quite disappointed in. The Stalfos in The Wind Waker are well designed, but I would have preferred that they be called another name, because I would have brought in the Stalfos from Ocarina of Time. The Stalfos in Ocarina of Time were probably the most challenging enemies in that game, and perhaps also the most fun. I actually died in my earlier battles with these baddies, whereas I usually could beat even a boss on my first try. The sword fighting with these skeleton warriors was rewardingly tense. These enemies are at the top of my wish list to include in the next Zelda game. That said, I do think that Nintendo designed the Stalfos of The Wind Waker well, as long as they are thought of as a lesser enemy in comparison to the Stalfos of Ocarina of Time. The variability of these Stalfos is interesting; for instance, if you pick up its massive club, it will use a snapped arm in its stead. Smashing its head when it’s dismantled can be a bit challenging, but in the actual combat there isn’t much challenge involved. As with moblins and nearly every other enemy, aggression is the key. The Stalfos simply doesn’t have time to swing that club if you keep slashing it. On a positive note, I found its spin attack to be fairly dangerous.

Darknut — I fail to see the difficulty posed by these warriors. The main problem is that they simply don’t take off enough hearts to pose much of a threat. I realize that the Iron Knuckle is not the same thing as a Darknut, but they are parallel enemies, at least. An Iron Knuckle could take off something on the order of 5 hearts with one blow, and the blows were actually harder to avoid than those of the Darknuts. Provided you didn’t use bombchus, the Iron Knuckle could pose quite a problem. For the Darknuts, it’s simply a matter of tapping “A” at the right instant, which is no real difficulty at all. When they are in groups, they can provide a challenge, and yet even then they tend to kill each other with their own sword blows. Battling darknuts is fun, but certainly not because the gameplay is tense; it’s fun simply because it looks cool.

Mighty Darknut — They don’t really pose that much more of a difficulty than their weaker counterparts. I would consider the differences to be negligible.

Conclusion

From the enemies profiled thus far, we have seen that battles in The Wind Waker maintain the traditions of the previous games in providing a wide array of enemies that require diverse strategies, and in providing enemies that truly add to the feel of the Zelda world. However, there does seem to be an area that’s lacking. I think that IGN was right-the “hard” battles are simply too easy to win. In Part Two, after looking at the remaining 23 enemies (including the bosses), I will try to see if there are some ways they could improve the next Zelda game in this area. But for now, let me close with this simple observation: there is far too much emphasis on offense. It works well in some ways, but it makes the swordplay unchallenging and inauthentic. At least we have no doubt about Link’s warrior skills!

The Missing Mystique

Before I describe what the real problem is, let me say that I still do think that the missing fairy is a detriment to the mystique of the game, because the guaridan fairy was a living, personal creature. There are two aspects two this. First, there is the subjective aspect of how much you or I liked the fairies in the N64 games. As for me, I never had an especial fondness for fairies in myth (as in, “Fairies are so cool!”), but the way the fairies looked in Ocarina of Time and Majora’s Mask changed all that. I loved the way they looked: little balls of light with insect wings, floating, darting, or diving about. They were a favorite of mine in my doodles, and when playing the game, I liked to see Navi or Tatl fly around my (Link’s) head and dart under my cap.

Second, the fairy has been replaced by a non-gameworld element. Previously I had stated that the guardian fairy had been replaced by a talking rock (i.e. the modified gossip stone). Since most of you have played the game, you now know that the stone only takes on the function of the fairy to give hints, and does not fly around. The most critical function of the fairy (to aid in Z-targeting to identify objects that can be interacted with) has not been replaced by the gossip stone. Instead, the arrow, a part of the User Interface (UI), has been enlarged to compensate for the missing fairy. The consequence is that you are forced to look at an element of the UI quite often. This pulls you out of the gameworld slightly, whereas a fairy actually pulls you into it much deeper. Some might complain that I’m nitpicking, and I would agree that it is only a minor problem.

The Real Problem

But as I said, the fact that the missing fairy takes away a bit from the mystique of the series is not the real problem. The real problem has to do with the game mechanics themselves. It all hinges on how you played Ocarina of Time and Majora’s Mask. How much attention did you pay to Navi or Tatl? I almost always watched them out of the corner of my eye (and ear). The second they changed color and whizzed off to some other location, I took a mental note of it. Without them, I would have never discovered that certain signs could be read. I would have also not noticed where more hidden characters or enemies were. Technically, the arrow does the same thing. But the critical issue is that the arrow does not move or make sounds. “Poof!” The arrow appears over an enemey! “Poof!” The arrow appears over wall text! The guardian fairy was not particularly useful to know precisely where the enemy or text or character was when it was perfectly visible. The critical moment was when the entity was offscreen or hidden, and in that case it was most important to see the fairy move in that direction. A fairy darting about gives me valuable information, especially when fighting enemies that tend to appear and disappear. Since the arrow simply pops up here and there, it provides me with little information. Granted, if there are multiple baddies on screen, it does tell me which one I’m Z-targeting, and it does alert me every now and then to readable texts and to characters. But it is a step down from the N64 games by providing me with significantly less information than the guardian fairy did.

If you’re like me and used Navi and Tatl as a prime source of information, there should be a couple of consequences for you as you play The Wind Waker. First, as has already been mentioned, you won’t notice signs and other objects you would otherwise notice. It could be argued that Link’s eyes overcome this shortfall. However, it is only a partial solution, partly because the standard camera view is behind Link’s head. Second, combat is not as smooth. When I was watching someone else play Majora’s Mask, I kept saying, “Watch the fairy!” That’s because the enemy was giving them a thrashing, and the solution was to watch the fairy dart around to where the enemey was. So, combat in the new game is actually less refined in some regards. It isn’t entirely a bad thing, because the combat in The Wind Waker is disappointingly easier than in the N64 games, partly because the enemies don’t take away much life with each hit. Then again, I don’t want the combat to be slightly harder because of sometimes frustrating gameplay mechanics, but because of difficulties imposed by the gameworld itself. And so the missing fairy has caused several problems for players like myself.

Conclusion

For most, Navi and Tatl added to the mystique of the series. Yet not only is their absence in The Wind Waker missed as characters, but also as gameplay elements. It is a small shortfall, but somewhat glaring for gamers such as I.