Realistic modes of play

Ever wondered how Link can fall into a pit and then somehow mysteriously wake up at the room entrance? How he can leap off a cliff and yet only take 1 heart damage? How a heavy object falling on top of him merely causes him to pause momentarily? How a bat flying into you takes off the same amount of damage as stab from an enemy weapon?

Should the mode of play in Zelda be brought into line with how things work in our reality, especially with this latest Zelda title, touting more realistic Zelda graphics than ever before?

I think the answer is yes. So what are some things you would change about the existing engine to make Zelda more realistic?

I think for one, falling off a cliff should mean instant death. I mean seriously, Zelda games have almost no vertigo factor what-so-ever due to the fact that if you fall, you just wake up at the start again! I've actually proved this. Me and several friends played Zelda through some of the areas that have a lot of cliff areas. We said that if you fall off the cliff, it counts as a game over and you have to pass the controller along to the next person. We did that, and it made cliff jumping puzzles a helluva lot scarier!

Secondly there should be some things in the game that kill Link straight away, regardless of how many hearts he has. Like say you get smacked in the head with a darknut's sword. As if that wouldn't knock you dead or at least give you a concussion! Or what about getting skewered by a sharp object or arrow through the heart? I know what you're saying to yourself, well the game can't be too hard and gory! Well, I think we can all mostly agree that Zelda games lately have been anything but difficult. And with the new realistic style, would a bit of blood here and there really be so bad? I'm not talking like getting limbs chopped off or blood squirting everywhere, but just a few scrapes and bruises. Stuff like that is on the news constantly anyway!

Finally I'd like to see a kind of knock down system implemented, where Link can be momentarily floored and have to take a moment to get to his feet. Or perhaps actually tumbling down steep surfaces rather than just sliding.

These primitive gameplay mechanics were fine for the 2d Zelda games, and even maybe for the N64 titles, but I think this is one area which needs to be evolved.

Dumb. I'd rather have another chance at completing the dungeon than whatever you're suggesting when I fall into a pit and die. Sometimes realism isn't fun. In this case, it's not.

I agree with you on the bats (actually called keese) doing the same damage as a slice from a blade. But you have to consider, as I did almost immediately after reading your post, how many of those little bumholes are flying around you. Eventually, as a group, they'll do some decent damage. And the enemies with swords or other weapons are usually a lot harder to dispatch than a swarm of keese; they take longer to kill. That's probably why they do those little bits of damage.

What you're suggesting, with all the instant-deaths, may seem like a nice, REALISTIC idea to you. But when you actually buy Twilight Princess and PLAY the game with your suggestions implemented, you'll see how ANNOYING it is dying instantly just because you didn't see that Darknut creeping up behind you while clearing out a room of keese, or because your controller screwed up at the perfect time and Link couldn't run fast enough to make that extra metre to the other side of the cliff.

I for one will be disappointed if the next installment to the super-mega-cool beyond belief Zelda franchise is ruined, not by the incredible graphics or entirely new storyline, but because of some guy who complained about how hard it was to die.

My suggestion - add more baddies. A lot more, if you really want. Instant-deaths mean instant-turn-off-your-gamecube moments. Many of them.

Okay, think about it like this. Any good game has a certain risk factor to it. So much of what I see in a lot of games these days (particularly Zelda but that's neither here nor there) is instant gratification gameplay. The thing is, an instant death system would soon educate gamers to be more careful in how they play and this adds more stress to the gaming environment, thus giving the player a greater feeling of accomplishment when danger is overcome and the challenge is won.

I don't think that people would be continually be dying throughout the entire game (if the system was like that, then I'd certainly be against it) but it would force them to adapt to that limitation and take more care, develop better strategies for overcoming enemies and actually feel fear when facing new challenges.

I'm trying to paint a picture here of a system that educates the gamer to stop taking having infinite chances for granted and attach some real stakes for survival. I think that's mostly why people (not just me) have been complaining that Zelda is getting too easy.

The risk factor is this:

You get right up the to last jump to get to wherever the hell you want to get to in some mountain region, and YOU SCREW IT UP! WEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE down to the bottom and you START ALL OVER AGAIN!!!!!! It's frustrating enough like that, without the game resetting itself because YOU SCREWED UP THAT ONE LITTLE JUMP! There's your risk factor. You don't need to return to the menu screen every time you fall a few metres, or get hit by some boulder, or because that last horizontal slice you made on that enemy didn't make an effect because suddenly he became etheral as he regained his balance from the previous strike AND STABS YOU IN THE EYE!!!

I'm QUITE FINE with Link flying into the distance because he got hit by a projectile as he went for that last jump to freedom, and falling down to whatever it is down there that could cause him a half heart of damage. Next time I get up to that FINAL JUMP, I'LL SHOOT THE BRAINS OUT OF THE LOSER WHO SHOT ME! Then I'll jump to freedom.

Ok calm down. I just want to ask, how old are you? If you are young it could be that you've grown up in a different generation. I find that young people get very frustrated and have short patience for games with any level of difficulty. Once again, I don't mean that to insult you, it's just that you could be from a different generation of gamers.

As an older gamer myself, I've been noticing a trend that games are getting much easier because when you fail at a task, you aren't punished severely enough. This means that you can repeat the same task over and over as many times as you want until you get it right, rather than being sent back further.

I remember a game called 'Dark Forces' one of the first 3d shooters back in the early 90s. Now you started out with 3 lives, and extra lives were extremely hard to find. The missions were long and the baddies were tough. And if you lost all of your lives you'd have to start the entire mission all over again. I nearly had heart attacks playing that game.

The stress of these old games actually served several purposes:
1. It really gets your adrenaline going, inducing a more intense gaming experience.
2. The adrenaline also serves to give you a heightened sense of perception, momentarily boosting your performance.
3. A feeling of accomplishment when a challenge is overcome.

Now for you, being a member of that younger generation (I'm assuming) the stress that already exists is probably as much as you can handle. So of course making it harder would be bad for you.

As a member of that generation, I probably just have a higher tolerance for that sort of stress than you do. Once again, not meaning to offend. It's just the generation you were born into.

And WhiteLink, don't be stupid, I didn't say anything about removing save features.

Think of it from Nintendo's perspective. They want to make games that kids can enjoy, teenagers can enjoy, and adults can enjoy. That means A CHANCE FOR THE LITTLE GUYS TO PLAY THE GAME AND FINISH THE GAME without turning off their big brother's gamecube and having a little cry about how 'NATENDO IS REALLY DUMB, MUMMY!! I WANT THEM TO DIE BECAUSE I DIED WHEN I TRIPPED OVER A WIDDLE ROCK'.

You can't expect people to appreciate a game that they can't play without saving constantly because they're afraid that, BECAUSE LINK ONLY HAVE ONE SHIELD, he won't be able to deflect all those flaming arrows, swing his sword at all those keese, and dodge those Darknut slashes, he'll DIE, and he'll have to do it ALL over again.

What I'm getting at here is the quanitity of the enemies. THERE ARE PLENTY OF BAD GUYS. You want difficult? PLAY THE GAME YOUR OWN WAY! If you take an entire heart of damage, TURN OFF YOUR GAMECUBE AND TRY AGAIN. PLay it your own way. Set your own goals, your own challenges. If you're super good at the game, FINE - play like a super good Zelda fanboy. Kids are not going to want to play a game that they can't enjoy - they'll grow up hating the franchise, hating the company, or hating video games in general, because people like you think that a game is TOO easy, just because you want a ridiculously hard game. Ridiculously frustrating. Ridiculous.

There's your opinion, from a member of THE YOUNGER generation, as you put it.

You make a good point. Kids would get frustrated, and frustrated kids would equal poor sales.

But I still find this instant gratification trend in games to be disturbing one. Geez I know this is going to make me sound like Kranky Kong but: In my day we were expected to complete a level with only 3 lives, and I never complained one bit!

PS: I do actually do turn off my gamecube and try again when I fall off cliffs.

"PS: I do actually do turn off my gamecube and try again when I fall off cliffs."
There you go - you've solved your own problem.

By the way - you have ONE life in Zelda. It's just a bit different. The games are more complex these days, so to compromise it's harder to lose all your hearts and therefore your one and only life.

You get ONE life in Zelda. If you have a fairy, THERE YOU HAVE IT: your difficult to acquire extra lives you were going on about a few posts before. The fact remains. If you lose ALL your hearts in Zelda, YOU WILL DIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And you will return to your last save point.

Well, sometimes, falling off a cliff in a puzzle and returning to the room entrance makes sense, the room itself is a puzzle, and if you fail you must start that puzzle all over again rather than restarting from your last save point.

But falling off a cliff in the overworld should count as an instant death. I agree that more instant death scenarious would make the game a helluva lot more riskier, it just depends how many you have.
A stab or an arrow wound shouldnt instantly kill you, that just wouldnt be fun, link has a health meter for a reason. I think a way to solve all this is to have certain heavy or extreme puncture wounds take away alot of health, but only gradually, say link gets hit by a large darknut sword, that constituets a loss of 4 hearts, but the health meter will only go down a 1/4 heart every 3 seconds until 4 hearts is reached. And say you have only 3 hearts? well, you will certainly die unless you have a fairy or red potion.

Think about Lttp, it may only take 1 heart of but the puzzles when you keep falling of cuz of those blue skulls, those hearts add up.

Realism for the sake of realism is stupid. One thing that is attractive about Zelda games is that they never throw instant deaths, or extremely frusterating scenarios at the player. There are better ways to increase the difficulty.

-Falling off a cliff should do 1/4 of you're health. That way, even at the end of the game, it is a threat.

-Increase normal falling damage (when you actually hit the ground), but not by much, because jumping off cliffs is something I do for convenience in order to save time. I doubt I'm alone.

-Multiply damage dealt by 2. The key is, the damage dealt must increase throughout the game (by introducing harder enemies frequently).

-Increase environmental hazards (slide traps), guillotines, fire, icicles. These things are often harder to avoid by enemies. By making them a frequent occurence, you force the player to be aware consistently. These can where you down over time.

-Maybe, MAYBE, have one enemy that features a one-hit kill, but make it enormously easy to dodge. No matter how easy it is to dodge, fighting an enemy with a one hit kill would provide tension.

-Reduce, or even eliminate replenishments.

-A big one that I believe is already confirmed for TP is to have enemies attack you at the same time. In OoT/MM/WW, if you locked on to an enemy, other ones would wait politely for their turn. Not so in TP, and hopefully this alone will make things tricky.

There are other things you can do, but you get the point. However, instant death when falling off cliffs is a terrible idea. And one-hit kills from getting stabbed is a terrible idea (realism for the sake of realism).

I agree with you some of the way, Thorn, but I also don't think instant death is a good thing to have anywhere in the game.

If you ask me, Link should take up to four hearts fall damage when falling onto solid ground (but only that many when you've had a long, long fall). As for those bottomless pits you get in dungeons, I reckon they should 'do a wallmaster' and make you start again at some predetermined point in the temple (like WW) or even the beginning (like OoT).

Even better than that, though, was what they did in OoT's Fire Temple, in that room with the tiny ledges, and if you fell, you fell down into the bridge room which was physically below it.

Now the enemies. For heaven's sake Nintendo, Link can get up to twenty hearts. He's practically guaranteed ten without even trying. Yet most enemies - almost all enemies, in fact, in recent games, have done no more than a quarter heart of damage per hit. That's forty standard enemy attacks before you die. If you've got a fairy, eighty. A six-year-old could avoid getting hit eighty times.

It's hard to judge from the TP videos whether Nintendo's done anything about this, since they only show scenes from near the start of the game, which you wouldn't expect to be too hard on you. But it is evident that:

- Link has 5 hearts
- The Forest Temple's boss can bite you for 1/4 heart damage
- The mounted Moblins can attack you for 1/4 heart damage
- The moblins can run you over for 1 heart damage
- You take 1 heart damage for falling into the void.

Of course, all this is subject to change, but it gives you an idea, doesn't it?

alright, i'll state my ideas without yelling ::phew:: one reason about this eralistic thing, is, gamecube probably can't handle it. if u take more damage getting shot in the face than in the foot, and having a 4 inch gash in your arm is as not as bad as having a large hole in ur chest, you gotta do a lot of programming.

also, while being tense while playing the game would actually be a bit enjoyable at first, eventually, after playing for an hour, at least i would start feeling a bit uncomfortable. other people probly will too. that could reduce fun factor. you wanna thoroughly enjoy the game the whole time

i agree, though, that by the end of the game, being loaded with hearts can make it easier, o damage should maybe be increased in certain interals. but 1-hit kills would be terrible, as having hearts would lose it's purpouse. maybe hey could reduce how easy it is to obtain fairies, but nothing too drastic.

there you go.

Here's an idea: difficulty options. Don't know this would work, but it could somehow. And for the falling off cliffs dilemma, give Link a parachute

I think it'd be fun to die whenever you fell off a ledge, or break your leg when you trip down the stairs, or get your arm cut off rendering all your weapons useless for the remainder of the game, and spend six hours staring at a black screen while I wait for Link to come out of his coma. I've always had a fetish for pain, and this new fantasy game is the perfect way to manifest that..

Originally Posted by Xerhik Forge

The risk factor is this:

You get right up the to last jump to get to wherever the hell you want to get to in some mountain region, and YOU SCREW IT UP! WEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE down to the bottom and you START ALL OVER AGAIN!!!!!! It's frustrating enough like that, without the game resetting itself because YOU SCREWED UP THAT ONE LITTLE JUMP! There's your risk factor. You don't need to return to the menu screen every time you fall a few metres, or get hit by some boulder, or because that last horizontal slice you made on that enemy didn't make an effect because suddenly he became etheral as he regained his balance from the previous strike AND STABS YOU IN THE EYE!!!

I'm QUITE FINE with Link flying into the distance because he got hit by a projectile as he went for that last jump to freedom, and falling down to whatever it is down there that could cause him a half heart of damage. Next time I get up to that FINAL JUMP, I'LL SHOOT THE BRAINS OUT OF THE LOSER WHO SHOT ME! Then I'll jump to freedom.

I understand Where Thron is coming from, For you I cannot. Thorn and myself Seem to want a Zelda game where you don't just go through it without having to worry about anything, It seems like you like having the easy way out.
Thron seems like he is good at Zelda and wants a real challenge, As do I.

Making it harder would improve Zelda greatly.

To add onto Sear's leg-breaking idea, Link could also get a cast, which takes a dramatic toll on Link's speed as he goes up against a group of Moblins, trying to hold a sword and sheild while balancing on a pair of crutches. Then when they knock his crutches out of the way, Link has to wriggle about the ground and hack at their toes.

i dont think it will be a good idea that you die (Game Over die) when you fall from a cliff, because there are parts, that is nearly impossible to pass without falling once. For example the Final Boss in the big boar. Where you are dueling in a brigde... you miscalculated for 1mm and die. Game Over, continue? Maybe it should take you half of your magic and life gauge, to make it more "real", so every time you fall, you must drink a potion or something.

it would be pretty class if arrows and stuff effected you, for a small time, like slower runnig, weaker attacks, but Whoops I was hit with in arrow in the face, game over, would not be cool. Epona (or whatever you call it) getting hit with an arrow would probably kill it. Not good.

right. maybe a stagger. if you get hit by an arrow, you get knocked back for a split second.