The Zelda Doctrine: Why the Series isn't Moving Forward.

All recent Zelda games follow the Zelda Doctrine, but what is this Zelda Doctrine? The Zelda Doctine is the long list of rules the recent Zelda games follow. These rules include: Game is measured by the number of dungeons, Hyrule, Ganon, same soundtrack, no voice-acting, same items, Master Sword, NPCs that are based off of past characters, puzzle-based bosses, medieval time period, Triforce, a Link with the same backstory, Link cannot talk, Gorons and Zoras, Forest/Fire/Ice/Desert/Water dungeons, every dungeon has an artifact you need, towns are all based off the towns in Ocarina of Time, same exact battle-system, etc. There are so many rules, and fans mistake this Zelda Doctrine for what makes Zelda Zelda. It's not, this Doctrine is not the essense of Zelda. It's just a rulebook that is limiting the series from moving forward.
There are so many rules, and fans mistake this Zelda Doctrine for what makes Zelda Zelda. It's not, this Doctrine is not the essense of Zelda. It's just a rulebook that is limiting the series from moving forward. Of course, you get "innovative" gimmicks like sailing, new graphics, wolf tranformations, shrinking, and touchscreen controls, but that's all they are: gimmicks. You are playing the same game over and over! And really, the only new features you can add to the Zelda games are gimmicks because the Zelda games are strict with so many rules to follow. There just isn't room for innovation or originality anymore.

Let me show to a diagram:

See how if you make a Zelda game with the true essense of the series as its foundation, you have a lot more room to innovate?

Aonuma has made the Zelda Doctrine the new foundation of the Zelda series. Because of this, there is no room for creativity because the games are filled with rules set by previous Zeldas. Since there are so many rules, you have to cram in innovation. However, if you go back to the true essense of Zelda, there is so much more room for creativity, and you are still staying true to the series. Majora's Mask is my favorite Zelda game because it stayed true to the essense of Zelda, and threw the rulebook out the window. Dungeons were not the main focus of the game, Hyrule and Ganon had no role, there was no Master Sword, it didn't follow the same plot formula, the game was based on the theme of having faith in yourself (giving the game a deeper feeling), puzzles were completely new, the game was faster-paced (thanks to the trasformations), etc. Majora's Mask was the only step forward Zelda has made since OoT. Then, with WW, the series went backwards, and continues to make side-steps with gimmicks instead of going forward again.

EDIT:
That's how I feel about the Zelda games. I think the series should go back to the foundation set by LoZ, and build up from there so there is more room for evolution. Maybe the genre could use some changing or tweaking. Afterall, look at the legacy Metroid Prime brought, and it change to a first-person perspective. It offered fresh gameplay, but it was completely true to the essense of Metroid--exploration, upgrades, platforming, a feeling of isolation, moody atmosphere, puzzles, and all-out boss battles; not to mention the morphball stuff.

Now, Zelda doesn't have to completely change its genre to be fresh, but I'd strongly suggest the series adopts more platforming, action and RPG elements. That's why I said AoL was onto something, but it presented everything in a crappy way that, I think, made Zelda fans fear change. I feel Majora's Mask added more fast-paced action and platforming elements that made the gameplay feel very fresh (Deku Link gliding, Goron rolling, Zora swimming, and unique dungeon designs that required the player to use platforming techniques with these abilities). Twilight Princess and Wind Waker tried to duplicate the platforming and fast-paced action, but it failed because the action was still, for the most part, very slow-paced, and the dungeons lacked the complex designs that MM had.

So, I suggest that Nintendo goes back to the foundations of LoZ, and builds on that with more fast-paced action, more complex battle system, and more RPG elements. What can Nintendo do with these 3 elements? How would they evolved the series? Well, first of all, I think Link should be able to jump manually. One of the few things I admire about AoL is how Link can jump because it adds more depth to both the battles and platforming.

I also think Zelda would feel fresher if it required you to learn magic skills. Again, this could add a completely new layer of depth to both the combat and platforming, but it would also complement the puzzle solving. Personally, I think magic spells/skills should replace more of the items so that you have a smaller range of items (there will be more uses for each item that way). The magic skills should range from freezing time to being able to transform your shape (like the mask tranformations in MM). I'm not really creative with coming up with ideas for this, but I'm sure Nintendo would come up with things that would drastically change the way you solve puzzles, fight in combat, and just give the game a fresher feel.

Those are just two examples of changes like that would force developers to change up the gameplay engine, but if you think of it, it would just be another way to evolve from LoZ. It would just be taking a different path in terms of gameplay.

Eh. I could go for one more 3D Zelda game following the formula, but I think TWW (which really did not follow your "doctrine" all that much) & TP perfected the OoT formula and thus it can be done with, and new ideas may be introduced.

I agree completely. The foundation is as solid as ever, and it always will be. But the superfluous elements, the so called "traditions," are becoming increasingly stale and banal. Zelda is a game of surprise, but there is no surprise anymore. As long as fans cling to these tenets, the series will continue to move sideways rather than forward. When these ideas were fresh, they were wonderful--I'm not saying they weren't. But now, they're predictable and boring. The series is a victim of its own success, and the developers are tied down.

People, places, objects, and ideas I really don't want to see in Zelda Wii include but are not limited to:

Triforce, Master Sword, Gorons, Zoras, Dekus, Hyrule (or any of its constituent regions), Remixed music (unless it is truly fitting), rehashed bosses, Ganondorf, Zelda, basic elemental themed dungeons, 3 gem/big event/X Sages set up . . .

If we can drop the above, we can also add new features. Among these might be voice acting, enhanced AI, orchestrated music, a difficulty level, perhaps even a revamped and challenging combat system. The chains will be broken.

I would like to see the series turn considerably darker, while still maintaining a light hearted undertone. I want a deep and intricate story--totally original like Majora's Mask, rife with symbolism, and a focus on mood.

(which really did not follow your "doctrine" all that much)

Psh. You've been fooled by cel-shaded graphics. The graphics and the very boring sailing element are the only substantial "innovations" are the only major deviations from the doctrine.

-Forest, Fire, Water, Dark, and Wind Temples? Check.
-Triforce, Zelda, Ganon, Master Sword? Check.
-Collect three gems, big event, free the sages? Check.
-Forest Haven = Kokori Forest, Windfall = Kakariko, Dragon Roost = Death Mountain
*They're even located in roughly the same places. Note too that Jabun and the water pearl were located in the vicinity of where Lake Hylia would have been located in OoT.
-Rehashed music, control scheme, presentation*? Definite check

*No voice acting, no orchestrated music, similar text boxes, etc etc.

I think the main problems in the banality of the series environment lies rather extensively in the fact that the series storyline is set up as such that hundreds of years pass between games. As such, the developers seem to think they can get away with presenting the same basic environments, with the same place names, with only certain minor deviations or updates. Same goes for characters, specifically the reused ones, although this is notably mostly a Capcom phenomenon.

If Nintendo forced itself to stick to the same incarnation of Link, they'd have to give us more variety in terms of overworld design, quest setup, item collection and use, and so on.

I actually am perfectly okay with the following appearing in a number of games--Deku Scrubs, Gorons, Zoras, Kokiri and/or Koroks, Gerudo, Sheikah, temple dungeons, the Master Sword, Ganondorf, Princess Zelda, the Triforce--but they ought to be incorporated in such a way that it's not the same exact story every single installment. I would have a problem with, say, Zora's Domain freezing again, or a dinosaur/dragon terrorizing the Gorons, etc. etc. (unless the series were to reboot, in which case I would forgive a one-time-only remake of these scenarios), but the series mythology and characters shouldn't be shoved aside with each new game; it should be expanded. Frankly Ninty never really does this in their games, they add a new "Ganondorf was captured and is escaping" plot, and some additional story about some evil in the past that caused catastrophe, and then give us the same story in every other respect.

I can begin to see why people praise ALttP, LA, and the originals for their dungeons (and why I like the Oracles games so much): even if they're really not all that difficult, their dungeons aren't the overtypical elemental dungeons, they're actual palaces and dungeons and towers. This is the epic Zelda; the same old Forest, Fire, Water, Desert, Darkness, +2 others thing is frankly cliché, and not in the good way.

Originally Posted by Eldin

Triforce, Master Sword, Gorons, Zoras, Dekus, Hyrule (or any of its constituent regions), Remixed music (unless it is truly fitting), rehashed bosses, Ganondorf, Zelda, basic elemental themed dungeons, 3 gem/big event/X Sages set up . . .
Wow...uh...that leaves us with? Um...yeah. No. No, please, no. That'd be horrible.
_______________________________________

Psh. You've been fooled by cel-shaded graphics. The graphics and the very boring sailing element are the only substantial "innovations" are the only major deviations from the doctrine.

-Forest, Fire, Water, Dark, and Wind Temples? Check. Yes, it's a fault but they're done very differently from other ones. And I don't recall any Zelda prior to Wind Waker having a Wind Temple.
-Triforce, Zelda, Ganon, Master Sword? Check. Uh...they're very well justified for this game. It makes a lot of sense for them to be in.
-Collect three gems, big event, free the sages? Check. Okay, you've got me there...sorta.
-Forest Haven = Kokori Forest, Windfall = Kakariko, Dragon Roost = Death Mountain Well of course those things are there. This game takes place post OoT. It makes sense for things to be similar. It'd actually be a plothole if suddenly the massive volcano is gone.
*They're even located in roughly the same places. Note too that Jabun and the water pearl were located in the vicinity of where Lake Hylia would have been located in OoT. Except the Water Pearl and Jabun were in Zora's Domain and see above
-Rehashed music? Definite check
Rehashed music? Uh...about, let me count...1 (fairy fountain), 2 (LoZ theme), 3 (Windfall), 4 (Hyrule Castle) 5 (Death Mountain/Dragon Roost)... so 5 rehashed songs. Half of which sound very different and one of which is the main theme of the series. Wow.
Rehashed control scheme? Definite check
It's quite different actually. Camera control is just one of them, but for the most part it's vastly improved.

*No voice acting, no orchestrated music, similar text boxes, etc etc.
Voice acting can't really be a complaint. A lot of people don't want it in. And the GameCube can't handle fully orchestrated music although it would have been nice. And OH NO, similar text boxes! We're DOOMED.

Wind Waker is quite different, and there's really very little you can fault it for. Alot of things in it either makes a lot of sense chronologically wise or isn't really true. It certainly does not repeat ALttP half as much as OoT, TP or PH.

I understand what you are saying, Seran. Nintendo could definitely make a great mythology with the foundations of the Triforce story, but I feel like they beat a dead horse with for far too long. It's at the point where I get nauseous when the Triforce is brought up, or you have to get the Master Sword. It would be cool if Nintendo expanded on these ideas to create new stories, but that's not going to happen. I think it would be best to just reboot the series and start a new mythology without the Triforce, Ganon, cliche dungeon themes (how many times must they rehash the Forest, Fire, Water, and Desert temples until they realize Ocarina of Time's were the best?). Take thise for example:

Originally Posted by Aonuma in new interview

Ocarina of Time was the first title I worked on, and I was continuously tackling challenges every day during its development, so I think this is the title I feel I impacted the most. I believe that experience made me what I am now. I always think about what we couldn’t do and what didn’t work well in the previous game when we start a new title, but there’s no game that I would want to actually change as such. I have to say though, the first Zelda game that I played and felt potential in was Link to the Past. I’m actually very interested in what it would be like if we remade that title as a 3D game.

Source

Regarless of what Aonuma says or thinks, his true intentions are to just recreate old Zeldas. I mean, come on, Ocarina of Time is already the 3D version of A Link to the Past, but it is forgivable since OoT brought so many new elements to the series. Doing it again is just killing the legacy of the series. If the Zelda series is ever going to enter new grounds, Aonuma needs to be dropped from his position. It's honestly got to the point where his games feel like fan-fictions rather than new official installments in the Zelda series like Twilight Princess.

In my opinion, Zelda needs a new director that has his own vision, a new development team that is more hip, and a complete reboot of the series.

*pastes my reboot post from Zentendo*

Zelda has become far too predictable. Every game follows the "Zelda formula", and it is really getting old. I think Zelda should go back, and start from the bare bone basics: Exploration (non-linear), puzzle-solving, sword fighting (along with other classic items used in the original LoZ), and a hero in green questing to save a princess/kingdom. I think everything else should be thrown away because Nintendo is just covering the same ground over and over. The series has been following the same formula since A Link to the Past, but it lost the original's essense a while back.

The Zelda series reminds me a lot of the James Bond and Batman films. The James Bond films were just doing the same thing over and over, and the plots were getting too ridiculous. The Batman films did the same thing. Both were straying too far from the true essense material, so both series were rebooted completely (alas, Batman Begins and Casino Royale). Both films went back to the source material (the original Ian Flemming novels/DC comics), and they both ended up becoming the most critically acclaimed film in their franchises.

Now, the Zelda series follows a formula, and since it tries so hard to follow this exact same formula which is now the Zelda Doctrine, it has lost its essense. You are told where to go and you don't have a choice, the games are overall far more linear and exploration has drastically been dumbed-down, puzzles, enemies, items, and boss battles are just being copied and pasted, the plots are restricted by the pointless timeline, and the plots are virtually the same thing over and over.

Whatever happened to exploring a massive world, and just happening to burn a tree that became a dungeon? Zelda follows only cliche video game logic now. You are told to go to a level, you go there, fight a miniboss, get item, use item to get to boss, fight boss with item, get stone/artifact/pearl, repeat. Why does EVERY Zelda game have to follow this logic? It's not creative, it's predictable, and it's getting old. In the original Zelda, you didn't know what to expect. You were basically exploring a massive world, and you'd just happen to come across a new item or dungeon. Zelda should go back to the bare basics, and rebuild from there. Since A Link to the Past (with a few exceptions like Majora's Mask), the Zelda series has just been building over the same plot/gameplay/formula. It can't move on when the core is so full of rules to follow! You are just piling crap ontop of crap now. You can't offer anything new because the Zelda doctrine is so strict.

The creators don't want Zelda to become like Final Fantasy, where it's completely different every time. Then again, they really should talk more with the developers of Pokemon.

The Pokemon crew really know how to take the same formula, and add to it to keep it popular.

Of course, I have no problem with them reusing Link, Zelda, Ganon/dorf, and the Triforce. Except for the lack of difficuly, I don't have many problems with the games.

I do agree with the foundation somewhat. I'd also prefer to tack on challenge, character development, and story. Character develoment and story are what get me emmersed in a game, and challenge is what keeps me playing for a while. I hate that nowadays I beat a Zelda game in a week.

Originally Posted by Daphnes

The creators don't want Zelda to become like Final Fantasy, where it's completely different every time. Then again, they really should talk more with the developers of Pokemon.

The Pokemon crew really know how to take the same formula, and add to it to keep it popular.

Of course, I have no problem with them reusing Link, Zelda, Ganon/dorf, and the Triforce. Except for the lack of difficuly, I don't have many problems with the games.

I do agree with the foundation somewhat. I'd also prefer to tack on challenge, character development, and story. Character develoment and story are what get me emmersed in a game, and challenge is what keeps me playing for a while. I hate that nowadays I beat a Zelda game in a week.

Oh God no! Please don't make it like Pokemon! I hope you were being sarcastic, because Pokemon is as similar as you can get!

What I don't like is the difficulty. Wait a minute, what difficulty? THERE IS NONE! The Zelda games are getting easier and easier. Truly it makes me want to cry.

Ocarina of Time was my first Zelda, and it took me years to beat it. When I finally did, I was weeping with joy. Wind Waker wasn't nearly as hard, but still took me a few months. Twilight Princess... one month was all it took. Seriously, they're just getting easier and easier. I want games with DIFFICULTY! Games that give you a true sense of satisfaction and accomplisment when you beat them! Games really required you to think, and bosses that are hard even when find out how to kill them! Games like Majora's Mask! Games like A Link to the Past! Games that have new ideas!

The original Zelda, A Link to the Past, Ocarina of Time, Majora's Mask... they were great because they had NEW IDEAS!!! ZELDA NEEDS NEW IDEAS! NO MORE REHASHES! NO MORE CLICHES! NO MORE REUSING DUNGEONS, CHARACTERS, OR ANYTHING! WHAT IS HAPPENING TO MY BELOVED ZELDA!?!? *sobs*

I apologize for my ranting.

Wow...uh...that leaves us with? Um...yeah. No. No, please, no. That'd be horrible.

The idea is to create new content. The franchise is a slave to its own traditions. These traditions are no longer exciting; rather, they are arbitrary, restrictive, and banal.

Yes, it's a fault but they're done very differently from other ones. And I don't recall any Zelda prior to Wind Waker having a Wind Temple.

The Stone Tower Temple could be considered a Sky Temple. More than that, the Spirit Temple, Stone Tower Temple, and Wind Temple all convey a similar mood. They are the final dungeons of their respective games, and I like each of them, but it seems that a thread can be woven through them, though I cannot quite put my finger on what that thread is.

Well of course those things are there. This game takes place post OoT. It makes sense for things to be similar. It'd actually be a plothole if suddenly the massive volcano is gone.

Doesn't change the fact that we are visiting the same places again and again, and thus, the series' past is holding the series' future captive.

Rehashed music? Uh...about, let me count...1 (fairy fountain), 2 (LoZ theme), 3 (Windfall), 4 (Hyrule Castle) 5 (Death Mountain/Dragon Roost)... so 5 rehashed songs. Half of which sound very different and one of which is the main theme of the series. Wow.

Menu Screen, indoor theme, cave theme, shop music, Lost woods (vary bad remix), various fanfares, Kokori theme (Outset Island)--there are likely others. Worse, the new music was patently unspectacular. The only noteworthy original track was Dragon Roost Island.

It's quite different actually. Camera control is just one of them, but for the most part it's vastly improved.

Camera control was a fairly obvious adjustment. That is what the "C" stick is generally used for. Aside from that (and perhaps the revolutionary addition of manual crawl), the control scheme is identical.

Wind Waker is quite different, and there's really very little you can fault it for.

So you would like to think. There is actually quite a lot you can fault it for, and we have many, many times in the past. But that is not the subject at hand, nor a topic I care to delve into much anymore. Dig deep into ZU History if you want to explore the many criticisms of Wind Waker.

Voice acting can't really be a complaint. A lot of people don't want it in. And the GameCube can't handle fully orchestrated music although it would have been nice. And OH NO, similar text boxes! We're DOOMED.

The people who do not want voice acting are the same people who hopelessly cling to many of the series' long held, arbitrary, restrictive tenets. These people and the developers that appease them limit the series' future. No question. And the similar text boxes are not a problem in themselves, but they serve as just another indicator of this series unwillingness to evolve.

I completely agree, KeeSomething. You said it.

I'm so tired of it. It's the same thing everytime, and Nintendo do it with most of their games.

It's just because OoT had so much success, and they feel like they have to cling to OoT's elements to attract people. They've tried just being a little different with MM and TWW, but a lot of people didn't like it. When the fans do that, Nintendo just go back to their OoT-whoring.

It's really tiresome, and ever since Aonuma took over, Zelda's changed.


Voice acting. I wouldn't mind it, but never for Link. Ever. He should not speak, and to be honest I dislike main characters that speak. Everybody else could speak. But it has to be pulled off well, if done poorly it could ruin the whole game.

Originally Posted by Eldin

I agree completely. People, places, objects, and ideas I really don't want to see in Zelda Wii include but are not limited to:

Triforce, Master Sword, Gorons, Zoras, Dekus, Hyrule (or any of its constituent regions), Remixed music (unless it is truly fitting), rehashed bosses, Ganondorf, Zelda, basic elemental themed dungeons, 3 gem/big event/X Sages set up . . .

If we can drop the above, we can also add new features. Among these might be voice acting, enhanced AI, orchestrated music, a difficulty level, perhaps even a revamped and challenging combat system. The chains will be broken.

I have several things to say about this. Firstly, the Triforce, Master Sword, the bearers of the triforce pieces and the various races are all part of the Zelda Universe. So unless, as Daphnes said, Nintendo is going to go Final Fantasy on us, these things are never going to disappear completely. Secondly, The lack of voice-acting is because of the fact you can choose your name. If they added voice acting hen no one would ever say your chosen name, so the whole idea of choosing your name would be pointless (they did this is FFX but i didn't think it was a very good system). Finally since Legend of Zelda is most oftenly set in HYRULE it is probably going to have the same places as HYRULE in other games.

Everything else you said I agree with, especially a revamped combat system. They could have done so much with TP "Sigh". Well, that ends my rant.

Originally posted by Twilightwolf64
Ocarina of Time was my first Zelda, and it took me years to beat it. When I finally did, I was weeping with joy. Wind Waker wasn't nearly as hard, but still took me a few months. Twilight Princess... one month was all it took. Seriously, they're just getting easier and easier.

The answer is in bold. They're not getting easier (except for WW), you're just getting more experienced. Hell, having finally beat PH I can say I had more trouble with it than, say, Link's Awakening.


Anyways, like I've said elsewhere, those that think Zelda isn't evolving aren't recognizing the changes that have occured over the years. Nowadays Zelda games have the most variety in their campaigns, period. You look at the older titles where 90% of the gameplay was dungeon crawling, and the other 10% was walking around finding the next dungeon, then you look at TP or WW and you have one of the most diverse sets of tasks ever in gaming. Hell, on the home-console side of things, the games contain more bosses that either make use of multiple phases, multiple attacks, or more creative ways of damaging them (I say "home-console" because PH's were a little more basic).

All I can say is if Zelda does make some form of drastic change ala RE4, there's going to be a backlash. Either a vast number of people will dislike it (mainly the immediate fandom), or it could hamper the gameplay significantly. A problem with the action/adventure genre, mainly with Zelda, is that it's so diverse with its missions that if you try to alter the formula drastically you run a great risk or making it feel like a gimick, or making the game too repetitive. There's ways around this, but it's damn hard, that's for sure.

Really, if Nintendo would make the storylines more complex, add higher difficulty settings, and increase the amount of exploration in the game, I think Zelda would be perfect. There's not that much that they need to do, because they seem apt to make changes to the franchise, and they don't need a FFXII to do that.

Originally Posted by Mirren

Really, if Nintendo would make the storylines more complex, add higher difficulty settings, and increase the amount of exploration in the game, I think Zelda would be perfect. There's not that much that they need to do, because they seem apt to make changes to the franchise, and they don't need a FFXII to do that.

The most complex I've seen Nintendo get with it's storylines since MM is flooding Hyrule and making Gannondorf control Zant.

Originally Posted by Twilightwolf64

What I don't like is the difficulty. Wait a minute, what difficulty? THERE IS NONE! The Zelda games are getting easier and easier. Truly it makes me want to cry.

Ocarina of Time was my first Zelda, and it took me years to beat it. When I finally did, I was weeping with joy. Wind Waker wasn't nearly as hard, but still took me a few months. Twilight Princess... one month was all it took. Seriously, they're just getting easier and easier. I want games with DIFFICULTY! Games that give you a true sense of satisfaction and accomplisment when you beat them! Games really required you to think, and bosses that are hard even when find out how to kill them! Games like Majora's Mask! Games like A Link to the Past! Games that have new ideas!

The original Zelda, A Link to the Past, Ocarina of Time, Majora's Mask... they were great because they had NEW IDEAS!!! ZELDA NEEDS NEW IDEAS! NO MORE REHASHES! NO MORE CLICHES! NO MORE REUSING DUNGEONS, CHARACTERS, OR ANYTHING! WHAT IS HAPPENING TO MY BELOVED ZELDA!?!? *sobs*

I apologize for my ranting.

I was laughing at Wind Waker when I noticed that even later bosses were dealing me about 1/4 a heart of damage. I believe the most done by a non-Ganon boss in WW is 1/2.

This is perhaps why I love Link's Awakening so much. Outside of a small mention of Zelda, it really threw most of the conventions out the window to create a game that I still enjoy today. It proved that we don't Ganon, Zelda, or even the Triforce to create a truly great Zelda game.

Originally Posted by Mirren

Anyways, like I've said elsewhere, those that think Zelda isn't evolving aren't recognizing the changes that have occured over the years. Nowadays Zelda games have the most variety in their campaigns, period. You look at the older titles where 90% of the gameplay was dungeon crawling, and the other 10% was walking around finding the next dungeon, then you look at TP or WW and you have one of the most diverse sets of tasks ever in gaming.

Twilight Princess and The Wind Waker have the "most diverse sets of tasks ever in gaming?" That's a slap in the face to gaming in general. The Wind Waker had a lot of side-content, true, but it was obvious that the main game was based on dungeon-crawling and sailing, and the quality of both were questionable. Twilight Princess's main focus was clearly the dungeons and collect-o-thons. The side-content was a joke! Bug collecting? Donating Rupees?

If you want a diverse Zelda game, go for Majora's Mask. That game made it unclear if the focus was on dungeons, exploring, or doing tasks for NPCs because you did a lot of each.

Hell, on the home-console side of things, the games contain more bosses that either make use of multiple phases, multiple attacks, or more creative ways of damaging them (I say "home-console" because PH's were a little more basic).

Yuck, if one thing must change in thr Zelda games, it is the boss battles. All bosses are pretty much the same in the sense that they don't try to kill you, rather, they protect the solution to solve their puzzle. Now, this can be done in a clever way, but recent Zeldas have extremely lame boss battles. You are not fighting a boss, you are solving a puzzle with the dungeon-item you collected. It's a formula that the gamer has to solve, and it is common sense. It doesn't feel like you are battling at all! Now, Zelda doesn't have to get rid of puzzle bosses, but they have to do them better like the Metroid Prime series. The Metroid Prime bosses have a weak point that you must solve, but the battles require you to FIGHT, and TRY to survive until you can get the weak point.

All I can say is if Zelda does make some form of drastic change ala RE4, there's going to be a backlash. Either a vast number of people will dislike it (mainly the immediate fandom), or it could hamper the gameplay significantly.

Ocarina of Time and Adventure of Link both marked the biggest, most drastic changes in the series to date (in terms of gameplay). While AoL is not universally liked, Ocarina of Time is rankedthe greatest game of all time, and is widely accepted by fans of the series.

A problem with the action/adventure genre, mainly with Zelda, is that it's so diverse with its missions that if you try to alter the formula drastically you run a great risk or making it feel like a gimick, or making the game too repetitive.

A gimmick? Repetitive? Have you not been playing the last 4 Zeldas? You are playing the same Zelda game, but with a gimmick like touch-screen controls, wolf tranformations, shriking abilities, or tedious sailing. That's repetition being masked by gimmicks that are refered to Nintendo as "innovations."

There's ways around this, but it's damn hard, that's for sure.

Create a Zelda game that drops the stubborn traditions, and goes back to the original foundation of the series: exploration, puzzle solving, sword fighting, and dungeon-crawling. There, you have the basics, and you can rework your way up from there. After all, that's what A Link to the Past did. It took the original essense of Zelda, and completely remodled over it creating one of the greatest games of all time. Then Ocarina of Time game, a built over that adding new innovations like playing that world in 3D. Since then, the series keeps building, and building on top on the same exact structure, and because of this, you have more rules to follow, and you have less room for creativity and true innovation. Rebooting the series back to the structure started in the original Legend of Zelda would completely solve this problem.

Mirren, Zelda can't be said to have any diversity in its campaigns whatsoever until it features something remotely on par with FFXII's "go out and kill a sentient tomato" scenario.

As for TWW: there was diversity there? I'm pretty sure most of the sidequests ended with "go out to sea, look at your treasure map, and reel in the prize." And the main quest mostly involved changing the wind direction and island-hopping with your boat, or otherwise rescuing someone from a temple to be rewarded with a crystal ball or something.
And TP? Please tell me you're joking. Please. TP tended to bury the point/storyline of most of the segments of the main quests halfway in, so inevitably most of the little side-stories of the main quest wound up feeling just like yet another dungeon crawl.

Originally posted by KeeSomething
Twilight Princess and The Wind Waker have the "most diverse sets of tasks ever in gaming?" That's a slap in the face to gaming in general. The Wind Waker had a lot of side-content, true, but it was obvious that the main game was based on dungeon-crawling and sailing, and the quality of both were questionable. Twilight Princess's main focus was clearly the dungeons and collect-o-thons. The side-content was a joke! Bug collecting? Donating Rupees?

Check out the order of events of the campaign again, silly.

And by that I mean, notice the Twili Insect missions, the battle with King Bulbin, Sumo Wrestling, protecting the carriage, the quests through the Lost Woods, taking Midna back to Hyrule Castle, the side-story regarding Ilia's memory etc. (yes, there's plenty more)

If you want a diverse Zelda game, go for Majora's Mask. That game made it unclear if the focus was on dungeons, exploring, or doing tasks for NPCs because you did a lot of each.

Aye, MM did do a good job in that regard. But it felt like there could've been so much more in that game. At least in terms of the campaign.

Yuck, if one thing must change in thr Zelda games, it is the boss battles. All bosses are pretty much the same in the sense that they don't try to kill you, rather, they protect the solution to solve their puzzle. Now, this can be done in a clever way, but recent Zeldas have extremely lame boss battles. You are not fighting a boss, you are solving a puzzle with the dungeon-item you collected. It's a formula that the gamer has to solve, and it is common sense. It doesn't feel like you are battling at all! Now, Zelda doesn't have to get rid of puzzle bosses, but they have to do them better like the Metroid Prime series. The Metroid Prime bosses have a weak point that you must solve, but the battles require you to FIGHT, and TRY to survive until you can get the weak point.

MP's boss battles still focus too much on "shoot the hell out of them" to be considered puzzle battles. Some guys like Quadraxis or even the Korak can maybe be recognized as that, but the majority are much more about direct combat.

This isn't a knock on them, of course, because they're placed in a FPS type of game. The fact that they have so much variety in them as it is makes them incredibly impressive. In fact I'd say that the Prime series has the best bosses of any game franchise to date.

Ocarina of Time and Adventure of Link both marked the biggest, most drastic changes in the series to date (in terms of gameplay). While AoL is not universally liked, Ocarina of Time is rankedthe greatest game of all time, and is widely accepted by fans of the series.

OoT's gameplay was not a drastic change. It was a new way of looking at it with a few additions, and that's it. You were still fighting bosses in a similar manner, you were still solving puzzles in a similar manner, you were still exploring the kingdom similarly, you were still going through dungeons similarly etc. The core idea of the Zelda's gameplay was virtually untouched in OoT.

AOL was a drastic change because it basically threw out all of the puzzle solving and dungeon crawling in favor of nearly nonstop action. That, and exploration took a pretty notable blow as well.

A gimmick? Repetitive? Have you not been playing the last 4 Zeldas? You are playing the same Zelda game, but with a gimmick like touch-screen controls, wolf tranformations, shriking abilities, or tedious sailing. That's repetition being masked by gimmicks that are refered to Nintendo as "innovations."

Do they make up the majority of the game, however? Hardly. When I said "gimick" before, I'm talking about something along the lines of making the next Zelda be a stealth-adventure, an RTS etc. Basically bringing in a brand new type of gameplay and making that the basis for the entire game.

Create a Zelda game that drops the stubborn traditions, and goes back to the original foundation of the series: exploration, puzzle solving, sword fighting, and dungeon-crawling. There, you have the basics, and you can rework your way up from there. After all, that's what A Link to the Past did. It took the original essense of Zelda, and completely remodled over it creating one of the greatest games of all time. Then Ocarina of Time game, a built over that adding new innovations like playing that world in 3D. Since then, the series keeps building, and building on top on the same exact structure, and because of this, you have more rules to follow, and you have less room for creativity and true innovation. Rebooting the series back to the structure started in the original Legend of Zelda would completely solve this problem.

Going back to the past is certainly easy when said, but how do you 'rework your way up from there', as you say? How do you make enough changes so that it feels completely fresh without turning the game into a whole different genre?

Originally posted by Seran Aileron
As for TWW: there was diversity there? I'm pretty sure most of the sidequests ended with "go out to sea, look at your treasure map, and reel in the prize." And the main quest mostly involved changing the wind direction and island-hopping with your boat, or otherwise rescuing someone from a temple to be rewarded with a crystal ball or something.

Easy, after two dungeons you had that quest to find Jabun, then the sailing to put the Pearls in their respective places, another dungeon, then the first Hyrule Castle visit, the return to the Forsaken Fortress, another Hyrule Castle visit, searching for the Sages and doing everything to open up their respective temples, the Triforce Quest (tedious, I know), and then the final dungeon.

You're doing a variety of tasks the entire time, it's not like you're simply going from one dungeon to the next. One moment you're on a fetch quest, the other you're doing some exploration/searching, another you're in a mini-dungeon etc.

And TP? Please tell me you're joking. Please. TP tended to bury the point/storyline of most of the segments of the main quests halfway in, so inevitably most of the little side-stories of the main quest wound up feeling just like yet another dungeon crawl.

Just go read what I said to Kee.

Easy, after two dungeons you had that quest to find Jabun, then the sailing to put the Pearls in their respective places, another dungeon, then the first Hyrule Castle visit, the return to the Forsaken Fortress, another Hyrule Castle visit, searching for the Sages and doing everything to open up their respective temples, the Triforce Quest (tedious, I know), and then the final dungeon.

Again, the game essentially tests your ability to follow instructions, usually in the form of having you go from point A to point B. The Triforce Quest, especially if you didn't have the IN-credible Chart, was probably the most diverse part of the entire game, since you really had no instruction whatsoever.

You're doing a variety of tasks the entire time, it's not like you're simply going from one dungeon to the next. One moment you're on a fetch quest, the other you're doing some exploration/searching, another you're in a mini-dungeon etc.

Again, it's fetch quests, going from point A to point B, and dungeon crawls (i.e., everything you outlined above) that the topic starter, and most of those who agree with him, are sick of.

MP's boss battles still focus too much on "shoot the hell out of them" to be considered puzzle battles.

I might point you to the Spider Guardian, Bomb Guardian, Flaaghra, and a number of the bosses from the third Prime (whose names I don't remember at present).

Originally posted by Seran Aileron
Again, the game essentially tests your ability to follow instructions, usually in the form of having you go from point A to point B. The Triforce Quest, especially if you didn't have the IN-credible Chart, was probably the most diverse part of the entire game, since you really had no instruction whatsoever.

But you're almost never performing the same exact task, whether it be a puzzle, a battle, some platforming, some exploration etc.

And last I checked, the game didn't tell you how to kill the 18 enemies in Hyrule Castle, or that Medli and Makar were the Sages you needed to find, how to get past all of the obstacles in the Fire and Ice Caverns etc.

Again, it's fetch quests, going from point A to point B, and dungeon crawls (i.e., everything you outlined above) that the topic starter, and most of those who agree with him, are sick of.

Sucks.

I might point you to the Spider Guardian, Bomb Guardian, Flaaghra, and a number of the bosses from the third Prime (whose names I don't remember at present).

A few are, but to say that the majority are, or even 1/3 are is false. They're still significantly about shooting the crap out of something.