The Futuristic Zelda thread

I'll say in this thread what I said in another.

Drastically changing the time period of Zelda (in relation to the real world at least) is a cheap fix to a deeper, underlying problem.

Zelda is ready for change again. Change like the transition between LTTP and OOT. Real, gameplay structure change. Not a tacky gimmick to throw Hyrule some centuries in the future whilst still keeping most of the gameplay architecture the same. Why not go for some prehistoric Zelda whilst you're at it?

Besides, most signs point to Hyrule just sort of fading away in the future. Most Zelda games further in the timeline get bleaker and bleaker as far as population density is concerned.

Originally Posted by GamenerdAdvance

Zelda is ready for change again. Change like the transition between LTTP and OOT. Real, gameplay structure change. Not a tacky gimmick to throw Hyrule some centuries in the future whilst still keeping most of the gameplay architecture the same. Why not go for some prehistoric Zelda whilst you're at it?

Who says its a gimmick? It might look that way, but it just opens the story up to more modern twists like incorporating government and diplomacy into things.

Originally Posted by GamenerdAdvance

Besides, most signs point to Hyrule just sort of fading away in the future. Most Zelda games further in the timeline get bleaker and bleaker as far as population density is concerned.

I don't see it. Old stuff eventually evolved into society that we have today...

Originally Posted by GamenerdAdvance

I'll say in this thread what I said in another.

Drastically changing the time period of Zelda (in relation to the real world at least) is a cheap fix to a deeper, underlying problem.

Zelda is ready for change again. Change like the transition between LTTP and OOT. Real, gameplay structure change. Not a tacky gimmick to throw Hyrule some centuries in the future whilst still keeping most of the gameplay architecture the same. Why not go for some prehistoric Zelda whilst you're at it?

Besides, most signs point to Hyrule just sort of fading away in the future. Most Zelda games further in the timeline get bleaker and bleaker as far as population density is concerned.

The most notable aspect of the transition between LttP and OoT was the 3d visuals-- much remained the same and continues today as you can see in TP. I'd like to see some reasoning behind the statement "a tacky gimmick to throw Hyre some centuries in the future..." What makes it tacky, exactly? And why is the case that the gameplay architecture would remain the same if done so?

A futuristic setting opens door to many possibilities, and it is not a simple whim of desire to just throw the series in a more advanced setting. The futuristic setting can lead to both a more complex storyline and a more refined gameplay not reminiscent to past LoZ titles. It's precisely the current so-called medieval setting that is starting to lose taste and appear more and more dull every time one roams around it. The setting introduced in TWW truly introduced a whole new concept to the LoZ series, and the setting was key. As limited as sailing can be among tiny islands, the concept incorporates new gameplay and deals with a compelling, even tragic storyline. The result of TWW's setting was truly amazing, and the same would apply with a more advanced setting, perhaps to a greater degree.

Originally Posted by JanDeis

I am going to have the world split up into multiple parts. The Hyrule part will have Upper Hyrule, Lower Hyrule, and Old Hyrule. Upper Hyrule will be the location of the new castle and the bulk of the business. Pretty much the market so many years after the old Zelda games. The Lower Hyrule will be the slum area. It will run off of crime, almost having no authority (by the way, the guards will affect the way you go through the world, GTA style). Old Hyrule will be the familiar Middle Ages layout, all busted up and decayed. Te forest will be over run by Ghomas and Stalfos, the temples and old dungeons will be hidden, making it an epic battle just to get to the front door.




I knew I would get these. At least these comments don't look like this topic. You guys just said "good idea, I don't agree", which is fine.

My main point for this game is to show that it can be done, and be done well enough to please new gamers and old gamers alike. By the way, there will be a lot of old and familiar elements in this game. The story goes like this:

Link figures out that he has the Triforce of Courage. He follows the guys who attacked the church and finds out their secret. If you don't want to spoil the story for this game (most of you won't really care) don't read the rest of this.

Link follows the guys back to a Stargate looking portal. They put in a medallion that was stolen from the church, which joins five others. The portal activates and they men go into the portal. Later, Ganondorf comes back through the portal, leading the other men and an army of Terminian guards. Ganondorf wages a war between Termina and Hyrule. It is later revealed that the war is a distraction so he can find the 12, yes that is right, 12 pieces of the complete Triforce.

Of course, this game being in the future, Link will have an arsenal of new gadgets. One of them being a modern version of the hookshot. It will be a wrist-mount grappling hook, with a secondary option of an assassin's blade. Another is, like nobody saw this one coming, a lightsaber-style weapon. I will probably rename it to avoid the Star Wars inclusion. I have much more, but I don't want to give away the entire game, otherwise it will suck like everyone thinks it will!

Awesome idea,I like the Stargate idea!

Originally Posted by Judicium

The most notable aspect of the transition between LttP and OoT was the 3d visuals-- much remained the same and continues today as you can see in TP. I'd like to see some reasoning behind the statement "a tacky gimmick to throw Hyre some centuries in the future..." What makes it tacky, exactly? And why is the case that the gameplay architecture would remain the same if done so?

A futuristic setting opens door to many possibilities, and it is not a simple whim of desire to just throw the series in a more advanced setting. The futuristic setting can lead to both a more complex storyline and a more refined gameplay not reminiscent to past LoZ titles. It's precisely the current so-called medieval setting that is starting to lose taste and appear more and more dull every time one roams around it. The setting introduced in TWW truly introduced a whole new concept to the LoZ series, and the setting was key. As limited as sailing can be among tiny islands, the concept incorporates new gameplay and deals with a compelling, even tragic storyline. The result of TWW's setting was truly amazing, and the same would apply with a more advanced setting, perhaps to a greater degree.

I call it a cheap gimmick because it is thrown into a series where the idea is completely out of place and frankly, unneccessary. They could easily achieve the same effects in the historical setting; what says there can't be some sort of democracy in old Hyrule? What's the point of a gun if a bow and arrow achieves the same purpose gameplay-wise?

There is a deeper flaw in the series that desperately needs addressing - it has gone completely off the rails from it's original "go anywhere, do anything" sense of style. Hell, Mario Galaxy was almost less linear than Twilight Princess. Changing the setting/time period is merely a shallow distraction to what's really going on.

And also, you say that they could change the gameplay architecture and the time period. But what would be the point? You're basically changing the whole game then; why not go all the way and just turn that into a new IP?

I would not object to a slight shift in time period; maybe some clockwork contraptions, or even a steam train, but ONLY if it stands to improve gameplay rather than just being there for the sake of it.

Boy, do I want to punch the guy who originally thought having a futuristic Zelda is a good idea.

Originally Posted by GamenerdAdvance

I call it a cheap gimmick because it is thrown into a series where the idea is completely out of place and frankly, unneccessary. They could easily achieve the same effects in the historical setting; what says there can't be some sort of democracy in old Hyrule? What's the point of a gun if a bow and arrow achieves the same purpose gameplay-wise?

There is a deeper flaw in the series that desperately needs addressing - it has gone completely off the rails from it's original "go anywhere, do anything" sense of style. Hell, Mario Galaxy was almost less linear than Twilight Princess. Changing the setting/time period is merely a shallow distraction to what's really going on.

And also, you say that they could change the gameplay architecture and the time period. But what would be the point? You're basically changing the whole game then; why not go all the way and just turn that into a new IP?

I would not object to a slight shift in time period; maybe some clockwork contraptions, or even a steam train, but ONLY if it stands to improve gameplay rather than just being there for the sake of it.

Boy, do I want to punch the guy who originally thought having a futuristic Zelda is a good idea.

1) It is not out of place because every civilization came from somewhere, and goes somewhere. What were we before all the sky-scrapers, cars, guns, etc.?

2) There has always been the "go anywhere" part, but never "do anything". There will be a linear story (there has to be for there to be a tangible plot) but it will have sifts in it depending on actions of the player. Maybe the player wants to steer Link towards the darker side, but still be the hero. Or he just wants to rule with Ganondorf, or take over and kill Ganondorf. Or the player can be the usual light hero. It all depends on the direction the player wants to take. I'm all for options. I would like to see a game with options without trashing the linear (well, somewhat linear with plot options) plot.

3) Well, I thought of the whole world in terms of Zelda, looked at the world from the point of view of individuals, races, and the world as a whole. I have a futuristic Hyrule shaped in my head that I want to show everyone. If I make a unique game, then I lose all of that. And I also know that if a 3D fan game is made, many people here will play it

4) I have thoughts on how each modern twist will impact the gameplay. I would never sacrifice gameplay quality for something like that. That is why I've so far written 8 different plots for this game, throwing each one out because of plot flaws, tackiness in how the futuristic setting is incorporated, and other things. It isn't like I'm ignoring game quality because I just want it futuristic.

By the way, I was the guy who started this thread, so are you saying you want to punch me?

Originally Posted by JanDeis

1) It is not out of place because every civilization came from somewhere, and goes somewhere. What were we before all the sky-scrapers, cars, guns, etc.?

2) There has always been the "go anywhere" part, but never "do anything". There will be a linear story (there has to be for there to be a tangible plot) but it will have sifts in it depending on actions of the player. Maybe the player wants to steer Link towards the darker side, but still be the hero. Or he just wants to rule with Ganondorf, or take over and kill Ganondorf. Or the player can be the usual light hero. It all depends on the direction the player wants to take. I'm all for options. I would like to see a game with options without trashing the linear (well, somewhat linear with plot options) plot.

3) Well, I thought of the whole world in terms of Zelda, looked at the world from the point of view of individuals, races, and the world as a whole. I have a futuristic Hyrule shaped in my head that I want to show everyone. If I make a unique game, then I lose all of that. And I also know that if a 3D fan game is made, many people here will play it

4) I have thoughts on how each modern twist will impact the gameplay. I would never sacrifice gameplay quality for something like that. That is why I've so far written 8 different plots for this game, throwing each one out because of plot flaws, tackiness in how the futuristic setting is incorporated, and other things. It isn't like I'm ignoring game quality because I just want it futuristic.

By the way, I was the guy who started this thread, so are you saying you want to punch me?

Well, no, I don't want to punch you. But I'd like to smack the inventor of the futuristic Zelda genre, whoever that may be. I mean, seriously, three years ago people wouldn't dare vocalise an idea about a futuristic Zelda, nut then something triggered and everbody and their mothers started theorising about futuristic Zelda.

Also, if time period changes are not out of place, then how about victorian F-Zero? I mean, where were the F-Zero racers before floating tracks and fire-y planetoids? Or would a futuristic Fire Emblem be more your cup of tea?

Originally Posted by GamenerdAdvance

Well, no, I don't want to punch you. But I'd like to smack the inventor of the futuristic Zelda genre

We want to smack you too, hon. (insert smiley)

Originally Posted by GamenerdAdvance

Also, if time period changes are not out of place, then how about victorian F-Zero? I mean, where were the F-Zero racers before floating tracks and fire-y planetoids? Or would a futuristic Fire Emblem be more your cup of tea?

Eh? It's kind of obvious to me. F-Zero is a futuristic sport. It wouldn't exist in a victorian world.
I don't know about Fire Emblem because I haven't played them (tough I probably should), but I'd guess that it has a 'continuous' plot, tied to a certain time, and it would be silly to transfer it to the future.

Now Zelda is a different thing. Basically it tells us of recurring battles between the avatars of good and evil or some other epic trash. It's not tied to a certain time or place, as we can see through the series. And the characters aren't the same, even Link's change.
So it's perfectly normal to chew on the idea, because theoretically there should be Link's in the future too, battling Ganons of their time.

It's like wondering why zombie-games always happen on modern times. I mean, think of how cool medieval zombies would be!

Originally Posted by Aleitheo

One thing alot of people fail to see when they think of a futuristic Zelda is that it would be the future in the world of Zelda (which is inevitable) and not our world or scifi like starwars (which funnily enough, has quite a few medieval sort of places which a good touch of the future)

That means their future would be dramatically different to ours. They have magic, they have gorons and zoras and the like which would dramatically change how their technology progresses compared to ours.
Take Majoras Mask and Windwaker for example, they clearly invented cameras before they used their gunpower technology to make the earliest guns.

---

A quick example, say the game begins with a strangely dressed man and his mysteriously disguised companion (who is a clockwork robot, because its not far from current Zelda). They appear as if from nowhere/portal in the air/a time machine similar to the one in the movie of the same name.
They walk through castle town attracting alot of attention. They approach the gate to Hyrule Castle and the man asks the guards to see the king of Hyrule about something urgent that begins in a few days. When the guards ask the man why they should trust him and let him in, he shows them the back of his left hand which bares the crest of the triforce of wisdom and tells them he could trust them with his life.

Turns out this man is from the future, a future that has been corrupted over the centuries (or thousands of years if we go by the supposed time distance of OoT and WW) by something that happened in the time he is visiting. This man is the current bearer of the triforce of wisdom and he was searching all his life for the one who bore the triforce of courage to help fight the evil in his own time. However when he found the lineage of all the heroes that bore the triforce of courage in the past, he found out the last one recorded was in the time that everything went downhill.
So realising that trying to find the current bearer was useless, he did the next best thing, he tried to find a way to get the last hero.
Using all the information and artifacts he could gather of the Temple of Time (destroyed mostly but the room beyond the door of time somehow stands untouched) he created a method to go back in time to find the courage bearer.

---

So you begin the game as Link like usual, its a few days after the time traveller arrived in this time and already the events of the future are beginning. Eventually the traveller finds you and thats where the real adventure begins. You must travel between times with him, learning of what is to come in the future and preventing it from happening in the past, each time making a dramatic change in the future the next time you visit.
Take note this is not like Oracle of Ages or OoT where the time travel is barely any difference, this is major time travel and your actions greatly affect the future. The future itself is incredibly different yet noticeably the same

---

Because of the way time travels in Zelda, swords are still widely used and favoured over guns due to not much research being put into guns themselves. Crossbows are much more favoured over guns due to being faster and simpler to use.
Magic still exists in the future and many people try to keep it alive by mixing it in with technology. Hover technology does not exist but there are airborne vehicles (think of airships, zepplins, ect.) thanks to mainly magic.
Hyrule itself has changed alot but relics of the past are still there. Hyrule Castle Town still has some of the old buildings (though updated quite a bit) but they are in the poorer sections of the town. The richer and more modern buildings consist of ornate marble and crystal giving a sort of shiny metal and glass look common in some future designs but sticking with the ancient.
The gorons would have alot of machinery, they would be the kings of inventions, most of them looking steampunk.. They would have steamtrains, huge drill machines and more.
The Zora would be a bit more in touch with nature and magic but would be the masters of any watercraft.
The Gerudo would have a slightly cyberpunk sort of theme, alot of them pirating and such the air, roads, traintracks, waterways, ect.

That is REALLY good. i love it. i wish Nintendo would make one like that. Seeing that there is still a lot of remains of the Hyrule we all know and love, but seeing also that they're entering the industrial age. it's a really well thought out formula. unlike most people on forums saying stuff like: "OMG! Liek Link Shoud totalllly haz a gunnnnnnn!!!! lawlzzz!"

I think that the Master Sword should stay, Epona should stay too, and if you've watched the Tales of Phantasia anime, you'll notice that they did a good job of utilizing both magic and technology.

i've always been curious about the hyrulian civil war and i had an idea that at the beginning of a zelda game instead of moving straight to link you play as a soldier in the hyrulian civil war just so that we learn a little more about hyrules past you'd only get to play as the soldier for a little bit like 5-10 min long part but i dont know (it could work......i think)

Whats that got to do with a futuristic Zelda game

Yeah, serious. If anything that's even more in the past... But at least this got bumped

I likethis idea. Fururistic Zelda can be a good diea, but iut has to be ade and designed well, or the idea becomes bad andofff the original idea. Theway you've done this is good