I don't think we've seen a mass encounted in the 3D zelda's, so I can't compare right now.

I suppose.

But I still think 2D Zelda is way better suited to mass encounters

Eh, yeah. It'd be a small matter to adapt it to suit mass encounters.

I reckon a jump button isn't such a bad idea, actually, provided the roll stays.

But jumping in combat to escape monsters? We already have those in 3D Zelda...

And that's a crap solution.

You just need to give the player extra maneuverability to escape the monsters, like, say a JUMP BUTTON!!!!

*dun dun dun*

In my experience, they've gotten around this obstacle by having enemies "wait their turn" when there are others, e.g. Stalfos in OoT, or by having enemies not throw attacks frequently (3D Bokoblins).

...you can get trapped easily?

Unfair? Perish the thought! You just need different cues to show you that they're around. Like sounds, and if you use the terrain/your ability to move, you should be fine.

There's a problem with enemies attacking in swarms that 3D Zelda hasn't addressed that 2D Zelda has. Allowing them all to attack at once could be understood as "unfair" because some of these enemies would be undetectable.

I have never played ALttP, so I'll take you're word for it.

I do like the 4-armed stalfos, however. It does look awesome.

The Deku Baba isn't really a monster, so I think Nintendo should stop treating it like one. It's more of a trap, something to spring out and attack the player when they get to close (that is to say, right next to it).

As for the Bokoblin, those are basic monsters anyway. They should attack by the swarm as opposed to just one or two.

If I might take ALttP as an example, those enemies with swords (i.e. the basic enemies) held them out in front of them as an offense that doubled as a defense.

*30-second google image search*


The 4-armed stalfos in SS looks epic because its multiple arms enable it to defend itself whilst attacking.

However, enemies like the Deku Baba and the Bokoblin cannot do this, which is why I don't really think these enemies will be at all fun to fight.

Actually, that would work for most enemies.

*shrug*

If I had it my way, the enemies' offenses WOULD BE their defenses.

Which is a step in the right direction, only the over shoot the destination. The ideal route is for you to have to get around attacks AND defenses. Add enemies that have interesting attacks and defenses and you have a good system of combat.

One more difference between classic Zelda and SS is that, in the former, combat revolved around getting past the enemies' attacks, while in SS combat looks like it revolves around getting past the enemies' defences.

Which only becomes worse when you realize they have no skill at it.

This is my issue with the games industry. What turns out most enjoyable often appears to be boring to the dev. It's boring to continually fine-tune battle mechanics. It's "fun" to make a "ZOMG DEEP AND MATURE STORY"

Eh, the genre itself if kind of boring. But the enemies, and if their coded correctly, their AI could make them extremely scary.

That hole thing in TP's Gerudo Desert was kind of like the original dungeons of Zelda 1. I dunno why it was optional, probably because the devs thought it was boring.

Horror? Meh. I dun liek horror.

But the entire idea of "survival" against enemies is appealing to me. Kinda like the hole in TP's Gerudo Desert that had 50 levels of enemies. Why was that thing optional?