Zelda Wii U won't have an open world like other recent games

Yeah. TES games are terrible for this reason. The day Nintendo puts out a Zelda game with only 6-8 hours of meaningful content, and 200 hours of content that includes crap like building homes, becoming a blacksmith, clearing rats out of people's basements, joining various guilds (with no meaningful consequences), etc. is the day I stop buying Zelda games.

As long as the world is bigger than Twilight Princess I'm sold.

Now that I think of it, the Zelda team will pull that off I'm sure.

"Open world + a more tightly designed experience", I feel as though that is the only way Aonuma would make it.

I think that world is big enough. They just need to fill it. Maybe add a town or two to it.

I would really like to see something like Skyward Sword, only instead of having to basically fast travel through a hub world to get to each area, connect the areas with a Hyrule field that has a lot of enemies. The design where there were enemies and puzzles outside of the dungeons was great, imo. That game was so fun to play.

lol don't listen to this fool I have a Wii U and have purchased many Wii U games. I was supporting the Wii U on this forum back when it wasn't the cool thing to do.

This is like a trend here. People post an opinion and swear they have evidence to back up a statement. But when we read it, no. There is no evidence.

Yeah no. The best moments in any Bethesda game are in the side quests. Vault 11 is one of the best examples of story telling in the history of video games, and most people who play the game don't even know it is there. The entire point of Bethesda games is to go out in a random direction and find something more interesting then the main story.

Besides, what in a Zelda game has a meaningful consequence? Not to bash the franchise or anything, I cut my gamer teeth on The Legend of Zelda, but even saving Zelda is pretty darn pointless. She is just going to get kidnapped again the next time Nintendo needs a cash infusion. Assuming she isn't going to get kidnapped in the exact same way she was last time, this time in HD. Not to mention the fact that while you might not become a blacksmith in Zelda games, you are encouraged to do tedious tasks like running around the desert with a bug net because screw saving the world tumbleweed catching is what the hero of time really needs to focus on right now.

Or other epic tacks, like finding a missing baby rattle...

its a shame really because the people posting conjecture don't have to do any research. they just write and click post.

eviscerating the claims is much tougher because it requires research against their imagination, and sometimes you need to get down to brass tacks to disprove their claims.

but its ok. i just remember who the dishonest folk are.

WiiU can't handle open world games, its just too much for its early 2000's cpu to handle

@cainetao11: swear to have evidence for what? what are you talking about? this was an article about an interview with the developer who has done interviews like this in the past. if you actually followed what was being said maybe you would have a clue as to what is going on. so the question is - why are you speculating, then?

That's a pity, unless they're being deceptive here. The only conclusion that I can make, based on a guess, is that it will be just like all of the other LoZ games, which are ALL open world (something people seem to forget a lot).

I say it's a pity, because modern open worlds are really my favorite new trend. I really enjoy the freedom they give.

Everything you do in Zelda games is directly related to saving Hyrule from whatever evil is lurking. Even the side quests always provide you with useful items. The Elder Scrolls games lack a sense of progression. Nothing I do matters. I can become the leader of the Thieves' Guild and the game changes in no meaningful way. I can beat the game, but the same NPCs are still there with the same quests. Nothing you do matters. Not in any of the quest lines. The game has objectives, but no progression. Once you become leader of a guild, you are just done with the guild. Nobody tries to overthrow you. You don't have to manage the guild's affairs. You can buy property, but you can't really do anything with it, other decorate it.

Even the things the game has that typically matter in RPGs, like leveling up and getting better gear, really make very little difference in TES due to the scaling enemies. The series is a shining example that sometimes less is more. The game has hundreds, if not thousands, of things for me to do, but nothing I actually want to do.

I recently went through it with someone here as well. Just complete conjecture and fought me tooth and nail. All good fun though.

@charizard1605 said:

'Sheep defense force?' Where is the defense force? If you can point to me where Aonuma said 'this open world is less ambitious than other open worlds on the market' and/or 'this open world is limited because of the Wii U's hardware' you have a point to make, otherwise there is no use in needlessly pulling out the persecution/victim card. You were very clearly wrong here, because you incorrectly jumped to the worst conclusion with no information. Accept that, admit it, move on. We all make mistakes. Continue to try to argue when you were abundantly wrong, and shift to a 'sheep defense force' argument, and you only make yourself look worse and sillier.

You stated the bold did you not? Is the posted interview your evidence? Because in the interview, Aonuma never says those things. Why even link this interview when you are going to make claims like the ones you did. Just say in thread title: I am talking some shit here.

@cainetao11: TC just gets upset when people call him out on his bullshit. Obviously it's our fault for criticizing the things he puts in the OP

You guys are silly. At no point have you actually read what I said and understood the context. Nintendo has been throwing around "open world" regarding Zelda for a while now. The reference to Skyrim has been cited all over the internet. Yet you blindly follow what Charizard says because why? Because you want to believe him more? What's even sillier is that this thread had nothing to do with making a point at all. It was a news thread where people could give their reactions on what they think Nintendo is doing here. It's not my fault that Nintendo was hyping it up the way they did. And as I mentioned already, the reaction I had was similar to the reaction of the article's author as well as others. So the fact that you're going by by Charizard's word purely by his own speculation of my motivations for this thread clearly show the irony of it all.

well, i'm not that silly. post 58 i took you out the quote chain because i wasn't talking about you.

My bad. When posting news, the conclusions you draw can be stated as fact because others may have the same impression. Really no reason to play the games anymore. Just read reviews and get an impression of them.

I did not say that. I asked the question - "Will the next Zelda be hampered by Wii U's underwhelming hardware? My impression was that it was going to be like Skyrim in scope. Looks like we'll be having a fairly linear experience again." It was simply a news thread. I was not trying to prove anything. Just giving my initial reactions.

ah huh

Where's your evidence?

And if this was just supposed to be a news thread, why did you throw in your unsubstantiated speculation? And why are you upset that people then commented on/criticized those statements?

He's being kinda vague. I'll wait for more information to come out.

dude, your contributions to this forum are zilch. you don't do threads, you barely write anything worth reading (many times you don't even go beyond one word or one short sentence), and the rest of the time you troll other people's threads and make personal comments. I mean, you honestly have not written anything that contributes to making this forum better what-so-ever. just about everything you write is what's wrong with this forum. in summary, it's just better to not read anything you write anymore at all and I'm not even going to acknowledge you from this point forward. goodbye

You've monitored everything i've posted? That's kind of odd

Open worlds are very demanding on RAM let alone CPU processing for various little things. We have to wait and see how big that world will be , if there will be back and forth missions on actually same regions , if there will be any loading screens in this open world and if thats the reason why he said "open world" because of hardware limitations etc ... We have to wait and see thats all.

Imho thats the ultimate question i have myself when it comes to Zelda Wii U . How big that "open world" will be. Nevertheless Zelda Wii U will be one of the hottest Wii U games , if not the hottest .

Yeah, sorry, already full of BS. You get in game currency for finding the baby's lost rattle and catching tumbleweeds with a bug's net, or racing your horse, or fishing, or whatever, that you can spend on upgrades. You can say the very same thing about like every game that actually rewards you for finishing a quest with gold or loot or whatever.

But finding a Rattle or catching tumbleweeds isn't saving the world. Heck even in The Legend of Zelda there were things to do that helped you become more powerful but ultimately were unnecessary for beating the game. You are not only extremely off base, you are overreaching to the point of fibbing. Zelda games are full of needless grinding and petty little fetch/gather quests that are far beneath the dignity of a hero.

Heck, in link to the past there are even basement rats that you are encouraged to kill because they drop lots of cash.

TC specifically compared it to games such as GTA and Skyrim and in his removed point mentioned how the Wii U's hardware was the reason it wouldn't be able to push a world like that when in fact the Wii U has superior hardware (even if by a small margin) to the "HD twins" Hell, even Wii's Xenoblade had a massive world. Either way, I agree we need to wait and see, the game may indeed not be "open world" like those games but in no way does the article confirm that, it's just TC's speculation. My whole point was that nowhere in the article did they say that it would be linear or smaller in scale because of the hardware as the TC had implied.

An open world handheld Zelda won goty so I only expect great things from the Wii U console game.

The vast majority of the side quests are done to obtain either a heart container, a bottle, or a weapon. You get rupees at certain points of the quest, but generally you get a nice reward at the end. I'm sure there are some things that you would classify as side quests that I wouldn't that only give rupees in the end, but they are not a focus of the game. Skyward Sword was pretty light on side quests and I think the game really was better for it. The series is at its best when it is more linear, more focused. With the improved hardware, it would certainly be possible to throw an element of exploration into that equation, but hopefully the main quest utilizes the entire world so the player will see everything without having to go out on their own to try to make the game fun.

There are better RPG coming out anyways, open world and semi-open world.

As for this game, look like sh!t compared to graphic this day in age.

And the vast majority of quest in skyrim reward you with the things you use to improve your character as well. That really doesn't factor into what we were talking about, and you sort of just went on a personal preference tangent.

To get the conversation back on track: Zelda pads it's gameplay out with all kinds of trivial tasks to run up the hours. We are talking about things far more trivial then clearing rats from a basement, I mean holy whiskers as you yourself pointed out Zelda is a franchise where you go on complicated quests to obtain bottles. They are not even magical bottles, we are talking about the epic quest to journey to the recycling bin kind of bottles.

@alcapello: good thing Zelda isn't an rpg :^)

sheep defence force? id say they have a right since their backs are to the wall this gen yet they have the best games so far. zelda is always good i expect nothing less this time around, and why does every rpg have to be open world to be considered good anyways?

Lol, of course there are better RPGs...i mean, Zelda is not even an RPG.

Glass blowers are rare in Hyrule, it seems. :) I could do without things like the wolf segments of Twilight Princess where you had to collect the orbs or the water dragon part of Skyrim Sword, but honestly those are really minor gripes. The games are filled with solid content. The opening segments lately have been way too long, but it's kind of cool to meet people before everything goes south. It's good story telling. Wind Waker did the opening sequence the best.

I just don't like how you get rewards in Skyrim like a suit of armor, only the suit you already have is better, so you end up selling your reward. Then you don't really have anything useful to spend the gold on, so you buy property. To me, TES games feel like a collection of mini-RPGs rather than one big, grand adventure. Morrowind was fun to me because it didn't have the level scaling. Some places were certain death for a new character to venture, so you had to take it slow with the side quests to develop your character before getting into the meat of the game. With Oblivion and Skyrim, that is not the case. There are thousands of quests, and they all feel pointless. I'm also not a big fan of the fast travel system within them. The world would feel a lot more authentic with some sort of transportation network.

I just want a Zelda game that has a living, breathing world that feels authentic. I don't think the series has had that since the NES games. Windwaker came somewhat close.

I don't think they should copy Elder Scrolls but there are many aspects of the game worlds of those games that I feel Zelda games should emulate. I don't think Link should be able to go anywhere from the beginning but I like the idea of the game world being one giant mass rather than discrete areas separated by bottlenecks.

Oh god I HATED those segments back then... They were scary, and boring (the worst combination).

The major difference between a Bethesda game and Zelda is that in Zelda you do the side quest for the items, and the story is just something you spam the A button to skip as quick as possible. Yeah your baby is annoying.Look I need Gratitude so just tell me what will shut it up so I can get it. In Bethesda titles individual items are less important (though the main reward of any quest is EXP) and the emphasis is focused on the story. Journey VS destination. I don't know if I got any worthwhile loot in Vault 11, but I am extremely glad they put it in the game because I got something way more valuable then an upgrade out of the experience.

The difference is most certainly not the importance of the tasks required to unlock whatever. No one does "Hey, I know you are saving the world but can you help me find my dog's ball? She lost it and look how sad she is...Look forget about the moon crashing into the earth we got a pouting puppy over here!" like Japanese games. Western developers are catching up but they still got a long way to go. I mostly think it is the character models Nintendo uses. Pouting puppies tug harder on the heart strings when they are bright and colorful.

Yes, I agree with this. Ocarina of Time, Majora's Mask, and Wind Waker felt great for their time, but they feel stale now. Twilight Princess was unforgivably empty. Skyward Sword at least had the backstory that explained why the land was as lifeless as it was. With the tech in the Wii U, Nintendo should be able to create a large world that feels alive.

I actually think Zelda does the story better than Bethesda, mostly because I have little to no recollection of what is even going on in the main quest when I get back to it. I treat the side quests in Bethesda games more as something to get cleared off the checklist in the journal than as some grand journey. I mean take the thieves' guild quests. Basically somebody tell me to steal something from a character, I go to ground, open the map, fast travel, run across town, rob the character, and then fast travel back for some worthless reward. Then I get the next quest, rinse, and repeat. There are like 3 or 4 different quests in that whole guild, and you just keep doing them, only in different cities against different characters.

If I had to guess what this is all about, it would be along the lines of having certain areas cordoned off until you get to a certain point. Why do I think this might be the case? Because. That is why... lol

Honestly I actually like that approach if not overdone. If that isn't what it is then no biggie. I am actually interested in this game and will buy it either way.

Several Zelda games have done that including the 1st two.

Another ay of looking into this is that perhaps enemies don't level as you do... maybe some areas are pretty much off limits simply because the enemies are harder to beat. That has always been one thing I never felt that Elder Scrolls got right.

And in a Zelda game, it is grab seven chickens, get rewarded with a regular old bottle. If you want me to concede that Skyrim is the worst Bethesda game I am happy to, but if you want to argue that the stakes are higher in Zelda games you are just off base.

When, on the other hand, Bethesda decides it is going to make a side quest interesting, they make it extremely interesting. Vault eleven is amazing, and there are so many layers of subtext in Minetown it is astounding.

the rarity of bottles is something that just has to be accepted for Hyrule though. It's possible that nobody really has use for bottles in that universe. Bottles are useful for Link but he's a very unusual person living an unusual life.

Bottles are basically the most valuable reward you get in Zelda games, though. You also have to track down the chickens (no map marker on them) and figure out how to get them back to their pen. The game doesn't hold your hand.

I actually liked Fallout 3. I can't put my finger on why, but Fallout 3 seemed to give a better sense of progression than Oblivion or Skyrim. I also thought the characters were interesting.

I sort of lost interest in Zelda. I haven't played Skyward Sword yet, we'll see how this new game turns out though.

I couldn't get into the Wii Zeldas. Twilight Princess bored the heck out of me. And I didn't even bother with Skyward Sword.

It is a bottle, and they are chickens. This line of discussion was started when you rolled your eyes over the inconsequential scale of things like killing rats in a basement. The fact that one of the most valuable rewards is a regular old bottle that is considered a fair payment for rounding up a handful of chickens would meet all the criteria of your original criticism if you took the time to apply it to Zelda games the way you apply it to Bethesda games. The idea that Zelda games trim the trivialities out of an open world is just laughable. One of the most endearing things about them is that you spend so much of the game roaming around doing childlike things for childlike rewards like empty pouches,empty drinking containers, butterfly nets, and sling shots.

Hopefully it's not a borefest like Skyrim.

Yeah that sounds about right.