During a recent investor Q&A session, Nintendo’s Shigeru Miyamoto shared some of his design goals for the next Legend of Zelda game for Wii. As you know, the game will likely be significantly different from its predecessors due to its use of Wii MotionPlus. While some of you are down on the game and down on Miyamoto, I’m pretty sure the next Zelda for Wii will be great. Anyway, here’s what the game-design legend had to say:
Of course we are preparing gorgeous graphics for the sake of users’ anticipation for a grand role-playing adventure. But what I believe is very important is the realistic, actual feeling players have experienced themselves; the feeling to have really been on an adventure, to have explored the unknown terrains, to have solved the puzzle through trial and errors, to have themselves grown through various experiences! In that sense, a personal sense of creativity is becoming important among us. We have assembled one of the most creative team for the recent Zelda for DS, and we want to be as creative as possible for upcoming Wii Zelda.
A lot of Miyamoto’s design philosophies reminded me of my exchange with Rpadholic “LarcenousLaugh” in yesterday’s Coffee Talk. Miyamoto’s games aren’t about heavy-handed storytelling; they’re about the experience. While many modern games have been successful with strong storytelling, Miyamoto’s games succeed with their transparency, allowing gamers to feel like they’re the star of their videogame adventure. Some players might think this style is old fashioned, but I think it still works today.
As always, I want to know your opinion on Miyamoto’s style and what you expect from the next Zelda Wii. Do you prefer heavy-handed storytelling (Kojima games) or do you like transparency (Miyamoto games)?
im glad its not the same cartoon style play. While the cel shaded cute as a button Wind Waker looked nice, i prefer this style of art. If I am going to feel how the "star" of the video game there needs to be more story, and allowance of exploration. if the world were a bit larger and just slightly less cartoon bight colors.
focusing on graphics and making it "gorgeous" is almost funny to think about on the Wii. I too would like to see a much more dark, realistic Hyrule then previous games. While Twighlight was probably the darkest game to date it was still heavy cartoonish and kid friendly. I'd like to see grown up link kicking ass
Woot, immortalized in the news!
I actually prefer a mix of both. It's a weird dicotomy – I want the experiences to be both theirs, as a character, and mine as a player. Miyamoto gets the second part; his games are experiences. But I just get this feeling that they aren't experiences for the characters themselves.
But LL, the characters aren't real. This is the point where I grab the bat and swing for the fences – as a writer (with probably the most horrible block in the history of writing) the characters have to be real to me. I can't just leave the characters in a book on the page, I have to know that even though I might not see it, they live on without me there.
Nathan Drake lives without me controlling him. He has wants and needs, he lives and breathes and f*cks and grabs on to life with both hands. Link is a puppet. I control him with a remote, but when I put that remote down, he stops moving until I pick it up again. Mario, always the trooper, jumps where I tell him, drives where I want him, and even plays sports to help me unwind. But when I put down that controller, his world stops, the princess sits in her room, Bowser waits paitently for his foe to reawaken, and the mushroom kingdom sleeps.
The only character I can't say that about it Samus Aran. She lives beyond Metroid. There is a purpose there, a driving force of character whose words are made of blaster fire and whose gaze makes those who stare into the visor freeze faster then her ice beam.
It's such a weird, weird corner I paint myself into with games.
I'm sorry, but in this day and age shouldn't high quality graphics on a AAA title be a given?
I would love to see a U-turn on the Zelda franchise akin to the one that Zelda II, The Adventures of Link took from The Legend of Zelda.
I know it is not an easy translation since the first two were 2D, and the Zeldas of now are 3D, but I like the fact that they mixed things up so radically and they both worked on some level… just different.
-M
He hasn't made a disappointing Zelda game, So why not just assume this game will be epic?
@Larcenous
If you think back to Ocarina of Time every time you pulled the Master Sword out of the Temple of Time, The characters did go on with out you. For like ten years or something like that. I remember the first time going back to Lon Lon Ranch and just seeing Ingo running the place and just thinking "Whats this douche bag doing?" I love how the worlds just seem to go about themselves even if Link isn't in it. Even as the wolf in the new one you could still see people going about things as normal without Link even being around. While each character may not play a huge part, most of the time you can get a real feel for those characters just by the 2 or 3 different phrases they say. While we never see Link like we saw Snake, With a Cut-scene every 5 seconds, I think that makes the game so great. Link may-not be a very deep character( mainly because he is, as you say, a puppet) he is what he needs to be. Maybe if he actually spoke he would be more than just a puppet, but all in all I think that's what all video game characters are, even Nathan Drake.
phantom hourglass was disappointing. you have to do the same temple over and over and over. cheap way to extend the game.
@smart guy
Never have been much of a fan of console game when they go hand held. They always feel like a disappointment to me. Even though I will go ahead and say Mario and The Six Golden Coins is my favorite Mario ever.
@Arguello
They can be fun if they aren't ports. Even ports can be quite fun. Example: Chrono Trigger
@smartguy
Chrono Trigger Is pretty awesome. But alot of the times when a handheld version comes out its like a step backwards instead of a step forward. Like Even the New Pokemon use the exact same game as the old ones but they up the graphics a few thing to game play and things like that. But console games that go handheld usually add a feture here and there but they almost lose what they are so they can fit on the cartridges.
@Arguello – good point. Ocarina of Time was very enjoyable. In my focus on the main character I was kind of leaving hyrule out of it… though it really only grows an evolves as much as Link does. I just don't get that sense of depth that I really crave in his games. I will play them for the experience, especially Mario, that punk ass plumber may be unlucky in love, but he brings the pain in his own special way.
@Arguello I disagree on the Pokemon games. There's always a new gameplay element introduce that can drastically alter strategy, breeding, etc. Splitting moves into special and physical was a pretty huge deal, for example.
@Poke – yeah there is a difference between version of Pokemon that is more then just graphical. While the gameplay elements are mostly the same, there are normally enough changes that make each experience different. Even the smallest changes can mean a world of difference on the hardcore side of things.
@Ray
I agree with you under the surface there are plenty of things that change and make each one different,I would definitely appreciate the smaller things more but in the world of pokemon, I never learned much about the serious things. But if you can play one Pokemon game you know how to play them all. Personally I think the biggest thing that was ever put into Pokemon, Was when they allowed you to assign select to a certain item, For extra fast biking. Because everyone remembers the days before the Bike and the Running Shoes. Breeding may very well be the next most important, and Shineys.
On a side note, Pokemon gave me the second most sad moment of my life, I trained a Charizard on Pokemon Gold all the way up to Lvl one hundred with no Rare Candys, And He was able to take out the Elite Four by himself, But on my vacation that year to Niagara Falls, I left my Gameboy on the Train, forever losing him. Yes I know I get sad about the Little things.
@ Arguello;
I can relate, man. I had amassed an unstoppable army of super Pokemon that were perfectly balanced and perfectly lethal. They were all at level 100. I used to go to the Pokemon tournaments whenever they would come around and I would wreck everyone. I even felt a little guilty about beating the crap out of a little 12-year old girl at the badge tournament. That was in high school. After a year or two of college, I bought the newest version of Pokemon (Sapphire and Ruby, I think) and got through the game and began to build up another super army of new Pokemon. When I learned that I could transfer all my old pokemon from the older games, I got all excited when I came back home and used the old Gameboy cable to start transferring my old super Pokemon. But my excitement quickly turned to utter dismay as I booted up the old version of Pokemon, and I discovered that something had happened to the battery save file and I lost every single one of those damn pocket monsters. I had collected all of them and it was just gone like that. I even had the rare ones like Mew and that other little one I can't remember the name of. All those hours and all that effort poured into those games just vanished. Never again, I thought to myself. Ruby/Sapphire was the last Pokemon game I ever played and I swore off the franchise altogether. People like Mr. Padilla can rave about the new Pokemon this and updated play mechanics that, but in the end, you're just wasting dozens of dozens of hours (if not entire days of your life) collecting and training and playing this game that could all just disappear in the blink of an eye. Thanks, but no thanks. Burn me once, shame on you, burn me twice, shame on me.
-M