By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo - Aonuma Suggests Future Zelda Games Could Feature A Top Down View

S.Peelman on 17 March 2014

Also, to supplement the 3D vs. 2D on WiiU argument, Zelda is an advertisement vehicle.

Maybe that's Nintendo's biggest gain from the franchise. Even if it doesn't sell as much as Mario does, everyone looks at the Zelda games to see what a Nintendo console is about; it always shows off the system. It's always a proof of a system's capability. It's continuously been critically one the highest rated franchises out there. It makes the press turn their heads. People buy a system for such a game and they have to go all out with this game if they want to retain any credibility in the eyes of the press, the industry and the consumers.

Putting out an 'underwhelming' Zelda game, one that isn't in the realm of expectations or one that doesn't push a system to it's limits, would be bad press.

Now directly at the premise in the OP; I wouldn't mind the main mechanics of A Link Between Worlds to return for handheld titles, which is what I think Aonuma is alluding to here. For consoles though, they just can't for reasons above and I personally would want my console experience to be as grand as possible which top-down games just don't do (even when Link's Awakening is my #2).



Around the Network
Mr Khan on 17 March 2014
oniyide said:
Mr Khan said:
Soundwave said:
Generally speaking Nintendo fans probably would've attacked someone 2 years ago if they said Mario 3D for the Wii U would be Mario 3D World, basically a direct sequel to 3D Land, not the "epic" Mario that they were going on about per se.

Or that Retro's new game would be another Donkey Kong Country.

Point is, Nintendo makes decisions based on their own internal design quirks and sales data not necessarily what their online community is clamouring for.

At the same time, in terms of finances, Zelda in recent years has done its best as a somewhat realistic game. Ocarina of Time and Twilight Princess being neck and neck for the top sales slot isn't really an accident. Neither did Link Between Worlds get a very good reception sales-wise, even as the critics loved it.

2D Zelda is less "risk", but a 3D Zelda has a certain degree of return, especially since you can apparently get a pretty epic game on a budget if you do it right (Xenoblade got a sequel, at its sales level, and that game had an excellent soundtrack and voice acting and larger worlds than any Zelda to date, and recall that Zelda *still* likely won't have voice acting going forward).

Money isn't really the issue in terms of scope, just as long as they can keep the development time down. Unfortunately the game could be another 4-year-cycle from Skyward Sword. That's where the money comes down, and changing it midway through would really just make it worse in that regard.

Plus, 3D World was plenty epic. DKCTF was definitely the one that was "low ambition" and a safe bet, but it was a game that needed to be made (not talking business here). Returns was more proof of concept, Tropical Freeze is the formula of a modern Donkey Kong game perfected. Much like 3D World itself was a game that needed to be made, to iron out the significant problems that held back 3D Land from being a truly superlative experience. 3D Land, again, was proof of concept, while 3D World was the grand adventure.


interesting, why did those two games needed to be made? What was wrong with their predecessors? IMHO DKC Returns was fine, the only thing i hated was the shoehorned terrible motion controls and that was fixed in the 3ds rerelease. 3dland was great it was just a bit on the easy side and even then once you unlock the extra campaign difficulty raised...BUT to be fair i have yet to play either, there was nothing in those games that screamed, lets do another becasue we didnt get the first ones right. Or at least they didnt need to make them now. IMHO Ninty needed games that was going to wow a move consoles. None of those really did it.

Mostly because DKCR was fairly limited (Diddy Kong help only). It wasn't "the whole package" as it were.

The disparity between 3D Land and World is larger than the disparity between DKCR and TF, definitely, but TF is a game in much the same vein.



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

etking on 17 March 2014

If Top Down means like Zelda 1, 3, 4 or Link between Worlds that would be great news. But I like Myamoto's idea of a first person Zelda, which was once considered for Ocarina of Time, more.



fleischr on 17 March 2014
daredevil.shark said:

I dont think this is a good idea. 

 


Perhaps he really means a top-down view similar to the kind used in Diablo or parts of GoW. Or the kind of top down view seen in the 2012 e3 tech demo. That wouldn't be bad...

I had read that to achieve the very traditional top down view for ALBW, all the graphics assets had to be slanted to give the proper effect. If he means the traditional top down view, they would be 100% into that. I don't think that fits into 'rethinking the conventions of Zelda' .



I predict NX launches in 2017 - not 2016

Pavolink on 17 March 2014
KylieDog said:

Nintendo skimping on dev budget because the game will not sell as much due to low userbase. I said this would happen many months ago.  SSB isn't going to include cutscenes either, skimping again.  I'd accuse Mario Kart of skimping but that series does it anyway with half the tracks being recycled from old games.


For the first time, I partially agree. I'll add a TP HD.

Hyrule Warrios

Top-down Zelda - 4 Swords similar game

TPHD

 

Enough Zelda for the rest of the gen.



Proud to be the first cool Nintendo fan ever

Number ONE Zelda fan in the Universe

DKCTF didn't move consoles

Prediction: No Zelda HD for Wii U, quietly moved to the succesor

Predictions for Nintendo NX and Mobile


Around the Network
Dulfite on 17 March 2014

I think it's pretty obvious that he is talking about future Zelda projects that haven't really started yet. LBW wasn't released until this year, and wasn't deemed a success until this year. Zelda U has been in development since 2010. I HIGHLY doubt they would totally change the formula of Zelda U from what it was for the first 3-4 years based on the success of a handheld game. I think FUTURE wii u/3ds games could follow the LBW forumula though.



Pavolink on 17 March 2014
etking said:

If Top Down means like Zelda 1, 3, 4 or Link between Worlds that would be great news. But I like Myamoto's idea of a first person Zelda, which was once considered for Ocarina of Time, more.


FP Zelda could be good. I'll like to play at least one game. If the view doesn't Fit they can go back to 3rd person-view.



Proud to be the first cool Nintendo fan ever

Number ONE Zelda fan in the Universe

DKCTF didn't move consoles

Prediction: No Zelda HD for Wii U, quietly moved to the succesor

Predictions for Nintendo NX and Mobile


TheLastStarFighter on 17 March 2014

I don't think too many people would complain if they got something that looked like this:

A Top-down Zelda that was given true AAA effort and a grown-up look could be something beautiful and amazing.  And since the original Zelda is still one of my favorite games of all time, I would be happy.

That said, I think what Aonuma is saying is that they can use 2D elements in the next Zelda - but it will still be 3D.  I'm really hopeful of this.  I've said for some time that Zelda could learn a few things from the Batman:Arkham series.  In particular, Batman allows a switch to a bit of a semi-locked camera top-down view for combat with a large group of thugs, and can zoom out and lock the view for certain boss battles.  I think this allows for better control and more action-intensive scenes.  I'd love for Zelda U to, like Batman, maintain the 3D for exploration and allow that feeling of immersion, but also allow for some 2D elements for gameplay.  I'd like to think this is where he is going with this.

I often actually use the dual analogue system in WW:HD to flip the camera overhead while wondering the overworld, and I really like it.

Also, I think Nintendo switching gears and skimping on this Zelda is extremely unlikely.  Aonuma gets a great deal of free reign in making his games.  He'll do the game he wants and take as much time as he wants.  It will cost a lot and have a lot of effort put into it, regardless of whether it is something we want in the end.



oniyide on 17 March 2014
Mr Khan said:
oniyide said:
Mr Khan said:
Soundwave said:
Generally speaking Nintendo fans probably would've attacked someone 2 years ago if they said Mario 3D for the Wii U would be Mario 3D World, basically a direct sequel to 3D Land, not the "epic" Mario that they were going on about per se.

Or that Retro's new game would be another Donkey Kong Country.

Point is, Nintendo makes decisions based on their own internal design quirks and sales data not necessarily what their online community is clamouring for.

At the same time, in terms of finances, Zelda in recent years has done its best as a somewhat realistic game. Ocarina of Time and Twilight Princess being neck and neck for the top sales slot isn't really an accident. Neither did Link Between Worlds get a very good reception sales-wise, even as the critics loved it.

2D Zelda is less "risk", but a 3D Zelda has a certain degree of return, especially since you can apparently get a pretty epic game on a budget if you do it right (Xenoblade got a sequel, at its sales level, and that game had an excellent soundtrack and voice acting and larger worlds than any Zelda to date, and recall that Zelda *still* likely won't have voice acting going forward).

Money isn't really the issue in terms of scope, just as long as they can keep the development time down. Unfortunately the game could be another 4-year-cycle from Skyward Sword. That's where the money comes down, and changing it midway through would really just make it worse in that regard.

Plus, 3D World was plenty epic. DKCTF was definitely the one that was "low ambition" and a safe bet, but it was a game that needed to be made (not talking business here). Returns was more proof of concept, Tropical Freeze is the formula of a modern Donkey Kong game perfected. Much like 3D World itself was a game that needed to be made, to iron out the significant problems that held back 3D Land from being a truly superlative experience. 3D Land, again, was proof of concept, while 3D World was the grand adventure.


interesting, why did those two games needed to be made? What was wrong with their predecessors? IMHO DKC Returns was fine, the only thing i hated was the shoehorned terrible motion controls and that was fixed in the 3ds rerelease. 3dland was great it was just a bit on the easy side and even then once you unlock the extra campaign difficulty raised...BUT to be fair i have yet to play either, there was nothing in those games that screamed, lets do another becasue we didnt get the first ones right. Or at least they didnt need to make them now. IMHO Ninty needed games that was going to wow a move consoles. None of those really did it.

Mostly because DKCR was fairly limited (Diddy Kong help only). It wasn't "the whole package" as it were.

The disparity between 3D Land and World is larger than the disparity between DKCR and TF, definitely, but TF is a game in much the same vein.

but what is the disparity? You really didnt give any information. You just said they were different. World added a four player option and cat suit. DKTF added mroe characters. 



milkyjoe on 17 March 2014

Picture the scene...

It's an E3 day in the future, and Nintendo are announcing their next console Zelda. Everyone is expecting something with an 'epic' kind of setting (that basically means 3D and non-cartoon graphics), and they show a quaint looking top-down 2D game.

The internet as we know it would cease to exist.



VGChartz