I think it will capture the spirit of that game as have greater aesthetic similarities to what that world brings, but as for strict mechanics and world design, it's more similar to WW. And WW is the closest 3D Zelda game to the game mechanics of the original NES Zelda anyway, so it's not such a huge leap from Zelda NES even with the WW comparison.

ufffs

WW is an awesome game!

I think that's valid. I like the scenery in Zelda U better as well as it does offer itself to more variety. However, that variety is purely aesthetic. I don't find sailing in WW boring because all of the fun little things you do in that game while sailing have nothing to do with the sea or how it looks. I mean, it's all dressed in a 'sea' motif, but they can all be done on land with no sacrific to the fun had. Submarines are mini dungeons. Fairy Islets are fairy caves. Treasure everywhere. Tons of pit stops. B-Lining it from location to location has got to be boring, but I can't imagine why anyone would feel compelled to do that.

I do understand the clostrophobic feeling that seeing the same type of setting can have, though. I don't fault WW for it, because it fits so well with that theme and they do as much as possible to change up that aesthetic constantly, whether it's the day/night cycle, the lighning storms, the ghost ships, or the cyclones. And because greater scenic variety is seen from the various islands you enter, offering aesthetic pacing.

One thing I hope to see from Zelda U is an expansion of this dynamic scenery. I thing the day/night cycle is pretty much a staple now in the series, and weather too, but I'd love to see an introduction of seasons. To see the changes of the overworld from season to season would offer an emmense feeling of scale, as it would make you feel like you've been on your journey for months instead of just weeks. And obviously it would offer an unparelelled variety in scenery. Link's garb can change slightly too, to fit the weather.

I totally agree that people have been way too quick to compare Zelda U to Skyrim and then go on to say that Zelda U looks too empty in comparison. I don't think we should try to apply any pre-conceived ideas of "open world" to this Zelda game. Keep in mind that even Miyamoto has insisted that Zelda U is not "open world" but rather he used the term "vast."

You have an interesting point about comparing Zelda U's over-world mechanics to WW as opposed to assuming that the over-world will be similar to Skyrim. We could definitely make sailing in WW boring if all we did was to go from point A to point B without any exploration. The point is to explore and find countless hidden secrets. Zelda U's over-world won't have NPC's to speak to every 20 steps but it may actually force you to go off the beaten track and uncover well-hidden secrets that won't be obvious to you from horseback. This is actually a lot closer to real-life exploration and I can see Zelda U being a masterpiece if this game mechanic is pulled off successfully.

interesting read.

I think Zelda U's overworld will be more about interaction with nature and interaction with animals,humans etc..so there wont be chart treasures like in WW maybe something similar but not to that extent. of course im expecting a lot of side quests considering how big the world will be and its also something that bothered me in previous zelda games there werent many as I personally wanted.

and I want not one town but two towns or multiple(not likely) more human races without zoras and gorons.. I want to chase those horses from the trailer maybe even train them..one thing miyamoto said "last time there were apples" hopefully that means a organic breathing world that changes and is never the same.

I don't think it will be more about nature interation as much as a deliberate addition of it. As in, on top of former exploration features, there will be more to do with wild life. I wonder how they will handle when players eventually get the idea to shoot at the wild life, though. I can't imagine Zelda with a hunting mechanic at all. Wouldn't that bump it to an M rating right there?

I can see you being able to feed the wild horses and pet them and little things like that, but I think they will give an immunity to wild life, similar to the cats in Bayonetta or the children in TP. Or you can hurt them, but then a bunch will come and attack you like cucco's and pigs. 

I think villages are a given. We definitely will see human races, but I think that we will also see other races as well. I hope that they are completely new races, though. It's interesting to think of, but I think that Link won't see his green tunic at all this game. I think that the clothes he is in will actually be what he will have through out the game. It's not really imperitive that he be in green or where a hat, so I'm actually fine with the idea of those being his clothes. It feels fresh. I'll get over him being right handed also, though it's really the sheild being on the left side that bothers me. (Holding the right trigger to block with your left arm feels backwards to me)

No. Everybody is just gonna hate it like they do whenever a new Zelda game comes out and complain that it is not like A Link to the Past or Ocarina of Time. It happens everytime. A new Zelda game comes out and everybody shits on it.

@OP

I'm sorry, but those comparisions are an incredible stretch.

The reasons I didn't care for Wind Waker, personally, were:

I just didn't care for the art style. Never have, never will.

The overall game story just wasn't as compelling or interesting (to me) as most other Zelda games.

And lastly, yes, the sailing did get boring as fuck.


Even knowing VERY little about Zelda U, it looks to have NONE of that. I love huge worlds, and I love exploring. WW did not have a huge world, nor did it have all that much worthwhile exploring. It had a LOT of water, and it had a LOT of sailing, and it featured a sprinkle of islands that, for the most part, weren't that interesting to explore.

This world, by contrast, looks lush and awesome. I would be all for a part (or parts) of Zelda U's world, that feature some boat action, like a nice coastal region, perhaps a big lake, etc. I'm totally down with SOME boat action and water, for sure. Just not that making up most of the damn game. The Zelda U world, even what tiny bit we've seen of it, which is NOT going to be what the whole game world looks like, looks amazing. They showed us ONE area of the game, that is mostly grassland with some small forests. There are no doubt going to be other, very different parts of this Hyrule, that feature vastle different terrain, such as mountains, snow/ice, dessert, coastal regions (hopefully), a volcanic "Mt. Doom" type area, a much more dense/bigger forest area, etc.

Who knows. But the entire game certainly isn't just going to be a "grass ocean". And this won't be anything at all like Wind Waker, which, in spite of appearances, was honestly one of the more linear Zeldas. This game promises to possibly be the LEAST linear since the original. And that's a-ok by me.

So in short, I really didn't like WW. But barring any incredibly silly, tacked on gimmick BS, I'm sure I will at least like, if not love this game.

Well, I guess this is a great thing for me, considering Wind Waker is not only my favorite Zelda game, but my favorite game of all time (rather, the HD version is, since I've yet to play the original). Though I think Zelda U may just surpass it. It seems very unified, lively and free. I can just imagine how much fun repeated playthroughs will be considering the fact that there doesn't seem to be much limitation to anything.

Its not necessarily just aesthetic though; variation in terrain height can hide secrets, or allow you to get a vantage point to see your objective. Different habitats can play host to different creatures, items, etc.