Things to change:

1. Voice acting. The mumbling is annoying and tiresome. The NPC's should talk to me.
2. Fast action. Having recently played WW for the first time on Wii U, I'll say that it trumps more recent motion-titles for having scenes where you're swamped by foes. I like it. It's not quite Zelda 1 or ALttP levels, but it's good, and helped by having the camera controlled with the right analogue. I hope they run with this further and have some great frenzied scenes where you're chopping or shooting everything.
3. Skill-based combat. Linked to item 2, I want less reliance on auto-aiming and Z-tracking. It has its place but I like to control things.
3. New music. OoT had some pretty epic new music. I'd like some new music when I enter house or whatever, not the same old melody. It's boring now.
4. Dungeons that aren't based on one item. I hate the get an item and use it to solve every problem dungeon formula. I want to use all gadgets, all the time.... and not know which one to use by default.
5. NO HINTS! I don't want my sword to tell me to look up and shoot an arrow through a whole in the ceiling. I want to figure that out myself.
6. Open world with lots to explore and some cool creepy places. Take me back to Zelda 1, and to a lesser extent, 2 and 3.
7. No stupid grind or insta-death quests to get an orb. I don't want to go to a shadow world or turn into a dog.
8. No gimmick. No waggle, no bird, no wolf... just classic Zelda action.
9. New outfits. And not just stupid civilian clothes before you get your green PJ's. In Zelda 1 you started in green, but most people wore the blue tunic (ring) for most of the game and fought the final battle in bad-ass Red. Visual upgrades to your character have been lost for decades... that's just sad.

Stop living in the past... And I'm saying this as a historian...

Blowing up random walls with no indication that it's breakable isn't hard. It's tedious, repetitive and poor game design. My favorite game is Metroid Prime 2, so please spare me the bullshit about not liking hard games. 

That's the problem.  A historian doesn't know what it was like to experience a situation, and you don't.  In order to experience Zelda 1 in its true beauty, you have to iliminate any knowledge of other games and of Zelda 1 itself.  You talk about blowing up random walls as being random, but you're missing the magic.  Think about entering a game world more massive and detailed than anything you have experienced before and where anything is possible.  That is the feeling of entereing Zelda 1.  You entere a room and any wall might be breakable.  Not just ones with cracks, not only ones that reveal their secret with some special item.  Any wall might have a secret.  Playing through it now the magic is gone because you view it as tedious grinding to complete an old game.  But before it was known that bombs would open secret holes, the discovery that they do was amazing.  It was like walking through a forest in real life where any random tree might have a secret staircase under it.  And secret random bomb walls was actally a pretty minor part of the game.  Most of the bombing that was necessary had a clue and you just had to figure it out... such as the shape of the dungeon or the growling of a monster next door.

That kind of "anything is possible" is what they should capture from the original.  It's something you kind of get in GTA today.  Just say here's a cool world, here are some gadgets and if you try different things, you might find something cool.

I know, SS' directors Fujibayashi must be the one in charge.

Actually, the whole point of historiography is to sympathize and understand the situation you're studying. If you're studying medieval history you need to think like a medieval person. That's hard to achieve and only someone with mastery over a certain subject can achieve it. And it by no means is perfect, but that doesn't negate the whole study.

So yeah, you have no clue what you're talking about. Are you saying only survivors of the Holocaust are allowed to speak about it? Because then we have a problem in the not so distant future...

What I just described is called the "Verstehen" method. There's no point to act like an elitist here. You think that with my passion of gaming and history I never combined the two? Because you're wrong if you think that. 

The Souls games will never sell like Zelda games for a good reason. Most people don't want a super hard game. That's not to say that there isn't a market for games like the Souls series, but it's never going to sell 9 million copies like TP.

The difficulty is not what makes the souls games good. The difficulty is simply used as a tool to invoke an experience in the player. That's an experience that used to be felt in Zelda dungeons. If you think of the difficulty is what makes dark souls great, then you're entirely missing the point. When I say I want the Zelda dungeons to be "like dark souls" I'm not simply saying that I want the dungeons to be brutally punishing. I already said that I want to difficulties, so I don't care if people want to play an easier game. that's not the point.

When you used to go into a dungeon, there was a feeling of intimidation, and then a feeling of satisfaction over overcoming a great trial. That is literally the antithesis of modern Zelda dungeons. I want to feel like I actually need a dungeon map again. I haven't used one since the first Zelda. You don't need them to beat the dungeons now. They used to be labyrinths. Bombs were used to create shortcuts. I don't remember a single time where are used a bomb for a necessary part of that game aside from the dodongo boss fight. When you went into a dungeon, you felt like the odds were stacked against you. That's what I want from Zelda U. I want to explore a huge over world, stumble apon a dungeon, enter it and immediately feel like the odds are stacked against me, blindly find my way to a map through curiosity and exploration avoiding traps along the way, find secrets and shortcuts using logic and experience instead of item gimmicks, and then find my way to a great boss that greatly tests my combat skills instead of my item usage. All or most of those are in dark souls, which is why I made the comparison.

And I would keep an eye on Bloodborne's sales numbers to see if people don't really want challenging gameplay.

That doesn't make much sense. If they disnt use puzzles. They'd obviously add other things in their place. And the overworld is used to break up all the fighting, since you'll me doing much less of it there. Exploration is supposed to break up all the combat, not puzzles. Just because the dungeons don't have puzzles, doesn't mean that they'll just be like Skyrim.

@ Bolded, the maps will usually show rooms you haven't been to (although if I recall correctly, some do not even appear on the map), which can hint at some of the bombable walls, but it will not make you suspect a bombable wall between two rooms you have already visited. Your sword makes the regular slashing sound no matter what wall you hit; the 'ping' sound of a bombable wall was added in a later entry (I think A Link to the Past, even though that one's bombable walls are clearly cracked).

@ Italicized, Miyamoto created Zelda from his experience exploring caves as a child with a lantern. Item usage is integral to the core experience.

Second bolded sentence amounts to, "I don't want Zelda to be like Dark Souls, I just want it to feel like Dark Souls," which is pretty funny. You liken Miyamoto to Picasso painting like Da Vinci, yet Zelda represents an extremely unique mix of action and true adventure as it is, and you are the one urging for it to be more like another already existing experience!

I have provided a detailed analysis of The Legend of Zelda to support my argument, and you have responded with your best "nuh-uh." In conclusion,

I didn't include a detailed analysis because yours fails to prove your point. You don't prove anything, so there's no reason to go into a detailed analysis of why a dungeon in NES zelda 1 proves you wrong. The entire dark souls series was inspired by the experiences in Zelda 1, so Miyamoto would not be copying someone else's work. He'd be "copying" his own. And a lantern in a cave is an optional tool to make exploring easier, just like the bombs and lanterns in Zelda 1. They were not an integral peace to exploring the dungeons. They were tools, just like the maps and the compass, to make exploring easier. There were no lock and key moments with those items.

No analysis needed. Nu huhs suffice.