Well I proved one thing, Mr. Hooper...

This thread really shows how there can never be Zelda that can come close to pleasing everyone.

What would they add in dungeons that would break up all the fighting? It would be boring if all you ever did was killing in the dungeons, that would make that whole section hack'n'slash. That kind of thing work well in Zelda 1, but doesnt really cut it in newer games. Dont get me wrong, I'd still like to see more enemies in tve dungeons, but even more so, I'd like to see more challanging enemies. Enemies that are mini puzzles in and of itself, where you need to master certain skills to take them down, kinda like in TP.

And I'd like "hot spots" where there is enemies in the Overworld as well, but maybe not as tough as those in the dungeon they're guarding

I love this chat. great constructive criticism of my favorite game series.

I think puzzles are a necessity. they distinguish zelda from other games such as skyrim, dark souls, and monster hunter. and , to a different extent, shadow of the collosus. this doesnt mean that elements of these games shouldnt be incorporated into the next zelda game though...

I think link has to be the playable character. he is called link because he is the player's "link" into the game, That doesnt mean that zelda cant be playble, but if zelda is playable I want zelda to act as a "link" to the game world. that means zelda would have to be silent. and you could name her whatever you choose, just like link. I also think that it would be cool to mess with people by playing as an unmed zelda searching for the triforce of courage or something...

I really want the dungeons to become less predictable... fire dungeon, water temple, forest temple... let's rethink the dungeon types. majora's mask did this sort of... the grass temple was more of a grass/posion, the ice temple was more of an ice/fire, water was water/mechanical, and stone tower was like stone/sprirt. How about a funky magnetism temple? tropical temple? badlands temple? jungle temple?

1 Agreed! Even if I think that the puzzle elements can be toned down a bit, I still want them there.

2 I wouldn't mind playing as Zelda at all, but in a spinn off title, something like "Guardians of Hyrule" and that has a different focus than the original Zelda games.

3 Agreed! Maybe we could start out with the tried and true fire, water and forest temples and after them move away from the same old formula.

If it worked well in Zelda 1, why can't it work well in Zelda U? Those dungeons weren't boring at all. Were they primative to what they can be now? Of course they were. They were, however, still engaging. I keep bringing up Dark Souls because it's such a great example. The labrynthine level design of Dark Souls never gets boring. You're trying to find your way through a world. Make being inside a dungeon about finding your way out of it. You should be encouraged to exploit your way through a dungeon, just like in Zelda 1. Bombing your way through walls was great in Zelda 1 because you hardly ever had to. It was a way to skip entire sections of the dungeon. You were outwitting the game using logic. It's not a key. You didn't need to do that to progress. You chose to do that to make progression easier. "If these two rooms are next to each other, I should be able to blast my way through the connected walls." That feels awesome, and there's so much room to expand upon that. Add those elements with what Dark Souls already does with level design, and you have got the best dungeons in Zelda hystory. No predictable item "key" gimmicks or puzzles required.

As for your bit about enemies in TP, I thought they all were a cake walk. A big problem with Zelda enemies is how passive they are. They need to be far more aggressive, and much less effected by sword stun locking. They need to react better to you as well and many could do with a larger arsenal of moves. Not all of them need to be these amazing fighters, but even the bokoblins should be able to take you out if you don't pay enough attention. And they shouldn't be "mini puzzles." They should simply be challenging enemies that require skill to defeat.

And you shouldn't be able to bottle fairies. That's a joke. 99% of why these games aren't difficult is because of that. It's literally an easy button. I'd never have played a three heart run of WWHD on hard mode if I couldn't bottle fairies.

But hey, just put all those changes on Hero mode, and I'm happy. Let anyone else play Zelda for the story or whatever.

Puzzles are not what destinguish Zelda from those games at all. The exploration is. None of those games are as good at weaving in exploration into the core game design the way Zelda is. 

I don't think Zelda should ever be playable in a mainline Zelda game. Her role is not to be the hero. That doesn't mean that she's useless, but that's not her role. There's a hero, a goddess, and an evil. I won't mind if she takes on a supporting role like in Spirit tracks, but it wouldn't make sense for her to take on both the hero's role and the goddess' role. It's literally the same, in my opinion, as suggesting that ganon should be both the princess and the evil. Or that Link should also be the antagonist.

Now I'm okay if their rolls were spun. Maybe Zelda is an aggressive, even conquestial ruler with good intentions but dubious execution. Maybe Demise's newest vessel of hatred is Link's sibling, and Link goes in his journey to purge them of of their cursed fate. Both of these are far more interesting prospects than a playable Zelda. The only reason people want Zelda to be playable is frankly because she's the most iconic female character in the games and people just want to play as a girl. If that's the case, simply leave players with the option to play as a boy or a girl. It's not a big deal, and even though I think Link should say male, that makes far more sense than Zelda being the player.

The only benefit I can see to having Zelda being playable is going through a Zelda game with a character who can speak for herself, and therefore being able to empathize in a way never experienced in a Zelda game before. That could be interesting, but that's also something I'd only want to see in a spin off. Zelda has unique enough abilities to make for her own side game that doesn't play like normal Zelda's.

In the same way that captain toad offers a behind the scenes look at SM3DW, I can see a side game starring Zelda offering a behind the scenes look at typical Zelda games.

So true. Some of requests are ridiculous.

Did you just quote my post twice? :p regarding ur answer to my TP example of enemies being mini puzzles; what I liked about them, and is present in both OoT, and to a lesser extent the original LoZ, is that you had to learn a new technic to take them down. In LoZ u had to stab the darknuts in the back, and this is only a continuation of that. Learn how to take down certain enemies. Trick to attack you, roll to the side and stab them in the back. That kind of thing.

I dont see how we cant both have the kinds of dungeons u describe with a few puzzles thrown in? I to would line big, maze like dungeons with intiminating atmosphere and enemies, but Id also like to use my brain once in a while solving certain problems.