Powerful enemies discouraging unprepared travelers from progressing to an area they are ill prepared for is literally a Zelda 1 thing. Only afterwards did Mmos and, you guessed it, Dark Souls, adopt it and Zelda abandon it.

As I said, lighting a torch is problem solving. Solving a problem is essentially a puzzle, logic or not. 

We are just going to have to agree to disagree on this. Guess we'll see when it comes out. I just hope many enjoy the game. 

Do you like the Prime series? Because the producer of those games said the world was designed so it was safe to explore and the only real danger were the bosses. They didn't want people to become afraid of exploring the world. 

And I think it worked out just fine. 

Problem-solving is not "essentially a puzzle." There is no way around that. When you turn on the lamp in your house, you didn't solve the puzzle. When you open a door in your house, you didn't solve the puzzle. Doing the same thing in a video game isn't solving a puzzle.

If items are used to create logical shortcuts through dungeons like bombing walls of connected rooms in Zelda 1, then I can get behind that. I can't get behind halting my progress to solve what is always a mundane puzzle. And don't think I can get behind item exclusive secret areas either unless it's for inconsequential rewards like a bunch of rupees or something like that.

Like I said. Sprawling dungeons where you're solving one macro puzzle throughout work if they are separate from the main dungeons. Have those be separate, though. There's not many puzzles in Zelda where you get them wrong. You just don't get them correct yet. Also all of those things aren't causing intimidation through puzzle solving. The puzzles are just acting as a tedious key to open a door. You take your time solving a puzzle, you get it wrong, and then your intimidated by enemies or a trap. You are intimidated by two mini bosses, and then calm down to solve a puzzle.

I don't think I've ever played a Zelda game where you aren't just waiting for the boss to attack so you can counter attack aside from Zelda 1. And you're never fooling a boss into attacking you. You're waiting for them to because until they do, they are usually literally invincable and you have no other option but to wait. With Dark Souls, the game teaches you to create openings for yourself. It can teach you to be patient or be punished. They are almost always vulnerable, but they also know that you're vulnerable and will try to harm you. They are defensive through offense, which Zelda can stand to learn. I'd actually rather more of the boss fights be aggressive like in Bloodborne than passive like in Dark Souls as it fits Zelda better in my opinion.

Things like interrupting a boss mid attack to stun them and create an opening is what I really want to see in Zelda bosses. You don't need to do that, but it would limit your effectiveness if you didn't. Options. With recent Zelda bosses, there's always only one way to defeat them. In the Souls games and Bloodborne, there are many. Since bomb arrows are confirmed, let that be a way to stun large bosses. If you are able to score a hit on them while they are attacking, then they become dazed temperarily, opening them up for a follow up, however the bosses actually are smart enough to dodge obvious attacks. Same with the sheild bash. If you can block a powerful hit, there's a chance you can daze the boss, but they can also punish you by knocking you off your balance if you abuse it. The parry system in WW would have been so much better if there were no visual cue. If you could only parry by paying attention to the way your enemy telegraphs an attack and also the alert sound, it would have felt less cheap. Also, they should have had you manually attack the enemy after you parry rather than it simply being automatic. Press A to parry and then time pressing B correctly to successfully execute the counter attack.

But yeah, the boss fights in Dark Souls are awesome.

Yes, items could be used to create short cuts - that's a pretty good use of them; reward the player for finding them by giving them the option of short cuts and things. The item-specific area would contain rupees or heart containers, as a reward for finding the area and stuff like that.

What I'm suggesting is that you NEED to take your time solving the puzzles; or else enemies or traps will be let loose. Get he puzzle wrong might open the WRONG door, letting enemies at ya. Imagine having only two hearts left, and you have to solve this puzzle, but if you get it wrong two darknuts will appear. Now, THAT'S a pretty intimidating situaition.

Sitting in a room taking your time to solve a puzzle is exactly what I don't want. To me, having strong enemies halt your attempts at solving a puzzle is frustrating more than it is intimidating. Your feeling of intimidation is shattered as soon as you halt your progress to solve a puzzle, and then the enemies just mean that you have to spend even more time solving that puzzle. Not because it's difficult, but because it's padding. It just forces you to stay in the same room for longer than you should need to.

But it doesnt have to be like that though. Puzzles can be intimidating if you know that IF you screw up, you might be attacked or set off some traps. Both of which would test your skills. Its really no difference from entering a room to fight a mini boss so that you can get a key. Whats the mini boss for? Testing your skills and halting your progress. Puzzles would test your WITS, and if youre not careful enough those puzzles would set of traps to test your skills.