Journeys Through Sea and Sky: Environmental Presence

LockeAugust 10th, 2012 by Locke

“Goal-oriented gameplay and environmental presence exist in unavoidable tension. In moderation, sense of purpose can make a place come alive. But when we focus on moves, strategy, puzzles, and other performance-oriented tasks, we’re left with little cognitive room to appreciate the surrounding environment.” – Douglas Wilson, “Look Before You Warp”1

The above quote is from a chapter in The Legend of Zelda and Philosophy: I Link Therefore I Am (a collection of essays, edited by Luke Cuddy) in which Wilson describes the environment’s presence as paramount to the journey, whether it takes place in the real world or in a virtual one; focusing on the destination of a journey is in conflict with offering an immersive environment that gives meaning to the journey itself. Criticizing The Wind Waker‘s warp system for fragmenting the Great Sea’s “sense of place”, he emphasizes traveling between islands as a meaningful experience in itself:

“Sailing between distant islands—a largely uneventful voyage—can take more than ten minutes. During these trips, it’s precisely the virtual world that steals the spotlight: when gameplay mechanics are deemphasized, we can’t help but pay attention to the motion of the waves, the artfully rendered cloud patterns, the stylized wisps of wind, and the slowly changing positions of sun, moon, and stars. At night, even the background music fades away, leaving only a quiet soundscape of wind and waves.”

Skyward Sword presents the Sky as a successor to The Wind Waker‘s Great Sea – an attempt to expand the good and leave the bad behind. This of course merits comparison between the two. Has the Sky really succeeded as an engaging overworld, or has it failed to capture the charm of the Great Sea?

“Look Before You Warp” was written before Skyward Sword was released, so I don’t know Wilson’s views on the Sky, but there are many ways in which its design has a similar effect as warping across the Great Sea. For example, think how much meaning is lost, finding yourself at the base of a volcano without having watched it growing on the horizon while you approached.

In the debate over the superior overworld between the Sky and the Great Sea, there are a lot of commonly referenced elements of their design and their approaches at travel. Contrasting the two overworlds, I look at what makes a good journey, at which environment has more meaning.

Starting big, expansiveness is a frequently discussed attribute of both overworlds. This is where I’ll admit that the Great Sea went a little overboard: It takes a long time to get from one island to another. While it’s important for a journey to have distance and duration to build substance, after a while it does become tedious. As I alluded to above, there’s something meaningful about watching a volcano approach on the horizon, but the distance between the islands means that only a few islands will be visible on the horizon at any one time, which can only hold one’s wonderment for so long. It might have been more interesting if the islands were closer together so one could, for example, see an island or two past the destination. However, the Great Sea does stress the importance of experiencing firsthand the expanse between source and destination; the player feels a special humility when at the mercy of the sea and wind, with the safety of land merely a speck in the distance.

Skyward Sword‘s Sky addressed the Great Sea’s overzealousness by compacting the overworld, bringing the ‘islands’ closer together. Good idea. Unfortunately, the only three or four useful islands are just about as far apart as adjacent islands are in the Great Sea. Granted, not all the islands in the Great Sea are useful, and one will often travel to non-adjacent islands, but planning an efficient route is an important part of a journey. Planning routes is also present to some extent in the Sky, but is far less profound thanks to the small number of islands. They’re small in number because much of the content takes place on the Surface, which by itself doesn’t enter into this discussion. However, the fact that the Sky breaks up these overworld areas is very important. Recall descending straight to the foot of Eldin Volcano. In The Wind Waker, your journey fluidly transitions from land, to boat, across the sea, and back onto land. In Skyward Sword, this sequence is broken up by cutscenes, forcing you to relinquish your control of that portion of the journey.

These drawbacks of expansiveness are addressed differently in each game, and in this case the Sky presents the superior option for giving the journey a boost. The Great Sea’s method is Wilson’s primary topic in “Look Before You Warp”. Warping from point A to point B severely harms the journey, even more so than Skyward Sword‘s cutscenes between the Sky and the Surface. The Sky allows players to speed up their journey by flying through boost-rocks. This both gives the Sky some character and allows players to experience it. The player is in control the whole time (more or less), and there’s no disconnect between point A and point B.

Sometimes one might wish to open one’s map for a different perspective. The differences between the Great Sea’s and Sky’s maps are often taken for granted as minor gameplay elements, but they have a profound effect on the journey. The important difference is that the Sea Chart starts out empty, while the map of the Sky is complete except for the Thunderhead. Why does this matter? Consider this situation in each game: You’re traveling from Island A to Island B, and you come across Island C on your way. If you’re traveling through uncharted waters, then you don’t know what wonders Island C may have in store for you should you stop there. You might even look around for a fish to tell you more about it and put it on your map to revisit later. But right now your destination is Island B, so you move on after considering Island C. If you’re traveling through the Sky, you pull up your map, see that it’s just a rock, and continue to your destination without a second thought. Island C would become part of your journey in the Great Sea, adding to its meaning. In the Sky, Island C is an afterthought and your journey is focused almost entirely on the destination.

Perhaps more important than what one can see along one’s journey is what one can (or has to) do. When supporting the favored overworld, people call this involvement; those citing it as a negative aspect of their less favored overworld call it tediousness. However, both overworlds have both involving and tedious aspects.

Changing the wind’s direction is often cited as a tedious requirement for sailing on the Great Sea. Regardless, its main purpose is a noble one: Enforcing an awareness of the state of the environment while traveling, which does a lot to make the journey more involving. By controlling the wind, players gain some ownership of the environment through which their journey takes them. However, I will agree that conducting the Wind’s Requiem and watching the quick cutscene every time can become tedious. Perhaps a quicker method could have been devised. Buying bait for the Fishmen in order to fill in sections of the map is another example of a Great Sea feature with great potential in journeymaking – as I mentioned earlier – that ended up rather tedious in its execution.

There are plenty of other things to do on the Great Sea. Sure, you can head out in the right direction, put down your controller, and come back when you arrive, but you’re robbing yourself of the experience of coming across things like the platforms rising above the water. Usually these aren’t as rewarding as one would like, but it adds something dynamic to the journey: keeping track of which ones you’ve visited and which ones you’d like to revisit, discovering ones that you missed when you first passed through the area… you might even run into a Big Octo!

The Sky has its own fair share of things to keep it from feeling empty – a task made more difficult for the designers by adding the vertical aspect. These include fellow Knights, some Octoroks and Guays, and my favorite: Flying squirrels. But what proponents of the Sky look to as more involving than the Great Sea alternative is the Loftwing. It is actively controlled, unlike the King of Red Lions. This means you’ll never have nothing to do while flying through the sky.

It’s more involving, so it’s better than sailing, right? Not in this case, where it pulls your attention to controlling the bird and away from experiencing the journey. I’d go so far as to say controlling the Crimson Loftwing is tedious, though I know many haven’t had the same troubles as I have. How is repeatedly flapping to the top of the Sky and diving to the bottom any more enjoyable than sailing straight across the Great Sea? It may give the player more to do, but if one’s ride doesn’t need constant attention, one has more to see. And since the former is rather tedious and the latter more awe-inspiring, this is a case where seeing adds more to the journey than doing.

But what can give an environment more meaning than its history and its importance to the story that unfolds within its boundaries? During the development of each game, the story was constructed using the game’s overworld as a base. From the Great Sea, the developers came up with the story of the flood that buried Hyrule beneath the waves, making way for a new society untainted by Ganon’s evil desires, much like the Biblical flood.2 With the Sky in place, the developers surrounded the concept with the heroine-goddess Hylia and a mysterious world with ancient secrets to explore down below.3

Discovering a long-lost land may be a common element between the two stories, but there are several radical differences that affect how the story is tied to the overworld. One of these becomes evident at the very beginning of each game: Link’s familiarity with the world. In The Wind Waker, Link is still rather young and likely hasn’t seen much if anything of the world outside his home island of Outset. Aptly named, this is the island from which his journey begins. That is, as soon as Link boards the pirate ship, he’s experiencing a new world.

Link is much older in Skyward Sword and is already proficient at riding a Loftwing. The sky is no mystery to him; it’s his playground. In order for the Sky to work, the player must immediately become familiar with it, hence the tutorial Bird Riding Ceremony. In terms of the “hero’s journey” – a literary pattern which most Zelda games, including The Wind Waker and Skyward Sword, closely follow – all of this takes place before the “call to adventure”. The Sky is part of Link’s normal life, before it is interrupted by events calling him to the land below. While embarking on the Great Sea marks passage through the “threshold” – the hero’s journey concept of the transition into the large, unknown world – the Sky remains inside this threshold.

This has serious implications on what meaning is added and how while journeying through these environments. Link encounters many distinct and interesting cultures in his travels across the Great Sea, thanks to their effective isolation (though they still have boats and airmail). The variety of these cultures is matched by the variety of their ties to the past. While Windfall Island is a marker of progress and a promising future, the people of Dragon Roost Island and Forest Haven commune with ancient deities and guard sacred pearls. Tingle helps uncover the legend of a heroic fairy who lived before the flood (not to mention in a different world entirely). The Fishmen encountered in the midst of the journey hint at artifacts from the mysterious sunken kingdom.

While the Sky itself is bereft of all this, its destinations – the regions on the surface – certainly are not. Each region features at least one race specialized to its environment, with ties to the past in the form of their guardian Dragons. Even the Fishmen have an analog in Gorko. So what exactly is the difference here? It would be difficult to argue that the large regions themselves are somehow inferior to the Great Sea’s islands.

Rather, one must consider this along with the previous point detailing Link’s experience. The Great Sea is new to Link, and by extension, the player. Hyrule is more mysterious yet. The characters on the Great Sea teach Link about the sea itself in addition to how the ancient kingdom is now viewed. The Fishmen go on and on about Triumph Forks, inspiring the player to find out the truth behind this hysterical legend.

On the other hand, Gorko is obsessed with the long lost sky people, with which Link is already quite familiar. It’s a matter of perspective: the people of the Great Sea wonder about the history hidden below; the people of the Surface wonder about the history hidden above. This doesn’t matter for the story itself (where the change in perspective is refreshing), but it does impact an analysis of the overworlds.

In learning about the flooded Hyrule, great revelations are made about the current state of the world. A couple of the islands contain entrances to submerged temples – portals to the old world. The initial call to adventure (Aryll) becomes tied to something much more sinister. The player comes to realize that the treasures he or she is collecting actually come from an ancient civilization that used to live on the seabed before the sea did. The water is no longer a simple natural obstacle taken for granted, but a tomb for a legend that finds relevance in the immediate journey.

Revelations in Skyward Sword are more about Zelda than about the Sky. Gorko’s comments are meaningless, their only purpose being for a comical way of introducing gameplay elements. The player quickly learns about the land below and learns progressively more about Zelda throughout the game, but the Sky itself remains as impersonal as ever. There is no more “place”-ness.

These comparisons betray the focus in designing each overworld. The Great Sea was designed with a strong environmental presence through which players can add meaning to their journeys. The Sky was designed as a means to an end; with the focus on getting the player to the next destination so the story can progress without regards to the Sky itself, travel was allowed to become more engaging at the expense of its sense of “place”.

Skyward Sword‘s exaltation of story progression extends beyond the performance-oriented gameplay featured heavily in its transportation overworld, which could indicate an unpleasant trend toward the “action” side of “action/adventure”. From the way the story is structured to Fi’s active role in guiding the player to where the action is and urging the player toward the objective, the player’s surroundings are almost always overshadowed by the goal.

Constantly reminded of the task at hand, the player hardly has a chance to simply soak in the environment. Must a game and its overworld go to such lengths to avoid being boring that it loses its quality as an adventure? What is a journey with no reflection of its meaning for the hero?

1. Wilson, Douglas. “Look Before You Warp”. The Legend of Zelda and Philosophy: I Link Therefore I Am (Popular Culture and Philosophy) ed. Luke Cuddy. Perseus Books Group. Nov 11, 2008. pp. 17-28.
2. “Okay, so we know Hyrule has been flooded and it’s at the bottom of the ocean, but then the question is how did it get there?” – Eiji Aonuma, GDC Roundtable, May 17th, 2004.
3. “We settled on having the sky and surface world, and on top of that, it was going to tell the story of the creation of Hyrule, with the untold story of the origin of the Master Sword. So, looking back at the series so far, we began knitting together the various elements.” – Hidemaro Fujibayashi, Iwata Asks: Skyward Sword Volume Six: The Dense Script and Direction.

Share this post



  • http://axlethebeast.com/ Axle the Beast

    This article is excellently written and just great in general, though I do disagree with probably about half of it.

    I think the main problem I have lies with Douglas Wilson’s outlook on
    this. He sees the gameplay along the journey as a distraction, but I see
    that as the core of the game. Maybe in another game or series, where
    the environment itself is supposed to be a huge part of the game (like
    Shadow of the Colossus), this would be a more compelling argument, but
    Zelda has always been gameplay-driven since day 1, and that never
    changed. So it seems like an odd argument, regardless of how much The
    Wind Waker may have tried to deviate from that.

    Either way, I don’t think they’re mutually exclusive in any sense. I
    look at both aspects — gameplay, and atmosphere and meaning during
    travel — as basic aspects of game design. Gameplay has never distracted
    me from a meaningful environment; it distracts me from a meaningless
    environment, which I feel the Great Sea largely was. I get the idea of
    it being humbling, but when you talk about what there is to SEE, I can’t
    agree because, at least for me, there WASN’T anything to see. The
    situation is the same with the Sky, and I think that’s the real reason
    it seems less meaningful: the overworlds in either game aren’t deep to begin with, and it
    becomes especially apparent when you actually have something else to do.

    • triforceofepicness6636

      Man, is page like the write something long that no one will read??? }:(
      .

      • http://axlethebeast.com/ Axle the Beast

        Protip: Don’t go to a page that says “article” unless you want to read.

        • triforceofepicness6636

          I read it, but I was joking!

          • Link

            Why make a stupid joke then… grow up.

      • Midnafan

        i can’t understand that sentence at all…

        • Dialgonie Murkrow

          Agrees with midnafan. ^

        • triforceofepicness6636

          Oh sorry.. will fix!

          • Free Advice

            It would work better if you had used quotes, like:
            …the “write something long that no one will read” page???
            It places emphasis where I think you wanted it.

          • triforceofepicness6636

            Ooooooh! Free advice! Nice! *party party*

    • Churzeh

      there wasn’t much to see… but in the time I have spent sailing across the great sea, I have noticed ever detail, sound effect, and there is no game environment I know better. You take in every little detail

  • Midnafan

    O.o….Dude, i just wanna get there…. but seriously, i actually agree with alot of what you’re saying, its just too bad that there’s so much of it i’ve forgotten most of what i just read :/

    • JuicieJ

      So you agree, but you can’t remember what you agree with?

      • Midnafan

        well i know nothing in the article came up that i particularly disagreed with, otherwise i would remember it and would have commented on it. although there were alot of good points in this article and its well-written, my point is basically that it rambled on about something that doesn’t seem all that important, or even noticable for that matter. its still a great article.

  • JuicieJ

    I’ll admit that the Sea had pretty good presence in terms of feeling like we were actually out sailing the waters, but that doesn’t automatically translate into good gameplay. When there’s nothing to do while traveling, that’s a problem. The Great Sea really failed hard with this, and while the Sky didn’t nail it perfectly, at least it had a good balance between the Great Sea and the travel in the DS games. It also wasn’t aiming for exploration, so it has some slight reasoning for not being incredibly adventurous. It should have had more, but it’s still infinitely better than the Great Sea.

    A very well-written article, though, Locke. You did make some good points, but I just can’t agree with all of them.

    • Tehlul

      Wind Waker was giving off a sense of depth
      A boy, a boat, a sail, and a great open sea
      I really believe it boils down to prefrence
      The Sailing in Wind Waker didn’t at all bother me
      And it wasn’t like there was absolutely nothing to do,
      You could collect treasure, fight enemies on the platforms,
      Chart islands,
      All while going to your next destination
      But I believe it does wear down during the infamous Triforce chart quest

  • http://www.facebook.com/jonathan.phillips.96 Jonathan Phillips

    I think the Great Sea was awesome. Even if it did get stale from time to time. Oh, and I wanted more from the Sky.

    • Lost woods dweller

      indeed, the wind waker is my favourite zelda game, then MM then OOT. I personally didn’t get sick of the sea until I had to chart it all and trawl it for the triforce shards, but it wasn’t terrible. In fact….. hate me if you want to but….. I haven’t been horribly impressed with a zelda game since WW. (except maybe minish cap) I liked SS’s controls but, I dunno, I just didn’t “connect” with it the way I did with the older games……

  • BlackRaven6695

    Flying Squirrels in The Sky? I never saw any of those…

    • JuicieJ

      They’re near Pumpkin Landing.

    • Locke64

      They appear over most islands if you start skydiving sufficiently high above them. If you touch them, they’ll dive in formation with you, and if you get each one you get 20 rupees.

      • JuicieJ

        Oh, I didn’t know they were in other areas.

      • BlackRaven6695

        Oh, yeah those multi-coloured things! I thought they were kites or something.

        • JuicieJ

          It’s hard to tell what they are. They tend to fly away pretty quickly.

  • BlackRaven6695

    That Fishman has Majora eyes.

  • GSusanj

    I’ve said this before, but as it fits here, please allow me to rehash:

    I enjoyed sailing, but it was too much sailing. It was a wonderful thing (even though my Dad, a consummate sailor found it annoying because the mechanics of how winds effect sails and boat speed was really off), but less could have been more. I really wished it could have just been a smaller portion of the game, perhaps more land to traverse before taking to the waters again (a lot more land). Even better for me if it were just a fragment of the game.

    • GSusanj

      oh, and if Wilson is really hard up for sailing for the sake of sailing and watching waves and weather and so on, there are some really great sailing simulators on the market. The rest of us (or at least most of us) like to warp.

  • HerosShade

    I don’t see any problems with the Sky not offering much for exploration, or even entirely agree with that statement. I also don’t agree that SS didn’t allow one to soak in the aesthetic beauty of the environment:
    1) If you wanted to, you could have checked out islands before they were useful in the game. This added a sense of exploration, mystery, curiosity, and anticipation; like you know that an island is important later on, but you don’t know what will be there. I personally found this on the Bug Mini-Game Island, Beedles Island, The rupee-game island with the creepy clown guy, and many others. One could also place a beacon on an island that had multiple treasure chests or for some reason you don’t want to loose track of that island.
    2) I enjoy huge vistas and being awed by the beauty of the environment, but the sky being just a bunch of clouds and circular islands that almost all look alike was not intended to be what the Great Sea was in that respect. The surface, however, was. The three very unique environments the new approach in game design, and the linearity of the game-play to an extent, and maybe the emphasis on dowsing, all help the player explore and take in the feeling of each place, even if your goal is getting from point A to B and there is no freedom to roam freely. While most games used the over-world for exploration and huge vistas, and this was well executed in TP, SS tried something different. We shouldn’t assume that the over-world has to serve the same purpose for each Zelda title; Nintendo obviously doesn’t.

    • JuicieJ

      That last statement. Thank you. Too many people assume that the overworld in every Zelda game must function exactly the same way for it to be “proper” or “good”. Not true. SS’s overworld had its flaws, but it was brilliantly-designed and was a nice change of pace from the norm.

      • HerosShade

        exactly

        • Ryan

          Totally agree with you, I have never been disappointed yet with each overworld in Zelda games. I was awed by the Great Sea, Hyrule Field, The Sky, TP Hyrule field and provinces. They all did something different. If they were all the same wouldn’t we be getting of bored of Zelda by now? Up until Wind Waker, the overword was just a way to get from one end to another with a few secret grotto’s scattered around. Nintendo changed it with Wind Waker and gave us a massive overworld that I personally found a joy to travers on boat. I rarely warped in the sea until my second run through. The sky was interesting but I wish they put more in it. My first time through I ignored the green light and went straight for the Lumpy Pumpkin. Twilight Princess was a response to people not happy with Wind Waker so went back to the old way of doing an overworld. I like variety in my Zelda games, it keeps them fresh.

    • http://www.zeldadungeon.net/ bob

      I wouldnt say that the surface was as big as u imply, Eldin was extremly tiny, and faron wasn’t that big either. None of the surface had much exploration or secrets to uncover either. I f transportaiton is going to be a “big element of zelda” nintendo cant slack of on it and make it underused, and simply a way of getting around.
      i respect your opinion, but i dont agree with it.

  • http://www.zeldadungeon.net/ bob

    the sky in skyward sword has always been just how u get around, it wasn’t very important due to the lack of room and thingsw to explore. It was less of an experience and more of a bother. The islands were almost to close and all the islands that u could explore in SS were boring to. The goddess cubes were a snore to me and it may have been rewarding to colect them, but it wasn’t fun or exciting.
    Even though i’m not a fan of the sky, it did get a few things right. I did like the controls and the senery of the sky, it looked beautiful and felt imersive, but u only used it for about a tenth of the time.I say the sky would have been amazing if they spread out the areas. I think that the locations were u drop down to the land should have been spread out into tree diffrent areas, each of the areas could have had a diffrent enviorment and diffrent islands. the sky seemed like a last minuite thing that didnt take as much work as the sea. I don’t think they should have made it nearly as big as the great sea, but they should have put more exploration elements into the game, because u need exploration in zelda! I hope in the next zelda game they combine the good elements in both of these games and make an amazing transportation system.
    Sorry for the long comment :)

  • Lady Midna

    to:axle the beast
    from: your number one fan lady midna
    I agree with you. you are right. by the way are you by any chance a brony?
    from:lady midna
    p.s. if you know mases please tell him that i am a big fan!