Linearity in Zelda

[JuicieJ]

Please read the whole thing before responding. The first two paragraphs can be somewhat misleading of the main point at the end.

Linearity has been a popular topic in Zelda over the past few years, and it's also been a common complaint. But I really don't see why. People act like it's practically ruined the series, saying it's not "traditional Zelda," which isn't a very valid argument to me, as it's more about keeping the basic aspects of a series than keeping the same style all the time. But beyond all that, one thing that really annoys me is that people treat Modern Zelda like it started the linear pattern, which isn't true. Linear aspects in Zelda go back to the early days in 1993 with the release of Link's Awakening.

A few of you may be staring at the computer screen saying, "What?" right now and thinking I'm crazy, but it's true. The dungeons in Link's Awakening have to be done in order, as the owl has to tell Link about where to go next before he can move on. It's possible to to skip some of the dungeons, but the item in the "correct" dungeon must be obtained first, and by that point the dungeon is already halfway through. Yet I fail to see one complaint about this, let alone an acknowledgement of it.

But linear aspects in Zelda didn't just die there and come back recently. Two games after LA, Majora's Mask came about with a linear story. Now some of you are probably really thinking I'm crazy, but look at how the story plays out. To move on to the next area (i.e. Swamp to Mountain), the item in the previous area had to be attained. Without the bow, getting into Snowhead would be impossible. Without the ability to buy a Powder Keg as Goron Link, Epona couldn't be gotten to get over the fence blocking the entrance to the Great Bay. And without the Zora Mask and Hookshot from Great Bay, getting into the depths of Ikana Canyon wouldn't be possible, either.

Don't think I'm saying Majora's Mask isn't open, though. I know it's less linear than the more recent games, as we can get the items and then go straight to the next area. However, that's not the point. By the time the items have been received, either half of the dungeon is completed (Woodfall and Snowhead) or it's time to move onto the dungeon in that area (Great Bay). Yes, MM has quite a bit of freedom to it, so it's more linear-ish, but a decent amount of linearity was still in the game.

Now, I know what some of you are thinking (again). "Juicie, those games weren't as linear as the recent ones. The latest ones have almost no exploration." I know that, and that does make a huge difference, but this goes back to the "traditional Zelda" thing. The linearity in Zelda hasn't really ruined the series at all. The same basic aspects of Zelda were kept, the games just became more story-based. I understand that part of Zelda is having the ability to roam free and do things how you want to, though. And the recent games have indeed strayed from this, especially Twilight Princess. But the thing is, if the same concept keeps getting used over and over and over again, it gets stale and boring. It becomes to where it doesn't feel as original anymore. That's why I think having some linear games has brought a balance to the series and keeps us enjoying that open and freelance style Zelda's always had.

However, I feel that a Zelda game works better if there's a mix between the two. That is, if the game is both open and linear. Like Link's Awakening. I outlined earlier how linear Link's Awakening was, but the ability to roam around the overworld a bit more freely than we could in games like Twilight Princess almost prevented it from feeling that way, which is probably why I never see any complaints about the linearity in the game (LA). Even The Wind Waker is a good example of this. All the different islands that were completely unique and having the ability to travel to (most of) them at will gave the gameplay an open feel, while the story was still linear. And, from the looks of it, it seems Skyward Sword is going to follow suit on this style of play, which I think is a giant leap in the right direction.

All this to say that I don't think linearity has ruined the series or even taken it in the wrong direction. Having one game like Twilight Princess with its ultra-linear aspects isn't necessarily a bad thing for the series. And not just because of what I said about balance and what not, but because using different styles brings variety and uniquen...wait, I guess that does kind of fall under that category. (Oops.) Well, whatever. The point is that linear aspects in Zelda can actually be a good thing for the series, so long as they are used in moderation, as that classic adventuresome feel does need to stay prevalent.

Anyway, what are your thoughts on linearity in Zelda? Please tell! =D

 

[MW7]

Very interesting post. I would have to start off by saying that I am one of the people that would view Twilight Princess as ruined by linearity whereas Link's Awakening was a nearly perfect game that happened to be linear. I was thinking about why I feel this way and I think that the main reason is story. It is true that linearity enables (but doesn't exclude the possibility of) a high quality story. However, my feelings about the stories of these two games are complete opposites. IMO LA has by far the greatest story of any Zelda game whereas the best aspect of TP's story was the option to skip most cutscenes with the start button. I feel bad saying that because clearly a lot of work was put into TP's story, but I just feel that within the interactive medium of video games that story should be minimal. If I want to be passively entertained, I'm going to watch Star Wars or Lord of the Rings and not play a video game for the story. I'm a die hard believer in gameplay>everything else and that's just my opinion.

Extending my opinion further, I would say that because the stories of Zelda games (or video games in general) are not that important, then a non-linear style Zelda game would usually be superior to a linear style Zelda game. The definition of linear, however, is tricky because as you pointed out there are numerous Zelda games (LA, MM, WW) that have a relatively linear main quest that still seem to have a spirit of exploration mostly due to the openness of the world and/or sidequests. This may be the "sweet spot" of linearity/non-linearity for Zelda games because all three of these games are held in very high esteem. These games are proof that linearity of a main quest doesn't hinder the ability of a game to be great. This being said, I would say that the true non-linear games (LOZ, ALTTP, OOT) are just as good as games. IMO though, TP would have been completely devoid of the adventuresome spirit of the Zelda series if it had not been for the latern caverns which were an amazing addition to the series.

I also liked your points concerning the argument about how linearity is not in line with "traditional" Zelda. In addition to your points (with which I agree with completely) I would like to add that who says that the style of a series can't evolve? Just because some series like Call of Duty release the same game every year doesn't mean that the style of all game series are static. Look at Mario. When Miyamoto designed Mario and Zelda, he made Super Mario Bros. as a completely linear game and LOZ as a very non-linear game. As you pointed out a couple games later in the Zelda series with LA, the Zelda series had made a fairly linear game. And what did Mario do when he made the jump to 3d? Super Mario 64 is the most non-linear main series Mario title to date. And going beyond evolution of style, how about a randomly dynamic selection of linear vs. nonlinear style. After the linear LA, Nintendo went with a moderately nonlinear main quest for OOT. And a few games later with TP, the Zelda series was back to extreme linearity. The Mario series is now seemingly heading back to linearity as well with Super Mario Galaxy 2 and it looks like even more so with Super Mario Land 3d. Like you said, it is good for styles to vary so that the series as a whole is balanced. And neither pure linearity nor nonlinearity is the way to go with Zelda.

 

[Blade]

Yeah, I think many Zelda fans are too picky, or don't even know what they want themselves. They whine that they want a new game more like Ocarina of Time, and then Twilight Princess comes out, and they whine about how it's too much like Ocarina of Time. The same goes for all of these fans that hate change in Zelda games, saying how any new feature will ruin the game because it's not EXACTLY like the traditional formula. If they want the same game, then they can go back and play the old games.

So I definitely agree, linearity does NOT, in any way, worsen a Zelda game. It always depends on what kind of game the developers want to make, and the more story-based it is, the more linear it has to be. Link's awakening was pretty linear, and also had a great story, because as you progressed, you start questioning where you are, while the villagers remain clueless as to anything beyond the island. This gives you the feeling that something is wrong, which is JUST what happens near the end of a dream.

I think what Twilight Princess suffers from is a combination of linearity and a lack of side-quests. Majora's Mask was pretty linear, but you had a ton of other things to do when you get bored of the main quest, the same thing goes for Wind Waker. And the original Zelda game didn't have much to do but fight monsters and beat dungeons, but it was still great because you could pick what to do and where to go. But in Twilight Princess, you have to do everything in order, and there's not much else to do besides that, which I think is what the fans really have a problem with. They just automatically blame the linearity, which is by no means a bad thing by itself.

I liked how MW7 brought up the fact that nobody complains about how different the Mario games are from each other, while so many people have a problem with the slightest change in Zelda. I really don't know why this is, but it does show that some Zelda fans are a bit too picky and overprotective of the series. Well, they should relax, because even a very linear Zelda game can be done right, as shown in the past.

 

[JuicieJ]

I think what Twilight Princess suffers from is a combination of linearity and a lack of side-quests.

Yes, that is one of the things that caused it to feel so linear. That and no mini-games (save the STAR Game, which could only be played twice).

 

[AustinFox33]

For the most part linearity just makes for better story telling; and isnt that half of what Zelda is all about? It just makes much more sense to me.

 

[Ventus]

The linearity in TP is different from the linearity in any other Zelda to date: where TP is struggling with a barren overworld, LA and MM, and any other Zelda considered linear has an overworld that is at least considered 'alive'. So the bore factor of the linearity of TP is more upped in a sense, making it much more noticeable than any other game of the series. Linearity is common throughout the series 'tis true, but seeing as how TP is the latest console Zelda to be released and is more or less one of the worse titles, people will blame Modern Zelda rather than look at the roots.

 

[JuicieJ]

The linearity in TP is different from the linearity in any other Zelda to date: where TP is struggling with a barren overworld, LA and MM, and any other Zelda considered linear has an overworld that is at least considered 'alive'. So the bore factor of the linearity of TP is more upped in a sense, making it much more noticeable than any other game of the series. Linearity is common throughout the series 'tis true, but seeing as how TP is the latest console Zelda to be released and is more or less one of the worse titles, people will blame Modern Zelda rather than look at the roots.

I'm guessing you didn't read the whole thing. I mentioned that at the end.

But, really, that's what bugs me. It's really only Twilight Princess that deserves the complaints if there are going to be any, yet Modern Zelda in general gets beat up on for linearity. If you look at games like WW and MC, they're linear in story, yet open in adventure. Yet just because of TP, they get blamed for the "change" as well.

 

[Rytex]

Linearity hasn't ruined the series YET, but with PH and ST, my hopes for the comeback aren't very high. Skyward Sword will have to be incredible for my hope to be restored in the Zelda series, which has been in decline since PH came out. Phantom Hourglass and Spirit Tracks were very linear, even to the point where you had to follow a set path and you couldn't just stop and get out and walk around to explore, like you could in Wind Waker. Even the plot made you go practically in straight order.

I consider RPG-style games, like Zelda, to be supported by certain imaginary pillars. One of these pillars is the ability to explore. Twilight Princess was huge, but there wasn't enough to simply look around. Remember the original Legend of Zelda, where you had to find everything on your own, unless you cheated and used a map? Or nearly all games in the Metroid series, where you have to look around, with a few hints to help you out in games like Prime? Remember how fun those games were?

Now, Twilight Princess was a great game. Yes, it had its moments of linearity, but the game in general was amazing. It has the third-most sidequests/minigames in the series (the rapids, STAR minigame, fishing, snowboarding, poe hunting, hidden techniques, and bug hunting), following The Minish Cap (hidden techniques, Cucco game, figurines, kinstone fusions, the Treasure chest minigame, the Magic Boomerang, and the Deities and their houses) and The Wind Waker (Battleship against the Octos, Barrel-Blasting, the Yacht Minigame, the Bird-man contest, the Hero's Charm, the Blue Potion, figurines, and Merman archery). But the fact that you had to follow the story until about halfway through the game, whereupon you could start to look for things, was a bit annoying to me.

But that's just me.

 

[JuicieJ]

Linearity hasn't ruined the series YET, but with PH and ST, my hopes for the comeback aren't very high. Skyward Sword will have to be incredible for my hope to be restored in the Zelda series, which has been in decline since PH came out. Phantom Hourglass and Spirit Tracks were very linear, even to the point where you had to follow a set path and you couldn't just stop and get out and walk around to explore, like you could in Wind Waker. Even the plot made you go practically in straight order.

I wouldn't say PH and ST have ruined the series at all. I mean, they were on a handheld with very limited capabilities in what could be done. Yet they took the most advantage out of the DS as possible, especially ST. ST also had an open feel to it. That roaming around on the train and opening new passageways kept the land feeling fresh and more explorable throughout the game. The different realms also gave each area a unique feel to it, only truly achieved before with Majora's Mask. Saying we couldn't just get out and explore in PH and ST like we could in WW isn't a very accurate statement, either. We could only get out and explore when we reached an island in WW. Same thing with the train stations in ST. Sure, we could get out of the boat any time we wanted to in WW, but we couldn't stay out for long. And what's the point in getting out just to swim, anyway? The only areas of exploration on foot were the islands, which is no different than PH and ST. And the plot in WW was also straightforward. There was no dungeon-skipping on WW. WW is just as linear as PH and ST. It's just the open sea that allows it to not feel that way, which I mentioned in this thread. The point is you can't really blame PH and ST for getting the Zelda series on a decline. The games made the most out of what they had to offer, so it's really not that fair to hold the games themselves accountable for that.

 

[Forlong]

I don't get how TP is linear. How is there not enough exploration? Try to find all 24 golden bugs without cheating. Go on, and tell me after that if there is no exploration. Even with a player's guide at my side I felt like that was an extensive task. What about those 50 Imp Poes? How is looking in every single cave for those guys not exploring? How is going to every area at night not exploring (it's annoying, that's for sure)? You know, if you want to complain about something in that game, you might want to complain about something that is actually wrong with it.

 

[MW7]

I don't get how TP is linear. How is there not enough exploration? Try to find all 24 golden bugs without cheating. Go on, and tell me after that if there is no exploration. Even with a player's guide at my side I felt like that was an extensive task. What about those 50 Imp Poes? How is looking in every single cave for those guys not exploring? How is going to every area at night not exploring (it's annoying, that's for sure)? You know, if you want to complain about something in that game, you might want to complain about something that is actually wrong with it.

I can't argue with you about exploration but don't drag linear into the argument. The sidequests in TP do require a very significant amount of exploration to finish entirely and the lantern caves are my favorite part of the game. TP is a great game but when it comes to the Zelda series, it is sub-par IMO because of the linearity among other things. Fans have to nit-pick in order to even rank the different games in the series, and TP sticks out like a sore thumb in the linearity department.

The game is linear in two interrelated respects. First, the main quest of the game can only be completed in one order. In contrast, OOT can be completed in 60 different orders (without glitches or entering dungeons for the item and leaving) and ALTTP and LOZ can be completed in many different orders as well. Second, the overworld of the game is slowly opened up to you until about when you have reached the Lakebed Temple.

 

[Earthtemple]

I can't argue with you about exploration but don't drag linear into the argument. The sidequests in TP do require a very significant amount of exploration to finish entirely and the lantern caves are my favorite part of the game. TP is a great game but when it comes to the Zelda series, it is sub-par IMO because of the linearity among other things. Fans have to nit-pick in order to even rank the different games in the series, and TP sticks out like a sore thumb in the linearity department.

The game is linear in two interrelated respects. First, the main quest of the game can only be completed in one order. In contrast, OOT can be completed in 60 different orders (without glitches or entering dungeons for the item and leaving) and ALTTP and LOZ can be completed in many different orders as well. Second, the overworld of the game is slowly opened up to you until about when you have reached the Lakebed Temple.

60 different orders? I find that hard to believe... I can find 4... you can switch fire and forest and shadow and spirit. Isn't that it?

 

[Forlong]

I can't argue with you about exploration but don't drag linear into the argument. The sidequests in TP do require a very significant amount of exploration to finish entirely and the lantern caves are my favorite part of the game. TP is a great game but when it comes to the Zelda series, it is sub-par IMO because of the linearity among other things. Fans have to nit-pick in order to even rank the different games in the series, and TP sticks out like a sore thumb in the linearity department.

The game is linear in two interrelated respects. First, the main quest of the game can only be completed in one order. In contrast, OOT can be completed in 60 different orders (without glitches or entering dungeons for the item and leaving) and ALTTP and LOZ can be completed in many different orders as well. Second, the overworld of the game is slowly opened up to you until about when you have reached the Lakebed Temple.

I know you can do the Ice Cavern and Fire Temple out of order, the Well and the Water Temple out of order, and the Shadow and Spirit Temples out of order. That's about 8 different ways, even so, how many people actually do them out of order? I haven't heard of many people. Since players rarely want to play through the dungeons out of order, why bother? Only a few Zelda games are nonlinear in any sense of the word, so I fail to see how it's a problem with TP.

 

[Ventus]

Since players rarely want to play through the dungeons out of order, why bother? Only a few Zelda games are nonlinear in any sense of the word, so I fail to see how it's a problem with TP.

The general Zelda player probably doesn't, but the average Zelda fan (this doesn't include solely ZDers) would love to be able to do dungeons out of order. Zelda is a series known for each of its individual games allowing the player to commit themselves to challenge, TP unfortunately doesn't have that grace. Playing without bottles? What's the point, enemies can hardly scrape you with their terrible AI and low damage. Playing without a shield and hidden skills? Those simply enhance your ability to blaze through the game; with or without doesn't make much of a difference. If you could do dungeons out of order, perhaps by way of the dungeon item not being so completely useless outside of that specific dungeon, therein could make more room for challenge.

Beyond that, yes no Zelda game outside of (4 of them?) is truly nonlinear.

 

[MW7]

60 different orders? I find that hard to believe... I can find 4... you can switch fire and forest and shadow and spirit. Isn't that it?

My stat is accurate but misleading; there are 7 base orders without glitches or entering dungeons to get the item and leaving but including the mini-dungeons bumps the number up to 60.

The seven base orders are: Forest, Fire/Water, Shadow/Spirit gives you four orders; Fire, Forest, Water, Shadow/Spirit gives you two more; and the seventh base order is Forest, Water, Spirit, Fire, Shadow.

You can fit the ice cavern anywhere before the Water Temple which gives you 18 orders from the base 7. The trick to getting up to 60 unique orders is that you can beat the bottom of the well at any time once you beat the Forest Temple, even doing it after all the Temples are completed or even choosing to skip it since the lens of truth is optional. You can fit the botw in 33 spots from the base orders. There are also 9 orders that can be derived from switching the order of the minidungeons whenever you choose to do them between the same two temples (i.e. Forest, botw/ice cavern, Water ...). So 18 orders in which you choose to skip the botw plus 33 orders in which the botw is added in plus 9 orders for switching the ice cavern and botw gives you 60 orders.

Fun Fact: if you only limit yourself to not perform glitches but allow yourself to enter dungeons for the item and leave, there are 18 base orders (the only Temple rules are that Forest, Fire, and Water are before Shadow and that Forest is before Spirit). Adding in the minidungeons would create 274 unique orders.

And this illustrates my point about TP because without glitches you cannot deviate at all from the one order in which you are forced to complete the game.

The general Zelda player probably doesn't, but the average Zelda fan (this doesn't include solely ZDers) would love to be able to do dungeons out of order. Zelda is a series known for each of its individual games allowing the player to commit themselves to challenge, TP unfortunately doesn't have that grace. Playing without bottles? What's the point, enemies can hardly scrape you with their terrible AI and low damage. Playing without a shield and hidden skills? Those simply enhance your ability to blaze through the game; with or without doesn't make much of a difference. If you could do dungeons out of order, perhaps by way of the dungeon item not being so completely useless outside of that specific dungeon, therein could make more room for challenge.

Beyond that, yes no Zelda game outside of (4 of them?) is truly nonlinear.

I couldn't possibly agree with you more, for me nonlinearity equals replay value.

And I think that LOZ, AOL (I think the 2nd and 3rd can be switched, not sure), ALTTP, OOT, MM (you can do 4 before 3 once you get the hookshot, I've done it multiple times), WW (I've heard of people doing Wind before Earth but haven't been able to do it myself, there might be different versions of the game), and PH (this I just heard about, I don't know if its true or not and I don't even know which dungeons would be switched). So I know for fact that LOZ, ALTTP, OOT, and MM are nonlinear but am unsure on the other 3. Also I have no clue about the Oracle games, MC, or the Four Swords games.