- Joined
- Nov 1, 2012
Are Iron Boots required for Shadow Temple? I honestly don't recall.
There are a series of wind tunnels that require the iron boots to pass. Unless there is another method I don't know about.
Are Iron Boots required for Shadow Temple? I honestly don't recall.
I'm pretty sure I used the hookshot too, though I may be wrong, and I recall using bombs...lots and lots of bombs. Actually...is there anything left to use? I mean we just lost a lot of the items from the time jump.
...
Off the top of my head:
Dodongo's Cavern: Slingshot
Jabu Jabu's Belly: Slingshot
Forest Temple: Hookshot
Fire Temple Hookshot(?), Bow, Bombs
Water Temple Hookshot, Bow, Bombs, Iron Boots
Shadow Temple: Eye of Truth, Longshot, Dins Fire, Bow, Bombs, Iron Boots
Spirit Temple: Eye of Truth, Longshot, Bow, Slingshot, Bombs, Megaton Hammer, Hover Boots, Boomerang
Let's keep in mind, this is Zelda. Also between LoZ and OoT...what had better puzzles? OoT.
Because Nintendo doesn't care about story. They've said this over and over. If Miyamoto had his way, he'd do away with it...in fact, I have a hunch that they're trying to use non-linearity as an excuse for that.
Why wouldn't they?
Because now Miyamoto finally has his excuse to chuck the story out the window.
Boxes hold down blue switches as well.
Eye of Truth isn't actually required; it's just recommended.
Dins is an external item not found in a dungeon.
Are Iron Boots required for Shadow Temple? I honestly don't recall.
Depends on how you gauge "better puzzle". Some people get stuck with the simplest of block-pushing puzzles. Pushing a block isn't at all complex, but complexity =/= good on its own. What merit does complexity hold if I figured it out on first try? What merit does simplicity have if I got stuck on it for two days straight? Different people like different things.
Nintendo obviously doesn't care about story -- the Zelda timeline is messed up as it is -- but they wouldn't release a game with a completely nonsensical, standalone story. Linearity or not does not judge how good a story is; you may not prefer X to Y but that doesn't necessarily mean X is better than Y.
They haven't done a single Zelda game since OoT like that, and I doubt it has to do with whether or not the games had (non)linear dungeon structure.
What makes you think Miyamoto doesn't care about story and wants to get rid of it completely?
That being said, non-linearity of dungeons and decent storyline are not mutually exclusive. All they would have to do is what they did with the OoT dungeons, but slightly more. The dungeon progression pattern usually has sequences where a few dungeons in a row have an objective of collecting pieces of a set (3 spiritual stones, 5 sages in OoT; 2 pearls, 2 sages in WW; 3 twili pieces of something, 3 mirror shards in TP; etc etc). They could make dungeons in those "sets" be completable in any order, maybe adding optional content that can only be unlocked by items from other dungeons in the "sets". Non-linear dungeon progression, story still allowed to move forward.
Again, I'm referring to carefully-laid-out puzzles, not jumping across revealed platforms or blowing up walls with cracks. Those are ways to use items, but those are not always clever uses.
Secondly, I would discount things like the Hookshot in the Forest Temple and the Lens of Truth in the Shadow Temple because you were at the very least highly encouraged to go out and get them.
(And as Ventus said, they weren't really found in dungeons.)
I'll agree with you there, but I'm not sure what you mean by "this is Zelda."
I loved some of the ingenious puzzles in Link's Awakening ("enter the space where the eyes have walls" in the Face Shrine was a brilliant riddle),
Besides, if dungeons rely on their individual themes and inherent items more than all the other stuff Link collects before then, they'd probably be made more interesting.
Acknowledging that gameplay comes before story is not the same as stuffing story into a corner and neglecting it. Zelda stories are highly flawed, but still generally interesting on their own, and each subsequent Zelda game is more evidence of that as they become more cinematic and complex.
Just as Nintendo has the opportunity to throw Zelda Wii U's story in the trash, they also have the opportunity to make it shine. History and developer quotes suggest they're always looking to improve their games, so I'm going with the latter until I see concrete evidence for the former.
Why WOULD they?
Which would again imply that he doesn't care about his games, but considering he's essentially a child in a man's body (in a good way), I don't think he's going to create a game he wouldn't personally enjoy.
They need to stop pushing you to complete specific game tasks and just let you take in the world and complete tasks as you discover them or as you're inclined to.
(btw Responding to Ventus & JJ didn't wan't to quote either as I'm on my Wii U. )
Err...I guess to me the plot is one of the most important parts of Zelda, It's why I loved Skyward Sword so much. The storytelling was phenomenal, and IMO the game has one of the best stories of the series, I'd hate to see that jumbled up or thrown out for non-linearity. Something that doesn't seem to add anything just potentially take things away.
(btw Responding to Ventus & JJ didn't wan't to quote either as I'm on my Wii U. )
Err...I guess to me the plot is one of the most important parts of Zelda, It's why I loved Skyward Sword so much. The storytelling was phenomenal, and IMO the game has one of the best stories of the series, I'd hate to see that jumbled up or thrown out for non-linearity. Something that doesn't seem to add anything just potentially take things away.
Thing is, non-linearity can be applied to more than just the gameplay. The story can adopt it, as well. Nintendo should design the games to where the ending is always the same outcome, but doing or not doing specific events before others changes the path of how the story gets there. For example, a certain character either appears or doesn't appear in a cutscene, causing it to play out a bit differently, but not to the point that the entire plot is changed. That would actually work out better than what we already have, as subsequent playthroughs would truly be different every time, upping the replay value immensely.
Zelda's stories should be linear...Personally I wouldn't mind non-linear dungeon order, just as long as it doesn't touch the story...story can be just as immersive as gameplay, gameplay should just come first.
Not trying to be rude, but you didn't really provide any backbone for your statement. What reasoning is there for Zelda's story needing to be linear?
It's Zelda. The puzzles are always easy.
Well good luck getting into the forest temple then.
Irrelevant.
Well you're talking about the games like there were these super hard puzzles to figure out or something...but there wasn't. The only "hard" part was when you weren't paying attention and missed a room or something. But the puzzles have always been easy. It's a casual series and many of us figured out the puzzles in OoT when we were around 6.
Sorry I don't recall. None of the puzzles in LA were memorable to me.
I don't see how. Some of the problems some games have faced was rather than thinking "What item works best here?" my thought process was "Well, I just picked up this new item...I bet its somehow related to this thing one way or another."
What story was complex?
They have said time and time again, they don't care....in fact, I think they even said that we as fans shouldn't care for the timeline (or something along those lines).
Because to Miyamoto, story is nothing but an obstacle that gets in the way of gameplay.
He cares about the game...but not the story.
Ehhh that's actually what really annoyed me in Wind Waker. They tried to make you explore way too much. Like when I was supposed to get the bracelets and iron boots. I had no idea what was the main quest and what was the sidequests. I was bored out of my mind doing so many sidequests, talking to so many fish, and I just wanted to get back to the main game.