Hrm, I worded it wrong, I just meant that the enemies took to attacking and doing nothing but attacking; few if any enemies in OoT actually have the sense to block.
Should the Overall Combat Battle Speed Increase?
- Thread starter Ventus
- Start date
I agree with the rest of this, but I don't feel that SS was slower. It just required you to be a little more methodical in your approach (or that you feint the enemy entirely via trailing your sword in one direction then attacking from another). By contrast, up until TP, the combat was really second nature, but didn't require you to be as methodical. Part of the reason it might feel slow is because you really didn't rely on your other tools as much as you did in the previous games. I do see your point either way, though.
I'll give you that they were aggressive, but not aggressive enough. It was more of a puzzle to figure out how to fight the different enemies, but once you deduced how to defeat them, it still became second nature. What would've helped is giving them new attacks, not just newer variations of the same enemy. Don't get me wrong, what they had was a step in the right direction, I just think adding more attacks and more ways of dealing with an enemy would benefit the series more than just increasing speed.
I don't see what you have to be sorry about. This is a discussion for everybody, so hop on in and join the fun! (Hi, by the way!
)They were more of a menace, but at least in my experience, they weren't menacing enough, for reasons I stated above. I had a lot of trouble dealing with Bokoblins myself at first until I reasoned that I needed to fake them out, then hit them. Same with the rest of the enemies, Moldarach especially (then again, Moldarach makes it rather obvious what you need to do- attack from a different angle herp-a-derp).
I think what you're asking in the OP, Vanitas, is "do you want more to happen onscreen", as in, should enemies have alternate methods of attack. I may be wrong, but in any case, I do agree with whatever it is you're stating. Whether it is the overall battle speed (animations) or just upping the ante on current enemy behaviorisms while giving them an alternate arsenal, I do want Nintendo to capitalize upon the feature. Would this alienate some players from the 3D market? Sure enough it would -- 3D Zelda games are traditionally calm and soothing whereas it is the 2D counterparts that are truly fast paced and hectic (look at Legend of Zelda and Adventure of Link for twenty seconds). It would be slightly unfair to call for wishes that would remove a sizable amount of the fanbase.
Increasing the battle speed isn't wholly necessary; I enjoy a Zelda game regardless of how fast or slow it gets. But, it'd be particularly fascinating if Nintendo could match the speeds of, say, Kingdom Hearts 1 (KH1 is the slowest of the series thus far, I believe even slower than VCAST as well as coded). Also, I see no harm in giving the enemies alternate methods of attack while making them more aggressive all the same. This would just push Nintendo to keep the TUTORIAL out of the main game, which I believe Miyamoto is looking to do [look at, say, Final Fantasy XII or Super Mario 64 for a gauge as to what I'm saying -- the tutorial sections do not pervade the entirety of the game in those games].
Speaking of Kingdom Hearts, take a gander at this video: Kingdom Hearts 2 Final Mix LV1 TA No Damage: Data Xemnas 2'49 (No Stat Boosts, RC, Items) - YouTube
Xemnas shows absolutely no quarter; he is relentless with his attacks and even has an unorthodox manner of defending himself. Most importantly, though, is two things: how he opened up the fight, with a quick deft strike, and the multitude of attacks under his belt. Note that Xemnas (Sora solo) is a penultimate boss in the game Kingdom Hearts 2. That is exactly how I envision a future Zelda game -- the boss opening up the battle with a quick strike leaving little if any time to react, as well as having many MANY ways to attack you, both from long range and short range. Honestly, the only way you'd know to block that strike upon first playthrough is if you saw it before...he's just too fast.
And is there any harm in transferring this to a Zelda game? By the climax of the game, you *should* be a seasoned veteran at this point. Introducing a new enemy or a previously seen enemy with all new attacks (keyword ATTACKS with an S, not attack) should be daunting and they *should* be a worthy foe not the first, not the second, but the third and even the fourth time. I suppose I can forgive Skyward Sword for its enemies; Ghirahim was trying nothing more than to stall Link for the entirety of the game, this much is apparent. But future Zelda games should go with the flow and let the endgame be difficult. Not challenging, but difficult.
Increasing the battle speed isn't wholly necessary; I enjoy a Zelda game regardless of how fast or slow it gets. But, it'd be particularly fascinating if Nintendo could match the speeds of, say, Kingdom Hearts 1 (KH1 is the slowest of the series thus far, I believe even slower than VCAST as well as coded). Also, I see no harm in giving the enemies alternate methods of attack while making them more aggressive all the same. This would just push Nintendo to keep the TUTORIAL out of the main game, which I believe Miyamoto is looking to do [look at, say, Final Fantasy XII or Super Mario 64 for a gauge as to what I'm saying -- the tutorial sections do not pervade the entirety of the game in those games].
Speaking of Kingdom Hearts, take a gander at this video: Kingdom Hearts 2 Final Mix LV1 TA No Damage: Data Xemnas 2'49 (No Stat Boosts, RC, Items) - YouTube
Xemnas shows absolutely no quarter; he is relentless with his attacks and even has an unorthodox manner of defending himself. Most importantly, though, is two things: how he opened up the fight, with a quick deft strike, and the multitude of attacks under his belt. Note that Xemnas (Sora solo) is a penultimate boss in the game Kingdom Hearts 2. That is exactly how I envision a future Zelda game -- the boss opening up the battle with a quick strike leaving little if any time to react, as well as having many MANY ways to attack you, both from long range and short range. Honestly, the only way you'd know to block that strike upon first playthrough is if you saw it before...he's just too fast.
And is there any harm in transferring this to a Zelda game? By the climax of the game, you *should* be a seasoned veteran at this point. Introducing a new enemy or a previously seen enemy with all new attacks (keyword ATTACKS with an S, not attack) should be daunting and they *should* be a worthy foe not the first, not the second, but the third and even the fourth time. I suppose I can forgive Skyward Sword for its enemies; Ghirahim was trying nothing more than to stall Link for the entirety of the game, this much is apparent. But future Zelda games should go with the flow and let the endgame be difficult. Not challenging, but difficult.
Last edited:
JuicieJ
SHOW ME YA MOVES!
You absolutely implied it, and later in your post you explicitly imply that that are harder. Keep your statements consistent.
1.) SS's enemies are just as aggressive as OoT's.
2.) Of course you died in OoT. You were younger when you played it for the first time.
How exactly was SS's endgame not difficult?
Again, this is the case for every enemy in Zelda.
And enemies that offer no defense at all are somehow better?
Last edited:
They are not, OOT and MM enemies were incredibly aggressive in comparison to other 3D Zelda games. The Deku Babas were more aggressive, Lizalfos were more aggressive, you had the Iron Knuckles which attacked as soon as you get near them. OOT's and MM's combat is a fair bit faster than SS and it is certainly easier to die in them.
JuicieJ
SHOW ME YA MOVES!
Yes they are. The style of combat was different, that's all. If you had your sword out, they reacted first with defense (which is very smart, btw), but soon after attacked. If you were out of stamina or were flailing wildly against a group, though, they let you have it, especially the blue Bokoblins later in the game (who are extremely aggressive).
Reacting any other way than running off is not smart if you are a SS bokoblin.
I found OOT's combat more fast paced and challenging, I don't remember running out of stamina and then enemies letting me have it in SS. Fighting an enemy in SS generally consisted of killing it whilst it desperately tried to stop me rather than avoiding it killing me and trying to kill it at the same time.
JuicieJ
SHOW ME YA MOVES!
Yes, let's have gameplay where the enemies run away from us in terror. That'll work out just fine.
/sarcasm
Are you sure OoT's enemies don't go down easily? Because I can assure you they go down much quicker and easier than SS's.
It's already been done. In Halo the grunts often flee in terror. It could work in Zelda with... this is not the place for a gameplay idea.
They put more effort into attacking link and they are much more effective at it. OOT does not have a Bokoblin equivalent but generally enemies dealt more damage and dealt out more frequent attacks which actually hit more often than in SS.
JuicieJ
SHOW ME YA MOVES!
Most of OoT's enemies do 1/2 a heart of damage. Almost all of SS's do 1 full heart. I also fail to see how they're less efficient at landing a hit.
In OOT you start with 3 hearts and SS you start with 6, so 1/2 a heart in OOT=1 heart in SS.
In OOT you get enemies that do 5 hearts of damage, in SS I think demise can do a maximum of 2.
SS's enemies are less efficient because they are slower and make their intentions to attack a bit too clear.
JuicieJ
SHOW ME YA MOVES!
Later in the game that percentage changes. The more hearts you get, the less chance you have of dying. All 20 hearts in OoT will still have enemies taking off 1/2 a heart. All 20 hearts in SS will still have enemies taking off 1 full heart. The damage ratio is larger in SS.
Demise attacks like crazy, and if you try to wail on him without having mastered the controls, he will end you. The bosses in OoT that take off large amounts of hearts are slow and their attacks are easy to avoid.
OoT's enemies' attacks were just as clear. I actually don't get hit by OoT's enemies. I will occasionally take damage from SS's.
I disagree, especially with the Deku Babas. SS's Deku babas were much more agressive. They attacked as soon as you got close. They were acually kinda difficult if you didn't have a shield, and you had to attack them a certain direction. In OoT you just went up and attacked them any way you want and killed them. All of SS's enemies attack as soon as you get near, they just block you're attacks.
Of course you don't remember running out of stamina. Stamina as a game mechanic did not exist in OoT. Link was like the Energizer Bunny, he just kept slashing and slashing and slashing and slashing...
I agree with this. Compared to the other 3D Zelda that featured Deku Babas, SS was far more aggressive by comparison. I simply wish they would've put that same amount of aggression in the other enemies. Up until SS, Babas did not really put up much of a fight, if they even went that far at all. However, while they are pretty aggressive, they're limited to just biting you with their mouths, and yeah, I admit that we're dealing with a plant-based enemy here, but come on. Make him some kind of ambush predator where if Link gets too close, they wrap vines around him and try to eat him or something. Make them hide in the background until the last possible moment, as though they were a harmless plant. That would at least bring in the element of surprise right there.
Except as I said OOT's later enemies can do much higher amounts of damage. Iron Knuckles can do about 5 hearts of damage and Ganondorf can do about 4.
The way he is fought I actually think was good. If there were enemies with less health with his attack ratio then they would have been excellent.
Well it's the other way round for me. SS's enemies are just so easy to block or avoid their attacks. Demise is my only worry in the game. In OOT enemies can hit me and the bosses are more difficult to avoid being hit by, silly mistakes can cost allot of hearts in this game.
I meant in SS, not with OOT. It's 00:40 here if things sound funny then it's because I'm tired
