What are you currently playing? 4.0

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

It was marketed to be more like a Zelda game, but its puzzles are pretty easy, bland, and forgettable for the most part, and it doesn't successfully duplicate the dungeon style of Zelda as its level design is rather bland. It feels more like a hack n' slash game because it tries to fill up most of its time in-between puzzles with combat, but even that is pretty shallow and just becomes boring after a playing the game for a little while, especially since there aren't many different weapons for you to use.

[talonmalon333]

It was marketed to be more like a Zelda game, but its puzzles are pretty easy, bland, and forgettable for the most part, 

So basically, like Zelda's?

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

Not sure which Zelda you've been playing.

[Foggle]

Not sure which Zelda you've been playing.

Skyward Sword.

[talonmalon333]

Not sure which Zelda you've been playing.

95% of Zelda puzzles are insanely easy.

(Also, SS has some of the harder ones.)

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

Not sure which Zelda you've been playing.

95% of Zelda puzzles are insanely easy.

(Also, SS has some of the harder ones.)

Once again, not sure which Zelda games you've been playing.

Also Zelda puzzles only become easy once you play enough Zelda games to notice the patterns. Even then, saying they are "insanely" easy is just your absurd over-exaggeration of things.

[talonmalon333]

Not sure which Zelda you've been playing.

95% of Zelda puzzles are insanely easy.

(Also, SS has some of the harder ones.)

Once again, not sure which Zelda games you've been playing.

Also Zelda puzzles only become easy once you play enough Zelda games to notice the patterns. Even then, saying they are "insanely" easy is just your absurd over-exaggeration of things.

With the exception of SS, none of the recent Zelda games have stumped me more than once. In fact, I don't think WW, MC, and maybe ST did at all (and I doubt TP would've either, had my first playthrough not been as spaced as it was). FS and FSA didn't, either. Most puzzles are just... there, for the sake of making dungeons longer.

I'd like to see them cut down on the puzzles, and have more dangerous monsters.

[gunswordfist]

talon, NO! Please stop digging this hole for yourself that you are digging.

[Foggle]

talon, NO! Please stop digging this hole for yourself that you are digging.

Don't listen to gsf. Keep digging.

[gunswordfist]

You know what, yeah don't listen to gsf.

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

With the exception of SS, none of the recent Zelda games have stumped me more than once. In fact, I don't think WW, MC, and maybe ST did at all

That's a load of shit. Each of those games had at least some challenging puzzles like all good Zelda games. To say that they had none is is just absurd. Also, those only make up 3 games out of this entire franchise. You described Zelda puzzles as easy in general. How is that so when you only list about a fifth of all of its major releases?

(and I doubt TP would've either, had my first playthrough not been as spaced as it was).

Whether puzzles are challenging at all to solve or not has nothing to do with how much you space apart the game. Maybe adjusting to the controls might take some time, but if you had any trouble solving any puzzle in the game, its because the puzzle had some form of challenge behind it, whether for better or worse (with the worse being if it were a tedious thing to do rather than hard to figure out).

FS and FSA didn't, either. Most puzzles are just... there, for the sake of making dungeons longer.

Never played either of those games, but from what I can tell those experiences were meant to be more action-oriented, since they were about the co-op and having tough puzzles in a co-op game would severely break up the flow.

I'd like to see them cut down on the puzzles, and have more dangerous monsters.

If they do that, then Zelda would turn into a hack n' slash game with Metroid style exploration, which is something that I do NOT want to see. It doesn't have the combat system to support that type of gameplay alone in a game, and it already had a perfect formula of having puzzles and tasks for you to perform to progress through a dungeon, with the monsters themselves sometimes being puzzles to figure out how to damage, and then after that they are merely just there to fill in the gaps between major dungeon rooms that you need to get to.

[Foggle]

SS already has too much combat IMO.

[gunswordfist]

NEVER say anything has too much combat.

[talonmalon333]

 

That's a load of shit. Each of those games had at least some challenging puzzles like all good Zelda games. To say that they had none is is just absurd. Also, those only make up 3 games out of this entire franchise. You described Zelda puzzles as easy in general. How is that so when you only list about a fifth of all of its major releases?

Let's just agree to disagree. I honestly mean it, I didn't find anything to be difficult about their puzzles (Doesn't change the fact that the games are awesome overall. ). OoT and MM had more tough puzzles, but those games, as a whole, were still made up of mostly variations of the same puzzles.

Whether puzzles are challenging at all to solve or not has nothing to do with how much you space apart the game. Maybe adjusting to the controls might take some time, but if you had any trouble solving any puzzle in the game, its because the puzzle had some form of challenge behind it, whether for better or worse (with the worse being if it were a tedious thing to do rather than hard to figure out).

What happened is that, in the time I was away from the game, there were certain abilities that I had completely forgotten about, abilities that are second nature when you play a game frequently. So there was a certain part of the game I didn't know what to do because I had forgotten this. I can assure you I wouldn't have majorly failed had I played most consistently.

Never played either of those games, but from what I can tell those experiences were meant to be more action-oriented, since they were about the co-op and having tough puzzles in a co-op game would severely break up the flow.

True, but they do have their share of puzzles. But you're right, which is the main reason I separated them from the previous games I mentioned.

If they do that, then Zelda would turn into a hack n' slash game with Metroid style exploration, which is something that I do NOT want to see. It doesn't have the combat system to support that type of gameplay alone in a game, and it already had a perfect formula of having puzzles and tasks for you to perform to progress through a dungeon, with the monsters themselves sometimes being puzzles to figure out how to damage, and then after that they are merely just there to fill in the gaps between major dungeon rooms that you need to get to.

I do think puzzles should stay, I just don't think they should be as frequent as they are, especially in SS (which was entirely puzzles, even though the game had it's share of good ones).

[Foggle]

NEVER say anything has too much combat.

So you're saying you wish Mirror's Edge and Jak 2 had more?