Miyamoto: Zelda needs to be “accessible” for casual gamers

[Deleted member]

http://www.nintendoeverything.com/?p=2069

Normally i wouldn't post stuff like this, but ever since E3 2008, Nintendo's been p**sing me off. Accessible means that there dumbing it down, and if you guys played Twilight Princess, youre wondering, " how can the dumb that down?" Exactly! ur opinions?

Note: I'm not a Sony or Microsoft fanboy. I actually like some of the games on the Wii. I liked Brawl, FE: RD, and MP3. I liked TP too (but too easy, thats why i'm complaining.)

 

[Eriatarka]

In a climactic showdown, you must send Gannondorf back to the shadow realm by defeating him in a series of mini-games..
This whole 'catering to the casual crowd' is a dangerous trend, especially when it goes seeping into the core series'. But alas they're a much bigger market than the gamers who like a bit of a challenge.
I'm worried we'll never see another Water Temple.

 

[Bowser King]

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!! This is reeeeeaalllyy dumb.

To defeat Ganondorf and send him back to evil land you must beat him in a round of wii fit.

 

[MxGm]

If Shigueru does that, Zelda will go downhill. Why does he want to make it accesible to casual gamers? Just to gather up more money? I don't know about Shigueru, but Zelda is supposed to be for hardcore gamers.

 

[Deception]

Miyamoto did not say anything about dumbing the franchise down in that article. He said he wants to make it more accesible to newcomers, but he said he wants the fans to be satisfied as well. Accesible=/= casual. Quit overeacting.

 

[derek.haines]

Miyamoto did not say anything about dumbing the franchise down in that article. He said he wants to make it more accesible to newcomers, but he said he wants the fans to be satisfied as well. Accesible=/= casual. Quit overeacting.

QFT.

Miyamoto is a genius, and he's right--if every Zelda game ends up looking like Gears of War, it's going to potentially scare off a generation of new gamers for the franchise. Look at the N64 games, they were instantly accessible to virtually everyone that played them yet there was metric tons of untold depth to the game once you started getting into them. It's that balance of lightheartedness and depth that initially made his games so great, anyone could pick them up but not necessarily everyone could beat them. I wouldn't say that Twilight Princess exactly displayed that, however, and he's likely wanting to take the franchise closer to it's roots once again.

Personally, I'd love to see a modern, 3d console Zelda game done in the overhead views of old. You could turn the Wii Remote on it's side like a NES controller, and use the two-button configuration that the Game Boy games did, plus you'd incorporate IR-pointing to draw lines like in Phantom Hourglass and to reveal secrets like in Super Paper Mario.

 

[Crazy_mofo213]

I don't see how the Zelda franchise could be dumbed down. Twilight Princess was pretty easy to me so I don't see how'd he would make it easier.

 

[Overload]

stuff like this worries me. Look what happened when they made mario kart and brawl "more accessible"

 

[SuperRacoon]

QFT.

Look at the N64 games, they were instantly accessible to virtually everyone that played them yet there was metric tons of untold depth to the game once you started getting into them.

Then why the hell do we need to make Zelda more accessible to non gamers?

WindWaker and Twilight Princess followed to for formula for for Ocarina of Time very closely, except there was one difference, both those games had their difficulty level dumbed down.

As for Phantom Hourglass, anyone who could not beat that game clearly does not have any problem solving skills whatsoever, clearly mentally ********.

My Mother was a non-gamer until she played Advance Wars, and at a glance, it really doesn't look like it is non-gamer/casual gamer friendly game. (she ended up playing that game far more than I did. well over 600 hours lol).

What I'm getting at? Replace the word non-gamer with the word ******, and that is who they are trying to make this game accessible to.

Again, video games have always been accessible to non-gamers, it's really a question of weather or not they are willing to put in more than 30 minutes to actually learn how to play the games. There is no need to make games more accessible to non-gamers.

You are lying to yourselves of you think there as a barrier of entry that people can't cross.

And You are lying to yourself still by thinking Nintendo is doing a good thing for Zelda by making it "more Accessible"

 

[Cashed]

SuperRacoon, that was awesome.

 

[Ilex]

This could just mean an easy mode and a hard mode.

 

[SkylerOcon]

What I'm getting at? Replace the word non-gamer with the word ******, and that is who they are trying to make this game accessible to.

Are you kidding me? They're trying to make it accesible to *******? I know a guy whose mentally ******** that went to the Brawl midnight lanuch. He also has a PS3 and an 360.

Non-gamers are more video game ******** than actual ******* are.

 

[derek.haines]

Then why the hell do we need to make Zelda more accessible to non gamers?

WindWaker and Twilight Princess followed to for formula for for Ocarina of Time very closely, except there was one difference, both those games had their difficulty level dumbed down.

As for Phantom Hourglass, anyone who could not beat that game clearly does not have any problem solving skills whatsoever, clearly mentally ********.

My Mother was a non-gamer until she played Advance Wars, and at a glance, it really doesn't look like it is non-gamer/casual gamer friendly game. (she ended up playing that game far more than I did. well over 600 hours lol).

What I'm getting at? Replace the word non-gamer with the word ******, and that is who they are trying to make this game accessible to.

Again, video games have always been accessible to non-gamers, it's really a question of weather or not they are willing to put in more than 30 minutes to actually learn how to play the games. There is no need to make games more accessible to non-gamers.

You are lying to yourselves of you think there as a barrier of entry that people can't cross.

And You are lying to yourself still by thinking Nintendo is doing a good thing for Zelda by making it "more Accessible"

Seriously dude, chill out. Why the superiority complex? Nintendo's goal since the very beginning has been to make games that appeal to large groups of people, i.e., games that are fun. This is why they've been able to penetrate the market more deeply than any gaming company in history, and the reason that they're the only remaining "Golden Age" gaming company left. I've got no place to tell you what to think or what to play, but I think personally that everyone should be playing games because they're fun. No more, no less. There doesn't need to be an ulterior motive to playing video games, entertainment is ultimately why we're all here. If you're playing games only "Because they're hard", then you're playing the wrong types of games, and there're games made specifically for that purpose.

Zelda games were from day one meant to be picked up and played by anyone, and God willing that's the way they should remain. It was never meant to be a "hardcore" or a "casual" experience, because back then those things didn't matter. It transcended labels, and it will continue to the way the films of Hayao Miyazaki do--they're not adult films, they're not kids films, they're films for everybody. Zelda games are just that: for everybody, so stop trying to make them just for you.

 

[SuperRacoon]

Are you kidding me? They're trying to make it accesible to *******? I know a guy whose mentally ******** that went to the Brawl midnight lanuch. He also has a PS3 and an 360.

Non-gamers are more video game ******** than actual ******* are.

Point taken, therefore, there is no reason whatsoever to be gimping games.


Derek.Haines, You clearly missed what I was trying to say, even though I said three times. There isn't one thing about the Zelda franchise in it's current state that is preventing people from playing and enjoying it, there never was anything about the Zelda games that prevented people from playing and enjoying them. The first part of the Ocarina of Time does a very good job and getting people use to the control scheme.

What makes you think I only play games because they are Hard? (I can't think of anygames that were hard that I have played that I didn't Enjoy) I actually liked playing Animal Crossings on the GameCube, and that was by no stretch of the imagination hard. It's probably the easiest game ever created and I thought it was fun. It feels good to beat hard games. There's no sense of accomplishment from beating an easy game. It feels a lot better understanding Calculus than it does just knowing basic math, and there's lots of pay offs to knowing calculus in various fields of science and technology.

Non-Gamers either don't find video games fun in the first place and would rather go do other things anyway, (this group of people is very unlikely to all of the sudden start playing games) or they become frustrated easily at things they can't do within 10 seconds of starting, these are also the people who are likely to buy a guitar and then give up because they thought it looked easier than it was. Basically, non-gamers either don't want to play video games in the first place, or they don't have the patience to do things they can't do and probably aren't interested in doing anyway.

It's this trying to appeal to everybody bull**** that is really making me hate Nintendo. People have their own different taste and interest. Its like food, believe it or not there are actually people who don't like chocolate, for what ever reason they won't eat it. There was a big difference in attitude between Nintendo back then and Nintendo now. Back then Nintendo was trying to make games that were enjoyable, they were focusing on the games not the audience. Now Nintendo is trying to make games that Everyone will buy, the result of that is that they focus on market trends and opinions and they listen the non-gamers cry about it being to0 hard, and people saying it wasn't different enough and core gamers saying to was too easy and on and on. They're not making works of art anymore. They making stuff that they will sell. The result their Core Fans are either upset or blindly hoping Nintendo will pull something amazing out in the near future that is absolutely amazing, while things like Boom Blox and Super Paper Mario quietly gather dust on the shelves of non-gamers who had fun at first, but then stopped caring.

 

[Crimson King]

Honestly, why shouldn't Nintendo dumb down their games? Anyone remember Mario 64. That game was a BEAST in terms of difficulty throughout, but then you get to Mario Sunshine, and it's extremely easy. Harder games will always turn away casual gamers. It's simple logic. Why would a person who, by definition, does not want to spend a lot of time on a game, spend a lot of time on a game to get better?

In all likelihood, Zelda Wii will be quite easy, and use the actual story to sell to the core gamers. Believe it or not, but it's the trend of the market - Easier, shorter games sell.

 

[Firus]

Why shouldn't they? Because they shouldn't be making titles that will simply sell. Just as SuperRacoon said, instead of making simply enjoyable games, works of art, they're focusing on what will sell. Maybe it's the most economically sound thing for them to do, but I don't think it's the right thing for them to do.

And hard games will turn away casual gamers, but if they want to come into this industry, they should learn that video games shouldn't be picked up in five seconds. They're SUPPOSED to have a learning curve. What next, are they going to complain because they tried playing piano and they couldn't pick it up in five seconds? It's ridiculous of them to demand that.

 

[Eriatarka]

I love the idea of Nintendo and us gamers being friends, but the truth is that the don't care about the smaller audience, and if the cost of higher (much higher) profits is angry words from the gamers who want something more, they'll happily pay it. And that's the right approach, it's a business they're running, that just incidentally encourages a lot of brand loyalty.

My complaint is that the people whom the Zelda series is kinda important to (ie. us who grew up playing the games.) would appreciate a challenging Zelda game so much, whereas most of the casual audience probably don't care that much about the franchise. So Nintendo (potentially) selling it down the river of profitably mediocrity seems like such a shame when they could just make a different, non-Zelda game which would please the casual gamers just as much but not alienate the long-time Zelda fans. It would be just as easy to sell a new game to the Wii Fit people as it would be to sell them a Zelda game, since the Zelda name won't really mean anything to most of them anyway.
Anyway, these are just the words of someone who wants the N64 games all over again.
Nothing against casual gamers by the way, point is I wish they'd target Zelda at the gamers who want a challenge and give something else to the casuals.

It'll probably be a cool game either way, just a less satisfying challenge, perhaps.

 

[Red Exodus]

This and the fact that Wii has few games makes me sad I bought a Wii. The few games it has are just some mass appeal project instead of being an actual game. I've never seen a bigger sell out in this industry, they just keep pushing these shallow games and expect everyone to come running back, and the fact that most 3rd party companies are following suit doesn't help at all. I kinda feel more like I bought a toy than a gaming system.

I'm not some 'H4rdKore' gamer, I enjoy Smash [mostly Melee], Mario Kart and a little Mario Party but I absolutely hate when developers go out of their way to make games casual or whatever when it's an established series.

 

[M.K]

Can't we just wait until we see the fruit of Miyamoto's laborious concepts?

MEANING:

Let's see what he means next time a Zelda title comes out and THEN start/stop complaining!

 

[SkylerOcon]

Isn't a difficulty setting the solution here then? We can have an easy and a hard Zelda all at the same time. Casuals and hardcores are happy.

Easy games are bad, but game companies changing their long time franchises to cater to people who are buying a Wii because it has motion controls is just stupid. I'm not saying that companies should stop making casual games altogether, because games like the Sims are fun.

What makes me angry is when people grab an already well established franchise that is known for being difficult and tries to make it easier, just for the newbies.

 

[Overload]

Honestly, why shouldn't Nintendo dumb down their games? Anyone remember Mario 64. That game was a BEAST in terms of difficulty throughout, but then you get to Mario Sunshine, and it's extremely easy. Harder games will always turn away casual gamers. It's simple logic. Why would a person who, by definition, does not want to spend a lot of time on a game, spend a lot of time on a game to get better?

In all likelihood, Zelda Wii will be quite easy, and use the actual story to sell to the core gamers. Believe it or not, but it's the trend of the market - Easier, shorter games sell.

although I haven't played sunshine for more than five mins, I hear everyone say it is difficult

 

[aznegglover]

stuff like this worries me. Look what happened when they made mario kart and brawl "more accessible"

-shudders-

I'm scared :[

 

[Crimson King]

Why shouldn't they? Because they shouldn't be making titles that will simply sell. Just as SuperRacoon said, instead of making simply enjoyable games, works of art, they're focusing on what will sell. Maybe it's the most economically sound thing for them to do, but I don't think it's the right thing for them to do.

That's the thing. There is nothing making them want to focus on the core gamers.

And hard games will turn away casual gamers, but if they want to come into this industry, they should learn that video games shouldn't be picked up in five seconds. They're SUPPOSED to have a learning curve. What next, are they going to complain because they tried playing piano and they couldn't pick it up in five seconds? It's ridiculous of them to demand that.

Nintendo is, and always will be, a business. From there stand-point, is it be to sell a deep and difficult game to 1,000 die hard fans who will dissect it for four years until the next iteration comes out, or is it better to sell a simple and shallow game to 100,000 people that will play it for a month then buy the next iteration as soon as it comes out?

Isn't a difficulty setting the solution here then? We can have an easy and a hard Zelda all at the same time. Casuals and hardcores are happy.

Easy games are bad, but game companies changing their long time franchises to cater to people who are buying a Wii because it has motion controls is just stupid. I'm not saying that companies should stop making casual games altogether, because games like the Sims are fun.

What makes me angry is when people grab an already well established franchise that is known for being difficult and tries to make it easier, just for the newbies.

It is difficult to just add a difficulty setting. All difficulty settings can do is make the enemies harder, give you less health, and stuff like that. They can't make a dungeon deeper, more levels, etc for every difficulty. Also, two is not enough because you have those that easy will be too easy and hard will be too hard and medium just doesn't work either for the games with three, then what do they do? Nah, it's much easier to create an overall easier and accessible game with fancy motion control.

 

[Firus]

Can't we just wait until we see the fruit of Miyamoto's laborious concepts?

MEANING:

Let's see what he means next time a Zelda title comes out and THEN start/stop complaining!

I don't think there are many things you can take from "accessible" other than what we have taken,

Isn't a difficulty setting the solution here then? We can have an easy and a hard Zelda all at the same time. Casuals and hardcores are happy.

Easy games are bad, but game companies changing their long time franchises to cater to people who are buying a Wii because it has motion controls is just stupid. I'm not saying that companies should stop making casual games altogether, because games like the Sims are fun.

What makes me angry is when people grab an already well established franchise that is known for being difficult and tries to make it easier, just for the newbies.

Well, Nintendo wants to make money, and as we all know, the casuals are always screaming "WE LOVE NINTENDO BECAUSE THEY MAKE COOL GAMES WITH MOTION CENSORS."

although I haven't played sunshine for more than five mins, I hear everyone say it is difficult

It's a lot more difficult than Galaxy, that's for sure. I wouldn't call it easy or hard, it was kind of in the middle for me.

That's the thing. There is nothing making them want to focus on the core gamers.

Nintendo is, and always will be, a business. From there stand-point, is it be to sell a deep and difficult game to 1,000 die hard fans who will dissect it for four years until the next iteration comes out, or is it better to sell a simple and shallow game to 100,000 people that will play it for a month then buy the next iteration as soon as it comes out?

I'm not saying that there's a whole lot of incentive for them to remember the core gamers. I'm just saying I wish they'd have morals and stop giving the casuals obsessed with motion sensor everything.

 

[The Fail Tracer]

Man, this is pissing me off so badly. Zelda was one of the greatest game series' ever made, and now they're making it so easy it's boring. I wish they'd make one for the core gamers and one for the casual gamers.

Games need a challenge. Nintendo needs to realize something: SCREW the lazy people who can't take a while to get good at a game. Why should they have to appeal to people who could have cared less back when their games were good? They need to realize that they're losing their long-time fans over this "Wii Fit" crap, and other dumb things.

Hmm... Speaking of Wii Fit, why would they even bother to come out with that? People can exercise without spending all their money on a game system. They are charging people tons of money for pointless things, such as this.

I'm still a Nintendo fan, as they're still coming out with few, very few, good games. Even so, I am so angry about n00bing up the Zelda series. There are other people out there besides little kids and their parents, Nintendo. People who actually like a challenge.

We need a revolutionary game, or we're doomed.

 

[notftomearth7]

I don't think "dumbing it down" is needed, rather shortening the amount of things you have to do to complete certain quests.

 

[Bowser King]

They could make the game at a medium difficulty, which I still would hate. Zelda, Metroid and FE (which HAS NOT went casual ) are all games I play because they make you think. Not, "Walk into a dungeon and pull some random lever to enter the next room". Although zelda has this sometimes, they incorporate it in a way so that it actually has you work to get to that lever.

 

[Warlock*G]

http://www.nintendoeverything.com/?p=2069

Normally i wouldn't post stuff like this, but ever since E3 2008, Nintendo's been p**sing me off. Accessible means that there dumbing it down, and if you guys played Twilight Princess, youre wondering, " how can the dumb that down?" Exactly! ur opinions?

First Thief, then Brawl, now Zelda. Prepare for another series to enter the realm of the casual, where even wiitards can play.

**** this ****, I'm getting a PS3.

 

[Bowser King]

F-zero where instead of racing you play the racing party game from mario party 5. That is what is heading to us next....

 

[Firus]

You've almost reached the finish line! You've lapped everyone in the race!

In order to cross the finish line, you have to win a minigame which involves no skill, but pure stick-waggling! Have fun!

Ugh. I hate Nintendo sometimes. In fact, a lot of the time.

 

[Numa Dude]

Ways to make Zelda more accesible withought it being casual.

1. More focus on combat.

2. Difficulty settings.

This way puzzles won't be a problem and you can choose whether you want a casual or hardcore experience.

3. Make the story more focused on side quests but can still be completed withought them.

4. Multiple endings so both casual and hardcore will have a reason to do all the side quests to get better endings.

Just solved any problems with the story being too deep or long.

5. Make a half ***** multiplayer mode that's essentially Wii sports resort fencing with different colored Links.

Because casuals are too stupid to know the difference and would think it's a whole new experience.

6. Make Tingle playable at some point.

To see how many people I piss off with that comment.

7. But seriously a level where you play as the villain laying waste to a whole army would be epic.

Nothing to do with the casual vs. hardcore stuff I just think it'd be cool.

You see? There is no reason to get all pissed when it can easily be both accesible and hardcore.

 

[The Fail Tracer]

They could make the game at a medium difficulty, which I still would hate. Zelda, Metroid and FE (which HAS NOT went casual ) are all games I play because they make you think. Not, "Walk into a dungeon and pull some random lever to enter the next room". Although zelda has this sometimes, they incorporate it in a way so that it actually has you work to get to that lever.

Come to think of it, you're pretty right about that. Having to think and work to do stuff adds to the challenge. Twilight Princess, although it was pretty easy, the puzzles and the thinking it requires makes up for it. I guess it's just easy because of all the new features that allow you to kill an enemy while you're running.

But I'm still angry that we're going to be getting more and more of these other easy games made for little kids and their parents.

 

[MxGm]

1. More focus on combat.

2. Difficulty settings.

This way puzzles won't be a problem and you can choose whether you want a casual or hardcore experience.

3. Make the story more focused on side quests but can still be completed withought them.

4. Multiple endings so both casual and hardcore will have a reason to do all the side quests to get better endings.

Just solved any problems with the story being too deep or long.

5. Make a half ***** multiplayer mode that's essentially Wii sports resort fencing with different colored Links.

Because casuals are too stupid to know the difference and would think it's a whole new experience.

6. Make Tingle playable at some point.

To see how many people I piss off with that comment.

7. But seriously a level where you play as the villain laying waste to a whole army would be epic.

Nothing to do with the casual vs. hardcore stuff I just think it'd be cool.

You see? There is no reason to get all pissed when it can easily be both accesible and hardcore.

I agree with you, that way it would be accessible to everyone and hardcore gamers will not complain.

 

[Bowser King]

1. More focus on combat.

2. Difficulty settings.

This way puzzles won't be a problem and you can choose whether you want a casual or hardcore experience.

3. Make the story more focused on side quests but can still be completed withought them.

4. Multiple endings so both casual and hardcore will have a reason to do all the side quests to get better endings.

Just solved any problems with the story being too deep or long.

5. Make a half ***** multiplayer mode that's essentially Wii sports resort fencing with different colored Links.

Because casuals are too stupid to know the difference and would think it's a whole new experience.

6. Make Tingle playable at some point.

To see how many people I piss off with that comment.

7. But seriously a level where you play as the villain laying waste to a whole army would be epic.

Nothing to do with the casual vs. hardcore stuff I just think it'd be cool.

You see? There is no reason to get all pissed when it can easily be both accesible and hardcore.

Difficulty levels? With changed difficulty the only thing they will change is that there will be more enemies and yyou will your health quicker. The can't add new rooms to dungeons or make hard challenges.

 

[Numa Dude]

Difficulty levels? With changed difficulty the only thing they will change is that there will be more enemies and yyou will your health quicker. The can't add new rooms to dungeons or make hard challenges.

What the **** do you think I put "more focus on combat" for? To fix that genius.

 

[Bowser King]

Then that's pointless it would basically be a casual game now where you have to shack the wiimote around more to kill more monsters.....

 

[Foxtrotter]

Ew mah goodness... WHY does Nintendo want Zelda to be more "accessible" to casual gamers when the Wii already has Mario Party, Mario Kart, and the Rabids series?! I think Nintendo should leave the core franchises as they are, and let Mario Kart and Mario Party entertain the casual audience.

The best game to go semi-casual, in my opinion, would be Star Fox. Seriously, all you do is fly an Arwing around and shoot things. Add in a DECENT ground level, and this Fox main would be satisfied.

Immensely.

 

[Spire]

Here's what the Zelda series actually needs:

• Harder puzzles; longer dungeons (Tomb Raider quality)
• Enhanced weapon/item-combat system, rendering all weapons entirely usable as much as your sword
• Difficult bosses (Morpha/Bongo Bongo/Odolwa difficulty level at least)
• Larger, more challenging enemies (TP lacked these TREMENDOUSLY)
• Much larger world that's entirely open and explorable (like the Elder Scrolls series)
• Addition of smaller towns; more merchants; many more NPC's, and much more [optional] equipment
• Explorers - NPC's traveling the lands, dungeons, etc.
• Factions (Goron, Zora, Hyrule, Gerudo, etc) that can be joined, and...
• Many, many, many side-quests.

I could probably think of a lot more, but as a hardcore Zelda fan, this would definitely benefit it. Some of this could actually benefit the "accessibility" that Nintendo is shooting for. Making the game a bit more customizable, adding difficulty settings (which would apply to enemies, bosses, and perhaps even the prices on items), and adding much more content would satiate the core and casuals with giving us all many, many more things to do. Hell, throw in a bunch of mini-games (as Zelda has been known to do) for the casuals, that incorporates the balance board and what not.

 

[SkylerOcon]

Actually, I don't think that the balance board is an entirely bad idea. Don't get me wrong, if it's a major part of the gameplay, that would piss me off.

But, if you had to use it for optional attacks during the games, such as the golden wolf attacks in TP, that would be cool. It would add a little variety to the attacks.

 

[Numa Dude]

Then that's pointless it would basically be a casual game now where you have to shack the wiimote around more to kill more monsters.....

Wii Motion plus fixes that easily by adding depth to the combat other than waggle.

Difficult bosses (Morpha/Bongo Bongo/Odolwa difficulty level at least)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TSAaTCc1NE

Real difficult.