Q&A Mailbag: 06-21-2005

Voice Acting in Zelda

N-Sider,

With all this talk about how Zelda could be made stronger than it already is, the story and storytelling seems to be the next direction after graphics for the Zelda franchise. I think what the storytelling needs to nudge it over the edge is some quality, well written and acted voice acting.

People talk about how Wind Waker's story was much more complicated, deep, and well written. I for one, however, found the lack of voices to be somewhat... distracting. Especially glaring is the final sequence with Ganondorf, Zelda, Link, and the King of Red Lions on the top of the tower. There was fantastic story telling, wonderful atmospheric effects and beautiful animation. However, as far as vocal audio went, there were merely grunts from Ganondorf (with some wonderful villain dialogue) gibberish from the King, and a giggle from Zelda. Such opportunities exist for great voice acting. Link doesn't even have to talk, others talk to him.

I think it's one avenue that Nintendo should definitely be looking down, and I wanted to hear your opinions on the matter.

Thanks for reading,

- Andrew Salter

Transparent Storylines

I don't know if this is the address to write q & a to or not, but it looked like it on the website?

anyways, all i wanted to say was that I think people don't notice the storyline in a zelda game because they are the one's living/experiencing it. There's some kind of storyline or plot to your actual, real life, but most people don't notice it because it is transparent to them. The same kind of thing goes for zelda games. I think Majora's mask is a perfect example of a game with an INCREDIBLY complex story with plenty of established characters. just because it isn't spelled out for you in text and motion videos doesn't mean it isn't there. I'd say it's there is short story about how each character is living out what they think/don't think are the last three days of their life, not to mention link's own story. Links ability to travel back to the first day is a really clever way to let the gamer discover the story of every character he interacts with. And that doesn't even take into account the different races (zoras, humanoids, gorons...) of characters responding in different ways collectivly to the impending doom of the moon. Then there's the shifts in urgency from the first day to the last, and the overall helpless feel the player gets after a while when you realize that no matter what you do, you can really only help/save one group of people or person at a time (until you beat it of course). before i get all carried away though, that's mostly all i wanted to say.

- Aaron Parker

Longest-Letter-EVAR!11

I'd just like to follow up on my lengthy Zelda letter that was posted in the latest mailbag, 'cause I think you misunderstood some of what I was trying to say. First, regarding the story--I guess it's a relative thing. You say that if I don't consider OoT, MM and TWW (augh, too many acronyms!) to have an epic story then I must be a little crazy, and you're right that, compared to let's-drop-you-right-into-the-game-without-even-an-introduction Zelda I, those games are the War and Peace of the interactive story scene. But let's compare. Against an RPG like Tales of Symphonia, the Final Fantasies or Xenosaga, The Legend of Zelda has nothing. Before you slam me for bringing in a story-focused genre which has at LEAST twice the number of hours to deliver the tale in, consider also Beyond Good and Evil, which has the best friggin' story and characters I have EVER seen in a videogame, and busts it all out in half the time that it takes to finish Wind Waker. BG&E is an epic story and no Zelda compares. I don't mean to dismiss the Zelda series as having no story at all, and I didn't mean to imply that the tale was lame, either.

But to me, a compelling and epic story requires two things: strong characters with Development (capitalized because it's so important), and a complex and involved narrative arc which dangles mystery and plot twists in one's face until the very end when everything is resolved. Wind Waker, for all its greatness, has little of either. The fleshing out of Ganondorf's personality (I empathized--a little--with the bugger by the end, and that was a nice touch) notwithstanding, the Zelda series has never featured very many characters with actual personalities, and those that have them don't really change in any significant way. I still LIKE the characters, but I never cared for Zelda or even Link half as much as I did for Jade and Pey'j by the end of Beyond Good and Evil. The characters in the Zelda games, because of the primarily-solo-wandering nature of the game, don't really get much of a chance to come alive in any way and imprint themselves upon my consciousness. I therefore have little emotional involvement with the various NPCs and that, in my opinion, hurts the story--after all, what is a play without its actors?

As for the scenario arc, or whatever you want to call it, while it's true that there is a great deal in between the dungeon-crashing and boss-bashing, how is it not just embellishment atop the latter? We know, from the moment we boot up a Zelda game, what's going to happen. We may not know that we will climb a fortress, knocking out searchlights and whacking a huge bird with a ridiculously-large hammer (heh heh heh), or just what form the next dungeon will take, or what secrets lie in that cave in the distance, but we still DO know that eventually we're going to proceed to that next dungeon, collect something cool to power up with, and then do it again and again until we can throw down with the G-Man (or Majora's Mask, but you get the idea), and there really isn't anything beyond that. RPGs may also break down into something similar, but they manage to disguise it in a way that the Zelda series does not. In Tales, you play 20+ hours only to discover that the goal you've been striving for all this time is not the end, and that there's a whole new quest to embark on--and then that quest goes places you could never have imagined. Xenosaga is a space opera, for crying out loud, which makes you feel like something HUGE is going on and you're not going to know what it is till you're through it. BG&E, again negating the length requirement, does that sort of thing too. I play (and love, mind you) the Zelda series because it has excellent and compelling gameplay. I do not play it because of the story. Am I at all compelled by it? Yes--each of the games still has its moments, no argument. Do I feel like I'm part of something big and breathtaking while playing, and remember the story with emotion afterwards? No, and it is for this reason that I don't consider the Zelda stories to be epic. Link may save the world of Termina from fiery destruction by the creepiest evil moon/mask combo in the entire universe (probably the only one, too), and that, I suppose, is epic in magnitude, but it nevertheless doesn't come off as an epic, far-reaching, captivating tale.

GREAT game, but not an epic tale to my mind.

Now (after that huge monologue), did Beyond Good and Evil have to sacrifice exploration and imagination-provocation (heh) in order to deliver such a kicking story? I'm not so sure. It's hard to become Jade like you can impose yourself on Link (and kinda pointless), and the world may not be quite as open and free-roaming, but there's still plenty of exploration to be done and magic to unearth. I see no reason why a Zelda game couldn't present a story on this scale and this involving, while still preserving the Zelda spirit. Make Link interact with people more! Make lots of characters like Sheik who keep on popping up but give them more active roles, deeper personalities, and true development so, by the end, you really worry at the possibility of one of them kicking the bucket (which is a danger). Make the story more than just an extension of Evil Dude rears his ugly head so let's level up and beat him down; give true plot twists that aren't just "gasp! You're really _____!" You're right--WW does have a deeper, more focused story than Ocarina and MM. Let's see that sort of jump again, but add in the characters and character development and mysteries beyond the "Oooh, I wonder what's on THAT island" sort. Surely this is doable, and I can't believe it would make anyone UNhappy. And hey! I've been pointing out how the length of an RPG isn't necessary because a game like BG&E can pull of a masterpiece like none other in 10 or 15 hours, but with the rumored promise of a 70+ hour playtime ( http://cube.ign.com/articles/606/606585p1.html ) for the new Zelda, it'll have just as much time as an RPG anyway!

At any rate, we may just have different definitions of "epic," but regardless I hope you now understand what I'm talking about. Oh, and speaking of different definitions, as for gameplay--I'm not at all dismissing the power of gameplay tweaks. But they are, as you said yourself, tweaks. Look at how much difference the tweaking of combat made in WW--think how much difference a fundamental change to the formula could bring. That said, I'm not positive I ever actually said that I WANTED massive changes, and I'm still not sure whether I do or not. If anything, such would be related the story changes described above. Altering the game to greatly increase the role of NPCs would go a long way towards enriching the story AND making the game a different beast, and I think the Zelda series could use such a shakeup, if for no other reason than for us to possibly discover that we PREFER same ol' same ol'.

And Jeff, I meant that Nintendo has little reason, in terms of consumer demand, to RADICALLY change anything between WW and the new Zelda besides graphics. I've heard the opinion voiced that the new Zelda's incredible realism is a way of assuaging the tempers of all those who didn't like "Celda," and whether or not one accepts that theory, the outcry WAS over the graphic change. What does it prove? All those gamers could see was graphics they didn't like, and now they're getting the graphics they wanted.

If everything else was crud, they'd still be unhappy (or at least one would like to think so), but as long as everything else remains AS good--but not-necessarily changed in any large way--I firmly believe there will be a lot of people who will be satisfied. As for story, what it comes down to is this: there are, I guess, two types. There is the sort of story which you really have to wrap your mind around, one that captivates you, mystifies you, and never lets go through all the cyclonic developments and earthquakes of plot twist until the very end, and it is this kind I consider "epic." Then there is the simple story, which can be just as masterfully delivered and interesting but requires considerably less emotional involvement and (this sounds negative, but isn't) thought, the sort you can read and enjoy and then more or less forget about until the next time you pick up the book.

Legends can fall into this category, and, unsurprisingly, it is this sort which I consider the Zelda series to be. There is nothing wrong with either sort. I'd just like to see a Zelda game with an epic story, that's all. It doesn't have to make my brain hurt like Xenosaga (or Xenogears...), but I would like more than what we've gotten.

And finally, because this topic will never be let go: Wind Waker's looks...I NEVER denied the beauty of the game. I am, in fact, one of the few whom I know who was not at all upset by the graphical change when it was first announced. It IS a wonderful-looking game. But you cannot deny that there were, and perhaps still are, plenty of gamers who felt differently. That's all I was saying. I don't agree with them, but they do exist.

As for the latest N-Banter, I think you came down far too hard on Matt (and not because he has the same name as I). Matt is doing exactly what a fanboy does NOT, which is to look at the cold, hard facts. I don't think he wishes Nintendo to produce the N-station 3 at all, and he's perfectly willing to give simple stuff a chance. His point is simply that the gamers who own PS2s and X-Boxes (the majority, in other words), are still happily buying the same games with the same, tired game designs, and have given no indication that they intend to do otherwise in the future.This is reality. To therefore ignore this entire consumer base, convinced that they don't really want what they're buying when they clearly do, is a huge mistake. To design a console which does not support the same ol' stuff is to alienate all of those gamers and the companies who make games, and that would be financial suicide. But, as you pointed out, Nintendo has no intention of doing that. I think Matt is just worried that they'll focus TOO much on producing the simple stuff and not support the old-school crowd enough, which could doom their chances of dominance and indeed continued market presence. As a Nintendo die-hard, he doesn't want that. You're right that, prior to the NES, gamers didn't know they wanted it. How could they? But there have been a LOT of other new ideas that gamers STILL didn't want after the stuff came out. What happens to Nintendo if this is the case with Revolution, especially when they've already got games and systems they're happy with? Disaster, that's what. You suggest Matt doesn't understand Nintendo's philosophy, that he's too fan-boyish and uneducated. But take a look at this paragraph which I jacked outta the offending IGNCube mailbag:

"According to Nintendo, players are declining, or will decline in the future. However, this only seems to be true of Nintendo players. I look at sales of PlayStation 2 and Xbox games and they are on the rise. Sales of Halo 2 did not decline compared to the original. Sales of San Andreas did not see a dramatic reduction compared to its predecessor. The market is healthy. There are millions of gamers out there buying these titles. Why ignore that? For a company that always reverts to the bottom line, which is profitability, going against the grain of the industry and its consumer base doesn't seem the most logical move."

Now, explain to me how this is uneducated in any way? Seems perfectly logical to me. He doesn't want Nintendo to just follow in Microsoft and Sony's footsteps, but he wants it to realize that there are a LOT of already-established gamers who are, and maybe they should receive just as much attention as the theoretical five-million more Revolution might attract. This is well-reasoned and good business. Nintendo cannot just blindly assume that gamers will follow its whims if it wishes to survive--its lackluster position in the current market is evidence enough of that. I am a hardcore gamer, and though I love Nintendo most I am willing to play other consoles (originally only 'cause Sony snagged Square, but what can you do). I still want what the current crop of games delivers. I can't wait to play through Ratchet & Clank: UYA and Jak III (once they go to Greatest Hits and my cheapo budget can afford them). I'm excited about what the Revolution offers, but I'm more interested in deep gaming experiences than simplistic ones (RPGs are my favorite genre, after all), and I'll keep wanting them for a long time yet, whether Nintendo thinks so or not. Why should I be neglected? Nintendo says it will continue to fully support those of us who want this big-budget, big-deal stuff, but it's said things like that before (continuing strong GBA support, post-DS, anyone?), and what I'm worried about, and what Matt's worried about, is that it will not deliver, and will thus abandon the current crop of gamers in quest of a dream that might or might not come to fruition. Innovation does not have to exclude everything else. You suggest Matt is too skeptical and has no faith, but if you read all of his mailbags you'd know that he has plenty of faith...it just isn't blind.

And finally, so that there will be SOMETHING that I can be reasonably sure we'll agree on...BEYOND GOOD & EVIL ROCKS THE FREAKIN' HOUSE DOWN!!!!!! It is the ultimate crime against humanity that the gaming world forsook that gem, and thus hurt me personally by denying me any possibility of a sequel, an especially nasty truth after the game's ending...

Do I have the Longest-Letter-EVAR!11 Award? ;)

Peace

- Matt Griffis