#1 Posted by TheeGravedigger (93 posts) -

Well, I just finished it, checking the system log, I played the game for 23 hours. So, $2 an hour, basically.

It felt short though, I was really surprised seeing it saying 23 hours. I felt it was more like 10-12 hours.

#2 Posted by ll_Exile_ll (1479 posts) -

Well first of all its a Zelda game, you shouldn't really be expecting much in the way challenge either combat wise or puzzle wise. Also, the $/hour ratio isn't exactly a good way to judge either the quality of difficulty of any game. Finally, if 23 hours felt like only 10, wouldn't that mean you were enjoying the game so much you lost your sense of time? That's what happens to me when I really get into a game.

#3 Edited by Lyisa (333 posts) -

Well first of all its a Zelda game, you shouldn't really be expecting much in the way challenge either combat wise or puzzle wise. Also, the $/hour ratio isn't exactly a good way to judge either the quality of difficulty of any game. Finally, if 23 hours felt like only 10, wouldn't that mean you were enjoying the game so much you lost your sense of time? That's what happens to me when I really get into a game.

Classic Zelda games weren't easy, so I dunno why you wouldn't expect some challenge if you missed all of 3d Zelda. Otherwise I agree.

#4 Posted by Fredchuckdave (5339 posts) -

You could always play Twilight Princess if you wanted to play a game that took forever.

#5 Posted by Wuddel (2079 posts) -

I am dying all the time, though I am not usually playing this type of games. And I just got my 3DS.

#6 Posted by NegativeCero (2976 posts) -

@lyisa said:

@ll_exile_ll said:

Well first of all its a Zelda game, you shouldn't really be expecting much in the way challenge either combat wise or puzzle wise. Also, the $/hour ratio isn't exactly a good way to judge either the quality of difficulty of any game. Finally, if 23 hours felt like only 10, wouldn't that mean you were enjoying the game so much you lost your sense of time? That's what happens to me when I really get into a game.

Classic Zelda games weren't easy, so I dunno why you wouldn't expect some challenge if you missed all of 3d Zelda. Otherwise I agree.

I can definitely confirm this. Despite having bought ALBW, I decided that I need to go back and finish Link to the Past. Enemies, especially bosses, will kill you if you're not careful. It's still an amazing game though (just got to the second of the 7 dungeons in the dark world).

#7 Edited by TheBlue (317 posts) -

While I do agree that the game was easy and kind of short, for me I feel there were many factors to this. Having played A Link to the Past back in the day as I'm sure many of you have, I definitely felt I already knew my way around the world and where I was going every time. If it were an entirely new version of Hyrule or whatever, a lot of us would've spent time exploring a lot more. The 3DS is capable of a much more expansive and fleshed out world, but they needed to stick to the LTTP world for this one, which I've always considered to be rather small. Also, Zelda hasn't always grown up with its fanbase. In some cases, they introduced darker elements and storylines (eg. Twilight Princess), but for the most part, Zelda has typically remained a lighthearted, sometimes cartoony adventure with generally the same puzzles and dungeon tricks. If you've played a bunch, the puzzles never become more than just a little tricky. In the end, I'm sorry you felt that you needed to quantify how much you paid with how much time you put in, but hopefully you had a good time with it?

#8 Edited by ryanwhom (290 posts) -

23 hours is a lot of time. I pay about 12 dollars for an hour and a half in the theater and theatergoers treat needlessly long movies as they should; a waste of their time. A game's job isnt to consume as much time as possible. It should be exactly as long as it takes to tell its story and solve its gameplay. People should be angry when a 23 hour game takes 40 hours to beat because its wasting a huge amount of their time. Yet people love Bethesda and Rockstar, I dont get it I guess.

#9 Edited by HatKing (5838 posts) -

For some reason the whole dollar-to-hour ratio grosses me out. It kind of makes the whole medium feel like a theme park rather than a place to experience a creative vision or be told a story. Though, I guess it's kind of a hard stigma to shake when you look at the roots of video games (note: film has similar roots as gimmicky attractions). If a game succeeds in creating something meaningful, then I couldn't care less how long it took to do it. And I get the whole "I don't have a lot of money, I want something that will last me" mentality. But as a person who grew up on games like Super Mario Bros., Excitebike, and Duck Hunt (all relatively short experiences), I have little sympathy for those unwilling to appreciate short and sweet experiences.

Also, I think I'm one of the weird ones who doesn't really mind an easy experience. Especially for a handheld game. I mean, sometimes I just want a game to happen to me, I want to immerse myself. And that can be difficult if I'm too frustrated to continue playing. Of course, difficult/challenging games have their place too (and that can be a different sort of immersion if applied correctly).

Sorry for the diatribe.

#10 Posted by xaLieNxGrEyx (2605 posts) -

You could always play Twilight Princess if you wanted to play a game that took forever.

The worst part of The Legend of Zelda: Toilet Paper was Ganon being impossibly easy

#11 Posted by Xeiphyer (5597 posts) -

I was a little disappointed with the difficulty as well. The first Lorule dungeon I did was the Dark Palace and found it pretty challenging in terms of difficulty and puzzles. Then every dungeon after that was basically a breeze.

Still, its for everyone so I can't complain too much because I like me some puzzle games, and some people will find the game a lot harder. Plus playing Lttp a zillion times as a kid meant that the combat in this game was crazy easy for me and I ended up beating it without ever dying.

Hopefully Hero mode is going to be more challenging, although knowing the answers to all the puzzles and the dungeon layouts kind of makes me uninterested.

#12 Edited by GERALTITUDE (2996 posts) -

If I asked somebody Hey what'd you think about this game? and they broke it down to a dollar/per hour value I would never listen to any opinion they had about anything. Ever.

All that BS aside, to address the difficulty: meh. I can't remember ever thinking Zelda was challenging. Not after I turned 12 anyways. It's impossible to compare difficulty of an old Zelda to a new one unless you give it to a young person who's never played either, but I imagine some of you just remember Zelda being harder when you were young. It's never been hard, but anybody can get stumped some times. There's a thread around here somewhere that's literally just "I'm stuck and have no idea how to progress".

Online
#13 Posted by Tireyo (6409 posts) -

Well, 23 hours of a Zelda game is fine for me though it's not great. I prefer 35-40 plus hour Zelda games.

#14 Edited by Aegon (5419 posts) -

I think it's challenging here and there. It took me a while circling around an area in the Thieve's Hideout before I realized the solution. Of course, it was simple when I figured it out (MERGE! [behind a thing]), but still. Also that cyclops ambush was kinda intense. Had to fight them a second time (cover the flanks by staying in a corner and spam the sword).

I don't know how I feel about stumbling (literally) into the solutions to extra stuff such as the maimais (sp). I was using the pegasus boots and just happened to run into a tree which caused apples to fall. That's literally the only use for the boots I've found so far. I had seen a maimai earlier in Lorule on a treetop and didn't know how to get it. Now I'll have to go back.

#15 Posted by Embryonic (144 posts) -

@lyisa said:

@ll_exile_ll said:

Well first of all its a Zelda game, you shouldn't really be expecting much in the way challenge either combat wise or puzzle wise. Also, the $/hour ratio isn't exactly a good way to judge either the quality of difficulty of any game. Finally, if 23 hours felt like only 10, wouldn't that mean you were enjoying the game so much you lost your sense of time? That's what happens to me when I really get into a game.

Classic Zelda games weren't easy, so I dunno why you wouldn't expect some challenge if you missed all of 3d Zelda. Otherwise I agree.

I can definitely confirm this. Despite having bought ALBW, I decided that I need to go back and finish Link to the Past. Enemies, especially bosses, will kill you if you're not careful. It's still an amazing game though (just got to the second of the 7 dungeons in the dark world).


Yeah, ALttP doesn't mess around. It doesn't even include healing items outside a dungeon's boss door.

#16 Posted by marchismo (70 posts) -

My 3DS clock says that my time played was 15:15. Seems a little short, but I missed two whole heart containers and they were 15 hours I enjoyed, so whatever. I did feel that the game had a good level of challenge but got progressively easier after completing the first Lorule dungeon (Turtle Rock for me). I might go back and give hero mode a shot at some point.

#17 Edited by BisonHero (6236 posts) -

I find myself actually intentionally putting the game down so I don't just blast through it in like 4-5 sittings. I kinda want it to last, but the dungeons just aren't stumpers in the way that ALttP's dungeons were to some extent. The dungeons actually seem really straightforward, though they have some cool elements (the dungeon in thief town where you have to escort the thief out is done pretty well).

I mean, there were rarely hard puzzles in ALttP, but sometimes it just wasn't obvious where to go next in the dungeon, or there was some bullshit where you had to hit a switch to raise or lower some blocks but you weren't sure what that changed exactly and the thing you had to do might be several rooms over. This time, all the block raising/lowering seems confined to one particular room in the dungeon, so you never really fuck yourself by doing it wrong because there is always another switch in the next room that is easily accessed, and you almost never have to even do basic shenanigans like "use bomb/boomerang to trigger far away switch". I haven't finished all the Lorule dungeons, so maybe a few are harder.

At least the game actually has enemies that do 2 or 3 hearts of damage per hit, which every 3D Zelda has been afraid to do. It gets so boring when every enemy does 1 heart or half a heart of damage, but you have like 14 fucking heart containers so who cares.

Anyway, I guess I've accepted that Zelda isn't going to be as hard as NES Zelda or ALttP ever again, because the dungeons are designed in a way that leads the player around pretty well, and the boss attacks are now designed to be much, much easier to avoid. Some of the Dark World bosses in ALttP were kind of assholes (especially the giant moth in the upper left of the map if you didn't kill him quickly), but so far none of the Lorule bosses have been particularly rough.

#18 Edited by Gonmog (580 posts) -

First shame on you for doing that dollar to play time ratio. Shame on you!!!

Second. It's Zelda. They have never been that hard. Some may have found one or a other hard, i found OoT way harder then LttP. That could have just been the jump from 2d to 3d for me though.

Third, it was made to be a portable game as well. So the dungeons are bite sized for the most part. But still fun.

Fourth...SHAME ON YOU!!!

#19 Posted by Morningstar (2145 posts) -

If you are looking at the dollar per hour ratio you are doing it wrong.

#20 Posted by ProfessorEss (7283 posts) -

I think lack of difficulty is the main reason why most modern Nintendo games have been failing to click with me.

#21 Edited by BisonHero (6236 posts) -

@professoress said:

I think lack of difficulty is the main reason why most modern Nintendo games have been failing to click with me.

Yeah, they definitely went the "comfort food" route at some point.

The SNES was the last time they designed games that were actually tough. Very few N64-and-onwards Nintendo games really seem particularly hard. Mario 64, some of the levels are large enough that I just couldn't find the fucking star it was telling me to find (there's a cave level where you're Metal Mario that I remember being annoying). Ocarina of Time had those asshole skeletons that would just block everything, but that was just poor design and otherwise the game was super easy. Pikmin 1 is probably the only remotely challenging thing Nintendo made in the Gamecube era (F-Zero GX is the hardest motherfucker ever, but Nintendo didn't develop it). And nothing lately has been hard except for that secret final level in Super Mario 3D Land that actually took me like an hour to beat.

#22 Edited by ProfessorEss (7283 posts) -

@bisonhero: I heard DK for the Wii was challenging but I never got around to trying it.

I also wonder what people mean by challenging when discussing Nintendo. Do they mean challenging compared to Kirby's Epic Yarn? or challenging compared to Rayman Legends? I really want to play 3D World but watching videos of that game has been leading me to believe there is next to no challenge involved.

#23 Posted by Veektarius (4642 posts) -

If you don't calculate dollar to time ratio then you're going to end up paying $60 for 4 hour experiences. And that's not cool.

#24 Posted by Ryuku_Ryosake (203 posts) -

Well having played through ALttP in recent memory. I can confirm that LBW is pretty much the same exact length maybe slightly shorter.

Yes is was a bit too easy. If it was much harder the renting mechanics would probably be a little too frustrating for some. But I have played some hero mode and it is no joke. It quadruples enemy damage. Which makes the minimum hit two hearts. I haven't confirmed it myself but that means those Lions on death mountain would do 12 HEARTS a hit. So again Hero mode is no joke.

#25 Edited by MormonWarrior (2544 posts) -

I got 100% in 16.5 hours. I loved every second and thought the difficulty level was just right. Didn't die once. I don't think it's because Nintendo games have gotten dramatically easier since I find the old stuff super easy too...it's mostly just familiarity and skill.

I still have the only user review of this game too apparently.

@tireyo Wait a minute...what Zelda games are 35-40 hours? I've played every game in the series multiple times and it's never been more than maybe (maybe) 25 hours to get 100% for me, not even using guides. I think I got semi-close to 30 on Twilight Princess because of those stupid bugs. Skyward Sword was maybe the longest, but it sure didn't earn it. It was super padded out with backtracking and repeated objectives. Zelda games have never been like Persona or Final Fantasy length experiences.

#26 Edited by BisonHero (6236 posts) -

@mormonwarrior: Collecting all the Pictographs for statue making in Wind Waker took a long ass time, but yeah, that's padding and the actual game isn't all that long. Also I refuse to believe that anyone, ever, has collected all of the Golden Skulltulas without a guide.

#27 Posted by MormonWarrior (2544 posts) -

@bisonhero: You severely underestimate little obsessive completionist me when I was like 11 or 12 years old. Since then when I want to do my yearly playthrough of OoT I use a guide for the heart pieces/skulltulas but I found them on my own as a kid.

#28 Posted by ArbitraryWater (11495 posts) -

Zelda games haven't been hard in a long time, especially the combat. That being said I'm still playing though OOT Master Quest here and there and some of the puzzles they throw at you are real jerks. I'm half convinced you need the Fire Arrows for the Fire Temple, which means I have to complete the Water Temple first.

Seriously. Master Quest is crazy. People should play it.

Online
#29 Posted by tourgen (4432 posts) -

I mean, ... it is a Zelda game. What did you expect?

#30 Posted by Tidel (360 posts) -

I thought it was just right. The penalty for death was inconvenience, but enough of one that I was wary of extending too far and felt more engaged throughout. And I found some of the dungeons gave me just the right amount of head-scratching for them to feel worthwhile. Nothing in the game felt like padding or busywork. It was fun to play from start to finish, enough that I immediately booted up Hero mode.

Hard or easy don't affect my enjoyment much. There is no objective worth in challenge.

#31 Edited by deepsouth (2 posts) -

First of all, for you people who say zelda games have never been that hard, well that arguable. Some Zelda titles had some challenging dungeons. Majoras Mask had the perfect difficulty in my opinion. Ocarina of Time Master Quest was difficult. Dont care what anybody says. Twilight Princess had some challenging dungeons. BUT,..... This new game...... A link between Worlds. You guys are being to nice. This was By FAR the easiest zelda ever made. By the fourth dungeon I felt sooo over powered. Eventually there is no need in even fighting the enemies, you can simply just bouce off of them. You are damn near invincible. The lack of difficulty realy took away from the game. It made getti g the item upgrades almost pointless. Why would I want to upgrade my sword when I can already kill Every enemy in the game with ease? Why would I want to upgrade my armor when I'm already damn near invincable? and the rupees. Geez, I mean it was sooo easy to get rupees in this game. The whole item rental system is flawed becouse of this. Whats the point of even renting the item? Why not just start the game with every fucking item??! By the fourth dungeon I had every item and was damn near maxed out on rupees. So for the rest of the game, rupees were literally worthless. The potion shop, only had to visit there once really. Filled up four bottles of blue potions, and never used one of them! This game was so easy it broke the game in my opinion. I got to thinking why they would make a zelda game this easy. Then it hit me. This game was made for little kids. Little kids are the target audience for this zelda title. There is no other explanation. This game wasn't made for nintendos more mature, experienced zelda fan. It was made for kids who have never played zelda, to get them into the series. Nintendo has officially turned its back on the older, LOYAL Zelda fanbase. If thier console version of Zelda mimics the difficulty of A Link Between Worlds, I will turn my back on Nintendo for good.

#32 Posted by BisonHero (6236 posts) -

@deepsouth: To be fair, I think Nintendo always looks differently at portable Zeldas. Maybe not Link's Awakening (which is honestly the true sequel to Link to the Past, more than this game at least), because LA was actually pretty tough in the later dungeons and you had zero bottles whatsoever in that game.

But after that, they allowed Capcom to make a few Game Boy Color/GBA Zelda games, which is neither here nor there, but arguably Nintendo wasn't super interested in making portable Zeldas at that time. But have you played the DS Zeldas? They're as ridiculously easy as this one. Maybe that was because it was a new control scheme and they didn't want to ask too much of people, but the enemies are not particularly aggressive nor are they numerous.

Also, in general, the 3DS is a kids' system in Japan. Similar to the West, adults are all busy playing shitty Bejeweled knockoffs on their smartphones. Gamers/otaku are playing Monster Hunter on the PSP (and I guess now on the 3DS for the more recent MH games), but the DS/3DS do really well with kids, between Mario and all the Pokemon games. And it's honestly the same in North America. How many adults or teens do you know that think a 3DS is all that cool, compared to having a smartphone? Sure, if they're a gamer in the know they respect the 3DS, but your average person is fine with playing kinda bad games on their smartphone.

So it wouldn't surprise me that this Zelda was designed for kids. A lot of 3DS owners are probably kids.

#33 Edited by TheeGravedigger (93 posts) -

The $/Hr ratio was in my head mostly because my gaming budget has become a bit tighter recently and I'm having to justify my purchases a bit more.

#34 Posted by MEATBALL (3092 posts) -

I didn't feel it was too easy, I found the dungeons all satisfying to play through and solve the various puzzles. Combat is easy, I guess, but I've never played Zelda for challenging combat.

#35 Edited by deepsouth (2 posts) -

@BisonHero: I agree with everything you said. And yes, the DS games were easy, but not this easy. At least they had that central dungeon, which was a pain in the ass. But anyways, yea ALBW was made for kids, and so is the 3ds. And thats ok, I understand kids are a huge part of Nintendos consumer base. ( even though the average age for a gamer is 30.) But it would have been so easy to put a higher difficulty in the game for the more experienced player. But they didn't. Not until after you beat the game. In my opinion that is a slap in the face to thier older fanbase, the ones who have supported them all these years. And im not the only one saying this, there are many others out there just as upset as I am over this. I just hope Nintendo has someone that reads internet forums so they do not repeat this mistake on the console version coming in the near future.

#36 Posted by BionicMonster (1032 posts) -

To those saying combat is easy, once you beat the game you can start a new one with tougher enemies.

#37 Edited by Superkenon (1397 posts) -

The secret "difficulty option" in Zelda games has always been the three-heart challenge. They actually seem to make an intentional nod at it in this game. ALttP was the one game where you couldn't avoid the hearts, as you had to grab them to make the pendant appear after a boss. LBW copies this presentation, but adds an invisible timer that drops the pendant anyway if you do nothing, heh.

Anyhoo, I'm no speedrunner by any stretch, in fact I'm a pretty sloppy-ass player, but whenever I go back to ALttP, I can clear the whole game in about four hours, even going around grabbing all the unnecessary crap. It was never a very long game -- it just BECAME long because we weren't as good at games when we were younger.

This game seems to be paced similarly, and it kinda excites me, actually. As much as I want it to go forever, I'm happy to have a short-but-sweet adventure, because that makes it imminently replayable. I can already tell it will be as lasting as ALttP as a game I'll keep coming back to for additional playthroughs, either to play straight or come up with my own weird challenges.

A secret to video games: you can play 'em more than once.

#38 Edited by PandaBear (1310 posts) -

You could always play Twilight Princess if you wanted to play a game that took forever.

I think that says it all. I had 50-ish hours on that game and wasn't done. I'd say about 20 of those were actually fun, the rest was me looking for the fun.

I got it at launch and gave up a month or so later. Then tried to finish it off before Skyward Sword and got bored after an hour or two.

A 20-ish hour good Zelda game is far more desirable than a 40+ hour boring Zelda game

#39 Posted by makari (595 posts) -

Play it on Hero Mode.

#40 Posted by FancySoapsMan (5808 posts) -

I finished the second dungeon in fifteen minutes. Kinda disappointing considering how much praise the dungeon design has gotten but maybe the others will live up to my expectations.

#41 Posted by Buneroid (428 posts) -

Am I fucking terrible at this game? I died to the first few bosses about two times each until a figured out their patterns. I feel so ashamed. To be fair for one of them I was half watching the VGX awards :S

#42 Posted by Video_Game_King (36100 posts) -

I initially read the title as "A bit too sexy?".

Please tell me that this game is the appropriate amount of sexy.