The Legend of Zelda: The Minish Cap's dungeon design | Boss Keys

Hi! My name's Mark, and this is Boss Keys - a research project to figure out how Nintendo makes the dungeons in The Legend of Zelda games. This time, we're looking at The Legend of Zelda: The Minish Cap, a 2004 Game Boy Advance game made by Capcom - who previously made Oracle of Ages and Oracle of Seasons. This game's big gimmick is that Link can shrink down to the size of a pea, and escape through tiny holes to find hidden rooms - and a secret race of microscopic people.

Unusually, this core idea is also prominent in the dungeons, where you'll need to shrink down to solve puzzles like entering these clockwork soldiers to turn them on or off. In fact, some dungeons are played entirely in Minish size and you'll find yourself fighting huge bosses that are actually just normal enemies. The best boss, though, is in the Fortress of Winds and has you wrecking this robot head so you can shrink down, sneak in, and blow it up from the inside.

Another good boss, which has you leaping between flying monsters high above the Palace of Winds, uses the game's other key idea: splitting Link into multiple forms. This comes straight out of Four Swords which is the multiplayer component of the GBA's Link to the Past port, and was also done by Capcom. It's interesting to see a puzzle motif build throughout the entire game. In the third dungeon, the Fortress of Winds, you'll find puzzles about splitting Link into two. Then you'll get puzzles about splitting into three in the Palace of Winds. And splitting into four in the final dungeon, Dark Hyrule Castle.

The game also has the dungeon-specific puzzle motifs we talked about last episode. So in Deepwood Shrine you instantly learn about pulling back mushrooms to spring over gaps, and then that idea is remixed - sometimes you only want to pull the mushroom back a certain amount. And eventually you'll need to use the key item, the Gust Jar, to grab mushrooms from afar. Unfortunately, some of the puzzles are undercut by this chap: Ezlo. He's your talking hat and he likes to offer tips and advice unrequested. Now I like the idea of being able to ask for help if needed but old Captain Obvious here just can't wait to chime in.

Link's companions have changed throughout the series. He started out alone, but that famously changed with the introduction of Navi in Ocarina of Time. However, I think we'll go more in-depth on these "helpful" companions in a later video. Minish Cap is interesting because it has some dungeons that feel like the levels we encountered in the first six Zelda games I looked at for Boss Keys. Fortress of Winds, for example, could be a middle dungeon in one of the Oracle games.

Others, though, feel like the more simplistic dungeons I saw in Wind Waker. Palace of Winds definitely could have come from that game. And this made me realise that I need some new language and better definitions to really talk about what makes these two types of dungeons different. And I think there are four key questions we can ask of Fortress of Winds and Palace of Winds... wait, that's confusing. Let's call them Fortress and Palace. I think there are four key questions we can ask of Fortress and Palace to decide what type of dungeon they are.

Question one: does the dungeon have branching paths? In Fortress, there are points where the path forks and the player must pick which route to explore first. In Palace, the player almost never gets to pick a route and the path forward is very clear. Now this isn't about giving the player a choice in the sequence of events. A dungeon can have a branching system, even if every branch, except one, is currently a dead end.

But having the route branch out serves two purposes. It means the player must explore to find the correct path. And it means that the other paths will be behind the player, and so they'll have to backtrack after they find a key or unlock an item or flip a switch. Question two: does the player have a choice in the sequence of events? So, this is when the dungeon has branching paths, and multiple routes are valid. In Fortress, the player can go and get this key - or this key. And when they get here, they can choose to go through one door or the other. Palace, on the other hand, is mostly set in stone but at one section you can get these two keys in either order before unlocking this door.

Ultimately, one path will eventually lead you to a dead end, until you complete the other path. In Fortress, if you go through the door on the right first, you'll hit this room that's filled with mud. So you'll need to go back and go through the door on the left to get the Mole Mitts. Question three: does the player have to do any backtracking? This is also contingent on the dungeon having branching paths because, as I said, you need to leave a locked door behind you, so you have to walk back, later, with the key. But the extent of the backtracking depends on the dungeon design.

Fortress has quite significant backtracking. The boss door, for example, is accessed from this central room and so eventually you'll have to come back here to finish the dungeon. And depending on the order you do things, you may have to return to certain areas after you grab the Mole Mitts. Palace does not. After each obstacle is cleared, you move on and never need to return. Any diversions you do make, to get a key for example, are short.

Question four: does the player have to do the backtracking themselves? I talked about this in the episode on Wind Waker. How the player gets the key item and is then lead directly to the room where they need to use it. It's basically a level design cheat because the dungeon has backtracking, but the player doesn't actually have to do it themselves. So, in Fortress, when you get the Mole Mitts it's on you to figure out where to use them.

But in Palace, when you get the Roc's Cape your route back is locked off and you have to jump over here... right to the place where you need to use the cape. So we have one dungeon with lots of branching, the ability for the player to make choices, and proper backtracking that the player has to do themselves. I'm going to call this style of dungeon a "find the path" dungeon because the player will have to hunt down the correct route through the level.

And we have another dungeon with very little branching, only one choice, almost zero backtracking, and that tiny bit of backtracking is done for the player. So I'm going to call this style of dungeon a "follow the path" dungeon because the route is made obvious to the player. By asking these questions, and seeing whether you get mostly "yes" answers or mostly "no" answers, every dungeon in Zelda can be put into one of these categories, In Ocarina of Time, the Water Temple is a full-on find-the-path dungeon, while the Shadow Temple is totally follow-the-path. Pretty much every dungeon in the Oracle games is find, while almost every dungeon in Wind Waker is better described as follow.

I guess the question is: is one better than the other? Throughout the series I've made it clear that I think that find-the-path dungeons are better than follow. And, if YouTube comments are anything to go by, I haven't done a terrific job of explaining why. I mean, follow-the-path dungeons sound simple but also quite pleasant. They are always giving you new content instead of making you trudge back through rooms you've already seen. They don't let you get lost because you're guided through the backtracking, and there's hardly any branching. And, anyway, what good is choice if you'll have to find every key and open every lock eventually?

Well. Here's my pitch. Find the path dungeons are more interesting because they challenge something that video games rarely test you on: your spatial awareness. To succeed in Fortress, you will need to make a cognitive map of the entire dungeon. Which means: it's in your brain. You need to log the layout of the rooms, and make a mental note of important elements like locked doors, and barriers you can't yet overcome.

Smartly, Zelda dungeons are just about the size where most players can keep the entire dungeon in their head at once. When you get something new - like a key, or an item. Or when you change the dungeon - like flipping it upside down or altering the water level - you need to consult your cognitive map to figure out what you can do now. You got the Mole Mitts? Well now you can dig through the dirt in that room you encountered earlier.

Crucially, Zelda dungeons never give you a map marker or a waypoint or a floating compass arrow. It's on you to understand the layout of the dungeon and figure out how to proceed at each turn. And when you make that intentional, player-driven decision to return somewhere - the reward is so much sweeter because you did it. That's the magic, right there. That's why I play Zelda. Modern designers tend to see levels as places that hold the challenges. Zelda designers see the levels themselves as the challenge. When they're at their very best, I argue that a Zelda dungeon would still be fun even if you ripped out all the enemies.

But maybe that's not why you play Zelda. And, that's okay. Stick with me, we've got other things to discuss. But first... we've got to do a quick graph update. I know you all love the graphs. I've come to realise that my old diagrams are no longer fit for purpose. And that's okay, it was bound to happen as I better understood the level design. I want to give a thank you to Patrons like Ian, Daniel, and Julian, who gave me the kick up the arse I needed to give these graphs an overhaul.

First things first, I've simplified the symbols. A square is a lock, and is unlocked by a diamond of the same colour and symbol. Easy peasy - you don't even need to have played a Zelda game to know how these work anymore. Now, as for the layout, these new graphs more clearly show where the path branches. So the first Minish Cap dungeon, Deepwood Shrine, branches out like this. Now this is all well and good. But, just like the old graphs, we will need to manually follow the lines and figure out what we can do, and when. It's a pain. But we can shrink this graph and pull it down, so that the locks, or squares, are beneath the necessary key, or diamond.

When presented like this, we can immediately see the sequence of events in the dungeon. Unlock a door, flip a couple switches, unlock two doors to get the key item. Then backtrack to use the item, unlock another door, and get the boss key. Then backtrack right to the start to unlock the boss door and face the boss. We can see how branches are dead ends until they become accessible, after getting new stuff later in the dungeon.

Plus, if two things are on the same horizontal line, like these two switches or these two barriers, it means we can theoretically do them in any order we desire. So now, the graph shows branching paths - by the number of forks off each horizontal line. Backtracking, by looking for tall white lines that stretch back to earlier parts of the dungeon. And choice, where multiple symbols appear on the same horizontal line. Three of the four questions can be answered just by look at the shape of the graph!

The only thing they don't show is the fourth question: does the player have to do the backtracking themselves? But I guess we can just slap an arrow on like this. If the game's gonna cheat, so will I. Anyway, look at how Palace of Winds is tall and thin because it has no major branching, and no backtracking. While Fortress is short and fat, because it has lots of branching, lots of choice, and full on backtracking. Okay. Let's chat about something else. Minish Cap made me very aware of loops. This is a level design structure where the route bends back around so the player ends up somewhere they've already been.

As an example, check out this part from Cave of Flames. The player goes through these rooms, solving puzzles and fighting enemies, so they can get this key. Instead of forcing the player to simply walk back to the beginning of this area, a one-way door dumps them out here - a couple rooms over from where they started. This is a really smart way to cut out the most boring bits of backtracking. After all, it's about making the right choices when navigating the dungeon, and not just going back over old content.

Of course, the designers can choose where you loop around to. They can use loops to guide the player. A bit later in the Cave of Flames, you get the Cane of Pacci - I may be pronouncing that wrong but the obvious way to pronounce it is a racist slur so let's not even go there. So you get the cane and then loop around and end up - hey, exactly where we need to use it. Proper Wind Waker style. But loops can also be used without explicitly guiding the player. In Fortress of Winds, we have to go through a bunch of rooms, killing enemies and solving puzzles, to get to the Mole Mitts. But once we've got them, we don't have to go back - we can just drop down here.

This isn't where the Mole Mitts are needed but it is a familiar room which we can use to reorientate ourselves, and start figuring out where to apply our new key item. That sense of realising where you are is a powerful one. And this can be used to give the illusion of complex design. Take this room in Temple of Droplets. You go to the left and wander around in a big ol' loop before returning to the room. So you hit a switch, and open the door to the right. Now you go in another big ol' loop, until you get back to the main room again so you can flip another switch and open the final door.

It is, admittedly, a clever idea. By bending a straight path back over itself, Capcom gets to hide the fact that this is, ultimately, a follow-the-path dungeon. And it may fool some players into thinking that they're super smart and unlocking this dungeon's secrets when actually they're being lead through the whole thing by the nose. Right, this one got way too long. So let's do some stray thoughts before I escape. The dungeons also have optional items to find, as usual. In this one, it's mostly heart pieces, rupees, and these kinstone pieces. If I had one complaint about Fortress of Winds, I'd say it hid too many of these optional items in dirt, which is the barrier you overcome with the key item. That makes it very difficult to remember where everything is in your cognitive map, by the time you get the Mole Mitts.

Also, it's interesting how two dungeons - Palace of Winds and Temple of Droplets, use the boss key for something other than the boss door. It feels like a nice throwback to Link to the Past and, hey, I'm down for anything that screws with the formula. So, in conclusion, Minish Cap has a pretty even mix of find-the-path and follow-the-path dungeons. Deepwood Shrine, Fortress of Winds, and Dark Hyrule Castle all branch out, offer choices, and don't guide you in the backtracking. Palace of Winds, Cave of Flames, and Temple of Droplets offer much more guidance and much less branching.

And I think that's okay. The two types of dungeon offer different experiences and a mix of the two is no bad thing. I'll take that over having all the dungeons be follow the path. Finally, I want to take a moment to answer a few frequently asked questions. Yes, I will release all the dungeon diagrams but not until the end as they obviously keep changing as I figure stuff out. Yes, I will look at Zelda 1 and 2 on the NES. I'm just not sure when. No, I probably won't look at Ocarina of Time's Master Quest or any of the multiplayer games as I need to wrap this thing up. Yes, I will try and do an episode on Breath of the Wild. And yes, I will do a second season of Boss Keys with another game series. I've got two big ones in mind.

More on that in 2017. Next time, on Boss Keys - it's Twilight Princess. Thanks so much to my Patrons for making this show possible.