Zelda 2005 New Pictures

[toxic]

Oh I'm sorry. Once every 10 or so years they bring innovation such as....3D. The series, aside from your fucking inventory never changed until Zelda: OoT, and now we're locked back in your typical Zelda phase

Well, your two for two in ignorance. How is Zelda 1 like Zelda 2 on the NES? Could two games be more polar opposites?

Seriously ... quit making an ass of yourself. Your giving Nintendo bashers who actually KNOW what they are talking about a bad name.

[Sl1p]

Oh no, I forgot about the one game that no one cared about

Zelda. Zelda 3. Zelda: Links Awakening, Zelda: Time and Seasons. Aside from one of these games having a pokemon gimmick, whats the difference? Nothing.

But please reply and tell me I'm wrong. I get a kick out of seeing butt hurt Nintendo fans.

[toxic]

So after you tried to brush aside that you made an ass of yourself, you picked out 4 games over a 20 year time span on 3 different platforms as an example.

Some companies release 4 variations of the same game in the same calender year.

Do you want a Zelda FPS or a Zelda zombie survivalist game ... is that whats wrong here?

[jarrod]

Oh no, I forgot about the one game that no one cared about

Zelda. Zelda 3. Zelda: Links Awakening, Zelda: Time and Seasons. Aside from one of these games having a pokemon gimmick, whats the difference? Nothing.

Zelda 1 is rather fundamentally different actually, thanks to it's predominantly nonlinear design and structure. Zelda 3 is really the archetype for current day Zelda games, though new elements are still being added such as the trading quests (started in Link's Awakening), traveling companions/animals (started in OoT) or kinstone fusion (started now in the Minish Cap). Not all Zelda games follow the Zelda 3 mold either, Majora's Mask and Four Swords Adventures were extremelty divergent... when you sit down and examine things you find there's actually a lage degree of variety in the Zelda series, moreso than any other ARPG/Adventure series to be honest.

[Bacon McShig]

Zelda. Zelda 3. Zelda: Links Awakening, Zelda: Time and Seasons. Aside from one of these games having a pokemon gimmick, whats the difference? Nothing.

It's funny, the same people that are always saying Nintendo is teh kiddy also bemoan the fact that they retread stuff once or twice a system gen. Now, if Nintendo is indeed kiddy, which they are to an extent, doesn't that mean that for a lot of owners of their systems, it's their first system? Ipso facto, a good chunk of people that play the system have never played a Zelda, so it's new to them. While I'd definitely like to see some new IPs, I can't fault Nintendo for sticking with what worked for many of us as new gamers to introduce kids to.

I mean, I agree that for a company that says they're about innovation, it's a little hypocritical to do all these retreads... But yet, I'd also contend that in the current state of the industry, in the face of games as a whole shifting towards a much older target audience, sticking to their guns as a company focused around delivering games for all ages (that don't insult their intelligence) is a sort of innovation, and a welcome one. There's far too few games like that for kids nowadays.

[Sl1p]

I love the fact that everyone is in "OFMGUJUSTHATENINTENDO" mode when all I have to say is this.

[Cowutopia]

...
Zelda 2 is haaaaard (whines)

[sethsez]

New Zelda games are the same as old Zelda games, but with a tweak here and there. So what? It's a series, they're not going to all have completely different playstyles, plots and genres, and aside from Final Fantasy (where the only constant is extremely boring gameplay) I don't think you're going to find a series that changes that dramatically from game to game.

Hell, Half-Life 2 is just Half-Life with better graphics, some new weapons, a boat and a buggy. That doesn't change the fact that it's a really great game.

[Drewbacca]

Metroid Prime 2, Paper Mario 2, Mario Power Tennis.

Awesome, three games all of which have already been released and are either sequals or rehashes.

EVERYTHING IS A REHASH THIS GENERATION. EVEN THE STUFF THAT'S NEW.

I'm not disagreeing, but it's so trendy right now to make sequels to games that don't need sequels. Paper Mario 2 is the only one on that list that could due with the upgrade.

They're right about the Zelda's though. The dungeons from Wind Waker compared to Majora's Mask and The Ocarina of Time were so similar. You have the elemental dungeon designs again, the controls were dead similar, and they even rehashed the sword tennis that they used on Ganondorf at the end of The Ocarina of Time (if that spoiled someone's experience I'm glad).

I liked The Legend of Zelda: Wind Waker, but the graphics were the best and most innovative thing they added. They should work on making some bigger changes than graphics.

Even through all of this, the games remained fun.

The Ocarina of Time was amazing because it innovated all of that into the Zelda series. But I think it's time for Nintendo to stop riding on the coat tales of the generation that ruined its name.

[jarrod]

Wind Waker was a total letdown in terms of game design, really it was a mess. Presentation was amazing, arguably the best out any videogame so far, but outside that it's really could've used an extra year or so in R&D. EAD's early GC philosophy of "shorter games more quickly" has really come back to bite them in the ass this gen.