So his main point is that Zelda games always were all alike, and we just grew out of them? That makes no sense.
After all, many of us started playing the series from the original, and we were always perfectly happy with the amount of innovation a new Zelda introduced. Zelda I, III, LA, Ocarina, MM, Wind Waker, Twilight Princess... all great (btw, I always failed to see how Ocarina was "a 3D Link to the Past"). Maybe Twilight Princess was the first major title to feel a bit formulaic, granted.
But apart from that, most of us can exactly put their finger on the aspects they didn't like on certain games. My take:
- I didn't like the Capcom parts, cause these felt like Nintendo gave them a "LttP Zelda construction kit". Unoriginal and fake, in a way.
- Never managed to come far in Zelda II, cause it's so freaking hard and dry.
- PH was pretty good, but missing the epic scope and towns and exploration; Spirit Tracks' train mechanic killed the game for me. Seems that I'm not that happy with the focus of the DS team.
No decline, I'd say, and I haven't grown out of anything. And considering that Nintendo is willing to shake up the formula next time, I'm more excited than ever.
Currently playing: NSMB (Wii)
