There has been a lot of discussion, especially in the last few days, about the sales potential of realistic vs cartoon Zelda games. The easy answer would be yes, the dark, gritty, more realistic Zelda games have higher potential to sell than the bright, colorful, cartoon entries due to the fact that Ocarina of Time and Twilight Princess are the best selling entries in the series history at 7.6m and 6.95m(8.54 Including GC version) compared to 4.6m and 3.75m for Wind Waker and Skyward Sword. But is it really as simple as that? For one Ocarina of Time was one of the most revolutionary games ever and is often considered the greatest game of all time, would sales really be that much lower with a brighter and more colorful artsyle? Another thing to consider is Twilight Princess sold less than double the amount of Wind Waker despite having nearly 6x the install base to sell to. If u believe install base doesnt matter than how come Majora's Mask sold less than Skyward Sword? The both had many similarities, released near the end of generation when the console was already declining and about to be replaced plus they also both required an add on to play. The only difference is Majora's Mask was dark and Skyward Sword was colorful, if artstyle really affected sales then shouldnt MM have outsold SS? So what are ur thoughts, does artstyle play a major role in how well Zelda games sell?
When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.
