The Fall of Xbox - Video by Videogamedunkey

[SammyGiireal]

pikashoe said:

RJTM1991 said:

Drastically changing? I wouldn't say that. OOT, MM, WW, TP, SS, and the handheld games all build on each other, similar to Gears and Halo. They changed certain things but kept the core gameplay, setting, story and so on. I remember some in the Zelda community complaining about how stale and repetitive the Zelda series had become when Skyward Sword released as well.

There's nothing wrong with sticking to what works, I'm just surprised that one company can spend decades re-doing the same thing over and over again, but get a pass while others get buried.

The only thing particularly similar in Zelda is structure and progression. But tone, artsyle, control, music, setting etc changes dramatically from game to game. It's one of the few franchises that tends to scrap everything and start from scratch with new releases.  Most Zelda games have a new engine and radically different  control schemes, physics, etc. 

Mario has so little focus on story so that's a non point. In terms of gameplay it's very hard to say that galaxy and 64 have much in common. Mario 64 has open sandbox levels while galaxy is more linear and course based.

The main issue with gears is that the gameplay changes are much more slight than Mario or Zelda along with the gears series getting many more releases in a short period of time. We have 7 3d Mario games since 96 and 6 gears of war games since 06. The main issue with halo is that bungle left,

Yeah Reach was the last great Halo. 343 has done a stellar job in Multiplayer, but the series hasn't reached the heights it previously did campaign wise.