Mario = Right Way, Zelda = Wrong Way

[boden11]

Words Of Wisdom said:

Grey Acumen said:

now, before you zelda fans get your panties in a bunch, i'm not talking about which is cooler or a better game by itself, but which game best demonstrates the philosophies inherent to the Wii console.

In conclusion, I feel that Mario Galaxy is Nintendo's first step in showing that they are capable of providing for the new casual gamer market without having to ignore the hardcore gamer market.

Discuss.

Neither game is demonstrating inherent philosophies to the Wii. They're demonstrating themselves.

Mario has always been as you describe since the very first games where you could take pipes to different stages or use warp whistles to skip entire lands.

Zelda has always been a straight dungeon-to-dungeon adventure with sidequests along the way.

There is nothing new in the actual design of these games.

One just happens to fit your ideal of Wii gaming more than another.

Yeah--these big 2 page posts are overanalyzing what should be obvious--

Zelda has always been geared towards older players. Look how hard Zelda 1 was--it was crazy finding the levels and getting the triforce pieces. Super Mario Bros was hard, but nowhere near it. Additionally, Mario has always had tons of hidden areas/secrets which is akin to what the harder to find stars are all about in SMG. However, hidden areas are not exclusive to the Mario series--Zelda has tons of examples of this as well. Mario has always been more accessible than Zelda, that doesn't mean it's a better Wii-style game.

I'd also like to say that for a real example of the RIGHT way to make a Wii game to look past both Mario and Zelda and check out Metroid Prime 3!  The controls on MP3 REALLY take advantage of the unique capabilities of the remote and nunchuk.  Although, I do feel Zelda utilizes the Wii better than Mario (arrow aiming, grappling, etc), Mario pretty much just spins.