Roll: You are largely correct, but you must realize that your idea of content is naturally biased. Cutscenes, events, Ocarina-playing, roadblocks, item-descriptions, enemies, dungeon layouts, etc. are all part of the design of the game - in other words, content.
As I mentioned, I don't think of most of this content as bloat. What I do think of as bloat is that which is needless or serves very little purpose, such as (the very concept of) repeated descriptions. What I don't think of as bloat is that which adds to the experience, such as Ocarina-playing. I am of course aware that this is an entirely subjective notion, and I only ask you to admit as much yourself.
PS. You can't skip the (far too long) note on the compass in LA...
Mr Khan: That's a good point about the bosses. What do you get out of a boss? In the older (2D) Zeldas, it was simply a good fight. In the more recent (3D) titles, you are combating a foe with a real sense of history, lending another kind of gravitas to the fight. For example, Barinade wasn’t just some evil parasite - he, like Gohma, was on the verge of killing a deity, and Link struggled with him repeatedly throughout the dungeon (the tentacles you fight are his). The way the bosses are treated, with ‘cinematic’ elements, reflect their additional significance within the game world.
The same could be said for many other aspects of the games. The old games are direct and play-centric in their approach (calling the bird in ALttP), while the newer ones are careful to integrate disparate elements, creating a world history which imbues events with additional significance (playing the Nocture of Shadows). What I can say is that I enjoy both paradigms of design - both new and old Zeldas.
