Zelda SS outsold by Zelda OO3D

[KungKras]

Lucas-Rio said:

KungKras said:
SS had all the advantages for it. Even though Wii is declining, its userbase is 95 million against 14, even if only a quarter of that is made up of active players, it would still be a lot bigger.

This is the same discussion that we always had when a good(ish) third party game on Wii flopped. It's BECAUSE OF THE GAME. And if you don't realize that now, you are being a hypocrite for saying so about third parties failing because they didn't put any effort in it (which is true, so STOP giving SS special treatment).

Aonuma is ruining the Zelda series, Phantom Hourglass and Spirit Tracks already left a bad taste in players mouths, but aside from that, he never further developed the overworld from OoT, in fact, removed the overworld and replaced it with a series of puzzles. He allowed in some of the worst dialogue I have ever read in a game ("Hahaha I am such a wimp" - some wimp, Zelda SS) and flooded the game with it. He gave it the most boring beginning of a Zelda since Wind Waker. He keeps wanting to replace the epic art style defined in OoT with cartoonish visuals reminecent of his lame games, Marvelous and the like. He hates combat, he never finished the game that established the series because of the combat, he likes to remove link's sword.

Is this how you imagined Zelda's sequels after OoT? I am asking, because it sure as hell isn't how I imagined them.

Are you a Mallstrom sheep? Because I see in your poss the same non sense than I see in his blog posts who are spread around here.

Aonuma has done a fantastic job with the serie.  Phantom Hourglass and Spirit Track are both universally and critically acclaimed. They are obviously not on par with home console Zelda but they are among the very best games on DS and they are among the most innovative and creative game created for the the whole genre.

You keep bringing up the first game but the seria has got unreally better since these days. The serie became what it is now with A Link to the past. Zelda 1 was fantastic for his time but was a very flawed game that had to give players a map because nobody knew what they had to do. It was endless exploration whas hacking and slashing monsters.

I am glad these times are over. All Zelda since A Link to the past are much much better than Zelda 1.

Skyward Sword is a near perfect title and has totally his place amont OOT, WW among the best games of the whole serie.

I am so glad Miyamoto and Aonuma are there and prevented Zelda to evolve into a thing like Elder Scrolls. I usually dislike RPG and I am glad that Zelda did not become one. It is great how it is.

I read his blog, yes and I find many of his points sound, because he backs them up really well, I mean for example, about Aonuma being the worst ever chioce of director of the series. But there are times where I disagree with him, his drunk on Darwin post was utterly retarded, and his labeling of creativity as something bad is just wrong. Creativity is a means to an end, not an end in itself, and not an enemy of good entertainement, period. So unless your definition of sheep is different from mine, I'm not a sheep.

Still, you said Aonuma has been fantastic to the series, then did the DS games get sent to the bargain bin so fast? And why are they poorly regarded among fans? Critical reception is a bad indicator since we know how corrupt and sometimes incompetent reviewers are. innovation and creativeness does not equal good, they are a means to making something good, and that failed with the DS games, Aonumas "creativity" has just morphed those games into abominations.  Is the approach of making "It's Zelda, now with .... Boats!/Wolves!/Trains!/Flying birds and robots!" a good thing and would you not just have a real evolution of the series into better gameplay, and more content, and more epicness?

Do you really think it's great that Zelda has only increased in linearity when games like Elder Scrolls let the player do whatever they want (which was a selling point of the original Zeldas) Not saying leveling should have been incorporated, but the freedom and implementation of physics engines, monsters you don't fall asleep bettling, etc, are how I would imagine a natural evolution of Zelda.

Do you think a guy who didn't even finish Super Mario Bros, should be a game designer at Nintendo?

When you played Ocarina of Time, how did you imagine its sequel?