HoloDust said:
And yet, it seems Nintendo failed to realize (or care), despite TP sales numbers, that that's exactly what people might have wanted out of Zelda, and made E rated Zelda again....which I doubt will reach sale numbers of TP http://www.zeldadungeon.net/2012/06/the-legend-of-zelda-a-sales-history/ Yes, I have to agree that most people seem to want a darker tone, and I don't understand hos Nintendo can't see this as well... But I don't think that was the big fault with SS; I don't think it was the art style that turned people off or the lack of blood. There was this great little article back when SS launched (that I can't seem to find now) wrote by some game journalist about his girlfriend who is hardcore Zelda fan. And how she abandoned SS and started playing Skyrim with conclusion in the line of "this is more Zelda than Zelda". I have to admit that I haven't played Skyrim yet (I have it for PC, but have to get a better mouse), but as far as I understand Skyrim has very little in common with Zelda. Zelda relies very much on puzzles, and thus far I haven't seen any praise for Skyrim's puzzles... Zelda is all about the temples and bosses, and these elements seem to be lacking in Skyrim as well. But, again, I havent played the game yet so I don't know... Now, I'm not saying that Zelda should be Skyrim (actually, I'm not to happy that Elder Scrolls came to that either, compared to Morrowind), but article did make some valid points. Openess of Elder Scroll alike games is something that we have seen in original Zeldas. Completely "mature" content is maybe not what is best suited for Zelda, but darker tone of TP was very good step in right direction. And then there's those puzzles - now, I love when puzzles are well incorporated into game, but Zelda has gone way too far, neglecting both exploration and combat, both pillars of original Zelda games. As much as I mostly disagree with Malstrom's rants, I think he has few good points in this one: @Bolded: I completley agree! More exploration and combat! But that's actually one thing that SS did really well imo; the combat was the best I've ever had in any game. Every foe was a challange!! And this goes very well with the first LoZ where you had to find the weak spot on certain foes. "Take the issue of Retro making a Zelda game. The reason why people want Retro to make a Zelda game is because of the pent up frustration people have for Zelda today. Zelda is too Japanese orientated, too anime, and plays like a crappy Japanese adventure game. In the past, Zelda used to be influenced by Western RPGs hence the non-linear nature of the early Zelda games. In the past, Nintendo said, “What do we learn from those Western games to make an even better game?” Today, Nintendo says, “Let’s purge all Western influences from our games” resulting in Nintendo games becoming extremely creepy. I think we’re at the point where parents will feel uncomfortable giving the game even to their child. It’s just too weird. And these parents today are those that grew up with Nintendo games. I think there is another story going on here. Korean culture has more international presence today than Japanese culture. Korean culture in movies, music, and games has to be controversial in Japan. Is this all some nationalist venture? It made more sense to go Japan culture back in the 80s when Japan was on the ascendency. Today, Japan is a rapidly shrinking country especially with its aging population. What is to gain by making games that tilt so heavy to the Japanese tilt? The reason why we want Retro to make a Zelda game is because we are sick and tired of the Japanese eccentricities in Zelda. “But Zelda is about story and puzzles,” says Miyamoto which is nonsense. We want Retro to make the game or any Nintendo game because we want a more cultural neutral game. The reality is that Retro is actually a Japanese company that happens to be located in the United States. Nintendo doesn’t see Retro in the way how you or I see it. Nintendo’s relationship to Retro is for Nintendo to tell Retro the Way How It Is. Retro’s job is to soak it up. Retro is not allowed to go, “Hey! This is wacky Japanese stuff which is just crap. Here is how real game makers do it,” where Retro outdoes Nintendo on Metroid or on 2d platformers. A Retro Zelda sounds pretty damn good at this point. Miyamoto talking about how communication is needed for the puzzles and story is actually Miyamoto saying: “The soul of Zelda is Japanese.” But if we look at the classic Zelda games, we find the soul of Zelda is Western. Zelda is the combination of arcade gameplay with the Western Role Playing Game. Nintendo seems intent on crashing the Zelda franchise rather than admit that the Western RPG is the soul of classic Zelda gameplay."
@Bolded: Serioulsy? That's the worst thing that could happen to Zelda! The Fable series have a VERY boring combat mechanics! VERY very boring combat indeed!! It's all about button smashing, and that's never been what's Zelda is all about. And it never should be. And Gothic-ism is sooooo mundane; every RPG nowadays tries very hard to incoporate that element. Just look at Skyrim and Dragon Age; they both look quite similar. Even WoW have a bit of this in it. Try to find something else that the stereo typic medeviel setting! Much of what we see in games is taken from the 13th century and unwards, while the era between 500-1000 AD is very much unexplored in modern games. That's a very interesting era imo. So Zelda shouldn't try to emulate modern RPG's in that aspect either. I couldn't disagree more with you on these two statements. |
I'm on Twitter @DanneSandin!
Furthermore, I think VGChartz should add a "Like"-button.
