| Runa216 said: Revolutionary does not mean timeless, since the definitions are different, and they refer to different things. A game can be timeless and revolutionary, but that doesn't mean one can equal the other. Correlation =/= causation and all that jazz. And seriously? The resistance argument was supposed to be absurd, that was kind of the point. Your logic that something can be timeless just becuase it was revolutionary, while logical to the simple minded, is wrong, I was just showing you why by showing you a simpler to decipher case. And seriously dude, don't lecture me on how changes are sooooo different in a series that has always had the same basic idea behind it. And no, simplifying ANY game to an extreme to claim that all games follow the same logic is just wrong and faulty and full of logical holes. Why in the world are people allowed to get away with that? it's one of the most frustrating logical fallacies. If you simplify enough, you can claim any one game is fundamentally similar to another. Final fantasies are all the same? Sure, let's go with that, completely different worlds, characters, stories, fighting systems, and gameplay elements, but hey, they all use a variation on turn based combat and share some thematic elements like crystals. oh, and the protagonists are almsot always male, square enix must by mysogynist. No, that logic does not work. Zela happens in the same world, reusing locations, reusing puzzles, reusing a hero and gameplay style, and many of them share VERY important thematic elements and features that are supposed to make them stand out. When Link to the Past did alternate parallel worlds, that was supposed to be a very specific way to make it stand out, but then a few years later Ocarina did the SAME thing by doing young link and old link worlds. exact same idea with a slight variation (time instead of dimensions). Then Twilight princess did it. that's a VERY specific gameplay feature to repeat, especially considering just how important both were to each game's respective stories. Same with the temple layout. Go to three dungeons to get the courage, wisdom, and power amulets to unlock a secret awesomeness! I know not ALL zeldas do this, but the fact that three follow a very specific layout kind of shows the progression of that basic idea. IT's just so frustrating when dealing with people who constantly resort to strawman fallacies to make ANY argument nullified becuase THEY don't see it that way. Also, you're getting VERY defensive. Never once did I say any of these games are bad, or that reusing elements is bad. I am, however, saying that the Zelda games are very similar, and in some ways feel like it's being copied and pasted with a different coat of paint, especially with those three examples. |
The resistance example is weak because the point being put across to you by not just me but someone else as well is that OOT is a great game that pioneered many of the 3D adventure aspects that's why it's heavily liked and considered timeless not because it was the first which makes your Resistance example not only m00t but has no bearing what so ever because OOT being the first is not the main reason and it's also puts an amusing irony here due to your "strawman fallacies" comment. The usual "don't get defensive" approach as per usual comes up when someone is pulled on their post I see. Revolution doesn't mean Timeless but it can help make something timeless.
Yes I'll will point out the changes whether you want to accept it or not, a basic idea doesn't make them the same you've homed in on vague similarities and I'll point out the flaws even if you find it hard to swallow. An example is MM is nowhere near the same as OOT even if you have dungeons in both, one game has you manipulating the flow of time to advert a disaster the other is a straight up 3D adventure, one places the player in a cycle of an active world which the player has to interact with to achieve their goal while the other has the player going on an adventure which is dictated by events in the story, one uses mechanics governed utilization of abilities of other races in the Zelda lore (Gorons, Zoras, Deku) the other requires use of inventory, one takes place in Termina the other in Hyrule (so much for always in the same locations). Zelda happens in the same world well guess what so does games like Resident Evil, Metal Gear etc... what dismantles this notion is that WW, Oracles, MM and LA don't take place in Hyrule at all.
The Final Fantasy example was an example of how your own example is flawed and it's hilarious that you just proved me right even more, as for the character Link for someone who loves Zelda with a passion this part calls you out, OOT's Link design has only been used in 4 games OOT, MM, TP and SWS the other games utilize different designs (so that's the same argument look out the window) and any Zelda fan with half a brain knows why Link is always present he's the incarnation of the original Hero of the Goddess each Link, Ganon and Zelda are not the same (same hero notion out the window) it's an on going cycle between good and evil in the series and the incarnations of the goddess, hero and darkness are locked in it do you even know why the princesses are called Zelda? Ofcourse gameplay styles are similar they're adventure games much like other game franchises have similar gameply elements and styles in their installments.
Could care less is you never said the games were bad I'll still pull your post if the are things I don't agree with or see as flawed.
