By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Frogger on 25 May 2014
Edit Thread
VanceIX said:
spemanig said:

Oh, there is so much wrong with this.

1. There is no indication that a non-realistic Zelda wouldn't sell. WW sold better than TP on the GCN, and TP on the Wii had it's sales inflated because it was a launch title for the most successful launch title in Nintendo's history and was riding the same motion control waves that sold Wii Sports. More people liked TP because more people had the chance to play it. If SS was in the same position, it would have sold just as much.

2. Not realistic does not mean cartoony. Journey is not realistic.

3. Aonuma doesn't care. His job is to make a good game, not please whining non-fans.

4. OoT and MM are not "realistic." There is no cycle. There is only TP. That's your cycle.

5. Zelda can be brought to life without being realistic, hence WWHD.

No. Voice acting doesn't break any game. Bad voice acting does. Their experiece doesn't matter. Zelda needs to get with the program and incorperate quality voice acting into it's games. There's not one game out there that is worse off because of good voice acting.

1. You can't just count out Wii sales -_-

2. Journey is cartoony by most standards. Yes, it's beautiful and not what some people consider "cartoony", but it uses overly vibrant colors just like a cartoon does, and mixes it up with lighting and shadows to create a better blend. That being said, Nintendo already teased a realistic Zelda, and not releasing one would be waving a white flag on the Wii U's hardware potential.

3. His job is to make a game that will sell. And just cause I'm saying that not doing a realistic game would be a bad financial move makes me a "non-fan"? Get over yourself, please.

4. OoT and MM were realistic by the standards available during that period of time. Nintendo could have gone down a colorful route like Mario 64 or Banjo Kazooie, but they didn't. When I played it as a kid, it struck me as the most life-like game.

5. I love WWHD as much as anyone (WW is my all-time favorite Zelda game), but a life-like game could be stunning in much more ways than Wind Waker. Instead of trying to copy WW, how about going above and beyond?

There's no guarantee VA will be good, and even then Zelda is iconic because of its silent characters. It allows the player to imagine them better. People imagine the script in different ways and tones to fit their play style. Nintendo changing this for no reason would be stupid, and I hope that they never do. Zelda is perfect in terms of dialogue the way it is. 

I doubt any VA could ever get Ganondorf's voice spot on, and everyone imagine's Zelda's voice differently, it would suck to ruin that balance. 


1. I didn't. Still, sales of launch titles have no baring on their popularity with a game like Zelda.

2. No it isn't. Nintendo didn't tease anything. They showed a tech demo that reused assets from a prior game and then expicitely said that that wasn't how the game would look like at the same event.

3. No. It's his job to make a good game. It's the marketing teams job to make it sell well. No. "Rioting," because the game isn't the artstyle you want makes you a non-fan. I have nothing to "get over."

4. No they weren't. Perfect Dark and Goldeneye where "realistic by the standards available during that period of time." When you where a kid, you didn't know what you were looking at because every single peice of promoart for that game was explicitely cartoony. Just because a game isn't filled with primary colors doesn't mean it's suddenly realistic. It's not even a little bit.

5. Just because a game isn't "realistically dark and adult," doesn't mean it's a copy of WW. ALBW isn't WW. OoT isn't WW. MM isn't WW. ALttP isn't WW. SS isn't WW. LoZ NES isn't WW.

Who cares if there's no guarantee that the voice acting will be good. Do you seriously think someone would put "bad voice acting" on a wish list. Zelda isn't iconic because of it's silent characters. Link is iconic as a silent character. It doesn't allow the player to imagine anything better. Get good voice acting and you won't have to imagine. This isn't a book, it's a video game. They wouldn't be changing it for no reason. They'd be changing it because reading through text in a 2014+ AAA game is completely unacceptable. Zelda's dialog as it is now is antiquated.

"I doubt any VA could ever get Ganondorf's voice spot on."

That's retarded. No voice actor on the face of the Earth can portray the industried most cliche villian? Give me a break. You're never going to get 100% fan approval from something like that. No game with voice acting has 100% approval. People would need to just get over it, because the alternative is antequated.