A) "That said, I do hope that Miyamoto is forcing Aonuma to tone down the puzzles all right, and just focus on the combat, the adventure, the world etc." You do not say "according to Aonuma's vision" but you place all creative and directorial emphasis on him in this sentence.

B) Invalid. There is no lack of a sword. I was poiting out that this "there wasn't going to be a sword!" thing is something I've only ever heard Malstrom say, and now you.

You are repeating his objections whether you mean to or not, including the erroneous ones.

You didn't answer my question concerning AoL and LttP.

A) is once again taking far more out of what I said than was there. Aonuma is of course involved in the creative process, and I would of course like to have him (and everyone involved) focusing on the combat, the adventure and the game world. But to say this means I think he has all creative and directorial control is a stretch, you would be effectively assuming that I thought Zelda was a one man project with Miyamoto supervising it. Calling it "Aonuma's vision" goes further as you are once again putting Malstrom's views into my mouth.

B) I said there was a lack of a sword. There was, Miyamoto pointed it out. Now there is a sword. This implies there was a change in direction. That is all I said it implied. You pointed out that it was Miyamoto who told us there was no sword as if this was contradicting something that I had said, but there was nothing in my post this was contradicting. You had simply taken me to be arguing Malstrom's position.

What "erroneous objections" of Malstrom's have I brought up? The fact that Link didn't have a sword and now does is true. The fact that Aonuma tends to put puzzles in his games are also true.

As for AoL and LttP, yes, I think both were involved in the gradual accumulation of unnecessary elements in the Zelda series, but what does that have to do with my posts? I never made any analysis of the history of Zelda, or that because something was there in the past it should be here in the present. I just said I hope the puzzle elements are toned down along with other elements, you are only bringing up when they were introduced because that's a point of disagreement between you and Malstrom.

I'm glad to hear that it's not going to be easy! I'm eagerly looking forward to this installment. So much so that I changed my profile picture to the only drawing I did of link.

I'm hoping both combat and the puzzles will be equally as difficult. From what i hear from people I know who got a chance to play it; The combat is easy to do, but hard to master.

i really hope that the make the bosses ALOT harder.  I shouldn't be defeating bosses on my first try and only losing like 3 hearts.  I want it to be an intense battle that takes a few tries to get it right

What we have here is literally a failure to communicate. The onus is on me. I apologize. I speak poorly and did not communicate my intentions well.

Please, pay this conversation no more mind.

Gentlemen (and ladies), we have a first. An argument on the internet that ended with civility. Reminds me why I hang out here instead of all the other gaming forums.

Who cares everybody knows what the people want...Pikmin and not Zelda...Ha Ha...oh wait thats just me.

Anyway I am happy for Zelda fans because hard is what most Zelda fans want. For me though I never beat a single Zelda game in my life(I played O.O.T,M.M,T.W.W,and T.P) and I didn't even come close to beating any of them.(The best I did was get to the water temple in O.O.T) Zelda is very hard for me and too hard for me. So for me I wouldn't mind Z.S.S being easier as I could have the chance to beat a Zelda game. I don't want Zelda to be easier though because that would be messed up for the Zelda fans. If one of the things that make Pikmin Pikmin in Pikmin 3 changed or was removed I would be pissed off about it and hard is one of the elements that make Zelda Zelda for most people so that should also not be changed. I would never want Zelda fans to go through what I went through in Resident Evil... I mean how could they change Resident Evil from Survival/Puzzle to Action. R.E was my favorite franchise until Pikmin came along and R.E.4 and 5 are still good just not what they used to be... R.E is still my 2nd favorite franchise though because of the older games...oh yeah this is about Zelda not Resident Evil... oh well already posted now!

Yes the water temple from OOT was almost overkill with the puzzle design. It's understandable if you didn't finish OOT because of it and especially if you didn't used a guide.

I have always thought the Zelda series could really benefit from a difficultly setting. However that wouldn't help much with the puzzles.       

Yeah, people who played lots of Zeldas seem to underestimate it's difficulty. I think the ideal solution would be for them to integrate some sort of optional hint system, a version of the Super Guide, that's not too intrusive or distracting for people who don't want it, and actually make some parts, maybe optional parts, even a little harder, puzzles-wise. Combat, on the other hand, has been fairly on the easy side for some time now.

Judging by the gameplay demo's on the showfloor. This new Zelda will not be easy.