By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo - The problem of Zelda in Japan

Resident_Hazard on 10 September 2010
wfz said:


With so many Zelda games, I can imagine why the basic premise of the story stays the same. It'd be really hard to change the basic premise so many times without changing what the entire series means. We would have GTA Zelda by now, or something. What I mean by basic is that there is an evil entity trying to take over/destroy the world, and Link, a young competent kid with nothing super amazing and special, goes around gaining power and collecting new weapons and artifacts and becomes powerful enough to take down the evil. That remains true in every Zelda I think; correct me if I'm wrong. The finer details regarding how Link goes about doing that and who the characters are in the story I believe should change and be more creative, I definitely agree with you there.

 

In the end this is just personal musings between us, and we can hardly start to represent the larger market without knowing what they really want. Considering most of the mass market hasn't played Zelda for the most part, I personally doubt story repetitiveness has anything to do with it. It's a complain from longstanding fans for sure, but for people who have never played before?  What I want to know is why those people pick up NSMBWii and not Zelda. That's the question Nintendo needs to find the answer to.

That being said, I'm sure a lot of original fans are being turned away from the series due to the same story. It could be why interest has been down in Japan, but there isn't any proof of it. conversely, Pokemon ... Hmm.. Nintendo really likes keeping stories the same. Also, with the success of Mario in Japan, I don't think the lack-of-sales problem in Japan resides in the story.

 

I could rant and rave about Majora's Mask for hours and days, believe me, but I don't want to start derailing this thread. Just let me say that I've played the game more than 25 times getting 100% each time and never do I grow tired of it. For countless playthroughs I would find small little gems I didn't notice before. There is so much complexity to the day system that absolutely blows me away. Even little tiny things like finding Sakon hiding in a tree near the observatory, and being able to roll into the tree and knock him down. There's just so many little things that you can play through and never notice.

 

And don't get me started on the sad-looking tree, how even Link can't save everyone, and the overall emotion in the game (like Mikau's legacy, Pam and her father, etc). And then there's all the philosophy someone wrote up about the Termina world and it's relationship to the Gods. It's mind-blowingly awesome, even if it's not confirmed to be true. It takes details in the game as evidence and writes up a really cool theory. I could link you to the page if you want, it has the most amazing theories and stories written on it.

 

Wow I wrote a lot more about MM than I meant to. Sorry!

EDIT: One last thing. Did you know that game events, like character dialog, are changed base on WHICH FILE you play on? It's downright mind-blowing.

I'm not really talking about changing the premise too drastically--mostly from Zelda, I'd like to see a completely different story and plot.  You know, take an older Link, maybe older than we've ever had--a seasoned adventurer--an adult and not a teenager, who must face some kind of new looming threat to the land.  Something where Princess Zelda, for one goddamn time, isn't in peril the whole time--but fills a completely different, but still important role. 

I'm not saying GTA Zelda per se.  But how about Zelda where Link does something different than the same old routine of meander the landscape, troll through dungeon, meander the landscape, troll through dungeon, etc.  Oh man, that's why I so love Majora's Mask--it's not just the fact that it's about the only game in the series so thick with atmosphere and mood--but it's because it's so damn unique.  Give Link a mystery to solve that's not so obvious.  Let him carry over skills and items from a previous title, and then give him new items which must be used in conjunction to the old ones, or some kind of improvement.  Majora's Mask broke the old Zelda mold by placing so much emphasis on the world around, and much less on the dungeons.  The only downside, in my opinion, was the general lack of boss battles, but the fact that the game was so much bigger in so many ways is what made the game great.  No more time travel/time warp play, and no more light world/dark world crap.  Again, Link battling alien abductors?  Pure gold.

I'd like to see a Zelda game which keeps many of the things the series does right (exploration, puzzle solving, boss battling) and to expand upon it and evolve it.  Again, an older, seasoned Link, a new threat, a new mystery.  No Gannondorf, no "Zelda in distress."

And are you fucking serious?  The dialog is different in Majora's Mask depending on the save file?  Holy evil grimacing moon! I never knew that!



Around the Network
Khuutra on 10 September 2010
Resident_Hazard said:

Staleness creating lower sales is a false dichotomy?  Generally, the staleness of the Mario Party games created, for the most part, gradually lowering sales.  That, and Nintendo was just making too damn many of the things.  Which, I will point out, is something they've been doing with the Zelda franchise as a whole.  Years passed between the first four games, way back in the day.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Legend_of_Zelda  Scroll down a bit and you'll see that games that impact the most on the series were spaced apart the most in release dates. 

Numbers are fun and all, but we need to think outside the box for a lot of things.  Numbers aren't going to explain why Zelda sells less.  A theory with some thought behind it can offer a potential solution.  You can't disprove my theory, just as it can't be readily proven without, say, some kind of hefty polling of Japanese consumers.  You act like it if can't be analysed from current internet "stuff" that the theory is automatically invalid.

You know, techtonic plate movement was considered a laughable psuedo-science at one time--at a time when it was no more than a very good theory that had some thought to it.  As science advanced, the scientific community realized that it was factual.  Now, my theory cannot easily be proven or disproven (and I admit my first post wasn't glamorous, but I get flamed a lot here for what I can only think of as "not following Nintendo-love groupthink," which, while a poor excuse, never-the-less may have influenced my quickie post). 

Yes, Majora's Mask had poor sales.  But there were three things working against it we must not overlook: 
1.  It was released fairly late in the life of the N64 (2000), at a time when large-scale abandonment of the system had happened for the Playstation, Dreamcast, and people looking forward to the PS2, which launched that year.

2.  The requirement of the RAM expansion didn't help things.  Nintendo didn't really hand out the RAM expansion the way they have with many of the Wii's accessories--namely by bundling them left and right with all kinds of crap.  There weren't a lot of these things out there.  I had it, but then, I was still looking forward to the 64DD!

3.  Nintendo fans have, unfortunately, shown a habit for turning up their noses at change far too many times.  Many turned their noses up at Wind Waker just for the graphics (which were it's only real saving grace, aside from a storyline that actually sorta linked to Ocarina).  Look at the Wii--a system where doing things differently across the board has been ignored because the gamers want all the games to be exactly like the releases on other systems, just using the Wii Remote.  LordtheNightKnight admitted as much in a different thread--he didn't want the creativity promised by from Nintendo pertaining to the Wii--he wanted all the same games as the Xbox360 and PS3, just using the Wii Remote.  Which, I'm reasonably sure, completely negates the point of the thing as Nintendo saw it.  Personally, my Wii collection is of a decent size, and focused almost entirely on games that are different and only available on the system.  Oh, except for Scarface and the Guitar Hero titles.

Saying that Majora's Mask's change is what hurt it is a false dichotomy given the circumstances of it's release, all things considered.  Hell, you even backed up my theory (which you are arguing against) by pointing out that it performed better in Japan--where we're discussing the lowering sales overall of the franchise.  I postulated the theory that "maybe staleness is hurting sales" and you added to my point by showing that "being different was previously beneficial to the Zelda franchise in Japan."  This in no way proves my point, but even despite everything against Majora's Mask, it out-performed Twilight Princess--a game requiring no extra equipment, released on a console which was far from flagging in it's popularity.

For the record, I didn't buy Zelda or New Super Mario Bros Wii for my Wii.  I did buy NSMB for the DS, but I didn't put all that much time into it compared to other DS releases. 

Any tone you found was interpreted how you wanted.  As Dee Snider once said, "you get out of music what you're looking for--Tipper Gore was looking for S&M, and that's what she found."  Perhaps you were just looking for some kind of tone to flame.  I admit my initial post in here wasn't fantastic, but it didn't ask for any kind of rude response.

I know my ideas are not always popular, but without a voice of dissent, what have you got? 

....*chuckle*

Okay, I resisted the urge to actually make a joke about the Zelda franchise here.

1. The last two Mario Parties were the highest-selling titles in the franchise by staggering margins. Staleness does not seem to be a problem here so much as frequency.

2. It's not a "theory" without actual evidence. It's not on me to provide negative proof; conjecture, in order to be taken as part of a conversation, has to have some proof in the first place. Yes, as a theory it is invalid; it is not invalid as an idea, but you did not present it as merely an idea.

 

Skipping tectonic plate stuff

 

3. There is no question that Majora's Mask had many things going against it, but its sales are what they are. Phantom Hourglass is the biggest change in the series since 1998, but it has similarly failed to light things up the way Ocarina or Twilight did. I am pointedly ignoring the ranting about Nintendo fans, except to say this:

4. If Nintendo fans "turn their noses up" at change, then staleness by definition cannot be the problem in Japan.

5. You didn't use "false dichotomy" correctly.

6. What you personally buy has nothing to do with this topic.

7. In spite of what you would like to pretend in terms of the absolute impenetrability of text, it's possible to communicate tone. Wen you talk about "nintendo die-hards turning up their nose at change" and claim that that has no inherent tone, you either have a tin ear or pretend to be an extremely bad communicator.

8. In talking about refraining from making a joke about the Zelda series, you effectively make a joke about the Zelda series.

9. You are not constructively contributing to the topic; you're just arguing. I'm asking you nicely to either contribute in a constructive way or leave.



Resident_Hazard on 14 September 2010
Khuutra said:

1. The last two Mario Parties were the highest-selling titles in the franchise by staggering margins. Staleness does not seem to be a problem here so much as frequency.

2. It's not a "theory" without actual evidence. It's not on me to provide negative proof; conjecture, in order to be taken as part of a conversation, has to have some proof in the first place. Yes, as a theory it is invalid; it is not invalid as an idea, but you did not present it as merely an idea.

 

Skipping tectonic plate stuff

 

3. There is no question that Majora's Mask had many things going against it, but its sales are what they are. Phantom Hourglass is the biggest change in the series since 1998, but it has similarly failed to light things up the way Ocarina or Twilight did. I am pointedly ignoring the ranting about Nintendo fans, except to say this:

4. If Nintendo fans "turn their noses up" at change, then staleness by definition cannot be the problem in Japan.

5. You didn't use "false dichotomy" correctly.

6. What you personally buy has nothing to do with this topic.

7. In spite of what you would like to pretend in terms of the absolute impenetrability of text, it's possible to communicate tone. Wen you talk about "nintendo die-hards turning up their nose at change" and claim that that has no inherent tone, you either have a tin ear or pretend to be an extremely bad communicator.

8. In talking about refraining from making a joke about the Zelda series, you effectively make a joke about the Zelda series.

9. You are not constructively contributing to the topic; you're just arguing. I'm asking you nicely to either contribute in a constructive way or leave.

The last two Mario Party games were on the Wii and DS wherein they both found some appeal to their stale formula by literally shaking things up on the Wii (using the Wiimote).  Besides that, they are both on systems that are leagues more successful in sales than the GameCube.  Obviously they're likely to see some kind of boost.  Prior to MP8, the games were in decline, and the unevolving gameplay (staleness) likely had a lot to do with it.

Yes, actually, if you just want to jump in and disagree with me, without some kind of compelling argument or any kind of thought, all you're doing is flaming.  "You're wrong because I sense a tone in your post and disagree," despite what you think, is not a thought-provoking argument.  And it seems you responded to quite a few of my posts in the exact same manner in the past couple weeks.

I used false dichotomy in the same sense you did.

I am not arguing, I am providing a point of view.  But as has been the case too much on teh intarwebs, people can't handle different points of view especially againt Nintendo. 

Now, I didn't say my theory is perfect.  No theory is.  Scientists still argue some of the finer details of evolution* (which is one of the things that causes ID assholes to jump in and dismiss the theory outright), but that doesn't mean evolution is wrong.  I am theorizing that Zelda sales have been decreasing in Japan, and that two issues that may play a part is the overall lack of growth in the series and the fact that gaming is in a decline in that region.  That's, we'll say, pertains to general gaming.  Nintendo fans, on the other hand--while they may be both bored with staleness as sales of the Mario Party series illustrated prior to the Wii and DS versions--they also tend to dismiss change.  After all, the change in graphics of Wind Waker turned off many fans--I personally know people who dismissed the game due to the graphics (personally, I loved the graphics--I had a million other issues with the game, foremost among them being that it was predictable and stale in the gameplay, and way too easy).  Major changes to a formula or series are dismissed.  I myself am not totally immune to this despite how much I look forward to new ideas, because the negative growth and unwarranted changes in the Metroid series with Other M irritates me. 

It's kind of a catch-22, gamers are tired of repetition and increasingly stale design, but at the same time, tend not to support change or newness.  Again, the Wii fans I've encountered who don't understand the system's original intention to be different.  They love that Nintendo was daring enough to be different, but want all the same old games the same old way.  In essence, they want Call of Duty on the Wii identical to the Xbox360 version--and any change to the game for the Wii is hated.

I have little doubt that Xbox360 and PS3 fans (who are adopters of Kinect and Move) will show up over the next year expressing the same sentiment.  "Yay, Killzone 3 will be different." Then it's released and they'll say, "boo, Killzone 3 is different."  So this will no longer be a Nintendo-fan specific thing.  The difference is that Nintendo fans should've expected drastic change from the start, and we never should've expected the Wii to be flooded with identical 3rd party titles as the other two.

 

*My theory works mostly on circumstantial evidence and the theory does fit unless disproven.  Unlike evolution, I don't have 150 years of solid science backing me.