I don't think you or anyone else besides Nintendo should get to decide what is "Zelda" or not.

I don't see how the RPG part is getting weaker, since the new upgrade system is very much an RPG feature and non-linear exploration isn't beholden to a specific genre in the first place. And less epic? How? Many of the gameplay ideas present in Skyward Sword are just as interesting as anything else a Zelda game has done. Sales numbers are influenced by multiple factors, such as the penetration of Wii Motion Plus and flagging interest in the Wii console, so the sales do not necessarily denote preference.

The quality of ideas is still there. Many game mechanics are still there. However, the familiar structure and scale isn't, which is the real issue. It didn't bother me- in fact, I find it to be superior in some ways, which I have already stated. If this is all a matter of taste (and it is), then I'm all the more pleased that Nintendo made at least one Zelda game that is more up my alley.

Just look at Zelda games of the past. It's not me who decides what Zelda is. But the recent games have been... well, different. The "less epic" part is easy: Riding a bird drawn in a Cel-shading-like art style is slightly less epic than killing Ganondorf on top of his Castle. (And the last boss in Skyward Sword doesn't compare to Ganon who gave you all reason to kill him throughout OoT.) And sales numbers have been very consistent: Cel-shaded Zelda games sell less than the ones with a more realistic art style. This has been the case for multiple releases over various consoles / handhelds now.

I did not intend to pick on your personal taste, so I apologize if I sounded rude in that post. I'm glad you enjoyed the game. But with all the negative feedback recent Zelda games have been getting (negative feedback on a high level that is) I'd argue a big part of the fan base doesn't like the direction the series is going.

Many Zelda fans have heavily criticized every Zelda game since Ocarina of Time was released, despite each game taking the franchise in very different directions. Twilight Princess went back to a very OoT style, and it still wasn't immune. It's like a cycle. A new Zelda game comes out. Reviews are mostly positive, inital fan response is positive, and within few months people are nit-picking everything little problem and calling the previous games superior. So I apologize if I no longer care about what the majority thinks about Skyward Sword, because in my eyes it seems like they have no idea what they want beyond having OoT remade for every Nintendo platform. Besides, the Zelda fanbase is huge and diverse. You can't develop your games based on what the most vocal members want.

As for sales, there are always other factors at play. Twilight Princess came out right when the Wii launched when there were hardly any solid games for it. Ocarina of Time came out right when the N64 was at peak popularity. The GameCube had a poor install base. Wind Waker still outsold Majora's Mask regardless, and so did Phantom Hourglass. Skyward Sword is on track to do it, too. Of course you could say that Majora's Mask required an accessory... and so did Skyward Sword, so... ultimately I don't think it's wise to point to sales as if correlation proves causation.

Yeah, I considered that but that would go too far. Well... there's no point in arguing over it so we'll just agree to disagree. 

Each of the three areas are built around a different central theme (Power, Wisdom, and Courage, naturally). The desert represents wisdom, so it's the most puzzle-heavy area of the game. The volcano represents power, so it features challenges based on stamina and powerful tools (such as bombs). The forest is decidedly more combat-centric, has fewer puzzles, and has tightrope and vine-swinging challenges (fitting the courage theme). As such, it's inevitable that the player would prefer one over the others, depending on the gameplay element he/she enjoys the most.

I'm glad you mentioned the combat, because I had problems with it too. Though I think is has more to do with getting used to the expected inputs than the WMP's ability to read movement (save for thrusting, which can only be done well with comparatively slow, precice motions). After roughly halfway through Skyward Sword, I finally had a good grip on how the combat worked. Don't jerk the Wiimote about unless you want to strike. Just move the sword gently into position and you won't have many problems. In most cases one can perform combos after the initial blow, so you don't need to worry about the backswing unless you're facing a Stalfos or Lizalfos. In fact, one of the best ways to hurt the final boss is to have him deflect some of your quick backswings until you finally hit an open spot. In time, the vast majority of my attacks were interpreted without a hitch, and the few mistakes came from overly hasty thrusts because those can be finicky at times. Once it clicks (or if it clicks), I think it's the deepest, most fun combat system in the series. But yeah, the learning curve can be brutal. It doesn't help at all if you take long breaks from the game (which you did).

Bosses were hit and miss to me. I enjoyed most of the dungeon bosses (the second one was amazing), but having to fight The Imprisioned more than once wasn't great. Neither was the boss of the fifth dungeon, which is a shame because that dungeon is otherwise my favorite in the entire series. Of course, if you're tired of how bosses operate in the Zelda series, then it doesn't matter. You probably wouldn't like them very much. Plus, boss battles are where camera control can be an issue, so I see where you're coming from there. Not locking onto a boss in order to break some nearby pots does have its consequences.

I don't know how many of the sidequests you did, but you can get up to 80 gratitude crystals doing quests and such. Even more side content is always appreciated, but I'm okay with it because there's more meat to Skyward Sword's main game than previous installments.

Many Zelda fans have heavily criticized every Zelda game since Ocarina of Time was released, despite each game taking the franchise in very different directions. Twilight Princess went back to a very OoT style, and it still wasn't immune. It's like a cycle. A new Zelda game comes out. Reviews are mostly positive, inital fan response is positive, and within few months people are nit-picking everything little problem and calling the previous games superior. So I apologize if I no longer care about what the majority thinks about Skyward Sword, because in my eyes it seems like they have no idea what they want beyond having OoT remade for every Nintendo platform. Besides, the Zelda fanbase is huge and diverse. You can't develop your games based on what the most vocal members want.

As for sales, there are always other factors at play. Twilight Princess came out right when the Wii launched when there were hardly any solid games for it. Ocarina of Time came out right when the N64 was at peak popularity. The GameCube had a poor install base. Wind Waker still outsold Majora's Mask regardless, and so did Phantom Hourglass. Skyward Sword is on track to do it, too. Of course you could say that Majora's Mask required an accessory... and so did Skyward Sword, so... ultimately I don't think it's wise to point to sales as if correlation proves causation.