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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Increasing Evidence That Nintendo is Not Serious About the Hardcore Gamers

DanneSandin said:
HoloDust said:

And yet, it seems Nintendo failed to realize (or care), despite TP sales numbers, that that's exactly what people might have wanted out of Zelda, and made E rated Zelda again....which I doubt will reach sale numbers of TP  http://www.zeldadungeon.net/2012/06/the-legend-of-zelda-a-sales-history/

Yes, I have to agree that most people seem to want a darker tone, and I don't understand hos Nintendo can't see this as well... But I don't think that was the big fault with SS; I don't think it was the art style that turned people off or the lack of blood.


Honestly, I don't mind SS art style, though I prefer TP - but I do think that more "serious" tone of TP can appeal to more "hardcore" PS360 audience.


There was this great little article back when SS launched (that I can't seem to find now) wrote by some game journalist about his girlfriend who is hardcore Zelda fan. And how she abandoned SS and started playing Skyrim with conclusion in the line of "this is more Zelda than Zelda".

I have to admit that I haven't played Skyrim yet (I have it for PC, but have to get a better mouse), but as far as I understand Skyrim has very little in common with Zelda. Zelda relies very much on puzzles, and thus far I haven't seen any praise for Skyrim's puzzles... Zelda is all about the temples and bosses, and these elements seem to be lacking in Skyrim as well. But, again, I havent played the game yet so I don't know...


Indeed, Elder Scrolls does not have very much in common with what Zelda is today - but quite a few with what Zelda was. Elder Scroll games, as well as other open-world WRPGs, do have puzzles (not as much as they used too, to be honest), but Zelda has become almost nothing but puzzles - overworld is completely marginalized, or underdeveloped.


Now, I'm not saying that Zelda should be Skyrim (actually, I'm not to happy that Elder Scrolls came to that either, compared to Morrowind), but article did make some valid points. Openess of Elder Scroll alike games is something that we have seen in original Zeldas. Completely "mature" content is maybe not what is best suited for Zelda, but darker tone of TP was very good step in right direction. And then there's those puzzles - now, I love when puzzles are well incorporated into game, but Zelda has gone way too far, neglecting both exploration and combat, both pillars of original Zelda games. As much as I mostly disagree with Malstrom's rants, I think he has few good points in this one:

@Bolded: I completley agree! More exploration and combat! But that's actually one thing that SS did really well imo; the combat was the best I've ever had in any game. Every foe was a challange!! And this goes very well with the first LoZ where you had to find the weak spot on certain foes.

"Take the issue of Retro making a Zelda game. The reason why people want Retro to make a Zelda game is because of the pent up frustration people have for Zelda today. Zelda is too Japanese orientated, too anime, and plays like a crappy Japanese adventure game. In the past, Zelda used to be influenced by Western RPGs hence the non-linear nature of the early Zelda games. In the past, Nintendo said, “What do we learn from those Western games to make an even better game?” Today, Nintendo says, “Let’s purge all Western influences from our games” resulting in Nintendo games becoming extremely creepy. I think we’re at the point where parents will feel uncomfortable giving the game even to their child. It’s just too weird. And these parents today are those that grew up with Nintendo games.

I think there is another story going on here. Korean culture has more international presence today than Japanese culture. Korean culture in movies, music, and games has to be controversial in Japan. Is this all some nationalist venture? It made more sense to go Japan culture back in the 80s when Japan was on the ascendency. Today, Japan is a rapidly shrinking country especially with its aging population. What is to gain by making games that tilt so heavy to the Japanese tilt?

The reason why we want Retro to make a Zelda game is because we are sick and tired of the Japanese eccentricities in Zelda. “But Zelda is about story and puzzles,” says Miyamoto which is nonsense. We want Retro to make the game or any Nintendo game because we want a more cultural neutral game.

The reality is that Retro is actually a Japanese company that happens to be located in the United States. Nintendo doesn’t see Retro in the way how you or I see it. Nintendo’s relationship to Retro is for Nintendo to tell Retro the Way How It Is. Retro’s job is to soak it up. Retro is not allowed to go, “Hey! This is wacky Japanese stuff which is just crap. Here is how real game makers do it,” where Retro outdoes Nintendo on Metroid or on 2d platformers. A Retro Zelda sounds pretty damn good at this point. Miyamoto talking about how communication is needed for the puzzles and story is actually Miyamoto saying: “The soul of Zelda is Japanese.” But if we look at the classic Zelda games, we find the soul of Zelda is Western. Zelda is the combination of arcade gameplay with the Western Role Playing Game. Nintendo seems intent on crashing the Zelda franchise rather than admit that the Western RPG is the soul of classic Zelda gameplay."


Now, there's A LOT of Mastrom's BS in there (as usual), but the fact is that Zelda once was close to what bolded sentence states. And that type of games (in some similar form, as witnessed by success of Skyrim) is what "hardcore" audience today wants to play, and where the sales are. So maybe Nintendo, if they are really serious about "hardcore" (PS360) gamers, should be thinking about making something 1st party that catters to that audience, be it main Zelda title, spin-off Zelda title (I can completely see Adventures of Link spinn-off, with Fable-like combat and Gothic-like open world), or some completely different IP, yet tuned to "modern" game development (and consumption) tastes.

@Bolded: Serioulsy? That's the worst thing that could happen to Zelda! The Fable series have a VERY boring combat mechanics! VERY very boring combat indeed!! It's all about button smashing, and that's never been what's Zelda is all about. And it never should be.


For me, Fable has very good combat system, which can be very, very different depending on what skills you choose (hence replayability - I probably played Fable I 3 or 4 times, each time differently). And original Zeldas were way more in line of button smashing - it's so called Aonuma's Zeldas that brought the way of combat as we know it today (fire up Link to the past for example, and see what I mean about button smashing). But that's why I said I can see Zelda spin-off with that sort of combat and not main titles - way too much of current fans would object if put in main titles, but if it's spin-off (or whatever we would like to call it ("Classic Zelda"?), I think we can have something that's both more true to original Zelda and modern day standards.

 

 

And Gothic-ism is sooooo mundane; every RPG nowadays tries very hard to incoporate that element. Just look at Skyrim and Dragon Age; they both look quite similar. Even WoW have a bit of this in it. Try to find something else that the stereo typic medeviel setting! Much of what we see in games is taken from the 13th century and unwards, while the era between 500-1000 AD is very much unexplored in modern games. That's a very interesting era imo. So Zelda shouldn't try to emulate modern RPG's in that aspect either.

I couldn't disagree more with you on these two statements.

 

 

LOL, Gothic as in PC WRPG franchise, not setting. In my opinion, that game strikes very good balance between open world and storyline (plus I loved combat in first 2 parts, though it was very weird compared to what other games have). But, you're right, too many gothic (as in period) based settings, that's (among other reasons) why I love Elder Scrolls: Morrowind so much, it was quite different, but Bethesda seemed to think that alienated some folks (hence, pretty much standard setting in Oblivion and Skyrim).

That said, no, Zelda should not emulate modern RPGs in setting, it's got its own unique world and it should stay that way (though when you look at it, it's quite medieval itself). But I think Nintendo should take some of good stuff from curernt WRPGs if they're trying to get to that "hardcore" PS360 audience (and as I said, it may be in main titles, spin-offs or completely new IPs). If they're not - well, business as usual I guess.







Around the Network
HoloDust said:
DanneSandin said:
HoloDust said:

And yet, it seems Nintendo failed to realize (or care), despite TP sales numbers, that that's exactly what people might have wanted out of Zelda, and made E rated Zelda again....which I doubt will reach sale numbers of TP  http://www.zeldadungeon.net/2012/06/the-legend-of-zelda-a-sales-history/

Yes, I have to agree that most people seem to want a darker tone, and I don't understand hos Nintendo can't see this as well... But I don't think that was the big fault with SS; I don't think it was the art style that turned people off or the lack of blood.


Honestly, I don't mind SS art style, though I prefer TP - but I do think that more "serious" tone of TP can appeal to more "hardcore" PS360 audience.

 

I would have loved to see a combination of SS and TP; kind of a darker SS art style... Just look at WW; that game still holds up pretty nicely even after 10 years - something we won't be able to say about Skyrim...

 


 

There was this great little article back when SS launched (that I can't seem to find now) wrote by some game journalist about his girlfriend who is hardcore Zelda fan. And how she abandoned SS and started playing Skyrim with conclusion in the line of "this is more Zelda than Zelda".

I have to admit that I haven't played Skyrim yet (I have it for PC, but have to get a better mouse), but as far as I understand Skyrim has very little in common with Zelda. Zelda relies very much on puzzles, and thus far I haven't seen any praise for Skyrim's puzzles... Zelda is all about the temples and bosses, and these elements seem to be lacking in Skyrim as well. But, again, I havent played the game yet so I don't know...


 

Indeed, Elder Scrolls does not have very much in common with what Zelda is today - but quite a few with what Zelda was. Elder Scroll games, as well as other open-world WRPGs, do have puzzles (not as much as they used too, to be honest), but Zelda has become almost nothing but puzzles - overworld is completely marginalized, or underdeveloped.

 

I kind of have to agree with you about the Overworld; at least while talking about TP. That Overworld lacked content (which Nintendo themselves said). But take a look at SS. Sure, Skyloft was kinda dull - but when you decended things changed radically! I loved what they had done with the different areas in SS; those Overworlds (or whatever we call 'em) were great. I would love to see this thinking merge with old Zelda Overworlds. Merge the overworld of SS with LoZ with a dash of OoT thrown in. Hope that makes sense :P

 


Now, I'm not saying that Zelda should be Skyrim (actually, I'm not to happy that Elder Scrolls came to that either, compared to Morrowind), but article did make some valid points. Openess of Elder Scroll alike games is something that we have seen in original Zeldas. Completely "mature" content is maybe not what is best suited for Zelda, but darker tone of TP was very good step in right direction. And then there's those puzzles - now, I love when puzzles are well incorporated into game, but Zelda has gone way too far, neglecting both exploration and combat, both pillars of original Zelda games. As much as I mostly disagree with Malstrom's rants, I think he has few good points in this one:

@Bolded: I completley agree! More exploration and combat! But that's actually one thing that SS did really well imo; the combat was the best I've ever had in any game. Every foe was a challange!! And this goes very well with the first LoZ where you had to find the weak spot on certain foes.

"Take the issue of Retro making a Zelda game. The reason why people want Retro to make a Zelda game is because of the pent up frustration people have for Zelda today. Zelda is too Japanese orientated, too anime, and plays like a crappy Japanese adventure game. In the past, Zelda used to be influenced by Western RPGs hence the non-linear nature of the early Zelda games. In the past, Nintendo said, “What do we learn from those Western games to make an even better game?” Today, Nintendo says, “Let’s purge all Western influences from our games” resulting in Nintendo games becoming extremely creepy. I think we’re at the point where parents will feel uncomfortable giving the game even to their child. It’s just too weird. And these parents today are those that grew up with Nintendo games.

I think there is another story going on here. Korean culture has more international presence today than Japanese culture. Korean culture in movies, music, and games has to be controversial in Japan. Is this all some nationalist venture? It made more sense to go Japan culture back in the 80s when Japan was on the ascendency. Today, Japan is a rapidly shrinking country especially with its aging population. What is to gain by making games that tilt so heavy to the Japanese tilt?

The reason why we want Retro to make a Zelda game is because we are sick and tired of the Japanese eccentricities in Zelda. “But Zelda is about story and puzzles,” says Miyamoto which is nonsense. We want Retro to make the game or any Nintendo game because we want a more cultural neutral game.

The reality is that Retro is actually a Japanese company that happens to be located in the United States. Nintendo doesn’t see Retro in the way how you or I see it. Nintendo’s relationship to Retro is for Nintendo to tell Retro the Way How It Is. Retro’s job is to soak it up. Retro is not allowed to go, “Hey! This is wacky Japanese stuff which is just crap. Here is how real game makers do it,” where Retro outdoes Nintendo on Metroid or on 2d platformers. A Retro Zelda sounds pretty damn good at this point. Miyamoto talking about how communication is needed for the puzzles and story is actually Miyamoto saying: “The soul of Zelda is Japanese.” But if we look at the classic Zelda games, we find the soul of Zelda is Western. Zelda is the combination of arcade gameplay with the Western Role Playing Game. Nintendo seems intent on crashing the Zelda franchise rather than admit that the Western RPG is the soul of classic Zelda gameplay."


Now, there's A LOT of Mastrom's BS in there (as usual), but the fact is that Zelda once was close to what bolded sentence states. And that type of games (in some similar form, as witnessed by success of Skyrim) is what "hardcore" audience today wants to play, and where the sales are. So maybe Nintendo, if they are really serious about "hardcore" (PS360) gamers, should be thinking about making something 1st party that catters to that audience, be it main Zelda title, spin-off Zelda title (I can completely see Adventures of Link spinn-off, with Fable-like combat and Gothic-like open world), or some completely different IP, yet tuned to "modern" game development (and consumption) tastes.

@Bolded: Serioulsy? That's the worst thing that could happen to Zelda! The Fable series have a VERY boring combat mechanics! VERY very boring combat indeed!! It's all about button smashing, and that's never been what's Zelda is all about. And it never should be.


For me, Fable has very good combat system, which can be very, very different depending on what skills you choose (hence replayability - I probably played Fable I 3 or 4 times, each time differently). And original Zeldas were way more in line of button smashing - it's so called Aonuma's Zeldas that brought the way of combat as we know it today (fire up Link to the past for example, and see what I mean about button smashing). But that's why I said I can see Zelda spin-off with that sort of combat and not main titles - way too much of current fans would object if put in main titles, but if it's spin-off (or whatever we would like to call it ("Classic Zelda"?), I think we can have something that's both more true to original Zelda and modern day standards.

 

I enjoyed playing Fable2, but always found the combat lacking. I think that a good example of button smashing combat would be Batman: AA. You're more or less smashing them buttons, but you can counter and make different kind of attacks, making the combat more involving. In Fable I'd always sit back and smash them buttons as soon as enemies appeared... Kinda boring when playing for hours...

 

 

 

 

And Gothic-ism is sooooo mundane; every RPG nowadays tries very hard to incoporate that element. Just look at Skyrim and Dragon Age; they both look quite similar. Even WoW have a bit of this in it. Try to find something else that the stereo typic medeviel setting! Much of what we see in games is taken from the 13th century and unwards, while the era between 500-1000 AD is very much unexplored in modern games. That's a very interesting era imo. So Zelda shouldn't try to emulate modern RPG's in that aspect either.

I couldn't disagree more with you on these two statements.

 

 

LOL, Gothic as in PC WRPG franchise, not setting. In my opinion, that game strikes very good balance between open world and storyline (plus I loved combat in first 2 parts, though it was very weird compared to what other games have). But, you're right, too many gothic (as in period) based settings, that's (among other reasons) why I love Elder Scrolls: Morrowind so much, it was quite different, but Bethesda seemed to think that alienated some folks (hence, pretty much standard setting in Oblivion and Skyrim).

That said, no, Zelda should not emulate modern RPGs in setting, it's got its own unique world and it should stay that way (though when you look at it, it's quite medieval itself). But I think Nintendo should take some of good stuff from curernt WRPGs if they're trying to get to that "hardcore" PS360 audience (and as I said, it may be in main titles, spin-offs or completely new IPs). If they're not - well, business as usual I guess.

 

Oh, hahaha silly me! Never heard of that franchise to be honest :P Yeah Morrowind were kinda badass!! Really enjoyed that game as well!!

What I would love to see with Zelda is combining 8-bit open world, exploring Zelda with OoT and some elements of SS... That would be an amazing game!!


 









I'm on Twitter @DanneSandin!

Furthermore, I think VGChartz should add a "Like"-button.

Plz cut da trees



DieAppleDie said:
Plz cut da trees

http://i854.photobucket.com/albums/ab105/setsunainoue/Funny/Pokemon_Cut.jpg">



 

DanneSandin said:

 

I would have loved to see a combination of SS and TP; kind of a darker SS art style... Just look at WW; that game still holds up pretty nicely even after 10 years - something we won't be able to say about Skyrim...

 

Well, WW type of art style usually does last longer than games that go for realism - it's just how things will always be. But I agree, I can be pretty much sure that I'll be thinking about visuals of Journey in 10 years more or less the same as today (just as I think about Rayman 3 today as almost 10 years ago) - and I doubt I'll be thinking the same about Skyrim. Though, when it comes to Zelda, I think lot of people where hoping to see something in the line of that demo...

 

I kind of have to agree with you about the Overworld; at least while talking about TP. That Overworld lacked content (which Nintendo themselves said). But take a look at SS. Sure, Skyloft was kinda dull - but when you decended things changed radically! I loved what they had done with the different areas in SS; those Overworlds (or whatever we call 'em) were great. I would love to see this thinking merge with old Zelda Overworlds. Merge the overworld of SS with LoZ with a dash of OoT thrown in. Hope that makes sense :P

 

Yes, it makes very much sense - I would love to see old school approach to Zelda, with much more open world. And not just for the sake of "classic Zelda" - considering all the love open worlds are getting from gamers, I think it would be very smart move if they try and incorporate some of good open-world design ideas from other developers into future Zeldas.

 

For me, Fable has very good combat system, which can be very, very different depending on what skills you choose (hence replayability - I probably played Fable I 3 or 4 times, each time differently). And original Zeldas were way more in line of button smashing - it's so called Aonuma's Zeldas that brought the way of combat as we know it today (fire up Link to the past for example, and see what I mean about button smashing). But that's why I said I can see Zelda spin-off with that sort of combat and not main titles - way too much of current fans would object if put in main titles, but if it's spin-off (or whatever we would like to call it ("Classic Zelda"?), I think we can have something that's both more true to original Zelda and modern day standards.

 

I enjoyed playing Fable2, but always found the combat lacking. I think that a good example of button smashing combat would be Batman: AA. You're more or less smashing them buttons, but you can counter and make different kind of attacks, making the combat more involving. In Fable I'd always sit back and smash them buttons as soon as enemies appeared... Kinda boring when playing for hours...

 

Yeah, I get what you mean, though I never found Fable's combat system boring. I do enjoy OoT introduced Zelda combat system, as much as I enjoyed Gothic's system for example - the fact is, I wouldn't call neither of them too much pick-up-and-play. Is that bad? Not really for most of core audience, but fact is that pretty much anyone can take old Zelda game and play it easily; OoT or TP - not so much (I tried it, my kid loves OoT, but can't play it very succesfuly - though he has no problem playing Link to Past). Similar thing is with Fable - my brother, who I see as "casual" CoD-ish gamer, had no problem with Fable - and quite a few problems with Gothic. But as I said, I can't see that in main Zelda title, there would be probably too much backlash from current fans.

 

LOL, Gothic as in PC WRPG franchise, not setting. In my opinion, that game strikes very good balance between open world and storyline (plus I loved combat in first 2 parts, though it was very weird compared to what other games have). But, you're right, too many gothic (as in period) based settings, that's (among other reasons) why I love Elder Scrolls: Morrowind so much, it was quite different, but Bethesda seemed to think that alienated some folks (hence, pretty much standard setting in Oblivion and Skyrim).

That said, no, Zelda should not emulate modern RPGs in setting, it's got its own unique world and it should stay that way (though when you look at it, it's quite medieval itself). But I think Nintendo should take some of good stuff from curernt WRPGs if they're trying to get to that "hardcore" PS360 audience (and as I said, it may be in main titles, spin-offs or completely new IPs). If they're not - well, business as usual I guess.

 

Oh, hahaha silly me! Never heard of that franchise to be honest :P Yeah Morrowind were kinda badass!! Really enjoyed that game as well!!

What I would love to see with Zelda is combining 8-bit open world, exploring Zelda with OoT and some elements of SS... That would be an amazing game!!

 

Yes, that would be great game - however (and I really hope I'm wrong), I somehow fear that we'll see even more puzzle designed levels, and even less exploration. Is that bad? It is, if less and less people are buying Zelda (and by looking at SS numbers...). That's why I would love to see something as spin-off or completely new IP that has more or less "soul" of original Zelda, with good things from modern open-world games thrown in. I'm not saying current Zelda fans would necessarily like that, but I believe it would be good move (one of many, off course) for Nintendo in their attempt to gain more attention of "hardcore" audience. If they want that attention, that is.



Around the Network
HoloDust said:

 

DanneSandin said:

 

Yeah, I get what you mean, though I never found Fable's combat system boring. I do enjoy OoT introduced Zelda combat system, as much as I enjoyed Gothic's system for example - the fact is, I wouldn't call neither of them too much pick-up-and-play. Is that bad? Not really for most of core audience, but fact is that pretty much anyone can take old Zelda game and play it easily; OoT or TP - not so much (I tried it, my kid loves OoT, but can't play it very succesfuly - though he has no problem playing Link to Past). Similar thing is with Fable - my brother, who I see as "casual" CoD-ish gamer, had no problem with Fable - and quite a few problems with Gothic. But as I said, I can't see that in main Zelda title, there would be probably too much backlash from current fans.

*** I guess that's why they always have those long tutorials in Zelda games nowadays :p I believe there could some kind of "middle ground" for the controllers; something to please the core fans AND something that is simple to pick up and play for casuals. I'm sure Nintendo will be able to figure it out (sooner or later)

 

LOL, Gothic as in PC WRPG franchise, not setting. In my opinion, that game strikes very good balance between open world and storyline (plus I loved combat in first 2 parts, though it was very weird compared to what other games have). But, you're right, too many gothic (as in period) based settings, that's (among other reasons) why I love Elder Scrolls: Morrowind so much, it was quite different, but Bethesda seemed to think that alienated some folks (hence, pretty much standard setting in Oblivion and Skyrim).

That said, no, Zelda should not emulate modern RPGs in setting, it's got its own unique world and it should stay that way (though when you look at it, it's quite medieval itself). But I think Nintendo should take some of good stuff from curernt WRPGs if they're trying to get to that "hardcore" PS360 audience (and as I said, it may be in main titles, spin-offs or completely new IPs). If they're not - well, business as usual I guess.

 

Oh, hahaha silly me! Never heard of that franchise to be honest :P Yeah Morrowind were kinda badass!! Really enjoyed that game as well!!

What I would love to see with Zelda is combining 8-bit open world, exploring Zelda with OoT and some elements of SS... That would be an amazing game!!

 

Yes, that would be great game - however (and I really hope I'm wrong), I somehow fear that we'll see even more puzzle designed levels, and even less exploration. Is that bad? It is, if less and less people are buying Zelda (and by looking at SS numbers...). That's why I would love to see something as spin-off or completely new IP that has more or less "soul" of original Zelda, with good things from modern open-world games thrown in. I'm not saying current Zelda fans would necessarily like that, but I believe it would be good move (one of many, off course) for Nintendo in their attempt to gain more attention of "hardcore" audience. If they want that attention, that is.

*** First of, it seems that Zelda games are following some kind of cycle; every second game sales "poorly"; LoZ sold great; aLttP not as much. OoT; great sales; MM not so much... WW... Meh :P TP great sales! SS... Is undertracked here on VGC

Secondly, I think this ties well in to what we were speaking about earlier (which I happened to erase); that Zelda would benefit greatly by merging Old Zelda with New Zelda. It seems a lot of core Zelda fans on this site would love the idea! The openness of LoZ combined with OoT and SS - that's something I'd love to see!

Sorry for the late reply: I've been away :P



I'm on Twitter @DanneSandin!

Furthermore, I think VGChartz should add a "Like"-button.

Maybe Nintendo isn't serious about hardcore gamers because one usage of the term would refer to people who play XXX games, and the other (more common) usage is an oxymoron.



I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

Jumpin said:

Maybe Nintendo isn't serious about hardcore gamers because one usage of the term would refer to people who play XXX games, and the other (more common) usage is an oxymoron.


LOL, I agree, stupid term, hence why I always use it as "hardcore" - in lack of better, and for the sake of easier conversation, I would, for example, call those 13+ millions who bought Skyrim "hardcore". I don't know if Nintendo is seriously after them or not, but if they are, I do hope they either make some 1st party title that catters to that audience or pull N64 "Rare" and find some good 2nd party developer to do it for them.