People say it was a disappointment because that's what it was. It was a shitty Zelda title best forgotten.

Very empty, very dank, somehow easier than WW, poor musical scores, half-assed story line... I could go on. It tried to leech from OoT's by calling itself a "spiritual sequel", but failed in every aspect. The only Zelda game I've disliked more would be Zelda CD-i, and that isn't even a fair comparison because I've never actually played Zelda CD-i.

I find that most people who defend it haven't dipped their noses into too many other Zelda titles first. A Zelda title is like very fine wine; someone new to wine tasting may not see a difference between a poor and high grade wine, while the people who have developed their "taste" can notice the difference instantly (and for the more upper crust people, spit it right out).

I sincerely hope Miyamoto has more control than Aonuma next time around.

I'm surprised people think Galaxy was too "linear". Was SMB too linear? Was SMW too linear?

Hm.

True, but recent rumblings from Galaxy staff point to Galaxy 2. i mean, we all know another Mario platformer is coming; it's inevitable. But the big deal is a Galaxy 2 before Mario's next big leap (lol pun). 

Neither do I. I don't think Nintendo releases one main Mario game per sysem by design, it's a consequence of their last two systems having five-year life spans. They'll bat ideas around for the next 1-2 years, followed by a three-year production period, and release it as a nice swan song for the Wii.

I've played every Zelda game but the CD-i titles, and Twilight Princess is one of my favorites - definitely my favorite of the 3D games.

 Complaining that an excellent game is "too linear" is like having the best steak dinner you've ever had, and your only comment is a complaint that you couldn't order the duck confit instead.

You are entitled to your opinion, but may I ask what it is you actually liked about it over the other 3D games?

The only redeeming quality in my opinion the game had was Midna, but one character arch isn't quite enough to tip the scales...

Gameplay was at heart similar to OoT's, but made several needed improvements. I was never happy with the combat in the 3D games, and this was the first time I didn't feel constrained by the limited move list (at least, after you've gained a few skils).

I loved the larger, more organic overworld, and unlike in Wind Waker, exploration wasn't an exercise in tedium. (I'm not even going to get into the fact that, for thousands of years, we've had sails so that wind direction wouldn't be a problem.) I liked the game's maritime concept, but not the execution.

The puzzles and boss fights were the series' usual excellence, and I liked the new mechanics introduced with Wolf Link. They weren't exactly deep, but those sections were a nice change of pace from the usual Zelda formula.

And the motion controls were, with one exception, well-implemented. My only complaint is that the most useful move in the game, the instant spin attack, only worked about 80% of the time for me.

IMO the wolf stuff is the worst part of the game. Controlling wolf-Link is very frustrating (a first in the series), and the whole world looks so drab and awful, as well as the music being not at all interesting or motivating the way it was in previous outings. Yeah, I know, it's supposed to be a shadow world, but LttP had a dark world that looked 10 times more interesting. I've only played TP for about 12 hours because it got so annoying.

I loved WW, BTW. 

Thing with Zelda is TP wasn't the Wii's title - it was adapted for the Wii to help the launch, it doesn't suprise me we are going to get another so soon.

I reckon they were probably half way through when the Wii got launched, Mario on the other hand - didn't expect that but bring it on.

But where's Pikmin 3 - come on Nintendo, it's my favourite GC franchise