Nothing justifies five year, massive, HD game projects. Grand Theft Auto V barely took five years to make. Unless Zelda is selling GTA numbers, Nintendo needs to cut down on development time and costs. I believe that Iwata told Aonuma after Skyward Sword that the next Zelda game should take only three years to make, as previous games did. Now it seems the game will take four years.

"Follow the sales" is the strategy that led to Resident Evil 6. Nintendo could turn Metroid into an online multiplayer-focused military FPS, and it would probably sell way better than any Metroid ever, but it wouldn't exactly be Metroid anymore. They can make Zelda more realistic-styled, make its gameplay more action-focused, take away the adventure game elements that have defined the series since day 1, all in a bid to appeal to the mainstream Skyrim crowd. But what's the point? Zelda has its niche. It's a pretty big niche. There are very few games out there that are similar to Zelda, and most of those are obviously directly inspired by the series. Right now, Zelda is the master of its domain. It is the biggest series of its kind by far. Try to edge into someone else's territory, and it becomes the low man on the totem pole.

Ocarina and Twilight sold well for many reasons, not for their aesthetics alone, if for their aesthetics at all.

Wind Waker is one of the fan favorites...

I want a modern OOT art style
gimme pls

Soleron pretty much said it. It's what Maelstrom keeps saying! The problem is giving Aonuma the right to impose is creative ego on the project. He has to focus on what people want and not what he wants to do. It's pretty much true that people love Twilight Princess and Ocarina of Time art style.

So why not do that? Why keep trying to push the Cell-Shaded art style from Wind Waker? I like those games but it's not really what people want.

Just look at sales trends and you will see what artstyle people like when they play zelda.

People are speaking with their wallets and its the less cartoony zeldas that sell best. That is fact.

Take what you're given and like it, peon.  As long as it can be called art, you have no choice.  

My mom asked me to place some flowers in her kitchen window.  I took an empty whiskey bottle, filled it with dirt, and stuck some dead briar limbs inside.  When she frowned at me, I said, "you're part of the problem!"

Nintendo's philosophy of surprising customers over giving them what they ask for can be very hit-and-miss.  It seems like that kind of thing would be a better fit with new IP or spin-offs than with existing franchises.

I'm one of those guys that thinks Zelda can do no wrong. I'll just ignore this thread since I'm happy with whatever artstyle they come up with as long as the game is as good as ever.

You may have a point with OoT, but Twilight Princess released during the Wii launch, and as we all know, that launch was massive. I warranty you that without a Wii version TP would not have sold nearly as much as it did, TP alongside Wii Sports were one of the games to get during the Wii launch period. Twilight Princess became popular thanks to the Wii and not for the game itself. The GC sales prove my point.

And only one game in the series doesn't really prove your point.

Only an idiot would think that Zelda games have failed in what they sought to achieve... well except the sales success. But for Nintendo, Zelda is more important as a high-review title for the console, rather than a high sales game. One would hope that both go hand-in-hand, but they really don't

 I mean Mario Kart will always outsell Zelda. Not being one is better than the other... but simply because one can be appreciated and played by a broader potential audience (all ages) while Zelda is much more for just the "core" gamers (even though I think if anybody were to give it a try, they would thoroughly enjoy it in the long run - the starts of the Zelda games can be hard to get into, but Link Between World start was great example of that improving).