This is why I stopped listening to Malstrom.

Nintendo has always prided itself on creating new experiences that people will come to love. See: Wind Waker. It has always taken the attitude that surprising the gamer is more important than giving them what they say they want, because when it comes down to it, people don't know what they really want, and so they ask for the obvious rather than the best.

The Wii itself, which Malstrom praised as Nintendo's greatest idea since the NES, was based on this idea - sure, they could have just ramped up the power. Nobody was asking for motion controls, before they revealed the Wii. Instead, they made the system to provide a new experience that you couldn't get elsewhere.

Now, what is Aonuma doing with Zelda? He's aiming to make an experience that you can't get anywhere else. And that means leveraging the Wii U's hardware to make a game with a unique feel - which includes the visuals. They could, alternatively, go with graphics that seek out realism... in which case, the game would age rapidly.

Note that he never said there wouldn't be a realistic feel to the graphics. He said it's going to have its own feel. This could mean that it'll end up looking much like the Tech Demo, only with more of a, say, futuristic feel to it. Or it might end up looking like a cross between Okami and Epic Mickey. Or like Rayman Legends with a hint of Mario 3D World. Or like Grand Theft Auto crossed with Xenoblade. It could end up great. It could end up simply not looking that good. But the greatest games usually come out of making an effort to do something different, going the more challenging route and refusing to copycat something just because it was successful.

When it comes down to it, I'd love for there to be some new Zelda titles made by other producers than Aonuma... but every one of the games he has made so far have been top-notch (yes, including Phantom Hourglass and Spirit Tracks). I'll give him free rein to guide things for now, and see where it takes the franchise. This isn't like Sakamoto and Metroid: Other M, we're not talking about a developer trying to insert his grand vision into the game, we're talking about a developer seeking to provide new experiences to the player - in other words, his focus is on the player, right where it should be. But then, Malstrom will rant about the new Zelda no matter what it looks like or plays like, because it's not going to be a game designed solely for people like him (and he certainly does not represent the market as a whole).

The current sales of the series don't justify the expense. Aonuma's direction and ideas haven't changed in years and years. The fault must lie with some element of his decisions.

I don't understand why he continues to be given free reign.

The art style is merely an example of this. If he wants it cartoon, it's cartoon. Wii U Zelda sell badly? Doesn't matter, he's still in charge.

I was one of those who was against the idea of cartoon type graphics for wind waker and then when I saw the results of that vision my opinion totally changed. It was the most successful Zelda by ratio of owners who bought it. Even today as a wii u title with minimal enhancements it still looks fresh and has a wonderful atmosphere.

I have to say I'm slightly more focused on action than puzzles so games like Skyrim have been more appealing to me nowadays. The ambitions of Zelda nowadays are restrained by Nintendo focusing on weak hardware that gives them maximum profitability. Windwaker was the last Zelda on competitive hardware and it was utterly stunning for its day. It's very hard for Zelda to impress nowadays. Zelda on ps4 would be pretty amazing but Zelda on wii u will probably result in the same sort of engine we have already seen on ps3 and 360. No point looking at that Zelda technical demo. That was produced on PC and does not reflect wii u power.

Zelda U is difficult for Nintendo. If they try to produce similar graphics to PC, PS4 and even Xbox One they will not impress. It needs its own art style that doesn't give away the weakness of the hardware straight away. It really needs to be cartoon graphics like wind waker.

I somewhat agree with the OP...Nintendo should do whatever they want when it comes to making Zelda/Mario games. We all know they are going to be amazing, so just let Nintendo work its magic. Sorry if its not what you wanted but quite frankly, I don't give a damn. I get that Nintendo needs to make games that sell but Nintendo wouldn't be Nintendo if they just followed the crowd and did what everybody expects them to do .-.

That said, I would have absolutely zero complaints if the game comes out looking like the tech demo or if it comes out looking like something radically different because Nintendo will make it beautiful.

Ocarina of Time 3D >>>>> Wind Waker HD
Hopefully Zelda U is in the same line of Ocarina. Not TP, but Ocarina.

Although I think the OP is being a little too harsh on some fans, I agree that we need to stop complaining about all the little things in Zelda games. In my opinion Aonuma and company have consistently delivered great Zelda games for over a decade. So I say let the team continue unabated.

As for those who want Nintendo to cater to the lowest common denominator, be careful what you wish for.

pls ocarina or twilight princess style

You do understand that the phrase "come to love" refers to the fact that people might be against it at first, but experiencing it changes their mind, right? As for 3D vs 2D Mario, that was a different situation. And sales of NSMB U prove that the massive sales of NSMB Wii were driven by the fact that there hadn't been a 2D Mario in a long time, and the fact that the game was on a system with a massive install base. I remember Malstrom predicting that there wouldn't be another 2D Mario, that 3D Mario would be the focus and that it would be the first Mario title released on the Wii U because reasons. When NSMB U was announced, he didn't recant, he didn't admit to being wrong, he just suggested that Nintendo was clearly doing what it wanted rather than what the public wanted as proven by Wii U itself, and refused to acknowledge the contradiction with his previous statements.

Wind Waker HD isn't selling massively because it's a *remake*. And Wind Waker sold 4.6 million on a console that barely made it to 20 million. Twilight Princess isn't quite up to 7 million, and it's on a console with a 100 million install base, and it released at launch, thus making it a title that people were bound to buy alongside the system itself. Sales of TP come from it being on a more popular system, not an inherent superiority.

You do realise that "doing things differently each time" isn't a consistent strategy, right? It's a change in strategy with each game. Suggesting that this is some sort of "direction" is ludicrous.

I'm sorry, but "anime visuals"? Really? Perhaps you should look at what Anime looks like, because none of the Zeldas have an anime look. But more than that, the one that comes closest is the DS games - PH and ST. And PH is the best-selling handheld Zelda of all time. And I see you've bought into Malstrom's assertion that Zelda has "become" about puzzles and story - it's just nonsense. Zelda has always blended action, puzzle, and story into an overall whole, and each title changes up the balance one way or another. Note that the ones with the most extensive stories were actually OoT and TP, which were the best-selling ones of all. As for puzzles, Phantom Hourglass was heavy with them, and it was the best-selling handheld Zelda. The action Zeldas have actually consistently performed worst of all.

Success comes from copying? I'm sure that Sony and MS love hearing you say that, even if there's no fact behind it. The best games of all time have pretty much always been completely new ideas (gameplay-wise). They often don't have the strongest sales within their franchises, but that's because of business - you have to build the market, it doesn't just magically appear when you release the game. Wonderful 101 suffered from having too high an entry point in a new IP on a new system - there was no existing market to leverage, and people weren't going to get it straight away.

I'm sorry, but did you just suggest that 7.5 million is mainstream, but 5 million is niche? Seriously? And by the way, Wind Waker outsold Twilight Princess in Japan. Phantom Hourglass sold roughly as well as Ocarina of Time in Europe. Each entry has performed differently in different regions. Oh, and Skyward Sword easily outsold Ocarina of Time 3D... by your reasoning (by invoking WWHD), this proves that Skyward Sword is a better game than Ocarina of Time.

You do realise that his son's desire for trains in the game were inspiration, not some master plan like Sakamoto's overarching idea of where Metroid is going, right? That Aonuma tries to make the best game he can, and each time he gets inspiration from different places? Just like Miyamoto did when making various mega-franchises? Or do you believe that the best way to make a game is to colour-by-number, tick all the boxes? Because that's what makes games like Resident Evil 6 (a game where copying from successful games was the whole method of development) - which demonstrates quite nicely that passion and inspiration, combined with new experiences, will always trump copying and incrementally improving a formula. Which is why NSMB 2 and NSMB U are struggling compared with NSMB and NSMB Wii - because the latter just created some new hooks within the formula, rather than changing things up. Super Mario 3D Land is selling better than NSMB 2. If SM3DW remains outsold by NSMB U, it'll only be because of bundling. So much for "3D Mario isn't as popular as 2D Mario".

The more realistic Zelda games are the more popular ones, just look at the sales.  People have every right to ask for what they want, especially considering Nintendo was teasing a realistic Zelda from that tech demo, if they have no intention of going in that direction then they shouldn't have shown that, but now people see what a realistic Zelda on Wii U looks like and they want it.  Your acting like we should be grateful for whatever we get.