I agree with everything! I know that this would probably be controversial, but I think that the hero of time should die in the last game. Like, in a martyrial way. And in a very lonely way. Perhaps as he passes he finally finds navi reunites with navi and as his life fades away, the last thing he hears is Navi panicing to wake him up, shouting "hey, listen! Please..."

It would be a nice nod to the fans and it would be bitter sweet. The greatest video game journey is finally at an end and you start to miss the things you thought you hated. I don't think that the game should be about him looking for her, though. They should do it like in MM; the game starts with link in the lost woods as a child, then it fades and we see him still wandering as an adult/older teen. Some plot device happens and he finds his way out. Actually, what if he finds Navi in the beginning and she leads him out, only for (plot device) to happen to her, and he must save her from (plot device). Then the story would effectively start out like WW. A personal journey to rescue someone dear to you, but then the story opens up and the real threat reveals itself, whatever it may be.

I think that Malon should definitely be involved, but I don't think that Link should be romantic with anyone. They'll all obviously love him, that's part of the humor and charm, but the hero of time should remain a loner. Maybe Malon just starts the village and there are some hints to that. But all in all, I don't think it should try to tie anthing together. That's how sequels and prequels are ruined; they're confined. MM was so great because it wasn't. OoT didn't matter to MM. The same should be true for this one.

I actually agree for the most part. Even the death thing. He should die alone in the Lost Woods. It's implied as much in Twilight Princess. I don't think the story would revolve around the romance any more than it did with Skyward Sword, and in the end, Link is an adventurer so he'd never just settle down like that. When I say it should tie into the next game, I don't mean in a way that would confine them, such as turning TP into a direct sequel, I just want them to make more sense of that branch of the timeline. There are several implied connections between OOT/MM and TP, but it doesn't really make sense yet. Wind Waker, the sequel on the adult timeline, ties in perfectly for a Zelda game. It's obvious why WW follows OOT on the adult timeline, and they couldn't tie up more loose ends if they wanted to. Maybe make a game that took place in between that told another story in the time of the flood, but again, these tie ins don't confine the story, just make sense of it. It's not so obvious why TP follows OOT on the child timeline, aside from the Hero's shade and Ganondorf being executed instead of sealed. Perhaps that's enough for most people, but I mostly just want the end of the Hero of Time to be clarified, really. It's the only time in the series that one version of Link is present in another Link's game, and the only time there's a confirmed blood relation between the two. If anything, the fact that Link is supposed to be the Spirit of the Hero that reincarnates perpetually, him being related to his next incarnation has interesting implications. There's obviously a story there, and I want it to be told. So I definitely want his death in the third one. It's the...missing Link...oh that doesn't even work, shame on me...

Hey come to think of it, the Hero's Shade had several artifacts from Majora's Mask, so there's your MM remnant! Also, I just noticed the phrase "a self contained plot that uses elements light from past games to keep cronalogy" in your OP. That's a better way of saying it. It explores another story, contains elements from other games to establish chronology, and makes just a little bit more sense of things without constraining them. I just feel like in particular, the story that needs to be told is the end of the Hero of Time. It could establish the Links as individuals seperate from the Hero's spirit that they house, hence why the Hero of Time has a shade in TP, while the real Hero's Spirit is housed in TP Link at the time. It would also explain why Link needs to "awaken the spirit of the Hero" within himself in each incarnation. Each Link is just a normal guy, imbued with godlike courage from the unbreakable spirit of the hero within him, if he can just awaken the hero within.

90% isn't only... But so what?

Why does it only take advantage of 90% of the power? Why not use 100% and boost the performance?

...I don't know what I just read.

"concept art has the graphical limitations of a system in mind."

No. It doesn't. First, that isn't "concept art." It's real game art. It's art that expresses what the developer wants the player to see.

This is game art from DK64. If Nintendo cared about scaling back game art to better represent the ingame graphics, this wouldn't exist.

This:

...is still not even close in art direction, and not nearly as "cartoonish" as this:

Who care's if they art both "naturalistic?" Naturalism isn't an art style. It's a principle encompasing many completely different artstyles. Just because both games display grass in a kind of similar way doesn't mean that they share an artstyle or are even artistically similar, or else the Pokemon Colleseum would be considered the same "art style" to OoT and TP. Even colleseum has more stylistically in common with OoT than TP does. If Nintendo wanted OoT to look like TP, then OoT would have looked like TP, but it doesn't, because they didn't. Sheik in Brawl wouldn't look so completely different from sheik in Melee if they shared an artstyle. In fact, Link in Melee wouldn't look so completely different from Link in brawl if they were supposed to share a similar artstyle. They are night and day. The only thing they have in common are Link, Zelda, and Ganondorf.

I'm not even going to requote the ingame comparison you just did, because any human being with eyes can see how completely different those are from each other, and that's on hardware of similar power.

"An anime style. Obviously they all did it in different ways."

Different ways.

AN ANIME STYLE DONE IN DIFFERENT WAYS.

DIFFERENT ART STYLES!!!!!!!

You literally quoted an article that agrees with me. Anime style =/= realistic and anime style =/= same or similar art style. And he lists OoT, Skyward Sword, Twilight Princess, and every other Zelda game that isn't Wind Waker derivitive. Now, unless you are going to try and argue that OoT also shares it's art style with ALttP, the Oracle games, Link's Awakening, ALBW, Zelda 2, and the original Legend of Zelda, this back and forth is over. You've literally proven yourself wrong with links, quotes, and side by side images that you yourself compared.

You are confusing concept art with promotional art (DK picture was an example of promotional art.) A lot of concept art is repurposed as promotional art. Concept art ALWAYS is suppose to represent the final end-product by the nature of brainstorming, and consequently concept artists have the limitations of the media in mind. The Twilight Princess pictures I posted come from Hyrule Historia, and are labeled as concept art in Hyrule Historia. But if game art is suppose to reprsent the goals of the developers, then why did you dismiss that Twiliight Princess was suppose to be more akin to OoT artistically, as repetitively mentioned by Aonuma. Why? Because the end-product is what matters, and the styles of Ocarina of Time and Twilight Princess in-game are not completely different. Different, yes, but not completely.  

Also naturalism is a style of art, 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realism_(arts)

http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalism_(arts)

"Realism as a style or movement needs to be distinguished from "realism" as a term to describe the very precise, detailed and accurate representation in art of the visual appearance of scenes and objects. Realism in this latter sense is also called naturalism. "

"Realism or naturalism as a style meaning the honest, unidealizing depiction of the subject, can of course be used in depicting any type of subject, without any commitment to treating the typical or everyday. 

"Some writers restrict the terms "Naturalism" and "Realism" for use as labels for period styles of the middle and late nineteenth century in Europe and America, thus making available the terms "naturalism" and "realism," all lowercase, for tendencies of art of any period so long as the works strive for an accurate representation of the visible world. Thus, "Naturalism" is tied to a time and place, whereas "naturalism" is timeless. As well as a major turning point in art."

I never said that the art-styles were the same. I said that they were not completely different, but similar. Both have a mix of stylized and realism in the characters, and naturalism in the environments. 

Why does it only take advantage of 90% of the power? Why not use 100% and boost the performance?