Dulfite said:
1) Zelda is intended to be a linear game. Yes, in recent ones, there have been side quests but they aren't really anything special or character developing like the affinity missions or quests you stumble upon in X. 2) I HATED Majoras mask time thing so much that I want nothing to do with any game even remotely like that. That was so stressful. I'm not saying it was a bad game or that people can't enjoy it, but it's not my type of game. My type of game is like X, where there is no stress. Yes, they occassionally make you think about the lifehold deadline (it isn't even that often), but afterwords they bring up random little things, implying that you as a gamer shouldn't be stressed playing this game. It is meant to be enjoyed. 3) Zelda, despite it's linear storyline and lack of major side quests that have nothing to do with that major storyline, does offer plenty of things to do, especially in recent games, that have nothing to do with the story; fishing, for example. |
1) If you're going to classify Zelda as a linear game, then X is right up there with it. Both allow for exploration and player freedom, with certain objectives vital to the main story that need to be completed in a certain order (dungeons for Zelda, story missions for X), and both allow for side quests that can be done whenever the player desires after a certain point in the game (after obtaining certain items in Zelda and after reaching a certain level or point in the story for X). The inclusions of affinity missions doesn't make X less linear; all it does is simply change the type of sidequest you're doing or how long the sidequests take to accomplish.
2) I'm not advocating Majora's Mask as something this game should seek to emulate; I'd advocate anything but for something like X. With that said, if the goal of the game isn't to make people feel rushed, then choosing a storyline revolving around the entirety of the human race dying out if a certain object isn't found in enough time was a really, really poor decision.
3) Zelda offers plenty of things to do, and this is where we come to the crux of the issue. Well, two cruxes, actually. The first is offering versus forcing. It's fine if a game wants to allow its player to screw around and completely ignore the story, it's another thing entirely if the game forces the player to do so. If X didn't require the player to, say, save people's cats before going off to search for the lifehold, then I wouldn't have a complaint. The forcing of the sidequest upon the player is what drastically changes things.
The second crux, however, and what I'd argue is the most important one, is that in the case of most Zelda games, you're really in no rush for most of the time. In Ocarina of Time (with the exception of the last bit where Zelda gets captured) the world is already fucked. Can't get much worse. In Majora's Mask, everything's just getting undone anyway, so there's no reason to not screw around. It's not like any good you do will matter much. In Wind Waker, Ganondorf isn't really in a position to do anything harmful at the moment. In X (again, speaking purely from a narrative standpoint), if you don't hurry, everyone dies. That's the difference.