Also yeah. Links Awakening DX is possibly the greatest game ever made by anyone ever.

Zelda >>>>>>>>>> Artsy overrated but good games. Sorry, NEVER gonna happen. Especially with just the 2 games released. Joke thread, imo.

NOBODY can make 2 games, and compare themselves to Zelda. It is atrocious, and the guy behind these games would probably be flattered, but angry at you for even making that comparison.

It's like saying Bono is greater than God.

I'm sorry dude, but I think we played different games.

Both Team ICO games had NO story whatsoever. However emotionally gripping it was for people to watch two kids hold hands for 6 hours, and see what happened at the end of that game, or to watch a sleeping girl through an entire game, and consider it a story...no.

Those are not stories. Those are visually emotional emotes expressed throughout and mostly at the very ending moments of both games, and while some might relate them to moments in movies, or in their life, and feel something....that is NOT a compelling narrative. I could crap on paper and write a more compelling narrative than one that does not exist. There is no narrative, and the characters, while visually appealing, are completely shallow and uninvolved.

Zelda, nor the ICO games have ever been about story. Sure, they have won a couple of artsy "we're smarter than you" awards from some stuck up critics.

The Emperor has no cloths, sir.

Saying SotC has a good story is like saying Tetris has a compelling narrative, because of the menu text, and the fact that you once loved a girl whose name started with the letter "L"

In a real game with a good "story" you don't have to play to the very end to see a very short cutscene of ANY STORY AT ALL. Also, don't get me started on the horse.

A real, compelling narrative, lies in a game like Bioshock, or to a much lesser extent, Final Fantasy...or even Braid.

You can't just hint at things and get credit....actually, no wait, I guess you can hint at things and get credit that other games much more rightfully deserved.

Im not sure if the two series are comparable enough to call one a winner over another. But when i describe ico to people i always say its like a realistic zelda game. Their both magical in a sense that you really can find an escape in following along with the story. I would have to say that the team ico games are my absolute favorite game experiences. Especially shadow of the collosus, and i believe that Ueda will only make more and more incredible game experiences as his career goes on. If he doesnt get to worried about his games becoming a huge commercial success like the zelda series is.

the story of slowly killing colossi and becoming increasingly evil yourself is a story, whether they use text to spell it out or visuals. A wanderer who decides to become evil to save the woman he loves. and you're telling me it has the same amount of story as Tetris? Bullshit.

How about this, since you don't like the word story I'll use the word atmostphere. They use an atmosphere to convey emotions with a simple story but one that is meaningful and extremely well thought out.

It requires digging deep, but there are underlying concepts that make a person wonder about ideas.  I haven't played Twilight Princess enough; so, at the moment for me, that statement is true for Twilight Princess.  However, when these literary "tools" are used, you can't simply say that the story is made only to guide someone through the gameplay sections.  If the Zelda stories were all that you're saying they are, things like ambiguity and theme would not be incorporated into the story.

I never picked up the "becoming more evil" part. Honestly. I think they should have spelled it out.

Anyway, yes, atmosphere.

That said, OOT's atmosphere can compare favorably to either ICO game.

Again, you can't compare yourself to Zelda, with just two games under your belt, I don't care how great they are. Everything else is opinion, that is hardly debatable though. Why not give the best developer ever award to whoever made LBP.

You can say any game is better than any other game.

But, when you are comparing a FRANCHISE, against Zelda, you have to stand up to MANY great things, one of which is longevity. Could team ICO keep their level of quality up over 15 games? Could they make a 60 hour game interesting throughout? Could they make a great game in 2D? Can they revitalize a console? Can they make the highest reviewed game of all time? Can they even come close?

Truth is this.

A. The Zelda franchise contains the highest reviewed game of all time.

B. No main Zelda game has ever been considered bad by reviewers

C. and there are MANY main Zelda games, over many many years.

D. Zelda has been good, no matter how poor the graphics are, or how non-existant the story is.

E. Team ICO only has two games, meta average 90 and 91. The franchise has no continuity or longevity at this point.

F. Zelda has a huge fanbase, and is a cultural phenomonon.

G. Nearly every console Zelda game ever had had higher metacritic scores, and won more awards than either team ICO game(90 and 91 respectively).

H. Team ICO games have little diversity. They seem very formulaicZelda games range from 2D, to 3D, to handheld, to console. The Last Gaurdian does NOT look to break this trend. They have had AAA breakout hits in both dimensions.

I. Also, Zelda games are almost always much longer than either Team ICO game, and keep themselves interesting throughout.

I don't care how big of a fan you are of both of those games. It is fallacy to compare the Team ICO "series" of games to the Zelda series. It just does not stack up. In fact, it is completely unfair to Zelda, because Zelda has had to make so many more games. If you want to compare the top 2 Zelda games to the top 2 Team ICO games, fine. ICO and SotC, verses OOT and LttP.

And many people think that Zelda games have some of the greatest atmospheres ever made. For example the first time you go into Hyrule field in OoT, that is still to many people (me included) one of the most magical moments ever in gaming.

In a lot of the Zelda games (and actually I personally wouldn't count TP as one of them) the world is just stunning (and I'm not talking about in a graphical sense here), that is how Zelda conveys a lot of its atmosphere, not from what you're doing but from where you are.

@Zen

If you'll look, I never ever agreed with Megaman. My only contention has been that I like Ico games more than Zelda. But it is obvious that any objective measure will have Zelda on top. I just don't like people coming in here and laughing as though Ico games are no where near good enough.

Also, I don't see how you can call Ico games formulaic and think Zelda games aren't. How many more times must I go into the Lava temple?

In a way they are, but both series are really. My point was that the overall gameplay style is vastly different from a 2D to a 3D Zelda. If team ICO made a 2D game, we don't know how well it would stack up. Could Team ICO convey their particular brand of atmosphere without all the awe inspiring visuals? Perhaps they are a crutch.

Also, my posts are more aimed at the thread, than you. Take no offense, please.