LOL so be it ! , but i agree Zelda Does have a Fitting amount of "side Quest" would be nice to Get some From dialogue with a NPC , in my opinion, Hunting down Hearts and taking them for my self on Zelda Has always Been the Best part of the game. Especially with OOT and MM

It appears I'm struggling to have an original thought tonight, every time i want to type something in a thread, someone else has already said it.

I could also add that alot of people seem now to be coming out of the woodwork saying how Zelda needs a change despite the fact that Nintendo said this themselves long ago, before they even released Twilight Princess, and are currently working to evolve the series for the new iteration. 

If bigger or more realistic/complex is your idea of change, then you're in for a surprise. Hopefully for everybody a good one, that they didn't even think they'd like.

Everybody is doing the "add development resources" thing, and "build complex coding". The game will be pretty, and you can quote me on that but I don't think Nintendo is going to go down the regular technical road with this Zelda. Sometimes less is more.

Let's have some faith shall we? We're going to be surprised, but I don't want to put my foot down and say "If it's not in this direction, of being bigger and more complex, I won't be happy at all". I enjoyed the first Zelda, and it was very very simple, it did the job well. If it can be a good game with a nice powerful gameplay structure, then I'll be happy. Videogames aren't part of the technology industry afterall.

Why did you use such a small font in the op? You made my eyes hurt reading it

Am trudging (and I do mean TRUDGING) through FALLOUT 3 at the moment...got the goty edition... I do like it a lot but bought it more for the post apocalyptic setting than the type of game it is as am not usually a big rpg fan (though I do like the occasional action-rpg)...

As a big Zelda fan though, I think it could just as easily be said that Fallout 3 could learn from Zelda games...I get more of a sense of accomplishment from the Zelda games as a whole...sure they are simpler, but when I play a game at the end of, say, a hard days work, that's what I look for for entertainment.

A lot of the sidequests in FALLOUT 3 (and yes there are a lot) seem to be there simply for the sake of making the game even longer than it needs to be (eg go somewhere and switch off a machine or kill a few raiders/mutants/woteva and then switch off a machine)...Aside from the whole talking to npc's and selecting choices from menues (which to me is about as much fun as reading a 'Choose Your own Adventure book) there isn't really a lot of puzzle solving and such (which is what makes the zelda series what it is). Much of Fallout 3's gameplay really is just dungeon crawling with a twist.

Funny! Don't recall hearing many Zelda fans complaining. I think each Zelda has been different in their own way. Different enough to bring something new. But it's Zelda. The reason why we play it and it's always highly anticipated is because of it's game play. I'm pretty sure the new Zelda will have something new but over all there needs to be no drastic change. The game is fine the way it is. Which is what's made it one of the best franchises.

I agree with this. We would never see a game like Morrowind come out last gen. While the Wii is technically superior to them, it isn't close to the PS360 which is required to have an open world in the vein of Fable or other WRPGs. I mean Fallout 3 is clearly the first game to ever try and get any sort of super open ended system, and is a series original to this gen.

@Topic
I stopped reading seriously when he complained that the side-quests didn't need to be done. Of course they didn't need to be done! They are side-quests! By definition they shouldn't be required.

Uh-huh? ...I can't account for this thread's lack of taste.

Seriously, Bethesda's games epitomize some of the most boring, inept, tripe-for-design I have ever had the displeasure of experiencing. No way is Zelda taking notes from those games. No. Fucking. Way.

As for this article, I'm afraid it has little substance to offer. As others have pointed out, the author appears to take for granted that the solution to Zelda's presupposed woes is to make the series more like Fallout 3. Well, that's nothing more than a case of begging the question, as the author doesn't seem to bother explaining why Fallout is the one template of all that is good design in adventure-rpg-style games, nor why Zelda specifically should follow that template. Personally, I "know" Fallout 3 had less substance than any of the console Zeldas, so I don't see how the series would benefit from it at all.

As for the OP's claim that the Wii couldn't handle a more "sophisticated" game, that's rubbish. What do you know about game design - about game history? I study game design, but even if I didn't I would know that "more dialogue" is not a resource-dependent feature. I mean, other than the pre-adolescent suppositions of the kind that made little children think the PS2 was the most powerful console last gen, was there any basis for this claim?

I totally agree, Zelda is getting boring, it should be more open world based.

I thought I was the only one who noticed that, but thankfully there are some observing people left...

Might be because of the font though that not many people noticed it. Man, it's so tiny I almost need a miscroscope to read it.