Malstrom himself does not like Ocarina that much, he got bored of it. And he most certainly doesn't think Majoras Mask was Zelda done well.

He only names Ocarina because it doesn't have all the fluff from the later games and has a rich overworld and elements from the arcade like combat in the old Zelda games (in tems of the intensity in some of the fights and areas). He does not think Majoras mask is a good Zelda since it's just Ocarina of Time with a different spin.

What I mean by proper fantasy is that ALL Zelda games from the first all the way to Ocarina of time had a classic fantasy setting. Nintendo has already defined the universe, they can't just change those definitions, Zelda is supposed to be medieval, always has, always should have been. Changes to an already defined universe are unnecessary and only confuses people.

Yet he named those two games - Ocarina and Majora's Mask - as possessing the quality of relevance that he feels later games lack. My point stands.

Your point concerning fantasy still doesn't stand, save as a point of continuity, and even that only matter for people who have already played the games, which isn't the largest possible audience here.

I edited my post.

I can look up malstrom articles where he complains about both Ocarina and Majoras Mask, but please don't make me do that today, I have to get some sleep soon.

I'm sure he dislikes them, but that has nothing to do with the subject at hand. To wit:

Him liking the games have nothing to do with it - in this case he's not acting as a critic save in some isolated clauses that I addressed in other posts, and not in this conversation.

Whaaaaat? malstorm thinks zelda is in decline? I think its doing the oppsite.

This is why I don't trust his tastes. They are much diffrent from mine. Though I do agree that they are basicly Zelda with [insert random thing here]

  I have to agree with Malstrom, Zelda hasn't interested me in a good long while (well except for the thoughts of Princess Zelda being part of a lesbian orgy), and unless Zelda Wii really gets back to its roots, I'm probably going to skip it

Twilight Princess was also a launch title for the Wii. All launch titles get a boost in sales. Also, none of the games have out preformed Orcarina, meaning something is wrong.

Mario Galaxy didn't outperform Mario 64 either, I don't think we can take that as a clear sign of "something's wrong".  Twilight Princess came within 500k of Ocarina of Time, that's a great pick up for the series after it's actual decline with Majora's Mask and The Wind Waker...

Telling you guys - zeniths and nadirs. Adventures of Link, Majora's Mask, and maybe Spirit Tracks are nadirs - the original, Ocarina, and Twilight Princess are all zeniths. Over time, the sales of the series have been extremely consistent. The big problem with the series is that it hasn't seen any growth for its zeniths.

This would be so good for a lot of RPGs! And also for those not using WM+, or not on Wii at all. Using the budget more for gameplay and to draw vast interesting and open worlds more than on fancy graphics, that's what can make a game a classic. Epic graphics will be average a few years after, but an epic world with flawless gameplay lasts forever. Anyhow it should be added that these roots aren't the most primitive of videogames, but, so to say, those of their Middle Age, when game saving was already available, vast open worlds were impossible to do before. Previously you could have excellent gameplay, but the ability to save allowed to have worlds vaster than what you could explore during a single gaming session.