Khuutra said:
Kantor said:
Khuutra said:
This being the case, I will elaborate further on my reasoning:
I expect Zelda Wii to be an active rejection of certain core values while holding onto others, but it will do so in just such a way that it strikes the wrong chord with critics, as New Super Mario Bros. Wii has done. It will be very successful for a Zelda game - at least comparable to Twilight Princess on the Wii, though perhaps not both versions combined - but this will stand at odds with critical reception, which, wihle acknowledging it as "great", will lament the things that could have been if not for certain design decisions vis-a-vis Wii Motion Plus or perhaps the Super Guide.
|
Zelda with a Super Guide? How the hell does that work? Motion Plus would surely improve the experience? 1:1 sword motions, and 1:1 bow aiming, and other things which will be a pain to use but nevertheless awesome.
Zelda is one of those reviewer's darling series, like 3D Mario and Final Fantasy. The game can be as ridiculous, disruptive, and eccentric as you like, and it will still be 90+.
|
It may fight tough fights for you (sans bosses), or work out a particularly hard puzzle for you.
People will complain about Motion Plus making the game tiring, especially if it is more action-oriented than the last few games.
2-D Marios used to be critical darlings too, and to a degree they still are, but I think this one will break the mold in too many ways for the tastes of reviewers.
|
The Super Guide is supposed to show you how to do things, not do them for you. It definitely wouldn't fight. Puzzles...maybe.
I was kidding about the 1:1, by the way. That would be ridiculous, annoyingly hard to implement, and a pain to use.
88 probably does still qualify as "critical darling", looking at the scores that most Wii games get (SCORES. Not quality, SCORES. REVIEWS. METACRITIC. Numbers. Facts)