Legend of Zelda The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword - NO SPOILERS, USE THE SPOILER THREAD PLEASE

[kupo15]

Neither OoT nor MM were particularly difficult.

The water temple likes to say hi. Remember how much everyone complains how hard that is? The layout of the temple to this day still is rather tricky I feel like because there are sooo many sections that branch out of the center room. Of course playing the whole game nowadays its not that challenging but it was compared to when it first came out and that is the part that matters.

Again, OoT and MM didn't have any particularly mind-boggling puzzles.

Once again, you can say that now looking back, but when it first came out, it was a different story because it was a completely new experience and we were not used to 3D Zelda language. MM expanded (or went in a different completely new direction) of Zelda which once again made it extremely fresh. Differences include:

Time vs no time
Elaborate steps to even enter the temples
Different forms via masks

Elaborate.

Later. I don't have much time right now

Wind Waker says otherwise. Plus, I never really got why everyone thinks that OoT is this massively open game with a ton of stuff to explore. Really, the world is kind of small and even though there is some cool stuff hidden around it's not anything special.

Windwaker doesn't say otherwise. Like someone said above me, most of the islands are a waste of time to explore. Everything after 64 only really rewards to with heart pieces or money. Look at all the 100 rupee chests that remain unopened from your explorations in TP.

In past games your rewards were masks, unnecessary weapons and special upgrades. SS needs to introduce a new collectible system instead of scraping the old ones and only keeping POHs and bomb/arrow/money upgrades

I kind of feel that this "MM IS THE MOST IMMERSIVE GAEM EVAR" is just kind of something that sprung from the internet. And really, I felt the only characters with a memorable back story that you get to help were Anju and Kafei. And what was the reward system again with the bombers notebook? I really don't remember that.

Postman was really cool. It wasn't a "reward system" per say like the masks it was a thing that was a check list that kept track of your side quests. To me, the nice jingle and confirmation that you completed one of the side quests that you had to figure out yourself made you feel like you accomplished something. Its like checking things off your checklist.

The only thing that came close to this checklist was the stamp collection in Spirit tracks. That was my favorite side quest.

Which is why I'm interested in seeing what they do with it in SWS.

Which is why I said that I'm afraid of the over reliance on motion when it could just as well have been done without

Don't forget that Mario 64 was basically a massive tech demo

Oh yea? In what way? Graphics don't count

The nostalgia counterargument is getting really old.

I agree. Yes I can seem to be wrapped up too much in the past, but I feel like that I really do give an honest comparison and try to look at both on its own merit compared to most people. Especially those ppl who complain that something is bad because of bad graphics. Sure the graphics are worse but I never give it a thought. I honestly don't see bad graphics when I play because its not anything that's important, even when I go back to the very first one

Furthermore, I've been though these games since the beginning and played them when they came out so I can say that my insight is a little more valid than those who didn't.

 

[MuraRengan]

I disagree. Fight some enemies or bosses in OoT then immediately fight some in TP. There is a world of difference in fluidity even though it's technically the same control scheme.

You're also ignoring Majora's Mask and its masks/transformations, Wind Waker's grappling hook and floating leaf thing, and neat things (though quite underused things) TP had like the Dominion Rod and the Spinner.

In fact, that whole post comes off as attention-grabbing comments with little thought behind them.

First of all, the point I was making was towards the notion that Zelda has made gameplay changes worthy of valuing one game over another, which most games have not.

1. Fluidity becomes negligible once functionality is achieved. OoT has no issues with fluidity, and any improvements on it from there are merely cosmetic and create little if any better gameplay experience. It's like saying that TP is the best zelda because it has the best graphics.

2. WW's grappling hook is just a watered down hookshot. There's nothing it did that couldn't've been incorporated in the hookshot.

3. The leaf is a good addition, but it's not so great of an item that it would warrant calling WW's gameplay a veritable improvement. Surely you wouldn't weigh your entire position on just that one item.

4. TP's new items were barely incorporated into the game after the dungeons they're in, so they aren't relevant to the gameplay experience as a whole. Again, not enough to say that the gameplay has improved.

5. Majora's Mask is the ONLY Zelda that made a significant gamplay change that worked very, very well through the use of masks. But that concept couldn't be used twice, and this isn't reflected in any of the following games, which is why it still didn't have any IMPROVEMENTS.

I put a lot of thought into my post. I just assumed that you would put enough thought to see past the minor gameplay changes that offered nothing that Zelda as a whole has improved from. An example of an improvement to gameplay is the parry system.

 

[finalark]

The water temple likes to say hi. Remember how much everyone complains how hard that is? The layout of the temple to this day still is rather tricky I feel like because there are sooo many sections that branch out of the center room. Of course playing the whole game nowadays its not that challenging but it was compared to when it first came out and that is the part that matters.

That's just because the Water Temple was a horribly designed dungeon (hell, it's easier in master quest because it's better designed the second time around). And I really think the only reason why people say it's not that hard these days is because OoT's been out for fourteen years and we all know how to work that horribly designed dungeon.

Once again, you can say that now looking back, but when it first came out, it was a different story because it was a completely new experience and we were not used to 3D Zelda language. MM expanded (or went in a different completely new direction) of Zelda which once again made it extremely fresh. Differences include:

Time vs no time
Elaborate steps to even enter the temples
Different forms via masks

That was then, this is now. And even when it first came out I didn't feel the puzzles particularly hard. And yes, it was nice for Nintendo to try new things (on a side note, it's a shame that Nintendo was allowed to try new things on their holiest of consoles the N64 but once they try it on anything else they're the spawn of Hitler and Skeletor) with MM but really it wasn't that work-shaking.

Later. I don't have much time right now

I'll give you a bit to come up with an answer.

Windwaker doesn't say otherwise. Like someone said above me, most of the islands are a waste of time to explore. Everything after 64 only really rewards to with heart pieces or money. Look at all the 100 rupee chests that remain unopened from your explorations in TP.

Not like OoT was much different, and how else did they reward you in OoT aside from Hearts and chests?

In past games your rewards were masks, unnecessary weapons and special upgrades.

What unnecessary weapons and upgrades are we talking about here? Because in later LoZs you could go out of your way to upgrade your magic bar and the like too.

SS needs to introduce a new collectible system instead of scraping the old ones and only keeping POHs and bomb/arrow/money upgrades

It would be nice to see more collectibles, I agree.

To me, the nice jingle and confirmation that you completed one of the side quests that you had to figure out yourself made you feel like you accomplished something.

ACHIEVEMENT UNLOCKED!

The only thing that came close to this checklist was the stamp collection in Spirit tracks. That was my favorite side quest.

Eh, I never really did much in the way of side quests. For me, it's the main game that matters.

Which is why I said that I'm afraid of the over reliance on motion when it could just as well have been done without

Well, we'll see what they do with it.

Oh yea? In what way? Graphics don't count

Isn't showing off what a console can do, including graphics what a tech demo is?

I agree. Yes I can seem to be wrapped up too much in the past, but I feel like that I really do give an honest comparison and try to look at both on its own merit compared to most people. Especially those ppl who complain that something is bad because of bad graphics. Sure the graphics are worse but I never give it a thought. I honestly don't see bad graphics when I play because its not anything that's important, even when I go back to the very first one

Furthermore, I've been though these games since the beginning and played them when they came out so I can say that my insight is a little more valid than those who didn't. [/COLOR]

The above statement would be more valid if you didn't act like everything after the 90s is a scourge on gaming.

 

[Luigitoilet]

First of all, the point I was making was towards the notion that Zelda has made gameplay changes worthy of valuing one game over another, which most games have not.

1. Fluidity becomes negligible once functionality is achieved. OoT has no issues with fluidity, and any improvements on it from there are merely cosmetic and create little if any better gameplay experience. It's like saying that TP is the best zelda because it has the best graphics.

2. WW's grappling hook is just a watered down hookshot. There's nothing it did that couldn't've been incorporated in the hookshot.

3. The leaf is a good addition, but it's not so great of an item that it would warrant calling WW's gameplay a veritable improvement. Surely you wouldn't weigh your entire position on just that one item.

4. TP's new items were barely incorporated into the game after the dungeons they're in, so they aren't relevant to the gameplay experience as a whole. Again, not enough to say that the gameplay has improved.

5. Majora's Mask is the ONLY Zelda that made a significant gamplay change that worked very, very well through the use of masks. But that concept couldn't be used twice, and this isn't reflected in any of the following games, which is why it still didn't have any IMPROVEMENTS.

I put a lot of thought into my post. I just assumed that you would put enough thought to see past the minor gameplay changes that offered nothing that Zelda as a whole has improved from. An example of an improvement to gameplay is the parry system.

1. I think controls are a little more fundamental than graphics, but I'll take it at your word that you feel that OoT isn't clunky by modern standards.

2. WW's Grappling Hook is something that could not have worked in the game the Hookshot debuted in (LttP). Functionally, it is used for the same reasons as the hookshot in the N64 games but actually using it is a very different experience with the emphasis on momentum and all that.

3. I didn't say this, I was only refuting what you said: "there have been no new items since Link to the Past".

4. See #3.

5. I also disagree here. Even though I hate the games, the DS games have very different gameplay and approach to puzzles that hasn't really been in the other games in a long time. Don't feel like arguing any further on what constitutes "improved" or "not improved" though so

 

[MuraRengan]

1. I think controls are a little more fundamental than graphics, but I'll take it at your word that you feel that OoT isn't clunky by modern standards.

2. WW's Grappling Hook is something that could not have worked in the game the Hookshot debuted in (LttP). Functionally, it is used for the same reasons as the hookshot in the N64 games but actually using it is a very different experience with the emphasis on momentum and all that.

The fact that it debuted in LttP is irrelevant. OoT's hookshot has a greater relevance in this manner. Everything that was done with the grapple could've been done with the hookshot based in OoT's hookshot design, momentum included.

3. I didn't say this, I was only refuting what you said: "there have been no new items since Link to the Past".

If you're claiming that Zeldas have made major gameplay/item improvements/changes, and this is what you're using to support that claim, then you did say that. Regardless, I was referring back to the premise I had established first in that post: that the changes made in most of the games aren't significant to be regarded heavily when comparing the games. Of course I know that there have new items in these games, but on a universal zelda scale, most of those items don't matter because they functioned in or were unimportant in only one game. Which is more Zelda? The leaf thing, or bombs? The Dominion rod, or the bow and arrows? In the grand scheme, a lot of the new items don't matter.

4. See #3.

See #3

5. I also disagree here. Even though I hate the games, the DS games have very different gameplay and approach to puzzles that hasn't really been in the other games in a long time.

First off, PH's approach to gameplay is completely new to Zelda. PH clearly set a standard for the DS games only. It's gameplay is far inferior to that of the major consoles, but that's just a technological fault. Regardless, discussing them in the context of "improvements to Zelda gameplay" is pretty foolish. Sure, they did something different, and that difference was done well, but they're not improvements.

Don't feel like arguing any further on what constitutes "improved" or "not improved" though so

I really hate when people back down from arguments they start themselves.

 

[Luigitoilet]

I wasn't trying to start an argument. I was disagreeing with the statement, which I apparently misread, and the general quality of your initial post. I also have no obligation to carry out a debate longer than I want to, unfortunately for you.

 

[TheBuzzSaw]

The graphics update is impressive. It doesn't look as bad as the initial trailer put out.

 

[kupo15]

That's just because the Water Temple was a horribly designed dungeon (hell, it's easier in master quest because it's better designed the second time around). And I really think the only reason why people say it's not that hard these days is because OoT's been out for fourteen years and we all know how to work that horribly designed dungeon.

Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't. Its still an extremely hard temple. I get the feeling that dismissing the water temple as a credible challenge because it was "designed terribly" is a bad excuse. And talking about the MQ version which I agree is easier, it actually has a very clever puzzle in it. You need the Farores wind to light the torches in the inner chamber. And I was also talking about the water temple in MM as well. The mini boss in that temple was scary challenging as well as the main boss in comparison to much of the later games.

And also if you want to talk complex, look at the 4th temple in MM. Or was that also poorly designed?

The bold was not properly read. I said the game as a whole and not just the temple

That was then, this is now. And even when it first came out I didn't feel the puzzles particularly hard.

Did you play it when it first came out or was it like goldeneye where you played it 2 years afterwards? I remember you didn't grow up with Nintendo the way I did. In any case, you can't just dismiss this likee you did. What we are arguing has its relevance in the initial reception when the game comes out. You have to compare the difficulty and stuff when the game first came out otherwise its not a fair comparison.

It would be like me saying that OOT should be rated lower than TP because the graphics are worse. Well duh. You can't fault OOT for having bad graphics in comparison to TP because it was made 14 odd years ago. You need to think back to when the game was first released because back then, the graphics looked just as good to our immature eyes as TP looks now to our mature eyes.

Similarly you can't say that OOT is no more difficult than TP is because its been out for 14 years. No kidding! I would hope that us gamers have gotten better since then which would mean that TP should be harder than OOT or at the very least as hard as OOT was when it first came out. The fact that I'm not struggling with the newer Zelda's the way I did with OOT or MM is kinda shameful. And for the record, even IGN (for what its worth) always deducts points from present N games due to being easy.

And yes, it was nice for Nintendo to try new things (on a side note, it's a shame that Nintendo was allowed to try new things on their holiest of consoles the N64 but once they try it on anything else they're the spawn of Hitler and Skeletor) with MM but really it wasn't that work-shaking.

You are not understanding what I mean and where my priorities lie. You think that because I'm against the motionness that I'm also against new things. I'm not. I've made this distinction several times throughout our history but I think I should repeat myself yet again.

There is a very big difference between gameplay (design) and controls. I even said that SS should introduce a new collectible item that we haven't seen before. I also loved MM which proves that I like new things. But all of these things are gameplay things. Not control things. Maybe this will clear things up.

SS is the best zelda game ever. It is better than OOT and tons better than MM. The game is the best but the controls suck so much that the game is just terrible.

I'll give you a bit to come up with an answer.

They give you everything you need when you need it. I'm not saying it should pull a Lttp where you run out of magic and you have to mirror out of the boss fight. They give you the items you need when you need them and then you never need them again. Examples include like the water bombs. It would be much different if there was only one all purpose bomb that you got early on then you had to figure out that you need to use the bomb underwater instead of getting the water bombs at the water temple.

If you look at OOT, its been a while but off the top of my head, I can't think of an item that was only used when it was originally needed like TP was. Look at items like the ball and chain. Temple specific. Water bomb. Temple specific IIRC. They give you tons of items that are only used once.

Just some examples

Not like OoT was much different, and how else did they reward you in OoT aside from Hearts and chests?

Skulltulahs. Magic spells, arrow type upgrades, Biggoron sword. Extra bottles. (little more rewarding because in the n64 ones bottles mattered a lot more than just faeries and potions. You had blue fire, fish, bugs, Princess ect)
You are going to hate this because its more of the originality argument, but with the skulltuluhs, you can get a bigger wallet, the rumble feature that helped with getting more skulltuluhs, ect You are probably saying "but this game also has quiver and wallet upgrades" and you'd be right. The difference is that at the time, this was new. So if SS wants to be new and equally impacting, it needs to come up with new items and new upgrades worth seeking out. It needs to add on to old instead of removing old things that were great or just keeping things the same.

I'll go back to Spirit tracks example. The stamp collection was a new collectible and a new reward. It was an AMAZING new addition to the franchise and something I cared about collecting. SS needs to do more of that.

What unnecessary weapons and upgrades are we talking about here? Because in later LoZs you could go out of your way to upgrade your magic bar and the like too.

Ice rod, ice arrows (except for MM), deku nuts, Blue cane, Magic cape, Farore's wind, nayrues love, masks, bombchu, biggoron sword, bombos medallion, magic dust, upgraded mails......

ACHIEVEMENT UNLOCKED!

It was kinda like the stamp collection. The bombers notebook is more connected to the rewards of the masks.

Eh, I never really did much in the way of side quests. For me, it's the main game that matters.

I used to be that way but for many of us, its the whole picture. That is what Zelda is. The side quests is half the exploration and half the challenge of the game maybe even more.

Isn't showing off what a console can do, including graphics what a tech demo is?

Sure I guess but remember that unless the graphics are Atari, they really don't impact the gameplay at all. Surely you can agree that the tech demo you claim found in Super Mario 64 is nothing compared to the tech demo SS has? I hope you can agree that the tech demo feature of SS is extremely risky compared to showing off graphics like SM64

The above statement would be more valid if you didn't act like everything after the 90s is a scourge on gaming.

I don't.
Melee
PSO
Tony Hawk
Four Swords
Sunshine
Luigi's Mansion
Time Splitters
Second Sight
Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicals
WW
TP (GC)
Some more GC I can't remember

Super Princess Peach
Phantom Hourglass
Kirby Canvas Curse

Excitetruck WII
DKCR (bad controls though)
Galaxy (not bad not amazing, annoying controls)

 

[MuraRengan]

You've got a SEVERELY lacking list of post-90s games

 

[kupo15]

I'm sure there is more that I have forgotten esp in the GC and DS. I for sure have tried more games then I've listed but those are just the ones that stand out which is what I was responding too. Also my debates are always focused on the differences in established franchises that I grew up with. I didn't play too much games from other systems. Some but not much and nowadays I'm too old to spend money on new consoles and games. I have more important things that I have to do which is why I'm only going to buy the franchises I grew up with from now on unless there is a something completely jumps out.

 

[Lore]

That trailer has gotten me really excited. I can't wait to play the actual game.

 

[The Photographic Genius]

Oh my gosh... Is... is that the villain?

.... what am I supposed to think of that? Some kind of albino zora/human hybrid drag queen? I mean, I'm sorry if some die-hard fans of Zelda get offended that I'm not all "gung-ho" about this new trailer, and I'm sure every single one of you is going to verbally beat the **** out of me for saying this stuff...

But I digress, what am I supposed to think about this? I mean, this entire game looks like an updated remake of "Mystical Ninjas". Even the main villain (if that's what he/she is) looks like one of the "weirdos".

I'm still holding out that this game will have fun gameplay... but I aint holding my breath.

 

[Eturnus_Frost]

---------------------------------------------------------

 

[finalark]

We call him Happy Vaati.

EDIT: While I'm here I might as well respond to Kupo15.

Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't. Its still an extremely hard temple. I get the feeling that dismissing the water temple as a credible challenge because it was "designed terribly" is a bad excuse.

Compare the easily understood Forest Temple or even the Bottom of the Well. Then look at the Water Temple, it was hard because the layout was a mess.

The mini boss in that temple was scary challenging as well as the main boss in comparison to much of the later games.

Remind me what the mini boss was again?

And also if you want to talk complex, look at the 4th temple in MM. Or was that also poorly designed?

Complex =/= challenging. And yes, I do think Stone Tower was well designed. Although it's been years since I played it.

Did you play it when it first came out or was it like goldeneye where you played it 2 years afterwards?

I played it at the age of seven around the time it came out, and I loved it. And for the record, I first played Goldeneye in 2008, a good elven years after it came out.

I remember you didn't grow up with Nintendo the way I did. In any case, you can't just dismiss this likee you did.

I would say nostalgia but people seem to not like it when I do.

What we are arguing has its relevance in the initial reception when the game comes out. You have to compare the difficulty and stuff when the game first came out otherwise its not a fair comparison.

I believe it's fair enough. Sure, WW wasn't revolutionary like OoT was but it played a lot better. Besides, the problem with claiming a game is the best in the world because what it did at the time is irrelevant because newer games will come by and improve on what said revolutionary game did. This means that people playing it for the first time won't see a world-breaking phenomenon but rather a primitive version of the games they know.

It would be like me saying that OOT should be rated lower than TP because the graphics are worse. Well duh. You can't fault OOT for having bad graphics in comparison to TP because it was made 14 odd years ago.

Why is it that everyone thinks that I'm always talking about graphics?

You need to think back to when the game was first released because back then, the graphics looked just as good to our immature eyes as TP looks now to our mature eyes.

Back then.

Similarly you can't say that OOT is no more difficult than TP is because its been out for 14 years. No kidding! I would hope that us gamers have gotten better since then which would mean that TP should be harder than OOT or at the very least as hard as OOT was when it first came out. The fact that I'm not struggling with the newer Zelda's the way I did with OOT or MM is kinda shameful.

Either that or it might have felt like OoT was harder than it actually was because of how much younger you were.

And for the record, even IGN (for what its worth) always deducts points from present N games due to being easy.

Again, above.

You are not understanding what I mean and where my priorities lie. You think that because I'm against the motionness that I'm also against new things. I'm not. I've made this distinction several times throughout our history but I think I should repeat myself yet again.

I have yet to see you accept very many new ideas.

There is a very big difference between gameplay (design) and controls. I even said that SS should introduce a new collectible item that we haven't seen before. I also loved MM which proves that I like new things. But all of these things are gameplay things. Not control things. Maybe this will clear things up.

Alright, I get where you're coming from with this. And I do agree that it would be nice to see some more collectibles.

SS is the best zelda game ever. It is better than OOT and tons better than MM. The game is the best but the controls suck so much that the game is just terrible.

How can yous say that the controls suck if the game isn't even out yet? Unless I'm forgetting another LoZ with the initials SS.

They give you everything you need when you need it. I'm not saying it should pull a Lttp where you run out of magic and you have to mirror out of the boss fight. They give you the items you need when you need them and then you never need them again.

So giving you the items you need to proceed is "playing itself?" What?

Examples include like the water bombs. It would be much different if there was only one all purpose bomb that you got early on then you had to figure out that you need to use the bomb underwater instead of getting the water bombs at the water temple.

I really don't miss the days when game's were "challenging" because they hit information from you.

If you look at OOT, its been a while but off the top of my head, I can't think of an item that was only used when it was originally needed like TP was. Look at items like the ball and chain. Temple specific. Water bomb. Temple specific IIRC. They give you tons of items that are only used once.

So? I really don't mind that.

Skulltulahs. Magic spells, arrow type upgrades, Biggoron sword. Extra bottles. (little more rewarding because in the n64 ones bottles mattered a lot more than just faeries and potions. You had blue fire, fish, bugs, Princess ect)
You are going to hate this because its more of the originality argument, but with the skulltuluhs, you can get a bigger wallet, the rumble feature that helped with getting more skulltuluhs, ect You are probably saying "but this game also has quiver and wallet upgrades" and you'd be right. The difference is that at the time, this was new. So if SS wants to be new and equally impacting, it needs to come up with new items and new upgrades worth seeking out. It needs to add on to old instead of removing old things that were great or just keeping things the same.

You're using those words again. Plus you could upgrade a number of things back in AlttP if I recall.

Ice rod, ice arrows (except for MM), deku nuts, Blue cane, Magic cape, Farore's wind, nayrues love, masks, bombchu, biggoron sword, bombos medallion, magic dust, upgraded mails......

These things were in the newer installments too.

It was kinda like the stamp collection. The bombers notebook is more connected to the rewards of the masks.
I used to be that way but for many of us, its the whole picture. That is what Zelda is. The side quests is half the exploration and half the challenge of the game maybe even more.

For you maybe, I personally enjoy the dungeon crawling the most myself.

Sure I guess but remember that unless the graphics are Atari, they really don't impact the gameplay at all. Surely you can agree that the tech demo you claim found in Super Mario 64 is nothing compared to the tech demo SS has? I hope you can agree that the tech demo feature of SS is extremely risky compared to showing off graphics like SM64

Nintendo knows what they're doing with the Wiimote, SWS isn't a tech demo the show off graphics because the Wii isn't about graphics, and it isn't about showing off the wiimote either. Wii Play was a tech demo showing off the Wiimote, Wii Sports resort was a tech demo showing off the motion plus, SWS is the motion plus put into action.

I don't.
Melee
PSO
Tony Hawk
Four Swords
Sunshine
Luigi's Mansion
Time Splitters
Second Sight
Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicals
WW
TP (GC)
Some more GC I can't remember

Super Princess Peach
Phantom Hourglass
Kirby Canvas Curse

Excitetruck WII
DKCR (bad controls though)
Galaxy (not bad not amazing, annoying controls)

I'm seeing a major lack of non-Nintendo titles here. Especially key titles that have defined modern gaming such as Bioshock or Portal.

 

[Lore]

He looks like Vaati, but who knows; he might be one of the interlopers. He DID warp away in a similar manner to the Twili.

Besides, he looks like a "subordinate" villain anyway. I wouldn't be surprised to see him turn into the Gilded Sword for the main villain to use, kinda like what everyone thinks that the fairy girl will do for Link.

 

[The Photographic Genius]

The fact that you have to consider what you're supposed to think about it, shows you're quite insecure in my opinion.

Lighten up, am I the only one around anymore that doesn't bother with standards for video games?

Everything you just said made no sense. And that's an opinion I'm quite secure it.

 

[MuraRengan]

Everything you just said made no sense. And that's an opinion I'm quite secure it.

Yes, Eternus's post makes very little sense, but your first post was completely ridiculous as well. Full of random assumptions based in trite (and false) judgments of good and bad that have no relevance to the game in the first place. Honestly, your post didn't deserve a reply that made sense.

 

[kupo15]

EDIT: While I'm here I might as well respond to Kupo15.

As much as I hate that you disagree with me, its nice to debate ideas. I enjoy it

Compare the easily understood Forest Temple or even the Bottom of the Well. Then look at the Water Temple, it was hard because the layout was a mess.

I bet there are some that argue that the temple layout is easy to navigate. Its a simple NSEW layout with many layers. And I remember one reason why the water temple is 10x easier in MQ is because they cut out like 1/2 the temple. 1/2 the rooms that you needed to visit is not needed anymore.

I still don't think criticizing the layout is a good counter argument.

Remind me what the mini boss was again?

The frog in the bubble. You had to freeze him on the ceiling then chase after him and slash him. He also took out like 1/3 your health if you got caught in his blob

Complex =/= challenging. And yes, I do think Stone Tower was well designed. Although it's been years since I played it.

Complex can equal challenging because its challenging to figure out how to work the complexity. I think we are not on the same page as to the definition or context of the word "difficult"

I believe it's fair enough. Sure, WW wasn't revolutionary like OoT was but it played a lot better. Besides, the problem with claiming a game is the best in the world because what it did at the time is irrelevant because newer games will come by and improve on what said revolutionary game did. This means that people playing it for the first time won't see a world-breaking phenomenon but rather a primitive version of the games they know.

I honestly disagree. In what way does the game play better?

If a game improves on the precedent down the line in every way, I'm not going to claim the precedent game best in the world because of the nostalgia or how revolutionary it was. In fact, I think that MM is better than OOT and look at how it innovated and improved on OOT. The thing with Zelda games is that, after MM I'm having a hard time finding ways that they improved on what was already done. Neither WW or TP have ever taken a giant step forward the same way MM did with OOT. If this were to happen then I would respect it as highly as I do the n64s

Also, because of the nature of Zelda games, I really don't understand how you think that the phenomenon's are more primitive versions the more you go back in the 3d games with the exception of graphics which shouldn't even be considered. In fact IMO the further along we go in the Zelda games, the more primitive we get. I feel like Nintendo came out with all the best versions and ideas early on and now has nowhere to go.

Why is it that everyone thinks that I'm always talking about graphics?

I feel like you make a point about graphics a lot when in the overall scheme of things, graphics aren't that important as long as it doesn't like atari. And I was just using the graphics as an example.

Back then.

Back then what? What are you trying to disprove?

Either that or it might have felt like OoT was harder than it actually was because of how much younger you were.

I can't ignore the possibility. But the point I'm trying to make is that even if this is the case, the games should be getting tougher but I feel as though they aren't.
Even if they are staying at the same difficulty as OOT, the perception of difficulty would also be declining because we are getting better as the games are staying the same. And because the OOT gamers are getting older and better this demands that the games also get better and harder as well.

Although I feel that overall, MM is a tougher game than OOT. This noticeable jump in difficulty from OOT should be constant from MM to WW and from WW to TP

Again, above.

You too

I have yet to see you accept very many new ideas.

Thats because there isn't many new ideas or they aren't good or they are watered down versions of what was perfect in the past.

Grappling hook is worse than the longshot
Bomb arrows are amazing
Wolf is worse than the time travel and ocarina
Stamp collection was amazing

ect..

How can yous say that the controls suck if the game isn't even out yet? Unless I'm forgetting another LoZ with the initials SS.

This was a "what if" comment. I was pretending that SS will be the best Zelda game ever (even though I don't really believe that) to clear up my ideology about design vs controls in relation to innovation

So giving you the items you need to proceed is "playing itself?" What?

No. This is a really hard concept for me to describe. I'll be doing a runthrough of OOT and TP this weekend. Maybe I can articulate better afterwards

I really don't miss the days when game's were "challenging" because they hit information from you.

They didn't really hide information from you. Can you cite some examples?

And for this example I was thinking that the game told you what you can do with it when you first got it so you knew in advanced that it can work underwater but you didn't know when it would come into play

So? I really don't mind that.

I do. There is a very big difference between being given a limited amount of essential items then coming up with a multitude of unique puzzles from that limited combination compared to being given an "overloaded" (for lack of a better word) amount of items that are specific to one particular puzzle at the time the item was introduced then its never used again. Doing a lot with a little is better than doing little with a lot.
This is a pretty good example of why I feel that the game plays itself

You're using those words again.

Because its all about context. At the time it was new and revolutionary...now not so much. SS needs to come up with something new so it can have the same impact as back then otherwise it will just feel like more of the same.

Plus you could upgrade a number of things back in AlttP if I recall.

Yes you could and I thought of that when I was writing my response which is why I didn't include things like bomb and arrow upgrades in the list. But I think I should have because the process was different. Lttp you just had to pay money to a faerie but OOT you actually had to earn the upgrade.

I also included things like bottles because since the bottle took on new and more important responsibilities, its value became higher thus it felt more rewarding

These things were in the newer installments too.

Huh? I just gave you examples of unnecessary items found in the other games. Other than the hawkeye and I guess the bombchu bomb, what other unnecessary items did TP have?

For you maybe, I personally enjoy the dungeon crawling the most myself.

Well then it doesn't seem like your opinion holds much weight on the aspects outside of dungeons then. To me, the dungeon and story aspect of Zelda hasn't really changed at all except for the jump to MM which means the bread and butter of Zelda is more in the exploration and extra stuff. Don't get me wrong, challenging dungeons are important and cool and all but I want a world that is not only vast but stuffed with things to do and explore.

It is true that Hyrule has been getting bigger but proportionally it isn't being stuffed enough with things to do as it was in like MM or Lttp.

Nintendo knows what they're doing with the Wiimote, SWS isn't a tech demo the show off graphics because the Wii isn't about graphics, and it isn't about showing off the wiimote either. Wii Play was a tech demo showing off the Wiimote, Wii Sports resort was a tech demo showing off the motion plus, SWS is the motion plus put into action.

One can only hope.

I'm seeing a major lack of non-Nintendo titles here. Especially key titles that have defined modern gaming such as Bioshock or Portal.

Once again, I am the most knowledgeable with debating topics that compare franchises that I grew up with that is Nintendo based. Because that is what we are debating whether or not I've played key titles on other systems is irrelevant. Sorry but that is how I grew up.

I at least have 6 titles listed that are amazing non Nintendo made games though. One which I forget to include being Sonic Adv 2 Battle

 

[Luigitoilet]

Oh my gosh... Is... is that the villain?

.... what am I supposed to think of that? Some kind of albino zora/human hybrid drag queen? I mean, I'm sorry if some die-hard fans of Zelda get offended that I'm not all "gung-ho" about this new trailer, and I'm sure every single one of you is going to verbally beat the **** out of me for saying this stuff...

But I digress, what am I supposed to think about this? I mean, this entire game looks like an updated remake of "Mystical Ninjas". Even the main villain (if that's what he/she is) looks like one of the "weirdos".

I'm still holding out that this game will have fun gameplay... but I aint holding my breath.

Considering Mystical Ninja Starring Goemon is the greatest video game ever made, I'm perfectly fine with this.

 

[The Photographic Genius]

Considering Mystical Ninja Starring Goemon is the greatest video game ever made, I'm perfectly fine with this.

Indeed!

Of course, I am simply critiquing what I've seen so far. My opinion, it's terrible. Terrible looking graphics-wise, and terrible looking gameplay-wise. Link just seems so static in the trailer. He barely moves that much at all. This is probably due to the Wii-motion Plus, but aside from a violently flailing sword-arm, Link just stands there, uninteresting. The only really interesting thing I've seen was the Wario-ware door puzzle, and thats only because it reminds me of Wario-ware.

I'll have to read the reviews first before I actually buy this game.

 

[Eturnus_Frost]

----------------------------------------------

 

[MuraRengan]

I believe it's fair enough. Sure, WW wasn't revolutionary like OoT was but it played a lot better.

"Playing better" (If we're on the same page, this being smoothness of animations, consistency of actions, lack of glitchiness, etc.) is a cosmetic improvement that game makers are pretty much obligated to improve. It's pretty silly to compare OoT's "play" to WW's "play' when obvious that WW will have effort put into making the gameplay better. To use this as the sole basis for whether or not the game is good is disrespectful to the other aspects of the game. Again, it's like saying a game is better because it has better graphics. You're looking too narrowly at the game. There's plenty reasons why OoT is better than WW besides gameplay.

Besides, the problem with claiming a game is the best in the world because what it did at the time is irrelevant because newer games will come by and improve on what said revolutionary game did. This means that people playing it for the first time won't see a world-breaking phenomenon but rather a primitive version of the games they know.

The console Zeldas after MM have not improved on several things which MM excelled in. You can throw cosmetic gameplay improvements out as an argument, but you'd be ignoring several other aspects of the game.

 

[GwJ]

Question about Haapy Vaati and the Gilded Sword.

I realize he looks like the Gilded Sword, but why would he? It's just Link's sword in MM with gold plating. What significance does it have to even deserve to make an appearance in SS? It's not like it's a mythical sword or anything.

 

[Luigitoilet]

Question about Haapy Vaati and the Gilded Sword.

I realize he looks like the Gilded Sword, but why would he? It's just Link's sword in MM with gold plating. What significance does it have to even deserve to make an appearance in SS? It's not like it's a mythical sword or anything.

We don't know.

It is too similar to be a coincidence, but most likely it is just a throwback to MM. I doubt it will even come up in the game's story/mythos.

 

[Ganonsburg]

I'm with GWJ. It's confusing to think that Happy Vaati would turn into the guilded sword. I guess if Nintendo wanted to, they could retcon the GS so that it's based on legends of a sword from another land in times long past, referring to this guy. But that's still quite a stretch.

But do we all agree that he's of the same species/class/being type as the Sword Girl?


Also, the statue makes me think of Far Eastern religions. Which is cool, because we just saw the Pantheon in TP which represents the Western religions.

 

[Luigitoilet]

We can't agree on anything. That trailer hasn't shown us a substantial amount of info to agree on any plot speculation.

 

[Ganonsburg]

We can't agree on anything. That trailer hasn't shown us a substantial amount of info to agree on any plot speculation.

I was just wondering if anyone had ideas to the contrary. Since they both have the same general body build, hair color, etc, it would make sense to think that they are the same species. I mean, if you saw two Gerudo in a trailer, would it be reasonable for the fans anticipating the game to agree that they're the same people group? I think so.

But since everyone thinks differently, I was thinking maybe someone had counterpoints.

 

[Lore]

Of course, the guy could just be part of/sorta commander of an army that USES gilded swords, and the design of the swords stayed around in Termina.

 

[The Photographic Genius]

Maybe that particular pattern is quite commonplace by Terminic standards? I mean, it was probably put there to show the link between the two. There isnt much by ways of "patterns" that you can make an assumption with with termina. Gorons have that bear claw, Hyrule has the triforce, Zoras have the swooshy corral thing, and gerudo's have their own pattern that are completely unique. You dont really get that with Termina. They probably did the best thing they could do and based the cape off of the Guilded sword, which is a very cool looking sword. This, of course, is if this guy has anything to do with Termina, which remains to be seen.

As for me, he looks more like a zora with a nose. I didnt get Gerudo out of him at all. He's probably one of the strange races tha were there before the Hylians.

Edit: Sorry if my previous post sounded rude, Eturnus_frost. I just didnt understand your post.

 

[Spire]

Considering Mystical Ninja Starring Goemon is the greatest video game ever made, I'm perfectly fine with this.

Word.

Indeed!

Of course, I am simply critiquing what I've seen so far. My opinion, it's terrible. Terrible looking graphics-wise, and terrible looking gameplay-wise. Link just seems so static in the trailer. He barely moves that much at all. This is probably due to the Wii-motion Plus, but aside from a violently flailing sword-arm, Link just stands there, uninteresting. The only really interesting thing I've seen was the Wario-ware door puzzle, and thats only because it reminds me of Wario-ware.

I'll have to read the reviews first before I actually buy this game.

Just wait until you actually play it. It may look flimsy when watching videos of it on the internet, but I bet you anything that once you finally get your hands on it, you'll think otherwise.

 

[IYM!]

the pants give the static efect

 

[finalark]

Just wait until you actually play it. It may look flimsy when watching videos of it on the internet, but I bet you anything that once you finally get your hands on it, you'll think otherwise.

Plus this is all (assumingly) early footage, I really don't expect it to be polished until it's closer to its release.

And honestly, the only Link who I can think of that wasn't static was Wind Waker Link.

 

[IYM!]

Plus this is all (assumingly) early footage, I really don't expect it to be polished until it's closer to its release.

And honestly, the only Link who I can think of that wasn't static was Wind Waker Link.

OoT Link have a very fluid movement, for being a old game, Tp have a fluid movement in his attacks, but his jumps fel to lazy.


MM have a very good jump movement, specialy with his cool animations.


again, i thigs than are the new Link pants than give us a static efect

 

[finalark]

Again, early footage. We'll see how it looks when it comes out.

 

[IYM!]

yeah, i thing the same thing (and the i said about the pants too )

 

[The Photographic Genius]

I was watching an early game-play demo of the game, and I didnt sit there laughing my head off like I was previously. In fact, I kindof liked how it looked... a little. I mean, Link walking around with his sword flying all over creation looked a little weird, but I could get used to it. I think my only problem now is that the art style seems to get stifled with Nintendo Wii's graphical capabilities. I felt the same way with Twilight Princess. What i mean by this is: Everything in the game has a sort of blurry look to it. It isnt crisp-looking at all. I'm beginning to think that it is the Wii's fault more than it is the graphics of the game.

 

[kupo15]

OoT Link have a very fluid movement, for being a old game, Tp have a fluid movement in his attacks, but his jumps fel to lazy.


MM have a very good jump movement, specialy with his cool animations.


again, i thigs than are the new Link pants than give us a static efect

Yea I was going to say that. Actually the jumps become less fluid after MM. You can't control anything after you jump.

I fear that Links animations will look sloppy and ragdolly because of the 1:1 motion which is worse than a stiffer n64 movement (if you call that stiff that is, I felt things looked more natural in the 64 and WW than TP)

 

[Luigitoilet]

I was watching an early game-play demo of the game, and I didnt sit there laughing my head off like I was previously. In fact, I kindof liked how it looked... a little. I mean, Link walking around with his sword flying all over creation looked a little weird, but I could get used to it. I think my only problem now is that the art style seems to get stifled with Nintendo Wii's graphical capabilities. I felt the same way with Twilight Princess. What i mean by this is: Everything in the game has a sort of blurry look to it. It isnt crisp-looking at all. I'm beginning to think that it is the Wii's fault more than it is the graphics of the game.

I think that's why it is a good decision on Nintendo's part to make the art style deliberately Impressionist. Impressionism is known for it's softness, even "blurriness" in a sense. With TP, it was more dreary and more grounded to "reality" (sort of) and as a result it doesn't really hold up to modern-gen graphics. Also, you should remember that TP is by all rights a Gamecube game. The Wii isn't a huge step-up, but I'm sure they could have pulled off better textures if they did the bulk of development on the Wii.

 

[Spire]

I think that's why it is a good decision on Nintendo's part to make the art style deliberately Impressionist. Impressionism is known for it's softness, even "blurriness" in a sense. With TP, it was more dreary and more grounded to "reality" (sort of) and as a result it doesn't really hold up to modern-gen graphics. Also, you should remember that TP is by all rights a Gamecube game. The Wii isn't a huge step-up, but I'm sure they could have pulled off better textures if they did the bulk of development on the Wii.

Miyamoto instructed they develop this art style based on Cezanne's paintings to reflect Impressionism, but Cezanne was post-impressionist. Impressionism while looser than traditional painting, was still very much realistic whereas post-impressionism broke that barrier.

 

[kupo15]

Ok so I just did 2 speed run contests against my friend this weekend, first was OOT and the second was TP and I stick to my initial response that TP is restrictive, stiff controls and it plays itself and I have examples