The Gaming Lounge

what is it with Nintendo's revamp of the Zelda series??

Because Nintendo realizes putting out the same game with a different coat of paint is stupid.

When people wanted another Ocarina of Time after years of stuff like Majora's Mask and Wind Waker, Nintendo made Twilight Princess. It was a straight-up Ocarina clone, and everyone complained because it was just a new Ocarina. So now they're trying to make a new experience because everyone flip-flopped their opinions. Don't tell me you wanna flip-flop again :|

Technically, it was less a straight-up Ocarina clone and more of a poor man's Ocarina clone. Your point still stands, however.

First of all, I think the term "Ocarina clone" is getting extremely loosely used here. Twilight Princess was anything BUT an Ocarnia clone in my eyes. Completely different plot, completely redesigned world (but then again Hyrule is apparently insanely geologically active because the land mass changes around EVERY GAME...), totally new graphics style, new selection of pretty remarkable items and at least one dungeon that was unlike anything I'd ever seen in a Zelda game before (City in the Sky). Really the only similarities I see (other than obvious ones, such as being 3D, being a Zelda game, using keys to unlock doors and other such bonehead observations) between the games are as such:
1. You have a horse (also was true in MM)
2. The game has a dark atmosphere (but in OoT, the atmosphere wasn't as dark in the first part)
3. The game is divided into two 'sections', where your dungeons contain different plot devices (LttP also had this)
4. You get the Master Sword between the two sections (which, again, LttP also had)
And if you want to get down to the structure of game flow and base your assumptions on that, then you could practically say every Zelda game is the clone of another Zelda game (except, of course, the first few in the series). If you're going to blame Zelda games as being a 'clone' or 'the same game as another except with a new coat of paint', you'd practically have to call every sequel in a long-running game series a clone of its predecessor 'with a new coat of paint'.
The entire series runs off a framework guideline, and it has since its conception. The framework is thus: "You travel through the world and find dungeons, collecting keys and the dungeon item to progress through each one, and collect a plot item from each dungeon. The dungeon item you gained in the dungeon helps you get to the next one. Once you collect all the plot items, you enter the final dungeon and fight the final boss." Obviously this is just a guideline as not all Zelda games follow this precisely. The rules can be bent but not broken, if broken then it would likely be a Zelda game in name only.

Regardless, did I hear the words "Rope Snake" somewhere around this discussion? Hmm, I wonder where we've seen this before... If it's what we suspect it is, it's something that most English-speakers won't pick up on. (And the people who played Brawl will be asking "I've seen that before on Brawl! Where'd it ORIGINALLY come from? Must be that Earthbound-related Japan-only game Lucas was from. Da**it, Nintendo!")

So it seems the fanbase is becoming divided on which way they should think the Zelda series should go. There's the pro-dark who liked the more serious atmosphere, and the path in which Twilight Princess followed... then there's the pro-cartoon, who liked the more goofy, cartoonish look to the games that the series seems to be following as of late. Maybe there needs to be a balance?

I'm getting more and more frustrated about the fucking flute, can't get past the place where you have to use it the first time...

Completely different plot

A Zelda plot is about as important as Link's boot size. Neither changes, and neither are important. I just got a memo from Nintendo: Link beats Ganon every time, never hooks up with Zelda, and has a green tunic. Woops, I spoiled the sequel  

new selection of pretty remarkable items

Bombs
Arrows
Slingshot
Boomerang (with unremarkable wind)
Iron Boots
Hookshot (with unremarkable retracting ability)
Bottles
A sniper scope mask

and at least one dungeon that was unlike anything I'd ever seen in a Zelda game before (City in the Sky).

It really doesn't have any interesting features. It's in the sky, and there are lots of ways to fall off. That's not exciting. That's a 3D Sonic level.

1. You have a horse (also was true in MM)
2. The game has a dark atmosphere (but in OoT, the atmosphere wasn't as dark in the first part)
3. The game is divided into two 'sections', where your dungeons contain different plot devices (LttP also had this)
4. You get the Master Sword between the two sections (which, again, LttP also had)
And if you want to get down to the structure of game flow and base your assumptions on that, then you could practically say every Zelda game is the clone of another Zelda game (except, of course, the first few in the series). If you're going to blame Zelda games as being a 'clone' or 'the same game as another except with a new coat of paint', you'd practically have to call every sequel in a long-running game series a clone of its predecessor 'with a new coat of paint'.
The entire series runs off a framework guideline, and it has since its conception. The framework is thus: "You travel through the world and find dungeons, collecting keys and the dungeon item to progress through each one, and collect a plot item from each dungeon. The dungeon item you gained in the dungeon helps you get to the next one. Once you collect all the plot items, you enter the final dungeon and fight the final boss." Obviously this is just a guideline as not all Zelda games follow this precisely. The rules can be bent but not broken, if broken then it would likely be a Zelda game in name only.

Leaving this chunk in tact because, somewhere in there, you realized that every Zelda is pretty much the same, which is exactly why Nintendo is revamping the structure for the Wii game.

Regardless, did I hear the words "Rope Snake" somewhere around this discussion? Hmm, I wonder where we've seen this before... If it's what we suspect it is, it's something that most English-speakers won't pick up on. (And the people who played Brawl will be asking "I've seen that before on Brawl! Where'd it ORIGINALLY come from? Must be that Earthbound-related Japan-only game Lucas was from. Da**it, Nintendo!")

Rope snake is from Mother 3. Spirit Tracks calls it a whip, though it has the same functions.

[you're shooting aliens and stuff]

A Zelda plot is about as important as Link's boot size. Neither changes, and neither are important. I just got a memo from Nintendo: Link beats Ganon every time, never hooks up with Zelda, and has a green tunic. Woops, I spoiled the sequel  

So stop complaining about TP in specific, then. It is as different as a Zelda game could get. If it didn't follow that pattern, it wouldn't be a Zelda game, so how much more unique can you get without breaking the tradition?

Bombs
Arrows
Slingshot
Boomerang (with unremarkable wind)
Iron Boots
Hookshot (with unremarkable retracting ability)
Bottles
A sniper scope mask

You forgot the Dominion Rod. You seem extremely critical and negative, downsizing just about anything that is unique and original here. Those new features on the boomerang and the hookclawshots provided new methods of solving puzzles. Plus, when you get two of them, you can do amazing things with them that were completely unheard of before then. The bow and arrow had expanded functionality over OoT, allowing you to use item combos with the scope and bombs (the latter, granted, being a kind of homage to LA). Besides, 'unremarkable' or not, these things still put it apart from OoT.

It really doesn't have any interesting features. It's in the sky, and there are lots of ways to fall off. That's not exciting. That's a 3D Sonic level.

Not even my point. It was still something that set it apart from OoT. You switch between indoor and outdoor areas, you have to use your clawshots to pretty much hang over infinite drops and make your way through long and complicated paths where there is no solid ground.

Leaving this chunk in tact because, somewhere in there, you realized that every Zelda is pretty much the same, which is exactly why Nintendo is revamping the structure for the Wii game.

Do you hate the Zelda series or something? Either way, again, this is NOT my point; my point, entirely, is stop picking on TP in specific for unoriginality. If you're going to pick on something, pick on the entire series, okay? Also, once more: If you're going to blame every Zelda game for being the same, you should also blame every game, movie, or fictional work of a long-running series as being the same as its predecessors. That means, according to your logic, Halo 2 and 3 are Halo clones ("Oh, but how could they be? Sure, you're shooting aliens and stuff, but look at the new weapons and maps you get! And it looks so much better too!"). Every Sonic game was virtually the same ("New stages, new plot, for Sonic to blast through at top speed like before!"). Every Final Fantasy game is the same ("The conceptual battle system hasn't changed in the last decade, but hey -- we've got new characters and a new plot!"). Every Metroid game is the same ("How could it be? Our famous returning heroine, Samus, goes to a different planet and you get new upgrades to help you progress through it!"). And Super Smash Bros. Brawl is the same as the original N64 predecessor ("We have new characters, an online mode, a story mode, and a ton more unlockable things! This'll make the old tradition of beating up characters and throwing them off the arena so much better!"). And don't even get me started on Mario.

Come on, how the heck do you quantify originality? Where do you draw the line between two games being clones and two games being completely original? Because apparently from your viewpoint, there's no such thing as "different games with some similarities" -- there's only black and white, original and clone, and no gray areas in between. Don't nitpick on originality, when you get too far into complaining, you start to lose out on potential enjoyment. Remember how hard it is to make something completely original these days. Whether you realize it or not, you're probably using a concept that's already been used SOMEWHERE in there before.

Do you hate the Zelda series or something?

No, he just has standards for quality, unlike you. 

No, he just has standards for quality, unlike you. 

How very polite.

I just don't see what the big issue you people have with TP is. Compared to other Zelda games I've played, it has excellent graphics, a compelling storyline, well-defined characters, and most importantly: It's fun to play. And ultimately speaking, that's the most important element of a video game: That it's fun to play. Plot comes second, graphics come third.

[major]

You wanna know what the big issue I have with it is? It's a giant, poor man's clone of OOT. The entire game & world lacks any form of "adventure" what so ever, and is so pathetically easy you can three heart it with not much trouble at all. All the items, save for the Dominion Rod, are completely unoriginal, and all the dungeons are completely boring and piss poor designed with one too many puzzles.

And if Twilight Princess is your idea of a "compelling story" and "well-defined characters" then you have major issues. That, or you've never read a good story in your life.

First of all, Sophia. I was comparing it to other Zelda games, so please don't get on my case for opinions I have that aren't even 'in general' but instead in the context of the entire series thus far. Second of all, I'd say that among the 3D Zelda games, it was definitely harder than OoT, especially when fighting the darknuts. Primarially because they're hard to hit and have a number of their own special moves. Once more, take note that this is in the context of the entire series.

Now please, don't flip out, but if you're going to debate the point as to why the game is low-quality in your opinion, give more specific reasons. Instead of attacking my good tastes, tell me why my opinions are apparently wrong. Why does it lack 'adventure'?

[it was definitely harder than OoT]

Second of all, I'd say that among the 3D Zelda games, it was definitely harder than OoT, especially when fighting the darknuts. Primarially because they're hard to hit and have a number of their own special moves. Once more, take note that this is in the context of the entire series.

No, it was not. Please quit being delusional. It is by far, without question, the easiest console Zelda game ever made.

Now please, don't flip out, but if you're going to debate the point as to why the game is low-quality in your opinion, give more specific reasons. Instead of attacking my good tastes, tell me why my opinions are apparently wrong. Why does it lack 'adventure'?

Because the entire game is going in a straight line for about 20 hours solving puzzles and randomly button mashing your way to the end? I mean, for christ's sake, the entire world save one area is blocked off initially once you hit the world map.

I long for the days when this thread was about Spirit Tracks.

If you guys wanna continue this course of discussion - which I'm fine with, as long as it's kept civil - start another thread about the stagnation, or lack thereof depending on your perspective, of the Zelda series.

I just got a new whistle for my train. My train experience is growing exponentially. I could write several posts about the train whistle, and I think I will.

Whenever I leave a station, I blow the whistle twice. "Choo choooo", to be specific. I draw out one long toot when I approach a station. Sometimes I use it to talk to the animals, even if they're not on the tracks. There are golden dolphins in the game, and they seem to like the whistle as much as I do. When I pass by other villages and towns, I toot the whistle to greet the people (who aren't even rendered on screen when you're in a train). Sometimes, I wonder if there's another person on a train, tooting their whistle whenever I toot mine, and for that moment, we're together.  I lay awake at night debating on if I should learn Morse Code and reach out to my imaginary soul mate. The whistle is also magical, because not only does it activate warps, you have to use it to hit magic switches at one point.

If I could be any video game character, it would be the train whistle. If someone asked me to grade this game for metacritic, I would give it whistle/100. And the tragedy of this post is that only half of it is facetious.

On the bright side, someone said there's 6 dungeons, which is better than the 5 we got stuck with for Minish Cap and Wind Waker. It's not 8, but there's more side content than I know what to do with. You definitely want to play this game leisurely and take in everything, because I have about 5 different things going on at once.

[2010 JULY 25Episode 191: Yamazaki vs. Leopold Goenitz, Part 3 (Conclusion): Egg in the Face!]

All I'm saying is that, with most games, the appearance gets better.  To "differentiate" itself, Nintendo's version of keeping this series fresh is to make it look more like a children's show (that's the NICE way of putting it)?  Are they just trying to make it more child-friendly or something?  Honestly, these characters almost look like they're a sequel or two away from South Park Zelda!  It's kind of like the mutated "quality" of cartoons from old vs. newer ones.

For me, story/plot matters.  I'm not wasting my money on a long game (that's not a straight-up puzzle or sport game) that doesn't have one because things have to make sense to me.  I have to get into the game or it'll bore the hell out of me quickly.  So, yes, I'm really not liking what I'm seeing here.  So, that simply means NoA's not getting my money on this one.  Don't need to let my opinion matter THAT much to you if you have a different set of standards, but to be fair, I'll avoid outright trashing it.

Using non-comic art style in a 3d environment would look poo on DS, and outdated like hell. Using the comic style they avoid making the game looking so outdated by using another kind of graphics. You gotta realize they're limited on hardware on the DS.

Story exists, but it's the same as other Zelda games. Which means, if you didn't like the story on those you wont like it on this.

No, it was not. Please quit being delusional. It is by far, without question, the easiest console Zelda game ever made.

What the heck is that video to prove? I can beat Ganon on OoT with losing 1 heart, showing a video of someone beating a boss for the 10th time doesn't say anything about the difficulty of the game. Just face it, only thing preventing someone from completing any game without losing a life is random stuff and those we could just as well do without. If you show me a video of someone completing TP with 3 hearts the first time they play it without dying once I would be impressed.

Also knowing where to go =/= being easy.