From here:
http://www.1up.com/features/most-important-changes-zelda
Some of these ideas are so seriously misguided/wrong it's almost hilarious. For instance, they say Zelda is too formulaic then...
Sorry, what?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_vAXPRvRJs
As much as I like Mario and think the series keeps varied, this might be a little TOO nice to the series as far as originality goes.
Varies radically?
You mean how New Super Mario Bros always has the exact same world themes of 'grass/desert/water/forest/ice/mountain/sky/dark world', with exactly eight main worlds a piece?
How Mario's 3D games always emphasise the idea of collecting 120 shiny objects per game?
How every Mario RPG has you collect between three and seven, usually seven in the case of Paper Mario, treasures needed to save the world?
How Bowser is the big bad every single time?
It's not bad, but when their criticism of Zelda is:
[font=arial, helvetica, verdana, sans-serif]
[font=arial, helvetica, verdana, sans-serif]
You know what, that general similarity isn't really that much of a bad thing in any Nintendo series, is it?
As for this:
[font=arial, helvetica, verdana, sans-serif]
[font=arial, helvetica, verdana, sans-serif]
[font=arial, helvetica, verdana, sans-serif]
[font=arial, helvetica, verdana, sans-serif]
[font=arial, helvetica, verdana, sans-serif]
[font=arial, helvetica, verdana, sans-serif]
[font=arial, helvetica, verdana, sans-serif]
[font=arial, helvetica, verdana, sans-serif]
Hey kids/journalists! Your art games don't sell, people generally don't WANT them. If Zelda wants to be mainstream, it needs to please the mainstream not the hipsters/online geeks. More combat/better combat is a good start here, as is a more mainstream style.
Do you think 1Up is wrong with their concerns?
http://www.1up.com/features/most-important-changes-zelda
Some of these ideas are so seriously misguided/wrong it's almost hilarious. For instance, they say Zelda is too formulaic then...
Sorry, what?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_vAXPRvRJs
As much as I like Mario and think the series keeps varied, this might be a little TOO nice to the series as far as originality goes.
Varies radically?
You mean how New Super Mario Bros always has the exact same world themes of 'grass/desert/water/forest/ice/mountain/sky/dark world', with exactly eight main worlds a piece?
How Mario's 3D games always emphasise the idea of collecting 120 shiny objects per game?
How every Mario RPG has you collect between three and seven, usually seven in the case of Paper Mario, treasures needed to save the world?
How Bowser is the big bad every single time?
It's not bad, but when their criticism of Zelda is:
[font=arial, helvetica, verdana, sans-serif]
And you can apply much the same logic to Mario, it kind of looks stupid.
[/font][font=arial, helvetica, verdana, sans-serif]
As for the same items... yeah, but in Paper Mario, same applies. You get one partner who can tattle enemies, another which acts like a bomb, a Koopa which throws his shell at enemies, one who Mario can ride/be held by to cross gaps, one to turn invisible/sideways/through the floor to avoid obstacles... isn't that basically what they're criticising Zelda for?
[/font]You know what, that general similarity isn't really that much of a bad thing in any Nintendo series, is it?
As for this:
[font=arial, helvetica, verdana, sans-serif]
You mean like most Zelda games? Skyward Sword doesn't have the same items as earlier games. Nor does the Minish Cap, the DS games, Majora's Mask or even The Wind Waker. At least two games have no Boomerang or no Hookshot.
[/font][font=arial, helvetica, verdana, sans-serif]
Did we need every single super hero origin story ever? There's a reason its common in both movies and games.
[/font][font=arial, helvetica, verdana, sans-serif]
If Skyward Sword's plot wasn't great, then blame Skyward Sword, not the concept of a prequel/origin story.
[/font][font=arial, helvetica, verdana, sans-serif]
Really? Didn't they shoot back up when Twilight Princess came out? And weren't they on a downward trend prior to Ocarina too?
[/font][font=arial, helvetica, verdana, sans-serif]
I understand how changing the formula could be good, but the story given here is flawed and quite frankly, most big name games don't change too much or really need too. Want proof? Look at some high selling series like Call of Duty, or Mario, or Pokemon, or Dragon Quest. They haven't changed all too much, and still do really well.
[/font][font=arial, helvetica, verdana, sans-serif]
Could they try something new? Yes. But there's a reason big franchises don't radically change too much, and that's because what's known is also often what the fans/audience wants.
[/font][font=arial, helvetica, verdana, sans-serif]
I do agree with this though:
[/font][font=arial, helvetica, verdana, sans-serif]
Pity they go wrong immediately:
[/font]Hey kids/journalists! Your art games don't sell, people generally don't WANT them. If Zelda wants to be mainstream, it needs to please the mainstream not the hipsters/online geeks. More combat/better combat is a good start here, as is a more mainstream style.
Do you think 1Up is wrong with their concerns?
