motion Posted May 31, 2007 Posted May 31, 2007 Okay we have to put this one down to opinion. Personally I think the game left you alone, like Zelda games are supoosed to. It ain't final fantasy thank you very much, and that's the way I want it to stay. Weren't we talking about story though? Ha, okay mate you've lost yourself here, I was giving OoT as an example of how it did it as well. Actually I admit TP was a little rushed just a page back. Go on, take a look. Ah, fair enough lol Dunno where you get that idea from. I feel games should be always striving to focus on gameplay instead of story. Well yes gameplay, story, visuals, music, innovation. Generally, games in a series should be getting better as the years go on.
LazyBoy Posted May 31, 2007 Posted May 31, 2007 Weren't we talking about story though? You were saying how the story pretty much died after the grounds, and i'm saying the game left you to get on with the adventure instead of pestering you with cut-scenes. Well yes gameplay, story, visuals, music, innovation. Generally, games in a series should be getting better as the years go on. Yes but that's very rarely the case for any game.
McMad Posted May 31, 2007 Posted May 31, 2007 - Majora's Mask takes place in the child timeline for obvious reasons. Link looks for Navi as a child at the end of OOT, the setting for the beginning of MM. - Twilight Princess follows MM and is about a different Link. The scene in TP where Ganon is about to be executed by the sages happens after child Link goes back in time (end of OOT) and warns the Princess/King about Ganondorf. As told in TP, he escapes and spends time stuck in the Twilight Realm, till many years later when Zant comes around. This explains why TP Ganon has no knowledge of Link or the Master sword as to him, he hasn't fought Link yet (child Link warns the king/queen before the events of OOT play out) - The Wind Waker is in the Adult timeline because it speaks of the OOT legend + the fact that Link never returned to triumph eveil... because he'd been sent back in time by Zelda at the end of OOT. - Phantom Hourglass comes after WW for obvious reasons again. Okay, I agree with you now.
motion Posted May 31, 2007 Posted May 31, 2007 You were saying how the story pretty much died after the grounds, and i'm saying the game left you to get on with the adventure instead of pestering you with cut-scenes. Who said anything about cutscenes? I'm talking about a STORYLINE, the foundation for all Zelda games. There was none after Arbiter's. Just a classic collect the different pieces of something then fight the end boss. Nowt more than that. Having said that, WW's wasn't exactly much better. Yes but that's very rarely the case for any game. It was true enough for Zelda. The quality of each game was improving with each new 3D Zelda (regardless of which you preferred), until TP came around which offered us, shorter dungeons, less time between dungeons, easier bosses, less story, less magic and less 'Zelda-ness'.
LazyBoy Posted May 31, 2007 Posted May 31, 2007 Who said anything about cutscenes? I'm talking about a STORYLINE, the foundation for all Zelda games. There was none after Arbiter's. Just a classic collect the different pieces of something then fight the end boss. Nowt more than that. Having said that, WW's wasn't exactly much better. Or any of the 2D Zeldas, or Ocarina after he turned into an adult. Majora is the only Zelda that has had a heavy(ish) story. I mean are you honestly telling me that Minish cap had a deeper story than TP. In no way, NO WAY is storyline the foundation for any Zelda game. In fact the majority have the same storyline, save the Princess. The quality of each game was improving with each new 3D Zelda (regardless of which you preferred), until TP came around which offered us, shorter dungeons, less time between dungeons, easier bosses, less story, less magic and less 'Zelda-ness'. Well you see this is a hard one. I mean OoT is still my favourite Zelda, but i'm not going to argue that the Zeldas were getting worse. They just weren't as good. And then you're picking and choosing with criteria. TP had more dungeons, it was longer, better graphics, better control, wolf mechanics etc etc, so you're point ain't that great.
DCK Posted June 1, 2007 Posted June 1, 2007 Zelda is about the storyline, yeah right Only Majora's Mask had a story that really made a difference in the game. Every Zelda set in Hyrule has the same storyline each time, every once in a while with an excuse to make some difference in the gameplay.
Mr. Bananagrabber Posted June 1, 2007 Posted June 1, 2007 How did the world go all cel shaded between Ocarina and Wind Waker?
DomJcg Posted June 1, 2007 Posted June 1, 2007 How did the world go all cel shaded between Ocarina and Wind Waker? i think it was just a style...
Mikey Posted June 1, 2007 Posted June 1, 2007 I'm stuck. I have a fishing rod, and I'm trying to catch a fish. I can never get a bite though. Any hints?
Hellfire Posted June 1, 2007 Posted June 1, 2007 i think it was just a style... WOW SERIOUSLY? Sauce please!
Tyson Posted June 1, 2007 Posted June 1, 2007 You're really passionate about this, aren't you Motion?
motion Posted June 1, 2007 Posted June 1, 2007 Certainly am. The only computer game series I'm passionate about.
The Bard Posted June 1, 2007 Posted June 1, 2007 Pfft. Metroid pwns Zelda. Coming to think of it...a lot of gaming series are a lot better than Zelda.
Ellmeister Posted June 1, 2007 Posted June 1, 2007 I disagree. I agree (with motion2000). Although I still think TP is one of the best zeldas as well.
Hellfire Posted June 1, 2007 Posted June 1, 2007 Pfft. Metroid pwns Zelda. Coming to think of it...a lot of gaming series are a lot better than Zelda. What you prefer is not necessarily better, you know.
The Bard Posted June 1, 2007 Posted June 1, 2007 If it wasn't better, then why exactly would I prefer it? Actually, there aren't really that many series that are better...I was just talking vacant hyperbole still...Metroid is better.
motion Posted June 1, 2007 Posted June 1, 2007 Opinion doesn't equal fact. Having said that there's a reason why Nintendo considers Zelda its flagship series.
Hellfire Posted June 1, 2007 Posted June 1, 2007 If it wasn't better, then why exactly would I prefer it? Personal taste? It might be better FOR YOU, but that doesn't mean it's better.
The Bard Posted June 1, 2007 Posted June 1, 2007 Firstly, Nintendo clearly don't think of Zelda as their flagship series. 2. If something is better for me, then I'm clearly going to think that it's better in general aren't I? Dear lord, I can't believe I'm having to explain this.
Zell Posted June 1, 2007 Posted June 1, 2007 Opinion doesn't equal fact. Having said that there's a reason why Nintendo considers Zelda its flagship series. I'm pretty sure Nintendo considers Mario as its flagship series. And I'm with teh Bard, Metroid is way better than Zelda. But Metroid isn't for everyone, Zelda has a wider target audience. Just because the majority of people prefer zelda does not make it better.
motion Posted June 1, 2007 Posted June 1, 2007 I'm pretty sure Nintendo considers Mario as its flagship series. Mario and Zelda. 2. If something is better for me, then I'm clearly going to think that it's better in general aren't I? Dear lord, I can't believe I'm having to explain this. Then stop making opinion sound like fact. That would help.
The Bard Posted June 1, 2007 Posted June 1, 2007 If we base it on how many games they put out and how well they sell, I guess you could say Pokemon is also ahead of Zelda.
Recommended Posts