What was 'wrong' with Twilight Princess?

[pedrocasilva]

One of the biggest problems was that it didn’t feel like a fluid, 3D world. The GameCube version, at least, had terrible load times. You couldn’t run from one part of the overworld (or sections of Castle Town) to another without a good few seconds’ wait. This really ruined the illusion, and was a far cry from the fluid world of Wind Waker where you could sail up to an island, without a pause for the “action” to load up.

You're too used to having no loadings, they were short.

Also in the “technical limitations” category is the “flat” feeling forest, which does not resemble the 3D forest of the 2004 trailer. But hey, if the GameCube couldn’t handle that in the end, it’s easy to accept.

Actually, the hardware could deal with it just fine, it ran on-spec (as everything Nintendo shows, really), it's in the disc, and was unlocked by people toying with codes and the like.

 

The choice for the final one probably came more as a means for you not to get lost and make it more linear than a free roaming florest.

Like the lack of camera control in Castle Town, I blame the Wii not having the necessary buttons.

Rest of the game on GC regarding camera controls=I blame Wii con... Oh wait!

[Invisible Painting]

The only problem I had with the game was that it felt a bit too much like the other ones, just didn't feel as fresh as I thought it would. But it was still a very good game, well made and put together. Just felt a bit samey to a degree, but that wasn't a terrible thing either...

 

Rupees back in the chest, handy as bigger rupees could be picked up later.

 

And I agree that temple design was really good in this game. I always generally prefered the in between temple bits but this game it was more even for me.

 

But yeah, not too much wrong with it, it's a very polished game. But I think for the next Zelda they need to do something new, not sure what but something new

[M-PG71C]

You know, OoT has aged pretty badly and that is to be expected, it was the first 3D Zelda title.

 

I think the only reason why people fondly remember it is because of nostalgia alone because if you go back and play it and give TP a fair shake, TP is far more evolved in every single respect.

 

So clearly I stand with TP being a fine evolution of the 3D Zelda and while there could have been improvements, like any game, they can be addressed next time.

 

EDIT: Stupid internet, I'll finish the post later.

[darkjak]

Nothing was wrong with it at all, I loved it. Everyone hyped themselves up and expected a true revolution like Ocarina of Time though. I wish they wouldn't listen to you people and keep trying to make a 'realistic' Zelda, the visuals in Wind Waker were absolutely gorgeous and breathtaking. If we get a prequel to Wind Waker (the Hero did not appear) or a sequel to Phantom Hourglass as the true Wii Zelda, I'll be ecstatic - I feel that if they wanted to do something revolutionary with the controls a la PH, then the cel-shaded visuals are the way forward.

 

Personally I'd like to rip your head off.

I hated Wind Waker. The graphics in TP were so much better, and I never want to see another console toon Zelda. Personally I have nothing against Wind Waker or Phantom Hourglass, except for one thing: It's called a Zelda.

 

Imagine if Ferrari, the manufacturer of the greatest of sportscars, would decide to NOT making a new sportscar in the forseeable future and make a stationwagon instead. OK, so people want stationwagons too, and no doubt that they'll make a very good stationwagon. But still, if it's not a sportscar, it's not a Ferrari.

 

It's the same thing here. Noone would have complained if Nintendo would have had different characters, removed all refferences to the Zelda mythology and release a game called plain and simple: Wind Waker, and then make the DS sequel: Wind Waker: Phantom Hourglass. Then noone would've complained.

 

But they decided to go and, from my point of view, ruin one of the gratest game series ever. Twilight Princess was lightyears ahead of WW, but it still didn't have that special thing that made me replay it eight times, like Ocarina of Time. The surroundings were too confined, and the game was too easy. Plus that Nintendo could have adapted the game better to the Wii, and add so called 1:1 controlls and better graphics.

Those flaws would not have been fixed by, from my point of view, ugly cell-shading. No, this time I want Nintendo to give us what they promised in the TP trailer.

[Zero]

Personally I think if we just ignore all information regarding the Zelda when it arrives, we'll enjoy it a lot more.

[Jonnas]

You know, OoT has aged pretty badly and that is to be expected, it was the first 3D Zelda title.

 

I think the only reason why people fondly remember it is because of nostalgia alone because if you go back and play it and give TP a fair shake, TP is far more evolved in every single respect.

 

So clearly I stand with TP being a fine evolution of the 3D Zelda and while there could have been improvements, like any game, they can be addressed next time.

 

EDIT: Stupid internet, I'll finish the post later.

 

Personally, I think OoT has aged fine. What made the game so great is still there (and is absent in TP).

 

Personally I'd like to rip your head off.

I hated Wind Waker. The graphics in TP were so much better, and I never want to see another console toon Zelda. Personally I have nothing against Wind Waker or Phantom Hourglass, except for one thing: It's called a Zelda.

 

Imagine if Ferrari, the manufacturer of the greatest of sportscars, would decide to NOT making a new sportscar in the forseeable future and make a stationwagon instead. OK, so people want stationwagons too, and no doubt that they'll make a very good stationwagon. But still, if it's not a sportscar, it's not a Ferrari.

 

It's the same thing here. Noone would have complained if Nintendo would have had different characters, removed all refferences to the Zelda mythology and release a game called plain and simple: Wind Waker, and then make the DS sequel: Wind Waker: Phantom Hourglass. Then noone would've complained.

 

But they decided to go and, from my point of view, ruin one of the gratest game series ever. Twilight Princess was lightyears ahead of WW, but it still didn't have that special thing that made me replay it eight times, like Ocarina of Time. The surroundings were too confined, and the game was too easy. Plus that Nintendo could have adapted the game better to the Wii, and add so called 1:1 controlls and better graphics.

Those flaws would not have been fixed by, from my point of view, ugly cell-shading. No, this time I want Nintendo to give us what they promised in the TP trailer.

 

 

But seriously, I thought WW was fantastic. Nothing wrong with it (except length and easyness).

 

It had the sense of adventure a zelda is supposed to have (unlike TP). How is it unworthy of the "Zelda" name?

[Tellyn]

Personally I'd like to rip your head off.

I hated Wind Waker. The graphics in TP were so much better, and I never want to see another console toon Zelda. Personally I have nothing against Wind Waker or Phantom Hourglass, except for one thing: It's called a Zelda.

 

Imagine if Ferrari, the manufacturer of the greatest of sportscars, would decide to NOT making a new sportscar in the forseeable future and make a stationwagon instead. OK, so people want stationwagons too, and no doubt that they'll make a very good stationwagon. But still, if it's not a sportscar, it's not a Ferrari.

 

It's the same thing here. Noone would have complained if Nintendo would have had different characters, removed all refferences to the Zelda mythology and release a game called plain and simple: Wind Waker, and then make the DS sequel: Wind Waker: Phantom Hourglass. Then noone would've complained.

 

But they decided to go and, from my point of view, ruin one of the gratest game series ever. Twilight Princess was lightyears ahead of WW, but it still didn't have that special thing that made me replay it eight times, like Ocarina of Time. The surroundings were too confined, and the game was too easy. Plus that Nintendo could have adapted the game better to the Wii, and add so called 1:1 controlls and better graphics.

Those flaws would not have been fixed by, from my point of view, ugly cell-shading. No, this time I want Nintendo to give us what they promised in the TP trailer.

 

There's no need to get to violent, I am allowed to like the style and general gameplay of a certain game as opposed to another.

[spirited away]

 

 

 

 

 

Quality post.

 

Lol at Darkjak; the most annoying type of person to try and have a constructive argument with...

 

Personally I'm with TellyN. WW had that soul, and charisma and artistic flair. It had that cheeky charm and sense of real emotion from Link's evocative expressions and the subtle change in pace and mood of the music. It had a beautiful, consistent art-style that would play to the strengths of this gen's system. The sense of scale and exploration was really well done also (I personally loved roaming around on the ship), and there was countless places to explore, that weren't integral to the story.

 

To me WW was short and sweet, which encouraged multiple playthroughs. TP just dragged on for me, and was needlessly long - I had to force myself to finish it. You may not like WW; but to say that it is unworthy of the Zelda name, is just ignorant.

[darkjak]

Personally, I think OoT has aged fine. What made the game so great is still there (and is absent in TP).

 

 

 

 

But seriously, I thought WW was fantastic. Nothing wrong with it (except length and easyness).

 

It had the sense of adventure a zelda is supposed to have (unlike TP). How is it unworthy of the "Zelda" name?

 

When Nintendo made OOT they themselves set the standard of how a 3D Zelda game should look and play. Making Zelda cel-shaded was like making a fully realistic Timesplitters, only ten times worse, since TS allways has had a SOMEWHAT realistic graphic style. It's like that comparasint to Ferrari. Ferrari don't make stationwagons, just like Zeldas aren't toon shaded.

 

It's not really a case of worthy or not worthy. It's more a case of fitting in. Wind Waker would have recieved a lot less criticism if it hadn't had the Zelda name, just like the Saab 9-2X would've just kept being the Subaru Impreza. The Impreza is a fantastic car. It's better than a Saab, with it's four wheel drive and boxter engine. But it's not a friggin' Saab just because of some exterior makeover and a new dashboard. It doesen't quite look like a Saab, it doesent feel like one, doesent sound like one, it doesent sound like one. It doesent have a soul of a Saab.

 

OOT still remains the best Zelda in my book, and TP comes close second. MM was a great game although it took a bit too much patience to complete a few tasks. I place it third.

[Grazza]

There was no back and forth porting, the game was made for GC, they spent an aditional year making the Wii version and tweaking it and that's it.

 

Regardless, those changes were applied back to the GameCube version, such as the extra padding at the start of the game (2 hours?) It ended up taking too long to introduce the core gameplay.

 

I would have liked to control the shield like in the previous ones too, although it's useless it was cool

 

But it was in the playable demo just months before the planned release. Why take it out?

 

I'd say it's also quite likely that they took out the Mirror Shield. After all, there's a big gap by the swords and armour where a 3rd (or 4th, technically) shield is missing.

 

Straying into speculation, imagine if the item for one of the later dungeons was originally the Mirror Shield. If the designers decided this didn't work on Wii (due to no R-trigger), do you really think they'd leave it in the GameCube game? No, they ported all the changes back to make the versions the same.

 

In the end, you couldn't even lock-on or draw your sword without the shield automatically being raised.

 

The camera control in Castle Town doesn't have anything to do with buttons or lack of it, it's just that it's easier to design a level, specially if it's a busy town with narrow streets with a fixed camera.

 

They didn't even let you go into first-person view though. Same applied to the (deserted) passage between the town and castle. This is the first time since OoT this has happened in an outdoor area. In contrast to MM and WW, it didn't feel like you were in a fully-calculated 3D world.

[Guest Maase]

You know, OoT has aged pretty badly and that is to be expected, it was the first 3D Zelda title.

 

I think the only reason why people fondly remember it is because of nostalgia alone because if you go back and play it and give TP a fair shake, TP is far more evolved in every single respect.

 

So clearly I stand with TP being a fine evolution of the 3D Zelda and while there could have been improvements, like any game, they can be addressed next time.

 

EDIT: Stupid internet, I'll finish the post later.

 

True

 

Personally I think if we just ignore all information regarding the Zelda when it arrives, we'll enjoy it a lot more.

 

True

 

That's way i love TP and don't care about OOT

 

But, i have to admit, that TP looks kinda bland in comparation with OOT, specially in Kokoroko (:X) Village

[Zell]

After watching the first trailer, I was expecting a huge game world. TP didn't deliever, though SOTC gave us the epic world we wanted.

 

The problem with TP was that the game hadn't moved on at all from OoT. It was the same game but eight years later! Yes Nintendo, you made one of the greatest games ever, now build on it! Show some bloody evolution!

[Guest Maase]

SOTC? What's that?

[Emasher]

OoT was the first 3D zelda game, with that came the charm of bringing the world we had know for years into life. Also It had the first 3D hyrule we knew, anything else feels like a bad attempt to replicate it.

[Zell]

SOTC? What's that?

 

Shadow of the Colossus

[Hellfire]

After watching the first trailer, I was expecting a huge game world. TP didn't deliever, though SOTC gave us the epic world we wanted.

 

The problem with TP was that the game hadn't moved on at all from OoT. It was the same game but eight years later! Yes Nintendo, you made one of the greatest games ever, now build on it! Show some bloody evolution!

 

Yeah, cause you know, OoT had horseback swordfighting, motion controls, you could turn into a wolf and you had sword techniques. Meanwhile in TP music is the main focus of the game, you can travel in time and be a child or an adult. It's amazing that everyone asked for someone closer to OoT, Nintendo made it a little more like OoT than WW, yet incorporated new things, but people now say it's the same as OoT. It's the biggest and most "epic" Zelda yet with the biggest world and people still want more.

I just don't get it, there's not a single Zelda that doesn't feel completly different from the others, they all feel so unique. Before you go "lulz Hellfire is defending Nintendo again", I've justified my point and I stand by it. I also understand how people were swayed away by expectations and the first trailer, but that's the price of not controlling hype.

And comparing a game as complete as Zelda with a game where you have 2 weapons, a horse 16 enemies and that's it, is really a bad comparison. And I fucking love SOTC.

I am curious as how the series will evolve though, PH was very different, but it will be hard to shake the gameplay style they created in OoT. I reckon the next Zelda is far away though.

[spirited away]

Yeah, cause you know, OoT had horseback swordfighting, motion controls, you could turn into a wolf and you had sword techniques. Meanwhile in TP music is the main focus of the game, you can travel in time and be a child or an adult. It's amazing that everyone asked for someone closer to OoT, Nintendo made it a little more like OoT than WW, yet incorporated new things, but people now say it's the same as OoT. It's the biggest and most "epic" Zelda yet with the biggest world and people still want more. And comparing a game as complete as Zelda with a game where you have 2 weapons, a horse 16 enemies and that's it, is really a bad comparison. And I fucking love SOTC.

I am curious as how the series will evolve though, PH was very different, but it will be hard to shake the gameplay style they created in OoT. I reckon the next Zelda is far away though.

 

The motion controls weren't an evolution - they were pointless and irritating (IMO).

[Owen]

I actually don't have any complaints for TP! For me, it was the closet feeling to Ocarina Of Time i had when playing it...

[Hellfire]

The motion controls weren't an evolution - they were pointless and irritating (IMO).

 

In your opinion, indeed, just like it was an evolution in my opinion :P Honestly I can't go back without motion and mainly pointing.

[Coolness Bears]

I love Twilight Princess as soon as I started playing it everything felt great.

 

My only problem with the game is the emptyness of the land I couldn't help but notice this. Although there was VAST amounts of space and it felt epic travelling through the fields on Epona, it was a bit lonely.

 

I think this has to do with the story because through out the adventure (which I have yet tto finish ) I felt absent from the world as if Link didn't exist. A few more sidequests would have kept me happy. Though what was in the game was good.

 

I loved playing as the wolf and didn't feel it got old and just as I was beginning to get bored of it I could use Link again. The Dungeons were really good and I prefered them to exploring the land. I really like Lake Hylia for some reason as well. ^_____^ Flying down on a chicken never gets old.

 

I don't think it's an Oot Beater but that game Is just excellent to me and I feel it has aged well.

[K-project]

I love Twilight Princess as soon as I started playing it everything felt great.

 

My only problem with the game is the emptyness of the land I couldn't help but notice this. Although there was VAST amounts of space and it felt epic travelling through the fields on Epona, it was a bit lonely.

 

I think this has to do with the story because through out the adventure (which I have yet tto finish ) I felt absent from the world as if Link didn't exist. A few more sidequests would have kept me happy. Though what was in the game was good.

 

I loved playing as the wolf and didn't feel it got old and just as I was beginning to get bored of it I could use Link again. The Dungeons were really good and I prefered them to exploring the land. I really like Lake Hylia for some reason as well. ^_____^ Flying down on a chicken never gets old.

 

I don't think it's an Oot Beater but that game Is just excellent to me and I feel it has aged well.

 

This.

 

I don't think it's an OoT beater either. I don't think it quite has that spark of the new or the magic of OoT, but in it's own right it's an amazing experience. I certainly agree that it needed more life too in it's fields and towns, but for me I've loved every minute. Not a moment of it dragged or bored me, and that is a rare blessing indeed in a modern videogame, especially one with an adventure as large as TP.

[Zell]

Yeah, cause you know, OoT had horseback swordfighting, motion controls, you could turn into a wolf and you had sword techniques. Meanwhile in TP music is the main focus of the game, you can travel in time and be a child or an adult. It's amazing that everyone asked for someone closer to OoT, Nintendo made it a little more like OoT than WW, yet incorporated new things, but people now say it's the same as OoT. It's the biggest and most "epic" Zelda yet with the biggest world and people still want more.

I just don't get it, there's not a single Zelda that doesn't feel completly different from the others, they all feel so unique. Before you go "lulz Hellfire is defending Nintendo again", I've justified my point and I stand by it. I also understand how people were swayed away by expectations and the first trailer, but that's the price of not controlling hype.

And comparing a game as complete as Zelda with a game where you have 2 weapons, a horse 16 enemies and that's it, is really a bad comparison. And I fucking love SOTC.

I am curious as how the series will evolve though, PH was very different, but it will be hard to shake the gameplay style they created in OoT. I reckon the next Zelda is far away though.

 

*sigh* I didn't mean they were exactly the same. But TP is pretty much a clone of Ocarina (something you couldn't really completely say for MM or WW). The swordfighting on horseback added nothing to the game (and was hardly used), all the motion controls did was emulate a B button press, and the wolf thing was just there replace the absence of the child/adult thing. There aren't that many profound differences, yet the similarities go on forever.

 

And about SOTC, I wasn't comparing gameplay, I was just saying that the world in SOTC is what I really wanted in TP (though IIRC, one of the bosses in TP was heavily SOTC influenced). Afterall Zelda and SOTC are very different games.

[Hellfire]

And I was saying it was nothing like a Clone of OoT, because the main mechanics were completly different, just like with WW and MM.

Regarding SOTC the world of a game is heavily influenced by the gameplay.

[Invisible Painting]

To say it's a clone of OoT is unfair in my opinion, but as I stated earlier my biggest flaw with the game is that it feels a bit too much like the earlier Zeldas. The way the game plays feels similar. What we have is a very polished game and a very good one, but it doesn't feel that different.

 

Playing as a wolf isn't that original if you think about it though given you could transform into 3 different forms in MM. But the wolf played very well in my opinion.

 

When Nintendo made OOT they themselves set the standard of how a 3D Zelda game should look and play. Making Zelda cel-shaded was like making a fully realistic Timesplitters, only ten times worse, since TS allways has had a SOMEWHAT realistic graphic style. It's like that comparasint to Ferrari. Ferrari don't make stationwagons, just like Zeldas aren't toon shaded.

 

It's not really a case of worthy or not worthy. It's more a case of fitting in. Wind Waker would have recieved a lot less criticism if it hadn't had the Zelda name, just like the Saab 9-2X would've just kept being the Subaru Impreza. The Impreza is a fantastic car. It's better than a Saab, with it's four wheel drive and boxter engine. But it's not a friggin' Saab just because of some exterior makeover and a new dashboard. It doesen't quite look like a Saab, it doesent feel like one, doesent sound like one, it doesent sound like one. It doesent have a soul of a Saab.

 

WW perfectly fits into Zeldas history and style. So the graphics were different, if you're going to repeatedly use car analagies then the closest one to this is that it's like painting the car a different colour. It may look different but it's the same car underneath. WW had great play and style throughout and a greta sense of adventure.

[Goron_3]

Yeah, cause you know, OoT had horseback swordfighting, motion controls, you could turn into a wolf and you had sword techniques. Meanwhile in TP music is the main focus of the game, you can travel in time and be a child or an adult. It's amazing that everyone asked for someone closer to OoT, Nintendo made it a little more like OoT than WW, yet incorporated new things, but people now say it's the same as OoT. It's the biggest and most "epic" Zelda yet with the biggest world and people still want more.

I just don't get it, there's not a single Zelda that doesn't feel completly different from the others, they all feel so unique. Before you go "lulz Hellfire is defending Nintendo again", I've justified my point and I stand by it. I also understand how people were swayed away by expectations and the first trailer, but that's the price of not controlling hype.

And comparing a game as complete as Zelda with a game where you have 2 weapons, a horse 16 enemies and that's it, is really a bad comparison. And I fucking love SOTC.

I am curious as how the series will evolve though, PH was very different, but it will be hard to shake the gameplay style they created in OoT. I reckon the next Zelda is far away though.

 

Horseback swordfighting wasn't that great tbh, and remember OoT was originally going to have that but then they couldn't put it in. Oh and motion controls weren't the good thing about the wii controls, it was the way you could aim weapons. Slashing the wii-mote was exactly the same as pressing A (didn't hinder gameplay, didn't add..it was just there and some liked it!).

 

I really don't get why people thought TP was epic I mean, there were two pieces in the game i thought were outstanding, the first 2 hours (where you go into the dark world for the first time) and then the cutscene when you meet ganon. The rest of the game was just you know, walk here, talk to someone, walk to dungeon.

 

Oh, just so people know, I don't hate TP, it did some things perfectly. Dungeon design was top notch, especially Arbitars Grounds, the dungeon where you battle Zant and the erm, the Temple of Time

Hm such a shame the boss battles in the game where pretty lame, althought the fight vs the sky temple boss was ALMOST amazing until i realised he only had like one attack, but even then i thought it was still brilliant. Infact, the first time you fight a darknut at the top of the temple of time i was like 'Holy fuck the game is finally getting somewhere!', but then weirdly the rest of the bosses in the game were actually easier than the them. hmm.