The Video Game Critic

Ugh. Most of what you want taken from the game is what makes it great in the first place.

[QUOTE=Steerforth]Not a CLONE Mozart, just a sister in spirit.

Mario 64 is a game about solving puzzles with a perfect game engine. I think Link should only have 3 or 4 basic items (boomerang, bombs, bow, lantern), and than design tons of different puzzles around them.
[/QUOTE]

Are you kidding? No hookshot? The magnetic boots was a critical part of several areas of the game. The dual hookshot was perhaps one of the coolest items in the history of Zelda, but it was bettered even then by the spinner, used to awesome effect in one of the boss battles. What you are asking for here is simply a dumbing down of the game. No thanks.

[QUOTE=Steerforth]
Go where you want, when you want, at any time. Completely non-linear.
[/QUOTE]

We already have that game. It's called Oblivion. It's a darn good game too, but Zelda shouldn't copy it and Oblivion shouldn't copy Zelda.

[QUOTE=Steerforth]
Absolutely no cut scenes delving into the dull mythology of Hyrule. More humour, brighter colors, striking, whimsycal landscape.
[/QUOTE]

The cutscenes are hardly intrusive, nor are they dull. That's just your opinion. Zelda already has humor, bright colors, and a "striking whimsical landscape." It's odd that you think it doesn't already have that.

[QUOTE=Steerforth]

Get rid of Navi and give Link a pet dog, like Hondo.

[/QUOTE]

I fail to see how this matters one way or another, unless you are just that much into dogs?

[QUOTE=Steerforth]

Give us a true forest feeling for part of the game, the Lost Woods in LTtP is still the most atmospheric Zelda area.

[/QUOTE]

Statements like this make me wonder if you've played Twilight Princess past the opening tutorial. The Lost Woods is amazing in that game, and much of the Zelda universe has always been in a forest.

[QUOTE=Steerforth]

Limit the scope and size of the game, but make everything in the game react and interact with  each other. Link could even hunt deer if he wanted to. More ghosts, several small castles, all ruled by small time knights. Draw on "The Once and Future King" for inspiration. Very random, but that is my next Zelda.

[/QUOTE]

Maybe you have a point with the length of the game. Hunting deer once again sounds like something out of Oblivion and Morrowind, although some hunting minigame isn't totally out of bounds.

I don't mean to sound so harsh, but it just sounds like you want to play a different game, Steerforth. I'm okay with the sandbox idea in other games, but I specifically play a game such as Zelda because it isn't Oblivion or Crackdown. Not that there isn't some elements of sandbox in Zelda games: in fact, I would argue that the Zelda game design was largely influential to the sandbox genre. But there is still a certain sense of "motion" that is lacking in an Oblivion type game. I love that game; but it is very weird that you are thrust, from the beginning of the game, into a "save the world" plot, yet you can just fiddle around for infinite amounts of time and there is no consequence.
 
I also think you are totally wrong in regards to items. I enjoy collection the various tools, and I do think the games largely succeed in using them in interesting ways. I'll put it this way to avoid spoilers: I can attest to the fact that you do, actually, use all of the items more than "one time."

But the facts are, Zelda is still extremely popular and a big seller in America, and that should be more than enough reason to keep making the games. Square-Enix doesn't stop making Dragon Warrior games just because it isn't big in the U.S. I sound like a purist here, but I think there are ways to move the series forward, but there is a reason why a particular game series is succesful. Trying to reinvent the wheel without remembering what made the games great in the first place is a recipe for disaster. Look at what happened to the Ultima series, for instance. Sonic also.

Okay, I know I promised "no more Zelda defense posts." I lied. It's just that a Zelda game as proposed here made me, frankly, throw up a little in my mouth...

-Rob

[QUOTE=Steerforth]Not a CLONE Mozart, just a sister in spirit.[/QUOTE]

I don't even want a "sister spirit".  I want a game that plays like Zelda.  I don't agree with you that Zelda isn't fun enough.  I have more fun playing Zelda than any other game series in existence.

[QUOTE=Steerforth]Mario 64 is a game about solving puzzles with a perfect game engine. I think Link should only have 3 or 4 basic items (boomerang, bombs, bow, lantern), and than design tons of different puzzles around them. No item collecting to open more parts of the map, and then never use again. Go where you want, when you want, at any time. Completely non-linear. Absolutely no cut scenes delving into the dull mythology of Hyrule. More humour, brighter colors, striking, whimsycal landscape. Get rid of Navi and give Link a pet dog, like Hondo. Give us a true forest feeling for part of the game, the Lost Woods in LTtP is still the most atmospheric Zelda area. Limit the scope and size of the game, but make everything in the game react and interact with  each other. Link could even hunt deer if he wanted to. More ghosts, several small castles, all ruled by small time knights. Draw on "The Once and Future King" for inspiration. Very random, but that is my next Zelda.[/QUOTE]

There are some ideas here that aren't catastrophic.  Though I don't like most of them -- particularly Zelda only having a few items at a time.  I guess it comes down to this:  I KNOW what Mario 64 is like -- I've played it -- and I definitely do NOT want Zelda being modelled after Mario 64.  I want Zelda to be modelled after Zelda.

I also really don't get what you are saying about the cut-scenes.  I think those add some quality to the game.  They aren't too long, and yet really set things up for each aspect of the adventure.  I especially loved the lessons of friendship and honesty that Sheik gave to Link before teaching him new ocarina songs.  I honestly don't think that the game's storyline would be as good without them.

[QUOTE=Steerforth]Don't write of Phantom Hourglass yet, at least wait until it comes out.[/QUOTE]

I am definitely not writing it off.  I think the new control scheme will work rather well.  After all, Ninja Gaiden DS is also controlled entirely by the touch screen, and look how well that one seems to control here.

I only worry about other aspects of the game which dumb down the Zelda framework.  I don't know what those are, but I am in a period of angst, not knowing what to expect of the new Zelda design.

[QUOTE=Steerforth]I am gald the Japanese didn't fall in love with TP, that almost guarantees a new direction for Zelda, I think it needs it. Orcarina of time is still the 3-d champ for Zelda games because it didn't get too big.[/QUOTE]

Eh, it depends on who you ask.  I don't think TP was all that inferior to Ocarina, and I am not sure I completely agree that TP was a clone of Ocarina either.  I think it was a Zelda game -- pure and simple.  After all, Ocarina was modelled after all previous Zelda games, only in a 3D space.

In any case, the Japanese aren't ignoring Zelda primarily because it's not big enough, but because it's too big and time consuming for most Japanese to get into.  It's the same trend that led to the DS and Wii to begin with.  I seriously doubt that the answer to this will be more free-roaming, if indeed Miyamoto and company have Zelda in mind for casual gamers (I sure hope not).  The hardcore gaming element in Japan is still interested in Zelda to some extent, but that group of people is shrinking in that country, not growing as they are in the West.  And that group is largely more interested in turn-based JRPGs than anything else, which is one of the reasons for the Zelda decline.

Personally I think Nintendo should concentrate on making new franchises that fit their new gaming genre of casuals and non-gamers, and leave the older franchises largely alone.  Those franchises, after all, are tried and true over decades, and have ongoing successes built on fan support.  People like me, who played the original game when it was first released and every game since multiple times, like the series for what it is.  Miyamoto and company have proven that they can take the series forward without forgetting the unnamed essential aspects of what makes a game fitting to the Zelda series, but your suggestions just sound like you want Zelda to become something else altogether.  I think that would be a BIG mistake for those who play Zelda games because of its reputation as a solid game that fits the Zelda paradigm.

My last post in this topic (probably, maybe)

O.K. - heres my point :

Zelda I was a unique game, no game quite did what this game did before. Classic.

Zelda II was a nice sidescrolling rpg. It was hard, but still fun. Gets little respect.

Zelda III was Zelda I remade and expanded on. Some say the best game in the series.

OoT was basicly a perfect game, first 3-d Zelda

MM used the OoT engine, added some nice features. My favorite Zelda.

WW used an anhanced OoT engine, awesome graphics, liked the ocean concept.

TP used an enhanced OoT engine, added some new features, but was basicly a love letter for OoT fans, and critics of WW graphic style.

I am not counting 4 swords games here, but the last 4 'franchise' Zelda games, great as they were, have too much in common, control and concept wise. Its time to shake things up for a game or two, then the gameplay will be fresh again, even if they eventually go back to the "Orcarina" mold.

Closing: I loved TP, it was a great game, but I think it was a little too big and felt a little empty, and it did not blow my mind like OoT did. Its time for a change, good or bad. If they keep making the same game over and over again, it won't be as special as a franchise. Just my opinion.

P.S. I pat myself on the back each time I make Rob throw up. Score!

P.P.S. The orcarina was the greatest gameplay idea ever.

Post addendum, my bad.

Rob - In my opinion TP had NO forest areas. It just had narrow forest clearings with trees on either side, that you could not enter. I don't like the "islands of playable area" Zelda maps, that was a plus for WW, to me. Link should be IN the forest, maybe its hard to pull off, but thats what I want.