I think you both have your points. TP is, as said before, in reality a mere retelling of the OoT-tale. Gameplay-wise it is also actually strikingly close to OoT. The controls are more precise and accurate, but this is only natural as time and hardware progresses. TP is more playable for a Zelda-newbie just because of this - and may be more likeable for a person never before involved in either games having his first playthroughs now in 2009. Other updates is of course new items and such, but this is just part of the evolution of the series. TP is not drastically different from OoT. Sure it tells the story in a different way, no games are excactly the same story. It also adds the wolf/human change, but this is weighed up by OoT's adult/child-thing. Having the character change during the adventure is nothing new and fresh, it is the same thing as back in ALttP as one of you said. It is the same principle. While appearing different, which they undeniably are, OoT and TP nonetheless follows roughly the same formula. Whether or not this is a good thing, is a debating issue. Personally I think fondly of Twilight Princess. It is a bigger, slightly more epic version of the OoT-tale, and it was unique enough to have me hooked for a couple of months. But even so, you had the "been there, done that"-feeling when playing through it (if you had already played OoT, that is). But it satisfied the part of me longing for a OoT-esque game after the slightly different experiences of MM and TWW. While TP game is a new, "updated" and more technically impressive version of OoT - I'm not sure if I could stand a new similar retelling in a new game following the same formula. Nintendo may need to reinvent the series. This is hard, and not done easily. But I think the new Zelda is in a golden position. If you look back to Oot, it was the first Zelda backed by hardware to enter the 3D-realm. This, and all the drastic, revolutionary changes it brought to change the whole Zelda-experience is unique. The games since then haven't had this golden opportunity. Their hardware really didn't differ from the N64 in terms of how it is used. The technical aspect is what has driven them, giving them only the chance to evolutionize the series rather that revolutionizing it like OoT. You can't reinvent the 3D, if you know what I mean. TP was a GC-affair, only getting tacked on the motion controls from the Wii as a quick effort. The new game is pure Wii and has the possibility to, based on motionplus and the likes of innovations offered by Wii, give Zelda a new start. Also importantly is that Nintendo thinks "outside the box" as to further develop the storyline. It is a challenge, for sure, but they can do it.
While I absolutely loved TP, it certainly had ways it could be better. While the overworld (Hyrule Field) was truly huge, I think it at times got a little soulless. A lot of it was just a bunch of open space. While there were enemies flying around, it was kinda lifeless. I liked the size, but a part of it is just not interesting. Hyrule field in OoT, while a lot smaller, I just find more interesting. I think it did the job of connecting Hyrule better that the TP-version. Riding down to the shores of Lake Hylia, or into the Gerudo Valley - it is just great. And with the ranch in the middle of it. Hyrule Field in TP is just vast for the sake of being vast. The pattern is just "Huge Area 1" - "Narrow Road to Huge Area 2" - "Narrow Road to Huge Area 3" and so forth. It just feels a little "constructed". Don't get me wrong, parts of it are great, but it has a hell of a lot more potential. If they can combine the interesting aspect of Hyrule Field in OoT with the vastness of Hyrule Field in TP - it will be great. Other than that, I really don't know what I want storywise. But I think that while TWW and TP brought back the "fight Ganon - get Zelda"-formula pioneered in 3D by OoT, it would be nice with a new twist. Perhaps one focusing more on the personal aspect of Link; his aging, feelings and so on. I am also really interested in a game dealing more with the history of Hyrule, with focus on species and tribes (sheikas). I just see the Zelda-series as boiling over with potential for new ideas - which makes the waiting painfull.
While I would really like them to announce a new one, I don't think it will happen. I've experienced year after year going into the year (especially pre-E3-times) hyped for new announcements, and ending up getting a new round of family/training/excersise/fun- games and products slapped in my face. This time I choose to be pessimistic. Don't get me wrong, 2010 is a great year for Nintendo with lots of great titles coming up. But no, I don't think they'll announce a new console.
The whole kiddy-label was something that annoyed the hell out of me a couple of years ago, but that I've really grown out of caring about. Some people have just got their minds set on that Nintendo is for kids, and trying to change these kinds of opinions is, in many cases, hopeless. As for me personally, having sticked with Nintendo a couple of years now, don't really see Nintendo's machine as more kiddy than the others. I've always been a hardcore Nintendo-gamer in the fact that I look for games on mye own initiative. That is how I discover many of the "hidden" games, which often in Wii's case is the most violent and mature. The mass market doesn't search for games, they wait for what is presented and advertised to them by the media. And in the case of Wii, the games that are advertised for in a large scale is often the more family-friendly and "gimmicky". A Playstation-fanboy who has never owned a Nintendo-machine does only get what is presented to him by the media concerning Wii, which again affects his opinion that Wii (and Nintendo) is family-orientated/kiddie. 360 and PS3 is more marketed through mature titles such as Halo and Gears of War, making the mass market's perception of these machines as ultraviolent adult-orientated systems. If Nintendo had left their heavy advertising on "light" family-friendly titles, and instead advertised games such as No More Heroes, Madworld and such - chances are that the mainstream opinion on Nintendo could easily have changed. Right now Nintendo has found a success-formula, and will probably continue this public image. They are making money this way. It is business, after all.
I think No More Heroes is a really good game, and I certainly had a blast playing through it. Having completed it ages ago, I look back at the time playing through it as one of the finest I've had with the Wii. It really set me in a special mood, really because it's unique. It has also got a weirdness-factor which just contributes to making it a fine experience. But I'm sure not everyone agrees with me, it's a love/hate kind of game. The graphics are jagged, the overworld tame and empty, and such. To me, the empty overworld was really just a good thing. I think it fitted the game well. But others may think it was a disaster not making it more interactive like Grand Theft Auto. But yeah, I like it - and I sure look forward to the sequel. I am, though, extremely dissapointed with the fact that NMH is being ported to other consoles. It is great that others can also enjoy this game, but really think Wii just lost part of what makes it unique. NMH was always to me the kind of title that only Wii could offer. As 360 and PS3 gets all the HD-eyecandy-games - the stylistic Wii-titles (where NMH has/had a strong presence) was one of the only things, besides the excellent first-party-games, that Wii-owners really had to themselves. I've also got a 360, so my views is not those of a fanboy. Just being an enthusiastic Nintendo-follower, the news of NMH on other consoles hit a bit of a soar spot in me.
Log in to comment