Enough Complaining: A Fully 3D Realized Zelda Game Does Not Belong in a Zelda 3DS Title

So there was a new Zelda 3DS game announced today. Maybe you’ve heard of it. You know what I have seen in the wake of the announcement? A heck of a lot of complaining, and this time around I am going to address one complaint that is really grinding my gears. Apparently, people want a fully realized 3D world (like in Ocarina of Time 3D) on their “to go” handheld system. They don’t want 2D top down Zelda, rather, they want a robust console like experience.

My reaction? If you want a console like 3D world, and if Nintendo was to give it to you, why wouldn’t you just release it on the Wii U? I say this, because there is literally nothing the 3DS does that the Wii U cannot do better – except that the 3DS can be taken with you on the go and you need to wear glasses to experience 3D on the Wii U. Otherwise? The Wii U arguably has more functionality, and can definitely produce a much richer 3D world than the 3DS.

Now, that isn’t to say it’s not right to want to have that experience, however the question I pose is this: Why do you want it? I pose that question because I truly don’t see the point. Are people forgetting that the 3DS is an on-the-go system? It’s meant for short periods of play, and occasionally long ones when you are on trips. Yes, you can play it at home and many of us do, but it’s not intended, or is it designed, to be played over long periods of time. In fact, if you play for 3+ hours, your hands may even start to feel fatigued. If your wondering, no, that is not a common problem when playing console games.

One of my greatest fears after Ocarina of Time 3D came out was that Nintendo would try to create a full console experience on my handheld device. My problem with this was two fold. One: If I wanted that, I would rather have it on a system that can do it better without the same limitations. Two: It would mean an end to the top down Zelda kingdom, something many feared since the last true top down Zelda was The Minish Cap. What, exactly, is wrong with a top down Zelda game? Most of the games in the series are like this and many of them are regarded as great games – with some even preferring them over the fabled Ocarina of Time. As an example, I have A Link to the Past, Link’s Awakening, and yes… the Oracle games all ranked higher than Ocarina of Time. Why? I just think they are truly superior experiences.

What is wrong with top down Zelda? It’s the fundamental roots of the series. Guess what – Ocarina of Time is not the gold standard for what a Zelda game is. It’s just a standard for a certain type of Zelda game – the 2D top down games have been a staple since the first Zelda game ever existed. There is a lot of life left in these sorts of titles (as indie devs continue to prove). Why do we want that era to come to an end for a lesser version of a console game that cannot be played in short sessions very well and is inferior in every possible way to the same game ported over to the Wii U?

Zelda on the go is almost perfectly suited to a top down Zelda game. So, what is it with people wanting something else? Is it because Zelda U hasn’t arrived and we lack the patience for a true blue console experience? Is it because we lost our appreciation for the fundamentals of what a Zelda game really is? Or, is it simply because you are close minded to the point you refuse to play a game if it’s not in 3D? I don’t know what the case may be, but I really don’t understand this complaint. If you don’t like the fact it uses the same world as A Link to the Past? Fine, that’s understandable to want something totally fresh. Maybe you don’t like the art style. I get it, not everyone will. But to not like it because it’s not a 3D console experience? Why would I even want that to begin with? Bring that stuff to the Wii U please, thanks.