Search results for query: *

It's certainly not traditional, but there's not really any way you can argue that trains and Zelda don't mix. I could just as easily argue that boats and Zelda don't mix. It's just a fallacy. I would feel as if I were playing a Zelda-inspired game, so, in a sense, yes. How does that make...

How did ST not feel like a Zelda game?

How are they sidetracking? They've still always attempted to improve the core mechanics of the series' formula, which is part of what they were trying to do with the Wii MotionPlus (and what they did with many features in Skyward Sword).

Experimenting isn't wasting time. It's trying out new things and seeing what works best with them. It's how gaming evolution happens. Without experimentation, gaming would become static, meaning it would never grow. I don't think any of us want that.

That's true for a large portion of the Wii's library, and it's something they needed to fix. Thankfully it looks like they'll fix this in the near future with the Wii U, as they've set themselves up to have a balance of doing they're own thing alongside of third party companies doing their's.

Why? Just because you have the gist of a story in mind doesn't mean you have the entire gameplay portion of the game mapped out.

Yeah, which is ultimately why Aonuma made the decision to go with it. That doesn't mean they decided to base the story on that, though. If I'm being honest, that's grasping for straws way out in the depths of space. It's merely looking into something that's just not there. Twilight Princess...

Sorry, but as I've said before, this is purely conjecture and has no proof whatsoever. I also highly doubt this was their mindset. They clearly had Skyward Sword's story in mind when they made Twilight Princess. The correlations between the two are uncanny. Plus, Aonuma actually considered not...

Personal experience and judgement. That's all that's capable of being provided. I can't really put statistics on something like this, so we're just gonna have to leave it at that. (No, seriously, let's just leave it at that. No sense in keeping a never-ending cycle going.) Eh, I'm used to...

The way it's used in today's gaming market is what I described, though. At least that's how it seems the general public uses it to me. Plus, not all selling points are gimmicks. #jussayin

No, a gimmick is something pointlessly shoehorned into a game and used frequently just because. This can be things like Quick Time Events, button-mashing, and waggling (something SS's design discourages). A selling point is just a selling point. Nothing more, nothing less. I can agree with that.

Experimenting with art styles is fine. It aids each game in having its own specific flavor. They also aren't using gimmicks. The control schemes they use always work flawlessly and flow with the game design seamlessly, just like they've done in the past. So there's your answer. :)