I'm not sure if anyone will feel the same way, but I'm a little concerned on Nintendo's decision on the continuity of Niko in this game. Are we 100% sure that it's Niko? My point is the for the entire series I think that the physics of Hyrule has seemed so similar to that of our world. By that I mean that there is gravity, living creatures need water and food, and it seemed as though the characters aged at the same rate as us. If this old Niko really is Niko then that would make him borderline too old to be alive, especially considering that the Zelda series doesn't necessarily seem to have hospitals and medicine to keep old people alive. I understand that there are old people in other games, but we have never known the BS of those old people whereas we know that if this character is Niko then he is definitely at an age that he shouldn't be alive at.
Does anyone else have this concern? It kind of blows my mind about the capabilities of Nintendo being able to "make things work" when they probably shouldn't work. As much as I enjoyed WW, I think that the characters in WW should stay in the past. Tetra was a salty sea-dog and that's what I loved about her. I would hate for her to be a sweet old woman that should probably be dead.
Anyway, that was a little straying off the subject. I just hope that this doesn't disappoint me too much. I don't like the idea of past and present colliding, especially in a game that isn't a direct sequel.
Does anyone else have this concern? It kind of blows my mind about the capabilities of Nintendo being able to "make things work" when they probably shouldn't work. As much as I enjoyed WW, I think that the characters in WW should stay in the past. Tetra was a salty sea-dog and that's what I loved about her. I would hate for her to be a sweet old woman that should probably be dead.
Anyway, that was a little straying off the subject. I just hope that this doesn't disappoint me too much. I don't like the idea of past and present colliding, especially in a game that isn't a direct sequel.