A Link Between Worlds Am I the Only One Who is Disappointed?

[Azure Sage]

Ehm please explain how top-down is inferior to over-the-shoulder? I see no degradations except that we don't see a truly three dimensional world, and that in itself isn't a drawback necessarily.

At this point in the industry, not seeing a three-dimensional world is a drawback. It makes it harder for players to get sucked into the game and appreciate the world, and people are generally turned off to it these days. I would imagine it wouldn't sell as well because of that. If you have the capabilities to make something beautiful and you don't, it's just wasteful.

Behind the back is not superior to top down. It just makes for a different kind of level design. You just like it more. It isn't better.

Not true. I'm not that shallow. Please don't insult me by thinking I am.

 

[Kirino]

I am definitely irritated by the top-down gameplay as well as the general art style. For one I wanted MM3D dammit, not an ALttP Sequel. For two, why is it top down gameplay? After the success that was Ocarina of Time 3D, you'd think that the 3DS installment would be gimmick free! No, I get to see what's effectively Super Link 3D Land. They could disappoint me in a lot of ways but this one thus far takes the cake.

Top-down gameplay is a gimmick? Or are you referring to the wall paper mechanic? Either way, gimmicks aren't necessarily bad things.

And I still cannot understand why anyone would rather have a remake over a new game.

 

[The Omni Triforcer]

why u all hating on the top down design that's how the series started out and if it weren't for that you wouldn't even have the 3d zeldas u have today and some of the best zelda games are top down (Minish Cap, Four Swords Adventures, Classic Zelda, Links Awakening, and Links to the past) its about time we saw these games in 3d i for one is truly excited to get this game

 

[Ventus]

Top-down gameplay is a gimmick? Or are you referring to the wall paper mechanic? Either way, gimmicks aren't necessarily bad things.

Referring to paper Zelda and the overall structure of the game world - it, like SM3DLand before it, are basically serving as hosts to what the 3DS CAN do.

And I still cannot understand why anyone would rather have a remake over a new game.

New games: possibility to disappoint (Z3DS already has, at least thus far).
Old games: guaranteed to garner the same effect as it did previously, sometimes an even better response if it fixes glitches and what not.

 

[Azure Sage]

why u all hating on the top down design that's how the series started out and if it weren't for that you wouldn't even have the 3d zeldas u have today and some of the best zelda games are top down (Minish Cap, Four Swords Adventures, Classic Zelda, Links Awakening, and Links to the past) its about time we saw these games in 3d i for one is truly excited to get this game

It doesn't matter if it's how the series started out or not. That was then, this is now. It's nice to go back to your roots every now and then, sure. But these days, the top-down view of 2D games is generally outdated. Mainly the people who grew up with it and have a nostalgia factor would buy it. The younger generation probably wouldn't be as interested. It's not a good idea as far as sales are concerned.

 

[Kirino]

New games: possibility to disappoint (Z3DS already has, at least thus far).
Old games: guaranteed to garner the same effect as it did previously, sometimes an even better response if it fixes glitches and what not.

So you'd rather take an old game with a minor upgrade as opposed to a whole new game just because it has a possibility to disappoint?

 

[Trio the Punch]

And I still cannot understand why anyone would rather have a remake over a new game.

This. I love this. With all of my love. <3

At this point in the industry, not seeing a three-dimensional world is a drawback. It makes it harder for players to get sucked into the game and appreciate the world, and people are generally turned off to it these days. I would imagine it wouldn't sell as well because of that. If you have the capabilities to make something beautiful and you don't, it's just wasteful.

Not true. I'm not that shallow. Please don't insult me by thinking I am.

I didn't mean to call you shallow, I'm sorry. It just seems like the qualities you are describing are not necessarily things that are important, but just happen to be appealing to you. I for one don't care what kind of environments we get. I play the hell out of games like A Link to the Past to this day because to me the way the levels are designed in a top down perspective is just as appealing as they way they are designed in a fleshed out full 3D world. And as for beauty, I can sort of agree that the retro perspective doesn't lend as well to making attractive environments, but that really is just about making a game in a different way, and some things are sacrificed in that process. If that was something that was important to you in games like Wind Waker or Skyward Sword, I can understand how turning away from that can feel like a downgrade. But not all gamers value that so highly. I personally like fleshed out worlds and striking visuals, especially in Zelda, but I don't deem them necessary by any means, and having a game shy away from that in favor of some old school puzzle design with new depth is totally fine with me. That's all I mean when I say it's just about what you like. It isn't shallow, it's just thinking based on what you value in a game. :/

 

[DarkestLink]

At this point MM3DS seems very unlikely...3 Zelda games on one system? Even if two of them are remakes I just don't see it...

 

[mozetich]

Top down is just boring. I can't get into those games for some reason.. it's not that I don't give them a chance.. I've beaten both Oracle games and tinkered with all of the other ones.

This is basically a remake of ALttP with new dungeons and the wall melding.

 

[Justac00lguy]

I can see the reasons for the huge disappointment, i get it! everyone wanted the modern 3D, 3rd person perspectives game on a handheld after the success of Ocarina of Time 3D. However we will see plenty more of these so called "3D" games to come, in fact it's a given in my opinion. I think it's a nice shock that Zelda is retuning to its roots, just because it's retuning to a top down perspective it doesn't mean it will be a bad game, of course it's nice to get that sense of realisim when playing a Zelda game from this 3rd person perspective but just look at titles like the Minish Cap and A Link to to the Past. These are highly rated and have some of the best overworlds within the franchise.

People are always complaining about the lack of challenge in Zelda games and that it should return to its roots, well here you have it... I'm hoping for a more puzzle based Zelda game that captures the sense of difficulty that the newer titles fail to do.

 

[Ventus]

So you'd rather take an old game with a minor upgrade as opposed to a whole new game just because it has a possibility to disappoint?

Precisely. But, be aware that this is my stance only to the Zelda series, due to the disappointment of Modern Zelda as a whole.

It doesn't matter if it's how the series started out or not. That was then, this is now. It's nice to go back to your roots every now and then, sure. But these days, the top-down view of 2D games is generally outdated. Mainly the people who grew up with it and have a nostalgia factor would buy it. The younger generation probably wouldn't be as interested. It's not a good idea as far as sales are concerned.

On what grounds can you say that top down games do not appeal to the younger generation? I've nothing for a counterargument, honestly, but from what I remember several people loved VVVVVV despite being a 2D game (2D games are seen as incredibly outdated in thsi age from what I recall), TONS of people bought LoZ, AoL and LADX off the eShop...and much more.

 

[Azure Sage]

I didn't mean to call you shallow, I'm sorry. It just seems like the qualities you are describing are not necessarily things that are important, but just happen to be appealing to you. I for one don't care what kind of environments we get. I play the hell out of games like A Link to the Past to this day because to me the way the levels are designed in a top down perspective is just as appealing as they way they are designed in a fleshed out full 3D world. And as for beauty, I can sort of agree that the retro perspective doesn't lend as well to making attractive environments, but that really is just about making a game in a different way, and some things are sacrificed in that process. If that was something that was important to you in games like Wind Waker or Skyward Sword, I can understand how turning away from that can feel like a downgrade. But not all gamers value that so highly. I personally like fleshed out worlds and striking visuals, especially in Zelda, but I don't deem them necessary by any means, and having a game shy away from that in favor of some old school puzzle design with new depth is totally fine with me. That's all I mean when I say it's just about what you like. It isn't shallow, it's just thinking based on what you value in a game. :/

You've got some good points there. But for me, I have to question why not make a fleshed-out world if we have the capability to do it and still make incredibly well-designed levels and dungeons at the same time. I'm sure that plenty of the dungeons in Zelda 3DS will be very good and enjoyable. But it would be more enjoyable to see it fleshed out in 3D, in a more immersible world.

I guess you're right when you say it comes down to values; for me, putting everything you've got into a game is extremely important. Every little thing should matter. And to me, not making the world fleshed out in 3D and immersible when you have the ability to do it isn't putting everything you've got into it. That's how I feel about it.

 

[Kirino]

I think a top-down view is nice and refreshing, especially since Zelda U is almost definitely going to use a back view.

 

[Deku-Jack]

Why are people so upset about the top-down style? That's where Zelda is at it's best in my opinion. I love the 3D games, but the 2D top-down ones are just as good and some of them are actually far superior to certain 3D Zeldas. Plus, what's the point in having a console-style 3D Zelda when its on a handheld? It may as well be on consoles if that's the case.

The point is most of you haven't even tried out the old 2D Zeldas, let alone beaten them. I didn't even grow up with them yet I love A Link to the Past to death after I playing it on the Virtual Console. Go and see Zelda's initial roots because that's what Zelda is. Ocarina of Time was not the first Zelda game, so stop acting like it was.

At this point in the industry, not seeing a three-dimensional world is a drawback. It makes it harder for players to get sucked into the game and appreciate the world, and people are generally turned off to it these days. I would imagine it wouldn't sell as well because of that. If you have the capabilities to make something beautiful and you don't, it's just wasteful.

New Super Mario Bros Wii Sales: 26.80m
New Super Mario Bros DS Sales: 29.12m

These both have sold far superior to any other 3D Mario game that has come out.

 

[CynicalSquid]

Top-Down vs Back View debate

Top-Down and Back View are both great in their own different ways. Even back view games can have difficulty to it.

I don't mind Top-Down but, I am biased toward the back view so that's why I was hoping for the Zelda 3DS game to be more like OoT 3D.

Just throwing that out there.