Do you prefer direct sequels or stand alone games?

[mαrkαsscoρ]

There's been a good amount of direct sequels in the series, Zelda 2, Majora's Mask, so on so forth. But of course most games in the series are the stand alone ones, the typical Link to the Past, Ocarina of Time, Wind Waker, yada yada. So the question is, do you prefer it when we get direct sequels to the previous games, or do you like it more when the next Zelda game is its own stand alone game.

Heck for instance, do you like that the next Zelda game is Botw 2, or you would rather this upcoming Zelda have been another brand new story w/ a different Link?

 

[Spirit]

Even thirty years into the franchise the concept of a Direct sequel is weird.

Direct sequels don't usually happen on the same console, they dont usually have the same world or villain or Link.

I love The Wind Waker to death but I hate Phantom Hourglass with a burning passion. So there's no guarantee that a Direct sequel will be anything like the original.

But then you have theike of A Link Between Worlds, which isn't a direct sequel but it more like ALTTP than the sequel to that actual game that all had the same Link (LA/OoX)

So... BotW2 is weird that it is the same console, seemingly same world with same Link and probably most of the same mechanics.

I personally wanted to see an entirely new Zelda for the next game to see what Aonuma did outside of BotW. But I'm also fine with BotW2 being a thing since the original was a good game and the sequel is possibly going to be the most direct sequel we've ever had.

 

[mαrkαsscoρ]

But then you have theike of A Link Between Worlds, which isn't a direct sequel but it more like ALTTP than the sequel to that actual game that all had the same Link (LA/OoX)

it can be a bit fuzzy when you think about it, in the same way how wind waker and twilight princess are technically sequels to ocarina of time, but of course it has a different link and such
so I'm setting it up as it's a direct sequel if it has the same link, spirit tracks might be hazy b/c it literally has WW/PH characters and tie ins

 

[Quin]

Zelda 2 and MM are on the same console. I don't find it weird at all.
I'm fine either way as long as the game is good.

 

[Castle]

It's hard to even count some Zelda titles as Zelda titles in the first place. Wind Waker had to pull so much baloney out of its arse to make the excuse that it belongs in Zelda's established series. Suckward tries so hard and fails to make the excuse that it's a prequel that has bug-all to do with anything. And BotW is basically a completely stand alone/blank start that has little to no relation to the rest of the series at all.

From Zelda I to Majora the series' natural progression can be clearly charted. ALttP might easily be considered a hard reset of the series since Zelda and Zelda II but it doesn't stand in such stark contrast to the rest of the series like more recent entries have.

My point is that to have a series, every entry has to relate to each other in some way. Direct sequel or not, the Zelda series has a lot of entries that just don't compare to the entries in the series that clearly fit.

Right now Zelda series fans are used to whiplash every time a new Zelda game comes out. We can expect each new entry to bear little relation or resemblance to the last game. The series lost its cohesion a long time ago (with wind waker).

So I would prefer direct sequels or at least games that fit within the canon.

All that having been said, there is a strong case to be made for direct sequels that have yet to happen. I for one am certain that the Hero of Time's story isn't over.

 

[MapelSerup]

Sequels are some of my favorites and some of my least favorites. As long as the game doesn’t rely completely on the last one (can be played on its own), it’ll probably be pretty good. You never know, though. Like someone said, PH wasn’t that great.

 

[Quin]

Right now Zelda series fans are used to whiplash every time a new Zelda game comes out. We can expect each new entry to bear little relation or resemblance to the last game. The series lost its cohesion a long time ago (with wind waker).

With wind waker? While Majoras Mask exists? Sometimes I wonder if we even played the same Zelda series

 

[Farore's Chosen]

I don't really mind either way.

 

[thePlinko]

With wind waker? While Majoras Mask exists? Sometimes I wonder if we even played the same Zelda series

Especially considering Windwaker fits the Zelda canon arguably more than any other entry, especially in relation to OoT.

As for whether or not I like sequels.... it really depends. In order for a sequel to be a good sequel the previous game needs to set up the concept for the sequel. This is why WW is far better as a sequel than MM. At the end of OoT ganon promises to exterminate the descendants of the sages and Zelda, clearly setting up for a sequel. Windwaker flows perfectly from that setup into the game. Majoras mask just kinda said “oh yeah link just kinda went off and did everything Zelda didn’t want him to do at the end of OoT.” The child timeline always existed, but it was never really set up as something that was going to be extended upon. This is why TP is better as a sequel to MM than to OoT.

Speaking of TP, I feel like a sequel to it wouldn’t be the worst thing in the world, but only if it’s focused on the hero’s shade and building upon the hero of time narrative. It was one of the biggest redeeming qualities of the otherwise crapfest that was TP and Nintendo just refused to capitalize on it.

As for the other sequels.... eh. LBW has literally no reason to exist canonically and makes no sense as a sequel. LA, while a masterpiece in its own right, doesn’t quite make it clear that it’s a sequel to LttP. The oracle games are kind of in the same boat as LA, minus the masterpiece part. PH is a weird case. WW had the potential for an amazing sequel and what we got was something that didn’t expand upon its predecessor at all. It was a good game, just not the sequel WW deserved. ST on the other hand absolutely fit the bill. It was the perfect sequel story wise, it expanded upon both of its predecessors in a way that merged the two together, even though not a single one of them shared the same villain. It ended out the Windwaker saga, as I like to call it, in a way that’s satisfying, yet still allowing for expansion later on if need be.

So whether or not I like sequels really depends on if the previous game set up for one. That’s one of the reasons why I’m not too excited for BotW2 and would much rather like a sequel to TP or a prequel to ST.

 

[PokaLink]

Most of my favorite games are the first with their style/Link (OoT, WW), so I'm inclined to say stand alone. Just feels more entertaining to start off with a brand new Link, style, story, mechanics, etc.

Like despite the fact BotW II very well might be way better than BotW as it fleshes out the open world mechanic, it's still kind of boring that everything looks the same and we still have the same Link and Zelda. Even getting a new back story for a new Link and Zelda would freshen it up a bit.

Plenty of sequel game are great though, just don't have the same sense of wonder as starting fresh. An example of this being BotW. Watched the trailer so many fricking times because of how hype it looked visually, and it was super fun getting used to all the new mechanics.