• Welcome to ZD Forums! You must create an account and log in to see and participate in the Shoutbox chat on this main index page.

Have Recent Zeldas Disappointed You? Thats Your Fault

Joined
Feb 3, 2010
its your fault for putting high standards for a handheld zelda game.

it kind of seems clear by nintendo that they dont put as much as effort into handheld zeldas. it just doesnt seem like in their minds their thinking "right guys, this is the next zelda we HAVE to make this completely and utterly amazing that people will go on and on and on about for years"

i mean to me the handhelds are almost like a spinoff, just not much effort put in for most games, and id personally rather than make one okay game and one AMAZING game, than 2 good games.

point is, unless its a console zelda, dont put high standards for it, and if it is a console zelda, dont put ridiculously high standards that are impossible to match.

edit: apologies to anyone offended by this post, its jsut my opinion and wasnt my intention to give you a "HOW DARE YOU DISAGREE WITH ME!!!!" kind of post
 
Last edited:

Junehs

[the.Jumping.Bean] ~
Joined
Dec 15, 2009
Location
New Hamster!
I can see where you're coming from and how you view this matter, but any Zelda is worth discussing its matters. I enjoyed Wind Waker, yes, it had a change of graphics but it doesn't interrupt anything because people look down and not see what the amazing game includes. What about OoS & OoA? They're handheld, yes, but I personally found them to be a great game. Feel free to diss my opinion. XD
 

ChargewithSword

Zelda Dungeon's Critic
Joined
Jan 13, 2009
Location
I don't want to say.
What if people don't like the newest handheld Zeldas just because their not that good? Spirit Tracks is considered a repetitive game simply because people find it repetitive. We had already had our disappointment in Phantom Hourglass which has found it audience so our standards on Spirit Tracks were already lower.

However you are free to have whatever opinion you like of the new handhelds. Me and certain others don't like them while you and certain others do. It's what we call an opinion and you shouldn't slander other people's opinions. We're past the hype stage and some of us still don't care for them so what does that say? It says that people just don't care for the games.
 
Joined
Feb 23, 2010
Recent Zeldas (except ST and PH, those I built up in my head, before I got them, but I'm really enjoying them on my 3 heart file) have dissapointed me, because I played them as a kid, and loved them, but not that I'm older, they're not challenging, anymore. Don't assume we only get dissapointed by new Zeldas, by the way. I've been dissapointed by OoT for a long time.
 

Zeruda

Mother Hyrule
Joined
May 17, 2009
Location
on a crumbling throne
Dragmire, it's okay to have high standards for handheld Zelda games. Some of the greatest games of the series have been on the handhelds:

Link's Awakening/ Link's Awakening DX
Oracle of Ages
Oracle of Seasons
(you might even say The Minish Cap)

There is always effort put into handhelds. Even Phantom Hourglass and Spirit Tracks, though not the best Zelda games, were really, really worked on. Just because the final result didn't please everybody, it doesn't mean that they didn't put a lot of effort into them. In fact, they're really trying to make the timeline work, and they've been focusing on it with the handhelds recently. Not only that, but they've created new styles of gameplay with the new handhelds. That takes quite a bit of effort. Personally, I had high standards for the handhelds, and they really wowed me. I really like the DS Zelda games. Doesn't mean some parts don't annoy me. Still, I prefer them over games like TP. Likewise, many people don't care for the DS games and are in love with TP. Comes down to personal preferences.

You're entitled to your opinion of course, but it surely isn't the fault of the fans that they are disappointed. Each game will disappoint somebody. There is no Zelda game (or game period) that has pleased each and every fan, and there never will be such a game.

(also, you shouldn't target Charge, it's very rude)
 

Master Kokiri 9

The Dungeon Master
Joined
Aug 19, 2009
Location
My ship that sailed in the morning
Well, while in my opinion PH wasn't the greatest Zelda game (but still great), I actually had some high hopes for ST from everything I heard about it. There were parts that bugged me in both games, sure as heck (the rolling mechanism in ST annoyed me and I prefered the rolling in PH and the TotOK in PH bugged me a lot), but that doesn't mean I was disappointed.

Just because the general Zelda Fandom was disappointed with PH and ST doesn't mean that they didn't put a lot of effort into them. And just because they're handheld games doesn't mean they didn't put as much effort into them. Just look at OoA/OoS. While I haven't played either of them yet (I'm hoping to get them for my birthday! :D), I do know that they're pretty highly rated by most Zelda fans. Does that mean that they had really low expectations? No, it just means Nintendo and Capcom knew what they were doing. This is the same case with PH and ST, albeit they aren't as highly rated.

All in all, it comes down to opinions and it's not your fault whether or not you like a game.
 

Vanessa28

Angel of Darkness
Staff member
ZD Legend
Administrator
Joined
Jan 31, 2010
Location
Yahtzee, Supernatural
Gender
Angel of Darkness
I absolutely agree with both Zeruda and CWS. It is simply impossible to please or satisfy everybody. Even if all games were perfect there would still be people not liking it. I personally enjoyed the games so far (I only played PH and ST on a handhold console) and I loved it. Yes of course there were parts I would skip but besides that it is very well done. So far no Zelda game has really disappoint me and what if I would have been disappointed? Would I be a lesser gamer? And your latest message towards a certain member was not funny at all. So I hope you will edit it.
 

Austin

Austin
Joined
Feb 24, 2010
I disagree. Nintendo certainly has the ability to make a handheld game a great Zelda game. The evidence for this is that current handheld technology surpasses the technology of the NES and SNES, and some people's favorite games are on those platforms. And even if you consider them a "spinoff", that doesn't mean it's okay if it's a BAD game, just if it isn't amazing. I think most people aren't bothered that the new handheld games don't measure up to console games, but that they simply have several flaws.

Also, I'm not really okay with ganging up on people but I have an issue with your logic. Charge told you to respect other's opinions, and you have an issue that he doesn't respect your opinion about denying the opinions of others?
 
Joined
Feb 3, 2010
i just feel that after the oracle games (which i think sold badly) nintendo just gave up on putting as much effort on handheld games, phantom hourglass and spirit tracks are fantastic games...but filling the game up with 90% water/90% empty land just shows they dont care that much about trying to make their handhelds blockbusters, as just about every single console zelda game is and am sure the next zelda wii will be a blockbuster or a very strong attempt at being a blockbuster.

i mean remember the epic reveal for twilight princess? if not watch it here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXrsK8ICp8E

yeah see that? and remember how many times twilight princess was delayed. remember how a link to the past, remember how nintendo took a massive risk into making the wind waker cell-shaded and made 100% sure that the game stayed loyal to the franchise?

i just think they treat the handhelds as almost a spinoff nowadays and concentrate on getting console zeldas on the first page of gamerankings, as every console zelda is, with the exception of majoras mask
 

Vanessa28

Angel of Darkness
Staff member
ZD Legend
Administrator
Joined
Jan 31, 2010
Location
Yahtzee, Supernatural
Gender
Angel of Darkness
You forget it gets harder to continue a game without people calling it a "clone" of the former one. PH is supposed to happen after the WW so of course it was filled with water! You have to explore the seas, go treasure hunting and find froggs and kill enemies. I don't think that was bad at all. I don't agree with you about Nintendo. They have done a very good job to make it a good blockbuster and in my opinion they succeeded. I think some people are expecting way too much and forget the smallest details which makes it so special.
 
Joined
Feb 3, 2010
in the wind waker there were 49 squares, and at least one thing to do on each and every single square (more than 20 in windfall island alone) and i just felt you had more freedom, you could get off your boat, you could steer it. in phantom hourglass i just found it to be: draw a line, wait, tap the screen when u see a hurdle. and infact most of the time id get so bored id put my ds down and do something else, then get killed.

also in phantom hourglass there were extra islands here and there, but for some reason i just didnt have an incentive to check them out, wind waker gave me that incentive, phantom hourglass just didnt for some reason. and also think it was extremely lazy for them to make us do the same temple with an extra level added each time. but the game does redeem itself by having some great boss fights, great dungeons and just the good old zelda stuff.

to me, spirit tracks almost felt like it was given to us to keep us busy whilst were waiting for zelda wii (although spirit tracks far exceeded my expectations with its fantastic boss fights and dungeons)
but thats just me, some people hype the handhelds as much as the consoles, im not one of them :P
 

Jesper

I am baaacccckkkk
Joined
Jan 25, 2010
Location
Norway
They make those games for kids. The console games are for more grown people, that like graphics, more indepth story, and gameplay better. Smaller kids doesn't have standards. As long as it is fun. The more grown people play the handhelds because they either are hooked at Zelda, or for their entertainment. I can't see how people will get "disappointed" with Spirit Tracks, when it is made for 10-year olds :3
 

Vanessa28

Angel of Darkness
Staff member
ZD Legend
Administrator
Joined
Jan 31, 2010
Location
Yahtzee, Supernatural
Gender
Angel of Darkness
The thing I absolutely disliked about ST was the huge overworld which you had to cross by train. And this was boring. But both games had some great sidequests. I do like the handhold consoles but won't absolutely going to hype over them. I rather prefer the big screen and a normal controller than the stylus :lol: In PH you had the warp option but first you had to see the big frog before you would be able to warp. And in ST there is also the warp options. I haven't tried it out yet. I finished the game but never warped :|
 

NorthApple

GIVE ME THE APPLE!!
Joined
Jul 15, 2009
Location
UK :D
in the wind waker there were 49 squares, and at least one thing to do on each and every single square (more than 20 in windfall island alone) and i just felt you had more freedom, you could get off your boat, you could steer it. in phantom hourglass i just found it to be: draw a line, wait, tap the screen when u see a hurdle. and infact most of the time id get so bored id put my ds down and do something else, then get killed.

also in phantom hourglass there were extra islands here and there, but for some reason i just didnt have an incentive to check them out, wind waker gave me that incentive, phantom hourglass just didnt for some reason. and also think it was extremely lazy for them to make us do the same temple with an extra level added each time. but the game does redeem itself by having some great boss fights, great dungeons and just the good old zelda stuff.

to me, spirit tracks almost felt like it was given to us to keep us busy whilst were waiting for zelda wii (although spirit tracks far exceeded my expectations with its fantastic boss fights and dungeons)
but thats just me, some people hype the handhelds as much as the consoles, im not one of them :P

You forget that handhelds naturally have limitations, and so it was not physically possible for Nintendo to incorperate as many features into the handhelds as the console games. Hence the simplified sailing controls and the vast open space (to give the illusion that the worlds were a lot bigger than Nintendo could possibly make them). The temple of the ocean king is also an example of this- there probably wasn't enough cartridge space to program like, 10 seperate dungeons or something, so instead they combined them all into one huge one. And hey, they tried a new technique. So what if people thought it was boring/didn't work, at least they gave it a shot, and then even fixed it in ST.

So I'm sorry, but a lot of the evidence you give for Nintendo not putting as much effort into handhelds is actually the result of hardwear limitations- aka it's not Nintendo that are being lazy and reducing content, it's that they physically HAVE to simplify things in order to fit all they can into the game. Even so, by no means does it make the handheld games inferior... but I can respect your position on handheld games in general. I just wanted to point out that a lot of the examples you give are actually not caused by what you say they are at all.
 

Zeruda

Mother Hyrule
Joined
May 17, 2009
Location
on a crumbling throne
Both PH and ST disappointed me in some aspects, but so has every Zelda. But changes are made for a reason. With PH, character development was really, really worked on, and they continued to work on the humorous side of Zelda that they had emphasized in TWW. What was really cool was seeing how Link and Tetra had changed since TWW- Tetra softened up more towards Link and Link seemed a little more mischievous thanks to roaming around with pirates. Not only that, but they gave us Linebeck, who is possibly one of the greatest characters to ever grace the franchise.

With ST, I really disliked the train travel.. but now, after really thinking about it, I can see why it happened. Aside from the reasons they gave us in the developer interviews, it's also plain as day that the overworld was a bit barren (just like TP), so I'm kind of thankful that I didn't have to wander around in it. Still, I'd like to have been able to get off the train and move about in a detailed world. But, you know what? They really went oldschool on us and gave us a lot more puzzles. This really, really made me happy. Yeah, they were stupidly easy, but they were really fun, and the whole Phantom Zelda thing was a neat twist.

I disagree that the handhelds were "made for kids". The series as a whole (save for TP, obviously) is aimed at every age group. It isn't aimed at kids or teens or adults- it's aimed at everybody. The handhelds are no exception to this. And a lot of the time, when you hear "the general Zelda fandom", you're hearing wrong. For instance, a lot of people think the general Zelda fandom disliked TWW and loved TP. That's the case with the western fandom. The eastern fandom is just the opposite. You know that, in Japan, people complained that TP was too hard? Western gamers complained it was too easy. So, having easier games (like the DS titles) here and there will keep balance in the series-- some games will be easier, some will be more difficult. Nintendo can't please everybody, so in the meantime they have to try to work out the kinks when a new game is released.

Also, handhelds cannot put out the same that a console can. So, they focus on different aspects. I already listed some examples (like character development, different art styles, different control styles).

Handheld Zeldas are probably going to remain easier. After all, they are meant to be played on the go, unlike console games where, if you're playing it, you have time to sit down and actually focus. It doesn't mean, however, that consoles games are better than handhelds or vice versa. There are just different styles of gaming, and different styles will have different degrees of difficulty.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom