TimeLag said:
Yeah, I really don't want to waste my time debating with a fanboy
Good, then you can debate with me. I'll just clear some things up. If the next Zelda game is a FPS or something, I'm not going to go in looking for positive points and go on shouting them out to the world. Rather, I'd bash Nintendo for ruining a tried and true method. I'm open-minded to any game, and own every single major Mario, Final Fantasy, Sonic, etc. games out there. Not that I have time to play them anymore. BTW, that doesn't make me a die-hard fan of any of them (except for perhaps Sonic...I've got a major bias there...)
TimeLag said:
Um ok, you have absolutely no knowledge of the Mario series whatsoever. I guess that's what to expect from someone who only looks toward Zelda when it comes to Nintendo (AKA. Hardcore Fanboy). Well with the Mario series, we first get a Plumber who walks on a Brick road jumping on everything, going to the 1-2 underground encountering new enemies etc then rescue the Princess, Mario 2 has you in a dream setting encountering completely new monsters and even the Princess is fighting with new and the goal is not to stop Bowser, but to stop Wart, In Mario 3 you have a world map and kill even more new things and the 7 koopalings. Then the list goes on and on of new things with Mario, from Mario going on Vacation to Mario going to Space. Holy hell Mario has been on one wild ride accomplishing different things. Too bad Link can only do *slightly* different things.
That's the funniest thing I've ever heard. You're under the impression that you're aware of the Mario series. Well then, I'm sure you know that Mario 2 isn't a real Mario game, in that there was a Japanese game called Doki Doki Panic that was later remade with Mario characters when released to the western world becuase the original Mario 2 was supposed to be too hard and similar to the original, and Doki Doki Panic would get very poor sales in the West by itself. If you still argue that it is still a Mario game, note that you can then do that to any franchise. Simply replace all the main charaters within a struggling game with prime Nintendo characters and give it the seal "Super Mario!" or "Metroid" and release it to the west to fatten your wallet.
And regardless, Mario 3 is exactly the same thing as Mario 1 except that there is less linearity and the koopa bosses look different until you battle the big dog (turtle) himself. And then in Super Mario World it's the same old thing except that you get a little dinosaur aiding you with negligible powers that vary to this time kill Bowser's children first before him himself.
Whatever. You need to save the stupid princess and beat King Koopa no matter how you look at it. Now, with Mario Galaxy, we start to see something new. But that's the ONLY exception. Too bad Zelda doesn't have any ONLY exceptions as I'm about to demonstrate:
In Zelda, you save the Princess, or the entire parallel dimension you find yourself in, or the world from drowning, or you just want to go home.
In Ocarina of Time, you were supposed to get the Triforce first before Ganondorf, but when you failed, you were supposed to seal him away and prevent him from getting the splintered Triforce pieces in order to rule the world. In Majora's Mask, you're looking for Navi, but find yourself in another dimension that's about to be crushed by the moon by a lonely old friend of yours that got mind controlled by an ancient mask. How many games have you played like
that? And then in Wind Waker, you're eventaully pulled into a quest to research history in order to reseal an evil power made manifest in the released ganon. And then, in Twilight Princess, you are forced by a Princess from another dimension to recover her throne, especially after your own princess sacrifices her life to help the first. Ganon appears, but he was originally not supposed to. Zant was the final boss until Nintendo realized that they had an extra year or something to work on the game because of the Wii.
chrisbg99 said:
I always love the "It's my opinion" line. As if it that makes it invulnerable to debate.
The very fact that you put your opinion out there automatically puts it up for argument, deconstruction and rebuke. If you are unwilling (or unable) to defend your opinion then don't put it out there.
Or, perhaps, some people keep the discussion open to debate by stating that they themselves understand that what they've posted is simply an opinion and not the truth, and welcome intelligent opposition. I wonder why you've bothered to post anything if you're not going to contribute to the debate. I wonder if you're trying to gain brownie points or something. Really, it's quite perplexing.
I find it rather insulting that you second guess my motives rather poorly. Perhaps we can start over and I won't have a negative opinion of you?
Hello, my name is Ace_Strife. I do not seek fights with people that do not insult me. I am actually quite a friendly person, but will not tolerate jabs at my intelligence. I hope that is quite understandable.