Should Nintendo Release Zelda Installments Annually?

[Spirit]

Zelda may as well be Nintendo's primary flagship title. Its anniversary saw a whole new game, a traveling orchestra and an encyclopedia, whereas Mario got a crappy re-release of a game that by today's standards is a bit naff...

Fans want more Zelda, fans buy Nintendo consoles just to play Zelda, Zelda always sets the world on fire when it comes out and we always want more. But the problem is, if you're looking at the gap between TP and SS for a home console outing, you could be waiting up to 5 years just for it to end in disappointment. 5 years is ridiculous to wait for the next game in a franchise to me when other games like Assassin's Creed can appear annually.

And just Like AC, Zelda doesn't change that much between installments, the same combat and movement systems are still in place with each game as are a lot of the items and a few locations sometimes, the main body of the game is always in tact, only the aesthetics change. So what keeps Nintendo from knocking out Zelda games annually or something close to it? We already know that nintendo don't give a damn about the story in Zelda so they cut a lot of time there whereas games like AC can tell a decent and coherent and non-linear narrative whereas Zelda has plot holes aplenty and mythos buggering contradictions...

So, if Nintendo were to release a Zelda game annually would you prefer it or do you want to spend the majority of your fan life waiting instead of playing?

 

[JuicieJ]

If the games ran on the exact same engines with the exact same art style, yeah, I wouldn't mind. It would take less time to do things. But the way things are, no. I'd rather suffer for a few years and play an absolutely great game than wait one year and play a decently good game.

 

[Ventus]

I'd much rather play a crappy-to-good Zelda game every year (yeah, that's a hefty sum for Zelda but hey, beggars can't be choosers) than wait X amount of years for a Zelda that is hit or miss. So if Nintendo could shell out a Zelda every year, that means we would no longer have to wait and build up hype. It means Nintendo could possibly prioritize better. It also means they could get more customers for the 3DS and that other thing...the Wii U.

All Nintendo needs to do is:
- Cut back on gameplay development. We don't care about HOW we play the game (give us button controls will ya?), we care about WHAT WE'RE PLAYING. Give us traditional controls because they're clearly the easiest to develop.
- Cut back on storyboarding if that even exists. Zelda's story quite frankly is bad. It isn't some great epic. The minimalist titles (LoZ, ALttP, OoT) and the two grand titles (MM, TWW) certainly served their purpose, but in the grand scheme of things, they're not great stories except within their own biosphere.
- Stick with one art style. When you have to develop new engines to run games because you want to try that new artistic flair, you're wasting time. Find something that works and stick with it. TP's art style with a bit of color, SS' art style with a bit of darkness, TWW's art style, OoT3D's...just find SOMETHING.

I know annual Zelda could work. It's just up to Nintendo to do good with it, as I hate waiting.

 

[Cfrock]

Maybe not annually but certainly more often. 18-24 months between games would do me well I think. But then even saying that the long gaps don't really bother me either because, besides Adventure of Link, I'm still yet to play a Zelda game I haven't loved. Sure it was 5 years between Twilight Princess and Skyward Sword but the gap was bridged (for better or worse) by Phantom Hourglass and Spirit Tracks and then Skyward Sword exceeded my expectations. Of course this is just my opinion and I can understand how that length of time would be horrid for someone, especially if they didn't like Skyward Sword but for me I have no issue.

What would worry me is the potential to over saturate. Everyone hates Call of Duty because it's out every year with little difference between games and Assassin's Creed Brotherhood and Revelations had nothing on Assassin's Creed 2 in my opinion because they didn't mix things up enough. More Zelda games is definately something I want but I'm not sure I'd want them with a similar level of frequency. Plus, if there was a new Zelda every year, I wouldn't have time to play other games

 

[PhantomTriforce]

Not every year, but every other year would be good enough. Sure, Nintendo can reuse many things, except maybe a plot. I would like a plot like TP's, but it new almost every game, because frankly, TP has the best Zelda plot so far. Controls don't matter much for me, just give me something that works. Whether it it button controls or Wii Motion + or Touch Screen. As with graphics, anything is really fine, bu preferably TP's graphics because I love that style. A lot of music can also be reused if the games will have overlapping themes and locations.

 

[DarkestLink]

- Cut back on gameplay development. We don't care about HOW we play the game (give us button controls will ya?), we care about WHAT WE'RE PLAYING. Give us traditional controls because they're clearly the easiest to develop.

That's not gonna happen. I don't mind if it does, but it won't. Very few people will have classic controllers wit the Wii U. They'll all have motion controls. And that's what Nintendos gonna work with.

- Cut back on storyboarding if that even exists. Zelda's story quite frankly is bad. It isn't some great epic. The minimalist titles (LoZ, ALttP, OoT) and the two grand titles (MM, TWW) certainly served their purpose, but in the grand scheme of things, they're not great stories except within their own biosphere.

Two problems.

1) You underestimate how much story sells.

2) Why bother cutting story? You're saving very little time and resources. Don't expect the game to come out so much as a week earlier.

- Stick with one art style. When you have to develop new engines to run games because you want to try that new artistic flair, you're wasting time.

Yes and no....graphics may not make a game, but they do sell a game. Was making the Wind Waker style a waste of time? Yes. It took time and it ended up biting them in the rear. They then spend time on TP's graphics, and then the game doubles the sales of the previous 3D title. Hardly a waste of time IMO.

Honestly, I'd just rather see Nintendo cut back on sidequests. At least the majority of them, which are unmemorable, boring game content. Maybe keep some of the major ones. Heck with about 90% of the sidequests gone, they could give us some more dungeons too with the extra time.

 

[Vaati101]

Well it is a good idea to give us something while we wait for the next Big title. I think Nintendo should work on small projects for Zelda as well as their main Project; Small projects like Majora's Mask 3D or something I don't know. My main point is Nintendo should do something to distract us from Zelda Wii U or Zelda 3DS to stop us from constantly nagging about information. Phantom Hourglass and Spirit Tracks did exactly just that, and it's something Nintendo should or will do between now and before Zelda Wii U/3DS are released.

 

[A Link In Time]

If Spirit Tracks is an indication of a rushed development period-only around a year-then I'd be alright with annual Zelda installments but I feel as though expedience should sometimes be sacrificed in favor of quality. Yes, Call of Duty is getting away with rehashing the same game since 2007 but it's easier to do so with an FPS than an Action-Adventure game. Given the divided nature of the Zelda fanbase, I'd rather not see more problems arise from churning out Zeldas more frequently. The first five installments are also the most acclaimed and coincidentally feature the longest gaps between release-compare five game released during the franchise's first 13 years to over 10 in the subsequent 14.

 

[Jimmu]

Mabye not every single year but the gap between games is quite large. A two-three year gap would be ok with me because it gives them more than just one year to make the game, if they spend more time on a game it can be longer and possibly (but not always) better than a game that hasn't got much time to be developed. They could always just get more people to work on the game though.

 

[RegalBryant]

Xyphon, of course Mario is owning the 3DS. It's all Nintendo makes for it. And Zelda sales are higher on average, because there aren't over 100 Zelda games.

I think that they should setup a round for finished Zelda games. Have multiple Zelda games working at once.
2013: Team 1 Zelda game
2014: Team 2 Zelda Game
2015: Team 3 Zelda Game
2016: Team 1 Zelda Game

And so on, and so on.

 

[bspurka]

If they released an annual Zelda game, they it would be exactly like the CoD franchise, they only do it for the money, it isn't about "the game" to them, when referring to Nintendo all they care about is "the game" and how you perceive it, it means a lot to them. So I say they should take their time while making a Zelda game, and make it good.

 

[Ventus]

1) You underestimate how much story sells.

2) Why bother cutting story? You're saving very little time and resources. Don't expect the game to come out so much as a week earlier.

Honestly, I'd just rather see Nintendo cut back on sidequests. At least the majority of them, which are unmemorable, boring game content. Maybe keep some of the major ones. Heck with about 90% of the sidequests gone, they could give us some more dungeons too with the extra time.

1) I guess I do, heh. But, let's face it: Zelda's story no matter what the game is never so compelling that it reaches the far corners of the gaming universe. Zelda's arguably best story--that of Skyward Sword--goes unnoticed whenever there is talk of the game or if it IS noticed, it's only for criticism for being flat and full of padding. Zelda's story doesn't sell all too well; it's the greater stories such as the archplot of Kingdom Hearts that gamers look for. People play Zelda for gameplay, not story. Nintendo has tried to step the story up with the latest entry, but people still don't care for Zelda's story at large. It's all in the gameplay, or rather, what we play in the game.

2) Now that I think about it, there's hardly any story to cut. I guess you can disregard the section of my original post that talks of story.

3) I totally agree; cutting back on sidequests [the minor ones] would decrease development time by a lot. There are a ton of glitches/bug you have to work out before you can even make sidequests function (I know this because I once made a game in GameMaker lol), but why go the twenty or so miles when you can just give us some dungeons?

Oh, you mean the 3DS that is already selling amazingly and the Wii U that you can barely pre-order anymore? Those aren't selling very well, huh?
Never knew.

If you peer closely at my post, you'll see that I neither hinted nor indicated that the 3DS and Wii U are selling poorly. All I said was pushing more Zelda out would mean more people buy the systems. Pushing out more Zelda to have more system sales and pushing out more Zelda to recover a system from an impending pit are two somewhat related but distinctly different things. Thus, you're attacking an aunt sally. In other words, this bit has absolutely no relevance to my post.

Sales of SS say otherwise. If by WE you mean you and other people like you, then sure. If by WE you mean every Zelda fan, then nope. Plenty of people love Skyward Sword's controls and it is great for new players.

I never said anything about disliking non-traditional controls. I said and I quote

Cut back on gameplay development. We don't care about HOW we play the game (give us button controls will ya?), we care about WHAT WE'RE PLAYING. Give us traditional controls because they're clearly the easiest to develop.

Where in the world did I say people dislike or like one or the other? I didn't say either, nor did I hint at such a thing. All I said was we don't care about how we play the game [in other words, stop trying to be different], we care about what we're playing [give us a game worth playing], and that traditional controls are easiest to develop. You're still attacking ye olde Aunt Sallies here. :/

I agree that this would speed it up quite a bit, but apparently Nintendo mentioned something along the lines of "We're going to keep an art style similar to SS". Looks like its had positive reception, surprisingly, and Nintendo likes it.

Sorry, but I need your source here. I don't recall Nintendo saying anything about keeping an art style similar to SS, not in the past year. :?

 

[feraldonkey]

I think that would actually make me bored of the series..

 

[green goron]

I'd rather them release it when it is ready. I don't want it to turn into CoD where they make new maps, some new guns and a new mode and call it a new game. I prefer waiting for them to make a brand new game with a great story and many new additions.

 

[KawiNinjaZX]

I wouldn't mind a sequel like Majora's Mask after every major console release, but I feel like the quality is a reflection of the long development time.