Twilight Princess "Twilight Princess is a Good Game, but It's Not a Good Zelda Game"

[Blu Ray]

Comprehension issues aside, an intended dark tone has worked before extremely well as in Majora's Mask, which received almost universal plans from fans for shaking up the formula. This was in no less fashion from more proactive villains such as the possessed Skull Kid to the malicious looking moon hanging over Termina and shortly bound to determine the land's fate. Zelda can be mature and do it very well.

I'd say this fits on the "Its only mature if you actually try to make it mature" thing. I play through the whole MM when I was a kid without even noticing Its "dark and tense" parts like OoT. Sure, the moon will fall and kill everybody, but isn't that the case for lots of other games final bosses? They wanna rule the world, or destroy it, etc.

Twilight Princess was crafted for its specific art style. I truly can not picture Zant, Midna, or Wolf Link in the Wind Waker's cartoonish graphics. Twilight Princess told a story of despair and the style was very intentional in that respect.

Well, I didn't put much thought into it. OoT and MM could easily have WW graphics, not really the case for TP though, SS graphics would be better but It doesn't fit the game as much as Its art style. Well, thats pretty much the thing that makes me not really see it as a good Zelda game.

 

[JuicieJ]

Skyrim isn't an HD game. Many things in Skyrim were dumbed down to cater to consoles, and apparently the PC version isn't much different.

Skyrim is most definitely an HD game. Otherwise the back of the casing wouldn't say it has 1080p, the highest quality HD available.

I'm a musician and I disagree, I personally don't care for atmospheric music at all and I often don't notice it. I also disagree that tunes from classic games don't set the tone for areas, every classic game I've played did a very good job of doing so.

Of course the classic ones did. I just personally find atmospheric music capable of doing it better. But to each his own. Music is one of the most opinionated things ever.

 

[Dr3W21]

I don't understand this statement. Twilight Princess was the PERFECT Zelda game to me (other than Skyward Sword... but I can't count that, I don't own/haven't played a lot of it yet).

 

[(◕‿◕✿)]

Skyrim is most definitely an HD game. Otherwise the back of the casing wouldn't say it has 1080p, the highest quality HD available.

First things first, HD doesn't automatically mean a game is going to look good. HD(High Definition) refers in general the resolution. 1080p being 1920x1080 pixels. Secondly, this is *not* the highest HD. There is also 1600p, often used on 30" monitors. That aside, Skyrim is not graphically very good at all by default. It was dumbed down extremely for consoles, which could not handle the larger textures (Skyrim by default uses generally 512x512 texture maps, whereas many mods for the PC version include 4096x4096, or eight times the original resolution.) Furthermore, many things were changed to accomodate for consoles, such as lower specularity, low view distances, lack of SSAO (although this has been added in the PC version via newer drivers/hacks), the list goes on. The important point, however, is that HD *does not* automatically mean high visual fidelity.

That goes for any game with realistic textures, even HD ones. Anything up-close in a video game looks unimpressive. This happened many times when I played through The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim, sometimes to the point where things up-close looked like N64 grahpics. These were corners of the game that were unable to be explored and didn't have much time spent on them, mind you, but even the things that looked breathtaking from a distance looked kinda "meh" up-close. So, in all honesty, I don't think that's a very legitimate complaint.

Again, that depends. Many PC titles have much much higher quality graphics. For example, many games make use of Normal Mapping and bump mapping for extra detail. These two alone can add considerable amounts of detail to otherwise dull textures. In Crysis, many things were vastly improved with Normal Mapping, even though the textures weren't very high res. This saves resources and time, and has a nice visual effect. Bump mapping can add a lot of depth if properly applied, such as cement details, etc. There is also steep parallax mapping, which can create effects such as realistic bricks and so on. Don't base everything off of console graphics.

 

[JuicieJ]

The important point, however, is that HD *does not* automatically mean high visual fidelity.

Actually, it kinda does. HD stands for "high definition", which I'm sure you know. It's kinda self-explanatory. Now, Skyrim's graphics definitely aren't the best in the HD realm, but they're not bad, either.

Don't base everything off of console graphics.

I'm...not. All I'm saying is that any video game when viewed up-close is not going to look very impressive.

 

[(◕‿◕✿)]

Actually, it kinda does. HD stands for "high definition", which I'm sure you know. It's kinda self-explanatory. Now, Skyrim's graphics definitely aren't the best in the HD realm, but they're not bad, either.

I know that. I was referring to overall visual fidelity. The screen definition is largely irrelevant, it only plays one part in the graphics. You ignored everything I said.

I'm...not. All I'm saying is that any video game when viewed up-close is not going to look very impressive.

That depends, some games are very detailed close up. Many PC titles have detail textures and such that are not blurry at all close up.

 

[Hanyou]

I'm...not. All I'm saying is that any video game when viewed up-close is not going to look very impressive.

Having spent several hours on Portal 2, I can tell you that's certainly not the case on a computer built to handle its best. Yes, they can blur a bit, but it's not that bad.

I think the problem is that there were games on the GC with fantastic textures--see Mario Sunshine, Pikmin 2, Starfox Adventures--that just didn't blur that much. Twilight Princess' textures are blurry from a distance, which is not a good thing. There's also a lack of decent visual contrast between the areas, which makes the whole visual style monotonous.

Visuals certainly aren't TP's strong point, though there are pockets of brilliance (particularly Faron Woods).

 

[JuicieJ]

I think the problem is that there were games on the GC with fantastic textures--see Mario Sunshine, Pikmin 2, Starfox Adventures--that just didn't blur that much. Twilight Princess' textures are blurry from a distance, which is not a good thing. There's also a lack of decent visual contrast between the areas, which makes the whole visual style monotonous.

Visuals certainly aren't TP's strong point, though there are pockets of brilliance (particularly Faron Woods).

The graphics aren't exactly a high for the game, yes, but they're not bad, either.

 

[Hanyou]

The graphics aren't exactly a high for the game, yes, but they're not bad, either.

The graphics might not be, but the visual style arguably is

It seems as though Nintendo did not understand the limits of their own consoles when making the game, but more fundamentally, it's visually generic in the extreme. This is probably a consequence of them trying to appeal so heavily to Western tastes.

 

[TF/HH]

People call TP a good game but not a good Zelda game because it stuck with the bare minimum. Sure, it was an extremely long game, but it had little to no side quests, no easter eggs and very few extras. I personally have not problem with Twilight Princess as it is my third favorite Zelda game, and the graphics are superb, I guess some people just think it lacks.

 

[A Link In Time]

I believe Twilight Princess is a great Zelda game as well as game in general. The only major problem perceived with this title is introducing characters at the beginning who later play so trifling a role in the story. Unfortunately, the same problem reoccurs in Skyward Sword and no one seems to have a problem with that. In general, I thus perceive most Zelda fans to be horrible hypocrites who pick apart one game for its flaws and give leeway for a later game repeating the same mistakes!

 

[MW7]

I believe Twilight Princess is a great Zelda game as well as game in general. The only major problem perceived with this title is introducing characters at the beginning who later play so trifling a role in the story. Unfortunately, the same problem reoccurs in Skyward Sword and no one seems to have a problem with that. In general, I thus perceive most Zelda fans to be horrible hypocrites who pick apart one game for its flaws and give leeway for a later game repeating the same mistakes!

I wouldn't claim to not be a hypocrite in some respects for holding my opinions, but I'm pretty much the opposite of what you just described. I tend to forgive flaws in earlier games, and then demand for the later games to be crucified for repeating the same mistakes and in some cases making them worse. For example Ocarina of Time had flaws, but future Zeldas continued them. An example would be how some people complained about Navi being annoying, and then Nintendo took that criticism and decided to expand the helper role further and further in future installments. This wouldn't be a problem at all (since helpers do help beginners tremendously) if they would have given veterans of the series an option to not get any advice from the helpers unless they ask for it.

So for this reason I think Nintendo needs to learn common sense, and actually listen to fans a little more and stop thinking that we don't know what we want. Twilight Princess and Skyward Sword were great games, but they both repeated mistakes of the past and that's just inexcusable. Innovation is good, but refinement is good in some cases as well.

 

[Ventus]

I haven't read any posts so please forgive me if what I'm saying is a somewhat copypasta of what someone else said, BUT:

- "TP is a good game but not a good Zelda game" to me means exactly what it says.
In my eyes, there are two types of games: Zelda Games and Video Games. Zelda Games have an exceptional amount of quality in them (e.g Ocarina of Time, Majora's Mask) and Video Games have a not so exceptional amount of quality in them (e.g Punch Out). To become a Zelda Game, the game must first break the barrier of Video Game [so, for example, OoT is a Zelda Game because it surpasses the standards for Video Game and must go somewhere else and what other place is there aside from Zelda Game?].

Twilight Princess meets the needs for a decent Video Game, but doesn't even come close to Zelda Game. TP is awful Zelda game imo.

 

[JuicieJ]

I haven't read any posts so please forgive me if what I'm saying is a somewhat copypasta of what someone else said, BUT:

- "TP is a good game but not a good Zelda game" to me means exactly what it says.
In my eyes, there are two types of games: Zelda Games and Video Games. Zelda Games have an exceptional amount of quality in them (e.g Ocarina of Time, Majora's Mask) and Video Games have a not so exceptional amount of quality in them (e.g Punch Out). To become a Zelda Game, the game must first break the barrier of Video Game [so, for example, OoT is a Zelda Game because it surpasses the standards for Video Game and must go somewhere else and what other place is there aside from Zelda Game?].

Twilight Princess meets the needs for a decent Video Game, but doesn't even come close to Zelda Game. TP is awful Zelda game imo.

That's an interesting way to look at it, but it's definitely not how I view it. A Zelda game to me is a game that has Zelda in the title (excluding the CD-i's) and uses the core values along with original ideas to create a tremendous adventure experience. (Seriously, that's it. Same with any other game series.) I also don't view video games as what you said. It's kind of odd to label that term as a game that's just average and a game that breaks the barrier of a video game as a Zelda game. With that kind of logic, all great games are Zelda games and all average ones are just video games. I know that's not what you meant, but...it just seems a bit inaccurate to think of gaming that way to me.

 

[Wolf Sage]

It makes perfect sense, in my opinion. To some, it fails or falls below the expectations of what most fans have come to want in a Zelda game, but overall it is a great video game. It's as simple as that. Perhaps someone said this already. lol I didn't read the other posts...