General Zelda What's the Best Zelda Game to Suggest to a Newcomer?

[DarkestLink]

Popularity isn't an issue...it's about finding the most "Zelda-ish" game. SS's issue isn't its popularity...it's issue is how different it is. SS isn't what to expect from the rest of the series. If you play a game like OoT, though, you have a pretty good idea what the series is.

 

[CynicalSquid]

Games that aren't well-liked don't receive laud and multiple awards from the gaming community.

The main controversy surrounding SS is also undoubtedly the motion controls, which is really, really stupid, so the main reason why this game would even be "[not] well-liked" in the first place is a flawed one. There are other points of criticism, some with which I agree with, some with which I don't, but they're nowhere near as sung as the Wii MotionPlus's "inaccuracy and unresponsiveness.

Most of the hate I see SS get isn't about the controls. From what I see, it was about how linear and different it was. I've seen gameplay of SS, and nothing I saw said "Zelda" to me. I can't wrap my head around, but it just different. I feel the same way about MM. Whenever I see footage of it or play it I don't think it's a Zelda game. I'm not saying it's bad. I'm just saying that someone should start with a balanced game like OoT, because it shows what you basically should expect from Zelda.

You should also know more than well by now that every new Zelda game has a large wave of hatred pour on it, even if the wave of praise is larger, and talk of hate is always brought up much easier than that of praise. I mean, come on, even MM was extremely hated by most fans that actually played it upon release. In addition, TP an even more divisive Zelda game than SS when it came out. Same with the DS games.

I am perfectly aware of that. I wasn't even trying to make it seem like popularity mattered, because it doesn't. Everyone has different opinions. I didn't think a small detail I blindly put there with little or no though behind it would get analyzed. It's more about what represents the series well, not popularity. My apologies.

Irrelevant. I merely (quite heavily) summarized my thoughts on the games in order to give further context to the previous sentence.

How is that irrelevant? I was just pointing out that not everyone has the same opinion on what title can be considered elite. You may think they aren't elite, but others might.

Ergo why I said "in the sense that...".

Okay... ?

 

[Turo602]

LOL! Skyward Sword is no "Big Five." The number of awards and amount of critical acclaim a game receives are irrelevant. That doesn't make a game good or bad. There are a number of bad games that receive endless praise just as there are good games that receive none. Now I'm not saying Skyward Sword is a bad game, I love it. I think it's one of the better games of this generation. As a Zelda game though... it does have not so much flaws, but differences that do not go unnoticed. It doesn't feel like the standard Zelda game. Don't get me wrong, Skyward Sword did lots of things that I would love the series to expand upon, but it all feels too simplified. The world at least. It became too confined.

 

[JuicieJ]

The number of awards and amount of critical acclaim a game receives are irrelevant. That doesn't make a game good or bad. There are a number of bad games that receive endless praise just as there are good games that receive none.

And I never said it did. I'm honestly surprised you think that's what I meant, because all I said was "Games that aren't well-liked don't receive laud and multiple awards from the gaming community."

Am I not right in saying that? Do we now live in a world where games that are well-liked receive mountains of hate and games that are disliked receive endless praise?

 

[Salem]

I would suggest something that's easy to get into, like the 2D classics, the way I see it, someone new to the series is less likely to tolerate long prologues than a veteran, so some of the modern ones are out of the question, on the other hand, something short and sweet is preferable, like WW, maybe alttp and OoT if they want something longer. I wouldn't recommend MM unless they play OoT first, it had the 3-day system, that might turn them of.

 

[mαrkαsscoρ]

in all honesty,i think link to the past & ocarina are a little too bland for me to suggest to newcomers,and majoras mask is too much so i don't know why people are suggesting this
i think the gamecube titles and i guess awakening are a good starting point since they maintain the formula,and have more a little more to their story other than 'ganon's trying take over the world' [well except wind waker i guess,but the visuals are really appealing]

I wouldn't recommend MM unless they play OoT first, it had the 3-day system, that might turn them of.

yeah its a little too much for newbies to handle,they should get used to the games [or at least ocarina] before going to majoras mask

 

[Salem]

in all honesty,i think link to the past & ocarina are a little too bland for me to suggest to newcomers,and majoras mask is too much so i don't know why people are suggesting this
i think the gamecube titles and i guess awakening are a good starting point since they maintain the formula,and have more a little more to their story other than 'ganon's trying take over the world' [well except wind waker i guess,but the visuals are really appealing]

It's gonna depend on the newbie in question if they care at all how bland the game or the storyline is.

 

[Turo602]

And I never said it did. I'm honestly surprised you think that's what I meant, because all I said was "Games that aren't well-liked don't receive laud and multiple awards from the gaming community."

Am I not right in saying that? Do we now live in a world where games that are well-liked receive mountains of hate and games that are disliked receive endless praise?

My point is that it's irrelevant to begin with. No one should even be talking about the popularity of a game. It just sounds like two kids trying to throw everything they got to make themselves appear right. Honestly, this "elite" talk sounds really stupid to me. Zelda games in general, are among the best in gaming. That's elite enough. Nothing puts SS over WW or OoT over TP. They're all great games and do things better or as well as each other. It's okay to have favorites, I do, but I'm not gonna bash another great game and make it any less of itself because I like one more. And if you're talking about difficulty, yeah, SS shouldn't be on that little list of yours. I didn't find anything about SS to be more challenging than TP or WW. Hell, I didn't even die once.

 

[JuicieJ]

My point is that it's irrelevant to begin with. No one should even be talking about the popularity of a game. It just sounds like two kids trying to throw everything they got to make themselves appear right.

Meh, the only reason I even discussed it (very briefly, mind you) was because of the comment about it not being "well-liked", so whatever. I agree with you that it doesn't matter, just... it was relevant to mention since it had already been brought up.

And if you're talking about difficulty, yeah, SS shouldn't be on that little list of yours. I didn't find anything about SS to be more challenging than TP or WW. Hell, I didn't even die once.

I didn't die, either, but I'm very well aware of the fact that I've been a Zelda fan for a very long time, and a gamer for much longer. Naturally I'm going to be much better than I was back when I was younger. Hell, even compared to how I was just a few years ago. Going back and playing TWW and TP, I can see they're significantly easier than SS, both in combat and puzzle-solving -- not to say that SS is a difficult game (unless you're doing a Hero Mode minimalist run), just that it's not insultingly easy like the GCN games.

 

[Turo602]

Meh, the only reason I even discussed it (very briefly, mind you) was because of the comment about it not being "well-liked", so whatever. I agree with you that it doesn't matter, just... it was relevant to mention since it had already been brought up.

Oh yeah, I know. I wasn't getting at you were wrong for saying it, just trying to get it out there.

I didn't die, either, but I'm very well aware of the fact that I've been a Zelda fan for a very long time, and a gamer for much longer. Naturally I'm going to be much better than I was back when I was younger. Hell, even compared to how I was just a few years ago. Going back and playing TWW and TP, I can see they're significantly easier than SS, both in combat and puzzle-solving -- not to say that SS is a difficult game (unless you're doing a Hero Mode minimalist run), just that it's not insultingly easy like the GCN games.

I think it was. Come to think of it, I don't really see Zelda games as hard, aside from some of the earlier ones. Even then, you say that now. Some games have a way of becoming easier over time. With that said, give Skyward Sword some time. Actually, scratch that, give yourself some time. Years from now, you're gonna be saying the same thing about SS that you do WW now.

 

[Random Person]

Quick sum up...

Depends on the Person. I used to believe in getting the most Zelda-ish game, which is a tie between ALttP and OoT, however I tried this on a couple of people and it made them never want to play the series again. Even though Zelda can be enjoyed by almost anyone, if you introduce the wrong aspect of it first, some will turn away from it. OoT would be the best for game analyzers (people who take games way too seriously... like us). TP would be the best for people who just like video games and don't care about lore or continuity or anything like that. For anyone else, I'm not sure. It's particularly hard to find something a casual gamer would like as Zelda games are not meant to be played casually. SS may have had some casual elements in it, but even it is pretty far from being called a casual game. The only thing one can do is observe their friend and find what they like most in a video game and what they don't.

 

[DarkestLink]

2D games? Eh...they don't represent the series as a whole to me...and I think they'd be too hard for newbies. Do not overestimate the modern gamer.

 

[Salem]

Wouldn't 2D games be a better start? Because 2D gaming is easier to get into in general.

 

[JuicieJ]

Actually, scratch that, give yourself some time. Years from now, you're gonna be saying the same thing about SS that you do WW now.

I doubt it. I already both praise and criticize it, and I've been very consistent with both sides.

Besides, if I were to say the same things about SS as I do TWW, I would basically be saying that only the overworld and dungeon designs are flawed and that everything else (besides difficulty) is golden. That's pretty far from what I have to say about SS, since it has lots of little flaws and lots of fine-tuned elements.

 

[CynicalSquid]

Wouldn't 2D games be a better start? Because 2D gaming is easier to get into in general.

They are? I really don't feel like they are. Especially with modern gamers because most of them look at a 2D game and say "That's stupid". Well, most modern gamer think Zelda is a baby game. Despite that, from what I've seen the modern mediocre gamer prefers 3D games because graphics and 3D games tend to be easier. I guess it just depends on the gamer you're recommending the series to. If they can appreciate 2D games, then I'd recommend ALttP. If they can't, I'd recommend OoT or TP.

Also, like DarkestLink said, 2D games don't really represent the series as a whole. I remember seeing so much backlash when ALBW was announced because of it's top down perspective. It seems like 2D is lost in the franchise. A 3D game represents the franchise better now. Other old franchises are like that too. If I were to recommend a Mario game to a newcomer to the franchise, I would recommend Super Mario 64.