• 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.

Which Zelda Game Would You Erase?

JuicieJ

SHOW ME YA MOVES!
Joined
Jan 10, 2011
Location
On the midnight Spirit Train going anywhere
I agree with you but only to an extent. Skyward Sword was revolutionary in its use of motion controls and blending its dungeons with overworld. The overworld, however, was too linear and a departure from the world you were thrust into in the NES original-one without guidance or directions. Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask also progressed on the basis of multiply pathways through the dungeon and overworld. This is the direction the series needs to focus more on. Let's ditch the ornery controls and focus on what matters most-exploration.

The idea that Zelda is based off of exploration is absurd. That's only a small part of it. It's about the adventure in general. Going from dungeon to dungeon, solving puzzles, fighting baddies and bosses, and (usually) saving Zelda. Too many fans fail to realize this, and it hinders their view in the process.

Also, being put into a world without guidance is pretty lame. Some people can't maneuver around an overworld without an in-game map (I'm looking at you, LoZ) and/or being pointed in a general direction. There's nothing wrong with a little guidance -- just as long as the guidance doesn't stretch throughout the entire game (which ST and SS broke away from).
 
The idea that Zelda is based off of exploration is absurd. That's only a small part of it. It's about the adventure in general. Going from dungeon to dungeon, solving puzzles, fighting baddies and bosses, and (usually) saving Zelda. Too many fans fail to realize this, and it hinders their view in the process.

Also, being put into a world without guidance is pretty lame. Some people can't maneuver around an overworld without an in-game map (I'm looking at you, LoZ) and/or being pointed in a general direction. There's nothing wrong with a little guidance -- just as long as the guidance doesn't stretch throughout the entire game (which ST and SS broke away from).

I agree with you to an extent. Both the dungeons and overworld should be about exploration. The Water Temple in Ocarina of Time phenomenally showcased this to be true. No matter how many times I traverse the dungeon, there is always a new path I can take to make things quicker and more interesting. I feel like that aspect was missing in more recent titles.

markasscop said:
they're all great,but pretty irrelevant storywise

Nintendo's overarching philosophy has always been gameplay over story.
 

JuicieJ

SHOW ME YA MOVES!
Joined
Jan 10, 2011
Location
On the midnight Spirit Train going anywhere
I agree with you to an extent. Both the dungeons and overworld should be about exploration. The Water Temple in Ocarina of Time phenomenally showcased this to be true. No matter how many times I traverse the dungeon, there is always a new path I can take to make things quicker and more interesting. I feel like that aspect was missing in more recent titles.

Yeah, but in the spirit of what SS was trying to capture, I think what was done with the overworld was the right choice.
 
Joined
May 13, 2012
Skyward Sword. What exactly did it add to the series besides the "revolutionary" motion controls? No Gannon, technology that just disappears later, and what else? Those of you who say, "SS added a city in the sky, you f@#*ing idiot!", Twilight Princess did it six years before.
 
Joined
Jun 19, 2011
Location
Utah
Both Link's Awakening and Majora's Mask maybe sidequests, however, they contribute to the story and overarching timeline in their own unique manner. Above all, both games put more emphasis on seemingly minor characters. Majora's Mask especially featured a darker story ans I interpret is an an allegory for the corrupting influence of society. It was this development that made both titles memorable to me. Sorry if this post is a bit illiterate but I'm watching the stream.

But does Princess Zelda have any part in those games? No, which was my point and why I would erase those games. I didn't mention that side quests be erased did I?
 

HyruleLove

Twilight Princess
Joined
May 9, 2011
Location
Puerto Rico
Phantom Hourglass s . I just finished it, and it has to be my least favorite game of the franchise. The sailing was obnxious, and Jolene was even more annoying!
 

Beauts

Rock and roll will never die
Joined
Jun 15, 2012
Location
London, United Kingdom
I would erase Minish Cap. Sorry, I know a lot of people love this game, but I despise all of the handheld games on a gameplay level and I didn't think MC's story was that good.
 
Joined
Nov 14, 2011
Location
Portugal
Sakurai: *laughs*


It was listed that way because I played SS with the hype in mind. Then I realized what I WAS playing was a piece of almost no good. Same way with Twilight Princess; first play I was playing iwth the love of the graphics, then I realized that the game just sucks in comparison to other Zeldas. *shrug*
Twilight Princess was a OoT clone and it failed quite epically, being the most bland Zelda title directly made by Nintendo. It's story reeks of a false epic sense of scope. It tried too hard to be moody and epic, eliminating its sublety which was captured by other titles such as Wind Waker and Majora's Mask (and arguably Ocarina of Time). Skyward Sword....doesn't share these problems. It is a game that revolutionized the series for the better after the repetitive disaster that was Twilight Princess. It's story is moving, the characters feel real. Link and Zelda have never been so expressive before and in some moments, you get moved along with the characters. It's gameplay broke the template that was OoT somewhat, and the series NEEDED that. OoT is a very good game, but it has been surpassed by every title that came after it. (barring the DS titles and Twilight Princess). OoT deserves respect, but the series needs to move on and Skyward Sword did just that, pushing the Zelda series into what can be a brighter future.
Also, how can Skyward Sword ruin your images of Link and Zelda? SS's Link and Zelda have never appeared in any other game. ;)

Skyward Sword. What exactly did it add to the series besides the "revolutionary" motion controls? No Gannon, technology that just disappears later, and what else? Those of you who say, "SS added a city in the sky, you f@#*ing idiot!", Twilight Princess did it six years before.
Ganon does appear in the game, he's Demise. Have you never played through the game?
 

Random Person

Just Some Random Person
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Location
Wig-Or-Log
I've only played nine of the games, so my opinion might not be the best. It used to be that I didn't want any Zelda game erased. Even though I make a big stink about AoL, I still have nostalgia feelings about it (even though I played it more recently than most) and it was a clear sequel so I couldn't really complain story-wise. Even with AoL, there was never a game I felt so bad about that I wanted it erased... until SS. The more I observe, play and talk about SS, the more I come to dislike it. Not a bad game in itself, perhaps not even a bad Zelda game (debatable) just a bad addition to the Zelda series. The game came out at the wrong time in the wrong place in the timeline. Playing it, I didn't feel like I was playing a Zelda game, I felt like I was playing a generic adventure game that had a couple of Zelda components. I loved the new controls, the new items, Groose, collecting bugs and junk and a couple of other things, but there were too many things that I Personally didn't like and too many things that just weren't good in general for me to see this game in a positive light. My biggest concern is the story and how it jumps out of the Zelda feel we already had going on. With TP showing obvious signs that it was a continuation of the OoT story, SS's multiple differences to the land of Hyrule and its history was like eating something really sour after eating a lot of things that are deliciously sweet. It was too different at the wrong time. I know we Zelda fans get a rep for saying "It's different! RAGE!" but I don't mind different, as long as its done the right way. ST was in a new land, with new concepts and a new history for said land and it felt more Zelda than SS did with its story.
As I've said many times before, the worst part is that SS was a prequel to the Zelda series and in any entertainment a prequel's job is to act upon the story that created it, which SS barely did. The story was more individual base than explanatory and the things that were explanatory I felt Personally did a poor job.

People defend its flaws, or rather things I believe are flaws, but I've yet to see an argument about any of them that truly convinced me I was wrong. (With the exception of one I had with Axle but that was about story details).

All in all, I would like to have SS erased and give the Zelda series the proper beginning a Legend this big deserves. One that explains much more about the series, in much more detail rather than going on its own path and using the explanations as filler to its own story.
 
Joined
Apr 27, 2012
The WW has got to go.

Not only was it the end of the classic zelda games, but it was far to easy. I also hated the graphics. It seemed weird to me that it was so childish. I also hated sailing not only was it time consuming and hard but it was boring.
 
Joined
Apr 7, 2012
Location
Death Mountain
Probably Adventure of Link. I don't think it is bad but it is the dark horse of the series and a game that means very little to the series' development.
The other game I would say is Link's Awakening. I don't think it is bad either, but I mean no one ever seems to talk about this game and I don't remember anyone ever telling me that Link's Awakening was their favorite Zelda game.
 

Azure Sage

March onward forever...
Staff member
ZD Legend
Comm. Coordinator
The WW has got to go.

Not only was it the end of the classic zelda games, but it was far to easy. I also hated the graphics. It seemed weird to me that it was so childish. I also hated sailing not only was it time consuming and hard but it was boring.

NO! I love the Wind Waker. :kawaii: Well, to each his own, I guess.

Personally, I would erase Twilight Princess. It's my least favorite Zelda game and in my opinion, the weakest. It was by far the easiest Zelda game I have ever played, and it was filled with boring and bland graphics, poor challenges, a ridiculously easy final boss, and not to mention a treasure trove of unlikable characters.

Speaking of unlikable characters, Midna is at the top of that list. I really don't like her. I don't care how much she's changed at the end of the game, it doesn't excuse the fact that she made Link into her personal slave and manipulated him into doing whatever she wanted by using his feelings for his friends. And speaking of Link's friends, they were all basically utterly useless. Especially Beth. The only use they had was to the story, which I didn't even really like that much.

Speaking of the story, Nintendo made a poor choice with introducing Ganondorf. Really? You're going to wait until the middle of the game to tell us about him, and use him to completely ruin Zant's character? That really upset me.

... I think I've ranted enough. In conclusion, I think Twilight Princess really needs to be given the boot.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom