• 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.

General Zelda Would You Like To See More Direct Zelda Sequels?

Kudos to the TP 2 thread for imbuing me with the idea for this thread.

Most Zelda games are self-contained legends. There have been a few exceptions, however, including the two NES games, the two N64 titles, and the Toon Link trilogy.

Should Nintendo try its hand once more at a lengthier plot stretched across several installments or do you prefer games spaced farther apart on the timeline with allusions to past installments?

It's not something I overly care about; a change of pace is always appreciated but some gamers dislike having to buy multiple games to experience the entire story arc. This was a major complaint with the Oracle games and perhaps a reason Nintendo hasn't revisited the concept since.
 

Ventus

Mad haters lmao
Joined
May 26, 2010
Location
Akkala
Gender
Hylian Champion
Eh, I'd say that ST is relatively self-contained but that's just me...anyway, yes, I believe Nintendo should try to have more sets of one continuity; it is getting rather cumbersome to hear of Zelda XYZ that isn't remotely connected to Zelda ABC except by name and maybe a common figure (some legendary hero). This would be great for the writers over at Nintendo - they could finally craft a coherent tale after such a dearth - and it'd be great for the consumers since we'd be able to follow the games a bit easier.

I personally would like to see more direct sequels in the vein of Majora's Mask; where the first title is somewhat "normal", and the following titles are bizarre, flipping everything we understood about the previous game upside down. It's interesting and beautiful.
 

DekuPrincess

Are you serious?!?
Joined
Feb 6, 2013
Location
In a bottle
If sequels were executed as well as MM, and in a manner that provided as much new material as MM does (when compared to OoT), then yes, absolutely.
 

DarkestLink

Darkest of all Dark Links
Joined
Oct 28, 2012
Ehhh...I don't think they handle the sequels that well...but I wouldn't mind seeing one.
 

ihateghirahim

The Fierce Deity
Joined
Jan 16, 2013
Location
Inside the Moon
They better make them. Sequels like MM can add to an already amazing experience. The visual style and feel of OoT is the best in the series, and MM only extended the awesomeness of it.

It can allow us to get attached to one incarnation of the Hero. This makes that hero, and thus the original game all the more memorable and meaningful. OoT feels actually better when you can jump right into the dark mystery of MM.

It can help the timeline. Nintendo is now working with a official timeline. Direct sequels allow opportunity for expanded background information and character development. The history and features of Hyrule can grow deeper and more meaningful if a story expands on them.
 

Xinnamin

Mrs. Austin
Joined
Dec 6, 2009
Location
clustercereal
I'm going to assume we're talking about sequels strictly in the story sense? Because if so, I honestly don't feel like MM or any of the other games were really a direct story sequel. The only concrete story connection MM had to OoT is that it's the same Link, and the only implied story connections are that it's the same Skull Kid he met in OoT, and that he fell into Termina while looking for Navi. Otherwise, the stories are completely distinct and independent. PH was again, only a story sequel to WW in that WW explains why all of them are at sea to begin with. Then again, alternate dimension, and no one from WW is seen again until the climax, and then in a non-WW-related role. ST was also only a story sequel to WW and PH in that they found a new land and had descendents.

I feel like all sequels in the series were simply timeline sequels, not story sequels, and a timeline sequel (ie TP to OoT) doesn't make much of an impact on how good the sequel is.

Personally I feel story sequels are a hit or miss when the original was designed more or less as a stand alone. You either love what the added to the original story, or you feel like it ruined it. I'm usually among the latter. Just because there is potential for a continuation of the story doesn't mean it'll be good. Oftentimes, that potential itself, left to the imagination, is what makes the original story good, and thus a sequel can only hurt. So personally, no, I don't want story sequels.

As for timeline sequels, all the games are basically already either a timeline sequel or prequel of another game, so it's not like that's going to stop regardless.
 
I'm sure i've answered this before but...

I'm gonna say no to direct sequels in every regard. Direct Sequels tend to be too similar in more ways than conventional stand alone Zelda instalments are which i see as a bad ting in a franchise that desperately needs to move forward. Story-wise, Nintendo can't craft linking stories very well and sometimes cant even craft stories on a stand alone basis... it wouldnt mean that the direct sequel would be bad, and really since they recycle characters a lot anyway there'd be very little difference in any direct sequel overall, but one can never know what nintendo will pull for a direct sequel and if something like MM happens then i'd be all for it but then we could just get a PH-ST affair...

I'd rather not but really i dont see much of a difference being made between direct sequels and stand alone instalments.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom