Slashdot Mirror
Does Zelda Need an Overhaul?
CVG has up a piece noting the fact that not much about Zelda games have changed since the move to 3D. Chalk that up to the greatness of Ocarina of Time if you will, but the same mirror moving, fire-arrow switch activating puzzles have been in the last several titles. Is it time for some kind of radical change to the equation? "People generally don't like to accept change. But change doesn't always spell disaster. Final Fantasy introduces a totally new cast, setting and theme with each sequel and continues to please fans. Resident Evil 4 completely revolutionised Capcom's horror series and is now viewed as one of the best games ever made ... We still totally adore Zelda but eventually the appeal will tire and the series risks bombing. Nintendo needs to take the bold step and inject something totally new into Zelda. We're not talking about a couple of new items, or a new location - that's been done. We mean a significant change that affects the whole structure and gameplay."
The Zelda style of gameplay is what the fans keep coming back for. Perhaps a spinoff from the series would be best suited for this idea.
Of The Legend of Zelda.
Nope, fans will happily rescue the same fucking princess over and over again, especially since now it's done with a weeemote so it's ok to recycle everything a few more times.
Twilight Princess was, IMO, the best game in the series, because instead of concentrating souly on new gameplay elements, they actually gave the game a SOUL. In fact sometimes it felt like they transplanted it directly from the Final Fantasy series, which could explain the lack of soul in FF12 (as good as that game was). Every game is evolutionary, and they try expanding on a new area... this one was in story telling and character portrayal, and they get an A+ on this one. Wind Waker tried to experiment with a number of new gameplay elements, and while I applaud them on that, their new efforts were more like a B-.
To me, this sounds like an artical written by a disgruntled gamer who wasn't able to see TP for what it truly was, and while I respect his opinion, its hardly a reason for a call to arms. Does the series need an overhaul? After how good TP was... absolutely not.
TP was an evolutionary step in terms of gameplay, for the series. It added a few new elements (of which it did very well, I might add), but its main concentration layed elsewhere. The gameplay fanatics can probably look forward to Phantom Hourglass and the next Wii Zelda title for a boost in gameplay elements.
Multiplayer Gaming (defined): Sitting around, discussing single-player games with my friends, at the bar.
Twilight Princess was great, but isn't it past time to deprecate text-only dialog.
[Insert pithy quote here]
Long answer: yeeeesssss.
I love them, but they need to stop relying on the fire temple/water temple/wind temple/earth temple formula. The puzzles are usually good, but they get repetitive when I play them over and over in different games.
It's like sex, except I'm having it!
All great games eventually get made into a franchise that milks the brand for all it's worth. Take Madden, Super Mario, or even Zelda for example. Game companies exist to make themselves rich, and those games have a proven formula for success. Why would they tamper with that?
I've been saying this for years! Zelda's formula has gotten old in 3D. Especially the combat. Despite enjoying Twilight Princess a lot (a huge surprise to me) they really need to do a full refresh of the formula.
The Wii controls helped keep the combat feeling fresh, where the GameCube falls flat. But the advancements other games have made in dynamic since the release of Ocarina just leave the series feeling like something of a dinosaur.
With their vast resources (even before DS and Wii started printing money) and huge talent pool I except more from Nintendo. I seem to remember Miyamoto saying that TP would be the last Zelda game "as we know it." So hopefully that's a sign of big things to come.
The Farewell Tour II
It's not like Zelda hasn't changed before. I mean, the jump from 2D to 3D was fairly dramatic. And seriously, we've all seen where being formulaic gets you; Just look at the movie industry. That's the type of rut that I'd rather see one of my favorite game franchises avoid, if at all possible. I say, as long as some of the staples are preserved (sword combat, heart containers, and that little "you found a secret!" chime. Just enough to remind you that, yes, this is a Zelda game) then by all means try something new.
Wow, some people like something you don't like. I understand completely. Great reason to get that worked up about something. Somebody needs lots of therapy. Or if thats not available a shovel to the back of the head should do.
To be honest, not much changed even with OoT. It was the same "mirror moving, fire-arrow switch activating" puzzles even in the earlier 2D Zeldas. OoT translated the gameplay so well into 3D that the series continued to be extremely popular.
There shouldn't be any reason to change the style of game Zalda has always been, in fact Zelda-type games have, in a way, become a kind of genre all of it's own. As long as people keep enjoying the gameplay and Nintendo keeps the character's, stories and enviroments fresh it will sell.
Sometimes I almost feel bad for trolls.
Stories are stories, whether interactive or not. Some need to be refreshed over time to maintain value - others become timeless, only increasing in value with the fidelity with which they are told.
The Legend of Zelda series is not completely timeless, but most of it's aspects hold a very high value, even when they are not radically rehashed with each telling. It's a fairy tale where a boy with a sword rescues a princess, with some interesting action, oddness and strategy along the way.
No need to take away any of that when making a new Zelda game - you just have to make sure the core timelessness of the story isn't too overexposed, so that it doesn't become stale. No need to transform it into a guitar-based rock game with pinball elements or anything.
Ryan Fenton
I know another game that's in DIRE need of an overhaul: chess. I mean, it's been played pretty much the same way for like 500 years. Gamers are bound to get tired of it real soon now!
And I don't want them to just add new pieces or change the board from squares to hexagons or anything like that! I mean a significant change that affects the whole structure and gameplay!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Zelda 2 was radically different and radically sucked. It had side-scrolling action and RPG-like features that were totally alien for Zelda.
Change isn't necessarily bad, but Zelda 2 is the poster child for what can happen if you deviate too far from what makes your series fun.
I know I was not the only one to find twilight princess downright depressing
not only had they completely run out of environmental ideas (basically just ocarina of time again)
they'd run out of storyline ideas
(yes, they did in fact COMPLETELY rip off the concept of a wolf from okami, and anyone who thinks otherwise has not read the facts)
and they had long ago stopped even attempting to be new with the temple design
I really enjoyed wind waker and majora's mask, and I believe this is where zelda needs to be short, weird, completely original little games that, even though they're not the hardest in the world, come out at just the right length, and don't feel like they're stealing from past zelda games, or other games in the genre
they seriously need to stop with the "epic huge massive adventure" game, because it's obviously not possible for them to keep it original
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I disagree. I played the game for about an hour and a half and was utterly bored. Plus, I hadn't even left the village yet. Long adventure games should have something to grab you in the beginning, and this had nothing but corralling sheep and getting a bird to fly towards you.
I love adventure games with a good story and gameplay, but sadly, this was not one of those for me.
I don't want to achieve immortality through my work. I want to achieve it by not dying. - Woody Allen
Final Fantasy introduces a totally new cast, setting and theme with each sequel and continues to please fans.
I'm pretty sure that's not a sequel as much as just reusing a trade mark for new games. There have been a couple of sequels notibly, X2 but for the most part each new FF game is just that and Not a sequel.
Sequel - a literary work, movie, etc., that is complete in itself but continues the narrative of a preceding work.
I don't mind trolls. But when they are so tragically retarded it's just sad and pitiable. This is Slashdot; better work on your chops, buddy, and next time bring your A-Game. A weak troll like that will only generate ridicule outside of whatever AOL chatroom you fell out of. And posting AC? Well, you pretty much modded yourself. Sorry, thanks for playing.
+0 Meh
I am having a blast with the game, and yet, I still agree with you.
The beginning of Twilight Princess was slow and boring. The start of a game should be carefully paced to avoid this.
I've played nearly every Zelda game ever made, just not the gameboy ones and that horrid skeleton in our closet on the CD-I. I've saved the eponymous princess countless times. And i can tell you that I do have sympathetic feelings for the writer of this article. This latest Zelda did feel "new" but nothing really TRULY surprised me like when I found out what the blue Ring did in the original Legend of Zelda. The sameness of elements in the game are beginning to not be interesting anymore, and that's truly a shame. But you have to consider the consequences of "updating" Zelda. Could you even call a game part of the series if it doesn't pay tribute to its predecessors? Take out the Master Sword? Get rid of boomerangs and bombs? No more temples/dungeons/labyrinths? Why even have the main protagonist a green clad boy named Link? Make it a high-powered business woman set on mars. There we go. Change for change's sake. What I'm trying to say is that Zelda has basically completely defined a whole genre of action/adventure/puzzle game. How many times have you heard the adjective "Zelda-like?" The game itself defines other games that copy its gameplay mechanics. We can't change that core of the game, that IS the game. If you are tired of exploring dungeons and getting items that give you new abilities, well stop playing this goddamn game then. (Also take a good hard look at all the other games you have to play too) And don't take out that tired line that they don't change the specific settings and elements. Zelda 2: the adventures of Link had nearly nothing in common with the first, and now the things it's introduced have become standard. Majora's Mask changed the way you played the game. And Wind Waker completely changed the setting and introduced new characters and items. So piss off. Leave my game alone. I like knowing that in this world, this game will always have things that are the same. We all enjoy it. And the day we stop enjoying it and get tired of it I sure hope to hell they don't create a new edgier, flashier update called Shadow the Link where Link has a gun and a emo haircut. When we get tired of elements of Zelda, we will be tired of Zelda itself and it will end
(have not yet RTFA, just responding to the summary)
The funny thing is, even the jump from 2D to 3D was a lot less of a paradigm shift than with, say, Mario or Metroid...
I kind of missed out on the original Zelda, but liked Zelda 2 a lot.
My next games was Zelda:OoT. When after that i went back to the first game, I was amazed at how similar the dungeon puzzles etc felt!
Unlike Mario and Metroid, early Zelda was in a kind of 3/4 perspective, with a few light 3D-ish elements. So it's just not that big a shift. (FWIW, I feel the same way about GTA2->GTA3)
Actually, Zelda 2 is probably the stand out of the lot, a bigger difference than the 2D/3D switch...
SO YOU'RE GOING TO DIE: The Comic for Dealing with Death
Final Fantasy games have made about as much change as any Zelda game has. One thing final fantasy has up on zelda is that it is a "new story" with "new characters" each time. The combat in Final Fantasy has been the same for ages much the same as zelda hasn't changed much. The only difference in combat has been gradual upgrades to the same battle system before it. Final Fantasy games have increasingly offered more character customization, but the same spells and summons are always used. Zelda games have added more moves to link's repertoire, but its still a lock on slash and parry affair. Not much is changing either way, but the games are getting better and better. Boo to those who can't live past the "glory" of FF7 and boo to those who can't live past the "glory" of Zelda: Ocarina of Time. FF 9, 10 and 12 have been great games and Windwaker and Twilight Princess gave just as much if not more than what Ocarina of time had to offer.
You constantly struggle for self improvement - and it shows.
Hooray for bad Engrish on fortune cookies
I distinctly remember Majora's Mask not actually involving Zelda at all. If he was rescuing anything, it was a whole fucking continent, not one princess.
(Not to mention that in Ocarina of Time, he was also rescuing a whole fucking continent, and the princess.)
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
Isn't it time Master Chief's helmet came off? Or Gordon Freeman talked (or we saw his face in-game)?
Either of those would completely change the character, and depending on how pedantic a fan you are, could kill the series for you.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
Alternate answer: Heck, yes Zelda needs an "overhaul" if she looks like this.
- person namesake from Terrahawks. It'll be worth it to see the expression on the Nintendo fanboys' faces alone.
Am I the only person here who grew up associating the name Zelda with the Terrahawks baddie and not some Nintendo character? Particularly as I wasn't even aware that "Zelda" was a real name at the time. Anyway, the two characters seem like chalk and cheese...
BINGO!.... that's your answer! Nintendo can refresh their "Zelda" series by replacing their Zelda with the evil-Martian-android-that-looks-like-a-really-old
And they can get Windsor Davies to do the voice for that spherical robot Sergeant-Major, and have a game of Xs and Os for the "Game Over" sequence (Anyone who hasn't seen Terrahawks will be wonder WTF I am rambling about now... do a search at YouTube if you're curious)
"Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
What's funny is, since you posted AC, it takes exactly one modpoint to drop you to -1, Troll. That's one of five...
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
If you played the game for an hour and a half, then I can totally understand. But... AN HOUR AND A HALF???? The game is about 70+ hours! In dramatic narrative, usually writers suggest that about 1/3rd be exposition. In epic form, such as Zelda... there's usually multipul rising actions, so the exposition should probably be more like the first 1/6th. In a 70 hour game, that's about 12 hours. Zelda: TP moves into the action in about 3.
In some works, the whole work is meant to have consistantly riviting material. But in other works, the entire work is meant to lead up to a few key, extraordinary moments. Zelda: TP is one of those works. There is a moment about 4 hours in that is truly disturbing, one at about 18 where I wanted to cry. These moments were so incredible that they took hours to lead up to, and when the game is over, all that matters is those specific key points, and they made the game, IMO, the best game I've ever played (and I've played dozens of long-form titles).
Some games that start out with a BANG are great... like FF7, but probably the best start out quiet and subtle, and build into amazing things, like FF8 or Tales of the Abyss. Zelda falls into that category, in fact... Zelda typically falls into that catagory, it's just that TP is about twice the length of any other zelda, so its exposition NEEDS to be about twice as long to have the correct balance.
Multiplayer Gaming (defined): Sitting around, discussing single-player games with my friends, at the bar.
But I would like to see some variations to their overall 3D approach - Mixing both 2/3D gameplay & throwing in 3/4 would be very interesting in various scenarios - IMHO, the overall storyline and general gameplay is what has always kept me and the other legion of fans coming back for more - I certainly enjoyed the graphical twist with Wind Waker which added some spice to the look of Zelda, but the original charm of the series has always been kept intact
i had a recent discussion with a friend of mine over the exact same issue, that nothing much if anything at all has changed in the zelda series since the big leap to 3d. all the gameplay was the same dispite minor tweaks in it or story made limits(the 3 day limit in Oot's sequal). or stylistic choices like the cell shading in the game cube game version. he refused to see that at the basic game play level all zelda's are the same.
inital sword aquireing event -> dungeon -> boss -> dungeon -> new item needed for said dungeon -> boss -> (repeat for 5~7 times) -> final dungeon -> gannon or equivilant boss.
Yes in that there's only so many ways that you can kill Ganon and save the princess. And, as it so happens, Eiji Aonuma has said quite specifically that any further games in the series will be a substantial departure. (Personally, I'm hoping for a successor to Majora's Mask).
No in that the fundamental mechanic - enter dungeon, get new item, solve puzzles with item, defeat boss, find stuff on overworld, get to next dungeon - is unlikely to ever get old. As long as the surrounding narrative and premise aren't stale, then that particular progression of play is solid and timeless.
...but is it art?
I think that Zelda games are indeed "formulaic," but it's a decent formula that really suffers not so much from repetition as from the fact that everything besides the gameplay gets so little attention. The stories in Zelda are extremely basic and weak, and do little more than tie one dungeon/temple to the next. That's not a big problem, but when you have that AND no voices AND old-school-midi-quality music in a title that was released just recently, it starts to feel like, well, *there can be more to it.*
Even improving two of those three things would do wonders for Zelda and it's feeling of being an "aging" series. An epic, cd-quality orchestral score for once? That shouldn't bee too much to ask, after all games like Battlefield and Medal of Honor get that privilege, not to even mention the blockbusters like Final Fantasy and Halo.
Zelda's core gameplay -- making one's way through cleverly designed dungeons -- is STILL its greatest strength! And far from what makes a Zelda game feel like it's "lacking" in something. The reason it feels a bit outdated is that in many OTHER respects it truly IS. While no-one has been able to match Zelda's level design, when it comes to other aspects of gameplay -- combat, NPC interaction, even boss design and horseback riding controls -- Nintendo's greatest really has been outdone. Ninja Gaiden, DMC3, God of War -- these games have put others to shame in terms of combat. Oblivion's NPCs (and even those in games like the new Godfather) are far superior in AI and interactivity to those in Twilight Princess. Boss design -- look to Shadow of the Colossus for a lesson in "epic battles."
The summary calls for an overhaul of the core gameplay. That I believe is a MISTAKE. It's all the other stuff, which is admittedly *minor* in comparison to the gameplay that sets Zelda apart from everything else, that needs to catch up by about 9 years.
I like basketball!!1!
Wait. There's a game called Zelda?
The game sold very well. It seems pretty obvious that no overhaul is necessary.
Could sales be improved by a change? Possibly. Could they have been harmed by a change? Just as possible.
It's Zelda. The sales were very good and the game made money. That shows that there is room in the market for more of the same Zelda gameplay. If they want to change it, they can also make spin-offs.
Better yet, I would rather that they make a new game, entirely without Link, Hyrule, etc. and create a new IP. Don't just "tweak" or "refresh" the gameplay. Go the distance and come up with something new. No need to cover a new game with an old IP.
I understand your points, but I don't agree with them for an adventure game (maybe a dialogue-driven movie, though). I want to be wowed in some way early (and that could be by amazing graphics, a thrilling fight, a great cut-scene, etc...). Then I will put up with an enormous amount of tedium/exposition to get to the rest of the good stuff. Deus Ex is a great example of a game with a relatively complex story that gets you involved right away. Within 5 minutes, I was storming the Statue of Liberty and killing terrorists! Later the game turned the tables, so to speak, but it got me hooked right away.
I don't want to achieve immortality through my work. I want to achieve it by not dying. - Woody Allen
What are you talking about? My friend just had me start a game of Deus Ex the other day... and for the fist 45 minutes, I was in training rooms learning how to play the game. Sure, the normal campaign may start right off... but it doesn't count because I couldn't have done it without knowing the controls.
Needless to say, I was DISGUSTED by Dues Ex's choice of tacking on a training section on the beginning. A game is a learning process, part of the reason for playing the game is to learn how to play the game... why should I have to take a training session before I even begin?
I'm of the feeling that the best games hold your hand a bit and walk you through the gameplay, but make it interesting and reliavent to the story. Twilight Princess did that, FF8 did that, and those are probably my two favorite games. I haven't played through Deus Ex yet (and I want to, it looks good), but the beginning REALLY turned me off.
Multiplayer Gaming (defined): Sitting around, discussing single-player games with my friends, at the bar.
It would come with an Ocarina controller. The game would include songs such as 'Greensleaves', 'Scarborough Fair', and 'Crazy Train'.
He keeps saving the princess. He doesn't get princess nookie.
Frankly, I'd be saying 'if she's so dense that she keeps getting in trouble, let the gene pool get thinned'.
I love Zelda games, so I hate to agree with this assessment. However, I noticed while playing Twilight Princess that I instinctively knew the answers to most puzzles and boss fights. Heck, I even walked into dungeons and started guessing the sort of obstacles I'd face and the sort of treasures I'd find based on familiar themes. I'm sure I can't be the only loyal fan suffering from Zelda deja vu. Don't get me wrong; I still love the series and plan to continue playing the games as long as they keep coming out, but I think the "same old, same old" criticism is perfectly valid.
Isn't this pretty much what Nintendo attempted w/ The Wind Waker? Not just the graphics--though those did seek to create a new level of emotional expression unseen in the previous games--but also the obsession w/ the sea and expansion of the world? That wasn't a massive overhaul, sure, but everyone cried foul and begged for another Ocarina-style game. Just a few years later, they got it. Make up your minds, critics.
The Legend of Zelda: A Pain in my Ass (Part 1)
The Legend of Zelda: A Pain in my Ass (Part 2)
Would be to come up with a version where you're Gannon and you have to kidnap Zelda. Wait, is Gannon still around? Even better, you could actually be Zelda and save Link. Wait, is it still link? Man, I haven't played Zelda since A Link To The Past. Now THAT was a good game. I tried Orcana of Time, but I just couldn't get into it.
Maybe they should come up with a game where Mario and Link join forces because Koopa and Gannon joined forces and captured both princess'. That would probably be the second most amazing game ever. Jeopardy Jr. for the NES still reigns supreme for this hard-core gamer.
Ryan
Follow these steps:
1. Intro Scene - Make sure to contrast the menace and the hero, motivational, showcase some of the graphics
2. Opening Scene - Ambiance, small village, child hero, innocent life.
3. Strange Things - Make sure the motivation is there, encourage exploration
4. Build-up - Make sure the exploration leads to a larger plot, explain main quest.
5. Quest for Critical Items - E.g. Master sword, shield, etc. Include minor versions of dungeons.
6. Start of Main Quest - Once hero is equipped, unleash the main goals
7. Unleash Main Motif - Could be darkness (inverted worlds), modes of transportation, transformations, graphics or console unique engine etc. Make sure that Main motif is an intricate part of the game.
8. Side Quests - Include plenty, make sure that you confuse the player by making him/her pursue items that may or may not have a definite usage to the main quest.
9. Fake End Boss - Build the momentum with a fake sense of victory.
10. Ending - Make it inspirational, but open... after all, this is another instance of the hero overcoming evil.
Ever since 'A Link to the Past' this has been the formula, and the Motif basically changes. The ALTP was reused in Link's awakening to a very good result (to me probably the best of the 2D Zeldas), however, Ocarina of Time introduced a new engine with the 3D Motif, but OOT (3D), MM (Masks) and WW (Art and Mode of transport) are to me the same game (I have yet to play Twilight as I can't find the time to commit to it), but from what I've seen there's the possibility of it being the same as the prior games with the new controls being the motif.
I love this series, but I must say that I'm more excited about Phantom Hourglass than I am about Twilight, just because the portable platform makes them deviate from the formula a bit (portables are played in bursts of time).
I think Zelda can have some good spinoffs, a 'Tactics' game comes to mind. I would also like to see a remake of "The Adventure of Link" in 2D with upgraded graphics (A la New SMB), who knows, maybe even a Paper Zelda version with the Flipping ability.
This is not meant to be critical, I like the formula, but I must say that I don't get as excited as I used to before.
Oh well...
Nintendo will never change the Zelda formula. They tested the waters with Windwaker and the fanbois all screamed bloody murder. Not over some major game mechanic change or dramatic change in roles of Link/Ganon/Zelda. No, they lit the torches and sharpened the pitchforks because of the ART DIRECTION.
It's silly, of course. Yet, N is always redefining Mario. Donkey Kong was one type of game. Mario Bros. is another type of game. Super Mario Bros. 1 - 3 + World were essentially the same thing (not counting rebranded and polished Doki Doki Panic). Yoshi's Island. Super Mario 64. And I'm completely ignoring the games that are just Mario themed for simply for Mario franchise's sake: Mario Kart, Super Mario RPG, so many more.
Maybe if Zelda fans would be less drooly they could let Nintendo explore new directions and, in the end, they'd get a great Zelda game again. And a great Zelda game is already a LONG time coming.
More Twoson than Cupertino
Twilight Princess was great, but isn't it past time to deprecate text-only dialog.
It's harder to screw up a game with text-only dialog than it is to screw up one with voice acting because of the choice of a flat and talentless voice actor or two (or ten). I can think of a few games that I've found seriously hurt by voice acting -- the first Grandia game and Shenmue immediately come to mind.
(Good lord was Shenmue's voice acting terrible. It was like a dry read by tone-deaf people.)
On a related note: Hey, listen!
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
Uh, I just learned how to play Deus Ex in the first level. You can skip the training level by just starting a new game, and saying "no" when they ask you whether you want to do the training.
I would assume that most people did the same thing. Of course, I'd played System Shock 2, so the inventory system was already familiar to me. Beyond that, what's so hard about just learning that game as you go? I could see maybe a quick glance at the keymap in the options menu to see which button does what, but 45 minutes in the training level? I can't even remember if I ever bothered to do that level out of curiosity or boredom, but most dedicated training levels in FPS games take 5-15 minutes to complete, depending on the game.
Wait, are you talking about Deus Ex 2, by chance? I can't remember whether that one had a mandatory training level, but I do remember that it sucked ass. If that's the one you're playing, stop now. Trust me.
If you are in fact playing Deus Ex, get ready for a hell of a lot of fun. Explore everywhere. Talk to everyone. Use the implants, they're there for a reason.
Easily one of the top 5 best computer games I've ever played.
I don't have a PC right now, so no. But I'm ordering a Mac Pro... so possibly. But I've already got a game of Ar Tonelico going, and I'd like to get around to playing Valkarie Profile 2 SOMEDAY, so it might be a bit. I'm a little concerned though. I usually HATE (and I mean HATE) non-linear RPGs. But I've heard enough interesting things about this one, that I might give it a shot.
Multiplayer Gaming (defined): Sitting around, discussing single-player games with my friends, at the bar.
I've created a Slashdot account just to post this comment in a proper way. It really matters to me, because Zelda is one of those games that I grew up with and I've played every single iteration of it.
It is not true to say that there was not enough innovation going on in Twilight Princess (shape shifting, horse back fighting, cinematics). I like the game a lot. Having said this, Twilight Princess really made want to go back and play the original Legend of Zelda once again. Here are the reasons:
Thanks for listening (hopefully). :)
It's hard to balance. I actually got my girlfriend playing TP, and she enjoyed it for a while. She rarely plays video games, so she's not very good at them. The village stuff at the beginning was perfect for her. It was pretty simple and she really enjoyed it. For her, the village stuff ended too quickly, because things got too hard for her after that.
Personally, I hate voice acting in most games ...
Because of the costs associated with voice acting you tend to have very limited dialogue which ends up becoming repetative rapidly, and creates a far more static world. With a text based game you can have every character in the game have several unique things to say at any given time and (as a player finishes objectives) have what they change through out the game. Your development team of (roughly) 6 dialogue writers can quickly fill a town setting with content so that everyone in the town says something funny, interesting or useful towards the game; in most voice acted games every character in the game says the exact same canned saying because no developer has the time, money or storage space to create unique sound clips for every character in game.
Whether or not the Zelda series needs an overhaul, Nintendo's licensing for the property needs an overhaul. This game has been out for months and I still can't buy a stuffed Midna doll? I would buy two, just so I can keep one at work.
What sound do people on rollercoasters make? Hint: it's not Xbox 360.
weaksauce trolling.
(or perhaps this is a troll-within-a-troll. GENIUS!)
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
People often forget the black sheep of the series, but it was one of my favorites. Zelda 2 was an adventure RPG.
Collecting items doesn't make for an RPG, but getting getting experience and gaining levels some people might call an RPG. Not in the same way Final Fantasy is, but in the way that Diablo is.
(Is it just me, or does Zelda II just like the newer Castlevanias?)
-- Political fascism requires a Fuhrer.
Deus Ex isn't really an RPG, and anyway, it's only non-linear by FPS standards, not in a Morrowind sort of way. You can't stop the main "quest" (if you want to call it that) and decide to become a farmer, or spend hours hunting a certain type of animal, or crap like that. There are occasionally optional things to do, or more than one way to get to a place, or a person who will die if you didn't do something earlier, but you're pretty much always going in one general direction, plot-wise.
This article, if it were a post on /. would be modded down to -2 Troll. It has everything any troll article has: a popular subject, whining about how things "should" be, and total avoidance of anything that could counterpoint what he's writing.
I RTFA, but I didn't see anything about Minish Cap in there at all. That's a post-OoT Zelda game that broke out some nice twists that didn't play like every other Zelda. What of Four Swords with its rupee-collecting fun? This "article" does nothing but take up space.
This is the worst kind of navel-gazing. The un-entertaining kind.
Before the Wii's concept was announced, Miyamoto stated that Twilight Princess would be the last Zelda game using that same style of gameplay. Now that the Wii has been released, it's pretty obvious that the next Zelda game will be completely reworked to be more about analog weapon and tool movement than button sequence puzzles.
Sure, Zelda in its current state is nothing to shake a pointed stick at, but I agree that change isn't always a bad thing. If, say, the changed the main character, the world and it's dog would shout in outrage. If something must be changed, I'd say the control system should be altered to make full use of the Wii's capabilities. The problem would then be the hardcore gamers that complain that the control system should never have changed and they'll return it to normal. The series will continue in the original way and then this same discussion will happen again. It's like my Granddad used to say, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". Zelda ain't broke, so don't go changing it.
Sure, but I'm just saying, it's not exactly as if Deus Ex is a pinnical of starting out with a "bang" if the game needs a plotless training section (I would have been completely lost starting out without it, the controls are very different from what I'm used to), I'd like for a game to go along and teach me as I go along.
That doesn't mean that the game can't start out with a bang... FF7 does this, but the gameplay is still incredibly simple at the beginning. Not that I'm holding up FF7 to be a pinnical of any sort, it's just a reference that everybody knows.
Multiplayer Gaming (defined): Sitting around, discussing single-player games with my friends, at the bar.
Sorry if it has already been said, but this article sure has boiled my blood. It makes specific reference to final fantasy, a series i've long had a problem with in the naming department. The games are great, but Final Fantasy is 12 completely different games, all with the same name. When i buy a zelda game, i expect a zelda game. Not some completely irrelivant game with a similar name.
So would someone please tell my why they are encouraging this kind of behaviour?
I know that the first time I played a Zelda game I was enthralled for many, many months and then I beat it (both quests) and anxiously awaited the second game. I think I was so obsessed at some point I dreamed about the damn thing and it came out I remember thinking "This game really fucking sucks". I didn't bother beating and turned to alternate means of entertainment.
I got a PC then and quit Zelda playing until the 64 came out and I know that when I heard something new was coming out I about shit my pants. That was the first time I really got excited again about Zelda games and I was so not disappointed when I played OoT. That game was so great. It went downhill though for me at least. MM was alright. Once I played WW for a while I grew to like it, but something was missing until I got into the level where you go into what used to be Hyrule. I then realized why I never cared for the other Zelda games. Without THE Link, Princess Zelda and Hyrule's familiar landmarks it just wasn't Zelda for me.
Twilight Princess had the same effect on me that OoT did. Although I think the game kicks ass, I'm getting tired of the same ol same ol. I know that is a bit contradictory to my previous statement, but one can only explore Hyrule so much and I think this one gives you enough of it to explore that you don't feel like it's a rehash. The thing is where is it going to go from here? Hyrule has been dissected as much as it can be I think. I don't know if getting new characters would help thought since I am pretty tied to Link, but I didn't like the ones where he wasn't saving Zelda. Maybe Zelda and Link could go adventuring somewhere else together and you can play both of them and Zelda isn't just a princess, but a fighter. I don't know but I think it might just be time. That's my two cents.
Final Fantasy introduces a totally new cast, setting and theme with each sequel and continues to please fans.
That doesn't count as change... the games are still mostly the same from one to the next, with some small battle engine adjustments. I'm not saying that it's a bad thing, but I am saying that this guy picked one of the worst possible examples.
As for how this applies to Zelda... I play Zelda games because of two things. First, confidence in the developers. The only Zelda game I've disliked was Twilight Princess (please, no flaming; I'm not saying it's a bad game, I just didn't like it), and I've played most of the games in the series (CD-i doesn't count and I haven't gotten around to Minish Cap or Four Swords). Second, because I like the games as they are. I'm willing to give change a chance, but I don't think that very much change is needed.
11. ???
12. Profit!
That is why you should run a hot bath, find a sharp razor, and slit your fucking wrists fucktard.
No. Mirror moving and fire_activating puzzle are only stables of the game because those are the items you get in the game.
Legend of Zelda Four Swords Adventure was one of the best games for me in recent years because of one thing, it really brought a new look at the old Zelda items. It increased the difficulty because it requested the player do things outside of the box at times.
What I think Zelda actually needs, is some difficulty, and a new set of items. The classics (bombs, fire arrows even the mirror shield) are all good, and should stay, but let's take another look at the hammer from Link to the Past (my favorite console game of all time), or the whistle from the original game? These are items that could be used in interesting uses now, but has yet to be. How about adding in a way the player could go from dark world to light world with a mirror in a game like Link to the past on the fly to get around some enemies, but have both worlds be available?
Zelda doesn't need a overhaul, Zelda needs to grow up a bit, become a little older (there was a good amount of darkness in the last story) and give the players some hard puzzles. The biggest problem I see can be illustrated in the mirror puzzles, every puzzle requires a 90 or a 45 degree angle. There's many more degrees there' How about a nice 33 degree bank shot off a wall mirror you can only move left or right but not change the direction? How about some 3 dimensional mirror puzzles (they have had a couple I think but not much)?
Also in addition some more persistent bosses, the best Zelda bosses are ones you meet more than once, how about you enter a dungeon and the boss comes to you to help you out a couple times because he's actually waiting for someone to free him from his prison, he'll still have to fight you but it'll break up the game a bit.
These ideas aren't "full overhaul" these are just unique additions to the old formula. But I am a little biased, however every time someone says they are going to do an overhaul we either get what I'm talking about here (a non overhaul) or a game that is so difference it's just a completely different genre.
I know. How about Outer Space?
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Check this out: http://www.actionbutton.net/?p=70
Not just an overhaul. Just let it rest in the past.
I personally like Zelda the way it is. I believe that franchises should change a little but stay mostly the same. Why not just make a new world with new characters and new gameplay? Nintendo should be making new IPs instead of changing the old franchises. I would personally like the choice of having my favorite franchises stay the same but have new IPs created as well. There's no reason to always make more sequels to a franchise.
Tomb Raider - Dark Angel radically changed the game play.
It sucked.
Push the button, Max!
P.P.S. I'm doing Science and I'm still alive.
That's what Nintendo has called Twilight Princess. Telling them that they have to reinvent a series that they are already planning on reinventing is kind of pointless.
Put a V-tec engine in Epona and wait for it to kick in.
That was the one thing I found most jarring about Deus Ex, it pretended to be non linear but each path you took inevitably led back to the same outcome. Great game and I was one of the few people that actually liked the sequel but I always felt I was being railroaded back in the direction I was supposed to be going. Completely ruined the replay value. I mean seriously - kill good guy X, oh you shouldn't have done that you're a bad man now let's get on with the next mission - save good guy X, hey thanks for saving me now let's get on with the next mission. Overall Effect of me being there: 0
This was the best zelda game that ever existed... it was darker and more scary then the other ones and just freaking bad ass.. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vWagcUQtUWI here is 6 minutes of bosses and gameplay :)
Seriously, the one thing i hate about game makers is they try to target to big of an audience... so instead of cool it's more like charlie and the chocolate factory scary LOL...
It's slow to start. That's Twilight Princess's biggest flaw.
But the first horseback battle was probably the most intense experience I've ever had playing a video game. There are some absolutely amazing moments in this game.
My only political goal is to see to it that no political party achieves its goals.
See that's why zelda 2 was so cool.. cause it was weapon based... lots of fighting.. shooting swords... down thrust jumps...
It was dark, and cool and it made you think.
I was satisfied with walking on magnetic walls with iron boots (kick ass), the ball and chain (not very practical but fun to play with), and dual hook shots (if only they'd let you fire the next one while you're still in mid air).
The dominion rod could have been really interesting if they let it do more. They should have had an upgrade for it to allow you to control enemies. The spinner was probably the weirdest concept for an item in a Zelda game but they didn't really put it to much use aside from keeping you from getting to an inaccessible area until you notice the rails.
There's certainly a lot more new stuff than there was in Wind Waker.
My only political goal is to see to it that no political party achieves its goals.
I didn't exactly say Twilight princess wasn't new. It was, the Wiimote alone gave probably the best adventure experience in years, that's what we need in the new game, but we really need a more adult puzzles in it (not sexual but harder) and more usability, like the spinner could have been cool, but it was just too hard to use effectily, so the way it was implement was fine.
You want a game called Zelda that is completely and utterly unlike Zelda for the sake of making it different so that it will appeal to people who don't like or are bored by Zelda?
You wouldn't happen to work for Sony or Microsoft, would you?
Beaten it several times. Don't have anything against it at all.
But the series has at least a dozen games, and they all have the same core design except for 2...
Predominant opinion is that the Windwaker was disliked - stateside. In Japan it was critically, and commercially heralded.
Ive heard nothing but good things about TP in the states. You got it, the article is referencing the poor reception - in Japan.
People are perfectly happy watching the same Star Trek series for years on end. How long have the same staple comics been in the papers? Everything does not need a grand reenvisioning. If you got a great meal at a restaurant, would you refuse to go out again until you heard a friend talking about an even better meal he had somewhere, then go only there, and only once? To expect EVERYTHING to trump what went before (besides audio and video on a more powerful machine, FF10 SHOULD look and sound much better than FF7) is absurd. I would like to see more episodic games. There's a reason Mega Man was able to last six games on the NES alone, five more on the original Game Boy while the move to 3D was widely blasted. (This may have more to do with a poor implementation than anything else though.)
How old were you when you played Zelda on the NES? 5? 7? 10? I think I was 8. Then I got the SNES and bought A Link To The Past. Then the N64 came out, and I got Ocarina of Time. So on and so forth. Well, when the SNES, N64, and GameCube each came out, there was a new 8-year-old kid playing Zelda for the first time. Those of us who have played Zelda since the beginning might tire of it a bit. I, for one, don't care to see any major changes to Zelda, and I appreciate that there aren't ten offshoot games with Zelda characters running the show. God knows I don't want to see a Guitar Hero starring Ganon.
My point is that every Zelda game sells well because if Nintendo loses you due to boredom, there's a new kid to take your place. I mean, have you played the GameBoy Zelda games? They're all the same. Heck, Capcom basically promotes Oracle of Ages/Seasons as the same game, yet they sell millions of copies. There's no financial need to change the games, just because the author thinks everyone feels the same way as he and his friends.
The author tried to explain how revolutionary the Super Mario games have been in comparison to Zelda, yet he failed miserably. Basically, the "revolutions" came when the gaming system changed. 8-bit to 16-bit to 64-bit to GameCube. Wow. Exactly like Zelda. He even mentions that Super Mario Sunshine didn't sell as well as the others, yet he fails to mention that critics regard it as the most unSuper Mario game in the series. Look, as everyone here has said, Final Fantasy is an unfair comparison because it's 12 different games under the same brand. How many game series are out there that have been using the same model for 20 years and are still selling well? I think it's down to Mario and Zelda. That IS what's innovative.
One issue is that this is a game. The exposition may mean no real plot direction yet but it should mean that the gameplay is going already. People play a game for the gameplay and they want to see it instead of talking to villagers for hours.
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
Having played the GC and Wii Zeldas, I actually agree about Link's Awakening. I think it's the best in the series. Ironically, despite being on the GB, it also feels like one of the most mature Zeldas. Furthermore, in addition to not rescuing Zelda, another difference to the other Zeldas is that instead of saving the world you live int, your goal is actually destroying the world you live in - which is beautifully told during the storyline, becoming more and more obvious.
Probably one of the best games I've ever played in my whole life.
Dude, you're still in the Tutorial. Of course it's boring. And yes, the Tutorial part is too long, but the game picks up its pace quickly once it's over.
And that's --->ALL--- that matters in the end.
Hey! Those racing games need something new. All that driving around gets boring!
And other than Zelda and Link, don't all the games have different casts? Was Midna not a radically different sidekick?
To summarize: Aaaaah, shaddap!
A few minor changes wouldn't hurt, but something major would most likely hurt the franchise. You change the formula too much, and you end up with the CD-i version of Zelda.
It's common knowledge that Twilight Princess is the last Zelda game of it's kind and the series is going to get a total makeover. Game designer Shigeru Miyamoto said so last fall, 2006. If someone has time to find a link to the interview, please post! ;-)
I think we'll likely see a radically different Zelda as the next installment anyways. After Ocarina came Majora's Mask - which was really just more of Ocarina. Then for the Gamecube they went a somewhat new direction with Windwaker. Most likely Nintendo never thought the GameCube would have such a short life span, so in mid-development (as we know) they rushed Twilight onto the Wii. I would say Nintendo probably planned Twilight as a late stage Gamecube game, and already had given some thought to a "revolutionary" new design for their Wii system. Twilight just sewed up Ocarina basically - Ocarina on crack... The next game should be new(ish). At least thats my prediction for what its worth.
I don't remember any mirror moving or fire-arrow switch activating puzzles in Twilight Princess (although I suppose the bomb-arrows were similar to fire-arrows). I'm not saying I disagree that Zelda is a bit samey, but it just seemed a strange couple of examples to pick.
I love the series, but I thought Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask were superior to Twilight Princess. Wind Waker was somewhere in between - very good in parts but very disappointing in others.
* voice acting, no I don't care if Link talks or not, but the cutscenes in Zelda:TP just looked awful without any voice action, it was just way to obvious that something was missing
* seamless terrain, I don't want to ride from one litte 'room' to another little 'room', I want a large world that I can freely explore, Windwaker got somewhat close, Zelda:TP was a step back, they should have a look at Shadow of Colossus, which terrain was completly seamless without loading times and huge, I want to have something like that in Zelda
* less useless items, new items are all nice and good, but unless you can actually use them outside of the dungeon they are just a waste of inventory space, Zelda:TP had for to many of such inventory-space-waster-items
* proper NPC interaction, I am just sick and tiered of every character having exactly one sentence that he repeats add infinitum, where are the multiple choice dialogs?
* team play, in Zelda:TP you had a group of friends that helped you, but they only did so in a cutscene, how about having a real party when going on adventure to fight with? Maybe even make that online multiplayer, Link alone against the rest of the world just isn't all that interesting
* non-respawning enemies, fighting against the same enemies over and over and over again just gets boring, especially when those are ridiculously easy, give me some hard ones, really hard ones but don't let them respawn instead
* Zelda, give that girl a little more active role, just haven't her in the last boss battle is nice and good, but she really needs a more important role in the game
* a better horse, sorry, but Epona was just boring in Zelda:TP, not only was that horse unneeded since you could teleport yourself around long before you actually got the ability to freely call her, the gameplay mechanics also felt like lifted right out of OoT, Shadow of the Colossus did much better then that and presented a horse that actually felt alive
* jump button, Zelda:TP already had for to many jump'n run elements, so just give us a proper jump button instead of that stupid edge-jump thingy and while add that, give us some new climbing mechanics, something along the lines of TombRaider and the like to get some more vertical movement into the game
* realism, maybe this is just me, but game mechanics that worked in 2D, often just don't work as good in 3D, its basically what a lot of problems are rooted in, i.e. the non-talky NPCs, the separation into 'rooms', respawning enemies and such, I would like to see a Zelda that presents me with a believable fantasy world, not a fantasy video game, if I can bomb a wall, I will bomb it because it looks instable, not because it has that trademarked you-can-bomb-me crack-texture painted on it, I also would like labyrinths to actually have more of a purpose, i.e. not just puzzle rooms connected together, but if its an ancient ruins it shall look like as if it had a real purpose once, TP already did a little bit in that direction, but the puzzles still felt to much forced.
Wait, Final Fantasy is better than Zelda because it introduces a new cast, theme and setting?
The only real common components in Zelda games is Link, Zelda and occasionally the return of Ganon and the presence of the Master Sword.
Otherwise I could just as easily cast FF in the same light; you control a guy with a dumb haircut and a an unsurprisingly HUGE sword, wander around an overhead-looking map, and walk over an innocuous patch of ground, the screen swirls and your people jiggle around while they enact actions based on timers, menu selection and some predetermined battle strategy. Repeat ad nauseum, eventually find an airship, fly to some other part of the world, repeat ad nauseum, summon Bahamut, repeat ad nauseum... keep levelling up and stocking on Phoenix Feathers because the final boss will always be 3 discrete 'final' bosses right after each other, and take 7 hours to beat.
Repeat ad nauseum for *THIRTY GAMES*.'
That's better than "control the same green-suited elf and save the princess"?
If that's your only complaint about the game, you're missing out. It's like refusing to drive a friend's Bentley because the oak is too dark.
Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
When Miyamoto gave an interview late last year, he stated that Zelda Twilight Princess will be the "last of it's kind". That gives everyone LOADS of possibilities. He probably feels that Zelda is loosing the grip it once had on so many fans; and since he wants to broaden the gaming field a bit as well, then that means that Nintendo already has something up it's sleeves! Plus, there have been unconfirmed rumors that Nintendo has already been in production with project "Wii Zelda" for a year on December 11th, then restated April 2007, but that's only a rumor.
I'm currently playing Twilight Princess and I'm on I think the second last temple (dungeon). And I've lost interest. I'm having to force myself to finish it. The game is good, but the Zelda games since Ocarina have been clones of each other with different makeup on. Woah- big surprise... you have to collect something for a side quest, find fairy fountain and empty jars. Woah- I didn't see that coming: a forest/earth, fire and water temple. All the temples are identical with different decor. A semi-maze of rooms where you have to find keys to unlock doors to get to more keys and unlock more doors... and then get a new weapon/item and use it to defeat the boss. *yawn*. I'd love a Zelda that doesn't have a single key in it.
Also, the lack of voice acting is glaring... and even though the world is huge and it's very cool in that way... sometimes it takes forever to get where you want. Wind Waker had this main problem. Traveling is boring.
Now, I do love the Zelda games... but they need to re-think the series of temples concept, and add WAY more mini-games and side quests. Also, multi player or NPC team mates would be really cool (something like Alex in HL2).
Oh, and why do they call it Zelda? Let us play as her or give her a bigger role!
The gameplay is great, but they should get a creative, unique storyline that shakes things up. Have a game start out like any other Zelda, but then Link, in his over-enthusiastic 11-year old hero way, does something stupidly heroic that doesn't work and he gets killed. The rest of the game you play as Zelda (same basic gameplay, but different skills) with a much darker tone to the storyline. If done right it would be bigger to gamers than when Aeris died.
And if not, Nintendo can release OoT with wiimote controls and make back their money.
"What is Internet Explorer 7? Are you saying we can't access the normal internet?" - I love tech support. Really.
Hah hah! The difficulty of Ocarita of Time feels about right if you just avoid every heart piece / bottle possible. THAT is how you can modify the difficulty of the game. You get an amazing sence of accomplishment winning with so little life. Plus, you don't have to muck with collecting a bazzillion heart fragments.
Once you start despising the jerks, you become one.
Anyone else ever try Golden Sun? That game is awesome, and has the same feeling that Zelda gives. Can't wait to try the second one. Though it's only for GBA, still an amazing game.
Windbreaker and Twilight Princess both had me quitting towards the end. With Windbreaker it was some dungeon with the little bird chickie and with Twilight Princess it was the sky dungeon. I just got bored and didn't wanmt to play anymore. I've completed 1,2, Link to the Past, Ocarina of Tine, and The Minish Cap and love eavery one of those (or did at one time) but for some reason the last two failed to hold my interest towards the last stretch. TP is too long imo for rehashing much of Ocarina, and with Windbreaker I hated sailing around and stupid Tingle, and the camera BS (Beyond Good and Evil did it better and was worth finishing, even if it took what, 25 hours) - sheesh. They definitely need to do something different with the console followup. I hope Phantom Hourglass is worth playing through.
Gaming for over 25 years
Well, it's not my only complaint...
1) It's partially an FPS
2) It's non-linear
3) I've liked very few American made games (not really a bad thing, just an observation)
4) It uses a keyboard and mouse
5) It's on the PC
I'm still going to give it a shot, but I'll warn you, it's probably not my kinda thing.
Multiplayer Gaming (defined): Sitting around, discussing single-player games with my friends, at the bar.
First of all, I'm not sure your assessment of gamers is true. It's definitely true for some, but many people play games as an extension of literature and film, in which the gameplay isn't as important.
Also, TP gets into gameplay fairly quickly. In fact, it's the story that takes a while to ramp up. Within 20 minutes, you're hacking at monsters, and within the hour, you're in a dungeon.
Multiplayer Gaming (defined): Sitting around, discussing single-player games with my friends, at the bar.
Bombs definitely, boomerang and arrows, aside from offing grunts, no. In fact, you're doing none of this in the second game. Every Zelda title brought something new to the table, Mr. Jackson just focuses on the puzzle-solving parts that were admittedly annoying and tedious at times.
This guy has too many vivid memories of Ocarina.
"We are Microsoft. You shall be assimilated. Competition is futile."
I played the game for about an hour and a half and was utterly bored. Plus, I hadn't even left the village yet. Long adventure games should have something to grab you in the beginning, and this had nothing but corralling sheep and getting a bird to fly towards you.
I agree with you, the opening part of the game (up until the twilight appears) is pretty boring. There's no anticipation, and some of the puzzle elements are unclear.
For example, I wasted half an hour figuring out how to get the cat to go home because the solution was not obvious. SPOILER: you have to fish twice in a row next to the cat. I got fed-up after fishing by the cat because I couldn't use the fish for anything - it flopped around and disappeared. So, I wandered around before trying to fish again. If you do anything else in-between your fishing attempts, they don't count, and the puzzle remains unsolved. I had to look it up in a FAQ it was so annoing.
That said, I've learned not to judge games based on the first couple hours, especially Zelda games. The rest of the game is well-paced and worth the time.
Man is the animal that laughs.
And occasionally whores for Karma.
I hate 3D games, please to be giving me more top-view! (Played Minish Cap most recently, loved it. Really looking forward to Phantom Hourglass.)
Warning: Apple/Nintendo fangirl. Likes her electronics cute & cuddly. May be rabid.
The only thing amazing about FF8 was its mediocrity.
"Final Fantasy introduces a totally new cast, setting and theme with each sequel and continues to please fans"
..of course they fill it up with more stuff ...but don't ya feel that game companies sometimes add new stuff to get the playable hours up???
... Im sorry gonna stop typing I just miss my airship flying around it was the best thing in the game and they took it away cause it wound't work in the new enviroment... ...End of comment...
I can't Freaking belive there is no Flyable airship dammit !!!
----No change can mess Sh!t up....yes sometimes change is good...and i kind of like the new system to FFXII but it's too much of a change.
It's just diffrent and leaves me confused
Like i spent the WHOLE DAY on a fishing Mini-game and found out i barely tapped it... I am a guy who like to 100% complete his games but i dont know its kind of depressing now sometimes the gameplay being the same but throwing something new into it, can be very...bad
Games that are good have a chemistry that makes em good...
If that's the case they there good don't mess with em
Yes i didnt always like RANDOM battles but i really don't like taking 40 minutes to find a guy on a map to kill...i think it takes too much time...
Thanks for everyone who took the time to read the whole thing..
Unless, of course, you're standing too close to the water when you fish. In which case, you get off on the tangent of trying to figure out exactly *how* you're supposed to get the darned cat home. I was at it for 2 hours before my wife got sick of watching me try to lure/herd/catch/kill/shoot/etc. the cat. She checked on line, and told me I had to catch a fish and the cat would take it.
The first thing I'd done when I got the fishing rod was catch a fish while standing right next to the cat. I'd just done it standing too close to the water, so when I dropped the fish, it flopped into the water before the cat could get it. That was the single most frustrating point in the game for me. Even more so than the cave of challenges, or hunting down all the Poes.