So, who doesn't give a crap about Zelda?

Discuss and discover all the great games of yesteryear!

Moderators: mknott, NickThorpe, lcarlson, Darran@Retro Gamer, MMohammed

How do you feel about the Zelda series?

BEST GAMES EVARR!
35
30%
Good, but over-rated
19
16%
A mixed bag
23
20%
SNORE.
39
34%
 
Total votes: 116

User avatar
DreamcastRIP
Posts: 9376
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2008 10:40 am
Location: England

Re: So, who doesn't give a crap about Zelda?

Post by DreamcastRIP » Mon May 30, 2011 3:11 pm

DigitalDuck wrote:
DreamcastRIP wrote:Typical of the mentality to which I'm referring, one person here earlier in the thread told a non-believer :wink: that the reason he didn't enjoy one particular Zelda game was because he "wasn't playing it right". Words fail me. :shock:
You should read the thread again. That was me, in response to Shenmue hate. And it wasn't meant as a serious comment anyway.
My error. :oops:
Own: Jaguar JaguarCD Lynx 7800 Dreamcast Saturn MegaDrive MegaCD 32X Nomad GameGear PS3 PS PSP WiiU Wii GameCube N64 DS GBm GBA GBC GBP GB Virtual Boy Xbox Vectrex PCE Duo-R 3DO CDi CD32 GX4000 WonderSwan NGPC Gizmondo ColecoVision iPhone PC Mac

User avatar
o.pwuaioc
Posts: 208
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 1:34 am
Location: NY, NY

Re: So, who doesn't give a crap about Zelda?

Post by o.pwuaioc » Mon May 30, 2011 3:37 pm

Matt_B wrote:
o.pwuaioc wrote:
Matt_B wrote:Yep, that comment is almost sig-worthy.
Pray thee tell, what's realistic on the SNES?
Nice try, but you said 16-bit, not SNES. That includes games for the PC, Amiga, Atari ST, etc.

If you must have a console game, how about Mortal Kombat? You're not going to try to tell us that LTTP has a more realistic look than that, are you?
First apologies: I did mean the SNES. I'm unfortunately not as familiar with 16 bit computers. Also, I don't think you quite grasped what I was saying. And yes, we all know about MK's digitization of the sprites to make it realistic. That's a bit different from what I was getting at. Perhaps you should try reading the my posts to see my train of thought rather than isolate one line out of context. Or rather, to sum, as far as hand drawn animation goes, Zelda: LttP is less "cartoony" than Wind Waker. There's nothing overly cartoony about LttP. I'm obviously not looking at real life. :roll:

User avatar
nakamura
Posts: 7582
Joined: Tue Apr 07, 2009 2:32 pm
Location: Bournemouth
Contact:

Re: So, who doesn't give a crap about Zelda?

Post by nakamura » Mon May 30, 2011 3:43 pm

Crunchy wrote:
Freestyler wrote:Over the last few years I've come to realise that the RPGs of the past pale into insignificance when compared to their modern counterparts. Not all of them obviously, but a large portion of them. Zelda "feels" archaic, even the latter ones. No doubt that's what Nintendo were going for when they made them.

I'm an RPG biggie. I've also tried a few of the older ones lately and they just left me cold. After playing massive life-stealers like Fallout 3 and Oblivion lots of the 8 bit and 16 bit RPG conventions that everyone just seemed to mindlessly accept are just too much to overcome for me in today's age. Zelda titles are one of those perpetrators. Playing an old Zelda in a new coat of paint might not "be for me" let's say. :lol:
I'm the same.
I definitely enjoyed OoT back then. I thought Majora's Mask thoroughly topped it. I just liked the whole Groundhog Day thing.
But they're better appreciated from a distance because I know for a fact they'd annoy the hell out me if I played them today. They'd also seem very limited in scope and, well, childish I suppose. I'm a little sad that I seem to have lost that ability to buy into Nintendo's graphical style with these games but there it is. Something's changed in me. Whatever it is it's elusive (I have no problems when it comes to Viva Pinata, as just one example) but it's definitely there. The kiddy styling puts me off.
Modern western rpgs just have more oomph than this old stuff. Sometimes I guess there's no going back.
I'm the other way. I find games like Fallout 3 and Oblivion to be boring as hell. I like the purity of the dungeons, solving the logic puzzles and the trading item chains you get in the Zelda games.
For some reason though I struggle to enjoy the 3D games like I do the 2D ones. Zelda is certainly stale though, but you can't help feel if Nintendo changed it too much people would all moan.

A no win situation.
http://judged-by-gabranth.blogspot.co.uk/
Antiriad2097 wrote:I have a general rule of thumb that if Nakamura likes something, it's not for me ;)

User avatar
Crunchy
Posts: 2123
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2005 10:43 am
Location: Claymorgue Castle

Re: So, who doesn't give a crap about Zelda?

Post by Crunchy » Mon May 30, 2011 4:00 pm

nakamura wrote:
Crunchy wrote: I definitely enjoyed OoT back then. I thought Majora's Mask thoroughly topped it. I just liked the whole Groundhog Day thing.
But they're better appreciated from a distance because I know for a fact they'd annoy the hell out me if I played them today. They'd also seem very limited in scope and, well, childish I suppose. I'm a little sad that I seem to have lost that ability to buy into Nintendo's graphical style with these games but there it is. Something's changed in me. Whatever it is it's elusive (I have no problems when it comes to Viva Pinata, as just one example) but it's definitely there. The kiddy styling puts me off.
Modern western rpgs just have more oomph than this old stuff. Sometimes I guess there's no going back.
I'm the other way. I find games like Fallout 3 and Oblivion to be boring as hell. I like the purity of the dungeons, solving the logic puzzles and the trading item chains you get in the Zelda games.
For some reason though I struggle to enjoy the 3D games like I do the 2D ones. Zelda is certainly stale though, but you can't help feel if Nintendo changed it too much people would all moan.

A no win situation.
Easy to see what's going on there. You prefer a simpler rpg whereas I prefer a much more complex one. In fact, the more complex the better for me.
I'm among those who don't really consider the Zelda games to be rpgs at all. One of the problems I'd have with OoT today, and probably with all the more modern ones I haven't played, is that they're just too lightweight on the rpg front. The most recent Zelda-like game I've played is Darksiders. I never for one minute considered Darksiders as an rpg while I was playing it. It was absolutely an action game. I really enjoyed it too, even though it turned out to be rather different to what I thought it was. Which also shows how much the twee (that word again!) art style of Zelda gets in the way for me - I'll play Darksiders but not Zelda.
Zelda transposed into an open world format like that of Fallout 3 wouldn't work for anybody. I wouldn't play it because of the game's unattractive graphical style and childish trappings and you probably wouldn't play it because you're looking for something that's easy to get into and doesn't involve the wandering, looting and lack of linearity peculiar to games like Oblivion.

User avatar
C=Style
Posts: 9053
Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 4:07 pm
Contact:

Re: So, who doesn't give a crap about Zelda?

Post by C=Style » Mon May 30, 2011 4:37 pm

DigitalDuck wrote:
DreamcastRIP wrote:Typical of the mentality to which I'm referring, one person here earlier in the thread told a non-believer :wink: that the reason he didn't enjoy one particular Zelda game was because he "wasn't playing it right". Words fail me. :shock:
You should read the thread again. That was me, in response to Shenmue hate. And it wasn't meant as a serious comment anyway.
I actually totally agreed with you about that comment on Shenmue. There was a way of playing it and enjoying it, if you didn't take your time with it and try to understand what it was doing then it would go over your head, being a longtime Sega fan did help though. There was a whole article about people "not getting" Shenmue on Digitizer back in the day.
Image

User avatar
nakamura
Posts: 7582
Joined: Tue Apr 07, 2009 2:32 pm
Location: Bournemouth
Contact:

Re: So, who doesn't give a crap about Zelda?

Post by nakamura » Mon May 30, 2011 5:15 pm

Crunchy wrote:
nakamura wrote:
Crunchy wrote: I definitely enjoyed OoT back then. I thought Majora's Mask thoroughly topped it. I just liked the whole Groundhog Day thing.
But they're better appreciated from a distance because I know for a fact they'd annoy the hell out me if I played them today. They'd also seem very limited in scope and, well, childish I suppose. I'm a little sad that I seem to have lost that ability to buy into Nintendo's graphical style with these games but there it is. Something's changed in me. Whatever it is it's elusive (I have no problems when it comes to Viva Pinata, as just one example) but it's definitely there. The kiddy styling puts me off.
Modern western rpgs just have more oomph than this old stuff. Sometimes I guess there's no going back.
I'm the other way. I find games like Fallout 3 and Oblivion to be boring as hell. I like the purity of the dungeons, solving the logic puzzles and the trading item chains you get in the Zelda games.
For some reason though I struggle to enjoy the 3D games like I do the 2D ones. Zelda is certainly stale though, but you can't help feel if Nintendo changed it too much people would all moan.

A no win situation.
Easy to see what's going on there. You prefer a simpler rpg whereas I prefer a much more complex one. In fact, the more complex the better for me.
I'm among those who don't really consider the Zelda games to be rpgs at all. One of the problems I'd have with OoT today, and probably with all the more modern ones I haven't played, is that they're just too lightweight on the rpg front. The most recent Zelda-like game I've played is Darksiders. I never for one minute considered Darksiders as an rpg while I was playing it. It was absolutely an action game. I really enjoyed it too, even though it turned out to be rather different to what I thought it was. Which also shows how much the twee (that word again!) art style of Zelda gets in the way for me - I'll play Darksiders but not Zelda.
Zelda transposed into an open world format like that of Fallout 3 wouldn't work for anybody. I wouldn't play it because of the game's unattractive graphical style and childish trappings and you probably wouldn't play it because you're looking for something that's easy to get into and doesn't involve the wandering, looting and lack of linearity peculiar to games like Oblivion.
I can pretty much go with that. I do not like my RPGs too complex in terms of strategy and some other aspects. I do like Final Fantasy and other turn based games like that, I love all the customisation that they offer and the decision making in battle. FFXII is a particular favourite and that is pretty hard set to active but I don't like them all out complex.
I don't like strategy games at all really, just find them a bit slow.

As for Zelda not being an RPG, it isn't really. You don't really level up and there are no statistics. It is an action game, action adventure if you will. I don't personally have a problem with the 3d visual styles in Zelda though, Wind Waker is a lovely game to look at and I can get on with the 'childish' trappings perfectly well. I can see where you are coming from with those comments though.
http://judged-by-gabranth.blogspot.co.uk/
Antiriad2097 wrote:I have a general rule of thumb that if Nakamura likes something, it's not for me ;)

User avatar
Red_Avatar
Posts: 119
Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2009 11:47 am
Location: Belgium
Contact:

Re: So, who doesn't give a crap about Zelda?

Post by Red_Avatar » Tue May 31, 2011 1:59 am

To me, Zelda was never really an RPG either.

This topic made me think about games and how they age with time. I often replay old NES, SNES etc. games using emulators but, except for a few really good ones, most just feel ... old. Game elements that have long been considered "bad" (deaths you can't avoid for example) are one of the main reasons for this. Zelda has few of those except for the backtracking & a LOT of walking around finding what you're supposed to do next + often not a decent map. I remember being stuck on Link's Awakening for DAYS because I had missed some hidden entrance under a darn rock.

Oddly enough, home computer games of the late 80s and early 90s have aged a lot less I feel. I think this is because the consoles are mostly a Japanese playing ground and the Japanese seemed to fall into a certain way of doing things whereas home computers had many Western developers with a wide range of input.
Nostalgia is like a grammar lesson: you find the present tense, but the past perfect! ~Owens Lee Pomeroy

User avatar
thebear
Posts: 1032
Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 5:30 am

Re: So, who doesn't give a crap about Zelda?

Post by thebear » Tue May 31, 2011 5:21 am

Only ever played LTTP

Loved that but never been a Nintendo console owner aprt from when my brothe had a SNES
one of the biggest collections of classic 70's, 80'S and on wrestling and boxing around - http://www.freewebs.com/cbenee

User avatar
Opa-Opa
Posts: 4304
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 3:35 pm
Location: Kent UK
Contact:

Re: So, who doesn't give a crap about Zelda?

Post by Opa-Opa » Tue May 31, 2011 5:58 am

I have found them to be dull to look at and boring to play..
The only one I enjoyed was Wind Waker which not only looked far better than all the others it seemed to have some charm about it, which is why I don't understand how people tend to find it the worse Zelda out of the lot.?

User avatar
Freestyler
Posts: 4150
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2009 3:15 pm

Re: So, who doesn't give a crap about Zelda?

Post by Freestyler » Tue May 31, 2011 7:10 am

To me an excellent RPG is in it's Levelling system. I like to be able to choose how to level up in whichever way I want. So if I want to level up my cooking and Sewing skills (let's say) to obscene levels - at the cost of my combat skills - then so be it. Even if it makes the game hopelessly hard after doing so.

Oblivion was like this. Spend too much time on other non-essential skills and you could quickly censored it for yourself, making the game too hard to play. Still, the fact it gave you the choice is what I like. Same with others I could mention. They don't spoon-feed you. World of Warcraft is a terrible example of this because - for all the millions of players the game has - nearly everyone has the exact same spec. All after the exact same gear and weapons, and all playing their characters the exact same way, using the exact same button press rotations. It's a mess.

Creativity. The ability to be who I want to be in a videogame. That is what makes me want to play RPGs. And that's why they're my favourite genre of all time.
Freestyler: A customer that's too hard to please, complains all the time and wants everything for next to nothing.

User avatar
thevulture
Posts: 10152
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2008 5:33 am

Re: So, who doesn't give a crap about Zelda?

Post by thevulture » Tue May 31, 2011 7:39 am

Flaws i found with Oblivion, fantastic as it was:

I'd spend ages leveling up my combat skills, getting some kick ass armour and weapons, but your foes leveled up along side you, so something like a wolf say, was still a real pain in the arse to take out.

I never got to join Dark Brotherhood as chap who spoke to me, wanted to meet at location X at time Y...was killed by NPC coming out of the tunnels, so that was that! :cry:

Main Quest missions soon degenerated into:Legging it into tower, running like a lunatic to the top, dodging all guards/creatures etc, smash the power source thing, bingo re-appear outside.

User avatar
Matt_B
Posts: 5402
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 5:30 am
Location: 5 minutes from the beach, 30 seconds from the pub

Re: So, who doesn't give a crap about Zelda?

Post by Matt_B » Tue May 31, 2011 8:30 am

o.pwuaioc wrote:First apologies: I did mean the SNES. I'm unfortunately not as familiar with 16 bit computers. Also, I don't think you quite grasped what I was saying. And yes, we all know about MK's digitization of the sprites to make it realistic. That's a bit different from what I was getting at. Perhaps you should try reading the my posts to see my train of thought rather than isolate one line out of context. Or rather, to sum, as far as hand drawn animation goes, Zelda: LttP is less "cartoony" than Wind Waker. There's nothing overly cartoony about LttP. I'm obviously not looking at real life. :roll:
So, after all that, what you basically mean is that the characters in LTTP are rendered in a fashion that more resembles adults than the child-bodied style of WW and the DS games? Sure, absolutely, of course. However, it's still a style that most people would consider to be "cartoony", because it's far less realistic than what the hardware is capable of.

Anyway, if you're worried about people picking up on things that you don't mean, perhaps you should read through your own posts to make sure your train of thought is clear? :wink:

User avatar
pantal00ns
Posts: 3647
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 10:20 am
Location: Waaayy down south

Re: So, who doesn't give a crap about Zelda?

Post by pantal00ns » Tue May 31, 2011 8:42 am

Does taking a crap whilst reading about Zelda count?

User avatar
ShadowNeku
Posts: 2135
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 9:10 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: So, who doesn't give a crap about Zelda?

Post by ShadowNeku » Tue May 31, 2011 9:42 am

thevulture wrote:Main Quest missions soon degenerated into:Legging it into tower, running like a lunatic to the top, dodging all guards/creatures etc, smash the power source thing, bingo re-appear outside.
Yeah i did pretty much the same thing after a while for most missions. Use invisibility to conceal myself and then leg it to whatever item/person im supposed to get, then run back out.
I asked for orange. It gave me lemon lime!

User avatar
Joey
Posts: 3842
Joined: Tue May 19, 2009 2:45 pm
Location: Leicester, UK

Re: So, who doesn't give a crap about Zelda?

Post by Joey » Tue May 31, 2011 11:17 am

pantal00ns wrote:Does taking a crap whilst reading about Zelda count?
Only if its a two flusher...
Image

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests