The Legend Of Zelda - General Thread

The one thing that bothers me about the combat in SS isn't even the combat per se but the fact that the enemy variety was seriously lacking, meaning you generally were up against a lot of the same enemies most of the time.

It certainly would've been a lot better if they put Moblins, Stalfos, and Staldra in more places instead of sticking Bokoblins everywhere.

Or at least- The very least- Had the Bokoblins fight differently.

I like SS a lot but I can definitely say it has flaws.

TP and SS (plus PH and ST) are definitely the gray age of the series.

If they did something as simple as replace the required exploration in both console games with more varied sidequests perhaps we wouldn't have had to get BOTW to radically defy series conventions.

No this "doomsday" crap again, please. We all know you hate those games. No need to remind us every single time about it.

Here's something nicer to look at: A Zelda fan who sadly passed away due to a terminal illness was given a chance to play BOTW by Nintendo themselves.

The Big N doesn't always get it right but I can't recall the last time a game publisher did something that cool other than them.

And hey, at least Waxing Name isn't calling it a dark age anymore- Progress!

edited 12th Feb '17 8:03:43 PM by Pulse

Maybe he'll eventually think it's the light gray age, or even the off-white age

Nah, next is clearly the puce age.

No, it's definitely a gray age and it will always be remembered as such.

And I think it's absolutely clear that there really is no Zelda cycle. If that's the case, the gray age (or at least TP) would have benefitted from it already. WW and MM only got Vindicated by History because they truly were ahead of their time.

And I'm not going to let up on my criticism of Zelda's gray age. I've been too jaded by Sonic Team pissing away the forward progress of the Sonic series to have hope that Zelda will keep its forward momentum.

TP-SS was superior to MM/WW though. Not that Majora was bad, but it's odd and has a lot of its own tedium people like to brush off. And Wind Waker is just weaker at everything compared to TP and SS (or even Ocarina/Majora honestly) aside from graphics. Twilight Princess is remembered very fondly and was the pinnacle of the series back then. I haven't really seen more fondness for SS than WW at all. Don't revise history to suit your preferences.

By what measure do you consider TP-SS to be better than MM-WW?

Comparing just to Wind Waker, better dungeons, better overworld (maybe not the sky, but definitely everything else), better combat, better character development for the pivotal characters, better difficulty, and not being clearly rushed.

Majora as I said isn't as bad (I put it up there with SS), but the lack of dungeons hurts. And while TP and SS get (rightfully) criticized for all the tedium in the beginning, Majora has it the entire way through with playing the same songs over and over again along with repeating similar or the same sections multiple times as you figure out what to do.

I can see the arguments for TP being superior to WW but I think they have different strengths and weaknesses.

If we're comparing the two "eras" in general though, I can't say I agree with SS-TP being overall better. They may do some individual aspects better, but as EXPERIENCES, MM-WW are just superior in my opinion.

MM and WW have flaws but they are still creative games that took chances and pushed the series forward into new and exciting directions that worked, with MM having an amazing atmosphere, WW having a completely new aesthetic and a better plot than average for the series, etc.

SS drags down TP a lot because it has so many problems (not in the same league as MM at all in my opinion), and while mechanically polished TP is very formulaic and implements any new ideas very poorly. Its writing also frankly sucks compared to MM and WW which have some of the best storytelling in the series.

I also should mention that MM and WW are still fairly well-regarded. TP I think has a decent reputation these days but SS is still as reviled as ever.

edited 13th Feb '17 7:56:47 AM by Draghinazzo

"And I'm not going to let up on my criticism of Zelda's gray age."

No one's asking you otherwise, just to stop shoving it into our faces. It's getting tiresome. And most importantly, it's getting increasingly moot since the so-called gray/grey/dork whatever age already ended with ALBW. If you really can't resist the urge to screaming doomsday even when it's not the current discussion at hand, there are plenty of other websites where you can do it. We only have one Zelda thread in the TV Tropes forum, mate. If it's locked because of the constant complaining, we're all fucked.

You haven't even bothered to rebutt the many counterarguments we presented time and again. TP, supposedly the Start of Darkness for the series, is the second-best selling game in the series. SS, for all the crap it gets from fans, still sold a lot more than many Franchise Killers in other series. PH is the fifth-best selling game in the series, and ST is generally considered to be a major improvement over PH despite the criticism over the train and the railroaded overworld. And in the supposed threads you've shown as "evidence" about a Dork Age,.... in one of them the most voted opinion was that there was NOT such thing in the first place.

And this is the last thing I'm going to say about this near-strawmanned, logically fallacious topic. I'm afraid you're in for a uphill front if you're only here in this thread to continuously shove the same, repeated points over and over again.

For Pete's sake, what a bummer....

Ya know, I feel like people who complain about early DLC announcements and Day 1 DLC (which is not on-disc DLC) don't understand how game development works.

You see, there's a period of time that's usually about a month or so long where a game has gone gold. That means that it is, for all intents and purposes, finished and has been sent off to manufacturers so copies can be made and sent to distributors. Before the days of DLC, during this period of time, developers usually had absolutely nothing to do until the game launched and were basically being paid to just spin their wheels. With the advent of DLC, devs can now fix bugs or issues they new about but didn't have time to fix and that patch can be ready and waiting by the time you get the game. Alternatively, they can work on new content to be added to the game at a later date or, depending on how much content it is, even Day One. This is not a bad thing.

Basically, I don't care that they announced DLC before the game was released because it's certainly gone gold by this point. Given how far off the DLC packs are (especially the big one), the chances of this being cut content are slim-to-none. It's likely content that they either came up with after the game went gold, content they didn't have time to add before it went gold (and it's not like they can delay the game again), or side content that they planned to be DLC from the start.

Also, if Breath of the Wild does DLC as well as Hyrule Warriors, I see absolutely nothing to complain about.

"content they didn't have time to add before it went gold"

Yeah, so cut content.

I rest my case.

I doubt the bulk of the DLC is already complete. Hard Mode being paid DLC is dumb though.

I'll probably buy eventually anyway. Not right away, though. I want to experience the beginning of the game as the devs intended, without the bonus treasure chests, even if the difference is probably minor.

There are a lot of shady practices surrounding DLC, but I feel as long as:

A) The base game is perfectly playable on its own

B) Any potential competitive multiplayer mode does not put vanilla players at an objective disadvantage (that is to say, DLC perks should be either aesthetic or at least horizontal equivalents rather than vertical upgrades).

then it's totally harmless. Annoying, at times, but nobody is forcing you to buy it as long as the above two are true.

I'm taking a wait-and-see on the hard mode DLC- If it's an in-depth thing, or at least demands some consideration on where mobs are and how dense their groups are, I'm willing to accept it. That's the only suspect thing announced and honestly,thus far, Nintendo's proven fairly trustworthy with their DLC policies.

DLC is acceptable, yeah,it's just used so badly so often that I definitely see why so many people are opposed to it.

edited 14th Feb '17 10:10:21 PM by Pulse

Do you think there will be a "special edition" with all the DLC included out by Christmas?

No way they release a complete edition barely a month after the second DLC, assuming they even decide to release a complete edition.

I don't think they should make the Cave of Trials a DLC.

Just a heads up, been hearing Bot W Wii U has been leaked. Be mindful of spoilers.