Overall no, but their Oracle games were amazing. Nintendo will always be the best developer IMO, they have perfected their craft (though this does not mean I think they make the best games or the best hardware, far from it). I would like to see Capcom make a 3D Zelda, I was a bit disappointed with the two Wii installments.
Poll: Is Capcom better at making Zelda than Nintendo?
- Thread starter Souplex
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Once again I have to reiterate No Capcom would be bad for making this type of game. People wonder why Resident evil is so bad right now. It's because The developers for all of the good ones left the company. The team that worked on RE 1-3 Gone.TheLycanKing144 said:
The one who made the stellar 4 Also left the company. Capcom isn't the company we remember because it's not the people we remember anymore.
Who is there that you would really trust to make it?
this, Capcom isn't the only one that can make a better Zelda game then Nintendo.The_Echo said:
Okami was great, Darksiders was great, nether made by Nintendo and both I would recommend over the last several actual Zelda games
Okami is probably better than any Zelda game. I'm unsure. My opinion wavers from time to time, but it's always between that it's "maybe better" or "definitely better".
But Oracle of Seasons is among my least favourite Zelda games. Minish Cap is good, but still far from the best.
So no, Capcom can't make a better game than Nintendo. Clover/Platinum on the other hand, can.
Darksiders is really good, and my favourite new franchise of this generation, but it's not better than Zelda. It ranks among the great Zelda games, but not the best. It has got some things over Zelda, but it was never really able to find that perfect balance and identity of what it wanted to be, which led it to suffer in some areas too.
But Oracle of Seasons is among my least favourite Zelda games. Minish Cap is good, but still far from the best.
So no, Capcom can't make a better game than Nintendo. Clover/Platinum on the other hand, can.
Darksiders is really good, and my favourite new franchise of this generation, but it's not better than Zelda. It ranks among the great Zelda games, but not the best. It has got some things over Zelda, but it was never really able to find that perfect balance and identity of what it wanted to be, which led it to suffer in some areas too.
All I've played is Majora's Mask, so I can't really say. I do love MM though, but then again it's the oddball of the Zelda franchise so that doesn't say much.
If you're referring to Hidemaro Fujibayashi, then that's not true. He was the director for Skyward Sword, but before that the only Nintendo Zelda game he was a part of was as a subdirector and writer for Phantom Hourglass. The series is still very much mainly under the supervision of Eiji Aonuma.Winnosh said:
When Capcom does a Zelda game, they tend to include many more smaller rewards in their games than Nintendo. For example: Minish Cap gave you Kinstones and sword techniques upon finding hidden areas; Okami gave the player brushstrokes, beads, and Viewtiful Joe references at the end of every sidequest. I can't comment on the Oracle games, haven't played them. Meanwhile, Nintendo's Zelda only rewards the player's curiosity with pieces of heart most of the time outside of the main quest, except Majora's Mask which is mostly a scavenger hunt. Capcom's games also tend to be much less serious in tone. I don't think Capcom's Zelda's are better, but they tend to be more fun while Nintendo's tend to be much more personal and story driven.
Meh, I think RE6 is better than people give it credit for. I enjoyed it and thought it made some improvements to the series (such as being able to move and aim at the same time) but in others it was a step back (too much action focus), Capcom I think does need to get back to their roots a bit but honestly gamers are impossible to please, at least on the internet anyway. If they don't change anything they cry about how "it's not making progress, now it's COD" but when they do make changes they whine "they abandoned their core roots, the game sucks".Winnosh said:
If I was a developer I wouldn't know what to believe.
I think Nintendo has gotten incredibly uninspired and lazy in recent years, New Mario bros Wii they said they neglected to put Peach in because they'd have to animate her dress, okay that's incredibly lazy but now 2 games later and she's still not in it, it's just 2 nameless Toads in an extremely similar game. Then they kicked out that Mario Anniversary collection, a glorified emulator running a 3mb rom for 50 bucks, they didn't even put the better version of Mario All Stars that came with Mario World, or you know include Yoshi's Island.
Wario Land:Shake it! it was a far far more interesting game than the new Mario games on the Wii & WiiU. There was more effort and ...passion(?)put into it. So all in all I think they've just been lazy with games.
But on the Zelda topic Skyward Sword lacked a lot of what made Zelda interesting (exploring and such) it mainly focused on the stupid motion control gimmick and lacked the fun and reward for exploring despite having flight as a way of getting around, an awesome idea just snuffed by laziness? Lack of time?
Now they're ...releasing a remastered Wind Waker, a game that still looks/runs/is great currently is getting a remake, the fact people are excited for this blows my mind, the game right now looks great, unless they do some major overhauling (they won't) it's not worth the 50 bucks they're going to charge.
Okami had a lot going for it ,similar idea with a neat twist to it, and the visuals were just awesome. The Zelda games by capcom (I've seen LPs of them) were really well done, more so than the 'competing' 2D ones Nintendo had. Twilight Princess was my favorite of the Zelda series by a long shot, a large world with a variety of interesting characters you wanted to help and care for.
Despite the stab at Vigil and Darksiders I actually like that series more than a majority of Zelda games. Not because they're darker and edgier, but they actually feature a different character with different weapons in different worlds.
It seems they lost their passion (in general) and they just stamp out crap to just rake in nostalgia cash.
Wario Land:Shake it! it was a far far more interesting game than the new Mario games on the Wii & WiiU. There was more effort and ...passion(?)put into it. So all in all I think they've just been lazy with games.
But on the Zelda topic Skyward Sword lacked a lot of what made Zelda interesting (exploring and such) it mainly focused on the stupid motion control gimmick and lacked the fun and reward for exploring despite having flight as a way of getting around, an awesome idea just snuffed by laziness? Lack of time?
Now they're ...releasing a remastered Wind Waker, a game that still looks/runs/is great currently is getting a remake, the fact people are excited for this blows my mind, the game right now looks great, unless they do some major overhauling (they won't) it's not worth the 50 bucks they're going to charge.
Okami had a lot going for it ,similar idea with a neat twist to it, and the visuals were just awesome. The Zelda games by capcom (I've seen LPs of them) were really well done, more so than the 'competing' 2D ones Nintendo had. Twilight Princess was my favorite of the Zelda series by a long shot, a large world with a variety of interesting characters you wanted to help and care for.
Despite the stab at Vigil and Darksiders I actually like that series more than a majority of Zelda games. Not because they're darker and edgier, but they actually feature a different character with different weapons in different worlds.
It seems they lost their passion (in general) and they just stamp out crap to just rake in nostalgia cash.
Well Minish Cap was the only Zelda game I finished soooooooo yeah, I prefer Capcom's Zelda games.
My favorite Zelda game was probably Dark Cloud 2. Similar but less irritating combat. Good story. Under appreciated game.
Seeing as my favourite Zelda game is Windwaker, I'm going to have to vote no. Not only is it my favourite Zelda game, it's one of my favourite games of all time. I even liked it more than Okami (sorry Daystar).
All of that said though, I'm not really a Zelda fan. I think some of the games are neat but I don't like playing many of them, the only one I played far as well as enjoyed was Twilight Princess because the characters were interesting and someone I want to save. While OoT, a game that gets endless praise I felt was empty, unrefined and lacking in depth of character giving me no compelling reason to save them. I thought this even when the game was new so it's not like some sorta view on games of yester-year and I'm a big retro game nerd, I'm still stumped why people think it's the 'best game ever' or 'the best zelda game' I think TP and WW trump it in every way. I get what you're saying but I don't think I'm subject to the fanbase's turmoil insanity. I'm not a diehard Nintendo fan, Metroid? Yes I'll admit I'm crazy in love with that series (minus ...one game)j-e-f-f-e-r-s said:
I saw a lot of the Zelda games (LPs, friend playing) and while I agree Wind Waker was neat, I'm sure many didn't really enjoy seeing that awesome gamecube preview of Link v Gannon then getting 'a cartoon'. I really think Wind Waker was a solid title that's fun to play today and looks great.Which brings me back to my complaint about it, they're 'remastering it' a cell shaded game that looks great now is getting a remastering? Not much is being done but they're going to slap a 50/60 dollar price tag on it. It's that kind of Mario-lazy that bothers me.
Maybe I'm not the best person to speak up on it, because I have enjoyed a lot of the games via LP or through a friend and some think that makes my opinion less valid but it's just something I figured I'd state in the topic that was presented.