Why so many people dislike LoZ these days

[masterjiji]

i think the main reason LoZ has gone downhill lies in the "off" games: minish cap, phantom hourglass, seasons/ages, and the like. the "on" ones are spectacular (twilight princess, ocarina of time, majora's mask), its just that we just had an "on" game with LoZ: TP and must now slog through the phourglasses and stuff that sounds as weird as "LoZ: the plastic stick of the old gods"

 

[Daedalus1942]

personally I have for a long time thought that legend of zelda is one of the greatest game series of all time and i cant understand why so many people are against it. If I'm imagining things please tell me.

I like Zelda, but the recent ones are becoming just more of the same.
I'm not looking forward to Spirit tracks at all, and the next one on Wii apparently isn't going to be any different to previous Zelda's. Different is good. Look at Twilight Princess, having the two worlds and link transforming. They did the same thing in the gameboy colour games, and IMO they're some of the best Zelda games ever.
The fact that they're planning on not doing anything new is what sparks my anger (not hate) towards nintendo for the Zelda games.

 

[Daedalus1942]

I don't like it because it hasn't been as engaging as it used to be. Zelda 64 caught my imagination like nothing else, ever, (except for Metal Gear Solid 2), and it still holds up well with me to this day. The previous four games do the same thing for me.

Every game since then has done something wrong. Wind Waker has those two boring co-op dungeons and the horrendous Triforce quest, and Twilight Princess just depresses me because it's so bland and rips off of Zelda 64 so much.

Zelda needs to take a cue from Earthbound and bring a story where Link and Zelda's descendants are kids or teenagers in the 21st century because the medieval fantasy setting might be holding them back.

They're doing that with Spirit Tracks.. it just doesn't look like it will be any good.
It's a steampunk era from what I can tell.

 

[Lucky|Gamer]

I'm convinced all the anti halo people go home and write erotic fanfics about the holographic halo chick. Imagining such things will help deal with people such as them.

Actually, Halo feels more like a sellout and standard vs. what other good games (like Bioshock or Fallout 3) feel like, unique and innovative. Plus, speaking of, Bioshock was prettier even being a asylum at the bottom of the sea.

So the sentence above my words is stupidity. People have their own opinions, using your mind to make perverts of them not how you deal with them. Ignore them or accept all sides of the argument.

That being said, one argument I found against Fallout 3 was stupid.

"I saw a guy shoot thing Super Mutant thing is the head, dead center. But it lived, due to the fact he didn't do enough damage based on numbers. For that, fuck Fallout 3 it can't be worth trying."

I'd understand if it was multiplayer, but being a open-world single player, making that possible would make too easy, and be the greater of 2 evils. Plus, Fallout 3 does so much right, that it's not "fuck Fallout 3 for not giving headshot 1-hits" its "fuck the guy who said that for being close-minded".

Plus, snipers suck, they are evil cowards who rack kills by using guns that do the works for them. I'll save that for a new topic, though.

 

[Katana314]

Spoiler

Cause it's now on the wii, the wii is only for casual players soccer moms, therefor everything on it must be shunned and hated.
(wii owner and zelda fan btw)

You pretty much hit the nail on the head. I find that most of the hatred for the Zelda series is just another example of blind hatred for anything Nintendo.

In fact, I'd like to use this topic to dissect the major complaints against the Zelda games general, and offer a rational explanation to them.

The story is always the same! I'm tired of saving the princess and fighting Ganondorf! - I'll start off with this complaint, as I feel this one is the most unjustified of the bunch. In many aspects, the story in most Zelda games remain unchanged: Link is a regular everyday person who becomes a hero and saves his land from an evil malevolent being bent on world-domination. However, this is where the similarities end. The finer points of the stories in every Zelda game have always been different, and have always succeeded in giving each game a different feel. And besides, good storytelling is more about how you tell the story rather than what story you tell, and this is where the stories in the Zelda games truly shine. Practically every game in the series has been able to draw most people into the story and make them feel like they are a part of the narrative and not just an observer. Twilight Princess's storytelling in particular had me on the verge of tears by the time I reached the end of my second playthrough. The stories in Zelda have always thrived off concepts that are simple enough to understand, but with a rich narrative underlining it that always offer an engaging experience, and this isn't changing anytime soon (I hope).

It's never been dark or mature enough for my tastes! Link is too boring and cliched! - This is also another one of the more misguided complaints. Whenever Nintendo creates a Zelda game, no matter how realistic or dark the setting/story is, it must obey the golden rule: The Zelda games must always appeal to everyone. Every Zelda game since the original has always been safe enough for kids to play, and this is never going to change. Even Majora's Mask, which arguably has the darkest undertones of any Zelda game, was given an ESRB rating of E for Everyone (for the N64; not sure what the Virtual Console port is rated). This also applies to Link himself. From the beginning, Link was always intended to be a character that the player "becomes", which is why he never speaks, or is not dark or brooding in the slightest. Hell, that's why he was named Link to begin with: To create a link between the player and the character they control. Personally, I like Link just the way he is, and I always feel like I am Link whenever I play a Zelda game.

Nintendo just rehashes the same game over and over! Nothing ever changes! - This complaint's been around for a while, but I feel that Yahtzee's antics really exacerbated this. Yes, the core mechanics of the Zelda games haven't deviated too much from Ocarina of Time or Link to the Past. Every game has dungeons to explore, heart pieces to find, boomerangs to throw, and cracks in the walls to blow up. However, these elements are what make Zelda, well, Zelda. They're what separate the games from most other action-adventure games out there, and the fact that they continue to be just as fun now as they were 10 years ago shows how well everything works. Like Flying_Emu said earlier, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." In fact, the fact that Miyamoto says the upcoming Wii Zelda won't be too radically different from previous installments has me more reassured than concerned. Changing the core mechanics for the sake of change is never a good idea, and Nintendo would undoubtedly get panned by just about everyone if they made such a radical departure from what defines a Zelda game. I'll love the series no matter what direction it takes, but I hope Nintendo never forgets what makes Zelda such a great series to begin with.

I originally actually agreed with that first point (the criticism, not reply) but I suppose you make a good point about it. Still, though many many movies follow the standard sorts of narrative patterns we know (hero on quest to kill bad guy for revenge, for example) those are set apart because while the patterns are there, every THING in it is different. I don't see that much for Zelda. No matter how intricate the cutscenes are, I pretty much know that at some point Link is going to stab Ganondorf with the master sword.

I never felt Zelda should be darker, but your response to that criticism is valid anyway. No argument there.

I agree that if a good game is made and a sequel is deserved, base mechanics should remain. But that's all. Every mechanic in the game needs to be rethought, possibly tweaked in some way, etc. I was a bit surprised to see in HL2 that they had stripped about half the weapons from HL1. Headcrabs and sciency plotlines are still there, but the whole game almost has a different feel to it. I have no issue with a game reusing a protagonist, base mechanics, that sort of thing. But when you get a boomerang that does the exact same thing as the last game, bombs that still blow cracks in walls, and the light arrows always come near the end to kill the Big Bad, that's when I take issue. Interesting twists such as the dual-hookshot are things I'd like to see more of.

 

[Asickorphan]

you're probably right mine is Wind Walker. But its basicaly always the same story with all the same gear saveing the world from some same, and or sorta the same evil.......

 

[Chicago Ted]

I never really liked it much in the first place. I thought Twilight Princess was alright, but not great or anything, no reason for me to keep the Wii. And there were quite a few features they could have easily put in to it in order to make it better.

 

[TheGreatCoolEnergy]

My problem with LoZ, and Nintendo in general, is that they have re-made the same thing a million times. Like they have 6 hero's spread across their empire: Mario, Link, Samus, Kerby, Donkey Kong and Sonic. The company has used the same 6 heros(and supporting characters) for the past like 20 years. Perhaps it's time for them to think of something new?

EDIT: The only Zelda game I have played all the way through is Wind Waker, although I played a bit of Ocrana of Time and Mjorin's Mask, and they seemed good.

2nd EDIT: Look at Portal, as overrated and cliched this will sound, Portal was actualy quite good. A nice fusion of humor, physics, and puzzle action. A very underground game. Now lets say Valve had brought Portal to Nintendo while there where making "Super Mario Party 38" I realy do doubt that they would have even gave the game a chance, because it was kind of a gamble...like Portal may have been a smash hit or it may have flopped. But they new that "Mario Party 38" was a shure hit cause everyone who had bought the other Mario Parties would have been shure to buy the new one.

 

[shwnbob]

LoZ is a great game but the hand held titles really ruined the series for me go back to the OoT style and the games will get better.

 

[phar]

Twighlight Princess wasnt as good as Windwaker or OoT. Im one of the ones who didnt really like Majoras Mask that much. I still love the series and am looking forward to the next. Twilight Princess was good but what put me off was that fishing bit at the beggiing that seriously took like 2-3 hours. I was watching tv while waiting for a fish to bite my rod.

But kids these days wont appreciate the game at all. For one they wont like reading the text and second there isnt 10 explosions a minute like in Halo.

 

[madrick11]

i suppose if there are more people these days who hate LoZ it's probably because the series is generally more of the same, though personally, i've always felt that even though Nintendo rarely mixes it up when it comes to the LoZ franchise (with some exceptions being Link's Awakening, and the masterpiece that is Majora's Mask), it's a formula that works

but that's just what i think

 

[Mr. Fister]

Spoiler

Cause it's now on the wii, the wii is only for casual players soccer moms, therefor everything on it must be shunned and hated.
(wii owner and zelda fan btw)

You pretty much hit the nail on the head. I find that most of the hatred for the Zelda series is just another example of blind hatred for anything Nintendo.

In fact, I'd like to use this topic to dissect the major complaints against the Zelda games general, and offer a rational explanation to them.

The story is always the same! I'm tired of saving the princess and fighting Ganondorf! - I'll start off with this complaint, as I feel this one is the most unjustified of the bunch. In many aspects, the story in most Zelda games remain unchanged: Link is a regular everyday person who becomes a hero and saves his land from an evil malevolent being bent on world-domination. However, this is where the similarities end. The finer points of the stories in every Zelda game have always been different, and have always succeeded in giving each game a different feel. And besides, good storytelling is more about how you tell the story rather than what story you tell, and this is where the stories in the Zelda games truly shine. Practically every game in the series has been able to draw most people into the story and make them feel like they are a part of the narrative and not just an observer. Twilight Princess's storytelling in particular had me on the verge of tears by the time I reached the end of my second playthrough. The stories in Zelda have always thrived off concepts that are simple enough to understand, but with a rich narrative underlining it that always offer an engaging experience, and this isn't changing anytime soon (I hope).

It's never been dark or mature enough for my tastes! Link is too boring and cliched! - This is also another one of the more misguided complaints. Whenever Nintendo creates a Zelda game, no matter how realistic or dark the setting/story is, it must obey the golden rule: The Zelda games must always appeal to everyone. Every Zelda game since the original has always been safe enough for kids to play, and this is never going to change. Even Majora's Mask, which arguably has the darkest undertones of any Zelda game, was given an ESRB rating of E for Everyone (for the N64; not sure what the Virtual Console port is rated). This also applies to Link himself. From the beginning, Link was always intended to be a character that the player "becomes", which is why he never speaks, or is not dark or brooding in the slightest. Hell, that's why he was named Link to begin with: To create a link between the player and the character they control. Personally, I like Link just the way he is, and I always feel like I am Link whenever I play a Zelda game.

Nintendo just rehashes the same game over and over! Nothing ever changes! - This complaint's been around for a while, but I feel that Yahtzee's antics really exacerbated this. Yes, the core mechanics of the Zelda games haven't deviated too much from Ocarina of Time or Link to the Past. Every game has dungeons to explore, heart pieces to find, boomerangs to throw, and cracks in the walls to blow up. However, these elements are what make Zelda, well, Zelda. They're what separate the games from most other action-adventure games out there, and the fact that they continue to be just as fun now as they were 10 years ago shows how well everything works. Like Flying_Emu said earlier, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." In fact, the fact that Miyamoto says the upcoming Wii Zelda won't be too radically different from previous installments has me more reassured than concerned. Changing the core mechanics for the sake of change is never a good idea, and Nintendo would undoubtedly get panned by just about everyone if they made such a radical departure from what defines a Zelda game. I'll love the series no matter what direction it takes, but I hope Nintendo never forgets what makes Zelda such a great series to begin with.

I originally actually agreed with that first point (the criticism, not reply) but I suppose you make a good point about it. Still, though many many movies follow the standard sorts of narrative patterns we know (hero on quest to kill bad guy for revenge, for example) those are set apart because while the patterns are there, every THING in it is different. I don't see that much for Zelda. No matter how intricate the cutscenes are, I pretty much know that at some point Link is going to stab Ganondorf with the master sword.

I never felt Zelda should be darker, but your response to that criticism is valid anyway. No argument there.

I agree that if a good game is made and a sequel is deserved, base mechanics should remain. But that's all. Every mechanic in the game needs to be rethought, possibly tweaked in some way, etc. I was a bit surprised to see in HL2 that they had stripped about half the weapons from HL1. Headcrabs and sciency plotlines are still there, but the whole game almost has a different feel to it. I have no issue with a game reusing a protagonist, base mechanics, that sort of thing. But when you get a boomerang that does the exact same thing as the last game, bombs that still blow cracks in walls, and the light arrows always come near the end to kill the Big Bad, that's when I take issue. Interesting twists such as the dual-hookshot are things I'd like to see more of.

The odd thing is to me, I like it when a story is simple to understand and obviously has a happy ending, ala Zelda or the Mario RPGs. That way, I know for sure my efforts will pay off and I'm not dreading a so-so or worse ending, like I was with other RPGs. That, and Twilight Princess did a decent job of hiding Ganondorf until well into the game, so it kinda switched up the storytelling a bit, and Phantom Hourglass didn't reveal the true villain for a good while.

As for items always doing the same thing, Twilight Princess really mixed up things here as well. The boomerang had a mini-cyclone when you threw it, and you could use it to collect objects and solve certain puzzles. Bombs were split into three separate items, and each one of them could be attached to your arrows so you could shoot them at enemies. The hookshot became the clawshot, and then later on the double-clawshot, and worked differently than the regular hookshot. Phantom Hourglass sorta did this as well, with objects like the grappling hook and hammer. It's not just items that are different from most Zelda games, either; other mechanics, such as horse-riding/sailing, combat, and even quest progression are different in every game.