Break said:
I don't think the issue of Zelda is solely due to nostalgia. People who have memories of pre-WW Zelda games fell in love with the franchise when it was quite different to what Zelda is today. The games didn't used to be so afraid of the player getting stuck - the camera direction and level design of the newer ones makes sure that players don't spend half an hours wandering around because they're not sure what they can do next. You could easily argue that to be evidence of superior game design, but that philosophy is clearly evident in the boss battles, as well; I've been playing Majora's Mask again, recently, and despite knowing exactly what to do, I still found the Ikana Castle boss to be a bit of a handful. Compare with the bosses in Twilight Princess, which aren't so much fought as they are solved, as you use your latest tool in clearly telegraphed ways to stab their weak spot, then repeat the process two or three more times.
We'll never see another Water Temple because of this, and for people who liked the old games, those kind of moments were part of the charm. There's a lot that the new games do that's far and away superior to what people think of as the classics of the series, and there's a lot that people forget about the classics that's been improved upon by newer titles. Personally, I think that OoT, while it's influence and significance to the industry cannot be understated, has been somewhat superceded by games like WW or TP, in the same way that you don't need to play Red or Blue if you've already played through Diamond or Pearl. It no longer has the same impact as it did, because it served a very special purpose in the history of videogames.
I agree completely, I don't think this can be stated enough. In my opinion Twilight Princess was an amazing game and easily top of the class up to the Master Sword, after which it dropped to merely being good because the whole thing felt completely neutered with modern hand-holding game design.
In past Zelda games like A Link to the Past and Occarina of Time the difficulty ramped up as you proceeded through the game, the dungeons got bigger & badder and the puzzles increasingly difficult. In Twilight Princess however dungeon difficulty and size went static, no real change past the first 3, and infact became easier because Link became bigger and badder as you found more upgrades & hearts. The way to go next was always telegraphed and obvious, and ppart from the ice castle which didn't have hearts in pots I don't think I ever dropped below 3 hearts in any of the dungeons. You see any past dungeon games, hearts, magic and rupies only respawn from broken pots if you leave the dungeon, making them a limited in quantity. In Twilight Princess, to respawn them you only had to leave the room. Bosses too were pretty easy, for example while it was cool in concept I beat the dragon in the sky temple without getting hit once.
And I'm not saying this all as a huge OoT fan, my nostalgia remains with A Link to the Past... though it kind of took a hit when I replayed it last year on the virtual console. While still challenging in places I guess I've gotten a lot better in the past 15 years since I played it because I really steamrolled it, despite completely forgetting half the game finding 100% items without even trying.
But back on topic, I do have hope for Skyward Sword in the form of that crazy little patent Nintendo got where the game plays itself for you when it gets too hard. At first glance it sounds like a horrible idea, but when applied correctly it can actually turn out quite well, as seen in 2D Super Mario Bros Wii. Unlike the DS Super Mario Bros it was actually hard again, like the Mario games of old all us long time gamers remember, while at the same time providing an optional gimme past the difficult spots for newer gamers so they don't get frustrated and quit.
I really, really hope they apply the same concept to Skyward Sword to put the bite back into Zelda and make it hard again, like it should be.