Quote:
Originally Posted by GamenerdAdvance
I'll say in this thread what I said in another.
Drastically changing the time period of Zelda (in relation to the real world at least) is a cheap fix to a deeper, underlying problem.
Zelda is ready for change again. Change like the transition between LTTP and OOT. Real, gameplay structure change. Not a tacky gimmick to throw Hyrule some centuries in the future whilst still keeping most of the gameplay architecture the same. Why not go for some prehistoric Zelda whilst you're at it?
Besides, most signs point to Hyrule just sort of fading away in the future. Most Zelda games further in the timeline get bleaker and bleaker as far as population density is concerned. |
The most notable aspect of the transition between LttP and
OoT was the 3d visuals-- much remained the same and continues today as you can see in
TP. I'd like to see some reasoning behind the statement "a tacky gimmick to throw Hyre some centuries in the future..." What makes it tacky, exactly? And why is the case that the gameplay architecture would remain the same if done so?
A futuristic setting opens door to many possibilities, and it is not a simple whim of desire to just throw the series in a more advanced setting. The futuristic setting can lead to both a more complex storyline and a more refined gameplay not reminiscent to past
LoZ titles. It's precisely the current so-called medieval setting that is starting to lose taste and appear more and more dull every time one roams around it. The setting introduced in
TWW truly introduced a whole new concept to the
LoZ series, and the setting was key. As limited as sailing can be among tiny islands, the concept incorporates new gameplay and deals with a compelling, even tragic storyline. The result of
TWW's setting was truly amazing, and the same would apply with a more advanced setting, perhaps to a greater degree.