Quote:
Originally Posted by GamenerdAdvance
Well, no, I don't want to punch you. But I'd like to smack the inventor of the futuristic Zelda genre
|
We want to smack you too, hon. (insert smiley)
Quote:
Originally Posted by GamenerdAdvance
Also, if time period changes are not out of place, then how about victorian F-Zero? I mean, where were the F-Zero racers before floating tracks and fire-y planetoids? Or would a futuristic Fire Emblem be more your cup of tea?
|
Eh? It's kind of obvious to me. F-Zero is a futuristic sport. It wouldn't exist in a victorian world.
I don't know about Fire Emblem because I haven't played them (tough I probably should), but I'd guess that it has a 'continuous' plot, tied to a certain time, and it would be silly to transfer it to the future.
Now Zelda is a different thing. Basically it tells us of recurring battles between the avatars of good and evil or some other epic trash. It's not tied to a certain time or place, as we can see through the series. And the characters aren't the same, even Link's change.
So it's perfectly normal to chew on the idea, because theoretically there should be Link's in the future too, battling
Ganons of their time.
It's like wondering why zombie-games always happen on modern times. I mean, think of how cool medieval zombies would be!