Zelda, is it better in 2-D, 3-D or both?

Hi this is my first official Thread and I couldn’t find a subject similar to this on the forums. I hope this is ok, well…. Here goes!

Is the entire Zelda series just overall perfect? What I mean is that most brilliant games start out being 2-D but when we see a future release of a game in 3-D it usually turns out like a piece of rubbish! For example Mario games, Mario Bros 1, 2, and 3 plus Super Mario World are excellent. Mario 64 is quite decent but what the hell happened to Mario Sunshine and Super Mario Galaxy? I found that the Gamecube and Wii Mario games suck! Don’t know if it’s just me but I think it was aimed for an audience of 2-5 years, it isn’t hardcore. I found that Mario himself was quite a dark character back in the mid 80’s to the mid 90’s, especially in the cartoon series.

It’s the same with the Castlevania series. All the Castlevania 2-D games are excellent but playing them in 3-D? erm…. NO! It doesn’t work for me, it doesn’t feel correct and it isn’t the same game, it’s another game just titled Castlevania. I could go on but I won’t.

Zelda on the other hand is just purity at its best! The 2-D games are just brilliant and when they adapted the games to a new whole 3-D aspect, the developers thought about putting love into the games as well as making money. (Obviously they've got to make money from this.)

The controls work great in OoT and MM. WW adapts perfect to the Gamecube controller.

When I play 3-D Zelda games they still feel 2-D but with all the fun and freedom of a 3-D game, If you understand what I’m trying to say. OK I’ll shut-up now Phew!

All I want is your opinion, do you agree with what I’ve said so far or maybe you prefer 2-D over 3-D or vice versor. Maybe you agree that the Zelda series is just overall perfect.

Sorry if I have offended anyone with this issue, just looking forward to some interesting replies from other people’s views on this subject.

Thanks!

ToT

I personally believe that all Zelda games are good as well, 2D or 3D, but if I had to chose I think I prefer the 3D ones. I think it's easier to connect to the characters that way, it's more realistic.

Super Mario Sunshine was indeed kind of rubbish, but both Mario 64 and Galaxy are pretty great games I think. I don't think Castlevania doesn't work in 3D either. What exactly do you mean by Mario being a dark character? I don't really see it, the cartoon series were pretty colourful and happy as well. I do think all super Mario games are kind of trippy, 2D or 3D.

I liked both types. But 3-D just gives it that more alive and real feeling. It adds to the overall feeling of the game no matter what that the feeling is their trying to achieve. It allows for the player to feel more involve with the game.

Mario games were made to be damn weird. Seriously. >_> I think it was created while said creator was on a little something.

I prefer the 2D games, as the old formula seems to work best in those. The better 3D games (MM and TWW) needed to radiacally change the formula to help them stay good, OoT felt way too much like another ALttP (but more tedious) and while TP felt somewhat "fresher" compared to OoT, the Wolf transformation didn't really impress me and the only good characters were Midna and Zant (also Ilia and Colin, but to a lesser extent).

And IMO, the Zelda series had lost it's "purity" after the Four Sword games, they were not too bad, but they just felt...tacked on...

The Metroid series also had a way better transition to 3D (with the exception of Hunters).

I think a if a Zelda game is truly good that it doesn't matter if its 2-D or 3-D.

Originally Posted by Alisoun

I personally believe that all Zelda games are good as well, 2D or 3D, but if I had to chose I think I prefer the 3D ones. I think it's easier to connect to the characters that way, it's more realistic.

Super Mario Sunshine was indeed kind of rubbish, but both Mario 64 and Galaxy are pretty great games I think. I don't think Castlevania doesn't work in 3D either. What exactly do you mean by Mario being a dark character? I don't really see it, the cartoon series were pretty colourful and happy as well. I do think all super Mario games are kind of trippy, 2D or 3D.

I found that Mario’s voice in the cartoon series was cool, He sounded like a decent person you could go and have a pint with at the local. Nowadays he sounds like he has gone… you know, I can’t really say it here.

Originally Posted by Temple of Time

I found that Mario’s voice in the cartoon series was cool, He sounded like a decent person you could go and have a pint with at the local. Nowadays he sounds like he has gone… you know, I can’t really say it here.

Well, you could still go and have a pint with him, his sexual orientation doesn't change that

But yeah, I know what you mean, his voice is just kind of weird. The whole mute thing doesn't really work for Mario like it does for Link either, I wish he'd have a decent voice and really talk or just made no sound at all.

The 3-Ds are better, they are more realistic and draw you more into the game. But the 2-Ds we're great aswell. OoT, ALttP, LoZ, AoL, MM, TP, tWW, they all have the Zelda charm.

I agree with ToT, all the Zelda games a great and it doesnt matter whether its 2D or 3D. I never really pay attention to the graphics anyway..... its the gameplay that matters and all Zelda games score high when it comes to that category.

I dont agree with what you said about Mario though. Mario sunshine is a decent enough game and Mario Galaxy is just brilliant!

they all have their different feeling to it so i like both. some idiots can only like 1 tho

Well, I don't know what your problem is with 3D Mario games, I think that they are widley considered to be some of the best, most enojyable games of all time. Mario Galaxy recently cleared up the GotY awards of 07 all over the internet.

Anyway, the conversion of a 2D franchise to 3D is always a bit hit and miss. Mario- Yes. Zelda- Yes. Metroid- Yes. Metal Gear- Yes. Final Fantasy- Yes. However: Sonic- NO! Castlevania- NO! Worms- NO! Contra, Megaman, Mortal Kombat, NO NO NO!!!!

That is just how it is.

Just about all the Zelda Games are considered classics. (The later Handheld titles have been faltering I think.) But I deffinitely enjoy the 3D games much more. I just like the feel of it. The feeling of being in this living breathing world. Just has this vibe to it.

i think they're both '3D"

the older games are 2D rendered but also contain hills and ladders and you can jump using the feather so you get the same freedom as in 3D zelda.


EDIT: maybe in de first LoZ your freedom was a little more limited..

Originally Posted by ginger17

I think a if a Zelda game is truly good that it doesn't matter if its 2-D or 3-D.

Originally Posted by zeldagamer

I agree with ToT, all the Zelda games a great and it doesnt matter whether its 2D or 3D. I never really pay attention to the graphics anyway..... its the gameplay that matters and all Zelda games score high when it comes to that category.

2D vs 3D is not just about graphics. Three dimensions allow for a totally different world, one that incorporates that extra dimension into temple design, aiming weapons, and a huge step in the variety of fighting that's possible. Artistic expression in the game, through camera angles to see a larger area of the world, camera placement in cutscenes, character expressions, clearer animation, textures, and various effects, don't just serve to make the world look nice, they have the ability to convey messages or emotions that are not physically able of being conveyed in a 2D game.

Originally Posted by Alisoun

I personally believe that all Zelda games are good as well, 2D or 3D, but if I had to chose I think I prefer the 3D ones. I think it's easier to connect to the characters that way, it's more realistic.

This is true as well. It's possible to do the same in a 2D game but more difficult because 3D gives much more control over the look of a character, and hence over the gamer's visual attachment to him or her.

Originally Posted by Daemonius

I prefer the 2D games, as the old formula seems to work best in those. The better 3D games (MM and TWW) needed to radiacally change the formula to help them stay good, OoT felt way too much like another ALttP (but more tedious)

I don't see how you think OoT is tedious compared to the 2D games. In LoZ, great as it is, every dungeon sounds the same, has recycled bosses, checkerboard lands of the same enemies and forests, and you have to redo many dungeon rooms every time you pass through looking for something. I don't think I really need to even bring up the tedium in AoL, with its infinite armies of tinsuits. But they're still both great games, and contributed to form the series we know today. I'm only pointing out that tedium means repetition or long monotonous stretches of gameplay, and this was very prevelant in the 2D games, even if they're fun and classics. Ocarina, on the other hand, had very different temple layouts and enemies. Compare the Deku Tree with the Shadow Temple, or with the Water Temple. Plus, it has numerous sidequests and things to do, visually unique regions to exlore, and items to collect, so that if you feel a certain temple is getting tedious because you're stuck, you can go off and do those things instead.

Aren't there like a dozen threads on this already?