If they want a really great game to please most fans.

Still they could make him more important than he's been FSA proved that there's more to him than meets the eye.

Technically that one is Shadow Link who is made by the dark mirror.

Still, evil doppelgänger characters are rarely any good. Metroid did it well with SA-X who was just an infection of X in her suit and Dark Samus who was really Metroid Prime using Samus's form from DNA gathered from her Phazon suit

If Nintendo make an evil doppelganger, it would have to be someone completely different as Dark Link is merely dark magic taken physical form

Gaming has become so diverse that there really isn't a way to please one group of fans without upsetting another. Some fans want a darker, grittier Zelda while others want a whimsical, magical Zelda. A combination of the two probably wouldn't work. Western gamers like the more mature stuff, and eastern gamers prefer light-hearted stuff.

They have to worry about bringing new fans to the series, so it has to be easy. They want to please their veterans, so they throw in nostalgia. TWW was well received in Japan while TP was a hit in the west. They love Tingle, west hates Tingle. Pleasing "most" fans is near impossible, and it's more than likely that they'll keep the brighter games on handhelds and the darker ones on consoles.

Originally Posted by Zeruda

Gaming has become so diverse that there really isn't a way to please one group of fans without upsetting another. Some fans want a darker, grittier Zelda while others want a whimsical, magical Zelda. A combination of the two probably wouldn't work. Western gamers like the more mature stuff, and eastern gamers prefer light-hearted stuff.

They have to worry about bringing new fans to the series, so it has to be easy. They want to please their veterans, so they throw in nostalgia. TWW was well received in Japan while TP was a hit in the west. They love Tingle, west hates Tingle. Pleasing "most" fans is near impossible, and it's more than likely that they'll keep the brighter games on handhelds and the darker ones on consoles.

You know sometimes i really hate logic. Maybe if everybody say it this way they'd realize why TP was the way it was.

The problem is that all the Zelda fans don't like the same things, for example the question about VA kinda split the fanbase apart almost 50-50.

BTW I think this thread belongs to Future Zelda.

How many zelda games does any one think there will be?
i hope they keep making them for a long time

After twenty-five they'll probably run out of ideas. Thirty is my maximum guess.

If they keep going kiddier by the year, I think i'll have to stop being a fan. I have my fingers crossed for zelda wii.

Originally Posted by Demo

If they keep going kiddier by the year, I think i'll have to stop being a fan. I have my fingers crossed for zelda wii.

Well most of the original fans are in their thirties so they can't have the series mature with them. How are they getting kiddier by the way?

Forget I said that. I made a topic about this recently and I don't feel like entering this argument again.

Originally Posted by NintendoGuy7

They should consider the following topics to do.

A way bigger Hyrule. If there is more to explore, there is more to do in the game.

Not really. TP proved that having a bigger overworld does not increase gameplay. Almost all of the playtime in TP was dungeons and towns. The field was, like, nothing more than this unnecessarily big connector of towns. Now, if that's the purpose they want Hyrule Field to serve, that's fine. That's pretty much all it was in OoT as well. However, OoT didn't feel the need to make it so massive that travelling between towns takes five minutes. It's like a two minute trip across the field. If there is going to be a large field, there has to be a reason for it. Fill it up with stuff, then we're on to something. But big field =/= more stuff.

A trip of nostalgic. I would love to see some Kokeri's in the "Zelda Wii". As well as maybe familiar lookin places from OOT. I would feel more connected to the Zelda game. I would be thinkin "I came here before decades ago! And now I am back.:

Did you not notice the myriad of similarities between OoT's and TP's map. That's as close as I ever want them to come to making stuff the same. In fact, that was too close. TP's map was basically a larger, blown up version of OoT's. They need to do something radically different to Hyrule to make things interesting, like what WW did.

Alot more people, or NPC's. A whole lot more. And make them active. I wanna see them walk around Hyrule field. I wanna see them in different places other then just in one town. I wanna get to know them alot better. That way if I have to save them, I will want to.

This is definitely something I would like to see as well. I loved it in MM the way people moved about Clock Town (or wherever) and had a daily schedule. I personally think that they could easily incorporate, say, a weekly schedule for each NPC. They do a different thing on every day of the week. That would make them seem much more realistic. And adding more depth to their characters would be nice too. God, in TP they were nothing more than cardboard cut-outs, even a lot of the main ones.

More challenging bosses. I can easily tell how to kill the bosses, because I know that I am going to have to use the main weapon I got in the temple. It's not bad, But I'd love to be able to use more weapons to kill the boss.

This! Very this!

More creative towns! I had posted some ideas of different Temples and towns in a different thread, that I thought would be great.

Again, this!

The thing with Zelda is that every game its totally different. New Hyrule Castle, New Hyrule Castle Field, and Makret, EVERYTHING.

...Have we been playing the same games. TP is little more than remake/rehash of OoT. Even games like FSA and WW borrowed from OoT. And OoT is really just ALttP in 3D. Zelda hasn't really been all that different, especially lately.

I understand because who wants to play a game that is already too familiar. Well I wouldn't mind seeing a Couple of things that hasnt changed in areas. Have a section of Hyrule Field that is exactly as OOT, or sumthin. Heck, bring back the characters we loved!!!!

God dammit, didn't you OoT fanboys get enough nostalgia out of TP?! I mean, really, Zelda needs to be changing, not relying on more OoT repetition to make a good game. I mean, I love OoT as much as the next person, but if I knew it was going to do this to Zelda, I would seriously go back in time and prevent it from ever being made if I could. OoT rehashes/nostalgia needs to stop. At least for a little while, though preferably forever.

Shinespark i can tell you're not a traditionalist! A big field incourages exploration! I enjoyed searching for every secret location in hyrule field! Also, TP is in no way an OOT rehash! It has an entirely new story! The last couple of dungeons are completely new too!

Originally Posted by Oni Dark Link

Shinespark i can tell you're not a traditionalist!

When tradition clashes with progress, you're damn right I'm not.

A big field incourages exploration! I enjoyed searching for every secret location in hyrule field!

Yeah, what, the, like, ten secret locations in TP's field? Almost all of which were filled with rupees, the most useless thing in that game, since they're so easy to come by through other means, including, but not limited too: simple dungeon crawling, bug collecting, other minimal sidequests, and, occasionally, given to you during the main quest.

Also, TP is in no way an OOT rehash! It has an entirely new story!

Let's see here. The story is Ganondorf gets the ToP after the Triforce splits (OoT), and then attacks Hyrule from a different realm (OoT, FSA) using a pawn (ALttP, FSA) and attempts to transform it into a land of darkness (ALttP, OoT), and is defeated by a hero who, before said events, led a simple life in the woods (OoT) wielding the Master Sword (ALttP, OoT, OoX) and a princess wielding Light Arrows (WW), who then transforms into a beast king (OoT) and is eventually defeated. All the while, he is helped by a sidekick who ends up being an integral part of the events currently transpiring (WW). Mind telling me what part of the story was original now?

EDIT: Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying liking TP was a bad thing, but to deny the similarities it bears to past Zelda games (most notably ALttP and OoT) is nothing short of moronic. I don't want another game like it. We've had enough already. Like TP, that's fine with me, but don't sit here and try to tell me how "original" it was, cause it wasn't.

Do you remember my greatest hits post awhile back? You said it was an acceptable reason for why the developer's did what they did! There were secret location in Gerudo Desert too by the way. How much more can the series progress without changing genre or setting?

Originally Posted by Oni Dark Link

Do you remember my greatest hits post awhile back? You said it was an acceptable reason for why the developer's did what they did!

And so it remains. I realized my last post sounded a little harsh, so I edited in a bit to make it seem less so. Allow me to reiterate that:

Originally Posted by Me

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying liking TP was a bad thing, but to deny the similarities it bears to past Zelda games (most notably ALttP and OoT) is nothing short of moronic. I don't want another game like it. We've had enough already. Like TP, that's fine with me, but don't sit here and try to tell me how "original" it was, cause it wasn't.

TP was just bland to me. But you know what, I know that a lot of fans were clamoring for another game like OoT, and I know they were trying to give a good sendoff for the Gamecube, and that's all fine. But TP is done and gone now, and I don't ever want it rearing it's ugly head again. We've revisited OoT now. Let's not do it again.

How much more can the series progress without changing genre or setting?

If it needs to, then let it. Genre/gameplay changes have done wonders for games in the past. The Prime Trilogy, for example, brought a completely new fanbase to the Metroid series and many of the old fans loved it. Metroid Prime was the first Metroid game I ever played, and I loved it so much that I went and explored it's past, and fell in love with those games too. And the old fanbase got a great new title that kept the feel of Metroid but was still distinct enough to completely renew their interest in it. Why can't Zelda do the same thing?

Why can't they, for a few games, set Hyrule in a steampunk or cyberpunk setting, or change the game to a first person perspective, or any other myriad of setting/genre/gameplay options that could renew interest for the old fans (like myself), as well as bring it to a whole new generation, who could then get interested in some of the older titles and fall in love with them, like I did with Metroid? What is so wrong about that?

Originally Posted by Shinespark

And so it remains. I realized my last post sounded a little harsh, so I edited in a bit to make it seem less so. Allow me to reiterate that:

TP was just bland to me. But you know what, I know that a lot of fans were clamoring for another game like OoT, and I know they were trying to give a good sendoff for the Gamecube, and that's all fine. But TP is done and gone now, and I don't ever want it rearing it's ugly head again. We've revisited OoT now. Let's not do it again.

If it needs to, then let it. Genre/gameplay changes have done wonders for games in the past. The Prime Trilogy, for example, brought a completely new fanbase to the Metroid series and many of the old fans loved it. Metroid Prime was the first Metroid game I ever played, and I loved it so much that I went and explored it's past, and fell in love with those games too. And the old fanbase got a great new title that kept the feel of Metroid but was still distinct enough to completely renew their interest in it. Why can't Zelda do the same thing?

Why can't they, for a few games, set Hyrule in a steampunk or cyberpunk setting, or change the game to a first person perspective, or any other myriad of setting/genre/gameplay options that could renew interest for the old fans (like myself), as well as bring it to a whole new generation, who could then get interested in some of the older titles and fall in love with them, like I did with Metroid? What is so wrong about that?

The reason i don't compare TP to OOT and MM when saying i like it is because i played it before i ever got them, the fact that TP supposedly referenced OOT was one of the reason i got the game! To see what the connections were. If the developers are telling the truth you shouldn't have to worry about Zelda getting stale. The bolded is something i posted on another thread as being a good idea! I even gave an example of how it would happen. Nothing is wrong with that i'm just trying to get people to realize that TP was not a bad Zelda game because it was unoriginal.

Originally Posted by Oni Dark Link

Nothing is wrong with that i'm just trying to get people to realize that TP was not a bad Zelda game because it was unoriginal.

That's not what you said earlier:

Originally Posted by Oni Dark Link

Also, TP is in no way an OOT rehash! It has an entirely new story! The last couple of dungeons are completely new too!

I have based everything I've argued with you on this quote, and now you're telling me you don't think it's original, but rather you think it's unoriginal but are okay with that. And, you know what, that's fine. That's your opinion. I'm not going to argue opinion with you. But if you're going to try to tell me that TP was original, I'm sure as hell going to tell you how it's not.

TP did NOTHING to further the Zelda series, since nearly all of it was borrowed from previous games. That's the reason why I oppose it. You've really got me all wrong. I didn't hate TP. I enjoyed it, actually. It was, at times, boring and tedious, but overall, it was a good experience for me. Why, then, am I so insistent about it never happening again? Because it did nothing to progress the Zelda series. It was just a rehash of everything that came before it. There was nothing new or original.

Basically, I was just disappointed that the Zelda series seemed to be reaching this peak of originality (the insertion of Termina in MM, the completely new take on Hyrule in WW, the multiplayer in FS/FSA, the mini effect in MC, and the delightfully challenging puzzles of OoX), and then out came TP, and it was like Zelda took this huge step back. That's why I oppose it so vehemently. Not because I didn't enjoy it, but because it sacrificed progress for tradition.

When i said unoriginal i meant it didn't bring any drastic innovative changes to the series like you people seem to think MM did.

Originally Posted by Oni Dark Link

When i said unoriginal i meant it didn't bring any drastic innovative changes to the series like you people seem to think MM did.

What you don't seem to understand is that TP followed the same formula that OoT and ALttP had (get three items, get Master Sword, plot twist, get several more items, kick Ganon's ass).

Three games is enough, if I want that formula again I will replay those games. I want something fresh.

Originally Posted by Oni Dark Link

When i said unoriginal i meant it didn't bring any drastic innovative changes to the series

And that's precisely why I oppose TP and never want something like it to happen again. A new title in a series should never be made just for the sake of a new title, or to capitalize on the popularity of a previous title, or to do nothing more than an enhanced graphic remake of a previous title. A new entry in a series should ALWAYS bring something new to it and make it worthy of being made, even if it's only a new original continuation of the story.

For example, there was very little in the way of gameplay differences between God of War and God of War II. The two games play very similarly, but the story was new, original, and a fantastic continuation of the previous one. TP did nothing like this. Nothing was original in the way of gameplay or story. Hell, even the graphics engine was just a heavily modified version of the engine WW used.

like you people seem to think MM did.

Um, dude, it DID bring new and innovating things to the Zelda series. For one, it had a unique, and surprisingly complex, three day time system that wasn't seen before and hasn't since. It brought depth and originality to its characters and their characterizations. It was only the second game not set in Hyrule (the first being LA), and the only one set in Termina.

Termina was also a much more technological land than anything we've seen before or since (though TP rivaled this in some aspects). There were also the transformation masks, the first of their kind, which would be repeated in TP far less skillfully. It was also the first Zelda to be as side-quest focused as it was. Most other games have a large focus on plot and that's where the meat of the game is. In MM, the real meat and reason for playing the game was in the sidequests helping people.

So... yeah, MM DID bring a lot of new and innovating things to Zelda. The same cannot be said for TP.