Messages

1226

Nintendo Gaming / RE:They should make a Zelda RPG.

« on: October 05, 2004, 02:57:38 PM »

The only type of gameplay that I would use for an "alternative" Zelda would be RTS.  But I would rather see that be an aspect of a new Zelda rather than the focus of the game.  Its just that the Zelda universe (Hyrule) is overflowing with character and possibility for a game that is like a mix between WarCraft and FF11 using the Zelda engine.

1227

Nintendo Gaming / RE:Left handed!

« on: October 05, 2004, 02:39:28 PM »

I too am left handed.  I feel the fear.

The system is going to have to have completely programable controls because one they cannot force us to use the stylus and two they cannot force left handed people to use the stylus if they so chose to right handed.

1228

Nintendo Gaming / RE:They should make a Zelda RPG.

« on: October 04, 2004, 09:38:02 PM »

What does seperate Zelda from the pack is its gameplay.  That does not mean that the game cannot reach the same standard for story as it does for gameplay.  



If you take out the characters of Link, Zelda, and Gannon then it is nolonger The Legend of Zelda so what is the point of making it a Zelda game.  Just throw everything out the window and create something fresh preserving the gameplay philosophies.


I think we need to ask ourselves what percent is Zelda a world driven game?  To what extent is Zelda a character driven game?  How much is story driven?  How much is action driven?  

1229

Nintendo Gaming / RE:They should make a Zelda RPG.

« on: October 02, 2004, 03:33:04 PM »

The thing is that they already know generally how the mechanics of each progression in these games like Mario and Zelda are going to be.  I understand that they always get the physics of the world correct before they start making the world, but when you create a world you generate a story and cast of characters with that world.  

I like for a Mario game to have some story, but as of yet they haven't tackled any stories outside the RPG series.  I always wanted a Mario game story that revolved around explaining the pipes and the dinosaurs in the game.  Im not talking about that bad movie that came out in 93.  I want a story that propels the gameplay.  The pipes go everywhere in the Mushroom Kingdom and have to connect together.  They act as worm holes.  Someone built them and someone can control them.  What if Mario and the looney cast of characters from the games crossed over and came Earth for the last world of the game?  Most Mario games have been about plot.  Save the princess.  The story is just like that of Mario Kart; the story is the story of you playing the game.  At the end of Mario 64 you got to watch these awesome credits that showed all of the places you had played with cinematic camera work.  

So Deguello you only play games for the thrill of gaming?  Or do you play games for unique imaginative experiences?  

1230

Nintendo Gaming / RE:They should make a Zelda RPG.

« on: October 01, 2004, 10:43:34 PM »

How can you make a game and then a story.  You get a game like FZero GX.  Fun game; cringe worthy story.

A similar example would be like trying to put story into Gran Turismo or Mario Kart.  

You also do not want a game like RS2.  In the situation of most Star Wars games like RS2 everything is broken up into stages.  The game comes off as a Star Wars simulator with accessable controls and gameplay.  I loved the game though.  It was the reason I got a Cube when the system came out.  But I want an adventure game.  I want the story to flow through the gameplay.  

A parasite has attached itself to many games in the past two generations.  That parasite is the cinema.  I am tired of games taking hours to really get started in the game.  I want the story to be minimal at the beginning.  An obvious example of a long beginning would be FF11.   The character is reasonably easy to control in FF11.  But then there is a keyboard of comands to go with that.  The glory of Zelda is that it has in depth real time character control.  Though in the state it is in now using analog sticks it is half way between accessable and true.  It is merely developed.  The game control is stuck in pergatory.  The game controls are based on the gameplay which is run, hit, pick up, and throw.  With the advent of 3d we get jumping and camera.  What Zelda needs to make its controls more accessable and do away with the tutorials it has developed (aside from voluntary ones like advanced sword play) is a revolution in game control.  Zelda needs its action (sword fighting) to be simulative in scheme.  Rather than pushing buttons and doing combinations you have to learn, your sword control should be just as your character and camera control are; literal.  So you would be like a child swinging a sword for the first time and you would learn by doing it more rather than having to sit through instructions that should be read in the booklet.

WW is very easy to get into compared to FF11.  FF11 takes things to an extreme compared to WW.  But WW has far too many story pieces at the begining of the game for a Zelda game.  I like the story pieces in WW but I don't want so many at the beginning.  The thing you find whe you are learning to write fiction is that you usually need to throw out the first couple of pages because all of that getting started and narrative on the character is boring.  The character is expressed through actions and images.  You show, you don't tell.  

All of the tutorial stuff got in the way.  If you find yourself as I did trying to get into  new games on WW and finding it difficult to sit through all the boring Pirate Ship *insert word containing alliteration and rhyme whith ship here* then you know now what I mean by a slow beginning.  One can jump straight into the old 2d ones (particulary the original).  There is very little story in the original game.  But far more than any previous game.  LttP incorporated the characters' stories into the gameplay (mostly through the characters speaking rather than narrative animations).  

When we got to OoT suddenly we had to watch Link watch Gannondorf and Zelda ride out of the castle.  In LttP I believe they would have ridden out while you walked up to the castle in real time.  This is definatly something they tackled with MM.  

1231

Nintendo Gaming / RE:They should make a Zelda RPG.

« on: October 01, 2004, 03:10:18 PM »

It does seem like the story is an afterthought in Zelda games.  But Nintendo seems bipolar for saying something like that after claiming that the author of the "Zelda legend" created an entire storyline linking every game.  Why claim story as afterthought one day and claim it to be this huge interlinking storyline another.  

I know what you're thinking, Nintendo was feeding the media BS with the whole interlinking storyline.  That is what I have been thinking too.  

By the way, what the hell is the point of making fiction if there is nothing but plot and no story.  By brushing off criticism's of Nintendo not being good at story by saying that Nintendo doesn't care about story, Nintendo is only making themselves look horrible.  The F'N game is called The LEGEND of Zelda.  The game isnt called The Link Simulator.  The games cannot stand on gameplay alone.  Each game must progressively have more story, better written story, and better woven story with the gameplay.  

Example:  The plot is farm boy finds sword and saves the princess.
                The story is...

Let me put it another way.  The plot consists of events and actions you take in the game.  In other words every swing you make and stone you throw is a part of a series of events that take place in the plot.  The story would be what seperates each game keeping them from being the same game over and over just remade with prettier graphics or a gimmick.  Eventually in gaming graphics will get to where they can go no farther.  Example:  LttP.  It didnt take long for 2d to reach its pinacle.  So when faced with the situation of no new graphical advances then one must actually sit down and come up with something that differentiates the new from the old besides the look and sound.  You cant just come up with a new plot line.  You cant change what characters are in the plot.  You cant switch the gameplay from one weapon to another(gimmicky masks or time consuming musical instruments anyone?).  You cant just add multiplayer (didnt Super Mario Bros make it a standard?).  You also cant just flood the world and redo the same plot line with the new set.  If they just intend on giving us the same game with more dungeons and weapons then why dont they just do an expansion?  

The question of should Nintendo worry about story is like asking should Nintendo worry about doing another Zelda?

1232

Nintendo Gaming / RE:paper mario 2 thread

« on: September 28, 2004, 04:20:03 PM »

I like the nostalgic look of the Paper Mario series much more than the look of the 3d series.  

1233

Nintendo Gaming / RE:Mario 128?

« on: September 28, 2004, 09:09:49 AM »

I've expressed the awful taste left in my mouth before by Sunshine.  It really was Mario 64 lite with better graphics, same exact to a f'n tee missions on most levels, too much childish scavenger hunting, not enough platforming, the water pack has caused a racoon to roll over in his grave, it didn't take place in the Mushroom Kingdom??what are they smoking???, yoshi was useless, it had a plane in it, they didn't correct the mistakes of Mario 64 like bring back the traditional powerups and expand upon that (instead they just ignored them completly because they were afraid people would call it kiddy for not being 'realistic' enough), still no Luigi, no themed enviroments (Mario established the themed levels in videogames taking a cue from the classic old english tale Beowulf whose themes included man vs the elements which is expressed in the story by the dragon who lives in the earth, flies in the air, breaths fire, and dies in water), Mario finally crossed the line and did get kiddy, Bowser was way way way way too easy, Mario's gigly school girl expressions defamed the character, and it was marketed badly.  

I forgave Mario 64 for not being close enough to the old 2d Mario Bros games.  It didnt have Luigi or a playable Yoshi.  It dumped the powerups they had used for over ten years in the games.  There was too much collecting useless items.  But it was an orginal Mario title and it was the first real 3d game and it was a quality 3d game technically.  But  since Mario 64 established the technical qualifications for camera control, analog control, jumping in 3d, and other standards shouldn't Mario now be worried about being less of a 3d game and more of a Mario game that happens to be in 3d.  Maybe the solution is for the series to go back to the 2d but that could look bad for Nintendo to back away from 3d which they are credited for creating.  I don't think it has to go back to 2d, but I wouldn't mind.  

Paper Mario is awesome.  It brings back old themes and characters.  The graphics are great.  I'm not a fan of it getting gimicky with the paper thing (paper airplane?).  They think it is cute to make fun of the game in the game but it is just distracting, though I appreciate their ability to laugh at themselves.  I can't wait to play it.  While the 3d games have lost track of their roots Paper Mario takes full advantage of its past.

1234

Nintendo Gaming / RE:What old franchises should Nintendo bring back?

« on: September 28, 2004, 08:38:51 AM »

I feel it is possibel to see punchout or the kid come back like metroid did but pilot wings was never a hit like those three games.  Pilot wings has nothing to come back to except for the hardcore Nintendo gamers.  Truthfully it just can't be marketed to the mainstreme unless they couple it with a really really really badass comercial.  

If they did a Pilot Wings I would get mad at them for wasting time.  They could put that time and effort into Kid Iccarus instead.  Pilot Wings wouldn't help Ninendo's image next generation as a key launch title.  Then again if they kiddied up Kid I would die.  The game would already have to much running against it with the word Kid in its title and being on a Nintendo console which gives it the imediate idiot's impression that it has to be for kids.

1235

Nintendo Gaming / RE:They should make a Zelda RPG.

« on: September 26, 2004, 10:55:28 AM »

I see these custom character modes and Sim/Animal Crossing type characteristics popping up in RPGs and it bugs me because those things are just distractions.  What are you going to do after you get done playing dress up and interior designer?  Go pick flowers in the Hyrule field?

I've been reading about Fable and it seems like it is lacking the things I love most about Zelda.  Combat, camera, puzzles, bosses, and Link.  

1236

Nintendo Gaming / RE:What old franchises should Nintendo bring back?

« on: September 26, 2004, 10:31:35 AM »

The Revolution's supposedly revolutionary hardware would definetly give a new Punch Out the punch it needs to seperate it from all of the other boxing and fighting games ever made.  We would finally be able to control the action on screen directly.  They would truly be able to claim no lucky punches if cameras and/or gyro sensors were translating the speed, strength, and direction of your punches.  The Punch Out games always put the camera behind your character so a control setup where your punches are translatted to the screen would work well.  It would mean either having to use split screen or broadband to play multiplayer.

I think that could become the funnest game of all.

I dont understand why people still insist on Pilot Wings.  They didn't make it on Cube.  Nintendo knows it won't sell as well as other things they could put out.  I don't see how the hardware could progress the game any.  And most of all why waste time and money on Pilot Wings when there is a true demand for Kid Iccarus to come back in a big way like Metroid did.  

With the revolutinary hardware there will be a reason to make original exclusive games on Revolution.  You will be able to do things that the PS3 and Xenon systems could only hope to simulate.  It is not just the matter of coming up with a solution for camera problems in 3d games as much as it is the ability to really grab a hold of that non existent polygon character as if it were a marionete and move it around on screen any way you want to, not just run and jump any more.  We will finally have direct control of the arms of the characters if the rumors turn out true.

1237

Nintendo Gaming / RE:not many games on the horizon

« on: September 22, 2004, 10:28:06 AM »

I would want a new Doom, Mario Revolution, and Kid Iccarus for launch titles.  Im sure there will be plenty of multiplatform games too to rent.  

Metroid would make a good launch title but I dont think they have time.  

1238

Nintendo Gaming / RE:Mario 128?

« on: September 22, 2004, 10:13:58 AM »

I think Mr. Miyamato said that if he didnt show Mario 128 at the E3 04 show then we probably will not get to see it on GameCube.  

It could still be coming out on GameCube hardware and launch with the Revolution if the Revolution is backwards compatible.  But the game may not be compatible with the GameCube controller because the Revolution is supposed to offer new ways to game.  

Miyamato said he liked it when people used to move there controller when jumping as Mario the first time they played the NES.  I could see the movement of the controller or some flight sticks controling Mario.  For the first time we would move Mario on screen with our arms instead of our thumbs.

Then again we may be doomed to Mario Piano.  

1239

Nintendo Gaming / RE:What old franchises should Nintendo bring back?

« on: September 21, 2004, 07:47:56 PM »

Punch Out has been MIA for a long time.  I miss it badly but I dont expect Nintendo to bring it back.

I heard that Nintendo and EA are working on Nintendo themed sports games posibly for next generation.  Imagine NFL Mario Land.  

1240

Nintendo Gaming / RE:They should make a Zelda RPG.

« on: September 21, 2004, 06:57:55 PM »

If you want a plot line then have a new Link and a new Gannon grow up together in the woods as friends.  They could be theves like a Robin Hood and Little John.  Perhaps they should face the Shadow King or a new enemy?  Why not a dragon?  Or a cenataur?  

I think it would be cool in Zelda if there were more battles involving greater numbers.  Sort of like Dynasty Warriors or Warcraft but involving armies of characters from the Legend of Zelda operating on the Zelda engine.  I like the new abilities in the new Zelda to fight on horseback.  

I would like to see the four sword in a console Zelda.  

1241

Nintendo Gaming / RE:not many games on the horizon

« on: September 21, 2004, 01:20:03 PM »

They are not hiding 05's games.  They have let us know what is coming.  They have showed us the biggest games coming out in 05.  But it looks like Zelda and RE4 are the only meat left on the bone.  Im not worried about what is coiming out on GC or Xbox or PS2 in 05 because nothing really is.  I'm worried about what is going to launch on the revolution.  The next Mario!  Bwwahhahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!  

It is a while until E3, but I cant wait to see the next three consoles.

1242

Nintendo Gaming / RE:They should make a Zelda RPG.

« on: September 21, 2004, 01:07:20 PM »

If someone decides to kill a NPC then they will have to pay for it with their reputation.  Some will refuse to believe the reputation, some will run, some will attack you when they see you.  I want to see many different personality traits in NPC.  I want to see AI.

I liked how in LttP you were deamed a criminal.  

1243

Nintendo Gaming / RE:What old franchises should Nintendo bring back?

« on: September 21, 2004, 12:56:29 PM »

Next genereation Nintendo needs to use the franchises of Mario Bros (with DK in it), Zelda, Metroid, Kid Iccarus, Mario Kart(Mario Kart meets GTA minus the gore), Mario Party(the minigames should all be 2d platforming stages), Star Fox (flying only), Fzero, and Super Paper Smash Bros; and all of those franchises need to be online multiplayer/coop games.  

Other than that I want to see nothing but new original material.  Nintendo needs a new original AAA shooter in its deck of cards as well as a traditional in house RPG.  

1244

Nintendo Gaming / RE:They should make a Zelda RPG.

« on: September 18, 2004, 09:27:04 AM »

What is AFAIK?

Legend of Zelda is based on Arthurian lore.  Farm boy finds a magic sword and becomes a hero.

You're exactly right KDR_11k the game does take place in its own world and it needs to follow that world's set of rules.  I like how the enemies turned into exstravagent clouds of swirling smoke in WW.  It took me back to the old days of 2d gaming in which there wasnt a splatter of blood but instead a puff of smoke with a treasure left behind.  Now days developers throw in all the buckets of blood and then still have the character's fade away when you turn your back on their bodies.  That's not realistic.  WW took advantage of its nostalgic look.  Now that the look is changing I want Nintendo to put the same effort into making the game seem real as they did into making WW seem like an old school game brought to life.  The games may never look photo realistic but it cannot be denied what they are trying to imply with the look of the game.  I'll tell you another thing that distracted me from playing WW was how the Zora's turned into bird people in the face of a world covered in water, and in only a couple of hundred years.  I was never into the whole races thing to begin with but I recall in LttP there were still some Zoras left.  What the hell?  

Most of the characters in the game bugged the crap out of me.  I think in reality they wouldn't have been worried about the little kid running around at night, they should have been trying to take advantage of him(not sexually).  I liked how Gannon wasnt as flattly drawn as in the past.  He almost seemed right as any good vilain should, because who wants a vilain who doesnt have an interesting motivation that though evil seems just.  You finally get to sympathize with him which makes him so much more threatening.  But Link was so flat it was bad.  I appreciate that they allow you to take control of Link as always and do what you want with him but there is nothing 'bad' that you can do.  You aren't really given any options like in KOTOR or GTA to terrorize the in game characters.  But what really bothered me about the portrayl of Link was that in the story your actions whether, lazy, mediocre, triumphant, or evil did not change the way he was percieved as a flat perfect hero to the other characters.  I believe that Link should develop a reputation so that the depth of the character you portray in your playing comes across in the story.  This way the developer doesnt have to worry about writting a character that is complex because you will do it for them.  In case you're still wondering why I don't want nonwavering heros in games then continue reading this paragraph.  When writing fiction one should never write a flat character.  If the character never makes mistakes then the character's life is going to be pretty boring.  Perfect characters just are not any fun.  Link is already, not perfect.  He is a weak hopeless child.  What is great about the story isnt how great Link is, it is how far he comes from what he was.  It is the character development that charms people when they play Zelda.  This is why I want the game to start off with a weak cowarding Link.  These complaints are not things that ruined WW, they are just things that I either expected from a Zelda game this generation or were made obvious to me by WW that they needed to be in any new Zelda games.  Zelda has always been at the forfront of character development in videogames until this generation.  OoT and LttP where standard setting games in which the character is supposed to grow up and become the hero before our eyes.  Where did the ambition go?  Did it sneak away from Nintendo and find its way into Microsoft's Fable?  Well Fable is not at the same level of refined quality as WW, but I respect its ambitious nature.  

1245

Nintendo Gaming / RE:They should make a Zelda RPG.

« on: September 17, 2004, 07:37:17 PM »

Is everyone obsessed with turning Link into the first official homesexual leading male in a video game?

Seriously though, Link has always had a green tunic in every game.  I didnt like the multiple tunics in OoT.  

Plus the green will always make blood stains show up really well.

I want to add to my idea for a new child Link Legend of Zelda.  When he is sneaking past enemies he should not only automaticly look at them in fear, but he should also tremble.  His knees should get weak and shake as he clumsily sneaks by.  

1246

Nintendo Gaming / RE:They should make a Zelda RPG.

« on: September 17, 2004, 11:40:40 AM »

Yeah let us not talk of any more of these magic purses.  Its not The Fabulous Legend of Zelda.  Oh god now I have imagined four little Links running around with their swords unsheathed on a quest to redecorate the castle.  


I heard of Tim Burton talking about people that complained about the technicalities of, where did Edward get the ice at the end of Edward Scissor Hands.  The movie takes place in its own world.  What mattered was the story, the acting, the presentation, the music, the lighting, the camera work, the editing, and the plot.  It is sort of like one of the themes in Tim Burton's other movie Big Fish.  What mattered wasnt what happened.  What mattered was the way he told him that it happened and how he chose to remember it.  You can begin a story with the ending revealed for example because what matters isnt how complexly twisted your ending is, what matters is how it happens.  The story itself, the adventure, is much more valuable than the final destination.  

I just think that if a game is going into a realism scenerio that it should opperate with some kind of real life consequences to actions.  Im not complaining about the ice at the end of Tim Burton's movie.  But imagine if at the end Edward had stabed the jock and the jock fell over and faded away and they all just lived happily ever after.  Johny Depp saves the day, kills the baddy, no consequences, and gets the girl.  But that would ruin a great movie.

In Resident Evil noone complains because the whole virus zombie stuff is impossible.  They get caught up in the experience.  Resident Evil is like playing in one big Zelda dungeon.  RE differs from Zelda though in the fact that there is blood and there is also a limit on how much junk you can carry.  Why do they do this in RE?  Both games have brutal weapons, unbelievable monsters, and great production value.  RE is always trying to present itself as a realistic game.  It strives like no other series for realism and movie like qualities in the face of often the most commical of enemies (giant frogs and scorpions?).  Zelda has always gone in a different direction.  But now we see Zelda becoming a more realistic series.  I would like to see Zelda opperate realisticly if they are going to say blades will bleed.  This would mean that the health system could stay heart based but it would mean that damage taken will be damage shown.  It would mean that when you are outside you hear the wind and birds.  It would mean that you would be able to sneak not just based on programs operating on whether the enemies see you, but also whether they hear you crunching leaves as you sneak up behind them.  


This is a bit unrelated, but I was just thinking how my cousin always brings up how he wants to be able to change what Link is wearing like in other RPGs and I always tell him that it will take away from the charm of the character.  Sure Mickey Mouse for example can change cloths, but Mickey Mouse doesnt have his anatomy redone every time there is a new cartoon.  We must have something about Link that says Link.  

1247

Nintendo Gaming / RE:They should make a Zelda RPG.

« on: September 15, 2004, 09:32:30 PM »

This debate about blood in Zelda is just like the one dealing with whether or not your lightsaber should be able to do real damage in a Star Wars game.  I say leave the gore decisions up to the gamer.  If they are not into cutting down people with their saber then they won't, but we all know people are just gonna get GTA on it and start mowing innocents down with their force abilities.

I was surprised by the way Gannon died at the end of WW.  It was nice, but for them to have put blood in that scene after defering from it the whole game would have been distracting.  I cant wait to see the sword get pulled out.  

Another thing brought up is the issue of bombs, which I think should play a greater role in future Zelda games.  The original was based so heavily on searching for bushes to burn and passages to blow open.  Zelda's today seem to have lost that difficulty.  But the bombs definetly dont fit into any kind of reality scenerio the way they are.  They have to be redesigned at least.  This little kid in a skirt is carrying around a hundred bombs the size of his head.  Where?  Up his rear?  It is obvious to me that if they dont address these little issues then the whole realism thing will have been pointless.  I liked how in WW they were able to bring back enemies the way they once looked.  Like the jellies and the moblins.  I liked how they stuck to the whole cloud of smoke and really developed it as a special effect.  In a WW type game the boomerang and bombs are possible.  This is odd that we are discussing the abscence of realism in WW as a plus, while Myamato says he was concerned with portraying realism in the game so much that the characters actually act like concerned citizens in the game when they see this little kid at night.  

I think that if they are going to go with the whole cel shading/child Link scenerio again then they need to take advantage of Link being a child and make the game a much scarier world.  A child should be fearful when he makes his first kill.  A child should be cautious when sneaking around monsters in dark halls.  Imagine cel shading with doom3 level lighting effects.  You wont be able to see the beast making the noise ahead in the dark dungeon.  

The way WW sold reflects the duality of gamers.  They are too insecure to enjoy a game that plays on the fact that it is fantacy and is a game.  But they are afraid of games functioning like reality.  So really gamers like to pretend the game is real even though it obviously still functions as a game.  

Its like how everytime they try to translate Castlevania to 3d they f' it up.  From the beginning they are messing up thinking that they can put the perspective behind the character in a game whose primary gameplay focus is jumping.   Then they design all of the levels in the Castle flat.  We all remember that the Castlevanias in 2d had a lot of vertical rooms.  Also a lot of rooms that were open or long in the 2d games.  While the 3d one is just a bunch of square boring rooms focused on combat.  Then on top of that they cant make up their minds in either 2d or 3d whether they want all of their enemies to burst into flames or fall apart bleeding.  Castlevania is about monsters and vampires, and vampires drink blood.  My point is that they should either focus making the 3d games more like the art or make it more like reality.  Either way they will have taken a stance on the look of the game and thus the rules of the world it takes place in.  I dont want a realistic game in which the enemy bursts into flames when I hit him with an axe.  Think of it like this, if they were making a 2d Castlevania on GameCube, would you want it to look like a) Zelda Four Swords or b) Diablo 2.  In an age when we can have 2d graphics that look better than most 3d graphics do you prefer those that focus on the original watercolor 2d character designs or would you want photo realism.  There is no wrong answer, but my point is I dont want a game that rides the fence like a spineless democrat.  I want a liberal or a conservative, in the middle doesnt exist.  

1248

Nintendo Gaming / RE:They should make a Zelda RPG.

« on: September 13, 2004, 10:41:43 AM »

I tried to get across that really it wouldn't be a Zelda RPG, but just the next Zelda with more depth and actually a hopefull return to the old school just pick and play aspect of Zelda.  The stats wouldn't decide what you can and cant do, they would just allow you to get better at the things you do do.  I've never been a fan of the large numbers for hp in RPGs.  As for blood, I wouldn't include blood in say Mario for example, I don't even think Metroid needs blood, but Zelda needs blood because when you swing a sword you cut.  When you cut a bush in Zelda it doesn't turn into a cloud of smoke, it falls over cut in half.  The same should apply to the enemies.  I'm not saying that when you stab some kid in the gut he should fall over screaming bloody murder and dragging his intestines behind himself as he tries to crawl away, I'm just saying that when Link takes a swing I want to see blood spray on his green tunic.  I want to see it run down his sword.  I want to see it drip while he runs.  But I don't want to see any blood at all in the game if they are going to make a game where the enemies' bodies still fade away as they do in most videogames.  If the enemies are going to disappear then I can at least enjoy the fact that they are straight forward about it with a pretty swirl of smoke.

I fear that they will go in the direction of custom towns, houses, and other stuff that needs to stay in games like Animal Crossing for now.  

1249

Nintendo Gaming / RE:They should make a Zelda RPG.

« on: September 12, 2004, 04:41:13 PM »

The number one reason Nintendo should make a Zelda rpg is because the topic will never go away, especially if they actually make one.  Its like how for years Zelda fanatics like myself pressured nintendo to make a Zelda allstars.  It was an undeniable hit.  It is funny that the people who buy these anthology type games allready own them on the old systems.  

But as for a Zelda RPG; it could become one of the best selling Zeldas ever.  Actually its not a matter of making an RPG Zelda as much as it is finding that balance between Zelda and RPGs that feels like a comfortable evolution in the series.  I mean the last time we got any real advancement in Zelda was Oot and MM time systems.  I see Zeldas in the future having seasons as a standard.  This is something that does not occur yet in our 3d Zeldas.  

The purpose of the 3d graphics in the console games is to present with polygons the level and world layout in 3d without interfering in the oldschool game mechanics of being able to see in every direction of the character with a 3/4 view.  The reason for using 3d instead of just keeping them 2d is because of how flexible 3d is in comparison.  With 2d you are not going to be able to present a world where you can change the camera for example or have snow come to rest and collect on a house top.  The purpose of 3d is not to simulate reality to its finest detail.  I like how they are exentuating the new Zelda's skies so much for example.  The toon shading engine in the new realistic Zelda allows for some spectacular color and atmospheric effects.  I hope that in future Zeldas despite whether they decide to use realistic style or not that they will persue lighting more.  Fable on the other hand looks rather bland despite its beautiful graphics.  It looks like a pretty videogame while Zelda just looks pretty period.  I guess I'm trying to say that despite all of the little details in Fable it looks and moves like a video game.  Zelda just seems more real even though it is still using more supper deformed characters.  

Despite whether the next next Zelda has supper deformed characters or not, or if it is realistic or cartoon; the next next Zelda has to make killing things more realistic.  Ever since we got to 3d games like Soul Calibur and Zelda have stayed away from bring the character damage into reality.  Instead we get sparks and flashes.  I know that is not what happens when you swing to chop something's head off.  I think that Zelda needs blood.  The blood and realistic character models would contrast really well with the whole cartoon theme.  Japanimation proved a long time ago that mature content can sell just as well if not better in cartoon presentation.

As for the play mechanics of the next next Zelda and how to make it more of a RPG I would start by having the game automaticly record and develop the actions that you repeat over and over again.  You will get better at running if you run a lot.  If you swing your sword a lot, you will get stronger and faster.  This doesn't affect how well you control things, that is still left up to the player as always in Zelda.  For example you may be able to become a faster bowman if you use the bow a lot, but developing that speed won't help you aim any better.  These are the kinds of the things that the game needs to develop automaticly so that the soft core gamers can easilly play without worrying about whether their horse is getting faster because they ride it a lot.  Nintendo would never go so far as to put in random battles or battles using spells or menus.  They like to make a game that is played straight through your hands.  I wouldn't want the focus of the game to become leveling up.  Recent Zeldas have focused on the same old items too much.  I want new items that make the quest new and exciting.  I don't want anymore spells or music playing, it slows down the autonamy of the game.   Some say I want a RPG Zelda because I want spells.  No I want fewer spells and more adventuring, character building, sword fighting, exploring, and puzzle solving.  

1250

Nintendo Gaming / RE:Acclaim Inches from Bankrupcy

« on: August 29, 2004, 01:06:16 PM »

Celebrate good times.

They will burn in the fiery everlasting hell for making Turok and Shadowman so fun and then running them into the ground with poor sequels.