Author Topic: A realistic Zelda afterall?  (Read 30482 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline WesDawg

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
RE: A realistic Zelda afterall?
« Reply #100 on: January 30, 2004, 09:27:58 AM »
I figure the people who hated WW for its graphics are kinda the lowest commong denominator in gaming nowadays. The immature gamers who strangely only buy M rated games. It's been my favorite Zelda ever. If you hated it for some other reason than graphics... well I might let it slide.

Offline Don'tHate742

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
RE: A realistic Zelda afterall?
« Reply #101 on: February 03, 2004, 02:51:53 PM »
pokemon should definitely be cel shaded. Those screens for Colloseum are nasty, nasty 3d bumby pokemon. You can't go realistic with pokemon, its meant to be bright and colorful. Cel shading is the obvious choice.....

I didn't like WW style only becuase I don't like wide eye anime, but the towns people looked halarious. I loved the feel of it, everything was done so well that I couldn't help but be pulled in to the game. Although, I would like them to give realism a try. Not in the way of art style but in the way that a tree looks like a tree should.
"lol in my language that means poo" - Stevey

"WTF is your languange" - Vudu

Offline Bill Aurion

  • NWR Forum Loli
  • Score: 34
    • View Profile
RE: A realistic Zelda afterall?
« Reply #102 on: February 03, 2004, 03:32:33 PM »
Huh?  The trees in Wind Waker at least have a base, and aren't giant twigs sticking in the ground like in another certain Zelda game that comes to mind...
~Former Resident Zelda Aficionado and Nintendo Fan~

Offline Actraiser

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
RE: A realistic Zelda afterall?
« Reply #103 on: February 03, 2004, 07:28:31 PM »
i hated wind waker for the same reason i hated ocarina.  toooooo much walking (or in WW's case, sailing).

Offline Bill Aurion

  • NWR Forum Loli
  • Score: 34
    • View Profile
RE: A realistic Zelda afterall?
« Reply #104 on: February 04, 2004, 01:25:30 AM »
Eh!?  That's like hating Mario games because you jump too much...

The whole point of all the "walking" is that it's an adventure series...
~Former Resident Zelda Aficionado and Nintendo Fan~

Offline KDR_11k

  • boring person
  • Score: 28
    • View Profile
RE: A realistic Zelda afterall?
« Reply #105 on: February 04, 2004, 02:52:04 AM »
I thought the point of Zelda was puzzle solving, not straight running? OOT has much longer distances than other Zelda titles, or at least they felt longer. In other Zeldas the maps were littered with enemies even outside points of interest, but in OOT there's not much except for the randomly spawning skeletons at night.

Offline Bill Aurion

  • NWR Forum Loli
  • Score: 34
    • View Profile
RE: A realistic Zelda afterall?
« Reply #106 on: February 04, 2004, 08:46:59 AM »
But the whole point of the large distance travelled is symbolic of the amount of exploration you do...Let's use a real-life example:  Say you've never left your house before(hey, maybe it is a realistic example )  You can explore more if you head down the road a couple miles than if you just walk down to the end of your driveway...
~Former Resident Zelda Aficionado and Nintendo Fan~

Offline Uglydot

  • Jesus
  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
RE: A realistic Zelda afterall?
« Reply #107 on: February 04, 2004, 02:33:03 PM »
I loved wind waker, so I have no issue with it using the same engine/style etc.  And this topic already feels old, we all know what we prefer and the news is what it is.

Offline Actraiser

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
RE:A realistic Zelda afterall?
« Reply #108 on: February 04, 2004, 06:55:22 PM »
Quote

Originally posted by: Bill
Eh!?  That's like hating Mario games because you jump too much...

The whole point of all the "walking" is that it's an adventure series...


um......it's a game.  everything you do within a game should be fun, not tedious.  the excess traveling did nothing except make it take longer to finish the game.  there have been plenty of adventure games that got on just fine without long, boring, uneventful trips.

Offline Berny

  • Seriously.
  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
RE: A realistic Zelda afterall?
« Reply #109 on: February 05, 2004, 01:12:29 AM »
See, but there are some of us who think that exploration is fun. I do. I love love LUV sailing. And riding Epona. And just plain walking. Yes indeed.
has 6 gmail invites. wants to rid himself of them. email for gmail.

Offline vudu

  • You'd probably all be better off if I really were dead.
  • NWR Junior Ranger
  • Score: -19
    • View Profile
RE: A realistic Zelda afterall?
« Reply #110 on: February 05, 2004, 04:21:55 AM »
i prefer to forward roll through termina field.  with the occational backwards flip romp around the deku tree.
Why must all things be so bright? Why can things not appear only in hues of brown! I am so serious about this! Dull colors are the future! The next generation! I will never accept a world with such bright colors! It is far too childish! I will rage against your cheery palette with my last breath!

Offline revolg_98

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
RE:A realistic Zelda afterall?
« Reply #111 on: February 05, 2004, 12:59:46 PM »
It's ok if the game is still cel-shaded but get rid of the boring nothingness of the sailing and the neverending waves.  Even the ending was all waving.  What ever happened to bad guys not just bosses? Like in Zelda 1 and Link's Adventure

Offline Armed

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
RE:A realistic Zelda afterall?
« Reply #112 on: February 05, 2004, 02:06:56 PM »
Quote

Originally posted by: Actraiser
i hated wind waker for the same reason i hated ocarina.  toooooo much walking (or in WW's case, sailing).


Yes same here, that was the only part i hated about this zelda too... Sailing back and forth trying to peice together the parts of the triforce, but everything else was fine.
If you like to read comics click below
**My cousin made it, pretty cool**
"Bilaran Wars"-Click Me

Offline Actraiser

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
RE:A realistic Zelda afterall?
« Reply #113 on: February 05, 2004, 04:59:05 PM »
Quote

Originally posted by: Berny
See, but there are some of us who think that exploration is fun. I do. I love love LUV sailing. And riding Epona. And just plain walking. Yes indeed.


i love exploration.  "hey, look, more grass!!"  the walking and sailing were cheap tools to make the game longer, thereby making happy the game length whores of the world who feel robbed if it doesnt take them 3 years to beat a game.  most rpgs have open fields where you run around and fight many and varied enemies in an attempt to build up your character.  had Zelda employed this, I would have loved it.  as it is, it was like Tomb Raider without a jump button.

Offline Bill Aurion

  • NWR Forum Loli
  • Score: 34
    • View Profile
RE: A realistic Zelda afterall?
« Reply #114 on: February 05, 2004, 05:02:23 PM »
I feel like slapping you for comparing Zelda to Tomb Raider...That was UNCALLED FOR...
~Former Resident Zelda Aficionado and Nintendo Fan~

Offline Actraiser

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
RE:A realistic Zelda afterall?
« Reply #115 on: February 05, 2004, 05:10:56 PM »
Quote

Originally posted by: Bill
I feel like slapping you for comparing Zelda to Tomb Raider...That was UNCALLED FOR...


it wasnt intended as an insult.  at the time I bought Ocarina, I was deeply enthralled in Tomb Raider 2 and upon playing OoT, that game came to mind.  You run around, fighting baddies and looking for treasure in caves.  That's Tomb Raider.  Zelda's aiming really struck me as being tomb raider like, as well, since you could lock on to enemies and strafe around them, just like in Zelda.  Of course, Tomb Raider 2 had better puzzles and a lot more action.

Offline Bill Aurion

  • NWR Forum Loli
  • Score: 34
    • View Profile
RE: A realistic Zelda afterall?
« Reply #116 on: February 05, 2004, 05:15:00 PM »
You know what?  The Zelda series has been around a lot longer than Tomb Raider...Just thought I'd let you know that...

It's like you began gaming with Tomb Raider, because all those elements have been in LOTS of previously made games...
~Former Resident Zelda Aficionado and Nintendo Fan~

Offline mouse_clicker

  • Pod 6 is jerks!
  • Score: 3
    • View Profile
RE:A realistic Zelda afterall?
« Reply #117 on: February 05, 2004, 05:18:24 PM »
Quote

Zelda's aiming really struck me as being tomb raider like, as well, since you could lock on to enemies and strafe around them, just like in Zelda.


::shudders:: It's like he's saying Lord of the Rings ripped off Dungeons and Dragons. o_O Shouldn't that be grounds for banning? I think that should be grounds for banning.
"You know you're being too serious when Mouse tells you to lighten up... ^_^"<BR>-Bill

Offline Actraiser

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
RE:A realistic Zelda afterall?
« Reply #118 on: February 05, 2004, 05:31:50 PM »
Quote

Originally posted by: Bill
You know what?  The Zelda series has been around a lot longer than Tomb Raider...Just thought I'd let you know that...

It's like you began gaming with Tomb Raider, because all those elements have been in LOTS of previously made games...


those gameplay mechanics have NOT been around and they were not present in ANY of the other zelda games, since OoT was the first Zelda game in 3D.  Im talking about the camera, the auto aiming and the other "new" elements OoT had.  I owned the original Zelda within a month of it's release and have owned every game since, so dont try and school me on what is and is not Zelda.  the original zelda was an action game.  you ran around, stabbed the baddies, got the jewels, repeat.  There was no pointless walking for 5 minutes or sailing for 20.  Everywhere you went, there was something to do.  Also, you cant pick out one section of my statement and ignore the rest.  I am not so blind as to think Tomb Raider was an original concept.  It was essentially Indiana Jones in 3D gaming form.  However, it was the first game with the over the shoulder perspective now prevelant in most 3D games.  There ARE aspects of OoT's gameplay that are reminiscent of Tomb Raider, whether you like it or not.

Offline Berny

  • Seriously.
  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
RE:A realistic Zelda afterall?
« Reply #119 on: February 05, 2004, 05:37:12 PM »
Quote

Originally posted by: mouse_clicker
Shouldn't that be grounds for banning?


Yes. Yes it should. Insinuating Tomb Raider's (or any game franchise for that matter) superiority to any Zelda game should be legitmate grounds for banishment. Send him off to Elba!
has 6 gmail invites. wants to rid himself of them. email for gmail.

Offline Bill Aurion

  • NWR Forum Loli
  • Score: 34
    • View Profile
RE:A realistic Zelda afterall?
« Reply #120 on: February 05, 2004, 05:53:52 PM »
Quote

Originally posted by: Actraiser
However, it was the first game with the over the shoulder perspective now prevelant in most 3D games.  There ARE aspects of OoT's gameplay that are reminiscent of Tomb Raider, whether you like it or not.


WRONG!

I don't recall the first 3rd person game ever(I'm assuming it was a PC game), but Super Mario 64 came out before Tomb Raider...Super Mario 64's engine was then modified for OoT...Again I hold my claim that TR was one of your first games...  
~Former Resident Zelda Aficionado and Nintendo Fan~

Offline Berny

  • Seriously.
  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
RE: A realistic Zelda afterall?
« Reply #121 on: February 05, 2004, 06:09:39 PM »
So sad that your first is one of THE worst.
OOT was one of the most ground breaking games in the history of games. No one will admit to it, but many have ripped off the franchise. You may notice that the main character bears an uncanny resemblance to Link albeit with dyed hair.

I can write a poem and no one would even know...em... Dang it.  
has 6 gmail invites. wants to rid himself of them. email for gmail.

Offline NinGurl69 *huggles

  • HI I'M CRAZY
  • Score: 28
    • View Profile
    • Six Sided Video
RE: A realistic Zelda afterall?
« Reply #122 on: February 05, 2004, 06:37:46 PM »
According to Gamerankings.com, Super Mario 64 was released in the U.S. on Aug. 31, 1996.  Tomb Raider was released on PlayStation/PC on Oct. 31, 1996.

Then be reminded that the Japanese (THE ORIGINAL) release of Super Mario 64 preceded the U.S. version by several months.

OoT's camera system is similar to SM64's in that the camera was essentially a physical object that followed the character from a wide range of varying angles.  The only times I remember playing OoT from an over-the-shoulder view were 1) if you were in Z-targetting mode without a specific target enabling you to run back/forth and strafe.  There was one instance in the game outside the Forest Temple where such a view was useful, but it was hardly required nor necessary nor significant.  If you happen to just z-target like that just so you can do backflips, you're just doing your own thing.

2)  Seeing Link run around with an over-the-shoulder view under normal camera circumstances means you tapped Z to "fix" the camera view, and you pushed "up" on the analog stick.  Some people do this a lot, and others don't do this a lot.  It's largely a matter of choice, though the view fix is generally helpful.  Other than that, you're working with a camera mostly like SM64's.

If one would like to revisit some REAL HARDCORE over-the-shoulder view action, then let's return to Contra, Stage 2.  
:: Six Sided Video .com ~ Pietriots.com ::
PRO IS SERIOUS. GET SERIOUS.

Offline WackerJr

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
RE:A realistic Zelda afterall?
« Reply #123 on: February 05, 2004, 11:36:47 PM »
I think Nintendo actually patented the "Lakitu-cam" didn't they? Also, weren't they worried at one point in development because Sega had also come up with this type of camera system? I recall reading an interview with Giles Goddard in an old issue of N64 Magazine in the UK.

Offline Actraiser

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
RE:A realistic Zelda afterall?
« Reply #124 on: February 07, 2004, 10:46:52 AM »
Quote

Originally posted by: Bill
Again I hold my claim that TR was one of your first games...


Im 27.  Ive been gaming longer than some of you have been ALIVE.