Zelda, and why it took a turn for the worse.

I can go with "real-time". Suppose they found out Link could not be taken outside the poorly lit castle while maintaining the same high degree of graphical quality. Maybe it suffered from too frequent load times, pop in, short draw distance, slowdown with more than two active figures present, a noticeable lack of background detail out in the open. Perhaps the swordplay feature could not be effectively implemented at the level of graphics shown. As has been already stated, we\'re never going to know the real story behind the 180 taken if there is one beyond what Miyamoto has publicly expressed.

Of course no one should be taking my word on anything. I\'m merely offering speculation (backed by a few observations) on the reason why Zelda has taken such an odd turn with a result of annoying the hell out of a lot of serious fans. Being unique at the expense of looking like crap? I\'m just not buying it. Are you?

[Living-In-Clip]

Originally posted by Heretic
I can go with "real-time". Suppose they found out Link could not be taken outside the poorly lit castle while maintaining the same high degree of graphical quality. Maybe it suffered from too frequent load times, pop in, short draw distance, slowdown with more than two active figures present, a noticeable lack of background detail out in the open. Perhaps the swordplay feature could not be effectively implemented at the level of graphics shown. As has been already stated, we\'re never going to know the real story behind the 180 taken if there is one beyond what Miyamoto has publicly expressed.

Of course no one should be taking my word on anything. I\'m merely offering speculation (backed by a few observations) on the reason why Zelda has taken such an odd turn with a result of annoying the hell out of a lot of serious fans. Being unique at the expense of looking like crap? I\'m just not buying it. Are you?

Normally, I wouldn\'t believe it, but after what they done to Metriod just so they could be "unique and fresh to the series" , I am willing to believe anything.

Originally posted by Living-In-Clip


Normally, I wouldn\'t believe it, but after what they done to Metriod just so they could be "unique and fresh to the series" , I am willing to believe anything.

Do you suppose going 3D wasn\'t enough to be "unique and fresh to the series" ? Instead they opt to take on the look of a genre that has been so plaaayed for so long it\'s not even funny. At least it will be unique to GC. Well, for the moment anyway.
 
Curiouser and curiouser

I can go with "real-time". Suppose they found out Link could not be taken outside the poorly lit castle while maintaining the same high degree of graphical quality. Maybe it suffered from too frequent load times, pop in, short draw distance, slowdown with more than two active figures present, a noticeable lack of background detail out in the open. Perhaps the swordplay feature could not be effectively implemented at the level of graphics shown. As has been already stated, we\'re never going to know the real story behind the 180 taken if there is one beyond what Miyamoto has publicly expressed.

Maybe...

Or maybe Miyamoto got addicted to crack?

Maybe someone bombed Nintendo\'s main building?

Maybe all the people on the project quit because Microsoft offered them alot of money?

The possibilities are endless, but your theory has no proof to it while Miyamoto\'s explanation is the absolute right answer- they wanted to be unique. You seem to have difficulties accepting that for some unknown reason. It\'s a fact, there is no buts about it.

Of course no one should be taking my word on anything. I\'m merely offering speculation (backed by a few observations) on the reason why Zelda has taken such an odd turn with a result of annoying the hell out of a lot of serious fans. Being unique at the expense of looking like crap? I\'m just not buying it. Are you?

1. It doesn\'t look like crap, far from it. The desig might, but the game itself is gorgeous. It puts JSF\'s cel-shading to shame.

2. Observations? More like assumptions.

Hopefully you\'ll understand this time.

Originally posted by Heretic


A few weeks prior to E3 this year Nintendo announced if their soon to be given presentation wasn\'t well received Game Cube would not launch. Notably absent from the show were Zelda and Metroid. All very odd

What was it that inspired Nintendo fans to think PS2 would be shown up as a totally inferior system once E3 finally rolled around? Only one major thing I can think of, the Zelda SP2K "demo".

While imo the games shown by Nintendo at E3 did look great, none reached the level of quality Zelda showed the promise of. That was not a bash! Hell, if you ask me neither DOA3 nor Doom3 look as good graphically as last years Zelda demo(consider that a bash if you want).

After this years E3 almost all the Nfans big talk about GC kicking PS2\'s ass evaporated..

Observations^^^

Originally posted by Heretic



Put it all together and I see Nintendo scrambling to put together a playable version of Zelda that would live up to what was shown at SW2000. Finding themselves hard pressed to come closer than a sharper more detailed  N64 version, they gave up and went as far from the promised Zelda as possible so the image of their new system wouldn\'t be brought under too much scrutiny.

^Assumptions, although I prefer to view it as more of a supposition^

Originally posted by Heretic


Hey, so what if we\'ve seen Smurfs that look more lifelike (not to mention more macho). Everyone who feels they\'ve been burned has at least a year to get over it before it finally releases. By that time you\'ll be looking forward to it as much as you were a week ago. Even if Links not cool, you know the game will be.

^Conclusion^

Opinion>> "looks like crap" should have added \'compared to the version we thought was coming\'

^Imbecile^

<----is right here

A few weeks prior to E3 this year Nintendo announced if their soon to be given presentation wasn\'t well received Game Cube would not launch. Notably absent from the show were Zelda and Metroid. All very odd

What was it that inspired Nintendo fans to think PS2 would be shown up as a totally inferior system once E3 finally rolled around? Only one major thing I can think of, the Zelda SP2K "demo".

While imo the games shown by Nintendo at E3 did look great, none reached the level of quality Zelda showed the promise of. That was not a bash! Hell, if you ask me neither DOA3 nor Doom3 look as good graphically as last years Zelda demo(consider that a bash if you want).

After this years E3 almost all the Nfans big talk about GC kicking PS2\'s ass evaporated..(COUGH ROGUE LEADER IS BETTER LOOKING THAN EVERY PS2 GAME COUGH, but that\'s irrelevant to me since I could give a flying **** about graphics(not the style though))  

Those wern\'t any observations to prove your theory though.

If you ask me i think the super nintendo game is best:
 ZELDA A LINK FROM THE PAST.

Originally posted by Jumpman
^Imbecile^



Those wern\'t any observations to prove your theory though.

Call it supporting evidence. The proof will come if we don\'t see a game with the character detail of the quality shown in the picture you started this thread with over the life span of GC.

Rouge Leader? Beautiful, great looking, what else can I say other than you need to be reminded they are static images layered over a static background. Since I saw how hard T-shirts got pounded for pointing that out and you Jumpman have now stepped into Jumpboy mode by using insults...

I\'m done here for today