Well, the DS Zeldas had the disadvantage of touch screen... I'm not someone who says that the Touch Screen is bad. It can be good, depending on what game it is and how it's used, but in Zelda, it felt awkward. Especially in Phantom Hourglass, where you are practically forced to use the Touch Screen non-stop. Spirit Track was... yeah, it was... nice. It had button control, but also forced Touch Screen on me at times...

I dunno, I played Link to the Past and, while it came out while I was young, I still found it very boring. It's just dungeon after dungeon and most of them didn't feel very creative, just different colors for practically the same puzzles. Makes it somewhat hard to remember in what dungeon I currently am in.

C-A

---

The dungeons felt distinct enough to me but with, what, 12 or 13 in the game? There's bound to be a little crossover in design.

Speaking of design, that's what makes LttP the best. It strikes a perfect balance between the original, which said "It's dangerous to go alone, take this" and tossed you out into the wild to figure everything out yourself, and the more recent games that just lead you from Point A to Point B with little room for deviation, either by forcing you along a preset path (Spirit Tracks), nagging you with a navigator (OoT), or both (Skyward Sword).

Oh, and on a semi-related note, NA is finally getting the Oracle series on the eShop on May 30th. Looks like it's an awesome time to be a Zelda fan again.

---

Ah. I started playing Oracle of Seasons a while ago - I wanted the one with Nayru in it, but couldn't remember which one it was (I have both) so I guess and got it wrong, blegh - and overall, it feels very much like Link's Awakening. And Link to the Past. Actually, all the earlier Zelda game kinda feel super interchangeable with each other.

C-A

P.S: Now that I've finally started to play the game, I recognize your signature perfectly.

---

Well, my main problem stemms from the overall linearity of the games. Modern Zelda games just seem to have lost the "go anywhere you want" feel of the older games. Today's Zelda games are basically...go to dungeon, get item, use said item to beat boss in said dungeon, return to hub world, move on to next area in the game, rinse, repeat. I was 7 when A Link to the Past came out, and I remember how blown away I was by how huge the game was (you have to remember, in 1992 a game like ALttP was a huge deal). I just miss being able to explore the whole area and stumbling upon hidden secrets, which is something I feel that the newer games lack greatly. Twilight Princess was probably the last game where I truly felt that way. I'm not saying that the games should be like Elder Scrolls or anything, but a little bit of a return to that mysterious feel that the older games used to give me would be nice, and I'm really hoping this new game does just that. Maybe I'm just getting old though.

Ah, I completely agree with you. The newer Zelda games have been way too easy and they have lost the sense of "adventure". I'm not a big fan of ALttP, but it definitely had some things that are better than the newer games.

Skyward Sword, especially, felt like you were being guided through a tunnel with no freedom to do what you like. At least Twilight Princess gave you freedom to just roam around a world and go wherever you like.

---

Hey!

Oracle of Ages and Oracle of Seasons is coming out for the eshop...Which one should I get?

---

Ages.

---

Ok! Although traveling through different seasons does sound interesting. :/

---

Seasons will have you fight a lot more and with Ages you do more puzzles.
I started with Seasons and stopped before the second dungeon. Mostly cause I got bored. Have yet to touch Ages, but I do think Link looks really creepy when he's staring at Nayru sing.
And walking through seasons isn't that great. It's basically different color schemes and one or two things changes on the screen. Like in spring you can use a flower to jump up onto a little cliff, but not in other seasons...

C-A

---

Last edited by CatMuto on Tue May 28, 2013 11:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I like Seasons well enough, and while Ages does focus more on puzzles, I also feel it has a better story and villain. Veran is much more involved in the plot than Onox. It also feels like it has a better balance between puzzles and combat honestly. Seasons does have a couple more of my favorite items, but Ages has some good ones too. I loved the swim upgrade and the Switchhook. For the GB/GBC games, I daresay I like it just a tad more than Link's Awakening.

---

Get both. That's what I'm doing~

---

I wish I could...I kind of want Gnobo or my brother to get one of them.

---

Well, they're only $5 each, so, it's not toooooooooo bad, I guess.

---

I'm getting both, I've been waiting to play these games for so long. How similar are they to Link's Awakening?

---

Very, I guess. The 2D Zelda games felt completely interchangable to me, whether I play LA, Seasons or Ages, Link to the Past, it's all basically the same thing.

C-A

---

Here, have an answer that's actually helpful.

Controls are pretty much the same as in LA but both Oracle games are bigger. There's more puzzles, different weapons, minigames, mounts, and when you beat one, you can transfer items and information over to the second one via passwords or a link cable (in the originals anyway, not sure how it'll be handled in the eShop release).

Story is decent, I think LA's is better, but that's a personal preference thing anyway.

---

OK, that sounds good. Link's Awakening is one of my favourite Zelda games, mainly for the puzzles. It's nice to hear that there will be more.

---

Has there been any info on where this new Zelda 3DS comes in the "LttP" story? Before the Oracle Games, After LA, etc?

---

Isn't it said to be a direct sequel to the actual LttP?

Oh god why do people even care about the timelines? It's a freaking game series...!

C-A

---

Because its fun to play games in chronological order, even if that order has no bearing on the actual game itself. I'm a film guy first and a video game fan second, so the plot is always what I put the most emphasis on, even if it is almost nonexistent like in Zelda.

---

So you'd have to play.... uh..... Skyward Sword, then go to.... whatever the next game is.... play the Oracle Games side-by-side. For Ocarina, you'd have to play that, then go and play Majora's Mask, while simultaniously playing, um, Wind Waker and Twilight Princess, so you can go the 'Child' and the 'Adult' timeline.

At least, that's what it seems like what you have to do if you want to play Zelda games chronologically.

C-A

PS: Can you tell I don't know the timelines very well? Mostly because... I don't care. Who cares which Link clone/incarnation/asexually-created-ameboa I'm controlling right now. As long as the gameplay is good and the characters are interesting, even if somewhat weird, it's all good.

---

Technically, yes you would. However, the connections between those games are relegated to "timeline" status; they aren't direct sequels to eachother or anything. The Link from SS isn't the Link from OoT, etc. So there's not a lot of point in playing those in order, although it might be fun to do a playthrough of one of the timelines during a weekend or something.

The link from ALttP, though, is now featured in 5 different games, and while they aren't direct sequels to eachother plot-wise they have connections to eachother. The relation between A Link to the Past, Link's Awakening, and the oracle games have been observed back when they were first released, before any of the "timeline" stuff even came about. The fact that Nintendo released the timeline and that Skyward Sword was much more story-driven than previous games indicates to me that Nintendo is going to placing a heavier emphasis on plot and connections in upcoming games, which makes me think that the LttP sequel will relate to LA and the oracle games in some way. Because of this, I feel like it would be worth it to play them in "order" when the new one is released, especially since I have never completed LttP, LA, or the oracle games.

I totally understand why some people don't care about the timeline thing. It's not like it's a major factor in Zelda or anything. The main appeal behind the timeline thing was that before Nintendo released the official one fans could theorize and try to find connections between the game. It was a little like a treasure hunt, like a Zelda version of the Da Vinci Code. Now that Nintendo has told us what the timeline is, hopefully they will put a greater emphasis on story. If they don't, then there was kind of no reason to release an official timeline because it cost the fans a really fun hobby.

---

You totally lost me with that.

As for Skyward, well, it certainly tried to be more story-driven.
But once I descend onto the surface, I see nothing story-important appearing again for a very long time. Actually, until about 60% of the game is over, when I finally catch up to Zelda, that's when I get more story. The rest of the time, it's the typical Zelda Dungeon hopping.

So... Nintendo tried to be story-driven with Skyward, but ultimately failed.
As for wondering about the timelines, I just prefer to have little references to things in my games, rather than try in any form - whether it's official or fan-made - to create a semi-coheren time- or storyline in something. Like in Rune Factory Oceans, they make reference to Rune Factory Frontier by mentioning an island floating in the sky, talking about Iris and how to put two people back into one person.
Stuff like that.

C-A

---

The Da Vinci code was a film (and a book, but the film was much much better) about two characters who observed clues and symbolism in seemingly unrelated places to uncover a hidden history and forgotten events. (In a way, the author of the book also used symbolism and history to connect totally unrelated info, since most of it was BS.) This is similar to what Zelda fans did with the games. There might be a group of People in ALttP who never appeared again, but their symbol might appear on a wall in TP, and fans would try to connect the two using other evidence collected from the game. It was totally baseless and subjective, and also quite fun and helped you learn a lot about the Lore of Zelda.

I don't think Skyward Sword failed at being more story-based. It was more story-based than any of the previous ones. It just didn't do it enough. But Nintendo has never (to my knowledge) developed a full, only story-based game, so I'm cutting them some slack. I think in the next couple of years we will see their storytelling abilities improve.

The appeal of the timelines has to do with how the history and culture of Hyrule develops and how events influence other events. A very literal example is seen in The Wind Waker (my personal favorite Zelda) where the culture and history of OoT-era Hyrule is skewed and distorted to become a religion of sorts to the people of the Great Sea. Just like in real life, the evolution of historical and mythical interpretation is fascinating and its fun to see how Event A could actually be a possible explanation for Belief 1 or Event B, etc.

---

I know what the Da Vinci Code is.
What I meant was that I thought it was complete crap. People are always thinking something has a bigger meaning or hidden message in it, when mostly it doesn't. They just see things in it that they want to see. And just because they want to see it there, doesn't mean it's real.

If WW's religion was based off of OoT... happening-ish... things... why do they keep referring to Gods rather than the Goddesses from the OoT or all the other games? (Except for Skyward, they seem to have shoved Din, Nayru and Farore away to give us the supposed-awesomeness-but-not-really-great that is Hylia) And how come the freaking Zora had to evolve into Rito? Why is a bird person (or a fish person, counting the Zora-to-Rito evolution) the keeper of the Earth Temple? How come we never heard of these temples before? How come the freaking stone people - Gorons, who are the dumbest race I have seen in a videogame to date - can get by without evolving and live on the water on dingy little floats?

Those are questions I want answered, rather than find out if WW Link is somehow connected to any other Link.

C-A

---

Well that might be why the timeline doesn't appeal to you, as what you described is exactly why the timeline theorizing is so fun. It's nice to try and find greater meaning in things, even if its only a fictional construction based itself on a work of fiction. Some people simply aren't interested in that. I personally love trying to sort out what might cause a belief or historical change to take shape in some way, and am very interested in how facts and history can evolve into legend, religion, and myth.

The things you mention (with the exception of the Rito, which was indeed strange) can be explained in the same way that the culture of Hyrule has evolved. Like any other civilization, the people of the Great Sea's religion evolved and changed over the years and they began to worship "The Gods" instead of "The Goddesses". (They still have elements of OoT's belief system, though, as the Pearls are still named after the 3 goddesses. The Hyrule people have tons of deities that they worship and because of that the ones they hold particularly important change over the centuries, whether it be Hylia or that giant angry frog.

I think the interest in connected Links isn't so much "hey, that's Link's great great grandson! Awesome!" but is more about the circumstances of the character and how it relates to the Hero's journey. Games like TP, which feature a previous Hero who has become somewhat empty and didn't end his life the way he wanted imparts his knowledge onto another hero to take his place. Through this act he not only helps the new hero accomplish his destiny but also redeems himself and completes his final journey. That kind of stuff is really interesting to me but I totally understand people who aren't into that.

---

Here's the timeline if you still need it, direct from the Historia.

Skyward Sword
Minish Cap
Four Swords
Ocarina of Time

TIMELINE SPLITS

Ganondorf kills Link:

Link to the Past
Oracle series
Link's Awakening
Legend of Zelda
Zelda II

Following Young OoT Link's timeline:

Majora's Mask
Twilight Princess
Four Swords Adventures

Following Adult OoT Link's timeline:

Wind Waker
Phantom Hourglass
Spirit Tracks


Other than the goofy "Link fails" third timeline break, the games fell in more or less where I expected they would.

---

I don't take Hyrule Historia seriously in any way.
It might have some artwork on things, but the timelines being included and made 'official' is stupid. Again, who cares how the games are in what timeline? The only series where that might be important in Tales Of where most of the games are not connected except Symphonia being a 4000-year-Prequel to Phantasia, Destiny and Destiny 2 being absolutely connected and this Xillia-Xillia 2 thing.

Not to mention that Historia has that stupid manga in it.
Oh look! We're spitting into the face of Canon that has established things in the game of Skyward, but our manga contradicts that. Oh look, we have an even earlier Link! And he was kind of a dick! Isn't that exciting!? It totally hints that Hylia loved the Hero, Link! Isn't that fun?

No!!

It's not funny, it's not entertaining. It's just a stupid manga for the Zelda games and none of them has ever been counted as canon, so why should this one be counted as it? Especially since it shoves the whole HyliaxLink/ZeldaxLink into my face. Dammit, Nintendo, don't you realize that people have preferences in pairings? Fuck this whole PrincessxKnight thing, you didn't do it in the previous Zeldas (except Zelda II, I guess) so why suddenly shove it into our face after 25 years!?

C-A

---

Yeah, yeah, you hate everything, we get it already.

---

No I just hate Clichés, which the ZeldaxLink pairing is. You might say it isn't in Skyward, since Zelda is not a princess, she's the daughter of the school's headmaster. But considering what she actually is in that game, it makes it worse.

C-A

---

I wasn't aware the manga in the back of HH actually was canon. Apart from continuity issues with Skyward Sword, (Such as the Master Sword already existing, etc.) like you said the previous mangas aren't canon. The manga also undermines the importance of SS Link and his role in the evolution of the hero. So I don't think it's an issue since I don't believe most fans look at that story as canon. To most SS link is the first link.

As for the Romance aspect, I think they were trying to tie Link and Hylia's relationship into the relationship between Zelda and Link in SS (Because if I remember correctly Link and Zelda are described in SS as reincarnations of the Hero and Hylia). They're doing something new with the relationship, and it may seem cliched, but it's a fairy tale adventure with very traditional themes. There's lots of cliches in Zelda. It's kind of like Star Wars. The cliched aspects are just part of it because its meant to be an all-ages fairy tale. As for the pairing thing, that shouldn't bug anyone really. Pairings are just fanfiction. If authors of professional works had to worry about who their fans had paired with eachother they would never be able to write any romance into their stories.

---

I know people who believe that the manga is canon. Because...... I don't know. Aonuma wanted the manga to be made? Or they like that Hylia gets an appearance? They think that a Zelda manga isn't a Zelda manga unless a Hero was in there that was called Link?

As for the romance aspect..... like I said, why put it in?
They didn't put it into the other games - again, they sorta did in Zelda II, but some people like to pretend it doesn't exist like those CD-I games.... w-whatever those are... *shifty eyes* - so why suddenly put it into this one? Or, at the very least, make it so hard to believe?
I don't see any kind of relationship between Link and Zelda in Skyward. We are told they are childhood friends. Then she gets kidnapped and I spend the entire game racing after her for no good reason. I don't care about Zelda because the game didn't give me the time to care for her. If we had maybe spent more time with her, gotten to know her, not just have 15 minutes of screentime with her before she gets kidnapped, I might have cared about her being possibly in danger and rescuing her.
Instead, I get told something and boom.
I'm not one to go for ZeldaxLink but if they had made it believeable, I might have seen it and acknowledged it.

And the reincarnation thing.... why can't Skyward Link really be the first one?
Or why not go after the idea of.... I'll have to put this in spoilers.



I think that sounds better than the typical idea of "there's a Link in every time"
At least, it sounds more interesting.



What about the stories (any franchise, not just games) where there are canon pairings? And there are important characters to the plot, their romance being the main part? Those stories would still get fanfiction where the canon pairing gets destroyed for fan-preferences, but still.

C-A

---

I agree with you on the manga, and I think your theory is a great idea. And I don't see how your theory (which we could call "fanfiction") is any less "true" than the manga writers' "fanfiction". The people who believe the manga is canon are still putting non-Nintendo made content into the equation. This isn't any different from people who think the Phillips CD-I games are canon. Nintendo is not one to explicitly state what is canon and what is not for the same reasons it didn't reveal the timeline for 10+ years. But in a situation like Zelda where many people want to create stories, the most logical course of action is to adopt a "Not canon unless it's an official Nintendo game". Look at Star Trek. There are thousands and thousands of Star Trek novels, comic books, games, etc. But none of them are canon. Only the 6 Television shows and 12 movies are canon. People can think of some of that other stuff as canon to them personally, but in a discussion about the franchise they are officially not canon. And while Nintendo has never said something isn't canon (not even the television show from the 80's) it's safe to assume the reason why that is the case is because Nintendo isn't even giving those other non-Nintendo products the time of day (except when they want to make money off them, of course). (Not to mention Skyward Sword contradicts the manga on numerous occasions, and since SS IS canon that would most likely confirm the manga's non-canon).

So in conclusion about the manga, among the majority of fans do not believe its canon and Nintendo has never acknowledged it so the manga isn't even a factor in the franchise.

Regarding the romance thing in SS, no they did not put it into other games, which is probably why they did put it into this one. SS was trying to revitalize the series and change the pace but still tried to keep classic Zelda elements together. I felt that there was a romantic connotation to their relationship in SS. They are much closer than they were in the games, and there is even a song in the game called "Love theme" which plays when they are together. The reason why their relationship seems platonic in nature is simply because it's a rated E fairy tale story that no doubt has a large audience with children. Although really whether they are romantically involved or just great friends doesn't matter because both work with the SS plot. Your problem with "not giving me enough time to care for her so I didn't" seems to be more of a problem with the genre and Nintendo's story policies than anything else. It's a fairy tale. When kids are told Sleeping Beauty and Snow White, there isn't a lot of characterization until they get into trouble. Then the prince comes and rescues them. No character development. No realistic depiction of how a relationship would develop. The Zelda franchise has all of the same tropes which are put there for that reason: to make the series feel like one of those fantasy stories you heard as a kid. The other issue is, like I said, how Nintendo handles plot. While Skyward Sword made improvements in story delivery, it was still lacking compared to many other games. Spending more time on Zelda's character would have cut into gameplay time which Nintendo won't do. This is why I want Nintendo to bump up the plot and the cutscenes.





What about the stories where there are canon pairings? And there are important characters to the plot, their romance being the main part? Those stories would still get fanfiction where the canon pairing gets destroyed for fan-preferences, but still.

C-A[/quote]

I'm sorry, but I'm having a hard time understanding what you mean here. In response to your comment "Dammit, Nintendo, don't you realize that people have preferences in pairings?" I was trying to say that this isn't a good reason to dislike the manga or SS or any other work of fiction that adds a romance element. Pairings, as far as Zelda is concerned, are non-canon, so Nintendo won't and shouldn't care if a fan prefers link with Midna or something because it's non-canon and therefore is not a factor in the official works. I'm confused at what you mean by your last sentence.

---

Which you wouldn't know unless you specifically looked up the title of all the tracks and listened to them. Which I didn't do and, quite frankly, I don't care what music plays at which part or what its title is. That never means anything to me.



Yes but those fairytales come from a time when women were not that great or supposed to be interesting. It's like the older eras of superheroes, they barely had any personality, cause we were supposed to imagine we were them. Which is exactly why going along those lines, whether it be in games, movies, TV shows or books, doesn't work and makes them hated *coughTwilightcough* because we are past that stage. We want interesting characters, we want realistic things happening, we want development so that we can actually feel like we're part of the story.

And if Nintendo really wanted a fairytale like story with Skyward, they would've done things differently. I don't buy this whole fairytale thing for Skyward or any of the other Zelda games. Mostly because nothing of it ever felt like a fairytale to me, nor should it. If Nintendo was so big on plot now, why does Skyward - as the origin story - not explain things more thoughroughly?
It explains why a Zelda, a Link and a Demise-Incarnate are always fighting, but it's put in at the very end, like a throw-away scene that feels awkward. (Heck, anything with Demise feels awkward, mostly because Ghirahim felt like the actual threat instead of Mr Pwetty Toes)

As for my previous post's last sentence.
There are games, movies, etc where there is a canon pairing. Um... example, Sailor Moon. The manga focuses heavily on Usagi and Mamoru's relationship, it's absolutely canon, they will get married and have a child - two children, if you count Parallel Sailor Moon - and all that. They are absolutely canon. But if you look at the fandom, there are still tons of people who say "Screw canon!" and make Usagi dump Mamoru for Seiya, Haruka or anyone else. Mostly because.... it doesn't matter if a franchise has a canon pairing or doesn't. Fans will always revolt against it and create their own pairings.

C-A

---

Unfortunatly, the depiction of Zelda in many of these games is very similar to those old, sexist portrayals of women. Even when Zelda becomes a fighter in some form, they make her have to have an alias rather than letting her be able to be strong while being herself (Shiek, Tetra, etc.) So just like those older fairy tales, the depiction of women (and all the characters as a whole, to a certain extent) don't give you a real reason why you should care for the characters. Why do we want to play as Link? Why did we want to rescue Aryll? Why did we want to save the Deku Tree? with these stories, eventually it just boils down to the plot and nothing else.

Zelda is a light-hearted fantasy story mainly intended for children about a boy who rescues a princess and defeats the evil wizard. That fits a lot of the fairy tale elements. It's a morality tale with traditional, predictable archetypes about a boy who goes on the traditional Hero's Journey. It is because of this that story and characterization is lacking, along with the fact that Nintendo doesn't want to create a deeper story. Also, kids like Zelda for the same reasons they like old fairy tales. It's an adventure story that is totally black-and-white morally and has a happy ending. It's a medieval magical world which has fairies and monsters in it.

I'm totally with you on wanting better stories. I think Nintendo needs to get MUCH more story-heavy. SS had more than OoT or the WW, but it needs to get even more involved. I'm not arguing with you about that, but I am trying to explain why those issues are happening.

As for my previous post's last sentence.
There are games, movies, etc where there is a canon pairing. Um... example, Sailor Moon. The manga focuses heavily on Usagi and Mamoru's relationship, it's absolutely canon, they will get married and have a child - two children, if you count Parallel Sailor Moon - and all that. They are absolutely canon. But if you look at the fandom, there are still tons of people who say "Screw canon!" and make Usagi dump Mamoru for Seiya, Haruka or anyone else. Mostly because.... it doesn't matter if a franchise has a canon pairing or doesn't. Fans will always revolt against it and create their own pairings.

C-A[/quote]

Ok that makes sense. But I don't see how fan pairings are a good criticism of any form of Zelda media, no matter how terrible it is (I'm talking about the SS manga here). Just like fans can "screw canon!", Game studios shouldn't be criticized for ruining some fans' pairings by trying to add in a canon romance.

---

Generally, I don't care too much if a game series puts in a sudden Canon Romance. As long as it fits into the overall game series. With Zelda, it's a fantasy adventure game and a canon romance was never there to begin with and have one brought in suddenly just feels weird.
It makes me think that they're aiming to create a Dating Sim spin-off (Oh my god that'd be cool! I wanna date Ghirahim!)

That's what irks me about this whole LinkxZelda thing in Skyward - aside from the fact that I never really see anything that could hint at a proper romance, I totally go with the idea that Zelda likes Link but as for that being reciprocated I don't know I don't see it - the trailers and several gamers' reviews stated repeatedly that the Romance is this giant important thing to the plot and it's, like, the main focus!

Play the game and I don't see anything really romantic. There's nothing there that makes me think their romance is believeable, which just makes the addition of 'romance' in the Zelda game obsolete and pointless. It's like these post-night scenes I saw of Commander Shepard from Mass Effect... he's all... I dunno, kinda cutesy-romantic with the partner during that short scene and he kisses them and it just... feels awkward. It doesn't fit. (Okay I think those were DLC and I haven't played the games, so maybe they do have some introduction and interaction that makes it plausible)

C-A

---

since there remaking games now i really hope they remake all the old zelda games especially Majora's Mask i been wanting a remake for it ever since i beat it when it first came out and the whole LinkxZelda pairing its pretty much the only pairing out there in the whole series since zelda is the only character he could have a relationship with since shes in almost ever recurring game

No. It's definitely Link x Marin forever. It'd be interesting to explore their relationship further and question how one must procreate with a seagull to continue to keep the bloodline of the hero intact. Then, you get your end result: The Rito in Wind Waker.

---

I admit i did find LinkxMarin cute lol

I think Hatoful Boyfriend might answer that. Not in the first one, but hopefully in the 3rd game, Star Project?

As for LinkxMarin, Eh, she was kind of a Zelda-knock-off anyway. The rest I'm not commenting on for the sole fact that I do not support LinkxZelda - for one, it's a total cliché of Knight-gets-Princess and for another, if Link and Zelda constantly got together in every game, we'd get inbreeding.
Which was done in middle ages for keeping the bloodline pure and... yeah that caused crap to happen.

Cabanela, I can hear the 'hardcore Majora's Mask fans' raging at the idea of remaking MM. It was so perfect to begin with after all, even the graphics.

C-A

---