227 replies to this topic

[D~N]

Mmhmm, and you are Shigeru Miyamoto to say what Zelda is and is not. No wait, you are Mr. Triforce of Time Link-is-his-own-father.

Dont forget, SteveT has been owning us all since forever with that theory. Don't underestimate it. Ever.

Hey ODonnel, good to see you again! Glad to see my comment sparked your return, or at least associated with it. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but are you saying the Train transforms into the Darknut-like figure and acts as our buddy? If that's the case, then I still think it's cool. If that's not what your talking about, please elaborate, because your theory has me wondering.

Everyone arguing over the genre that is Zelda - to you I say, take a step back and look at the seriousness of the series. There's been bowling alleys and neon lights. There's been telephones and mine carts. No, they haven't been as integral to the story as the train appears to be, but from the looks of it, I would say that this train fits the recent developments of Twilight Princess. The Old Kakariko village was begging for this train, and in that regard I think this could mesh well with the franchise, be it steampunk or just western. Don't forget, there's bound to be magic involved - as many have pointed out, it's almost a given that we will be drawing the tracks to lay them down as we go. Of course, this calls for some magic, so the fantasy elements are still there.

Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but you guys are okay with steam boats, right? So why isit such a big deal to add a steam train? Furthermore, why does it bother you so much? Do you take it personally that this franchise is widening it's scope, and is allowing for new ways of fun transport? Or would you rather ride epona for the 6th time? Moreover, did the group that dislikes this idea miss the part of the trailer where the deku leaf and sword and shield and traditional dungeon crawling are? Did this group miss the part where this is the same old game, with a new element that makes it unique?

Does a (probably) magic train ruin the game for you folks? If that's true, I feel sorry for you. How did you react when link used a crossbow in Link's Crossbow Training? Was that blasphemy too? How did you react to the cannon in TP? Did yo ublock tha tbit of technology out of your minds? How will you react when a Zelda game comes out with a clawshot that is powered by gunpowder? Will you shun the franchise? If any of this sound over the top, it should. Its the same as your reaction, in my eyes. A train doesn't ruin a game before it comes out, so stop whining and wait for some real gameplay footage instead of a 1 minutes trailer.

For the record, I'd rather buy a barbie doll with a different hat than the same barbie doll over again with the same hat. Or better yet, I'd rather buy a barbie doll with a different hat than no barbie doll at all. And don't make fun of barbie dolls - they're action figures! And they're totally manly.

As my final note, I wanted to point out to those that were comparing TP to LotR - LotR had steam-based elements in it, if I remember correctly. Something to do with the trees that were being torn down and burned by the orcs for steam. Just food for thought, as the parallel is ironic if you think about it - people cite LotR as the great fantasy king, and yet it can have hints of other genres too and not get hurt. Hmm...

[TheAvengerLever]

^ The whole LOTR thing was about industrialization and how Tolkien frowned upon it.

Yet it was still in his book.

So what does that have to say to us here today?

We should frown upon trains and industrialization in Zelda.

But it's still gonna be in the game.

[Fin]

I guess I'm just looking at it as a single annoyance.

And I would too if it wasn't a single annoyance that will accompany us for the whole game.

Nah, I meant I consider it a single annoyance to the series in general. It may feel a little out of place in the context of the series, but it's just one game, and I doubt it'll matter much in the long run. In the meantime, I'll try to enjoy the game as is.

ALttP 12 (3 Light World, Hyrule Castle, 8 Dark World).
OoT 9 (3 young Link, 5 adult Link and Ganon's Castle) although there's eleven if you count the Well and Gerudo Fortress mini-dungeons.

Yeah the bottom of the well counts because it isn't optional (or is it possible to beat the game without the lens of truth? I never tried that). Gerudo fotress doesn't really feel like a dungeon so I would say no.

You're forgetting the Ice Cavern. And the lens is technically optional - I've beaten the Shadow Temple without it on one game, and crossed the desert without it on another occassion. I can only think of one other part of the game where it's "needed" (the Ganon's Castle shadow room) but that's another desert. If you're obsessive enough to know the path, you should be able to do it.

But I wouldn't count the well as an optional dungeon, considering you have to be crazy obsessive to beat the game without the lens, and it was obviously unintended for it to be possible.

In any case, it doesn't matter that much how many dungeons there are. Twilight Princess may not have as many as LttP or OoT, but it's still a much longer game than either.

[NM87]

If you had been paying attention you would have realised technology in Zelda is recessive, i.e. in the background and its purpose is humorous, it's not the dominant element of the games and never has been.

Well, let's look at the evidence. I can name 13 swords and sorcery Zelda games. How many steampunk Zelda games can you name?
If you can name more than 13, I'll concede that I'm wrong about what genre Zelda is.

There is an error in both of these statements: they assume that Zelda always has to be a certain way and can never change, because the way we have always known it can never change.

But…

the last Zelda game as you know it

I WIN I WIN I WIN I WIN I WIN I WIN HAHAHAHAAAAAAAA

ALL ABOARD!!!!!!! IT’S THE STEAM PUNK TRAIN AND THE NEXT STOP IS ZELDA

BEGONE EVIL ONE!

JOIN ME

NM87 reminds me of the people who buy the same Barbie dolls with new hats.

Thank you.

[everything they have said]

I agree.

[Toan]

the last Zelda game as you know it

I WIN I WIN I WIN I WIN I WIN I WIN HAHAHAHAAAAAAAA

ALL ABOARD!!!!!!! IT'S THE STEAM PUNK TRAIN AND THE NEXT STOP IS ZELDA

A: To cite something, you should, yknow, provide a source other than a name.

B: Keep your immature, childish comments untyped, or at the very least unposted, or I will

C: you off of these forums.

[SOAP]

Heck, a train would fit in TMC's world without it looking out of place.

...I think you just broke my brain.

Oh for cripessake. Then you're too easily broken. TMC had robots for crying out loud.

[Masamune]

Everyone get on board the Picori Train!

But I do agree. I think this would be an appropriate game for a Minish Cap sequel. It doesn't even have to take place in Hyrule.

[Arturo]

A: To cite something, you should, yknow, provide a source other than a name.

At least, I can assure you that, well, this quote is fairly well-known... below (yes, on Storyline)

[SOAP]

Mmhmm, and you are Shigeru Miyamoto to say what Zelda is and is not. No wait, you are Mr. Triforce of Time Link-is-his-own-father.

Well, let's look at the evidence. I can name 13 swords and sorcery Zelda games. How many steampunk Zelda games can you name?

That's really unfair. All that's really needed is one good precedent to show the Zelda series can be altered without damagizing the spirit of Zelda. I can actually give one precendent of a cyberpunk Zelda. TWW. Tower of the Gods. Cyberpunk. It was actually one of the coolest Zelda dungeons out there, despite it being futurist and straight up technological in nature it still fit into the Zelda universe, ironically more so than the sunglasses, neon lights, and jukeboxes in OoT which stick out like sore thumbs.

How many purely swords and sorcery Zelda games can you name? I'm talking about ones that have no technological anachronisms whatsoever, even as a joke. Ones that plays the medieval fantasy trope straight.

Edit: While I'm at it, no one's who's praising the idea of a steampunk Zelda is expecting Zelda to nbe like Bioshock or Fable 2 and I doubt Nintendo would go to those lengths if they were to make a steampunk Zelda so I think your fears are unfounded.

Edited by SOAP, 30 March 2009 - 11:22 AM.

[NM87]

Edit: While I'm at it, no one's who's praising the idea of a steampunk Zelda is expecting Zelda to nbe like Bioshock or Fable 2 and I doubt Nintendo would go to those lengths if they were to make a steampunk Zelda so I think your fears are unfounded.

Yea, lmfao. I think the point a lot of people are missing is that it won't be completely steam punk. Some elements may be included, like the ones I mentioned, but it won't be the focus of the game. It might just be a change in the amosphere. A change of pace, but not a significant one. There probably would still be swords and arows and the like, but the setting could be different.

[Showsni]

the last Zelda game as you know it

I WIN I WIN I WIN I WIN I WIN I WIN HAHAHAHAAAAAAAA

Yeah, but most of us were assuming he meant gameplay wise; which seemed even more likely with those patents (presumably for the next Wii Zelda). A change in setting/genre, though? I don't think many people were anticipating that, and for good reason. Zelda is a medieval style fantasy, just like Metroid is set on alien worlds and Famicom Detective Club is in the present day. A train is close to crossing the line, if not going over it entirely. Still, I'm content to wait and see how the game turns out befire judging it.

[Duke Serkol]

I think the point a lot of people are missing is that it won't be completely steam punk.

Personally, that is exactly what bothers me. I'd rather see them go all the way or leave it as is. This nonsensical mishmash irks me beyond what I can tollerate.

[Chaltab]

This thread has made me realize something:

Zelda fans are largely whiny, self-important, and they posses a ridiculous entitlement complex.

Seriously people. All this over a train.

Kudos to those of you who aren't. You know who you are.

[Raien]

Zelda fans are largely whiny, self-important, and they posses a ridiculous entitlement complex.

Since when did consumerism become an entitlement complex? Consumers tell the manufacturers what they want, through both their words and their wallets, and the manufacturers make what the consumers want to get money and critical success.

You know what's actually funny? When TP was released, I took your stance on the matter. I was looking forward to the game, and I didn't like to see everyone complaining about it. But as I've had more experience on the other side of the coin, I've realised that it's a ridiculous stance to take and you can't stop people demanding something they want. This is how the system works. And even if it is just Zelda fans, what do you expect? If someone has had little-to-no experience with a Zelda game, they're not going to have an opinion on the new game, and nor are they going to be posting on forums like these.

Edited by Raien, 30 March 2009 - 07:56 PM.

[Fin]

Zelda fans are largely whiny, self-important, and they posses a ridiculous entitlement complex.

Isn't that true of fans of all franchises?

Seriously though, I just don't like the idea of a train. I'm still open to the game kicking ass. Doesn't mean I have to like everything about it.

[Stew]

I wouldn't mind the fanboys complaining about the train so much if I didn't know they were going to buy the game on launch day anyway.

[SteveT]

That's really unfair. All that's really needed is one good precedent to show the Zelda series can be altered without damagizing the spirit of Zelda. I can actually give one precendent of a cyberpunk Zelda. TWW. Tower of the Gods. Cyberpunk. It was actually one of the coolest Zelda dungeons out there, despite it being futurist and straight up technological in nature it still fit into the Zelda universe, ironically more so than the sunglasses, neon lights, and jukeboxes in OoT which stick out like sore thumbs.

How many purely swords and sorcery Zelda games can you name? I'm talking about ones that have no technological anachronisms whatsoever, even as a joke. Ones that plays the medieval fantasy trope straight.

I never personally viewed the Tower of the Gods as cyberpunk, but I can definitely see how you'd make the argument. But the way I see it, the only difference between a golem and a robot is the world he lives in.

Anyway, for pure Swords and Sorcery, it's probably only the first 3; and maybe Minish Cap, FSA, and TP. I guess I don't have every detail memorized.

But again, here we're back to the Barbie hats. A bowling alley doesn't put OoT in the same genre as The Big Lebowski; it's just an anachronism in the setting of a swords and sorcery game. I really don't understand how the genre of this series is up for debate, or why anyone would be offended that I pointed it out.

If the genre of the series does change in a future release, then I'll have to revise my statement to "Every Zelda game except X is swords and sorcery."

All I've been saying is that the Zelda series is currently in one particular genre, which it has been designed around since inception. Should Nintendo decide to make a game in a different genre, then it makes more sense (in my personal opinion) that they do so with a new IP, even if the gameplay is otherwise similar to Zelda.

It will take more than a magic train to make Zelda a steampunk game.

This medieval stasis the series has been stuck is making the series stagnant.

I disagree. What has making the series stagnate is the regurgitation of the "Stop Ganon from getting the Triforce and save Zelda along the way" story. The Quest for the Master Sword, dungeons built around using the item that you find inside (and never use again), shooting arrows at switches and pushing blocks...

Even if Zelda were suddenly a Crime Noir game, I'd still be playing on autopilot.

Edited by SteveT, 30 March 2009 - 08:22 PM.

[Duke Serkol]

the way I see it, the only difference between a golem and a robot is the world he lives in.

Sorry but isn't the difference that Golems are animated through magic (whether or not they have clockworks or just mud)? Whereas robots have circuitry and electricity?

Anyway, for pure Swords and Sorcery, it's probably only the first 3; and maybe Minish Cap, FSA, and TP. I guess I don't have every detail memorized.

Are you ruling OoT out because of a single room containing nothing but a minigame? TP has done worse. And what of the Oracles (I mean yes, with those you'd have to ignore a couple things, in particular stuff Maple rides, but it isn't so bad I think)?

What has making the series stagnate is the regurgitation of the "Stop Ganon from getting the Triforce and save Zelda along the way" story. The Quest for the Master Sword

I concur wholly with this.

dungeons built around using the item that you find inside (and never use again), shooting arrows at switches and pushing blocks...

...and I guess this too, though this part isn't as bad I think (at least not quite yet. With the exception of the "never use again", that IS a terrible fault)

Edited by Duke Serkol, 30 March 2009 - 08:43 PM.

[Fin]

the way I see it, the only difference between a golem and a robot is the world he lives in.

Sorry but isn't the difference that Golems are animated through magic (whether or not they have clockworks or just mud)? Whereas robots have circuitry and electricity?

I kinda saw the physical appearance of the Tower boss as kind of a cute anachronism, but in the context of the game world I assumed it to be powered by divine magic.

What has making the series stagnate is the regurgitation of the "Stop Ganon from getting the Triforce and save Zelda along the way" story. The Quest for the Master Sword

I concur wholly with this.

Definitely. Batman and Superman comics have been running since the 30s in more or less the same genre (I think there was a scifi fad for a while around the 50s), and the comics are still going strong today.

dungeons built around using the item that you find inside (and never use again), shooting arrows at switches and pushing blocks...

...and I guess this too, though this part isn't as bad I think (at least not quite yet. With the exception of the "never use again", that IS a terrible fault)

I'd love to see a new game where all the traditional items (bow, hookshot, bombs, etc) are found between dungeons, with every dungeon item being something totally new. And some new puzzles would be nice, obviously. (Remember how ingenius lighting a torch to open the way felt at the start of OoT? Now we've been doing it for about a decade. )

[jacensolo06]

I'd love to see a new game where all the traditional items (bow, hookshot, bombs, etc) are found between dungeons, with every dungeon item being something totally new. And some new puzzles would be nice, obviously.

Definitely, I hate it when the item in a dungeon is something I've gotten a half dozen times before.

(Remember how ingenius lighting a torch to open the way felt at the start of OoT? Now we've been doing it for about a decade. )

OoT? We've been lighting torches to open the path since ALttP.

[SnowsilverKat]

I'd love to see a new game where all the traditional items (bow, hookshot, bombs, etc) are found between dungeons, with every dungeon item being something totally new. And some new puzzles would be nice, obviously. (Remember how ingenius lighting a torch to open the way felt at the start of OoT aLttP? Now we've been doing it for about a decade 16 years. )

Corrected. XD I don't mean to be nitpicky, sorry!

Hmm, well, to be honest, one of the last games to turn the Zelda formula on its head a little was Majora's Mask. It didn't have the regular dungeon setup, you didn't rescue a princess at the end (though you did about 1/4 through the game), the only dungeon items were the bows and different charges for your arrows, and there was no Ganon in sight.

Well, I enjoyed Majora quite enthusiastically. I also played it before I did OOT, oh shock of shocks. It would be interesting to see another 'gaiden' type game. Wasn't that Majora's working title anyway?

[Fin]

(Remember how ingenius lighting a torch to open the way felt at the start of OoT? Now we've been doing it for about a decade. )

OoT? We've been lighting torches to open the path since ALttP.

So we have. I feel pretty dumb now.

I guess OoT introduced the idea of carrying the flame by lighting a stick though.

But yeah, I guess the puzzles have never really evolved all that much, save one or two exceptions.

I'd love to see a new game where all the traditional items (bow, hookshot, bombs, etc) are found between dungeons, with every dungeon item being something totally new. And some new puzzles would be nice, obviously. (Remember how ingenius lighting a torch to open the way felt at the start of OoT aLttP? Now we've been doing it for about a decade 16 years. )

Corrected. XD I don't mean to be nitpicky, sorry!

No problem. I'd rather be corrected the first time than make the same mistake again.

Edited by Fintin O'Brien, 30 March 2009 - 10:14 PM.

[Arturo]

I kinda saw the physical appearance of the Tower boss as kind of a cute anachronism, but in the context of the game world I assumed it to be powered by divine magic.

Am I the only one who didn't see technology anywhere in the tower? I remember thinking "That's what the Temple of Light in OoT should have been". And the boss is a flying and talking golem, not a machine, no matter how much electricity or cannons it has.

[Duke Serkol]

in the context of the game world I assumed it to be powered by divine magic.

Am I the only one who didn't see technology anywhere in the tower? I remember thinking "That's what the Temple of Light in OoT should have been". And the boss is a flying and talking golem, not a machine, no matter how much electricity or cannons it has.

*Darth vader* "If only you knew, the power... of denial!"
khhsssh

[Wolf O'Donnell]

Mmhmm, and you are Shigeru Miyamoto to say what Zelda is and is not. No wait, you are Mr. Triforce of Time Link-is-his-own-father.

Dont forget, SteveT has been owning us all since forever with that theory. Don't underestimate it. Ever.

Hey ODonnel, good to see you again! Glad to see my comment sparked your return, or at least associated with it. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but are you saying the Train transforms into the Darknut-like figure and acts as our buddy? If that's the case, then I still think it's cool. If that's not what your talking about, please elaborate, because your theory has me wondering.

Firstly, It's O'Donnell and you can call me, Wolf.

Secondly, it's only logical if we look at the evidence.

This game is designed by Eiji Aonuma, who worked on The Wind Waker and Phantom Hourglass. Now the latter is a sequel to the former. The former features a talking boat, King of the Red Lions. Spirit Tracks uses the same game engine as Phantom Hourglass. It, like all Zeldas before it, draws from previous games. It takes the on-rails movement of the boat from Phantom Hourglass and you can logically assume it takes the talking vehicle aspect from The Wind Waker.

There's nothing too wild about this guess. It's a safe bet that that Darknut-like figure is either the train or a part of the train. Link needs a companion and has had one for every new single handheld game since The Wind Waker (although seeing as there were only two, that's not really saying much). The companion has always been a part of the plot, therefore so must the Darknut. He must be related to the train in some fashion and is it such a big leap to suggest he might be the train?

Of course, I might be wrong, but it's a logical position and I'm kinda surprised nobody's seen that angle to it yet.

Also, it was rather rash of me to leave this place. I managed to find new ways of viewing Anime lately and quite frankly, none of the other forums I go to discuss Anime or Manga (or even Nintendo games) as much as this place does. Although the Doctor Who Forums' debate section does tend to dissolve into silliness and lesbians whenever the chance arises...

[D~N]

Firstly, It's O'Donnell and you can call me, Wolf.

Hey you know what I just noticed, Wolf? Your username doesn't have the apostrophe in it. Was that intentional or accidental? Also, yes, I did miss the second L, and for that I'm sorry. It's probably because you haven't been here in so long!

At any rate, your argument is very solid. I was just making sure I understood correctly before i agreed, but yeah, I think you hit the nail on the head with that theory of yours.

However, I don't know how they can pull that off. Magic? Just your typical sorcery and transformation? I'd certainly hope that it's something a little less clichéd than that.

[Wolf O'Donnell]

Firstly, It's O'Donnell and you can call me, Wolf.

Hey you know what I just noticed, Wolf? Your username doesn't have the apostrophe in it. Was that intentional or accidental? Also, yes, I did miss the second L, and for that I'm sorry. It's probably because you haven't been here in so long!

I didn't think I could create a user name with the apostrophe in, so I left it out.

At any rate, your argument is very solid. I was just making sure I understood correctly before i agreed, but yeah, I think you hit the nail on the head with that theory of yours.

However, I don't know how they can pull that off. Magic? Just your typical sorcery and transformation? I'd certainly hope that it's something a little less clichéd than that.

It probably is as clichéd as that. If I'm dead right, then we know Nintendo has run out of ideas.

[Psytronic]

Maybe I should go read the rest of the topic, but it all looks like one big pissing contest.

Frankly, I think the argument that Twilight Princess is the peak of stagnation is absurd. OoT was stagnant the second it was made, simply because it was essentially LttP 3D, minus the nifty seamless overworld plus a bunch of pointless changes to continuity. Twilight Princess was, in comparison, clearly a superior take on the formula - actually going so far as to create completely new items and scenarios. It was also, in my eyes, the first 3D Zelda game to have an imposing villain. Everything was very well polished. OoT itself had amazing potential, but seemed to fall victim to the same malaise of mundane thinking as the rest of the N64's library - that every bit of setting in the game must be used and reused to such an extent that I simply became bored of the game halfway through.

The technology argument, though? Point is still moot. Here's a little history lesson:



That is a 2000 year old astronomical computer.



That is an automobile, designed 500 years ago by Leonardo Da Vinci, who lived in the 1400s and 1500s. Similarily, the first spring-loaded clocks appeared as early as the 1400's. If we are limiting Hyrule's standards of technology to the timeline of our reality, then it is actually appropriate that a locomotive could be considered a possible invention of about the same time, because locomotives operate on the same principles of motion as Da Vinci's automotives. According to Wikipedia, coal was first used as a fuel around 1000 BCE in China. So the technology, should it have been readily available to a mind such as Da Vinci, could have easily lead to the creation of a steam-powered engine as early as the 1400s, the same era in which the spring-loaded clock is documented as having appeared.

[Showsni]

Well, in our reality, the ancient Greeks had the steam engine... They also had railways. They just didn't make the leap of putting the two ideas together; imagine if they had...

[spunky-monkey]

Frankly, I think the argument that Twilight Princess is the peak of stagnation is absurd. OoT was stagnant the second it was made, simply because it was essentially LttP 3D, minus the nifty seamless overworld plus a bunch of pointless changes to continuity. Twilight Princess was, in comparison, clearly a superior take on the formula - actually going so far as to create completely new items and scenarios. It was also, in my eyes, the first 3D Zelda game to have an imposing villain. Everything was very well polished. OoT itself had amazing potential, but seemed to fall victim to the same malaise of mundane thinking as the rest of the N64's library - that every bit of setting in the game must be used and reused to such an extent that I simply became bored of the game halfway through.

Sorry to derail the topic (behold my bad pun), but I get very irritated whenever someone resurrects this illogical standpoint. Psytronic, without the revolutionary Ocarina you have no 3-D Zelda and therefore its successors Majora through to Twilight might never have been conceived either.

How the hell can a whole new approach or concept be called 'stagnant'? The very definition of stagnation is something not advancing or developing, i.e. lacking freshness, flow, change or progress. This is the exact opposite of what you dub Ocarina as being.

To summarise my whole response to your post: Do stop talking rubbish.

That is an automobile, designed 500 years ago by Leonardo Da Vinci, who lived in the 1400s and 1500s. Similarily, the first spring-loaded clocks appeared as early as the 1400's. If we are limiting Hyrule's standards of technology to the timeline of our reality, then it is actually appropriate that a locomotive could be considered a possible invention of about the same time, because locomotives operate on the same principles of motion as Da Vinci's automotives. According to Wikipedia, coal was first used as a fuel around 1000 BCE in China. So the technology, should it have been readily available to a mind such as Da Vinci, could have easily lead to the creation of a steam-powered engine as early as the 1400s, the same era in which the spring-loaded clock is documented as having appeared.

Absolute and bloody nonsense, Hyrule needs to have advanced ferrous alloys/steel-making processes in order for railways to operate as frequently as ST depicts. Richard Trevithick's locomotive couldn't run more than several times back in 1804 because it was simply too heavy for the cast iron rails to support, they shattered under the stress. Hyrule would require wrought iron or mild steel which appeared later.

Such processes couldn't be properly realized for railway uses until 1860s during the Industrial Revolution with Henry Cort's puddling furnace (a variety of the reverberatory furnace), in order to remove the various impurities in the metal.

Leonardo Da Vinci didn't understand metallurgy well enough to design n' build fully functional railways, or the importance of low-carbon steel for that matter.

Trains in Zelda is utter bullshit regardless of what you claim, the technological jump is too great. Or are you going to fall back on the infallible "LOLZ TEH UBER MAGIC PWNS ALL NOOB!" argument?

Edited by spunky-monkey, 06 April 2009 - 03:07 PM.