Current Events > The new Zelda is very likely bad because we know very little about it.

(+) Yeah! (+)

LinkDaLunatic posted...

it doesn't matter tbh. it could be the most soulless copy-paste job with two, maybe three new features that we've already seen in the trailers, it'll still win goty, zelda fans and nintendo fans will still praise it as the second coming and spend the year talking about how it does everything better than every other game.
then after that year's up, people will start telling the truth, just like with botw. joke fanbase, they make me ashamed to be a zelda fan and nintendo fan.

wanted to come back and address this.

That's gaming fandoms in general. New is always better. New stops being new after like a year and then it gets weighed more evenly against older titles.

The fact that a year later the flaws in BotW stood out or bothered me more, or the fact that six years later I find attempts at replaying it to be more of a slog, does not erase the fun and joy i experienced basically living in that game for months when it first came out.

hockeybub89 posted...

"I like gambling my money"

I'm with him. If it comes from a dev I trust to make something good, I wanna know as little as possible

If it works out and the game is good then it just makes everything better

Glob posted...

This.

I dont think most people have even heard of that.

You don't think people have heard of Genshin Impact.... I think that says more about you lol

creativerealms posted...

So glad Majora's mask was made in the nineties (and released in 2000) otherwise people would have said this same shit about it.

Majora's Mask was an entirely different game simply reusing assets and it was released in 2 years. It also had completely different mechanics, which people bitched about for years.

It's been 6 years and it's the exact same map and all we've seen is some floating platforms hovering over it. It's giving off very strong glorified DLC vibes.

archedsoul posted...

Majora's Mask was an entirely different game simply reusing assets and it was released in 2 years. It also had completely different mechanics, which people bitched about for years.

It's been 6 years and it's the exact same map and all we've seen is some floating platforms hovering over it. It's giving off very strong glorified DLC vibes.

The longer development times means it's less likely to be DLC not more likely. I would be agreeing with you if it was reased two years after the first game.

When we get the huge direct for this game I will be vindicated and you will be eating your words. And if I am wrong I will join you in hating this game.

all i know is that if this is supposed to be the last big exclusive for the Switch, then they better go out with a bang!

Gremlynn posted...

wanted to come back and address this.

That's gaming fandoms in general. New is always better. New stops being new after like a year and then it gets weighed more evenly against older titles.

The fact that a year later the flaws in BotW stood out or bothered me more, or the fact that six years later I find attempts at replaying it to be more of a slog, does not erase the fun and joy i experienced basically living in that game for months when it first came out.

all that really tells me, though, is that you're not capable of being objective during your honeymoon phase with a new game. if anything what you posted just validates what i said further.

Only on the internet do I see so many people say "BotW was bad and Nintendo doesn't know what they are doing. I could have made a more successful sequel, both critically and commercially" after BotW became the highest-selling Zelda of all time (and by quite a large margin).

A zelda game has never beat the corresponding Mario game on its console before... except until BotW started outselling SMO. And no, it's not because SMO sold badly, it's the highest-selling 3D Mario of all time (and by quite a large margin as well) and will probably enjoy 30+million sales, which is pretty close to how NSMBWii did. The fact that BotW still outsold SMO proves that Nintendo knows what they are doing.

LinkDaLunatic posted...

all that really tells me, though, is that you're not capable of being objective during your honeymoon phase with a new game. if anything what you posted just validates what i said further.

Naw like, I can SEE the flaws in the honeymoon phase, I recognize and acknowledge aspects of the game that can make it not fun for other people.

I just don't CARE during that time, because i'm still having a good experience.

creativerealms posted...

The longer development times means it's less likely to be DLC not more likely. I would be agreeing with you if it was reased two years after the first game.

When we get the huge direct for this game I will be vindicated and you will be eating your words. And if I am wrong I will join you in hating this game.

I get what you're saying, but longer development is not always a positive thing. Especially when developers have been able to push out entirely different highly rated games in shorter timeframes.

They could just be stuck trying to figure out where to go. It happens. When you combine that with what we have seen, it doesn't look that new or fresh.

I obviously want it to be great, but the entire concept so far seems very weak. Using the same map kind of diminishes it by default because a lot of the exploring is already done. All of this would be fine if it was a brand new game with a brand new map.

I think it's fine to be concerned without people getting defensive. It's all speculation right now at the end of the day.

Gremlynn posted...

Naw like, I can SEE the flaws in the honeymoon phase, I recognize and acknowledge aspects of the game that can make it not fun for other people.

I just don't CARE during that time, because i'm still having a good experience.

yes. so we're in agreement. you're not objective during the honeymoon phase.

it gonna be objectively good based on a set of parameters i created

LinkDaLunatic posted...

yes. so we're in agreement. you're not objective during the honeymoon phase.

You literally don't know what being objective means if you think we're in agreement.

Gremlynn posted...

You literally don't know what being objective means if you think we're in agreement.

you just admitted that you know games have flaws but don't care because you're having fun when in the honeymoon phase. not caring about flaws because you're having a good time is pretty much the perfect example of not being objective.