dan

someone tell the makers of StarFox to cough up the 5 bucks and take notes.

level design, level design, level design.

the first game had solid gameplay, but things got wayyyy repetitive. a game like halflife or halo used FPS gameplay from 1994, but they made things special by putting one unique experience in every section of every level.

Yeah, I'm really amazed that he went through the challenge. But I can't imagine how listening to Zelda is all that fun, because it seems like it would be hard to understand what's going on. A game with more dialog and stuff, though?

Either way, I'm really impressed.

low down FUNKY fresh, yo!!!!

maybe they could broaden their appeal from old, white, rich, (publicly) heterosexual guys by not attacking everyone else? might be more effective than "hey guys let's make a rap about it!"

What they really need to stimulate demand is a few more "must-have" titles. Not that Wii demand is in trouble, but they ought to recapture some of the hype from the first two years.

It's really too bad this didn't turn out well. They did a good job on the interface and graphics. But in an age where you've "seen it all" with FPSes, you really need to have top notch level and enemy design.

They just didn't have it.

Honestly, they just kept getting worse and worse. The original game had some alright rail-shooting. But after that, it was rail-tanks, and rail-submarines... It wasn't just boring. It was a step backwards.

Why not give us some more free flight? Learn from some classic flight-combat games, like Tie Fighter, and Descent. You have a 3D engine. Use it.

Thanks guys. I'm not sure which way I would go, the audience being what it is. There are risks with innovation. But there comes a time when being timid is the biggest risk of all.

Zelda was truly revolutionary for its time. A top-down, long-term, multiple sitting action-adventure. The second game tried out side-scrolling and RPG elements. The SNES game went back to the top-down format, but the mirror gimmick and level design made it play very differently. OOT brought us 3D and Z-targeting, and a few other fresh gimmicks.

That's a lot of innovation. Then things slowed.

Majora's Mask gets a pass: it was released on the same system as OOT. When you consider that, the time-loop and transformations were pretty fresh gameplay.

Wind Waker felt like OOT with new graphics. Same thing with Twilight Princess.

Anyone who says Zelda wasn't an innovative series hasn't been playing it long enough. There's a ton of directions they could take. RPG elements in 3D, like Zelda II meets Oblivion? A robust social world, like Zelda meets GTA? Dynamically generated dungeons like Zelda meets Diablo? A shift towards action through Wii-MotionPlus battles -- with swords, axes, whips, and daggers?

But if they're just going to do Twilight Princess with slightly better graphics and a few more waggles, they'll have missed a big opportunity.

Yeah, WM+ doesn't add anything when it comes to point-and-shoot. The Conduit won't suffer without it.

But if they should ever make a first-person swordplay game, you'll be damn right that they need it.