Fionn Fael wrote:Wow, kaemmerite, you're the least satisfied with Twilight Princess of anyone I've heard of.
I pride myself on being different. ]How can you have so many complaints?[/QUOTE]
For the same reason you can have so few. Opinions are great.
The game's graphics were gorgeous (especially since it's taken so long to be produced),
Well, I think they are not gorgeous. Don't get me wrong, they are great graphics. I'm not saying the graphics are low quality. However, I have seen better graphics on the Gamecube before, so it's obvious they didn't utilize the system's capabilities to its full potential. Overall its graphics are very average for a Gamecube game; this is almost inexcusable given that it is the very last Gamecube game ever made. They certainly know the extent of the system's power and should have been able to use that.
Also, I don't like polygonal graphics as a general rule. They produce jagged textures and look horrible close up. I much preferred the graphical style of Wind Waker. Zelda has always been a cartoony type game, and I point to Link to the Past and Link's Awakening as proof. For me, realistic graphics just don't fit Zelda's style. It's like if someone drew the Care Bears as realistic bears...it just doesn't work.
You prefer this style, and I prefer Wind Waker's. It all comes down to the fact that I have different aesthetic tastes.
Also, the reason Twilight Princess took so long wasn't because they were making the graphics awesome, it was because they were putting it on the Wii. That's the only reason it took so long, and you know, they COULD have polished the graphics in the entire year and a half they delayed the game.
the plot was deeper than any previous one,
I'll agree with you on that, but I felt it wasn't a very good plot. Deep =/= good. I actually thought Ocarina of Time's plot was the strongest out of all the games. I also thought this game had multiple plot holes compared to the other Zelda games since this took place in the same universe as OoT. For starters:
[SPOILER]Ganondorf was trapped in the Sacred Realm at the end of OoT. Why was he shown chained to a rock in the real world during a flashback scene in TP? Why were the sages faceless weirdos instead of Ruto/Darunia/Saria/etc.? In Wind Waker Ganondorf mentions the Master Sword was a "key" that kept him trapped in the Sacred Realm, but at the end of this game Ganon is not resealed in the Sacred Realm, nor is the Master Sword used to seal him in any way. Wind Waker fit perfectly with Ocarina of Time; this game screws up the whole storyline. Unless you ascribe to a "time split" theory in which there were two alternate universes created, one in which Link defeats Ganondorf in the future and seals him away, and another where Ganondorf is stopped before Link opens the gate to the Sacred Realm. But in the second universe (which TP would have to take place in), Wind Waker could not have happened.[/SPOILER]
the characters had great development and were very likeable,
I agree, Midna is my favorite Zelda character now.
the world of Hyrule is positively enormous (and you even go beyond its borders to the sky and Twilight Realm),
Yeah, but Link to the Past had the Dark World, which unlike the Twilight Realm in TP is an entirely different world that is exactly as big as the first one, rather than a simple dungeon.
And, sure, I messed around a lot and spent some time riding Epona around Hyrule Field, killing monsters, finding grottos, and traipsing through Lantern Caves. But hey, it's FUN. It's meant to be! That's why they put things like that into the game to begin with! Besides, I understand wanting to further the story and go on to the next dungeon, but why not savor the actual game and take in what it offers?
To me, furthering the story IS taking in what it offers. We have different playing styles; you obviously like to roam around and do nothing, which is fine. But I need a purpose to my wandering. I need a goal, something to strive for. If I am left to wander around aimlessly, my interest wanes quickly (this is why I could not play the original Legend of Zelda without a strategy guide, not because I couldn't do stuff, but because it felt purposeless).
This is why in RPGs my interest wanes when I have to fight random battles just to level up. It's the reason I sold my copy of Disgaea, because I loved the story and I loved the game, but fighting battles hour after hour just to gain levels made me bored VERY quickly. And as I already said, the rewards for doing the sidequests in Zelda were absurdly ridiculous. A silver rupee for getting 60 Poe Souls? I had a full wallet the last ten hours of the game. That's useless. I would've taken another useless empty bottle over a silver rupee because as needless as it would be, at least it would've been SOMETHING.
Now, I know what your response will be. "But some people just want to get all the Poe Souls for a sense of accomplishment!" Okay, great. Then don't have a reward at all. Let the reward just be that you got all 60 Poe Souls. Let it be a badge of honor.
In Final Fantasy V, when you defeat Omega you don't get any Experience Points. You don't get a weapon. You don't get anything except the Omega Badge. All it is is proof that you defeated Omega. What if they had given you a Potion for beating Omega? You would feel cheated. "I fought the hardest boss in the game for a lousy Potion?" But by gaining nothing except proof that he was beaten, it gives a sense of accomplishment, even if you didn't gain a useful item.
If you're going to give a reward for something, make it a good reward. If you're going to put something in just to give the player a sense of accomplishment, don't give a reward. But don't give a horribly crappy reward for something that's difficult to do. That just makes the player feel like they got jerked around. It's called poor game design.
Sorry, I don't want to start an argument or anything of the sort, but I simply found your blatantly negative "review" to be a little unfair and biased. Of course the game has faults. Every game does. But that's no reason to shoot it down so harshly.
And I find your blatantly positive "review" to be a little unfair and biased. And I'm not trying to be rude here, but this is my opinion of the game. It's mine, and by definition of an opinion, it cannot be right or wrong. Everyone else is showering it with praise. I feel it doesn't deserve that praise, so I set out to give my opinion of the game.
Let me put it this way. I saw nothing but hugely positive reviews of this game. I went in expecting too much; thus, I was disappointed. By giving a review that is largely negative, perhaps someone will go in more level-headed. I'm providing contrast. I don't hate the game; far from it. I liked it, and I certainly wouldn't be playing through it a second time right now if I hated it. I'm just saying that as far as I'm concerned it isn't the greatest game of all time, heck it isn't even the greatest Zelda game of all time.
By the way, short aside. I was playing Link to the Past a couple of nights ago and I actually DIED in it. I sat there for a few seconds, completely shocked at what had just happened. Because Twilight Princess was so easy I didn't die, and I'm pretty sure I never died in Wind Waker either (maybe once or twice, but it's been a while). As a gamer, I like to be challenged. I don't want to be given impossible tasks or odds, but I do like challenge. This game was not challenging, so it gets negative points for that.
And that is my rebuttal. XD
