Although Wind Waker bears a quirky story and connects to a weird scenario in the Zelda timeline (thus making it harder for a newcomer to understand), I do think it's probably the most accessible 3-D Zelda thanks to its charming visuals and low difficulty. And anyway, people just seem to love that game, perhaps more than it really deserves.
Yeah, I never understood the backlash Twilight Princess got. I never actually completed the game, but I always thought it was pretty top notch stuff.
Yeah, the timeline stuff is pretty silly, which is why I don't focus too much on it here. And I agree--the Oracle games are tough to care about, especially now with the more modern Zelda games out and about. I did play through Seasons and liked it well enough back in the day, though, and I hear Ages has some nice puzzles.
I'm actually replaying Link's Awakening right now, and agree it bears a lot of the original game's influence spread through its design, especially the dungeon layouts, which bear similar pictoral themes (Awakening's level 3, for instance, is shaped like a key).
I can find no fault in your views of the others games, either, although I doubt most newbie players will appreciate the antiquated design of the first game over the more modern sensibilites of the others. That said, I think the original is a game everyone should play at some point, as I think it will only further their appreciation of the series as a whole. (A pseudo-remake of its ilk would indeed be interesting.)
You have my full support on that one, although for a first-timer, Link to the Past is probably still a more accessible entry point, if only because of the more iconic world, characters, and visuals.
A top-down Ocarina remake is a very interesting idea, my friend. Sadly, that'll probably end up being a fan project at best.
Are you really criticizing me for posting a (perfectly valid) opinion in the comments section of the game you just reviewed? Isn't that, you know, what comment sections are for?
Anyway, my concern with the game is a legitimate one--why design such an arcadey-style experience based on score, clear times, and other simple objectives but then not allow players to compare their acomplishments with each other? I know Nintendo has this odd hangup about encouraging competition in its games, but for a title like this, a leaderboard-like system only makes sense.
But you're right, silly me. I should just go out and buy a capture device so I can post to Youtube! Sheesh.
I've considered buying this for a while, but the lack of a leaderboard or substantial achievement system (which is pretty much every Nintendo game) kills some of the excitement for me. What's the point of spending all that time completing these challenges if you then can't show off your accomplishments? The stamps help a little, but still...
Anyway, as you said, I'll wait for a sale, assuming that ever happens.
Yep, eet's ah me, as Mario would say. I'm pretty sporadic with the blogs these days, although I did just write one concerning my impressions of the Wii U--got one last week.
Nice write up--I agree with pretty much everything you said. The game is lots of fun but not radically different from what's come before--the anti-grav stuff is mostly inconsequential, if sometimes disorienting.
One thing about the blue shells and other items--the difficulty also affects their frequency of appearance. While playing on 50cc, for example, I got hammered by them all the time, but I could play entire Cups on 150cc and maybe only see one or two of the danged things. This goes for other items as well; even when lagging behind, the best I usually get on 150cc are three mushrooms.
Anyway, the game is beautiful and a lot of fun, and it's hard to be too disappointed. Battle mode flunked this time, of course, but I hardly ever played that anyway. I would have liked another track or two based on the SNES and GBA versions (especially one of the Bowser's Castle tracks), but in the end, this is a fine release for the Wii U.
