Quote:i have to say that ob1's arguments infuriate me. the way he selectively takes what was said, twisting words, and distorting messages makes me want to scream. it seems like every time somone posts to contradict it they start with a huge disclaimer about "maybe this time i can make you see what i'm trying to say" but it never helps. and i know it's not the fault of the person arguing OB1 because i've been able to follow their logic, and understand them from the beginning.

Quote:this newest tangent about OoT being realistic isn't even an issue. no one has ever said it was realistic, just more realistic than WW. and i certainly don't think that the spaceworld demo was that realistic. Link's eyes were huge. the style was definately anime, not lifelike, it was just more akin to something like Vampire Hunter D, or Princess Mononoke, or Nausicaa of the Wind Valley (same artist as PM), or like Trigun, as opposed to WW which is more like Hello Kitty (i'm exaggerating, please don't start arguing about that).

Quote:now, i'll agree with OB1 that i don't know what ABF means by Quote:

Quote:the most realistic look the game could have while still staying true to being a light fantasy game in a fantasy world... it obviously can't be "complete realism". But it could look realistic for that fanstasy world...

because i certainly don't want this game to look like baulders gate, diablo, neverwinter nights, or those other realistic looking PC RPG's. i still want it to look like a cartoon, just, a more sophisticated looking cartoon.

Quote:I don't think that wanting a company to do things that will actually be sure to make them money

Quote:I don't think I do...

Quote:I don't think that wanting a company to do things that will actually be sure to make them money (that IS the purpose of corporations...) is so strange... should they take some risks? Fine... but I'm not so sure about ones on major properties, especially when they are this dramatic... it really takes a lot of selling to get people to accept it...

Quote:The gameplay? I'd expect it would be almost exactly the same... modified somewhat in places to adjust for a more realistic world (it would be harder to program, for sure, because it'd require more detail and stuff... for things like wind...). I am just talking about graphics and presentation. They are hardly the most important factor in games... but you DO have to look at them so they are a vital part of the picture. Not as big as gameplay, but big enough to be an issue, especially when something like this is done...

Quote:Since he's the creator obviously his word is law... but still, I'm free to disagree... his opinion will obviously shape where the series goes but I don't see why that makes it automatically the best thing to do...

Quote:Oh, and I don't see how that statement directly relates to the quote you replied to there.

Quote:Well, I thought that the Spaceworld demo looked a lot like OoT with better graphics... and that necessarially made it more realistic, but I just don't see why it was some big departure from OoT's style... I bet that a full Spaceworld demo styled game wouldn't be some dramatic shift towards realism in the way you seem to fear...

Quote:Exactly the same? No. But VERY, VERY similar? YES! I don't see why you don't get that! It could have been done almost identically but with realistic graphics and slight modifications to animations to make the characters look like they were fluidly moving in a realistic environment! And it would hardly have changed the game so dramatically if the base game had been the same...

Quote:Originally posted by big guy
i never want to see this topic argued again. it's so frustrating to watch you guys argue, it makes me want to never come back to the forum again. i wish we could all just say our opinion on the game, state how we think it could be improved [b](to suit each of our individual needs), or why it shouldn't be changed and have no further discussion on it.

Quote:i have to say that ob1's arguments infuriate me. the way he selectively takes what was said, twisting words, and distorting messages makes me want to scream. it seems like every time somone posts to contradict it they start with a huge disclaimer about "maybe this time i can make you see what i'm trying to say" but it never helps. and i know it's not the fault of the person arguing OB1 because i've been able to follow their logic, and understand them from the beginning.

Quote:this newest tangent about OoT being realistic isn't even an issue. no one has ever said it was realistic, just more realistic than WW. and i certainly don't think that the spaceworld demo was that realistic. Link's eyes were huge. the style was definately anime, not lifelike, it was just more akin to something like Vampire Hunter D, or Princess Mononoke, or Nausicaa of the Wind Valley (same artist as PM), or like Trigun, as opposed to WW which is more like Hello Kitty (i'm exaggerating, please don't start arguing about that).

Quote:OB1: Maybe OoT wasn't COMPLETELY realistic, a la something like GTA: Vice City, but I still retain that there isn't anything in there that couldn't be done in a Zelda game akin to the SpaceWorld 2000 demo. OoT may divert that far away from Wind Waker, but not the SW2k demo. It simply looked like a more polished OoT.

Quote:Yeah... OB1, find somewhere where someone said that "realistic" meant "GTA" and not "OoT-Spaceworld" and I'll be VERY surprised... because "Realistic" in this case doesn't mean complete realism, as I know many people have said... it means realism compared to TWW -- in the style of OoT. Hardly "realistic" in the real-world sense, but it looks like it might be a world in some other place... the world is convincing in that way. TWW just isn't like that.

Quote:The developers of the game did not feel that the realistic direction that Zelda was headed towards was right for the series!

Quote:The whole argument between you and me, Mr. OB1, is how realistic Zelda: OoT looks and whether or not it would work in a game more styled towards that of the Spaceworld Demo. The point I'm trying to make is just that: if Zelda: OoT were remade, graphically updated, and styled towards the Spaceworld Demo, nothing would look out of place. We're not talking about Wind Waker, we're talking about OoT. Link doesn't do flips over the heads of enemies in OoT.

I brought up your quote because it was a rebuttal directed towards me. What's subjective is how realistic you view OoT to be. You say it's cartoony, I say it isn't. Answer me this, though: would you agree that the Spaceworld Demo was much like an updated OoT? Look at the pictures.

Quote:Shiggy wouldn't be dissatisfied with the series taking a step towards realism if there were no logical steps taken towards realism in the first place. Yes, there's the Spaceworld Demo, but as I said, the Spaceworld Demo is simply a graphically inspiration of OoT.

Quote:I'm going to introduce another metaphor. The video game industry is a gigantic carnival with hundreds and hundreds of tents waiting to be entered. Many salespeople attract audience members into the tent with flash and pizazz (pretty grahics). Others mention positive statements made by other audience members (EGM's game of the month). But until you actually pay the man at the tent entrance and watch the show, you don't really know how the experience will suit you. Many games promise the world, but once you get into the tent, there's nothing to sate this appetite.

Quote:There are multiple dimensions in my argument and, taken as a whole, I think it all makes sense. I have been saying this entire time that the look, animation, and presentation are not important for me. They are the noises, flashes, and smells coming from inside the tent that attract an audience. I think, in the scheme of things, that a game that had a different look, animation, and presentation would still be Zelda:the Wind Waker. For the mass market, however, look, animation, and presentation is paramount. You need to captivate the audience. What I would be willing to do if I was Nintendo is to compromise a smidge on the presentation side if it meant that I could get more people to open their minds to the game, let their guards down, and step behind the curtain. Then, I'd blow them away with all of the creativity I have. As an artist who would focus all of his creativity into entertaining, that's what I would do as Nintendo.

Quote:I understand that you want Nintendo to be the uncompromising artist. And that's simply a difference of ideals. I'm okay with that. I'm just saying that by compromising at just a 5% rate that you can change the audience's willingness to enter the tent by far more than 5%. I think the important thing to note is that this compromise rate is a continuum. It's not black and white:

0% Total Control, uncompromising artist, OB1's ideal. Example: Samba de Amigo
5% A nice compromise. You're considering the desires of the audience, but you have enough control to completely exceed their expectations. My ideal. Example: Metroid Prime
10% The limit of artistic integrity. It's beginning to effect the game itself.
20% You're now into over-compromise territory. Gameplay is effected.
30% You're now well into over-compromise territory. You may be borrowing some ideas from a successful product.
50% You've practically lost control of the product. You can still make a decent game, but you don't have enough control to blow away expectations. Example: Grand Theft Auto: Vice City
80% You're making a clone. You can maybe make it distinguishable from the original product, but not by much, or else the suits will fire you.
90% You're making a sequel to a successful game, and the publisher (probably Midway) wants you to basically change the uniforms and update the rosters. Maybe you can add a feature here or there.
100% You're doing a straight port.

Quote:Of note: successul titles have come from practically all points on this spectrum. However, as you get near 100%, it is almost guarenteed that the popularity of the series will decrease. However, titles near 0% are very hit-and-miss in terms of success. Because the artist does not even consider that he is making a product for the audience, it's like playing pin the tail on the donkey. As I hope you can see, I detest when companies are so conservative that they pander to the current tastes of the consumer. But my reaction to that is not to jump to the opposite extreme. Rather, I'd like to find a balance that is heavily in the favor of the artistic integrity of the artist, but an artist that realizes that he is not in a vacuum.

EDIT: Help, can't find spoiler tag. [/B]

Quote:The developers of the game did not feel that the realistic direction that Zelda was headed towards was right for the series!

Quote: Likewise, buddy.