More good news for Zelda in America

[OB1]

The thing is, I'm looking at the same words from Miyamoto, and I come to a different conclusion: that a SW2000 Zelda would be an arduous task, one that would take many years of polish. I absoutely agree with him. That, because it is a cartoon world, things like exaggerated animation and such are consistent for the world. And that consistency is important for a game. This consistency is what he calls, "realistic." Every photorealistic game to date has had inconsistencies (bumping into a wall strangely, etc.) that reduce the immersion. However, a realistic game does not require such glaring inconsistencies. It is simply because the graphics are photorealistic that people expect the rules of reality to apply. Yet, within the first five minutes, the Matrix skillfully explains to the audience that its photorealistic world has different rules from reality. And most of the audience accepted that without saying, "Ugh, that's so unrealistic!"

That first part of what you mentioned is exactly what I was talking about, but I disagree with the second half of your paragraph. The Matrix worked because these guys were doing all of this crazy stuff in a computer-generated world. It would look ridiculous if there was a realistic-looking Zelda game that animated like Wind Waker.

I must use part of that quote: "If not expressed properly, it will seem out of place." This leaves arguing room for my opinion. I agree with the statement, but what if it is expressed properly...?

And Miyamoto replies, "Well, it's very difficult to do that. It would take years and years. We would spend months just on realistic facial animations alone."

And I reply, "But it's not impossible, right?"

And I think we can all agree that, with the right amount of time and the right amount of inginuity, a "realistic" photorealistic Zelda could be done.

Sure it could be done with enough time, but Miyamoto doesn't even want to do that. He said himself that if they were to take the next step after OoT and make a realistic Zelda game that it would stray away from his vision of the series. All of you guys whining about how much you hate the look and how "wrong" it is need to take a good long look at what you're saying. It would be like me going up to Van Gogh and saying "Dude, don't paint like that! It's wrong! You're wrong!". This is Miyamoto's game. He created it, and he decides what's right or wrong for it. Not you, and not ABF.

P.S. OB1, name ONE innovaion in Wind Waker that I cannot explain how to convert into photorealism (with no time cap) and I will be convinced that you are right. It's just that I have not seen ONE thing in Wind Waker that I could not imagine working (with a generous amount of retooling) in a photorealistic atmosphere.

Just one example? Okay. The fighting. The way Link flips and flies over his enemies would look very out of place with photo-realistic graphics. Sure they could revert it back to OoT's fighting which was much more tame than this one, but would that be a good idea? I certainly don't think so. And they'd actually have to tone down OoT's fighting engine even more since OoT wasn't actually very realistic-looking like the SW2000 demo was. Unless of course they use your wonderful "Zelda Matrix" idea.