More good news for Zelda in America

[OB1]

Oh crap... here we go again.

I thought I'd explained this enough times... maybe this post will get it through? Probably not...

We've been over this already. You say one thing and then completely contradict yourself the next post.

Art, or success? Tough question for artists... but this isn't exactly art. This is videogames, and Nintendo isn't a artist in a attic... its a company that wants to be succesful... so they will of course do whatever it takes to succeed while staying in their moral (and whatever other) boundaries that they set... if they were smart they would do that anyway... but like Sega, as you point out quite well, Nintendo doesn't exactly always do that.

Should they? I don't know. Art for art's sake is good, but not the way to run a successful games company... a balance of the two is probably best. You just can't make art and expect the people to adjust to like it all the time... as both Nintendo is doing here and Sega does regularly.

It just doesn't work often enough. However... in this case Nintendo has a big thing in their favor: its a major, super-popular franchise that they are running this experiment on... instantly helping it gain in the consumers' eyes... but still... as I've said many times, its questionable to make a game like this that requires the consumers to adjust to like the game for them to be able to accept it... it just isn't a good business practice to follow much...

You're opposed against any sort of change or risks. Risk-taking is essential to this industry. The reason for the big video game crash was because of Atari's unwillingness to make anything new and different.

I thought my metaphor was pretty good...oh well. What I'm saying is that Link's animations in Wind Waker are not a key element in the Zelda experience. I think you could change the animations, the art style, the presentation, and it would still be Legend of Zelda:Wind Waker. But if you honestly think that the animations are one of the elements that are intrinsic to Zelda, I can't convince you of anything, because even the slightest change would ruin the game for you.

That's a complete contradiction of what you two have been saying this entire time! You say that the look, animation, and presentation are unimportant yet at the same time protest it. If it's not a big deal then why the fuss?? Fantastic point. I applaud you.

Yeah... it definitely does seem that he is saying that the realisitc style would be a lot harder to do, and would take a lot more programming and art time that they would rather not spend on the art and graphics style... a understandable choice, of course, but a interesting one, given how in most places these days graphics are so important...

You simply don't get it, do you? If Miyamoto thought that the realistic style would have been right for the game then he would have gone with it. But he has stated several times in the past that he did not feel that the direction Zelda was heading for was right for the series. You have to take all of his comments as a whole rather than one sentence out of context.

Yeah... I do see how people COULD expect a realistic world to have realistic physics, but I don't see why they'd REQUIRE it... like OoT -- it hardly had realistic rules in many ways but that wasn't a problem... but I guess it is true that with the increasing complexity that newer graphics bring people expect more. But still... it doesn't seem impossible to do -- just more challenging than a cartoon world is...

Well it's obviously important for Shigeru Miyamoto, and who are we to argue with him?

OB1, attempt to understand this concept -- by 'photorealistic' I'm not looking for something exactly like real life... I'm looking for 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...

But OoT wasn't realistic-looking. The graphics just weren't good enough to portray the cartoony art design.

Hmm... I don't understand something. Why do you think that I think OoT looked realistic or something? I never said that in the way you take it to mean... as I tried to explain above here. As for the Spaceworld 2000 Demo, it looked like OoT in improved graphics... and while Link and Ganon did look very serious, they could easily have had some much lighter elements to the graphics in a full game to make it not super-realistic or something...

Uh, because you've said all along that you want the new Zelda to look realistic like OoT. Hello? And the SW demo looked far more realistic than OoT. It did look like an evolution of OoT, but it took the whole realism thing much further.

Zelda has never had absolutely serious graphics, of course, and since its fantasy that style might not work so well... A 'realistic' Zelda would be like a (improved version of the) Spaceworld demo... but not without humor or anything... I don't see how that style would rule out realistic or convincing nonhuman creatures, or a fantastic world, or something. Its Zelda... it would have those elements, just in a more 'realistic' (considering the subject) style than TWW... its really not a challenging concept...

But one that the creators objected. Perhaps someday you'll get your realistic Zelda, but that time is not now. Deal with it.

Oh, and as said before, Link would have equilivant, but more realistic, animations to what he has in WW... same for the enemies. And it wouldn't hurt the game in any possible way I can see... I just don't understand at all why you think that there would have been some major creative sacrifice if it'd been done that way... it just doesn't really make sense...

I've repeated myself too many times, but I'll do it once more for you since you seem to have a problem understanding me. The fighting and the movements in WW were made with the visual style in mind, so they made things very exaggerated and cartoony. You could still make a fine Zelda game without these changes, but it wouldn't be the same. That's it. I'm sure they could make a damn fine realitic-looking Zelda game, but it would not be the same as Wind Waker. What about that don't you guys understand?