Zelda of the FUTURE

[ArlanKels]

Obviously his boomerang will return, and it'll be like that super awesome boomerang from that old NES game

[Meister]

Hell yes would I play it. Only I'm sure if Nintendo were to actually do this they'd have more of a sense of style than this. This is just futureworld, iteration #100,000, but imagine buildings and mechs with actual recognizable Hyrulian designs. Rock.

[greed]

Well Hyrule does sem to be progressing, it's already gotten most of the way to steam punk in WW and TP compared to dark ages of 1 and 2 and the middle ages of ALttP and OoT. Give it another decade or two and it might get there.

[Coinspinner]

I don't think changing the setting will do anything to refresh the series.

[P-Sleazy]

are you kidding? IT'll do wonders.

OK, maybe not wonders, but it'll be a nice change of pace.

[ArlanKels]

Originally Posted by Coinspinner

I don't think changing the setting will do anything to refresh the series.

Yet the setting has changed. The original game was a crappy 2D isometric over the top birds eye view whatever the hell game with such bland graphics and lack of overall environmental depth that it looked like 9/10th of the time you were walking around a desert/sandy beach/etc.

Then the second game had a 2D sidescrolling adventure which took you across the continent(And another one I think too).

Then the third game had a completely different world entirely, with the classic viewpoint.


Each game is a brand new world. the setting changes non-stop.
The legend of Link and Zelda and Ganon deals with a continually reoccuring event in a planet's history wherein every so many generations it happens once more.

[Coinspinner]

Changing the setting, even drastically, doesn't do much to freshen up the Zelda formula because it's the gameplay that's gotten stale. They've focused on pandering to the fans long enough that any change is met with "but that's not Zelda!" Yet sales seem to be flagging as more of those same fans grow tired of the formula. Such a drastic change to the setting would look like a desperate attempt to sell the same game with a new coat of paint.

I can picture it now. Same old game, but now with light sabers, motorcycles and grapple beams. Circle-strafe the cyber-ghoma and fire missles into her eye! But that's dangerously close to Metroid. So a modern setting instead... how about Link packs an imitation katana and an uzi and drives a lowrider around a decaying urban environment. And replace Link with Shadow Link. :p

Originally Posted by ArlanKels

Yet the setting has changed. The original game was a crappy 2D isometric over the top birds eye view whatever the hell game with such bland graphics and lack of overall environmental depth that it looked like 9/10th of the time you were walking around a desert/sandy beach/etc.

Then the second game had a 2D sidescrolling adventure which took you across the continent(And another one I think too).

Then the third game had a completely different world entirely, with the classic viewpoint.

Changes in perspective, not setting.

[Mannix]

I think the two best things the could do for the franchise would be to 1: actually release an official cannonical mainstream timeline so everybody knows where the start is and where we currently are, and 2: actually move the story forward from there; as it stands right now any game the release could be non-cannon or could be taking place anywhere within the vague time"fog" we have now. The gameplay isn't as big a deal as it seems, in my opinion; first person shooters haven't changed basically at all since doom but we're still playing them. The main draw of the LoZ series is the story telling, something that they've been neglecting (at least as a whole, even if not per game).

Of course, maybe I'm no judge; I haven't played a Zelda game since OoT. Mostly because I haven't owned a Nintendo system since then. I'd like to be able to play it on my computer, but obviously that's never going to happen in any official capacity.

[ArlanKels]

Originally Posted by Coinspinner

Changes in perspective, not setting.

-- www.m-w.com

3 a : the time, place, and circumstances in which something occurs or develops b : the time and place of the action of a literary, dramatic, or cinematic work c : the scenery used in a theatrical or film production

[BitVyper]

so everybody knows where the start is

Well, it seems fairly obvious that the start is OoT. ALttP actually referred to that time as being the beginning, and for the first time ever, we hear about Ganon's birth, and see him as a human ascending to the title of "king of evil." WW definitely comes after OoT, since it makes reference to it, but I'd put it before ALttP, since the master sword is in the same place OoT Link left it, and Ganon is still a human being called Ganondorf. Fortunately, WW's ending explains why Hyrule isn't covered in water during ALttP. ALttP, simply due to its title is implied to be a prequel to the originals, designed to flesh out Ganon's origins. Besides that, we know Ganon hasn't been in the light world since he got the Triforce, but he is during Zelda I.

I take The Legend of Zelda as the one where Ganon is actually killed, since Zelda II's plot actually shows us that the conditions necessary for his revival were not met. Then again, he is pretty good at being reincarnated. Of course, the games could well be taken as alternate timelines, but I like speculating about their connection better. Some of them do have definite connections. Zelda I and II, at least, use the same Link.