The_Darkest_Red
Member
I have no problem with criticism of the Zelda formula, the thing that bothers me is when people talk about "saving" the series and attempt to lay out some master plan in overly verbose wording to make themselves seem intelligent. I just find the writing style to be incredibly pretentious and, at the end of the day, purely lacking in substance.Okay. I'm confused. Long-winded as he is, I don't see too much to get really upset about - but even people I admire on GAF are ripping the guy a new one. What gives?
I don't want Zelda to be a western-style game; I don't want it to be an RPG. I want it to be an action-adventure title that challenges me to discover things and face enemies. That's what the early Zelda games were. And that's what I miss.
Even the examples he gave of games that Zelda could take notice of, SotC and Demon's Souls, are far from what people in this thread are suggesting he wants from the series.
It's the cotton candy of criticism, it might taste good at first but when you really dig into it you realize there isn't much there besides fluff. And even if there is a solid argument or two to be made from something buried in that fluff I find myself unwilling to deal with it because the digging just isn't worth the effort.