Support NeoGAF

[Oblivion]

I guess we view each series totally different. It seems as though Nintendo has essentially remade Link to the Past over and over again. And though much of MM involving talking to people and running quests for them (something very unique to that game), the gameplay and level design of the dungeons was still identical to what LttP introduced years earlier.

I have to say, I don't know how you think some of those Zeldas are the same as LttP when quite a few didn't even have that many dungeons as LttP.

I chronicled how, by just messing with level design Nintendo was able to redefine Mario every iteration, earlier in this thread. Would you be able to do the same with Zelda? The gameplay (namely the combat and ways in which you interact with the environment) and the dungeon designs have not changed in more than a decade.

Listen, I have to say that the Mario series haven't made as dramatic changes as you may have been thinking.

Super Mario Bros: Set the standard for 2D Marios
Super Mario 2(USA): Added new characters, and a throwing mechanism.
Super Mario Bros 3: Introduced flying, thematic worlds, and refined SMB's gameplay
Super Mario World: Essentially refined SMB, and added Yoshi.

Great, now you made it seem like I'm belittling the series. GOOD JOB!

Do you think the Time Dungeon from TP or the Ice Dungeon from PH would have been completely out of place in LttP? Do you think the Bee Galaxy would fit right into Super Mario 64?

No, and yes. Was there a temple of Time in LttP (actually I forget, since it's been a good while)? The Bee Galaxy would work just fine as a level in Mario 64 (bad example, yo).

 

[gray_fox224]

Y'all can blast me, but, I really want Zelda in high definition.

 

[Oblivion]

Y'all can blast me, but, I really want Zelda in high definition.

Eh? I don't think anyone would blast you for that.

 

[Zen]

How about making a Legend of Zelda game that starred Princess Zelda? now that is a novel idea.

Her magic based attacks would make the dungeon and the game design very interesting. Not to mention the fresh point of view.

That's a very good idea, either that or I would like to see a 'Zelda' game in a totally new setting (like a shadowrun mixture of the future and magic) or something, but eitherway traditional Zeld is getting long in the tooth. I wouldn't ant to see Link with a gun by any means, but doing somehting to change up Zelda is desperately needed at this point.

 

[gray_fox224]

Eh? I don't think anyone would blast you for that.

I don't know, imo, most Nintendo purists would think that wouldn't be important in their eyes.

 

[titiklabingapat]

It's not like Zelda in HD won't happen. Just not likely in the next 5-7 years.

Zelda in the modern day setting with very stylized art style like IAWW would be cool to me, too. I wanna see Link and Zelda dealing with emo teen issues of today.

 

[Battersea Power Station]

I don't want to read too much here since I'm avoiding all SMG impressions and stuff, but I did read the first couple of sentences. Is it better than Pikmin 2? Because that's an awesome EAD game (Kyoto, right?).

:lol

sorry.

I finished the Terrace and I have to say that so far Pikmin 2 is a much better game. Here's hoping SMG pulls together.

 

[AzureNightmare]

I wanna see Link and Zelda dealing with emo teen issues of today.

Dear god no, Thats way too close to Final Fantasy for my taste.

 

[rollingstart]

let them work on the StarTropics revival for the Wii.

 

[Gigglepoo]

I have to say, I don't know how you think some of those Zeldas are the same as LttP when quite a few didn't even have that many dungeons as LttP.

Since when is "number of dungeons" a relevant distinction? Every Zelda since Link to the Past has the same gameplay (not "similar" - the same) and the same dungeon design. Any dungeon or item could be imported seamlessly into any Zelda game. This is a stagnant series.

 

[Scrow]

I don't know, imo, most Nintendo purists would think that wouldn't be important in their eyes.

it's not important. some of the best zelda experiences i've had have been on handhelds.

it'd be great for eye candy, but it's not essential.

 

[Mithos Yggdrasill]

Y'all can blast me, but, I really want Zelda in high definition.

Who is the crazy that wouldn't it ? Zelda in HD would be a dream...

 

[Deku]

Since when is "number of dungeons" a relevant distinction? Every Zelda since Link to the Past has the same gameplay (not "similar" - the same) and the same dungeon design. Any dungeon or item could be imported seamlessly into any Zelda game. This is a stagnant series.

I agree with you that this franchise is stagnant, but only because I hold it to a very high standard. There are plenty of stagnant franchises which continue to get GOTM awards and oodles of love from its fanbases on GAF and elsewhere.

As for the gameplay, it can only be similar but not the same, the shift to 3D made some very fundamental changes to the gameplay and its what made Ocarina of Time feel completely new and it's still a great game for being the first 3-D Zelda. The problem with the franchise is what came after that game.

 

[Tristam]

I agree with you that this franchise is stagnant, but only because I hold it to a very high standard. There are plenty of stagnant franchises which continue to get GOTM awards and oodles of love from its fanbases on GAF and elsewhere.

As for the gameplay, it can only be similar but not the same, the shift to 3D made some very fundamental changes to the gameplay and its what made Ocarina of Time feel completely new and it's still a great game for being the first 3-D Zelda. The problem with the franchise is what came after that game.

After Majora's Mask, you mean.

 

[Deku]

After Majora's Mask, you mean.

I excluded it for the reason that Majora's Mask was a hugely divisive game. I appreciated it very much for trying to be different but many others criticized at it for being more hardcore and niche.

Zelda is a populist game, it sells a ton of software and people expect a certain accessibility to each title. Perhaps the backlash against MM is what set Nintendo on its current course of repeating the Ocarina of Time formula for so long.

Whatever the case, the old formula has run its course, they should reinvent the franchise so they can rip off the new formula for another decade.

 

[Scrow]

i'd like nintendo to take on a challenge of making a zelda game without any of the traditional items we've become accustomed to, giving exception to the sword and shield.

no boomerang, no hookshot, no bow & arrow, no slingshot, no bombs, no mirror shield, no hammer, no iron boots etc.

they need to stop falling back on old conventions.

 

[Lobster]

I excluded it for the reason that Majora's Mask was a hugely divisive game. I appreciated it very much for trying to be different but many others criticized at it for being more hardcore and niche.

Zelda is a populist game, it sells a ton of software and people expect a certain accessibility to each title. Perhaps the backlash against MM is what set Nintendo on its current course of repeating the Ocarina of Time formula for so long.

Whatever the case, the old formula has run its course, they should reinvent the franchise so they can rip off the new formula for another decade.

You're exactly right. People rip on Zelda when its different in anyway. It has to be like OoT.

WW was ripped on for being Cel Shaded.
MM was ripped on for the time system.
Four Swords was ripped on for being too "gimmicky"

Nintendo decided to go back to the OoT ways (Not Cel Shaded, day and night system, hyrule) because thats what the fans wanted..until some actually played the game. Once people played the game they realised the OoT formula had run its course.

Poor Nintendo..Whatever they do some fans will always hate on something even if the game is fantastic.

i'd like nintendo to take on a challenge of making a zelda game without any of the traditional items we've become accustomed to, giving exception to the sword and shield.

no boomerang, no hookshot, no bow & arrow, no slingshot, no bombs, no mirror shield, no hammer, no iron boots etc.

they need to stop falling back on old conventions.

I'd like this. The puzzles would maybe require finding something in the area that you could use to blow something up, lever something.

Basically like Zack and Wiki.

Oh and instead of a Mirror shield we could just maybe use our sword.

 

[Deku]

i'd like nintendo to take on a challenge of making a zelda game without any of the traditional items we've become accustomed to, giving exception to the sword and shield.

no boomerang, no hookshot, no bow & arrow, no slingshot, no bombs, no mirror shield, no hammer, no iron boots etc.

they need to stop falling back on old conventions.

Those can remain, or some can be omitted or their effects altered. I don't think the item is the issue, its the game design and structure.

They are still tethered to the overworld as a hub mentality originated in the 1st game, solidied in the 3rd console entry and turned into a partical science by the fourth.

There's polygon issues etc etc for designing the hub structure a certain way, but a Zelda that's closer in spirit to the 1st, and less linear with less filler text and attempts at dramatic storytelling would be a revolution. It would tell players ' Zelda has arrived in a new realm' because as you say, a lot of the 'conventions' are ultimately just 'conventions'. There was a reason to do it a certain way in the past, but Zelda can do much more with the technology Nintendo has at its disposal.

The Legend of Zelda's roots as a 'role playing' adventure has been eroded over the years with the characterization and canonization of Link as a certain kind of hero. Zelda in its purest form is a gamer's romp through a fantasy world. The diminutive Link as the hero was a way to show the hero's journey and the growth of the hero from child to adult.

Of course Link can remain or it would not be a Zelda game but he needs to step back again and let people explore. I'm actually mortified by the suggestion of some players that he should be voiced.

 

[Tristam]

I excluded it for the reason that Majora's Mask was a hugely divisive game. I appreciated it very much for trying to be different but many others criticized at it for being more hardcore and niche.

Zelda is a populist game, it sells a ton of software and people expect a certain accessibility to each title. Perhaps the backlash against MM is what set Nintendo on its current course of repeating the Ocarina of Time formula for so long.

Whatever the case, the old formula has run its course, they should reinvent the franchise so they can rip off the new formula for another decade.

I don't think it calls for a complete reinvention -- I've given my ideas on the topic. Zelda is all about variety, consistency, and interactivity. There's usually all kinds of shit in Zelda that can be picked up or tossed, but few objects are actually meaningful or can be used in multiple ways. This should change -- and where an environmental object simply won't suffice, Link's always got his trusty grappling hook or whatever. I think Wind Waker is the best Zelda yet as far as consistency and interactivity go, but since it was also a derivative of OoT with a fresh (and incredibly gorgeous) coat of paint, it isn't exempt from some of the criticisms that apply to Twilight Princess.

As for Scrow's comments about items...well, I don't care what items stay or go as long as the grappling hook from Wind Waker is in! That's my favorite item of any Zelda game ever. Plus, how can you go spelunking without a grappling hook?

 

[Deku]

I don't think it calls for a complete reinvention -- I've given my ideas on the topic. Zelda is all about variety, consistency, and interactivity. There's usually all kinds of shit in Zelda that can be picked up or tossed, but few objects are actually meaningful or can be used in multiple ways. This should change -- and where an environmental object simply won't suffice, Link's always got his trusty grappling hook or whatever. I think Wind Waker is the best Zelda yet as far as consistency and interactivity go, but since it was also a derivative of OoT with a fresh (and incredibly gorgeous) coat of paint, it isn't exempt from some of the criticisms that apply to Twilight Princess.

Zelda is not a western RPG, nor do i want it to be. Those have their fans and I'm not one of them. I don't need complex town NPCs, and all the bells and whistles Molyneux promised when he was making Fable.

The changes that needs to be made are more macro in nature and not so trivial as dropping Link's arsenal (it couple be part of the overall plan) or as making the worlds more interactive.

There's something to be said about being plopped down in a wide open field, no starting town, no opening cinematic, just dropped down in an open field and be left to fend for yourself in the wild. Then on your way to a riverbank, you see some white sandstone sticking out, you study it further and find its an entrance to a cave. In that cave, an old man gives you a sword.

I just described the opening to the first game as it would play out in an extended 3D world, and even doing just that would be revolutionary for a Zelda game. I think people forget that we don't need an opening town and a gazillion NPCs or a fairy to help us. Those are conventions I can live without. In fact starting out in the wilderness with no help and no map would make the first town and settlement we encounter an event.

That in itself could be part of an extended opening. I don't like fetch quests, I play an MMO already and there's enough questing to last me a lifetime. The Zelda of today relies too heavily on fetch quests and sometimes fun, sometimes not fun mini games usually involving chickens, the bow and arrow and some sort of shooting gallery. Those can go too.

 

[Ironballs]

I don't know, imo, most Nintendo purists would think that wouldn't be important in their eyes.

Not really, any Nintendo fan that says HD isn't important is probably lying,

Spoiler

and most likely to themselves

 

[Boerseun]

Not really, any Nintendo fan that says HD isn't important is probably lying,

Spoiler

and most likely to themselves

Clearly, you are the one doing the lying..... TO YOUR... SELF!!!!

 

[HolyCheck]

Not really, any Xbox fan that says Movement Controls aren't important is probably lying,

Spoiler

and most likely to themselves

it works either way.

 

[madara]

What was total development time for SMG? Am I right in thinking they got this out in half usual time frame? Not the usual 4-5 years on Mario or zelda? Be nice to get another one before next gen.

 

[Dascu]

Zelda is not a western RPG, nor do i want it to be. Those have their fans and I'm not one of them. I don't need complex town NPCs, and all the bells and whistles Molyneux promised when he was making Fable.

The changes that needs to be made are more macro in nature and not so trivial as dropping Link's arsenal (it couple be part of the overall plan) or as making the worlds more interactive.

Agreed.

Zelda needs a fundamental change. More NPC interacting, changing setting, artstyle or inventory isn't sufficient.

 

[Scrow]

I'm actually hoping Nintendo's Tokyo Studio's next project is a 2.5D Metroid game.

Retro has wrapped up its trilogy, time for them to move onto something new while Nintendo brings the franchise back home.

After DK:Jungle Beat and now SMG I have no doubt that they could bring some really cool stuff to the table with a Metroid game.

 

[shuri]

I'm a fan of of the oldschool, zeldaII in particular, the snes one, and the first gameboy title; and while i may sound a bit weird about this.. But the massive amount of story and dialogs turned me off from the 3D titles. I just can't stand it all. A link to the past was the perfect balance of storytelling in my opinion. You could explore a lot by youself, get in areas you were kind ot not suposed to yet because they were so hard at this point, but it was still really fun to explore.

I could never get into the 3D ones for some reasons.

 

[fresquito]

What amazes me is that Nintendo fails to see what makes Zelda awesome once and again.

It's like they try to recreate an experience by repeating the same settings. It's all the opposite they do with Mario. They are always trying to reinvent Mario, and that's what's great about his games. They are quite surprising. They always add new dynamics.

Zelda is all the opposite. They resort to old items,old concepts and old settings that have worn out as time has gone by. Zelda was once groundbreaking, now it's just yet another adventure game masterfully crafted but lacking any ambition.

They should just get rid of everything they've used for the last 15 years. Go back to the roots and create a game from scratch. Like they did with the first Zelda. Now, that was a groundbreaking and fucking awesome game. A masterpiece still today.

I'm a fan of of the oldschool, zeldaII in particular, the snes one, and the first gameboy title; and while i may sound a bit weird about this.. But the massive amount of story and dialogs turned me off from the 3D titles. I just can't stand it all. A link to the past was the perfect balance of storytelling in my opinion. You could explore a lot by youself, get in areas you were kind ot not suposed to yet because they were so hard at this point, but it was still really fun to explore.

I could never get into the 3D ones for some reasons.

Agreed. Although I preffer Zelda 1 in this regard. You know, it may sound stupid, but I much oreffer the way stories were told in games back then than now. Games had its own narrative. Now they resort to movie inspired tricks that simply don't work for a videogame.

 

[proposition]

You know what'd rock? A Zelda game with a faster pace.

Please Nintendo Tokyo?

Playing Okami, the thing I noticed most was how much the faster pace of everything helped to make the game just more fun. I find it hard to play Zelda games now, they feel so slow.

 

[Visualante]

Playing Okami, the thing I noticed most was how much the faster pace of everything helped to make the game just more fun.

What.

 

[cartman414]

Since when is "number of dungeons" a relevant distinction? Every Zelda since Link to the Past has the same gameplay (not "similar" - the same) and the same dungeon design. Any dungeon or item could be imported seamlessly into any Zelda game. This is a stagnant series.

This is false. Even though each game has had the same paradigm, the designs and items are different, particularly between Link to the Past and subsequent games.

And even though I've said it several times, I think it bears repeating since it's relevant to the subject of a "different" Zelda: new Zelda II type game please!

 

[CurseoftheGods]

Yes, yes, and yes. Aonuma obviously must be involved though.

 

[Gigglepoo]

This is false. Even though each game has had the same paradigm, the designs and items are different, particularly between Link to the Past and subsequent games.

Such as what? What items couldn't be easily transported into another game? The only thing that comes to mind is the Leaf from Wind Waker. It could be used in a 2D Zelda game to reach far platforms, but it wouldn't be as fun as the Leaf based temple in WW. Other than that, the items are either duplicated in every Zelda game outright or could be seamlessly integrated into the design.

 

[kammy]

What Zelda needs is a world thats not a blatent hub. Areas that are not just there as simple levels but part of a greater world. It needs more villages, more detailed areas to explore. A more naturalistic world setup.

What pissed me off about TP was how lazy the world design was. After the 1st 4-5 dungeons, the next set were "just over the horizon" to an area we had already been. All you had to do was go talk to someone and then you'd have access to that area.

In LttP, once you got past the 1st 3 dungeons, the dark ones could be done in a kinda random order of sorts. I remember through one of my playthroughs I did it in a mixed up order.

Basically Hyrule needs to be more dynamic rather than a thinly veiled map select screen.

Get rid of the instruments, hero of time etc bullshit.

 

[Shikamaru Ninja]

Kid Icarus and Metroid could both be done 3D in the same style as SMG. I mean honestly, the Wiimote-Nunchuk and SMG are the first game to blend platforming and third person shoot so elegantly.

 

[Gigglepoo]

Kid Icarus and Metroid could both be done 3D in the same style as SMG. I mean honestly, the Wiimote-Nunchuk and SMG are the first game to blend platforming and third person shoot so elegantly.

That's actually a really good idea. I'm not one of those people demanding a new Kid Icarus (the original was always too difficult for me) but I could see a Tokyo developed Wii game being really fun.

 

[evilromero]

I'm actually hoping Nintendo's Tokyo Studio's next project is a 2.5D Metroid game.

Retro has wrapped up its trilogy, time for them to move onto something new while Nintendo brings the franchise back home.

After DK:Jungle Beat and now SMG I have no doubt that they could bring some really cool stuff to the table with a Metroid game.

I'm a huge fan of the Retro games but I totally agree with you here. Tokyo should definitely pick up the next Metroid game and apply the 2.5D style that you suggest. It should also be a drastic departure from the series in terms of conventions. I want to see Tokyo revitalize all the staple franchises.

 

[radioheadrule83]

Kid Icarus and Metroid could both be done 3D in the same style as SMG. I mean honestly, the Wiimote-Nunchuk and SMG are the first game to blend platforming and third person shoot so elegantly.

It'd be different though. In SMG the starbits shoot from the player/screen towards the reticule, onwards forever until they hit something. Mario isn't actually shooting them himself. Whereas in Metroid or Kid Icarus, you'd need Samus or Pit to point their arm and shoot beams/arrows from the character outwards... it'd be less clean than the shooting in SMG imo. Much so. It'd be more like Batallion Wars -- where the targeting reticule flows over the contours of the land and land based vehicles or targets front-most objects in the sky.

I'd definitely prefer first person shooting to that actually. They could work like Zelda's bow and other pointer items work though... change viewpoint to behind (RE4 style), point from there.

 

[Eteric Rice]

I don't know, imo, most Nintendo purists would think that wouldn't be important in their eyes.

It's not really that important.

Unless you're one of those people with giant TVs. >_>

 

[Dr. Kitty Muffins]

Let it be a collaboration between Nintendo's Tokyo Studio and Mistwalker.

Nintendo needs to let some new blood inject some freshness in the Zelda series. The old formula is wearing a bit thin.

 

[Tristam]

Zelda is not a western RPG, nor do i want it to be. Those have their fans and I'm not one of them. I don't need complex town NPCs, and all the bells and whistles Molyneux promised when he was making Fable.

The changes that needs to be made are more macro in nature and not so trivial as dropping Link's arsenal (it couple be part of the overall plan) or as making the worlds more interactive.

There's something to be said about being plopped down in a wide open field, no starting town, no opening cinematic, just dropped down in an open field and be left to fend for yourself in the wild. Then on your way to a riverbank, you see some white sandstone sticking out, you study it further and find its an entrance to a cave. In that cave, an old man gives you a sword.

I just described the opening to the first game as it would play out in an extended 3D world, and even doing just that would be revolutionary for a Zelda game. I think people forget that we don't need an opening town and a gazillion NPCs or a fairy to help us. Those are conventions I can live without. In fact starting out in the wilderness with no help and no map would make the first town and settlement we encounter an event.

That in itself could be part of an extended opening. I don't like fetch quests, I play an MMO already and there's enough questing to last me a lifetime. The Zelda of today relies too heavily on fetch quests and sometimes fun, sometimes not fun mini games usually involving chickens, the bow and arrow and some sort of shooting gallery. Those can go too.

I'm certainly not advocating that (I don't even like Western RPGs much). I'm not asking for complex town NPCs (in fact earlier in the thread I was musing over a return to Zelda 1's idea of NPCs -- a handful of old ladies, gamblers, and moblins hidden in caves). And I certainly reject some other ideas in this thread including complex systems of weapons, armor, and combat and elaborate plots. But look at the crux of every Zelda dungeon: getting from Point A to Point B (preferably, Point B is visible -- it makes getting there that much more desirable if you can see but can't touch). And you advance by figuring out how to manipulate your environment based a combination of (a.) objects already in place, and (b.) Link's item inventory. They've translated this idea to other areas of the game in the past. Didn't you feel clever in OoT when you soared across Kakariko Village on a Cuckoo to reach an otherwise unreachable place? If many areas even on the world map forced you to think about stuff like that, Zelda would be so much more satisfying. Then it wouldn't be merely a matter of impatiently waiting for the next dungeon (dungeons whose structure have grown incredibly stale right now. I'm all for removing the convention of map -> compass -> mini-boss -> dungeon item -> boss key -> boss only defeated by dungeon item). Shit, I think "dungeons" should be so blended into the rest of the game and so varied that it should be sometimes difficult to identify what exactly constitutes a dungeon in the game.

 

[Oblivion]

What amazes me is that Nintendo fails to see what makes Zelda awesome once and again.

It's like they try to recreate an experience by repeating the same settings. It's all the opposite they do with Mario. They are always trying to reinvent Mario, and that's what's great about his games. They are quite surprising. They always add new dynamics.

Zelda is all the opposite. They resort to old items,old concepts and old settings that have worn out as time has gone by. Zelda was once groundbreaking, now it's just yet another adventure game masterfully crafted but lacking any ambition.

This is pretty much the whole fucking issue in a nutshell. Zelda is held in a different regard for most people it seems. It's the type of game where most people expect some radical revolutionary change with each new game. Though, I don't agree with that rationale that they should just for the sake of doing so. Why do you think Zelda in particular needs to be revolutionary with EVERY iteration? I mean, especially if you're one of those people that shrug off OoT as nothing more than a LttP remake in 3D.

Shit, I think "dungeons" should be so blended into the rest of the game and so varied that it should be sometimes difficult to identify what exactly constitutes a dungeon in the game.

This made me think that it would probably be kinda neat if maybe Nintendo went a route where instead of dungeons, you have certain wide open areas that you do the stuff that normally do in dungeons.

 

[the androgyne]

Shit, I think "dungeons" should be so blended into the rest of the game and so varied that it should be sometimes difficult to identify what exactly constitutes a dungeon in the game.

Sounds more like Metroid to me.

 

[Tristam]

This made me think that it would probably be kinda neat if maybe Nintendo went a route where instead of dungeons, you have certain wide open areas that you do the stuff that normally do in dungeons.

It's one thing that both Wind Waker and Twilight Princess excelled at compared to Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask, but I still didn't feel like it was enough -- with WW and TP, that stuff was limited mostly to finding secrets, not actually advancing.

Sounds more like Metroid to me.

In hindsight, I suppose that it is, and since I prefer the more cohesive design of a Metroid world to that of a Zelda world, I'm sure I unconsciously arrived at this conclusion. Still, I'm pushing for a high level of interaction with the environment, which is something Metroid typically doesn't feature. Hell, I thought it was even neat in Mario Galaxy the way you defeat some enemies -- you do a spin attack against a bulbous plant that fires at an enemy like a slingshot. I think Zelda should take these elements and multiply them exponentially. The one thing I can't really decide is if everything should have one solution or if there should be multiple ways of solving a given problem. I think earlier in the thread I said there should be multiple ways to defeat bosses (except that each way should rely on multiple items), but I'm not sure if I'd like it that way for environmental puzzles as well. It's finding that one solution and hearing that Zelda chime that makes you feel so darn smart, but it seems that alternative solutions would be just as likely to compliment your ingenuity.

If you do have some areas of the world map that rely on acquired items to access, fine. Like I said, the dungeon order doesn't have to be completely arbitrary. On the other hand, some areas should be able to be cleared by using just your own wits and Link's trusty sword. That way the game doesn't feel so restrictive and linear.

I wish there was a more direct means of communication with Nintendo from its fans. I think my ideas would genuinely benefit the franchise. *shrug*

 

[SantaC]

okay I am back from my ban -_-

 

[MadOdorMachine]

I don't know if it's been said yet, but I think the Tokyo studio should be the ones that try and bring back Kid Icarus.

 

[Rotanibor]

Kid Icarus or something new is definately the answer. They can create the right type of gameplay to make a game like Kid Icarus incredible.

 

[Oblivion]

okay I am back from my ban -_-

Why were you banned?

 

[SantaC]

Why were you banned?

some stupid memes...

 

[Spike]

No, they shouldn't tackle Zelda.

They should tackle Pikmin 3.