Showing posts with label Zelda. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Zelda. Show all posts

Friday, 21 February 2014

Do Nintendo actually NEED Third Party Developers?

The Wii U is failing, not only failing but borderline a complete failure all together. If it doesn't pick up steam this year and get level in sales at least with the other next-gen consoles, it's going to have to go down as Nintendo's first real home console failure. Sure they've had the Virtual Boy in the past that was quickly forgotten but they've never had a high priority console be a failure, not a home console. One reason people have been claiming is that Nintendo is not getting the 3rd Party support it needs. This is true, the lack of third party titles on Wii U does at times look pretty astounding. But let's take a closer look at that.

There are third party developers on the Wii U, plenty of them in fact, a lot of big name games from Ubisoft have ended up on the console. Are some of the bigger name games like Tomb Raider, Grand Theft Auto or Dragon Age ending up on the console? No, they're not. But is this really a problem is the question. Let's go back and look at Nintendo's history with third parties. In the past their consoles since and including the N64 have lacked 3rd Party support quite significantly.

The NES and SNES both had very strong third party line ups and are naturally considered the best line up of games in gaming. Of course back then, third party meant a very different thing to what it does today. Nowadays when a game is made on Playstation, Xbox and PC, it's practically the same throughout, with PC having a bit higher graphical fidelity. Back in the 8 and 16 bit eras, 3rd party games came out on say the SNES and Sega Genesis/Mega Drive, but they were completely different games. There was always a clearly better version, not to mention controller preference was always key as the SNES and Mega Drive consoles had completely different and layouts. But look at these two versions of the Contra, a 3rd party game.


They're completely different from one another. Compare that today where you get comparison videos that literally go down to the most basic of textures on the games just to try and find a difference, when really there is none.

Also interesting of note is that these games lack the same title specifically. They're both Contra games made and released around the same time for competing consoles but they're completely different games. Which brings up the next point. Third party games were often basically exclusives, sure you had your Mortal Kombat, which had a cheat-code blood version (people always forget it was hidden in a cheat code) on Genesis, and the superior version of Street Fighter II on SNES, but generally speaking third party games were often akin to what is now considered an exclusive title.

Final Fantasy for example, released six games across the NES and SNES eras (no, I don't count Mystic Quest or the other spin-offs). They were released as exclusive titles on Nintendo consoles that eventually jumped ship to Sony's Playstation with Final Fantasy VII, a game that put Sony's console on the map. The games were a huge success and I'm almost certain the video game landscape would be a very different place today if Final Fantasy had remained on Nintendo consoles - as Final Fantasy and Square Enix kinda represent that ship jumping mentality that happened in the late 90s that Nintendo never really got back.

Nintendo would continue to have third party developers for their consoles up to the GameCube era or at least more so than they do today. It didn't work out well for them then, so who is to say it would work out well now. Let's go down to basic numbers...

Ubisoft and other companies have released stats of where the percentage of sales for their game came from, and usually games like Assassin's Creed take 2-3% from Wii U. That is a very small number, now granted the install base is also considerably smaller than the other consoles and a lot of people say that is partially due to a lack of third party support. Does that mean Nintendo is in a Catch-22 scenario here. Perhaps a little, yes. But not to the extent that people believe.

What sold the Wii, it wasn't a third party game, they barely got any of those. It was Wii Sports. What sold the original Xbox or the PlayStation 2, it was Halo and the DVD Player in the PS2. None of these are third party games, they're often a bonus not a reason to buy a console. There are some GREAT third party titles out there, but often the best seem to come from first and second party developers. Games like Wii Sports, Halo, GoldenEye, Super Mario World, Gran Turismo, The Last of Us, The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, Xenoblade Chronicles, Super Smash Bros, Mario Kart e.t.c

The question in the eye of the average consumer, and make no doubt about it, the gaming industry is so insular and cliquey, that they've forgotten that most people who buy consoles, are actually averages joes not hardcore gamers. No-one outside of gamers really has loyalty to Nintendo, Sony or Microsoft. They look at three devices and say "what does this one offer me that the other two don't". For Sony and Microsoft, they offer better graphical power than the Nintendo. Nintendo last generation offered motion controls and dominated that generation, now they offer the GamePad - which while a neat innovation has had little in the way of software that showed off why this GamePad is the reason to purchase a console over the others. The main reason the PS4 is selling so well right now is the strong price point over the Xbox One. These are essentially exclusive features, reasons to buy a specific console for the non-mainstream gamer.

Nintendo's problem isn't a lack of third party games. It's a lack of games in general. No-one has a reason to buy a Wii U and it's version of let's say "Tomb Raider" when they already own a PS3 or 360 that can play that version. The GamePad simple isn't enough. Wii Sports and it's motion controls were something entirely different and new that consumers couldn't get on other consoles. The GamePad is an interesting addition but not enough to purchase a whole new console. The 3DS had a similar issue at first, 3D gaming, while I stand by and support it, is not enough to make people buy a 3DS. But hopefully, hopefully, Nintendo can convince developers to release some exclusives on the console like they have with Sega on the Wii U. Their future line ups of games might help boost the console's sales. 

More and more I see comments on Kotaku, GameSpot and other gaming sites that people are starting to say "I'm finding less reasons not to buy a Wii U". Public opinion is changing and it's not cross-platform third party games that are going to sell it. It's the question of "what does this console offer me that the others don't". And the PS4 and Xbox One are going to be powerful competitors for Nintendo, visuals are an easy sell for people to upgrade their existing consoles. Nintendo has an uphill battle but that's nothing new for them, at the very least they hopefully can bring out enough solid software that is exclusive to Wii U in 2014 to change people's minds.

Sunday, 9 June 2013

Pre-E3 Expo Thoughts

Just a short update this weekend. This week I will be at E3 Expo 2013, I'll get to see all the awesome new stuff Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft put out there, as well as see what else is in store. Will there be a new Zelda? A New Final Fantasy? Will Call of Duty: Dog Warfare be any good, or just yet another cash-in sequel by Activision and Infinity Ward. And perhaps most importantly, does the Xbox One actually play video games?

I'll be doing a three-day analysis at the end of each day, try and give you some impressions of what I get to play. Bearing in mind I am working at E3 this year for gaming website Screwattack.com, for whom I'll be editing many of their videos in the media room. However I'll try and give my best impressions, specifically relating to the major conferences, we have Sony and Microsoft dishing them out and Nintendo with their hour long Nintendo Direct trying to bring the conference less in a bombastic approach and a more... well direct one.

How will E3 go down this year, no idea. Everything seems pretty level this year, Sony and Microsoft have their new consoles coming up, Sony appearing to be in the lead here. They've shown off more games, though people seem to forget how bad their conference was in face of how disastrous the XBox Reveal was. Microsoft have be all about the games this year, tell us what is going to make someone like myself a person who has never owned an Xbox console before, buy one. What exclusives are you bringing to the table? The DRM thing is a real crap, so maybe they might sort something out there, but it's growing increasingly concerning that they won't be changing that any time soon and we'll all have to pay full price for used games, which frankly is BULLSHIT.

Sony on the other hand have shown off a few games, however they haven't shown off any heavy hitters really just the usual Sony stuff that we expect from them. When I saw the PS4... the presentation that is, I really hope they actually show the goddamn console this time, I was quite disappointed that all they showed off were games that had minute graphical enhancements and there was nothing new about the PS4. They've spoken about using the Vita in a similar way to the Wii U, but for someone to do that would cost them somewhere in excess nearly $1000 in all likely-hood. One thing they should emphasises is a worldwide price cut for the Vita and a massive push for cross-platform play. I love the idea that you can play one game on your PS3/PS4 then go play it on your Vita when you leave your house. The only problem is that you have to buy full copies of each. They've changed that for a couple of games but really they need to make it across all games, buy one copy get the other digitally free. Or buy the game digitally and you get the game on both handheld and home console.

Nintendo have to show off their big guns on the software side, with a very rough start to the Wii U, as an old-school fanboy I'm hoping they can pull something out of the hat. We're expecting Smash Bros, Mario, Zelda and hopefully a few surprises along the way. I'd hate to see their direct show off stuff we already knew was coming. I'd like to see some Mario Kart going on and perhaps most important for me, I want to see what Monolith Soft is working on, everyone keeps talking about Retro Studios... yeah, yeah Metroid Prime was a good game and DKC Returns was great too. But Xenoblade Chronicles was probably the best game on the Wii, and now Monolith Soft are bringing that kind of awesome RPG to the Wii U. What's coming up, I have no idea. But I'm very excited, let's just hope they don't flop like last year's conference, which started out so well and then completely lost steam by Nintendoland, which ironically has turned out to be one hell of a game.

How will things go down, it seems all companies need to focus on their games, with Nintendo probably a step behind because despite their one year jump on the others, they've not done much with it. Let's see how things go down, I'll see you guys and gals on Tuesday.

Saturday, 22 September 2012

Mobile Gaming: A Threat to Consoles?

Okay, I'm going to start this by saying that really, anyone with a brain can answer this but apparently it needs to be addressed. Mobile Gaming has become a huge part of the industry it cannot be denied. Now whilst many people out there think that mobile gaming is a big threat to the industry. That by having easy access via downloads from an App Store or Google Play or whatever Nokia is doing nowadays, the smartphone and tablet gaming companies have captured many gamers and it will drastically damage the industry forever. I'm here to say; no in fact it is the opposite, it's made it bigger and better than ever. 

Let's start by realising that the audience hasn't transferred, this current generation of Wii, PS3 and 360 has sold more console units than any of the previous generations including the previous where the PS2 became the best selling home console of all time. Now before anyone points out that smartphones have only been around this generation and just started gaining steam, I should point out that the first iPhone, the smartphone that kick-started this so-called "competition", was released less than a year after the Wii, the best selling home console of this generation. In addition as I write this the pre-orders for the Wii U are sold out practically everywhere and I can't find a damn single one to buy, which is really pissing me of and getting me so god-damn annoyed that I can't contain it anymore I'm gonna scr-- Sorry where was I? Ah yes; iPhones... 

The audience hasn't shifted, it's just grown. People are still looking at the gaming audience like it's 1985 and the NES has just been released, they fail to realise that gamers aren't just people who play these things for a giggle and a bit of fun to pass time. They play it for hours and hours, they try to be the best, they actually compete online like sports, sometimes even for money.  Now were this 1985 I'd say yeah, these smartphones are a competition because gamers back then were pretty casual. There weren't many games that took longer than five hours to complete tops if you were good at it and even those that did like Final Fantasy don't take anywhere near the kind of hours invested that their modern counterparts have... even if those games aren't quite my "personal favourites" shall we say? It's much the same as movies, people don't watch movies to pass time, they watch them to be truly entertained and for the art of it too; otherwise films like The Godfather wouldn't be so popular.

Let's compare the NES games of the 80s with the Smartphone games of today. Super Mario Bros. is not a game for the hardcore, it's something fun to play to pass a bit of time, you go from level to level in a linear fashion, take a few shortcuts here and there, find secrets and just enjoy a fun little game you can beat with easy in an hour or two even if you've never played it before. What is Angry Birds? A game where you go from level to level in a linear fashion, shooting birds at wooden beams and pigs, each level gets more difficult and you can easily pick up and play this game. Sure there were some more "hardcore" games out there, like The Legend of Zelda, Dragon Warrior and Final Fantasy. Well, the same Final Fantasy, with improved visuals from the original PSP port, is now out on iOS too but Final Fantasy XIII sure isn't. 


See back in the 80s, for the most part games had a pretty  much 90% casual audience. Just look at the controller at how simple it was. A directional pad that is easy to read, Up, Down, Left, Right, two buttons, A and B. And a Start and Select, which at the time, were literally used for just that, Starting the game and Selecting the mode you wanted to play. It was simple, it was easy to look at and hey, it was something to pass the time or have a little fun with; only a few games were there to be taken seriously and even those were very basic at the time. Final Fantasy wasn't the epic kind of storytelling that exists today and nor was Zelda the kind of complex game it is today really, it was a "kill bad guys, solve puzzles, save the princess" kind of game. Anyone could understand it, your Grandpa could play these games. The controls and the game itself were so damn simple...

Try giving this monstrocity to your G-Pa today! What is this, stick, there's like four buttons and.. a... an... another stick? Buttons on the back and what's this glowing X in the center... is it... is it radioactive? Why is it vibrating, Oh my god, oh Jesus, lordy help me!! What the fuuuuuu--?!!

No-one would know what the hell to make of this if it had been thrown into the market in 1985. People would lose patience and get angry with all the buttons and all the complexities. Nintendo kept it simple with their controller and then, did the same with the GameBoy when they went handheld to play on the go. It was simple, it was easy to use... not unlike a touch screen of a smart phone no?

Finally here come the 90s and everyone's used to these two buttons so... BAM! Two new buttons! Two shoulder buttons that, well weren't used much in those days but still... SUPER NINTENDO IS HERE MOTHERF***A!! This control was built in mind for people who had played the NES, they knew the basics of playing and game and now they were ready for those training wheels to be taken off and go wild with four face buttons, the games have now taken a leap up. Now admittedly as I write this I'm constantly hearing egoraptor's voice in my head a little from his Megaman X Sequelitis Episode. And he had point, everyone had played MegaMan, they were used to it, so it evolved into Megaman X, a true sequel, the training wheels are off bitch! Now you're playing with power... because it's so baaaad... and Super Nintendoes What Genesis Do--? I'm getting carried away here.


Point is, upgrades. The third Nintendo console ramped it up. Added an analog stick and... for some reason three handles... I dunno maybe Nintendo figured, eh, but the late 90s Nuclear War will have turned everyone into a mutant with three arms. Then when World War III didn't break out they just rolled with it anyway. Sony brought the rain with two analog sticks, the third of which, sorta wouldn't be used until like 2003 really, but it set a new Standard that Nintendo launched out with the C-Stick on the GameCube and Microsoft rolled out on their... well I certainly ain't gonna call that controller because it's nothing but a monstrosity designed for bigfoot to play video games.

See that's how video games have evolved. The market has shifted because well, the gaming companies had their peeps. They had gamers now, people who bought consoles for games to get invested in these two-sticked, four face buttoned, four shoulder buttoned, controller rumbling games. They had grown up with them and become gamers, it's own new culture. But that was kind of a problem in a way, no new people were getting brought into this industry unless it was to grab a cheap DVD player from a PS2. Gamers were the only people buying these consoles. And these consoles were only getting more and more expensive causing adults to go crazy and scream "shut up and stop taking my damn money!"... that's the meme right?

So in 2006 comes a whole new console for the home market... The Nintendo Wii. To this day, it's still the dumbest name I can think of. No wait, scratch that, Wii U is the dumbest name I think of. This console got hardcore gamers panties all in a bunch. "What is this game, there's no blood and violence in it?" and "This is for babies, I'm gonna go play my console with an X on it because it's X-Treme!!!" (which sorta plays into how I feel Microsoft are sort of the new Sega but more on that later). But Nintendo realising the state of the industry and their own dwindling sales as a gaming company realised what went wrong. People were looking at the controls, seeing them as too complex and thinking "SCREW THAT!" and moving on. I must admit, even as a long-time gamer, I was getting a bit exhausted too just like all the non-gamers out there. But not with the Wii they wouldn't be. The Wii was simple, it was easy to grasp and perhaps most importantly, it was cheap. Did this damage Nintendo's reputation, actually not as much as people think. Nintendo fanboys like myself stuck around and enjoyed the new control. And really by the time of the GameCube those gamers who wanted to stay with Nintendo were sorta stuck with them for life as fanboys, so their reputation wasn't as badly damaged as people seem to think, the people who would have left Nintendo's fanbase had... kinda already left with Sony and Microsoft taking what was once Sega's fans.


The Wii Remote was simple: you literally do what you're doing on the screen. You've seen tennis right? Swing the remote like a tennis racket. You've played golf right? Swing it like a golf club. You've shot alien monsters before right? Point at the screen and pull the trigger. It was genius, and it brought a whole new set of gamers to the industry along with the Nintendo DS, propelling Nintendo to new sales heights. But in addition to that, it was a simple button set up too, one big ass button on where the thumb is that basically means "YES" and turned on the side, you've got that classic NES controller once again. Suddenly people who'd never played games in the past were buying up Wii's like they were going to run out of stock, and well, they did for a time. It took me literally a year after launch before I finally managed to get one and even then I had to bribe a few people sell my soul go to extreme lengths to get one.

Casual gamers were back in the fold once again, they didn't have to deal with complex bullcrap and didn't have to read a frickin' tech manual to use it. This control was like their TV remote at home, hell I'm actually really surprised it never became one. Casual gamers had a place they could play games to pass some time, maybe they'd try out the nunchuck attachment, seemed easy enough; Play some Zelda or some thing with a bit more meat. Perhaps they'd even invest a little money into a Classic Controller and try out something bigger like Xenoblade Chronicles or Monster Hunter 3... maybe their foray by becoming gamers afterall.

Okay, time out from the gamer-tech-talk. What is a Smartphone exactly? It's a thin phone with a screen that is literally impossible to not know how to use. You touch the screen, any moron could learn how to use it. It's perhaps even simpler than the NES controller. The screen can create touch-pad controls for you to use with icons that indicate what they do rather than letters to make it even simpler. So of course, casual gamers flock to these devices. They pass the time on the go. But the days of the NES and Gameboy are long since gone. Companies have moved on and a subset of people known as gamers have been created. Casual gamers are being brought into the fold by smartphones just as they were by the Wii. They give people who have never even tried a video game before their first taste of the gaming world. Perhaps they'll buy a Wii U because they like the idea of the tablet, it's simple and easy to understand and has an even greater evolutionary bracket to turn them into hardcore gamers with the buttons that smartphones don't have. And see that's the problem with Smartphones, they don't have buttons and even if someone invented buttons, you can't replace a big 50" screen with a tiny 4" iPhone 5 screen. Nor can you just suddenly get gamers to give up what they've become accustomed to with those multiple-button controls by saying "hey look $0.99 games!" You just can't. Especially not with Nintendo's eShop, the PlayStation Store and XBox Live Arcade giving cheap games too in the near future. Can you integrate new functions like a touch screen, sure, the DS and soon to be Wii U are evidence of this. That adds something new to the formula whilst changing nothing from the old, it evolves it further. 

Smartphones have helped crack open much of the casual audience. But no self-respecting gamer is going to stop playing The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim, throw away their controller and go say "Hell yeah, I want me some Plants Vs. Zombies, I'm gonna throw my time into this badboy!". In fact companies have even realised this. The upcoming launch of the Ouya, a console built on made-famous-by-smartphones Android OS, will be launched soon taking easy to program and cheap approach to the home market for a cost effective $99. The Wii U, a console with Nintendo's market in mind and the Smartphone audience evolving at the right time could make a killing and based on my frustrations of not being able to find one, it already is.

The point of all this is this: The Smartphone is not a threat to consoles, if anything it's helping to broaden their appeal. Smartphones are growing sure, and the fact that a new model is released each year with greater processing power is fantastic but without a big screen, without buttons, this doesn't even begin to hamper the market of the handheld console, let alone the home console. Handhelds like the 3DS (not really the Vita) are selling like hotcakes because they are essentially offering something Smartphones simply can't and never will without losing their sleak, held in the hand, easy to carry appeal and then would lose their primary reason people buy them. TO BE PHONES! Don't believe me? Google: Nokia N-Gage. In addition they'd lose their secondary reason people buy them, to be use-all devices for everything. If Smartphones became gaming devices then they'd be just that; gaming devices. They wouldn't be smartphones anymore. Home consoles have nothing to fear and everything to gain from the increase of casual players on the phones. Of course many gamers are complete morons and don't realise this yet and will continue to bash "casual games" and "casual gamers" because they just don't get the concept of a constantly evolving market but the figures don't lie... the world of gaming isn't going anywhere and it isn't headed for another crash.

If anything, we gamers are in for a golden age soon the likes of which hasn't been seen since we saw a little brown and red plumber jumping on fanged-walking-mushrooms and eating glowing flowers to shoot fireballs (yeah I realise it as I write it) run across our screens twenty-seven years ago, bringing us back from what could have been the end of video games as we know it.

Wednesday, 1 February 2012

What I Would Have Changed: Twilight Princess

It's February, new month, new ideas. As promised a few days ago, this is something I'd been meaning to post for a while but here goes. It's a new series on this blog I'm going to call "What I Would Have Changed". It's kind of a What If series with retrospect. Hindsight is 20:20 as they say and I'll basically be saying what I would have done to change certain video games, films, television series e.t.c. We'll be starting with The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess, a game I really like but know very well it has it's flaws.


What I Would Have Changed: 
“The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess”

As a warning there are MAJOR SPOILERS for Twilight Princess in this article... duh! Also some spoilers for Ocarina of Time but none for Skyward Sword don’t worry.

First off let me get something out of the way, I love Twilight Princess, it was in fact until recently my second favourite game of all time closely; why, because I’m its target audience, I’m one of those people who wanted more of the same and essentially a steroid induced version of Ocarina of Time and boy did we get it with Twilight Princess, everything that was good about Ocarina’s gameplay and visuals were Next-Gen-ifyed. I loved the dark art style the easy to use interface and the impressive graphics for its day (the original release was during the PS2-Gamecube-Xbox era). However this all being said I know several people who didn’t like the game, one of whom Benjamin “Benzaie” Daniel of ThatGuyWithTheGlasses.com made a Top 5 (actually Top 2, don’t ask) list about what he didn’t like about the game, a link to which can be found by clicking here. To be honest, I can’t blame them, my love of this game is based in sheer fanboyism at times and really that’s what this game comes off as at times, pandering to the fans. Don’t get me wrong, Twilight Princess is an EXCELLENT game, against other games it’s still easily a 9/10 or even a 10/10. However nearly every Zelda game has innovated in some way and Twilight Princess’ lack of innovation has really become more apparent to me since the release of Skyward Sword and in some ways it comes off as the awkward cousin of Skyward Sword.

A BIT OF HISTORY

Let’s look at the beginning. The Legend of Zelda was probably the first sandbox style game in existence, it was an epic quest packed with hours of adventure, tough battles and complex puzzles; it was a shining jewel of the original NES system and laid the groundwork for all adventure games since. It’s sequel was Zelda II: The Adventure of Link but really, that game had very little to do with the original and is often considered the black sheep of the series despite being actually a very good game it strayed perhaps a little too far into what other games were doing like RPG’s and Platformers and not enough of what the original Zelda was and this is an important lesson, Zelda is a trend-setter, not a trend-follower.

The next big game was A Link to the Past for the SNES and it is quite frankly a masterpiece. Its open world feel is huge with once again hours and hours of gameplay returning to the style that made the original so great and solidifying Zelda as almost a genre of its own. Every inch of the overworld and dungeons seem hand crafted to perfection, every enemy placement, every puzzle, every tree, rock and pot seems perfectly placed. It had a sequel/spin-off game for the GameBoy called Link’s Awakening, which was the first time Zelda went portable and was also a big success bringing the huge adventure world to a handheld machine, something that when people first started watching bricks drop in Tetris on the GameBoy, people thought would be impossible.

Finally the fan-favourite, the critical favourite, the most critically acclaimed game of all-time, Ocarina of Time for the Nintendo 64. Another masterpiece that would lay the ground work for not just every 3D adventure game but pretty much every 3D game since. Fully rendered 3D environments, excellent visuals and gameplay that fully utilised left, right, up, down and distance like never before. For the first time in a video game we got a 3D sandbox game that would go on to influence everything, every Elder Scrolls game, every God of War, heck even every Grand Theft Auto. Majora’s Mask a direct sequel that utilised a brilliant time mechanic was also very successful.

Then came The Wind Waker for the Nintendo GameCube and it was a raving success despite fanboy’s cries for something more akin to the 2000 Spaceworld Demo of Zelda. They just wanted Ocarina of Time again but in all honesty Wind Waker’s cartoonish art style is beautiful and very fitting for such a gallant game and set the whole game on a massive ocean whilst keeping true to the Zelda genre as it were. So with all the cries for an Ocarina of Time-esque dark Zelda, we finally got Twilight Princess released at the same time for the Nintendo GameCube and Nintendo Wii with different control schemes. Honestly I’d say the Wii Version is superior buuuut.... in light of Skyward Sword it seems very tacked on now despite the motion controls making aiming with a bow or boomerang much easier, it wasn’t a game meant for motion controls and as such, it suffers in comparison with its successor.

Skyward Sword, is only on the Wii. It doesn't have the same problem that Twilight Princess had of being "is it GameCube or is it Wii?” and trying to fit in both. Skyward Sword’s gameplay is unparalleled and is frankly the best gameplay I’ve ever played in a game and it really puts the motion controls of Twilight Princess to shame. As despite Twilight Princess being a better game on the Wii in my opinion, it’s gameplay is more suited to the GameCube’s buttons only controls and the motion controls are mostly a gimmick with this game but a true revolution and game-enhancing with Skyward Sword.

So, now that I’ve gone through the massive history of the Zelda series, skipping many of the handhelds like Minish Cap, Phantom Hourglass and Spirit Tracks, as they’re not relevant to this topic. I think it’s time I actually discussed what this article is all about. What I would have done to make Twilight Princess a better game. Now obviously I’m not coming out and saying “I can do a better job than Shigeru Miyamoto”, no, I’d personally rather shred my own testicles in a blender than commit such sacrilege. Hindsight is 20:20 and for obvious reasons, they couldn’t see how Skyward Sword would pan out as I don’t think anyone at Nintendo owns a DeLorean DMC-12 or a Blue Police Box. So this is all based on the knowledge I have, on how I feel about Twilight Princess six years later and having played its successor and what I consider to be the only TRUE Wii Zelda game, Skyward Sword.

I’m limiting myself to three rules.
1.       I can’t add technology that didn’t exist e.g. no Motion Plus Controls a-la Skyward Sword or HD Graphics
2.       The game can’t be changed so drastically that it’s no longer recognisable as Twilight Princess, the core elements must remain, the Twili, Zant, Midna, Zelda, Ganondorf e.t.c.
3.        Can’t change the release date, as in, one change I would make would be to swap Twilight Princess and Wind Waker around, as I believe Wind Waker was released too soon and Twilight Princess too late.
With that then, let’s begin.

                THE CHANGES

Twilight Princess’s story is a strange one. Not the story itself but how to feel about it. You get this great sense of nostalgia from it and yet emotional detachment all at once. I think this is because Twilight Princess is designed as the true spiritual successor to Ocarina of Time, we get the nostalgia, but because it’s a cast of characters we don’t know we get emotional detachment. At first that doesn’t seem like a problem, nearly every Zelda game we meet a new supporting cast and we grow to like them, so clearly the flaw is with the characters themselves right? Well, yes and no. The supporting cast with the exception of Midna is pretty forgettable, even Link’s family and friends from Ordon Woods are kinda... meh. So yeah, the characters themselves aren’t the best, but I think the main cause is that we’ve got this yearning to play Ocarina of Time’s successor from the nostalgia and we’re getting these characters we just kinda don’t care about. So does that mean we just scrap the Ocarina of Time nostalgia and try and create a whole new game? Well sure that’d be good but we’re trying to make Twilight Princess better not create a whole new game. This has to be the game Ocarina fanboys wanted. So here is my dramatic change...

Make it a full sequel to Ocarina of Time. Before someone mentions Majora’s Mask, hear me out, as I’m including that game in this timeline. At the end of Ocarina, Adult Link goes back in time to being Child Link and tells Zelda everything, which leads to Ganondorf getting arrested and executed by the Sages, which becomes a focal point of the story a few hundred years later in the original Twilight Princess. Child Link then leaves searching for Navi and ends up in Termina where the events of Majora’s Mask play out and at the end of that he goes back into the woods to continue. Link has been an adult before but he’s back in his child body. Let’s say ten or so years later Link is now all grown up, even older than he was in Ocarina of Time’s adult time (he’d aged seven years). He’s a mature seasoned warrior at this point whose travelled far and wide (and it leaves room for midquels too) and now he’s returning to Hyrule, his homeland for the first time in ten years since he saved it. Instantly we’d have a greater emotional attachment to our protagonist.

Link is now the same Link from Ocarina of Time. We played as Link around ten years ago ourselves, as this Link has aged, so have we and we’re back in his shoes. To go on a quick tangent, one of the failures of the Star Wars prequels is that George Lucas failed to realise his primary audience had grown up, or he just didn’t care and wanted to appeal to a new generation, I can’t tell. One of the successes with Harry Potter is that J.K. Rowling did realise this and as such the tone, themes and characters aged with the readers of her books and as such people never grew out of the books because they books kept up with the audience but boy did I feel like I’d outgrown Star Wars when I watched The Phantom Menace at first... then I just realised George Lucas has gone completely barmy and went on with my life. If as many people did, go into playing Twilight Princess wanting Ocarina of Time Mk.2, we’d get the emotional attachment that comes with it and as such the character of Link who we grew up with is now grown up too and we feel attached to him, we’ve played as him before, we’ve seen his struggles and instead of a new Link with a life and family we have to understand, all the groundwork for Link’s back story is already laid out and much like Link, we’ve been away from this era of Hyrule for ten or so years as Twilight Princess was released eight years after Ocarina of Time, nearly a decade. We get the same sense of nostalgia that Link would get returning to this world that once gripped us and enthralled us by the millions. But all is not well, since Link has left the Twilight invasion has begun and now we the player as Link must save this world that both the character and ourselves love so dearly, the stakes are high once again and far more personal this time because Link is now a seasoned pro just like you but the world he once fought to protect is under attack from a new enemy... or is it.

Ganondorf and Link have a History. Unlike in the original game, Link has no animosity toward Ganondorf other than, “he’s the villain who wants to conquer my home and he must be stopped.” But with Link from Ocarina of Time and Majora’s Mask, he has a history with Ganondorf; he fought and defeated him once, then travelled back in time to put a stop to his plans once and for all but Ganondorf is still out to conquer his land. Ganondorf only knows Link as the “fairy boy” who led to his probably very painful failed execution by the Sages with a giant glowing magical sword and imprisonment in the Twilight Realm. He knows they’re connected via the Triforce and Ganondorf might even try to uncover why and find out that in an alternate future, he succeeded in conquering Hyrule but this boy, now a man, stopped him. It’s personal between them and would make the reveal of Ganondorf as Zant’s master and manipulator all the more threatening than just “the big bad coming to return” because this time, it’s the “big bad whose coming to return who we stopped once before but now is out again and more powerful than ever before... and seriously pissed at us!” At this point Link and Ganondorf want to put each other’s heads on pikes, they must HATE each other with a raw seething hot hatred of hating hate... It’s a lot of hate.

 The Supporting Cast are bolstered. In addition to the supporting cast that exists in the game, which might have to be worked around a little to be more memorable, the supporting cast gets a massive bolstering by having returning characters instead of what for many of the characters are just essentially clones of Ocarina’s characters. The Patriarch of the Goron Tribe, Darbus, for example is basically just Darunia, the Zora Prince Ralis could be changed to the Zora Princess Ruto once more, one who never met Link and never learned the lessons that he would teach her and as such is cowardly like the Prince Ralis. In addition there’d always be the lingering memory that Link has that he’ll always remember these supporting characters but none of them remember him. Bringing us to Zelda; Zelda in Twilight Princess is frankly a very boring version, she has little to no-screen time and really only serves to be “Princess Zelda” and nothing else. However if she were the same Zelda from Ocarina of Time, the one who worked with Link before to help have Ganondorf executed, then we have a character already built and her purpose in the story becomes more relevant and in addition we can add extra story to her that she’s now perhaps even Queen Zelda or still a Princess but preparing to rise to the throne, a fact that was present in the original game but is hardly touched upon, why because she’s really not important to the story at all. But if we have this character who we all knew about to be crowned Queen and then suddenly her old nemesis’ minions launch an invasion of her homeland and defeat her forces, then we’ve got a stronger character and a stronger motivation for saving this Zelda as there’s definitely something between them be it friendship or even romantic feelings of the man who saved her and her Kingdom once but now has returned when she needed him the most. This would also mean that Epona, whom you have from nearly the start of the game is still Epona from the original and avoids what I think is really dumb, having two Links... sure, two Eponas... yeah, you’re just pandering to fanboys now... But if it’s the same horse as before, it’s not pandering it’s logical.

How Link’s “family” fit into the story. Link’s “family” in Ordon Woods like Ilia are the driving focus o the start of the game in Twilight Princess. Obvious if they’re no longer Link’s family there’s no reason to have them is there? Well, yes there is. I liked the story of Link going after the Moblins to save the kids and Ilia. It was brave and heroic of him and then... it just kinda ended as Link’s quest continued on to save Hyrule and as such those characters became kinda forgettable. Well that’s only because they’re a driving focus of the plot, they needn’t be. Let’s say Link arrives in Hyrule by way of Ordon Village, he stays there to rest on his way to Hyrule when the village is attacked, and many are hurt and the reason for their attack? They’re after Link. The villagers blame him for their kids being kidnapped so Link sets out to right the wrong and in doing so heads into Hyrule to discover what’s happened and that something larger is at work which is why he was attacked. Someone wants the Hero of Time out of the way. This way these formerly very important characters that suddenly just kinda became inconsequential to the plot now are only a smaller part of the larger scheme of things.

The City in the Sky is Skyloft. Okay, I’m kinda cheating by using information from a game that hadn’t been made yet, but it’s very clear that the City in the Sky from Twilight Princess is meant to be the remnants of Skyloft from Skyward Sword, so clearly some ideas were in place... my question... why the heck are the natural inhabitants of this technologically advanced civilisation who once were in contact with the Hylians now retarded chickens?! Seriously, of all the things in Twilight Princess this baffled the crap out of me. Okay, now here’s where I’m no longer really cheating, because even if they hadn’t intended for the City to be Skyloft when they made the game, surely they must have known that a super advanced civilisation should not be made up of retarded chickens right? This is just plain ol’ stupid. Sure make them look a little different to Hylians, I’m sure after a thousand years or so since the evens of Skyward Sword the people of Skyloft might start to look a little different to Hylians but chickens? Really? No, just make them people, unless somehow the Loftwings and Humans merged to become tiny retarded chicken heads... yeah... no. Back into cheating mode, a few references to Skyloft would be nice but aren’t necessary so long as the super advanced civilisation in the clouds that we clearly know used to be Skyloft isn’t run by STUPID LOOKING CHICKEN FOLK! Maybe throw in a Loftwing or too, they were awesome.

Music can be done well again. Okay I’m going to throw this out there, I think the Ocarina was the pinnacle of Zelda musical instruments, since then it’s gotten worse and worse. Wind Waker had the... Wind Waker... it was just directional but y’know what it was fine. Twilight Princess had adjusting pitch with wolf whistles... okay weird... Skyward Sword had a crappy harp that you don’t so much play as you waggle the Wii Remote in time with nicer music that’s being automatically played. The skill variety has gotten less and less. The Ocarina had five notes, Wind Waker had four, Wolf Whistle has three pitches, the Harp is just bollocks. There’s little skill in the wolf whistle and virtually none in the harp, but I could harp on about it all day... (Bad pun is bad). You could keep the wolf whistle but make it better so that is somehow correlates with the Ocarina of Time, which Link has on him from all those years ago, where he last used it in Majora’s Mask. Adding new songs and perhaps even more notes using the C-Stick, X, Y, Z and even L & R buttons to make it challenging to fully remember them. Perhaps the wolf whistle teaches you the melody and then you have to remember it based on the whistle to play through the Ocarina for it to be effective later in the game.

Nintendo GameCube Only. When it comes down to it I’d rather play the Wii version over the GameCube, I’ll admit that readily... however having played Skyward Sword, it kinda makes Twilight Princess’ controls rather lazy by comparison on the Wii. The GameCube version however would be using the same controls as Ocarina of Time, which given that this whole game is now redesigned as a fully fledged sequel to Ocarina instead of just a spiritual successor that gives you an awkward sense of nostalgia and “I’ve played this game before...” feeling. It also leaves it defines it more clearly on the system without straddling the line.


Ganondorf’s Character Development. I’ve sort of covered this by mentioning how making this a direct sequel would enhance the Link-Zelda-Ganondorf characters but it needs to be said again really in more detail. In Wind Waker we really get the idea of this tragic Ganondorf who was filled with jealousy for the beautiful fields of Hyrule whilst his people suffered in the desert, which is why he tried to seize power. In Twilight Princess... he’s just power hungry. Sure he looks badass and the fight at the end is very cinematic and atmospheric but his character is totally underdeveloped in favour of Zant who takes the spotlight as the primary antagonist even after Ganondorf’s presence is revealed. I’m not saying decrease Zant’s development, his role is crucial to what was already good about Twilight Princess’ story, I’m just saying that once Ganondorf is revealed we need to see him and see how he’s manipulating Zant, discover his motivations and yes, see how much he hates Link and Zelda for what they did to him and how it’s their fault his armies were defeated by the Hylians and the Gerudo people slowly started to die out without a new male heir and suffering massive losses from Ganondorf’s invasion of Hyrule, who thanks to the efforts of Link and Zelda is thwarted thanks to an early warning leading to many of their deaths, as such this Link and this Zelda are directly responsible for the failure of his invasion and as such many of his people, whom despite his Greed was actually fighting for according to the Wind Waker are now dead and/or banished from their home. Obviously he shouldn’t have invaded but like many people who is Ganondorf going to blame, himself, no he’ll blame Link and Zelda... did I mention he’s gonna hate them? He might even hate himself secretly because of his own actions but refuses to believe he was in the wrong, his own guilt would get directed at his nemeses. This makes for a compelling Ganondorf who we’ve met before and understand but now can see his motivations clearly and why he has a personal grudge against our protagonists, because y’know he “would have gotten away for it if it weren’t for those meddling kids!”

That about sums it up. In conclusion really Twilight Princess as a game feels like it’s stuck between wanting to be a spiritual successor to Ocarina of Time and a game that stands on its own. I don’t think it needed to be a spiritual successor to Ocarina but rather a sequel, it needed to embrace its own fandom a little more. This game was designed to please the Ocarina of Time fans, the game’s combat mechanics are an upgraded version of Wind Waker, which are itself an upgraded version of Ocarina of Time. And the fact that Link fights against Ganondorf again, rides a horse called Epona through Hyrule field, visits Gorons and Zoras, and thus in the end the game becomes very much an upgraded version of Ocarina of Time but somehow feels detached from it. If it were a true sequel, if this were the Link fans of Ocarina had played as before returning to meet up with the Zelda they met before and fight a Ganondorf who had a personal grudge against this particular Link and the people around him, it would feel like a far more successful effort in replicating Ocarina of Time’s success with a darker art style and darker plot whilst bringing in new elements to the story like Midna, who was a great character and Zant’s Twili Invasion of Hyrule to keep this sequel fresh with some new ideas. Instead the game feels at times like a new Zelda game that uses way too much of Ocarina of Time’s locations, ideas and gameplay as though it were unintentionally ripping off its spiritual predecessor. On the other hand a sequel would feel more like it was made to continue the style of Ocarina whilst adding new elements into the game.