What's your favorite Zelda game ?

[Korby]

When you're playing with a friend and focusing more on talking to him or her, you tend to absentmindedly go through a game, which ends up in them skipping a bunch of stuff that was important and getting lost. Ross did an AMA a while back where he basically said that he's usually pretty good at video games, but it's hard to focus on playing and talking at the same time, so for the sake of comedy, he talks more.

That being said- I'm also bothered by their ineptitude in vidya games, but I understand why they're doing bad, at least.

[coolcat7022]

Sorry to change the topic, but why hasn't anyone discussed Link Between Worlds thoroughly? In my book, it's a straight-up MASTERPIECE! The dungeons are less of a hack and slash with the occasional bland puzzle like most Zelda games, and you actually unlock new parts to the puzzles as you progress! The items are inventive, and the control is simplistic but not too easy to use so you never screw up, the streetpass is done marvellously, and the bosses..... My GOD the bosses, Moldorm became simple once you figured out how badly the Hammer beats him, Stalbind was creative start to finish, Margomill wasn't too easy, but wasn't rip your hair out, like Moldorm is without using the Hammer on him.

[Ivory]

the sequelitis is 20% valid complaints
50% "i wasn't part of OoT's target audience"
30% opinions

And his opinions aren't even good. He said Trinexx from ALTTP was a good boss. Making a boss that has a mandatory weakness to a 100% optional and out of the way item is hardly good game design, it's just plain annoying to get that far and get roadblocked because you didn't find that optional item.

However, I think this quote best sums up the video.

His praise for LoZ seemed odder to me than his criticisms of 3D or object permanence ("The spikes I saw when I entered the room hit me even though I wasn't looking at them?! Horse shit! Not fun!"). LoZ had 0 combat depth, no dungeon variety, no puzzles, minimal dialogue and no story. It's a series of 16 square bullet hell rooms, times 8 dungeons. The enemies and bosses all have the same strategy of "Attack it head on". In half an hour of silly rationales not once does he speak ill of LoZ for any number of perfectly legit reasons. I'm still not even sure if he liked LttP or not; he seems to hate it when he's talking about LoZ but love it when he's talking about OoT.
His disdain for story or dialogue and misconceptions about what a puzzle should be also baffled me. Kill all enemies or bombing a cracked wall is apparently the apex of what we can hope to achieve, and having the player do so dozens of times is totally NOT repetitive and is completely fun. While using the 3D perspective mechanic to navigate and explore a room is stupid and silly. "If only they would make this particular puzzle that I'm describing, despite having just complained about exactly that room in the Shadow Temple earlier.
I don't agree with him because I think his goals for a game are wildly different that what we might expect and his argumentative toolset is flawed.

Honestly though, I wouldn't care too much about the video since as I said earlier, he's not even remotely close to the OoT target audience. I'd rather listen to the opinions and complaints to someone who is actually a fan of those types of games, rather than someone who isn't.

[MusashiAA]

LoZ had 0 combat depth, no dungeon variety, no puzzles, minimal dialogue and no story Yeah okay, that's good.. It's a series of 16 square bullet hell rooms, times 8 dungeons Okay, sure, sure, that's good, maybe a bit too simplified.. The enemies and bosses all have the same strategy of "Attack it head on" Yes, you're right.. In half an hour of silly rationales not once does he speak ill of LoZ for any number of perfectly legit reasons. Because they're not design mistakes, even if they are legit complaints. The game is simple from the ground-level, and that's not bad. Top down with projectiles is not "bullet hell", LoZ barely classifies as a shooter, not sure where someone got that idea. "Attack it head on" feels more natural and daring than "use item to expose weak point", which helps in getting the "adventure feel" point across, but makes battles feel more brute-forced than when using your items to defeat a boss.

If you liked LoZ, Z2:AoL, and ALttP, you were OoT's target audience, and I'm sure taking more into account the opinions of a fanatic of OoT isn't really...fair, is it?

[Ivory]

I would disagree entirely, OoT was fundamentally a different style of Zelda compared to the previous top-down and side scroller Zelda titles. 2D Zelda and 3D Zelda are different beasts. Some people love the top-down titles more than than the 3D titles. Just because you liked ALTTP, doesn't mean you will enjoy the game in 3D. Because yes, being in 3D is a different target audience than wanting a top-down adventure title.

[Swordkirby]

Majoras mask. Also, according to AVGN, keys are called bats in zelda.

[The Killer Nacho]

Twilight Princess was vastly underrated in my opinion, and it's my favorite game overall. Some games, like Skyward Sword and Wind Waker, seemed to drag out at certain parts and that kind of negatively impacted the experiences for me. Twilight Princess had a realistic art style that just clicked with me for some reason. Swinging around on the clawshot was particularly fun for me, although I can't say exactly why it was most fun in Twilight Princess. It was not a difficult game by any means, but it focused on smart play rather than overhyping the control scheme (Wii Motion Plus for Skyward Sword). I am truly surprised that nobody has yet voted for Ocarina of Time.