Kalin
07-24-2002, 04:54 PM
I found the following on a newsgroup a while ago and thought it was good enough to post here. It pretty much sums up my thoughts on ZeldaGC. I think the original source was http://www.n-sider.com/.
---------
Irate Gamers III
Okay, let's start this thing off right.
I hate you all.
Hmm, that came off a bit harsh. I suppose I don't hate you ALL. The "vast
majority" may be a bit more accurate. Either way, I've got a lot of pent up
rage, and you get to hear about it. After all, you're the ones to blame for
it.
But let's be a bit more specific for now. There's one particular debate that
's been driven so far into the ground that I thought it would never again
see the light of day. But thanks to a few new blurry screens, the dreaded
"Celda" argument has again reared its ugly head. I thought I had heard
enough ridiculous accusations and moronic streams of logic to desensitize
myself at this point, but for some reason the new insurgence has again cut
me to the core. And this time I'm not about to let it stand.
Let's see what we've got here.
"The new Zelda looks kiddy! It sucks!"
Here we have the most generalized argument against the game, if you can even
call it an "argument." The wild accusation that toon shading results in a
graphical style only acceptable for little babies, puppies, and magical
nymphs is so outrageously laughable that I have to muzzle myself in order to
keep from tearing someone's head off with my teeth.
Perhaps an individual with a smidgen of intelligence could look back and
notice how the vibrant and colorful Mario 64 remains to this day one of the
most entertaining games of all time. I'm sorry, but if an abundance of color
equates immaturity, I'd better be able to find you people living in houses
of black, grey, and brown. Only an infant would dare enjoy a color palate
that doesn't look like a puddle of mud, right?
I'll concede your point if Link comes out and fights Ganon with a giant
pacifier in his mouth and a pink bow on his head. But if his only offense is
being colorful and, dare I say it, "cartoony," then you all have nothing. It
all comes down to the simple illusion of your own maturity. A person doesn't
"grow out" of color, and suddenly require blood and cursing to make it
through the day. Zelda, and Mario for that matter, exists in an atmosphere
that can appeal to all age groups. I'm 19 years old, and I own and enjoyed
Banjo Kazooie/Tooie, Pokemon Snap, Yoshi's Story, and a plethora of other
such "kiddy" games. Good lord, what's the matter with me? Could it be that
my tastes transcend the societal norms and I exist as a beacon of
independence in an otherwise conformist world? Or are you all just
close-minded insecure dolts?
Regardless, this is assuming that Nintendo opts to make Zelda overwhelmingly
bright and sunny. However, that doesn't seem like it will be the case. There
are shots of moody dungeons, ominous thunder storms, and spooky caves. All
locations that the toon shading technique is quite capable of representing.
I don't know why people think you can't have a dark atmosphere just because
they're using more flat colors and an avant garde art style.
But most people don't really rip apart the style point for point when trying
to say it looks immature and terrible. They compare it to the N64 games,
which have a notably darker and more realistic presentation. However, does
that somehow mean the new Zelda will be crap? Let's see here...
"The new Zelda doesn't look like Ocarina of Time! It sucks!"
Hey, I like that logic! Let's use it some more!
"Link to the Past doesn't look like Ocarina of Time! It sucks!"
Oh, wait.
If you really sit down and think about it, the N64 Zelda games were the
result of an incorrect transition to 3D. The Zelda games on previous
consoles had never attempted to create a realistic atmosphere. Link to the
Past and Link's Awakening had sufficiently stylized trees and architecture,
cartoonish enemies, and a very bright color palette (once Zelda DX came
along, at least). They could've gone the route of, say, Final Fantasy III
(VI in Japan), but they remained light-hearted as a specific design choice.
The games were still epic and fantastically entertaining, they just weren't
trying to look real.
However, that all changed when Ocarina of Time came along. The game
maintained its sense of epic adventure and kept all the gameplay that made
the Zelda series great, but the developers went all out and created a world
that was in stark contrast to the older legends. It was beautiful, true. But
it wasn't the same. And Miyamoto later expressed regret as to where the
series ended up from a design standpoint. He wasn't thrilled with the new
Link. The earring-wearing badass gallivanting around in a realistic world.
So he went back to the series' roots.
The new Zelda, at least when it comes to appearance, is the true sequel to
the SNES and Game Boy games. It returns to the stylized and colorful world
of days long past. However, people can't seem to let go of the world that
the N64 games created. It was a nice world. That much is certain. But it
wasn't the RIGHT world.
Good attitude: The old Zelda games were great! While the N64 ones were also
fantastic, I can't wait to see how the series would look in 3D while
maintaining the art stylings from the originals. It's the best of both
worlds!
Bad attitude: I want more Ocarina of Time, dammit! The new Link looks like a
little girl! If a game isn't dark and realistic, I don't want anything to do
with it! Cel shading ruins the series!
How can it ruin the series if that's the way the series was FROM THE VERY
BEGINNING? It's a damn shame how many people fall into the second group of
opinions there. In the grand scheme, though, you have to ask yourself a
question.
"Why do I play video games?"
Do you play "mature" looking games so you can look cool in front of your
friends? Can you not bear to play anything that might be considered
"immature" because you're afraid of what people might think? Have you been
so warped by pop culture that you honestly can't find enjoyment in the
brightest and happiest forms of entertainment?
None of you will admit to anything in the last paragraph. It would go
against the very image you're attempting to uphold. But perhaps if you took
a good long look at what you're doing in the first place, you'd realize the
situation you're in.
Why should you play video games?
Because they're fun.
Nothing else is a valid reason. The appearance of a game only factors into
why you might like looking at it. If you can't actually enjoy PLAYING it,
however, all the realistic graphics in the world won't help you.
And luckily, that's what the Zelda games are renowned for. Being fun to
play. Being masterpieces of entertainment. Being the reason you go out and
buy a system. So you can run around in Hyrule field in your epic quest to
defeat the prince of darkness.
---------
Irate Gamers III
Okay, let's start this thing off right.
I hate you all.
Hmm, that came off a bit harsh. I suppose I don't hate you ALL. The "vast
majority" may be a bit more accurate. Either way, I've got a lot of pent up
rage, and you get to hear about it. After all, you're the ones to blame for
it.
But let's be a bit more specific for now. There's one particular debate that
's been driven so far into the ground that I thought it would never again
see the light of day. But thanks to a few new blurry screens, the dreaded
"Celda" argument has again reared its ugly head. I thought I had heard
enough ridiculous accusations and moronic streams of logic to desensitize
myself at this point, but for some reason the new insurgence has again cut
me to the core. And this time I'm not about to let it stand.
Let's see what we've got here.
"The new Zelda looks kiddy! It sucks!"
Here we have the most generalized argument against the game, if you can even
call it an "argument." The wild accusation that toon shading results in a
graphical style only acceptable for little babies, puppies, and magical
nymphs is so outrageously laughable that I have to muzzle myself in order to
keep from tearing someone's head off with my teeth.
Perhaps an individual with a smidgen of intelligence could look back and
notice how the vibrant and colorful Mario 64 remains to this day one of the
most entertaining games of all time. I'm sorry, but if an abundance of color
equates immaturity, I'd better be able to find you people living in houses
of black, grey, and brown. Only an infant would dare enjoy a color palate
that doesn't look like a puddle of mud, right?
I'll concede your point if Link comes out and fights Ganon with a giant
pacifier in his mouth and a pink bow on his head. But if his only offense is
being colorful and, dare I say it, "cartoony," then you all have nothing. It
all comes down to the simple illusion of your own maturity. A person doesn't
"grow out" of color, and suddenly require blood and cursing to make it
through the day. Zelda, and Mario for that matter, exists in an atmosphere
that can appeal to all age groups. I'm 19 years old, and I own and enjoyed
Banjo Kazooie/Tooie, Pokemon Snap, Yoshi's Story, and a plethora of other
such "kiddy" games. Good lord, what's the matter with me? Could it be that
my tastes transcend the societal norms and I exist as a beacon of
independence in an otherwise conformist world? Or are you all just
close-minded insecure dolts?
Regardless, this is assuming that Nintendo opts to make Zelda overwhelmingly
bright and sunny. However, that doesn't seem like it will be the case. There
are shots of moody dungeons, ominous thunder storms, and spooky caves. All
locations that the toon shading technique is quite capable of representing.
I don't know why people think you can't have a dark atmosphere just because
they're using more flat colors and an avant garde art style.
But most people don't really rip apart the style point for point when trying
to say it looks immature and terrible. They compare it to the N64 games,
which have a notably darker and more realistic presentation. However, does
that somehow mean the new Zelda will be crap? Let's see here...
"The new Zelda doesn't look like Ocarina of Time! It sucks!"
Hey, I like that logic! Let's use it some more!
"Link to the Past doesn't look like Ocarina of Time! It sucks!"
Oh, wait.
If you really sit down and think about it, the N64 Zelda games were the
result of an incorrect transition to 3D. The Zelda games on previous
consoles had never attempted to create a realistic atmosphere. Link to the
Past and Link's Awakening had sufficiently stylized trees and architecture,
cartoonish enemies, and a very bright color palette (once Zelda DX came
along, at least). They could've gone the route of, say, Final Fantasy III
(VI in Japan), but they remained light-hearted as a specific design choice.
The games were still epic and fantastically entertaining, they just weren't
trying to look real.
However, that all changed when Ocarina of Time came along. The game
maintained its sense of epic adventure and kept all the gameplay that made
the Zelda series great, but the developers went all out and created a world
that was in stark contrast to the older legends. It was beautiful, true. But
it wasn't the same. And Miyamoto later expressed regret as to where the
series ended up from a design standpoint. He wasn't thrilled with the new
Link. The earring-wearing badass gallivanting around in a realistic world.
So he went back to the series' roots.
The new Zelda, at least when it comes to appearance, is the true sequel to
the SNES and Game Boy games. It returns to the stylized and colorful world
of days long past. However, people can't seem to let go of the world that
the N64 games created. It was a nice world. That much is certain. But it
wasn't the RIGHT world.
Good attitude: The old Zelda games were great! While the N64 ones were also
fantastic, I can't wait to see how the series would look in 3D while
maintaining the art stylings from the originals. It's the best of both
worlds!
Bad attitude: I want more Ocarina of Time, dammit! The new Link looks like a
little girl! If a game isn't dark and realistic, I don't want anything to do
with it! Cel shading ruins the series!
How can it ruin the series if that's the way the series was FROM THE VERY
BEGINNING? It's a damn shame how many people fall into the second group of
opinions there. In the grand scheme, though, you have to ask yourself a
question.
"Why do I play video games?"
Do you play "mature" looking games so you can look cool in front of your
friends? Can you not bear to play anything that might be considered
"immature" because you're afraid of what people might think? Have you been
so warped by pop culture that you honestly can't find enjoyment in the
brightest and happiest forms of entertainment?
None of you will admit to anything in the last paragraph. It would go
against the very image you're attempting to uphold. But perhaps if you took
a good long look at what you're doing in the first place, you'd realize the
situation you're in.
Why should you play video games?
Because they're fun.
Nothing else is a valid reason. The appearance of a game only factors into
why you might like looking at it. If you can't actually enjoy PLAYING it,
however, all the realistic graphics in the world won't help you.
And luckily, that's what the Zelda games are renowned for. Being fun to
play. Being masterpieces of entertainment. Being the reason you go out and
buy a system. So you can run around in Hyrule field in your epic quest to
defeat the prince of darkness.