 |
| Register | Login | |||||
 |
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | ACS | Stats | Color Chart | Search | Photo album |
|
| | ||
|
| Register | Login | |||||
|
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | ACS | Stats | Color Chart | Search | Photo album |
|
| | ||
| 0 users currently in General Gaming. |
| User | Post |
| Alastor Posts: 7776/8204 |
You did.
By arguing. Also, yeah, I recently did hear that Miyamoto said that LoZ and AoL come before Link to the Past. Considering that logically, that does not follow, it's just... Augh... And I would really not like to think about it. So let's not talk about it, okay? |
| killer7 Posts: 56/62 |
Um Who said I was making an argument? |
| NEONswift Posts: 118/150 |
Originally posted by Racer XeoNowhere have i ever read that LttP was meant to be based before OoT. Ocarina was always theorised but not 100% officially announced to be the 1st in the series. Events in the Prologue to LttP seemed to directly describe the events in OoT. People just got confused over bad translation back in '91...or so I have always believed. I don't like the fact Nintendo neglect to create some continuity with their games. Mario very much IMO needs a history line established. Paper Mario has proven that Mario's universe is incredibly vibrant with some crazy diverse characters. What they really need to do is have each game standalone but have references that connect them together. Its all very well being a young kid and not caring about the bigger picture but just because I'm older doesn't mean I am going to stop playing Mario games....I just want something slightly richer in story with the fat plumber. I was never a big fan of YI to begin with. It always fealt somewhat sluggish to me after being able to complete Mario World and SMB levels incredibly fast - in contrast YI at its slowest was sooo slow. And I agree about the ground looking like cheese in YI2. Its seems to have borrowed some of its graphical style from Super Princess Peach, a style that I hated. |
| Xeo Belmont Posts: 648/1016 |
Although I've seen the GT video of their interpretation of the timeline and I can say I definitely think its highly believable, I'd like to see a clear explanation as to why Link to the Past has been considered in official Nintendo guidebooks, manuals, and whatnot as the first in the series. But this gets completely disregarded in most theories.. It was almost always considered to be before LoZ, LoZII, and even OoT (again, this is stated in the OoT strategy guide in the retrospect section). This would completely offset a lot of the timeline theories out there, as they place LttP towards the end.
Oh, as for Mario timeline talk ... MUSHROOMS. |
| NSNick Posts: 1905/2228 |
Originally posted by Alastor Totally off-topic, but this reminded me of a video I watched a little while ago found here. They incorporate the Capcom games as well and have the Minish Cap first, followed by OoT which splits the timeline. Timeline A: OoT > MM > LA > LoZ > AoL > FSA > LttP Timeline B: OoT > WW This was done before Twilight Princess came out, but they guessed it went between OoT and WW. Also, they have the two Oracle games at the end of each timeline, occuring simultaneously. |
| Alastor Posts: 7774/8204 |
Originally posted by killer7Okay, but I am. And so are many others. And your argument is a pretty bad one. |
| killer7 Posts: 51/62 |
I seemed to notice Nintendo doesn't develop for their last handheld anymore which is quite sad. But what you said made my point. The fact that it doesn't use the other screen at all just for the game it's self is useless. To be able to see above you would be simple if they didn't have it on DS. Having it on DS is simply just cheating in the fact you can see above you. XP But that doesn't make any difference. I'm not saying it isn't a good game. And why would anyone want it on the Revolution? I wouldn't hear of it, I'm not really a Nintendo fan at all. So I could care less about the Revolution I can't evan begin to believe you brought that up. And at this point there is no use useing the GBA for it of course. I didn't say anything about it in the first place. And you must remember what I said, I wasn't the only one who pondered this. |
| Cynthia Posts: 5414/5814 |
Well either you're going to put the game on the DS or the GBA and it's not exactly the best move to go the GBA route at this point. You're trying to get the most bang for your buck. |
| Alastor Posts: 7767/8204 |
Just because you have two screens and one of them is a touchscreen doesn't mean you have to use every gimmick possible. Mario Kart DS didn't use the touchscreen, but its use of the second screen made it clearly better for the DS. Plus, I mean... Nintendo doesn't develop for the GBA anymore. What would you prefer, then, that it be on the Wii? Your line of logic is quite flawed. |
| killer7 Posts: 50/62 |
What I'm confused about is why would they have made it come out on DS? Because the graphics and the gameplay is the same as the first game. Why would the sequel have to be on DS? I didn't see any part of the game that needs to use the touch screen at all. I have been pondering about it quite often. Evan on the gamefaqs board people are asking the same thing. |
| Alastor Posts: 7746/8204 |
But the Zelda games are EASY to put together.
It is inherently obvious that it goes Ocarina of Time, then Majora's Mask, then Twilight Princess, then The Wind Waker, then A Link to the Past, then Link's Awakening, then The Legend of Zelda, then The Adventure of Link. Alternatively, since Aonuma said there are two timelines... It is inherently obvious that it goes OoT > MM > LttP > LA > LoZ > AoL But also, OoT > TP > WW When you factor in the Capcom games, it's up for interpretation, but at least it makes sense and arguments can be fruitful... |
| Cynthia Posts: 5405/5814 |
But who cares about the timelines of those games? That's my point. There's not really supposed to be any sense of "everything has to fit together and be totally obvious".
Some people will get it and others will get really uptight about it. |
| Alastor Posts: 7745/8204 |
Originally posted by ColinWhat.. Then why did you say it HERE... I mean that's not even CLOSE to the case here, we're all saying the game is terrible except the few who say it's bad but gets better later... Originally posted by ColinThe Zelda games at least have connected plots and in general the games can be placed in a timeline without any real finaggling (especially if you take that there are two timelines, in which case only the placement of the capcom games isn't basically already laid out). Relating it to Mario (which I don't think even has a timeline) doesn't make sense. Originally posted by AilureWind Waker's not right after Ocarina of Time at all... Wind Waker is several hundred years after Ocarina of Time. Also, Eiji Aonuma (The guy who does Zelda) says there is a timeline. |
| Ailure Posts: 2230/2602 |
Well, the Zelda games does have some obvious connections, such as that Wind waker happens right after Ocarina of time for example.  Though I almost suspect there's really not any offical order, apart from Ocarina of time being first in the timeline apparently.
I actually thought about making a Mario timeline as a joke though. xD |
| Cynthia Posts: 5403/5814 |
Trying to pick apart the Mario timeline is like trying to pick apart the Zelda one. Don't bother, just enjoy the games for what they are.  |
| Cara Zeltina Posts: 95/95 |
Except, you're actually taking the Mario timeline seriously for some reason.. It isn't suppose to make sense, it isn't (nor ever WAS) consistent. I don't know why you're even "trying" to read into the plot any.. the series has just been about recurring lovable mascots who run into a variety of creative mischief.
It is the same as a Disney or Warner Brothers cartoon essentially.. You'll see the same lovable mascots depicted in a number of roles, and sometimes even at various different stages of their lifetime.. none of them (or very few at least) could ever possibly make a connection to one another.. It is just a different perspective or telling of the old roles and characters.. no gimmick about it, it is just how it is. (Baby Mario has no relation to Adult Mario, I'm pretty damn sure of that.. And if you can't wrap your mind around that basic concept, then just consider it as an alternate universe of events in the Mario world.) *shrugs* Mario is about fun anyway, not its stellar plotline. There are much more interesting and creative stories to examine and pick apart than this one. |
| Yoronosuku Posts: 1074/1239 |
I know it's just a game, I'm just reinforcing why I think it's a total gimmick |
| paulguy Posts: 64/71 |
Originally posted by YoronosukuOriginally posted by C:/xkas bio.asmOriginally posted by Ailure It's just a game, geez. :p I kinda like it even though i suck at it. (and pretty much all games in general  ) |
| Cynthia Posts: 5401/5814 |
Yeah, but don't forget that I'm not saying "It's OK if the game sucks early". The game can be *good* early but then a few hours in the hook comes into play. And that's when it goes from a good game to a great game. |
| Sakura Posts: 185/227 |
Originally posted by Colin The whole point of the start of the game is to hook you. If there's no hook at the start, where's the fun? Most people (hi) do not want to sit down for 4 hours until the game's fun-factor tips into the positive. |
| This is a long thread. Click here to view it. | |
