Why can't Nintendo just release a Zelda game yearly like Call of Duty...

#41Shinobi120Posted 3/17/2013 8:47:34 PM(edited)
Because yearly released titles of series like COD, Assassin's Creed, etc. always tends to degrade in quality & innovation.
#42lordofthenlpplePosted 3/17/2013 8:59:22 PM
Capcom produced a really convincing game called Lost Planet 2. But I sold it the moment I put 6 hours into it. Just keep the gameplay intact, but rewrite the game. Otherwise, it will just be another one of those games few people will play.
#43_Sovereign_Posted 3/17/2013 9:37:01 PM
Vegeta1000 posted...
2000- Majora's Mask
2001- Oracle of the Ages, Seasons
2002- Link to the Past + 4 Swords
2002/3- Wind Waker
2004- 4 Swords Adventure
2004/5- Minish Cap
2006- Twilight Princess
2007- Phantom Hourglass
2009- Spirit Tracks
2011- Skyward Sword

Bolded the ones that aren't side games.

The titles you bolded are no more important that the ones that aren't bolded. All of the those games are officially a part of the main series. Just because the consoles games have a bigger budget doesn't meant they're more important to the series.


They may all be of the official timeline, but the non-bolded are not main entries. The main entries all have a story, quest, and locations beyond what the others achieve. The "side" stories are produced by different teams as well while the MAIN ZELDA TEAM concentrates on producing the next entry in the main series.

I've played every game on that list, and not once have I ever thought "wow, I really needed to play Minish Cap to fully understand Twilight Princess". That's because you don't. If you don't play the main entries, you may be confused with say a title like SS, but skipping ST? Nah.
---
We impose order on the chaos of organic evolution. You exist because we allow it, and you will end because we demand it.
#44freutty2Posted 3/17/2013 10:11:58 PM
Oh I don't know, maybe because that would abuse ( milk it) and it wouldn't be that good of a game if it was rushed every year like CoD.
---
GE: Z:Tael 0193-8910-3838 Conduit 2 : 3138-6925-0692 Pokemon Black:3225-1688-5979
#45strongo9Posted 3/17/2013 10:34:37 PM
I'm not going to say if some Zelda titles are sides games or not, but you can't just count them all like that. It's like saying that Mario is milked and then citing the release years of both the 2D games and the 3D games. They're made by different development teams and have different gameplay styles. The large, big budget development studio that has worked on the 3D Zelda games (OoT through SS) all these years is not the same as the ones that made the various 2D and DS Zelda games. You have to look at them separately. That said, a new 3D Zelda game only comes every few years and the quality and time put into each title definitely shows.
---
Want Luigi's Mansion: Dark Moon, Rayman Legends, and Bioshock Infinite.
i7-2670qm @ 2.2ghz | 6GB DDR3 | 1GB Geforce 540m
#46Vegeta1000Posted 3/17/2013 10:43:38 PM
They may all be of the official timeline, but the non-bolded are not main entries. The main entries all have a story, quest, and locations beyond what the others achieve. The "side" stories are produced by different teams as well while the MAIN ZELDA TEAM concentrates on producing the next entry in the main series.

They're all main entries. Just because they're not as important as the bolded games doesn't mean they aren't a part of the main series. That's like saying Sonic Advance is not a part of the main Sonic series just because it didn't have a big budget like Sonic Adventure. Miinish Cap and Four Swords are a part of the main series just like Wind Waker and Twilight Princess.

I've played every game on that list, and not once have I ever thought "wow, I really needed to play Minish Cap to fully understand Twilight Princess". That's because you don't. If you don't play the main entries, you may be confused with say a title like SS, but skipping ST? Nah.

I don't think that's a good comparison. The Zelda entries mostly have separate stories. Twilight Princess only has a few connections with Ocarina of Time. You can definitely play Twilight Princess before Ocarina of Time or play A Link to the Past before the Original Zelda.
---
IT'S ME AUSTIN!!!!!
#47SolisPosted 3/17/2013 10:55:20 PM
_Sovereign_ posted...
They may all be of the official timeline, but the non-bolded are not main entries. The main entries all have a story, quest, and locations beyond what the others achieve. The "side" stories are produced by different teams as well while the MAIN ZELDA TEAM concentrates on producing the next entry in the main series.

I've played every game on that list, and not once have I ever thought "wow, I really needed to play Minish Cap to fully understand Twilight Princess". That's because you don't. If you don't play the main entries, you may be confused with say a title like SS, but skipping ST? Nah.

Well, then wouldn't that discount the Call of Duty games that aren't made by Infinity Ward from being main series Call of Duty games? At least until Black Ops came out.

And most of the Zelda games are essentially independent of eachother in story anyway. They don't even have a clear timeline going from what the games tell you. Hell, Miyamoto even stated that the stories in the games might not fit together anyway.
---
"Walking tanks must exist somewhere for there to be such attention to detail like this in mech sim." - IGN Steel Battalion review
#48bond465Posted 3/17/2013 11:13:15 PM
i dont see why not...i mean they have beyond milked mario.