"It gained a big audience, but it definitely did not cross age gaps. My dad didn't play Ocarina of Time. My sister didn't. I did, and I was already someone who played games regularly."

Ocarina of Time was the last game that my dad DID actively play, ironically (aside from Mario Golf). I played it too, and I was 8 when it came out. I'd say it crossed age gaps. :P Just certainly not as much as something like WiiSports has, but come on...

well im sure glad you didn't want them to completely leave. i think the director of Spirit Tracks might be your new guy. Spirit Tracks was a really good game. they're all really backstage at this point so i think there getting new people to actually develop

really though, they're all acting as godfathers at this point. the nitty gritty is now with the director ans other such jobs right? they have some degree of control but producers never really make the film great. its the team making them and the director. if they get the Daiki Iwamoto guy for Zelda Wii, i'll be confident it'll be great.

While I agree about Aonuma and Miyamoto, I don't agree about Tezuka. You said it yourself:

"When Tezuka was given freedom, he created Link's Awakening... "

and

"Tezuka is a man who understands the essence of Zelda"

Link's Awakening is one of my absolute favorite Zelda games and I have the feeling that Tezuka's influence on the Zelda series was too little and that he had to take the backseat. I would like to see another Zelda entirely directed by Tezuka.

And I would also like to see Retro Studios working on Zelda. They could add some fresh wind. But my hopes are, that they are already involved in the development of Zelda Wii.

without them, we wouldnt even have zelda. cant you just enjoy the series instead of complaining about every little thing!?

The problem is that everyone has a different opinion of Zelda. I agree that the franchise needs to evolve, and Zelda Wii will hopefully be the one to do it, but the fact of the matter is that everyone thinks Zelda should be this, that and everything else. Some people think we should just shut up and accept what they give us, but we all know that isn't working anymore. Zelda is missing something.

Some people like action, some people like puzzles, some people like tons of sidequests, some people like story, some people like exploration, some people like sidekicks, some people want multiplayer, some people want to control more characters, some people want it to mature, some people want it non-linear completely, some people want better NPC's all around. Everyone wants Zelda to be deep and engaging in one or more of all those aspects. The solution? It needs all of these things, and they all need to be deeply engaging and rewarding. Thats what I think it needs. It isn't impossible, maybe on the Wii it is, for now.

Zelda is still a good franchise as it is, but it needs to evolve. Its missing its full potential, and I agree that I don't think any of the producers are ever going to be able to evolve it, as long as they feel limited to what they can do with Zelda. They feel like Link and NPC's shouldn't talk, they feel like puzzles should be the main focus, they feel like Zelda should be linear to better the story, they feel like Zelda needs to be easier for the casual audience.

Zelda is just their game, and we'll never be able to tell them what to do. Even if someone else takes over, they'll have an influence on that person, and the direction won't be too far off from what we've seen before. This is why some people have given up, because they may be able to find this experience in another game. Sure, it won't be Zelda, but it'll be its potential.

Correction: it doesn't need ALL of the things I mentioned, but it certainly needs most of them. =/

"I know if I was on the team and had a great idea for the game, it would be extremely hard for me to tell them that I think this is better then what they were planning. It just wont happen."

I completely disagree with this assumption. I'm sure if any team member came to them with a new idea, they would be MORE than eager to hear them out. They aren't just going to put anyone on the team that creates Zelda, and I'm positive ideas for the games are a team effort and don't rest solely on these 3 gentlemen. They aren't the type of guys to not listen to new ideas because the ideas contradict what they have in mind.

If you mindless greekocentric games go play fable. Wow fable is a classic nobody even talks of it anymore. Let's continue playing Zelda and let Zelda be fun. Okay ms stooge we Know retro is ms and we need no ms tooling destroying a classic. How much does ms pay for people writing these articles anyway.

@Frankula: To be honest, when it comes to Zelda, Nintendo for the most part just does it their way.

@Nate: I just realized, I think what I was saying is different from what your article was trying to say. Just so there isn't any confusion, though, I do think of Zelda as a high-quality series. I just think it hasn't evolved enough since the N64 era. Wind Waker was probably good enough for its time as well, just brought down by the anti-cel-shade clans - But there was no excuse for Twilight Princess. >_>

The DS Zelda's have actually been pretty good for their time as well.

Wow, if this article isn't pretentious I don't know what is. Is this how you get hits on this site now? Making bold claims to stir up controversy amongst fans?

I don't think anyone has enough insight on these people to make such generalized assumptions about their views. Least of all to the point where one assumes the position to say they should step down from a series they have contributed so much to.

Also, you seem to be under the impression that once a person has worked on something that they are incapable of innovating their work any further. If I am misunderstanding something here than please enlighten me, because it sounds like this is exactly what you're trying to say for the most part. Personally I disagree, and think it takes a very shallow person to assume so. From what little we know of Zelda Wii it would appear Aonuma and Miyamoto are already on track to prove you wrong by evolving the franchise in an entirely new way. Zelda doesn't need to be musical chairs and switch directors needlessly when I'm sure that those running it are entirely competent enough to determine when and what something in the franchise has to change, without someone else's intervention. If what you're looking for is something drastically different than from what Zelda is, well that's what other video games are for.

yeah...the next Zelda Wii game is going to be Link without a sword! Miyamoto has crossed the line.

I can refute this entire article with one name. Sonic. There's a franchise that has no creative input from the original developers of said franchise. And it's a franchise that's a long, long way from it's best.

Zelda is probably the most consistently good name in gaming there is. And given that they're doing their best to change the formula in the next Zelda, I think suggesting that none of those three have any involvement is just simply making an attention grabbing statement for the sake of it.

I'd really like to see some input on what people would add to the series to help it evolve, rather than what they would remove.

I think the main thing he's trying to say is if the next Zelda's after Zelda Wii will just be Zelda Wii rehashed with gimmicks.

I don't think it will. Based on the performance of Spirit Tracks in Japan, I think they're starting to realize Zelda needs to change alot more than that in order spark interest. It needs a selling point that attracts more than just Zelda fans for people to buy it over there.

Majora's Mask was hard to approach, Wind Waker was similar to OoT and had questionable graphics for a lot of people, and TP was WAY too similar to OoT. PH was crazy new, and Spirit Tracks, while an improvement, is really just an improvement over the same game. Zelda Wii will definitely be new enough to attract a lot of people and fans alike. After that, I'm sure they'll start mixing it up more often. At least every two games.

You know, this website analyses what needs to change in zelda all the time. Change too much and it won't be a zelda anymore.

Interesting article. I would just like to point out though that Aonuma wasn't responsible for all of OoT. He was only a dungeon designer. Majora's Mask was the first game where he was a lead director.

I think what I would do is take the three of them, put them in a room for 12 hours, and tell them to give us three epic ideas for zelda games. Afterward, they are free to do whatever they like while others develop those ideas independently and new blood develops. Give the developers a framework to wiggle about in and I bet a few people, released from the pressures of the magnitude of the big three but somewhat handheld through their first steps into taking the zelda reins, will show themselves to be the "chosen ones."

@Anonymous | January 24, 2010 5:45 PM
He was hired as a dungeon designer and worked his way up during the creation of oot with his brilliant ideas to a more substantial role.

I don't think they need to get rid of Aonuma or Tezuka, but Miyamoto is only holding back the creativity of the rest of the team. He has had a tremendous influence on gaming, but Zelda no longer needs him.

It's kinda sad hearing Eiji is getting tired of Zelda. But after reading this article, I agree with you. Although I don't think those three should completely abandon Zelda, it'd be good having new people in the team.

The series started going downhill when Aonuma started doing more than dungeon design. Miyamoto has never had a bad influence on Zelda.

However, looking at this realistically. It's a very bad idea. Nintendo's entire market strategy is based on pushing the whole 'casual games' wherever it can, and shoving it down the throats of gamers who just don't want it.

Taking away some of the only designers allowed the creative freedom to make a game like Zelda would be a very bad idea. Hell, they're only allowed that freedom in the first place because it's a proven profit-maker. Simply put: Zelda sells.

Now imagine who Nintendo would put in charge of Zelda if these three disappeared. The last thing I want is a Zelda-based Olympics game. And you know they'd do it.

Nate, thanks for broaching this subject; great article.

I don't agree with every point but think you raised some good issues--I even mentioned the other day in comments to another post that I think the Aonuma Zelda's are flagging.

MM, TWW, and TP are missing something--something essential--that used to be there in LoZ and ALttP. Primarily I am talking about non-linearity and a sense of exploration.

This is not mere nostalgia for 2D games; I think OoT is a masterpiece and that all of the console Zeldas since are good games. But I truly think that the series as been harmed by OoT's success. Here are things that got started in OoT and have continued, as if by habit, in all the games since:

1.) NON-LINEARITY: the order of the dungeons, the way you must complete each dungeon, and your path in the overworld is heavily proscribed for you

2.) LIMITED OVERWORLD EXPLORATION...in many cases you can't explore at will. In the latest title, Spirit Tracks, you are literally on tracks! A RAIL ZELDA IS AN ABOMINATION.

3.) FETCH QUEST HELL: e.g. predictable overworld objectives that are basically like running errands (umm, sunken triforce pieces anyone?), increasingly fractioned heart pieces, and inanities like bug collecting

4.) GOOFINESS: Gorons. Sumo wrestling.

Now maybe this is Aonuma's fault, he has been at the helm. Or maybe the praise for OoT led them astray. Who knows.

One think I will say in his favor is that the dungeons in OoT and TP are absolutely superb. It's the overworld that has completely devolved (to the point that it is on rails! Rails!)

Zelda Wii is, they insist, a rethinking of the series. I hope they are thinking about non-linearity and exploration.

For the recored, the only one of the three I think we can really criticize with any authority is Aonuma. How do we know what Tezuka and Miyamoto have contributed to recent games?

Miyamoto as spoken about some things he contributed to NSMB Wii (that ice cubed baddies should float, etc.)

But for new Zelda games, really, do we know or is it just pure speculation?

Anyone? Anyone?... Bueller?... Bueller?

I feel like Miyamoto is holding the series back from being what it truly can be. I understand peoples stance that "Miyamoto is doing what he always did, let it remain the way it is." But here's the problem I have: They claim it's part of their hardcore line-up. If they want it to be casual, I may have a problem with it, but at least they would be up-front with it. But if they claim they want it to be hard-core, don't just say it and still try to dumb it down for everyone, they need to do what they claim. It's the double-speak that makes me upset.

Miyamoto is by far one of the greatest pioneers in the history of games. But what people need to grasp is that the industry has changed. Even Miyamoto himself went on record saying that he most likely wouldn't be working for Nintendo if he applied in today's day and age. We need to remember what was considered ground-breaking back in the day is simply par for the course now.

Take the Beatles, for instance. Amazing band back in the day, but if they had cut their first record today, they would be considered mediocre at best. What I'm trying to say is, Miyamoto is no longer a good fit for the direction that the other people on the design team want to go. Miyamoto should simply work on the games with the word "Wii" in the title, where he seems to be having the most fun and giving creative control to Eji. I don't believe that he's necessarily fed up with the series itself, but the fact that all of his ideas have to go through the filter Miyamoto. If he and Tezuka were given 100% creative control.
I can't believe I'm asking for Miyamoto to be removed from the series he fathered, but the fact is, the majority of the consumers that play Zelda want it taken to the next level. And honestly, how many more casual players that have never played Zelda games will play because it is kept simplistic?

Segan, your use of "casual" and "hardcore" is horrible. Easy games can be "hardcore", if thats even the word we should be using for games in the first place.

Assassin's Creed isn't for hardcore? Go ahead and say its not, frankly it is easy, but I can tell you that everyone knows it kicks ass like any "hardcore" game out there.

Zelda will always be core, just like Mario and Metroid are.

I appreciate the point the article was trying to get across, and it was pretty brave. But maybe the series would benefit from new blood, with a guiding hand from the veterans of Zelda. Think Metroid Prime.
I'm a big fan of Zelda 1-3, windwaker and Twilight Princess. I've recently been exposed to Ocarina and Majora's Mask, as well as four swords. And yes, it
does sometimes feel like a retread, despite some brilliant innovations. Still, it seems in small doses, as radical changes would piss off fans. (windwaker)
I've come up with numerous ideas in the past 15 minutes, none of which involve bug collecting or fractional heart pieces. Nintendo could do better, but I think they are playing it safe, which is the smart thing to
do, but this is why a lot of weapons/items/locales repeat, and maybe it is holding the series back.

To Realm:

My definition of hardcore and casual had nothing to do with the difficulty (although I do believe at least a difficulty mode should be considered in Zelda Wii), it was about the approach the designers take to each installment.

From what I can discern, Miyamoto has been the one that has kept the formula as it has for all of these years and it was only after twilight princess when that became blatant that he changed his stance on the designing levels.

But that's only a stem of the overall problem: his design style has become archaic. Nowadays, you have particular groups looking for particular things. It's not like the olden days where games were looked at as toys, primarily played by young children, whom Miyamoto tends to make games for, thus the design and story of the game is somewhat toned down and different control schemes are implemented.

For the sake of my argument, let's make a comparison between Twilight Princess and Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic.

Twilight Princess had a very predictable storyline and a shallow universe with NPC's and very little emotional involvement.

KOTOR, on the other hand, had a mature, thought-provoking storyline, believable main characters and compelling side-characters that seemed alive.

Now, both games obtained a T-rating. But do you see the difference? Bioware knew exactly who their audience was and honed in on developing a game to talor to their audience's wants.

Miyamoto (or Nintendo, to be fair) tried to please everybody with TP. They wanted to make the story "dark" for Zelda's core demographic, but didn't want to make it to too dark because they wanted to make it "accessible" to younger kids. Nothing wrong with that, but they need to realize that the majority of Zelda gamers are in their teens and mid-twenties.

In the end, Nintendo tried to please everybody and ended up pleasing few. It's not so much that they're trying to make it accessible to everybody, but they way they're going about it. What's so hard about making a difficulty setting? Or advanced control schemes for advanced players? I mean, if they're afraid of making an in depth story, why not make a parental control option that would remove the dark/ thought provoking stuff that younger kids may not be ready for yet.
There are opportunities to do this well. But the man in the big chair (Miyamoto) is not taking advantage of them.

I can sort of see what you're getting at. But I think they should stay on board. Zelda Wii seems like it will show that they are capable of mixing things up. At least I hope so.

I don't think any of them need to "take a break", especially Tezuka, who I think should be invovled more. Maybe just bring up some new, creative talent.

After all, Aonuma was once a nobody who was brought on to design the dungeons for OoT.

Well, I can't argue with you here... Mymoto has lost his touch. In fact it is quite a prodigous manifestation that he has not been adding any new fingerprints to the zelda series. Actually, the whole team seems pretty bleak... I mean take tracks for an example. It dismayed me quite a bit when I learned it had the same Ice, Fire, water and grass temples found in previous games. We need to be adding something to the saga, not repeating past decisions.

The other two, I feel are fine. Unlike Mymoto, there actually brainstorming and thinking in a healthy and colabrotive manner, not nodding off every five minutes...

I'm new to this website. is there any sort of membership opportunities? I'd like to know who runs this web site.