Forums
Guides
Features
Media
Zelda Wiki
Patreon
    Why does everyone hate Twilight Princess?
    • Original Poster wrote:

      Honestly, if you take out the nostalgia factor, Twilight Princess is one of my favorites. I love how it's darker than most of the Zelda games, gives you the ability to transform into a wolf, has the whole "Twilight Realm" thing going on, and has Midna! Midna is probably my most favorite character (one of the reasons being that she develops the most throughout the game)! Plus, I love the character designs.

      I mean, there weren't as many sidequests and it was a bit easier, but so what? I found the game fantastic!

      So, it all comes down to my question: Why does everyone hate the game so much?



      I did not hate Twilight Princess.


      I was disappointed.

      I honestly felt this way before I was influenced by any outside opinions. Of all the Zelda games to date, it is my least favorite. I do not hate it, but it is my least favorite.

      - The storyline was lacking. I felt little emotions coming from any of the characters - and Link's few facial expressions were usually really awkward or not clear. I also thought the part with the weird evil Ilia was random and a complete wtf moment and attempt at Twilight Princess trying to be scary. Twilight tried to be scary, but it wasn't. Just awkward at times. I guess it was just my feeling, but I really didn't care much for Zelda, and I could of cared less about Ilia. Most of the characters I found had little perosnality. Save for the characters in the market, oddly enough.


      - The wolf idea to me was strange to begin with (and I love wolves) but the honest reason I did not like the wolf was that it had little use. The only thing special you could do is sniff. Other than that, no use. He did not even have any special final attack moves when you were fighting. I was expecting a lot more variation in control with the wolf, and all we got was basically another epona, but slower and forced to use on occasion.

      - I really hated collecting those orb things. Very non-engaging and not challenging at all. Repetitive. Skyward Sword took this element, but made it much more challenging and interesting.


      It just dissapointed me, I was expecting something very scary and bizzare and what I got was some sort of half baked Majora's Mask atmosphere, but you could turn into a wolf that had no uses. :/

      It dissapointed me because the concept was good. The Twilight Realm is an interesting idea. Midna to me, is the only interesting character of the game and yet these good concepts were sacrificed when a really empty and unecissarily big overworld was put into place.


      I did love the character designs and official artwork, that was my favorite thing about it. Otherwise, it just was not a game I felt compelled to save the world in. The music was really nice too.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by DekuQueen ().

    • DekuQueen wrote:

      I also thought the part with the weird evil Ilia was random and a complete wtf moment and attempt at Twilight Princess trying to be scary. Twilight tried to be scary, but it wasn't.


      This is the exact way I feel about that part. It was just like... why? What was the point of that? How is it relevant to anything at all? And why do people find that creepy or scary? It's just... WHY?! It seemed like Nintendo just threw it in there so they could say, "See, look, it's dark and scary. Laughing upside-down Illias. Terrifying." Too bad it had nothing to do with what was going on.
      thanks

      The post was edited 1 time, last by thanks ().

    • I also thought the part with the weird evil Ilia was random and a complete wtf moment and attempt at Twilight Princess trying to be scary.

      What weird evil Ilia moment? You mean the Lanayru cutscene? I dont think it was trying to be scary as much as that whole cutscene was a huge metaphor....

      The only time that i felt the game was trying too hard to be scary was the "NOT TAKE MIRROR" moment.

      Badges and Awards

      Voted: Coolest Member, Most Likely To Win The Lottery, Most Likely To Take Over The World, Best at GIFs, and Could be Related To [Moriquendi] in Farore Awards.



    • Cereal Bawks wrote:



      At 3:50. The rest of the cutscene made sense, but just the falling Illias part made no sense. It didn't have anything to do with anything else.


      I think the purpose of it was to represent the unstable mindset of the Interlopers, or at least what their dark magic could do to people. It was to represent insanity and how people pretty much went insane to try and claim the Triforce. And those who did claim it would go mad with power.

      I guess.
    • Nah Uzuki, you pretty much got it. Also add it to being Link's mind interpreting what Lanayru is telling him...yeah. Initially, i found that scene to be a big lipped alligator moment too but after thinking about it, i enjoy that scene tremendously.

      Badges and Awards

      Voted: Coolest Member, Most Likely To Win The Lottery, Most Likely To Take Over The World, Best at GIFs, and Could be Related To [Moriquendi] in Farore Awards.



    • Uzuki Cheverie wrote:

      I think the purpose of it was to represent the unstable mindset of the Interlopers, or at least what their dark magic could do to people. It was to represent insanity and how people pretty much went insane to try and claim the Triforce. And those who did claim it would go mad with power.

      I guess.


      The rest of the cutscene already covered that, though. I still don't see how the falling Illias part was relevant.
    • Aww man..i think my post on that entire cutscene was wiped in the crash. *cries*
      But i thought the falling Ilia's was Link's mind interpreting desire.
      Ugh...im so sad that post of mine is gone... :( Id link you but...EARWAX!

      Badges and Awards

      Voted: Coolest Member, Most Likely To Win The Lottery, Most Likely To Take Over The World, Best at GIFs, and Could be Related To [Moriquendi] in Farore Awards.



    • How... how are falling Ilias a metaphor for interpreting Link's desire?

      Don't get me wrong - it's completely fine if people find it justified. But for me personally, this cutscene to me was just them trying too hard. Metaphor or not.

      I also hope it does not seem that I am disappointed with Twilight Princess for this scene alone. It's just that... this cutscene kind of begs for mention.

      Florina Stark wrote:

      What weird evil Ilia moment? You mean the Lanayru cutscene? I dont think it was trying to be scary as much as that whole cutscene was a huge metaphor....

      Well, I mean if Link is bent over on his knees and gasping at the end while looking rather shocked and concerned... I would think they were trying for it to be somewhat scary. But yeah.

      The post was edited 3 times, last by DekuQueen ().

    • YoMaNaTiOn wrote:

      I'm pretty sure you don't know what any of those mean, as OoT is not inconsistent in any of those aspects. Mood aside, as it doesn't need to be consistent and in fact making it that way would render the experience dull and flat as OoT is a pretty long game.


      Spot on. Ironically, I would say Twilight Princess is by far the Zelda game most guilty of "inconsistent" art-styles or mood. You had character designs that were, at times, more eccentric/bizarre/awkward, then any of the ones in OoT against the backdrop of realistic/drab environments. And the clashing of mood was particularly bad: in one cut-scene, they have the knights of Hyrule brutally beaten, while in another, they portray them as incompetent goons.

      I was not a fan of that Lanayru cut-scene. I understand that it was a metaphor, and yet, to this day, I'm not quite sure what to take from it. It was a little creepy to be sure, but I think it may have been more style than substance. Or maybe I'm just dense. Either way, it didn't feel like Zelda.

      Just an observation: Is it just me, or is Twilight Princess more popular with girls? Obviously, we have DQ here as a counter example, but it's just something I notice again and again.

      The post was edited 3 times, last by Bill ().

    • Cereal Bawks wrote:

      The rest of the cutscene already covered that, though. I still don't see how the falling Illias part was relevant.


      Yes, but it acted as a way to directly "link" (ba dum tss) that insanity to Link's own mind. After all, insanity in a person has to be connected on a deeper, mental level /somehow/ - a person doesn't go insane just for the heck of it - so I can imagine that because Link is close to Ilia's heart, that was the most accurate way to make that connection.
    • Although I have enjoyed what I have played of Twilight Princess, windtune makes a good point, however this change has been gradual throughout the whole of the Zelda series. As technology increases Nintendo tries to add more content and depth into the games, however this can remove some heart from the game. I recommend you read THIS article from Kotaku. While I disagree with his hate of OOT, he makes a good point on the evolution of the series and what they have lost.
    • Ah, this article is very discerning and enlightening! I appreciate you sharing it with us.

      There is something essential I took from reading the comments afterwards:
      Zelda of the past is actually just a different genre of game. I've always thought the industry needed to specify what these genres were instead of just "action-adventure." For a lot of Zelda fans, there is either a clear preference for games like Classic Zelda/OoT/Dark Souls or a clear preference for New Zelda/TP/Darksiders (or you know, some better game than Darksiders.) The former is a genre of adventure and the latter is a genre of story and intensity. Then there are people who receive both styles well. I would organize the genre shift from old to new as something like this:

      (Action-Adventure) Zelda 1 -- AoL -- aLttP -- OoT -- MM -- WW -- TP -- SS -- Zelda U -- x -- x (Action-RPG)

      RPGs feature adventure elements, but they are linear with a main focus on character roles and story development.
      Lame fanbase these days. Goodbye.

      The post was edited 42 times, last by windtune ().

    • Mood aside, as it doesn't need to be consistent and in fact making it that way would render the experience dull and flat as OoT is a pretty long game.
      There are two main different kinds of variety: consistent variety and inconsistent variety. Both give the subject at hand an equal amount of variety, but one makes a lot more sense than the other.

      YoMaNaTiOn wrote:

      Adsolution wrote:

      Inconsistent level design, inconsistent mood, inconsistent gameplay, extremely inconsistent artstyle.
      I'm pretty sure you don't know what any of those mean, as OoT is not inconsistent in any of those aspects.
      Of course I know what those mean, that's why I said them. But since you decided to basically lay upon me the accusation that my opinion is invalid, I'll explain in more detail:

      Inconsistent level design: This is partially due to a hardware limitation, but could have been circumvented at the cost of a slight bit of game art modification - some areas seem so pointlessly open and massive, while others seem far too cramped to walk around in; this is more aimed at the areas outside the dungeons, but sometimes to those inside. For a game like this a sense of scale is definitely important, but there are too many empty, vapid areas. I found the Desert to be especially annoying in this regard.

      Inconsistent mood: The game starts off solid. Very, very solid. It feels like a storybook come to life, and you get to experience the beauty and vastness of the land that is Hyrule, slowly unfolding, bit by bit. It's sweet and charming, as is the story. Once you draw the Master Sword however, while the game does get darker, it completely loses almost everything that made it so enchantingly magical. For the most part it doesn't seem ominous and apocalyptic, the atmosphere is just... boring. Then, in its random drops of exposition scattered about between the dungeons, it tries to switch back to its magical atmosphere for only a few minutes, and once in a while the game just turns totally slapstick. It's like a whole bunch of storyline motifs that were meant to be organised in some fashion, but instead were randomly scattered about the game in no particular order with each just deciding to show up when it wants to.

      Inconsistent gameplay: Largely sidequest-related. While it was a bit more normal at the time for them to be like this, the things you do seem so drastically different that they might as well be from entirely different games, and for the most part, have little to nothing to do with the main game. In the main story though, the game likes to shove you into situations that are so out of place, like most of the sidequests. Take the scene where you're being guided through the Desert for instance: it's very poorly made, as if they slapped it together as fast as they could (it just walks you back and forth until it eventually juts off to the side after about a minute of going nowhere), contrary to the dungeon that directly follows it which is one of the best made dungeons in a Legend of Zelda game in my opinion. It's so... inconsistent. Speaking of which, what was with the whole Gerudo's Fortress thing anyway? It was an alright contrast from the chain of dungeons experienced beforehand, but it was so non-threatening that it might as well have been put at the beginning of the game. Yet another note on the Fortress: the idea of using arrows to stun - not kill - guards sprang up from nowhere with no explanation and is never revisited again.

      Inconsistent artstyle: Some things just don't even attempt to mesh with other things. For instance, the rendered images used as static gameplay backdrops often look like they were created by someone who hadn't even looked at the rest of the game. A lot of them look far too realistically textured and modelled, and most of them aren't even rendered well at all. The one that bugs me the most is the one right outside the Market; it looks like you're walking through a lane of completely square, unstylised buildings with the flattest lighting they could have possibly rendered. Another one that bugs me is Kakoriko village - I don't think they had a direction for this at all. It's a grassy, colourful, boxy little village who's main inhabitants are flamboyant men, located right at the base of an erupting volcano named Death Mountain? Just thinking about it sounds silly And not only that, as soon as you step onto Death Mountain, it starkly switches from lush, green grass to barren brown rock. There is no transition whatsoever.



      I apologise for the wall of text, but I actually had to stop myself from going even more in-depth here. I'll just leave it at that. Remember, this is mostly just an opinion, so there's no need to tell me that I don't know what I'm talking about.
      [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

      The post was edited 4 times, last by Adsolution ().


    • Inconsistent artstyle: Some things just don't even attempt to mesh with other things. For instance, the rendered images used as static gameplay backdrops often look like they were created by someone who hadn't even looked at the rest of the game. A lot of them look far too realistically textured and modelled, and most of them aren't even rendered well at all. The one that bugs me the most is the one right outside the Market; it looks like you're walking through a lane of completely square, unstylised buildings with the flattest lighting they could have possibly rendered. Another one that bugs me is Kakoriko village - I don't think they had a direction for this at all. It's a grassy, colourful, boxy little village who's main inhabitants are flamboyant men, located right at the base of an erupting volcano named Death Mountain? Just thinking about it sounds silly And not only that, as soon as you step onto Death Mountain, it starkly switches from lush, green grass to barren brown rock. There is no transition whatsoever


      I'll give you the pre-rendered market since it's clear that was either done due to time constraints or just a lack of vision (though truthfully, it didn't bug me all that much). Outside of that, I think you're grasping at straws. Kakariko Village is awesome in Ocarina of Time. It's an idyllic little village at the foot of a grand mountain. And, for a game that released 8 years and two console generations before Twilight Princess, it had a more developed, believable citizenry. Seeing how the town developed over 7 years was one of the many rewarding moments in Ocarina of Time. Contrast this to the disappointing lack of development of the Twilight Princess Kakariko.

      And from a game-play perspective--not even close. The Ocarina Kakariko Village is home to a number of side quests and points of intrigue. The Twilight Princess Kakariko is mostly barren. Even harassing the Cuccoos lost its charm!

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Bill ().


    • Take the scene where you're being guided through the Desert for instance: it's very poorly made, as if they slapped it together as fast as they could (it just walks you back and forth until it eventually juts off to the side after about a minute of going nowhere)


      I really disagree that this was poorly made. The idea was an imaginative one. With fierce sandstorms and mirages, a desert is a perilous place. The concept of needing a guide and the Lens of Truth to brave it was appealing to me.

      As for the rest of your points, I hate to treat them with a broad brush, but I find them vague and unconvincing.
    • Bill wrote:

      I really disagree that this was poorly made. The idea was an imaginative one. With fierce sandstorms and mirages, a desert is a perilous place. The concept of needing a guide and the Lens of Truth to brave it was appealing to me.

      As for the rest of your points, I hate to treat them with a broad brush, but I find them vague and unconvincing.


      Yeah, the desert section of OoT was actually a great way of making a sort of "puzzle" out of the environment without blatantly having some artificial-looking obstruction that has no realistic purpose within that environment. The desert in OoT took something that makes reasonable sense in that area: a sandstorm, and turned it into a way to creatively use your items to your advantage.

      I mean, obviously, it's not quite extensive, but it's the exact sort of "puzzle-solving" I'd like to see in the overworld of Zelda games.
    • RE: The Haunted Wasteland

      I think the idea works because the idea of an endless desert in the fringes of Hyrule that makes travellers appear back where they came from adds a sense of mystery to the world of Hyrule. It feels like it has an interesting story behind it, which adds to the mythology of Hyrule. It's more than simply a novel puzzle idea (which isn't all that novel really).

      Come to think of it, the most memorable locations (mainly dungeons) in Zelda are the ones which feel like they have an interesting story behind them (which you can partially gauge from the speculation surrounding said location e.g. the previous owners of Snowpeak Mansion). For example, despite being rather boring gameplay-wise, City in the Sky is one of the most memorable locations in 3D Zelda for me.

      The post was edited 5 times, last by Double A ().