If you could only ever play the Zelda series or the Fable series, which would it be?

[Hatesink]

If you could play all of the other games you wanted to play, but you had to choose between only ever playing either the Zelda series or the Fable series (you had to give up of those two) which series would you choose to play?

...would you choose to only ever play the Zelda series?

or

...would you choose to only ever play the Fable series?

Feel free to post and say why you chose the one you chose etc.

[Redraf]

Zelda in a heartbeat. Fable was fun, but it wasn't nearly as good as they said it would be. Zelda will always be classic.

[vrap]

I dare say it'd be easier to give up a series of only two (and a half?) games over one with several ;).

[witch]

God am I sick of Zelda.

I'll choose Fable becuase I enjoyed it a lot more then the recent Zeldas that came out. Plus, in the future, even though PM lies about whats going to be in the game, I still think they will continue to upgrade the series (such as with F2 and the dog ) while Zelda won't. I really got sick of the formula long ago and the only way it was revived was from Okami (which story and art was light years ahead of any Zelda.)

[Hatesink]

My vote is for the Fable series (probably obvious, since I posted the poll ;)). I prefer the Fable series for much the same reason as witch. I love the inventiveness and the story of Zelda, but it's all the formulaic gameplay stuff in between the good stuff that bores me. These days I always play Zelda with a walkthrough, since I want to spend as little time as possible between the newer, innovative interesting parts, and the parts that develop the characters and advance the story.

The whole Fable experience just seems to be a lot more rounded and detailed, with a lot more interesting and entertaining content.

[Jeff]

I'll have to play Fable 2 before I make a permanent decision, but right now I'd have to go with Zelda. As fun as Fable was, when it got right down to it, it was a single path button masher, sure you could be "good" or "evil" but the difference between the two was almost non-existant, It's not like you got different quests for becoming evil, you just picked the antonym to the good quest, i.e. Raid the Barn instead of Protect the Barn. The pay-off for sacrificing the fun of killing everyone to play a good character was that when you stood completely still, a faint halo appeared over your head.... awesome? For a game that claimed to be as large and all encompassing as Fable, I can't wrap my head around there being roughly 12 melee weapons in the entire game, "Oh look, a black sword instead of a silver one, wkd" Also it has little replay value, this ties in with it's lack of free roaming and lack of different quests, basically once you've given this game one good serious play through, you're not going to see or learn anything new.

Zelda, at the very least, challenges you every time you pick it up, even after you've solved one of the various puzzles it's nearly impossible to commit it to memory because of the sheer vast amount of puzzles in the game, all that surrounded by a fairly rewarding story, in a world that lets you do (surprisingly) much more free roaming than Fable, with characters and settings that are far more encompassing than Fable.

For all of these reasons, right now my decision is Zelda. Fable 2 can change all of this though.

[Philosopher of Zelda]

Okay given my forum name this should be a no brainier, but The Legend of Zelda is unquestionably in my mind the greatest series ever made. Maybe I being a little unfair answering this question because I have only play a little bit of Fable, but every other game series I have play has never come close to touching The Legend of Zelda. And that list includes classics like Final Fantasy, Metroid, and Mario all extremely fun and well crafted series, but ultimately come no where near achieve the mastery that The Legend of Zelda series has brought with its compiling stories and flawless balancing of the Gameplay elements.

The First Zelda game I ever played was Ocarina of Time, it complete transformed the way I look at the video games and turn me into the hardcore gamer I am today. Its huge open ended world, intriguing story, wonderful characters and races, addictive gameplay rousing score, and secrets and minigames tuck into every corner made Ocarina of Time a classic that rightfully look upon as the greatest game ever made to this day. The next game in the series I play was A Link to the Past and while it was not graphically on the level of Ocarina of Time it still was an admirable chapter to the series that begs to play again and again. However the game that permanently won me over to the Zelda series was the sequel to Ocarina of Time, Majora’s Mask. With its gorgeous art, and one of the most haunting and touching scores in a game to date, the game immediately drew you into its world like no Zelda game had ever before, the gameplay was just as solid as it had been with Ocarina of Time, everything felt like new experience. The story was decidedly darker from previous entries with darkness always looming over the shoulder of the player, every character in the game had a story to tell if the player was wiling to stop and listing, and the world its was a vibrate creation of color and life (few places in the gaming world can compare to Clock Town in terms of intricacy and the characters who live there). From there on out I was permanently in the series hands with and while not every step of the series was perfect (I am looking at you Wind Waker), it has come define all that is great about the video game world. And with Twilight Princess we saw the Action Adventure/ High Fantasy genre taking to its peak, leaving us to dream about what could be over the next hill for the series.

[nmrahde]

I'm gonna have to go with Zelda. The same babysitter that let me watch horror movies when I was a lil kid also let me play Zelda and Castlevania. I felt so bad when I accidentally erased his 2nd quest character. Arggh...stupid "PRESS AND HOLD RESET"...

So i've got what like twenty years of Zelda nostalgia to get over and that ain't happening anytime soon.

[LowEnergyCycle]

This isn't really a question you can truthfully answer until Fable 2 comes out, since Fable 1 was uncomparable (IMO) with most Zelda games full stop. Plus, as nmrahde says, there's so many years of nostalgia associated with Zelda that it's gonna be very hard for ANY game to trump it.

But then again, Zelda has relied on the same basic mechanics for a very long time now - and I personally am fond of the idea that games will... y'know... evolve a bit every now and then.

And Fable 2 looks like the very definition of games evolving.

Anyway, I refuse to vote until I play Fable 2. It would be... unsporting ;)

[Hatesink]

But then again, Zelda has relied on the same basic mechanics for a very long time now - and I personally am fond of the idea that games will... y'know... evolve a bit every now and then.Sometimes I think that if I have to hack at one more piece of grass, or have to trawl one more generic zelda dungeon I'm going to throw my gamecube out of the window ;)

Having said that, I just got to the Goron Mines and it was a lot better than the Forest Temple (although I did have a couple of lucky intuitions).

One thing I really don't like about the Zelda series is that it can be really frustrating at times, both the gameplay and the fact that it doesn't seem to have been designed to be played without some kind of walkthrough or other foreign input into how the various tools work and/or can be utilised. The very first Zelda game I played was Wind Waker. I knew nothing of the tools, controls etc. and played all the way up to the marionette boss at the end without using any kind of walkthrough, guide or faq whatsoever, and ultimately it was just really frustrating (I didn't even know you could double the length of your magic gage or use the grapple to steal Joy Pendants until after completing the game). I wanted to be able to say that I'd completed it without using a walkthrough, but that marionette was just the last straw— at that point I'd lost too much respect for the series to want to be able to claim it, and just hit the web for a walkthrough :(

Of all the excellent opportunities to include more clues and instructions (in chests, relayed by other characters etc.), it felt that a lot of the time there were more red herrings than actual hints —the Windfall Island side-quests felt so poorly executed that I basically ended up thinking they were deliberately unsolvable so as to give the game the illusion of greater depth for the duration (you can probably tell that I'm pretty frustrated with the Zelda series).

I basically now use a walkthrough for Zelda (otherwise it just takes me longer than I'm willing to spend to get to the good parts— if I were able to get the that information in-game, I'd be a lot lot happier with the series.)

But hey, that's just my opinion ;)

[LowEnergyCycle]

Hatesink:

Yeah, I totally agree. I know there are some that would argue it encourages experimentation, but more often than not you find the answers or quirks to these mechanics by shear unrepeatable accident, or by GameFaqs.

And as for using walkthroughs... God damnit, there was no way on this fair land we call Earth, that I was gonna sail around Wind Waker for months on end just to find important stuff.... But that's just me I guess.

I think there's a limit to how 'open' a game needs to be. They have to provide the right balance between guiding the player and letting them find out for themselves. I'm sure it's a notoriously difficult thing to develop as every player is going to find different challenges, but I'm sure nobody can dissagree: getting stuck and not knowing where to go or what to do next is a gaming paradigm that we all wish would go away.

I don't enjoy using a FAQ one bit - I feel dirty every time I take a sly peek. I see too much - more than I should! It strips me of my innocence!It's just plain wrong!:p

But I find with Zelda, it's often a necessary evil in order to keep me interested in playing. Nobody likes a Wanderfest. Especially not your faithful scribe, My Good Self :)

[Hatesink]

Luckily I've played a lot of adventure games, so it didn't take me too long to figure it all out, since I'm used to the illogicality of it all.

It frustrated me how and why things worked, when and where and for what reason, and the lack of consistency. For instance— a single ice arrow will freeze an entire enchanted, flaming island (an island with iirc some kind of flaming dragon motif), but it won't put out either a simple campfire, or small fire around a chest, or freeze certain enemies for any amount of time.

Getting the kid out of the tree in Wind Waker is another example. I tried everything to get the kid out of the tree. I tried to hit him with the boomerang, I tried to blow him down with the deku leaf. I used the deku leaf to fly into him, I used the deku leaf to fly down to the top of the tree and then walked into him. I flew a seagull into him. I flew down to the top of the tree to hit him with arrows, the hammer, my sword. I hit the tree trunk with the skull hammer, I hammered the ground around the bottom of the tree with the skull hammer, I put the metal boots on and stomped around the bottom of the tree, I shot all three arrows into him from a distance, I threw bombs at him, I hacked at the tree with my sword, I threw a rock at the tree trunk in the hope that it might dislodge him. How did you get him down? Either use the hook-shot, or roll into the tree (I had no idea that rolling into a tree would cause it to shake, but even so, why didn't hitting the tree trunk with the skull hammer or any of the other stuff work?).

That's just what the Zelda series is like if you come to it cold (i.e. no prior knowledge no walkthrough, no faq or guide etc.). If you come to it cold it just feels broken and poorly designed and is very frustrating and boring.

[LowEnergyCycle]

Hehe! Yup! That sounds just like most of my time spent with Zelda too. It's the antiquated Trying-Everything-You've-Got-In-Your-Inventory gaming mechanic - I believe one of the key reasons that point-n-clicks died out.

It's indicative of a Nintendo game though. Everything follows clearly defined, neat little rules and boundaries. As much as they encourage experimentation, it's really just a means of finding the one correct answer to their puzzles. A true experimentation mechanic would have allowed a number of your methods to knock the irritating little git out of the tree.

I wanna play games where - depending on which object you throw at that tree-hugging moron - a different response is given by the game.

A rock will just kock him down and give him a black eye - he'll hate your for the rest of the game and you'll never meet his nice-looking sister :( (He now has a nice-looking sister...)
But a flame arrow will set him on fire, promting a mini-quest to find some burns treatment before he dies. He'll then be horribly disfigured and deeply traumatised.
Hammering the tree will knock it down and provide access to a hidden area, but again, you'll kill the poor guy in the process.
Waiving a free gift at him will make him come down peacefully, and he'll introduce you to his nice-looking sister...:cool:
Rolling into the tree will cause you to knock yourself out. However, he'll laugh so hard he'll fall from the tree anyway. You'll both then laugh about it and thus become the best of friends, and he'll follow you around and protect you. However, he'll never let you anywhere near his nice-looking sister...
If you water the tree roots with MiracleGrow, it'll grow so huge that he'll be stuck there forever, untill you return with a Deku Leaf and swoop from another building to save him.I could go on, I guess, but you get the idea.

[Hatesink]

I'd like to see games that follow that kind of design premise too.

I think the main problem is the time it takes to implement all the different options, since the player is always going to want more detailed options for dealing with the outcome of each of the detailed options, so it kind of becomes like that old fable of rice on a chess board— if you start off with one grain and double it to two on the next square, then four on the next, etc. you end up with millions of grains. But having said that I think it probably would have been easy to have let any number of those alternatives trigger the same result (i.e. the kid falling out of the tree).

That's one of the reasons I'd like to see more detailed and fully realised, but shorter, games with lots of replay value (I'd rather game length came from detail and replay value than the same mechanic over and over for hours). I think they could be produced in an episodic format and cost less per episode, and it wouldn't necessarily have to mean loosing money for the company that creates it.

Wind Waker could have been so much more if they'd included clues in the various chests to make it more like a treasure/scavenger hunt for hints, clues, tips and information on the game, so that if you didn't want to consult a walkthrough you didn't have to. I think that really would have made the game extra special.

[LowEnergyCycle]

Yeah, I was totally ellaborating. I can see why games developers don't have the time for such mechanics - the possibilities would be enormous, but developing and testing that kinda game? That'd be a nightmare.

It's just a shame really. Graphics and Audio have taken giant leaps over the years, but in many regards gameplay hasn't really moved on that much from the old days.

Perhaps our friend Mr Bioshock will allow us at least a taste of that kind of experimentation...

EDIT: Ooooh yeah! I'm so freakin' Senior!

[Hatesink]

EDIT: Ooooh yeah! I'm so freakin' Senior!Congratulations on becoming a senior member :p;) (I think we need more descriptions)

I agree with you re. the gameplay. Everyone's all about the graphics and I'm like: "yeah, but the gamplay's rubbish"

[LowEnergyCycle]

I think we need more descriptions

Heh! yeah, but you'd be OAP, or Deceased Member, or Daisy Pusher or something :D

They'll tell stories of the man who lived to almost 400 posts... ;)

[Hatesink]

I guess if you hit 1000 it could be "Practically lives here" or something similar.

Maybe "Citizen of Rapture" could be one.

[Hatesink]

Hehe! Yup! That sounds just like most of my time spent with Zelda too. It's the antiquated Trying-Everything-You've-Got-In-Your-Inventory gaming mechanic - I believe one of the key reasons that point-n-clicks died out.Absolutely. I was playing Tony Tough and the Night of the Roasted Moths, and at one point (while I was trying to figure out one of the puzzles) the player-character spontaneously told me "Trying everything with everything isn't going to get you very far in an adventure game", and I'm thinking 'tell me about it...tell it to the developers'.

This is a game that fits nicely into the same genre as Gabriel Knight III, where you had to attach a piece of masking tape to a hole in a fence, before chasing a cat through it (with a spray bottle no less) to get some of its fur which you later affix to your top lip using maple syrup so as to be able to use a pen to alter someones passport to look like they have a mustache in order to pass yourself off as them so you can fool the desk clerk of a moped hire-shop into giving you a bike.

[borgdrone89]

zelda is really good, but the style of the game hasn't changed much since the first zelda. in most, you go off, save the princess, go to death mountain or a bunch of temples and fight some bosses, and then you defeat ganon (in general) the wii zelda was great (i have it), but the fable series has more promise in innovation. the xp system in fable 1 was so different from anything i had seen, and it worked splendidly. I am actually finding the zelda games are getting easier with each incarnation, while i found maybe a couple of parts of fable hard on my first playthrough..it was easy the second time around :D
my 2 cents.

[borgdrone89]

This is a game that fits nicely into the same genre as Gabriel Knight III, where you had to attach a piece of masking tape to a hole in a fence, before chasing a cat through it (with a spray bottle no less) to get some of its fur which you later affix to your top lip using maple syrup so as to be able to use a pen to alter someones passport to look like they have a mustache in order to pass yourself off as them so you can fool the desk clerk of a moped hire-shop into giving you a bike.

sorry for the double post but, WTF??!? that is a very strange thing for anyone to have to do in a game, but i find it mildly amusing teehee

[LowEnergyCycle]

I am actually finding the zelda games are getting easier with each incarnation

I agree with everything you posted, but I ESSPECIALLY agree with that.

Zelda:TP was stupidly easy compaired to, say, Link to the Past. I don't know whether the Wii controler makes it any easier or harder, but on GameCube... well... It was a little insulting y'know?

This thread has punched a huge hole in my generally un-punchable faith for the Zelda series. They are great games, but when you actually sit down and think about it, Nintendo have been taking us for fools for far too long!

[borgdrone89]

They are great games, but when you actually sit down and think about it, Nintendo have been taking us for fools for far too long!
yeah, i dont think it was the wii controller, cos some of the aiming was a little awkward, eg: riding a horse and then looking behind to shoot; and if you dont shoot quick enough, and the horse runs into something, you lose momentum and get caned. all in all the game pretty much lived up to its hype, but i really didnt like the way horse riding went. I found it hard to get the horse to turn around, and found the quickest way was to jam the thumbstick back quickly, and the horse would go on his back legs and turn around... XD, but apart from that, the puzzles were interesting, but the most fun ones were the ones where you stood on the spinning top and did cool jumps.

until today i had no idea there was such thing as a fable 2. i hope it comes out on pc..

[Hatesink]

sorry for the double post but, WTF??!? that is a very strange thing for anyone to have to do in a game, but i find it mildly amusing teeheeThat's probably the most accessible extreme example. If you were to go into the technicalities of the way those kinds of puzzles are implemented, the sheer clunky un-userfriendliness of it it would be equally as baffling.

Most third-person point and click adventures are like that (the only ones I know of that are vaguely sensible are Syberia and Still Life (and maybe Dreamfall (although I've not played it yet)).

There's another game where you play as a private detective, and at one point you need to make a phonecall, but instead of using the phone on the desk right in front of you you have to go through a whole series of hotspot-clicking and item-combination to ultimately 'steal' a coin for a local payphone from a nearby vagrant (it's beyond me why people play these games, it's not even as though the stories are even that interesting.). I'll always be a fan of the first-person adventure (or at least the few of them that are worth playing). For me the 3rd person adventure is basically a different genre.

I don't know whether the Wii controler makes it any easier or harder, but on GameCube... well... It was a little insulting y'know?It feels strange playing TP on the Gamecube, when it seems to have been optimised for the wii remote.

Another thing that annoys me about Zelda is the combat. I like the environments and the characters and the story, but I'm sick of having to bash a bunch of things with my sword every time I need to go from A to B. It's irritating— the enemies have begun to feel like litter (or, more accurately, kipple (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kipple);)).

[borgdrone89]

It feels strange playing TP on the Gamecube, when it seems to have been optimised for the wii remote.

Another thing that annoys me about Zelda is the combat. I like the environments and the characters and the story, but I'm sick of having to bash a bunch of things with my sword every time I need to go from A to B. It's irritating— the enemies have begun to feel like litter (or, more accurately, kipple (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kipple);)).

I havent played the cube version, but i don't really feel like it when i'll be getting hl2 for my pc soon :D.

i also find it quite annoying that if you try to just whisk past the enemies, they sometimes hit you and you fall off epona, and then you HAVE to fight to get back on the horse. also, riding and fighting aint all that special, and perhaps is a little awkward (with the sword at least) when fighting those bad guys on warthogs in the west plains. instead of slashing the enemies, i just ram straight into them and keep on going.........--------------------------------------------------------------------->till i get to B

[Jeff]

I don't think wind-waker should be counted as an incarnation of Zelda, it was simply that bad. First and foremost, my eyes are offended by cell shading to the point of inducing nausea after some time, secondly I refused to finish the game at all. As soon as I discovered that my next quest was to sail aimlessly around that massive oceanic world looking for shards of the tri-force, I began to consider quitting, but then when I got to one of the supposed shard locations (via a handy walk-through) and I couldn't raise the damn thing, I gave up entirely. Just for my own sanity now, are you supposed to be able to just drop the hook, raise a chest, get a chunk of tri-force? or do you have to do something to trigger the existance of a specific shard before travelling to it?

I like twilight princess more than wind-waker, but if felt more like attempted conceptual art BS than a video game at points, and made it feel like it was attempting to pander to an audience that wouldn't understand the simplicity of it all but instead sit back remarking in the guise of an experianced art-critic about the beauty of the world.

To simplify that a bit, basically TP felt like it was a bit up it's own arse. Generally though the mechanics were good, the "hidden skills" were a nice addition and no matter how recycled the puzzles and dungeons are, they will always trigger a nostalgic response from me.

Fable's biggest problem for me was that it was, in essence, a glorified button-masher.

[Hatesink]

I don't think wind-waker should be counted as an incarnation of Zelda, it was simply that bad. First and foremost, my eyes are offended by cell shading to the point of inducing nausea after some time, secondly I refused to finish the game at all. As soon as I discovered that my next quest was to sail aimlessly around that massive oceanic world looking for shards of the tri-force, I began to consider quitting, but then when I got to one of the supposed shard locations (via a handy walk-through) and I couldn't raise the damn thing, I gave up entirely. Just for my own sanity now, are you supposed to be able to just drop the hook, raise a chest, get a chunk of tri-force? or do you have to do something to trigger the existence of a specific shard before traveling to it?It's strange that a lot of people didn't like Wind Waker, since of all the Zelda games I've played that's the only one I'm going to be hanging on to for my permanent collection (even despite the fact that there's a cool shaman in TP). I just found Wind Waker to be quite a lot of fun on the whole. I prefer the fighting mechanic to that of the other Zelda games and I loved the whole sailing dynamic (although having to change the wind direction can get pretty tiresome).

As far as the Triforce shards— I think that you have to collect each Triforce map and have it translated by tingle before you can find the piece it refers to, at which point you can sail to the island and use the charts page in the inventory to locate yourself in the middle of the cross on the map (the boat shows up on the chart as a small arrow). But it can be frustrating, since on at least one occasion you have to use the auditory clues to locate a triforce map, and the sound from the speakers emits in reference to the camera, rather than in reference to the on-screen character (which is a pain).

[One0Shot]

Psh of course Zelda. Fable is nothing compaired with a classic like the zelda series.

[borgdrone89]

care to elaborate?

[borgdrone89]

Fable's biggest problem for me was that it was, in essence, a glorified button-masher.

its only a button masher if you make it one. ie, when i played it, i made an art form of my method of play, i would do special movess... wouldnt just stand there mashing B, but i would assassin rush and THEN mash B. and to top it off i would flourish the enemy and my big finale would be a divine bolt

[Jeff]

its only a button masher if you make it one. ie, when i played it, i made an art form of my method of play, i would do special movess... wouldnt just stand there mashing B, but i would assassin rush and THEN mash B. and to top it off i would flourish the enemy and my big finale would be a divine bolt

What you mentioned was what makes it "glorified" button-masher, You could definitely increase the variety of skills or spells you used but the ones you bought very early into the game were enough to carry you the rest of the way through. There was no skill involved, you were never forced to really think your way through anything, it was a run-and-gun with swords and magic. Basically it came down to "See the enemy there" "kill the enemy there" "move to the next enemy".

Even Jack of Blades could've been killed easily had you skipped 60% of the game and traveled directly to him.

One thing that really got to me though, What was your reward for working hard and building a reputation(good or evil)? Canned reactions from canned citizens. M-E-H, meh.