Headline is misleading. There is no canon timeline and never has been, regardless of what officially-licensed book it was published in.
The game designers have said many times that they don’t take any sort of timeline into account when designing a new Zelda game. They nail down the mechanics, and the story comes next, and if it happens to match up thematically in relation to another game, that’s just a bonus.
I mean that’s one way to look at it I suppose. However I don’t think the story being secondary to gameplay means we have to discount what is there available to us. Like if you want to ignore it that’s fine but I don’t think you can say it’s wholesale not canon.
Edit: also want to say I am not taking this link as gospel, but just showing how the words can be interpreted many ways.
Also the newest timeline is on display at the official Nintendo live event in Sydney, which I would argue is more legit than a licensed book
Regardless it’s not really that important, so if people like the timeline, who cares? Nintendo clearly acknowledges it, and the devs don’t use it when making new games. Both can be true
i was honestly bummed when Hyrule Historia came out and codified the timeline, because half of the fun of the series for me was trying to imagine where all these games that didn't quite fit together fit together. that, and the third branch essentially being a what-if and relegating the original games to it felt like a dismissive cop-out. i appreciate how BotW was full of enough contradictory evidence to not be placed in any one timeline and then TotK doubled down by contradicting the original Imprisoning War, and now Nintendo has given up on placing them anywhere. we are so back
I know, but its better than messing up everything into one soup that does not fit anymore. Zelda is a long running series and many more will come. So I at least appreciate that they do respect the history and not ruin everything by putting it into one noodle soup. The new Breath of the Wild era games have barely anything to do with the old games and stand on their own.
The people who actually make these games have said that the timeline in Hyrule Historia is little no more than elevated fanfiction, because they don’t follow it when making their games. It’s all retcon and forced connections.
People who want them to have some shared continuity as if they’re a real history might as well make a timeline for Mario too. It’s silly, and misses the point
Yeah this marathon reboot extraction shooter is dead. It’s going to lie in developer hell for years…be silently cancelled and Matt McMuscles will give us an expose of “what happened” a few months later
I will be shocked if this “marathon” reboot sees the light of day
If it came across as talking bad about the game/franchise thats not the intent. It’s just rarely mentioned in the crpg mainstream articles I’ve seen over time. Usually Divinity and others are brought up more often.
No no, I just see “Underrated” used a lot about things that really aren’t underrated. It’s become a bit of a pet peeve for me. (Like when someone calls REM an underrated band. Like, they are world renowned. They’re just old and broken up.)
And I’m also pointing out a likely reason for them not being talked about as much as other titles in the same genre. Aside from going through the game with different roles, the first game just doesn’t have a lot of replay value. Not a lot of ‘Choice & Consequence’ or things to discover. There’s your Char and what God you choose to side with in the end. That’s kinda it.
The game is released, for a certain amount of money. If people don’t like what they get for their money, they simply should not buy it.
Except you don’t find out the devs/publishers released a broken game until after you buy it. Which is like, way too common. You can direct your frustrations to the publishers who insist on pushing out broken games and fixing them later.
Yeah although, within reasonable boundaries this is now on the side of the consumer:
Reviews exist and we can wait for them.
Even in cases where they intentionally tricked journalists and reviewers by giving them special copies, we got a 2h refund window on Steam and similar services on say GOG nowadays.
Can still be circumvented by shady publishers, sure, but it’s getting more difficult to trick customers slowly.
IGN’s hitpiece was very iffy in the first place, with mistranslated “tweets” from one of the devs weibo and all, but by doing these guidelines they gave ammunition to these people, I’m glad the game is doing well at least so hopefully china keeps making good, AAA games that aren’t also gacha for once.
I don’t think they realized anything. I worked for them for 13 years. I think they are likely looking at a strategy to bring archived games with low hardware requirements to new platforms that can run them.
For example, I worked on NBA and Madden Mobile. These were ps3 games that were ported.
It’s a good strategy. Why start from scratch when you can just port existing titles that had good sales.
eurogamer.net
Aktywne