[D-realJos]

It doesn't appear that you even know why you are this upset. Even now, I'm still looking for a substantial point throughout this topic. I can't find any, but believe you are just another gamer caught in the web uncertainty; it's clear you have mixed priorities.

"Do I want a great Zelda game, or will I prefer if Nintendo made a wicked realistic 3D engine, oozing with adult content, slap the Zelda logo on it and sell it to me?" While reading this topic, all I hear echoing is: "Game Is Noting, Image is everything!"

Sure, you'll probably deny it when/if you reply, but hey man, all the evidence is right here, and I'll be kind enough to point it out to you and everyone else.

For the record: I could easily prove my point by stating the pure fact that your are basically condemning the entire worth of a game(and possible ownership of GC) on it's visual style. There's is no reference at all to it's gameplay(nor can there be), so the basic point of this thread really has NOTHING to do with Zelda at all, but it's more about a pathetic CRAVE/LUST for a "mature image"(whatever that is). Still, somehow, I bet you wouldn't except that, so I'll have to go on a little further.

What are the chances that Nintendo was kidding about Zelda being cell-shaded, or that they decided to go back to the original format because of all the complaints?

See! Your very first sentence already sets to tone for what will turn out to be a shallow rant condemning a game you haven't played, because it's not "mature-looking" enough.

From here on, it's pretty straightforward. As I mentioned...the echoes!

I have so many friends that got a PS2 instead just because of this decision. I also was thinking about not getting a GC altogether.

"Game Is Nothing, Image Is Everything!"

What does Nintendo think it's proving by drastically changing Zelda?

"Game Is Nothing, Image Is Everything!"

Why didn't they just make another franchise to use cell shading and be innovative that way?

Game Is No...wait a sec, I like this one, it deserves a different reply.... So let me get this straight. Do it with another game, and it's automatically innovative. Do it with Zelda, and that's "jeopardizing" it? I would think Zelda needs that bit of innovation, especially since the last to games were the same exact stlye/look. What do I know anyhow, huh?

Zelda is already a popular franchise and they are jeopardizing it by making it something that it isn't.

"Game Is Nothing, Image Is Everything!"

Zelda was known for being one of the only Nintendo mature games, and now that isn't the case anymore.

This is especially disturbing. That's because, more than anything else, Zelda is known for being one of Nintendo's most greatest games, one of the world's greatest, in fact. Yet, here you are, depleting the game of all it's worth and achievements, only so you can fit it in a pathetic category of being "mature" or not. That's a scary example of just how the general consensus is beginning to look among many forums these days. A game's achievements are overlooked, and all that matters in the end, is if it's mature or not. Sickening!

You know what... I think I'll just stop here. There's no need to continue, especially after that last portion. Scary stuff man...

PS: Sometimes I question myself whether or not most gamers know how unhealthy their "new" attitudes are. When gaming has seen it's best days(not speaking profit wise), when SNES and Genesis were around, that's where tons of awesome games were out there, and we enjoyed every last one of them. That was also when we didn't concern ourselves with this kiddy-mature crap. If this worsens, someday gaming will be crippled, waiting for another Nintendo to save it like 20 yrs ago. Only this time, it will wait in vain.

(Think I'm taking this to serious? Maybe I am.. or maybe one day we'll regret we all didn't)