[Ginkasa]

I think Nintendo is pretty much between a rock and a hard place with the Zelda franchise. On the one hand, its one of the oldest video game franchises and hasn't really changed much since its third installment; it provides quality entertainment, but the same quality and entertainment installment after installment.

On the other hand, its one of the most classic and cherished of video game franchises and changing it would be very risky. Much of the loyal fanbase look forward to the familiarity and comfort of Hyrule and its patterns.

Its kind of a lose-lose situation. There's not really just one thing that makes a Zelda game a definitive Zelda game. Many of the staples and standards that have carried the series these past 20+ years are also the the features that naysayers call formulaic and repetitive. What can Nintendo do different with Zelda without making something besides a Zelda game?

Personally, I think anything truly different or unique that could have been done with the Zelda franchise has been already. The 3D action-adventure genre that was once filled out Ocarina of Time clones has grown and spun-off into different branches and even assimilated into different genres as well. Should Hyrule grow larger and livelier and less linear? Fable, Elder Scrolls. Should it become more linear and focus more on action than puzzles? God of War. Should it become smaller in scope and focus on a more personal, puzzle oriented quest? Ico. How about large in scope and focus mroe on the epic boss battles? Shadow of the Colossus.

Until Nintendo can come up with something truly and uniquely original that can easily fit into the established Zelda patterns, I'd prefer they continue to follow those same patterns and not try to emulate any other games or do anything that would ruin the essence of Zelda. From the looks of things, that's what they're hoping to do with Zelda Wii2. Until then, I don't mind some handheld games that just continue carrying the same torch to keep me busy.