There are "people" on this board right now who dislike Twilight Princess

>there are "people" on this board right now who dislike Twilight Princess

Attached: old.jpg (1139x628, 53.08K)

I mean, you have to agree the beginning is too slow and the seed bits suck at least.

it's good not gr8 i'd give it 8.8 m8

The light seed parts are fucking trash

it is perfect for someone beginning to explore the fanchise, a brilliant introduction that only becomes numbing on replays

>tfw still no 3rd OOT Link game

>there are "people" on this board right now who dislike Twilight Princess

good, it was trash

To me BotW made every 3D Zelda obsolete. And I don't even like BotW that much.

why was oot link so much bigger than tp link?

Is TP's "hero of time" design the worst design for a character in any Zelda game? Looks like a spooky ghost rather than a past hero.

>Twilight princess? No thank you, I am a Wind waker fan. The ocean is my home.

Attached: whyyes.png (603x598, 259.32K)

your opinion doesn't matter you subhuman

Attached: zeldur.jpg (1256x1890, 898.36K)

nope the light seed hunts were a fun way to explore new environments, the only reason anyone would dislike it is because they got lost and couldnt find one and you would have to be literally brain dead to get lost in such small areas

they both belong together as they are complementary introductory chapters to the franchise

Attached: ww.jpg (1920x1200, 242.01K)

>cant have bad areas in the game if there are no areas at all

Attached: 1447951246697.gif (301x285, 2M)

yea, why did it need to shit up the lore with this? it could have easily been a good game if it didnt try and take retarded liberties

>complementary
yikes, twilight fags riding the coattails of OoT AND WW now? lol

Is there anyone who prefers Skyward Sword over Twilight Princess?

I liked them a lot. It was probably the single most interesting forced exploration mechanic I've ever seen used in a game before.

SS is more interesting plotwise but i hate wii shit mechanics

I like collect-a-thons

neither belong
Ocarina did not need sequels outside of MM and ALTTP

Attached: extreme.png (391x419, 347.58K)

>MM
>sequel

OoT definitely didn't need MM lol

Attached: consume.jpg (500x375, 21.6K)

>Twilight Princess
>has shitty furfag coomerbait niggerloli
>Skyward Sword
>has THE GROOSE
The choice is clear

I've literally never played a Zelda game and I never will

>shitty furfag coomerbait niggerloli
no one:

>protag is the same Link
>takes place after Ocarina
Yes.

I think it has mostly good intentions but it's too limited by Nintendo's design philosophy at the time, i.e. linearity and low difficulty. 8.8 is unironically a fair score.

SS drops the ball in the third act (dragon trials), and of course has Fi, and the sky overworld sucks. I didn't mind the motion controls.

then 97 wasn't

Attached: dora.jpg (250x153, 15.46K)

literally retconned as "it was all a dream" and never acknowledged again in any other game

The people who don't like it never unlocked all the sword techniques, the fatal draw ability makes every annoying enemy easy.
My only complaints are having to dig up things to progress (especially in dungeons) or traverse wires as a wolf.

>Link's Awakening is no longer a sequel because it takes place in a dream and never gets acknowledged again

I really like the wolf, it combines like 5 different pieces of equipment into the most versatile transformation in the franchise.

based and good pilled

Running, smelling, seeing ghosts, digging, and jumping?

This, only dungeons and a main town smaller than fucking clock town from MM, of and that cocktease hyrule hidden under water

sidequel

Breath of the Wild is a solid 7/10.

i dropped breath of the wild as soon as i saw weapons broke
is there any way around that mechanic?

Attached: uq8l0affnxq11.png (2848x1458, 1.78M)