I've been thinking about this for a while but I've eventually come to a dead end...
We all know that one of the most general and widely known criticisms for Twilight Princess is that it tried too hard to be OoT. Somehow the completely different landscape, entirely new dungeons, characters, items, story, gameplay gimmicks, music, art-style and bosses were thought to be ripped directly from the untouched potential of OoT had it been made about ten years later prior to its original release...
This is a criticism of TP... So why is it that few other Zelda games are criticised as such when the notion is still true, if not truer, for other games?
For example, the Oracle games weren't made as direct sequels to Link's Awakening yet they play and look almost exactly the same yet they aren't criticised as being more of a clone than TP ever was...
Conversely, the very first thing that strikes you about playing Minish Cap, for those of us who have played A Link to the Past prior to having played MC, is how very similar to ALttP MC actually is. i spent the first hour or so of MC saying to myself "wow i remember this layout in ALttP", which is something i never did with TP where OoT was concerned.
While Wind Waker and Phantom Hourglass have the excuse of being on two very different consoles as well as being direct sequels to each other, there is no great Excuse for PH and ST which are the main offenders here, yet still they aren't criticised as being clones when the play almost exactly the same. Like TP, ST had a different story, gameplay gimmicks (to a degree), new characters, items and locations (despite the plot of the game being a carbon copy of PH with having to return to a hub temple), yet it is still TP which is criticised for its likenesses to OoT so much so that the notion has become a negative staple of the game as far as fanbase is concerned, when in my eyes, TP is one of the few Zelda games to set itself apart from what had come before...
So, with the backdrop in place- the question is:
How much of a varying degree must a Zelda game have for you as a Zelda fan to not consider it a copy, clone or opportunistic game that feeds off previous titles?
We all know that one of the most general and widely known criticisms for Twilight Princess is that it tried too hard to be OoT. Somehow the completely different landscape, entirely new dungeons, characters, items, story, gameplay gimmicks, music, art-style and bosses were thought to be ripped directly from the untouched potential of OoT had it been made about ten years later prior to its original release...
This is a criticism of TP... So why is it that few other Zelda games are criticised as such when the notion is still true, if not truer, for other games?
For example, the Oracle games weren't made as direct sequels to Link's Awakening yet they play and look almost exactly the same yet they aren't criticised as being more of a clone than TP ever was...
Conversely, the very first thing that strikes you about playing Minish Cap, for those of us who have played A Link to the Past prior to having played MC, is how very similar to ALttP MC actually is. i spent the first hour or so of MC saying to myself "wow i remember this layout in ALttP", which is something i never did with TP where OoT was concerned.
While Wind Waker and Phantom Hourglass have the excuse of being on two very different consoles as well as being direct sequels to each other, there is no great Excuse for PH and ST which are the main offenders here, yet still they aren't criticised as being clones when the play almost exactly the same. Like TP, ST had a different story, gameplay gimmicks (to a degree), new characters, items and locations (despite the plot of the game being a carbon copy of PH with having to return to a hub temple), yet it is still TP which is criticised for its likenesses to OoT so much so that the notion has become a negative staple of the game as far as fanbase is concerned, when in my eyes, TP is one of the few Zelda games to set itself apart from what had come before...
So, with the backdrop in place- the question is:
How much of a varying degree must a Zelda game have for you as a Zelda fan to not consider it a copy, clone or opportunistic game that feeds off previous titles?
Last edited: