what do i expect? well, if the overworld is as huge as skyrim's(which seems to me incredibly unlikely), then the graphics are going to suck, which is probably something nintendo doesnt want on their newest, most innovative home console

A better item system then Skyward Sword, didn't like it very much.
All it did was create unneeded farming of items.

With crafting and item systems there will always be farming, but I would like my games to either go all the way with a complex crafting system or not to have it at all.
Not something in the middle that is going to be kind of annoying.

So people should be forced to use motion controls, and therefor also be forced to buy more hardware/accessories, to be able to play a game? Just because you like it? Just because some people enjoy wiggling their arms around while playing doesn't mean that EVERYBODY does. Contrary to what you might think, the Wii U supporting motion controls and being backwards-compatible with Wii controllers is not the selling point of the system for a lot of people.

Nobody is forcing anyone to play the games. If you don't like the way games like Skyward Sword or Phantom Hourglass are made vote with your wallets and don't buy them. And contrary to what the "conventional wisdom" of gamer forum outrage suggests the controls in those games were not broken. If the controls were broken they wouldn't have gotten the scores they did and even mass praise about how well it worked from many reviewers.

I mean... when you get this from reviewers who are pretty strong non-fans of motion controls: http://www.abc.net.au/tv/goodgame/stories/s3379480.htm

......... I think they probably got it right with Skyward Sword and it's not just my "Nintendo fan" blindness or something. Anyone saying that Skyward Sword's controls sucked either has a broken memory or simply didn't play it and has NFI what they're talking about.

Tingle, Tingle and more Tingle.

I never said they were broken, I just don't like them. Along with tons of other people. And to say "just don't buy the game" is not exactly a fair argument. Why should fans have to miss out on a major series release because we prefer a classic controller based game as opposed to requiring open space and a controller that doesn't even come with the system?

I'd rather they stuck with SS type controls moving back to buttons would feel well like a backward step basically.

If Nintendo wants to make me happy, all they need to do is make Twilight Princess with a world as large as Xenoblade Chronicles and a ton of sidequests. And for a change, allow me to play the game (from where I left off) after I beat Ganondorf. I kind of want to explore Hyrule after I've stopped the threat of Ganon and see how I impacted everyone's lives.

Briiliant HD graphics.
Interesting story.
New items.
Great implementation of the GamePad.

You are quoting there the two same 'critics' that managed to think Lollipop Chainsaw was a sexist game. They went in and in about it. They're clearly not qualified to analyse games.

You could have made a much, much better argument by posting the Edge review.

I'm not saying that Skyward Sword controlled badly, because clearly it controlled well. It's just that to me Nintendo is so desperate to use the Zelda games to show off the 'innovation' of the hardware that it ends up feeling really gimmicky. I was not a fan as a result.

As good as SS's motion controls were, i'd like to have normal pad controls back. I just want to relax completely when playing a large adventure game, so having to move my hands all the time feels more like a burden to me than anything else. It's the main reason why i haven't gone back to play Skyward Sword (or Metroid Prime 3).

The controller came with the game. Usually I would argue how brilliant the controls are in SS but I understand it's not for everyone. I personally didn't like the stylus controls in Phantom Hourglass and Spirit Tracks (loved KI:U but you move Pit with the Circle Pad and aim with the stylus) so I guess I can understand that some people do not want to adapt to an unconventional control method. I will add though that I thought the motion controls added to the immersion for me but I'm happy for them to do something innovative with the Gamepad for the next Zelda (I think the Gyro in the Gamepad would be good for controlling the beetle though).

^thank you for being open-minded. My point isn't that motion controls suck, just that some consumers don't like them. And nobody should ever be FORCED to use them. Now, games like Wii Sports or Nintendo Land, it's understandable. Those games are made for people who WANT that experience. But a major, popular title (such as Zelda, for example) should NEVER make a player have adapt and accept it. Hell make it optional, but not required. Is it so crazy to think that some people just enjoy sitting down and being still, RELAXING while playing games?

I don't understand how people can think that the controls in SS were bad at all. They were the best controls out of any game to date. Why do you all want the gamepad to be used? It really would be a step backwards to go with the gamepad because all it would do is let you control the equivalent to the beetle with motion, put the entire item menu on the bottom screen, and occasionally let you aim by moving the pad. So, basically exactly what OoT3D did. It's already been done, it doesn't need to be done again just to show off the Wii U.

Also, the DS games weren't bad. I loved controlling the items and sword with the stylus, I just would have liked the option to move with the D Pad because it felt too much like Diablo for me...

@BXXL
Go play Metroid... Having light-hearted over-world with small mini-games and harmless places to explore being separated from dungeons with dangerous enemies and difficult puzzles and giant bosses is what Zelda does. Making everything one big dungeon is what Metroid does, and on the bonus side you'd get an entirely new set of items and controls!

I want Nintendo to make it outstanding in the visual and audio department, which Zelda games always excel at, but I really want them to take advantage of the Wii U's power.

I'd like to see a return to the large open world, with a Twilight Princess style. Of course it needs a good story with good characters as well.

So much potential.

@ Hdvisor

Zelda was always nintendos franchise where they experimented the most. Considering zelda u never knew how the next game would look like or even feel like. Every next iteration brought something new to the table. So saying to just want to relax while playing zelda is like saying that "hey im a beginner and have no idea whats the whole zelda franchise is all about in the first place" .
Zelda was always dynamic. Like the incredible stories in final fantasy games were. I guess nobody is complaining "man why does the new final fantasy have a whole new cast AND new story". Whine whine ....
First zelda was a bird view game, so you had nice overview and planning. Suddenly zelda shaped to an action game in 2d look much like metroid, but with some rpgish elements. Then u get a small island on a tiny screen, but wow its on the go! Etc etc jada jada dont need to recapture zeldas 25 years history ...

If u want always a predicable and same formula stay at CoD , WoW or Fifa ( whatever ). Both designs got pros and cons. Like CS u just feel at home and can start dishing out headshots.
But then just stay far away from experimental friendly zelda.

And no i wasnt happy with every zelda game. For example i didnt like spirit track and wind waker. But its great that they experiment and i for sure knew that different and still fun zelda games will come in the future. Step out of the tunnel into the light

Exactly how does point of view and story telling related to multiple control methods and the required use/purchase of controllers. Also, Zelda being as "experimental" as it has been, I never didn't feel "relaxed" just because of a view change upon battle. Lets compare oranges to oranges, not apples or potatoes.
And "Go play CoD ..."? WTF is that about? If a game doesn't implement motion controls its automatically a run of the mill FPS? Or are you just assuming that's the kind of experience I'm looking for? Silly you. Skyrim has no motion controls yet isn't predictable, not does it play like a FPS. Its obvious you have a romantic interest in motion controls, which is fine. But that doesn't mean anybody who doesn't share your opinion is wrong, or doesn't understand your precious Zelda franchise.

Why should the developer after designing a game based on motion controls be FORCED to have a RELAXING gameplay option? That makes zero sense. If you don't like how the game plays then don't buy it.

While it's a possibility, I think that'd be unlikely - as a flagship series for Nintendo, they'll want it to take full advantage of the Wii U (i.e. use the gamepad).

What's wrong with it being optional? So that everybody wins?