Topic: Does Nintendo need a new iconic character?

@Adam....it looks like we have very similar views on this subject. While I love a new Mario, Zelda, etc game everytime they come out I do wonder how long before we get something new again. Drilldozer was made and then just left to dust. Pikimin is great but this will be 3. I really would like to see a new game with all new characters. OR maybe even a new face in an existing game. Maybe a Mario game played as Peach or something I dont know. Thats why Im a gamer not a dev lol

Yea, I agree. Super Princess Peach accomplished that, though it didn't look too fun to me.

I have little hope for the next Zelda after Miyamoto's baffling comment that it will be very similar to Twilight Princess. Why they don't introduce Zelda as a playable character is beyond me. They just don't know what to do with the series.

It's like how Metal Gear Solid is dropping Snake in favor of Raiden. It allows the company to rely on the same successful brand name while branching out in terms of game play, character, and story.

Is Professor Layton not a Nintendo IP? That's relatively new...

@Adam: I played it. It was pretty fun. Even had an epic final boss fight with a giant Bowser.

@ Outrunner
Isn't that some sort of puzzle game? I don't own a DS at the moment. I believe Slapshot and I are talking about adventure games and such that really focus on character, setting, and/or plot. Action games or RPGs. I'm really out of touch with what Nintendo is doing on DS, but between N64, Gamecube, and Wii, the only new character-based 1st party game I can think of is Pikmin, which is embarrassing if true.

@ Twilight V
Is that so? I've only watched someone play, and the levels themselves seemed really empty of enemies and other hazards. I'll have to look that up. Poor Bowser, he only wants to be loved.

Of course, they still need to make another game featuring Perry so we can learn more about him... >:3

Layton is a puzzle adventure with focus on story and characters. And with a new trilogy announced (and a translation of the last two of the final trilogy), I guess we will see a lot of him in the future.

From what I could tell, it's more focused on how many animals you can put on a raft than character or story. Yawn. From what I've seen of it, doesn't look interesting at all, but I'm quite aware of how much people like it. Not my kind of game though, from the looks of it.

There are a lot of puzzles (not strange for a puzzle adventure), but it have a big story full of characters. Enough to fill six games with.

@Adam: I don't believe Miyamoto said the new wii zelda game is going to be very similar to Twilight Princess, he said that the new Wii Zelda will not be a radically different zelda game.

Couple that statement with his saying it will look much like Twilight Princess and I fail to see what your point is. If it looks like a duck and plays like a duck, it's probably a duck.

I hope to be surprised, but I'm expecting a sequel like Spirit Tracks or Galaxy 2 where it's very similar to the predecessor except with new levels and a few new twists, but nothing majorly different.

He said it will look like Twilight Princess, but that doesn't mean it will play like Twilight Princess. Look at MM, it is one of the most unique zelda games, nothing like Twilight Princess. Yet it is still a zelda game and not radically different.

Just because the new zelda will look like TP doesn't mean it's going to be all the same. All he said it wasn't radically different, which is good thing in my opinion. I loved the way TP looked, and I'm glad they are doing the same thing again. If it was radically different then it wouldn't feel like zelda to me. All that could mean is they are using some same characters and same way of controlling link and saying "not too different." but what do I know, I'm sure whatever they bring will have plenty of new content that will satisfy most of us.

It is a time-based Zelda where you transform into other creatures using masks, not to mention the much darker story that completely lacks Ganon. How is that anything but radically different?

But MM is also very similar to its prequel OT in many ways also. So I'm sure this new zelda will take a lot from TP while still bringing in many new fresh ideas. It may not be as radical as MM was, but I'm sure it will be different. (I hope atleast)

Well, it still has the whole dungeon, overworld formula. It has all of the items we are used to in the zelda series. And as for transforming into creatures, you also do that in TP(albeit not as many). The darker story isn't really radical, and neither is lacking Ganon. There have been a host of zelda games now that have lacked Ganon. As for the time travel part. AlttP has switching between the light and dark worlds, and OoT switching between young link and adult link. Those along with the time-traveling of MM are unique to their respective games, but they are additions to the classic zelda formula, and at least IMO are not considered radical changes. It really depends on how what you consider to be radical or not.

Switching between worlds is not the same. This is the only Zelda where you can run out of time, and it's also the only Zelda where you have a bunch of different transformations. Yes, Twilight Princess had a whopping single transformation, but even if it had ten, what's the point? It came after Majora, so it can't be called radically different for copying a previous game. The countdown and transformations were huge changes for Zelda and made it a very divisive game among fans.

While I do consider MM different, I still don't see it as radically different(as a whole). It does have some aspects which could be considered radically different, such as the masks. But it still has the dungeon/overworld formula and the many recurring items and species that still make it feel like zelda. Heck, I could make an argument saying that WW is radically different because of the graphics and the boat. But ultimately if it still has the classic zelda formula and feel then it is not radically different.

Graphics don't make a game radically different. There's no argument there; it'd just look radically different, at the most. And a boat is just a means of transportation. Not really that interesting.

Saying that it still has the dungeon / overworld formula says little. Tons of games have that "formula." That is the barest minimum for a Zelda game.

Considering how very little the series has changed, almost anything different is radical. There has been no game in the main series more divergent than Majora's Mask except for Zelda II. So if that's not radically different -- in Zelda terms -- the term isn't very meaningful to the series.

Like I said a couple posts up it just depends on how you translate "radical." MM still feels like a zelda game, so therefore I don't classify it as radical. And looking radically different can still be considered radically different. As for the boat, it can still be considered a radical change considering there have only been horses before WW.
"And a boat is just a means of transportation. Not really that interesting." And the time limit is just a game mechanic that delays you from wanting to take your time on dungeons and exploration.