I'm gonna do a quick Top 10 before I hit the hay. Sorry for no pictures, but maybe I'll edit tomorrow!

Feel free to add more or argue with some of my examples!

URL to share (right click and copy)

Yeah. The additions to the controllers are so minor. It makes me think of how bibliographies have to change every year. They just change how the "Works Cited" should be formatted so that you have to buy the edition of their latest book.

How is Classic Controller support on the Wii? I know it can work with the VC, but what about other games? That's another controller that's probably really similar to the Pro Controller (minus clicky sticks), but I'm sure it doesn't work for as many games.

i don't mind number 9 in general. I'm no fan of remakes, but I'm perfectly fine with sequels if the games are consistently good. A good game is a good game is a good game, so I don't care if it's a new IP or the oldest IP still in existence.

Number 8 doesn't bother me either, I like having options. I can see how it can get a little confusing and/or cluttered for some people, though.

Number 5 doesn't affect me since I always turn off voice chat no matter what is being said.

I'm fine with number 3 in theory, but I agree that there are plenty of games which didn't do the concept right. I like unlocking stuff, but there should be a better balance in some of these games so that good stuff can still be used early on. Goldeneye Wii's Proximity Mines being locked until level 55 is the most ridiculous example I can think of, as this means the 55-56 people can basically get free kills and there isn't much you can do about it (you can see and shoot the mines, but they're small and you don't always notice them).

Number 2 is stupid but didn't really affect me since I didn't buy much digital stuff. Number 1 is funny.

The rest, I agree with, and have nothing to add.

@GameDadGrant A few of these apply to handhelds, and then handhelds introduce their own set of problems, but I'll not get into that here.

DeputyVanHalen said:

That's exactly how I am with the 3DS and Vita. I rarely get a chance to play outside of home and when I am home, I want to play on my 55 inch tv, not a 4 or 5 inch screen.

Yeah, that's cool. (not being sarcastic or flippant, just to be clear! )

@Mop it up

Ha ha, yeah. Don't take my post too seriously!

@PogueSquadron
Do you mean Wii U? I think the old Classic still has decent support. Clicky sticks are stupid, anyway.

The big problem with Wii U is N64 VC stuff in Wii mode. Wii U versions would fix some of those problems, but they haven't even announced the N64 platform yet.

Anand said:

Regarding controllers, can you guys BELIEVE that current gen controllers won't be compatible with next gen consoles? Like, WTF. They're wireless.

That bothers me a lot, nevermind that neither of the other two console aren't even backwards compatible. If I could sell my PS3 to help pay for a PS4, I'd upgrade at or around launch.

Anand said:

Regarding controllers, can you guys BELIEVE that current gen controllers won't be compatible with next gen consoles? Like, WTF. They're wireless.

Yeah, but...I dunno. We've always had to buy new controllers for each console generation, so this isn't that big of a deal. It's no different than before.

Although...actually, you can use the Wiimote with Wii U, right? So hey. There's that.

An ever increasing reliance on cinematics and set pieces rather than design and gameplay mechanics.

The biggest offender of this in my eyes is Drakes Uncharted. A decent 3rd person shooter, and a downright bad platformer. I still cannot believe how much praise this series gets.

The reverse of this is Skyward Sword. It's disappointing that it's story/presentation/structure were so conservative, especially after Nintendo told us that big changes were coming in this respect. But the level design and the outstanding use of Motion+ made this one of the games of the generation for me. The fact that it went largely ignored by the gaming press is just further confirmation that great design really isn't as appreciated in the industry as it should.

The game that bridged the gap perfectly is Portal 2. A near perfect modern game.

@achhibbar
I think Skyward Sword did as much as it could with story/presentation, considering it was a Wii game, and the motion controls needed to be the focus, and they nailed it. I remember being surprised at how much story was presented, and the love story between Link and Zelda was well done. The characters were more likeable and more developed than in Twilight Princess (bar Midna). One could argue that it needed more cutscenes and voice acting, but that's not exactly what I'm looking for in a Zelda game. It will be interesting to see how the development of Zelda U plays out.

I surely think an over reliance on cinematics and set pieces can be frustrating....but I feel like Nintendo games could use some of them.

My favorite part of every NSMB game is the final boss with Bowser. It's always so fun, and dare I say, "epic." Honestly, I think all of the bosses should take a nod from that. That Bowser fight should be the FIRST boss, and they should run with things from there. I think very few boss battles in Mario games have even come close to touching the ones in Yoshi's Island, and that came is almost 20 years old at this point.

Or look at the set pieces within DKCR. Things constantly happening in the background, and you feel like you're going to actual places instead of just jumping around tiles.

Skyward Sword's problem wasn't that the presentation was mediocre. The game had plenty of setpieces IMO. I thought the presentation was awesome. The problem with that game WAS its gameplay (I say this feeling that it was still an awesome game). The individual puzzles were great, yeah, but the world design was incredibly truncated and isolated. Nintendo as of late has had real trouble finding a balance between designing great gameplay and tying that gameplay together with a world that's fun to be in and explore.

After playing Xenoblade, I think I understand now why Nintendo was saying something about wanting to take influence from it. In many ways, it scratched the itch of what older Zelda games used to offer in spades.

@GameDadGrant
But... they're WIRELESS.

I mean, the PS4 has some (possibly useless) new stuff, but the 360 just changed the naming on a few buttons, right? Actually, both should be possible, because they're already bluetooth. It can just send different data.

@anon_mastermind
I agree, the story was certainly very charming.

@PogueSquadron
It's interesting you bring up Xenoblade for comparison. It certainly had sense of wonder and exploration that Zelda increasingly doesn't have, and with the huge number of side quests you could tailor the experience to your own liking. But the weakest aspect of the game was its design. The side quests were straightforward and largely tedious and boring.

I agree that Zelda needs to have more side-quests and a greater degree of freedom and exploration. But it needs to do it in a very Zelda like fashion that retains the series' tight design.

@GameDadGrant Nearly every PS2 game allowed the use of PS1 controllers, with the rare exceptions being those that tried to use the analogue buttons on the PS2 controller. This doesn't really change your point, but the Wii U isn't the first system to use controllers from its predecessor.

@achhibbar Oh yeah, absolutely - the sidequests in Xenoblade were terrible. I only did them when I felt I had to.

I don't even know if Zelda needs more 'side-quests' if we're talking about getting things for NPCs and things of that nature. I just think they need to lock the world down less. SS felt like....Okay, go to this area. Now you're done that area. Go to this area. Now you're done that area.

I felt that at the very least, Twilight Princess kind of had that illusion that you could go to different places off the bat. You could at least find some caves here and there to run through. Something about SS' approach to the overworld just felt like I was in giant rooms that needed to be 'puzzle solved.' I wouldn't mind if they took some influence from Xenoblade and encouraged us to look around every nook and cranny. I really wouldn't mind if the progression in the game was dictated more by story than by a primary goal. They started doing this a bit at the beginning of SS, but towards the end, it felt like the same ole same ole.

Edit: I've said it before but I'm an active supporter of the next Zelda having far, far less character interaction. Let's worry less about that stuff, and more about making the design of the world and its puzzles as unique and unpredictable as possible. The best part of SS for me was when you first hit the surface of Hyrule. It just felt so...untouched. It really reminded me of the first Zelda, where you're just running around some world that you feel that people haven't been too in a long time. THAT's what I really want to get back to in Zelda. No more of this "Oh hi, we live in this village even though there are monsters everywhere, all the time" stuff. Let's see a world that feels truly untouched and full of peril.

@Mop it up

The Dual Shock Playstation controllers, yes. Not the original Playstation controllers though. The ones without the analog sticks.

Your point still stands too, though.

@PogueSquadron
I agree that Zelda could do with more freedom and less linearity.

It used to be that the game had 2 basic modes. The dungeons which were highly structured, linear puzzles, and the overworld which was more organic and allowed the player to explore where he wanted and tackle whatever puzzles and tasks he saw fit. They provided a nice counter balance to each other.

In SS, there was no counterbalance. The overworld existed in name only, and was simply more of the dungeon style gameplay. There was little freedom to explore and little need to wonder - it was almost over-engineered, an overdose of tight, linear design.

The next Zelda needs to bring back that sense of wonder and freedom in the overworld. Give the player a little breathing room and allow them to experience the world on their own terms.