Quote Originally Posted by Nemy View Post
Not only did you not understand my point, you did so IN CAPS. Kind of emphasized the fail there.

My point was, if realism and believable movement was not factoring into the fun in video games, then why do games even bother to evolve in that department, from this :



to this

How did I miss your point? You posted a picture of a crappy Atari game when I mentioned realistic movements and how they shouldn't factor into your enjoyment of a game. I still don't understand how that should make a game not fun to you, which is why I gave an example afterward. That game is just bad, the animation has nothing to do with it.

And it's funny how you bring up Zelda into this. Notice how Zelda II: The Adventures of Link has "better graphics" than The Legend of Zelda, yet it's generally seen as the worse game? That's because it took a great departure from the original and people weren't a fan. It had NOTHING to do with the graphics/animations (which were both better in the sequel, in case you were wondering). The gameplay is the factor in those.

Ocarina of Time was the first 3D Zelda game, and at the time, it was incredible. Every 3D Zelda since then has followed the same formula, but changed some things to fit into it's story (like no horse in Wind Waker). In the many times I've played Wind Waker (my favorite), I can't recall a single time I just suddenly stopped having any fun at all, because of the way Link didn't react to something a certain way, or the way he moved. I was too busy having fun playing the game.