[besson3c]

For some reason while I'm not a gamer at all, I'm a big Legend of Zelda nut. Perhaps some of this comes from fond memories of Ocarina of Time as a younger kid (I put the series aside for many years), but I've been trying to figure out what it is about this game series that compels me, compels anybody, and how Nintendo has managed to milk the some characters and evolving formula for 25 years with success.

I'm wondering if you can help me better understand how Zelda fits in with the larger world of gaming historically and in general, and if you have any insight as to what games this series work?

Let's start with my analysis, let me know what you think (leaving out the horrible CDi games)..

The Legend of Zelda, Adventures of Link, A Link to the Past:

These games back in the early days of Nintendo seemed to be more about hand-eye coordination than anything. They had some puzzles, but were more for gamers with the patience to practice getting through levels. I would imagine these games came about before the so called casual gamer, as these games were often frustrating in difficulty.

Links Awakening, Oracle games, Minish Cap

These games, especially the Oracle games made the transition to being more about puzzles. I guess the hand-eye coordination stuff didn't translate to such small devices for long periods of gameplay?

Ocarina of Time, Majora's Mask

This is where my gaming history is lacking. I'm assuming that back in the days of the early Gameboys and Nintendo/Super Nintendo that Nintendo was pretty much king, and this was well before the days of the Sony Playstation or the XBox. When the Nintendo 64 came out I think the Playstation was also out, but Nintendo was still a reasonably popular gaming device? Was the Playstation bigger?

At any rate, I could be wrong with my history here, but as I understand it Ocarina of Time was one of the most historically important game releases of all time. It made the transition to being about puzzles and exploration in a 3D environment. The items that you got, for example the Hook Shot, made good use of the 3D environment. Games like Wolfenstein, Descent, Marathon, etc. were also 3D, but didn't seem to do more than offer the 3D perspective in terms of actual gameplay, they were basically just scrolling type games.

Wind Waker, Twilight Princess

These games were basically an evolution of Ocarina of Time/Majora's Mask... No major formulaic changes, just better graphics, and in the case of Twilight Princess crappy early attempts at motion controls

Four Swords games

An attempt to make four player games, mostly pretty lame

Phantom Hourglass, Spirit Tracks

Quasi 3D games that made use of the stylus. Kind of nifty marriage of the Zelda series and DS stylus stuff

Skyward Sword

What motion controls should have been all along, several tweaks to the Zelda formula including the motion controls, orchestra, different role of dungeons and the overworld, etc. I'm sure many of these changes will remain in the next Zelda game for the Wii U.


When people talk about this series people seem to like these games for different reasons. One I don't get is the story. The story lines in every video game I've seen are pretty lame and generic, sort of what you'd expect from your cookie cutter story or novel or something, or perhaps Hollywood movie. I guess it's nice to have a story that connects with the action, but the Zelda timeline and all of the story elements don't really do much for me. A lot of fans get wrapped up in timeline debates and stuff.

To me what I enjoy is the physicality of working in the 3D environment and the puzzles.

Is Zelda unique in this sense? Have other games tried to copy from these concepts? Am I just a naive gamer? What has made this series last for 25 years? I know some of you believe that the formula is old, and in many ways I'd agree with you (although I have a very high opinion of the changes Nintendo made in Skyward Sword), but still, it's pretty amazing that this franchise is still going and making money after 25 years.

[P]

An interesting discussion - let's see where it takes us.

LoZ and AL for the original NES came before the genres were really established. LoZ was (according to Miyamoto) based on his explorations in rural Japan as a child - the point was exploration and maybe finding something nifty. You had to try EVERYTHING - pushing blocks here and there, bombing every other wall, playing the flute, just pushing through the walls - and the combat was honestly quite lacking.

AoL was an experiment to make it more about Link's movement and a focused journey towards a goal. A big part was jumping and moving the shield, while the exploration was less of an element.

ALttP was really just a remake of LoZ. It added some things like new items, that whole "Golden land" bit and a story that was really told in the game, not just in the instruction booklet, but the gameplay was really a remake. The improved graphics let them add hints for when to bomb, etc, which reduced frustration, and they had quite a bit of in-game effects instead of cutscenes - things that point towards the future. LA was the experiment again, using some elements from AoL and LttP and adding music as a point, which OoT would expand on.

I never played the Oracle games or Minish Cap. The Oracle games were developed by Capcom, not by Nintendo itself, and don't really fit into the pattern.

OoT is really the pivotal game here. As you say, with the 8-bit NES and the Gameboy, Nintendo was king based on low-priced base systems and high quality games. With the 16-bit SNES, they were still king but with a much smaller margin towards Sega - small enough that Sega did outright win in some markets. Nintendo always held off refreshing, because it wanted a huge installed base for its games, and it was Sega that forced it to even move to 16-bit. Sony's entry really changed the game here.

Nintendo had focused on kids and selling lots of games to everyone, and it had achieved this with a very strict "Nintendo code" on game content. Sony challenged this by recognizing that Nintendo's gamers had grown up, and the older gamers could spend more on each game. By making a powerful console, selling it at a loss and recouping that on the licensed games, they could take the most profitable segment of gamers. Sony also made a big point of how 3D games were completely different, and wouldn't even allow 2D games on the PS1 until Capcom blackmailed them into accepting Mega Man X4.

Nintendo's response was the N64, supposedly more powerful than the PS1 (that may or may not have been true), but the question was how they would transition their treasured 2D games to 3D. OoT is the Zelda version of that. The point about the game is that not only did they transition Zelda to 3D, they did it while also making a more adult game. They could have just remade LttP in 3D, and that would have been great, but they did something more.

After that I haven't played much Zelda. MM to me was always the experiment to mirror AoL and LA. WW was a lighter game that built on OoT. It apparently did not sell well (partially due the Gamecube not selling well, of course). The two DS games that followed, Phantom Hourglass and Spirit Tracks, were also quite light and childish, but I enjoyed them. TP then was the true successor to OoT - apparently very well received - and Skyward Sword was the game that had the motion controls that TP should have.

Zelda games are always interesting, and at some point I should probably play at least MM and TP, but there are so many games, so little time...

[ibook_steve]

Well, I've played each and every Zelda game from start to finish (though still working on Skyward Sword).

I think Zelda is really important because it was the first "open world" game. You could go wherever you wanted (that didn't require an item to get there) and just explore. I recently went through Ocarina of Time on my 3DS because I had never played the Master Quest. You can spend hours just running around, trying to find things to do and items to find. There's no timer (well, Majora's Mask kind of had a timer, but you could reset it) and no pressure. I like that.

Later open world games, like GTA, of course have expanded on the formula and changed the environment, but Zelda revolutionized this. And doing it in 3D for the first time in OoT? Awesome. There's a reason why it is usually listed as one of the best console games ever.

I also just started going through Minish Cap again (available to 3DS "ambassadors" as a consolation for being an early adopter and paying an extra $80!). Yes, the Capcom games are a bit more puzzly, but they are a ton of fun. You can still explore as much as you want.

I guess if I had to really put my finger on the appeal of Zelda, it would have to be the revolutionary idea of open world exploration.

Steve

[ibook_steve]

I think this article also sums it up rather nicely:

What Zelda Is

Steve

[sek929]

I'll preface my post with the games I've played.

LoZ, LttP, OoT, WW, and TP.

Starting with LoZ we have a very old-school Nintendo game. Nothing is handed to you, nothing is jumping out at you screaming "GO HERE" It's a hard game, and a very time-consuming game, but for its time a completely revolutionary open-world experience. The first game I can remember that used the formula of denying access to certain areas until resources or items were found allowing you to complete a requirement for that new area. However the game was pretty damn annoying at times, and did not lend itself well to the casual crowd.

Link to the Past is among my top 5 favorite games of all time, and even compared to games of today I can find very little to say negative about it. The graphics and art direction are fantastic, the music is iconic, the dungeons are amazing and complex without being impossible (cept maybe the Ice Dungeon) and you are allowed near total freedom in what you feel like doing. I completely disagree that LttP is just a copy of LoZ. LoZ was a very rough template and LttP is the polished final product realized to its full potential. Just the ability to use the magic mirror in the dark world to access otherwise inaccessible areas in the light world had dozens of implementations. The difficulty curve ramps up in perfect harmony with your increasing abilities and each new boss battle tests a different aspect of Link's arsenal. I consider SNES to be the golden era of Nintendo, when they led the pack in technology and games, and LttP is a fine example of what a perfect, or near perfect, game looks like.

Ocarina of Time added more RPG elements to the table, fleshing out characters within the world instead of just the world itself. Now talking to people was just as important as smashing their pots for rupees. Still used the dark world/light world combo but it still felt fresh, there was nothing quite as jarring in the old games as once you get the master sword and jump to the future where a bustling town centre is now full of horrifying zombies lurching about. The usual item fare was pretty much exactly the same as before, sans the Ocarina and songs that allowed for different solutions to certain problems, but more or less it's get the hookshot, beat the boss that has a weakness to hookshots. Highpoint of the game for me is the desert temple, where you use mirrors to direct light around the dungeon. Getting the horse or the biggoron sword damn near required a FAQ, and I wish they didn't make such awesome items so incredibly obscure to get. Still another one of the finest games ever made, and it appears plenty of people share that sentiment.

Wind Waker is a game I barely played, not because I disliked it, but because I was a young swinging bachelor by then and didn't play big involved single-player games. To me it bared little resemblance to the Zelda games before it, but for what it's worth, I felt alienated from it because of the lack of the Hyrule I knew and loved. The art direction was however fantastic, and from the first time an enemy burst into a pile of purple/black cell shaded smoke I was very impressed. Between this and Majora's Mask (which i was instantly turned off from due to the inclusion of a timer, something I think is completely un-Zelda) I feel like I am missing a decent hunk of Zelda cred, and I would love to go back and play them proper one of these days, but that'll probably never happen. I'd most likely play MM first anyways.

Twilight Princess is the only game I can say felt like a complete re-hash. It was Ocarina 2.0, and shared not only the same driving action, but the same villans, the same areas, and the same items save for a couple. I got very far in the game, around 60 hours in, but never finished because really, what was I going to miss, Ganon for the 4th time? I definitely enjoyed it, no question there, but I never felt enthralled by it in the way Ocarina or Link to the Past sucked me in. The more I played it the more I felt myself gazing into my closet, yearning to play the classics again and forget this newest version.

I bought my older sister Skyward Sword, and for what it's worth she loves it. We both played the original on a rented NES many moons ago, and both played through LttP extensively. Who knows, maybe in a few years when Wiis are like 40 bucks I'll pick up a copy and the system just to play it, that's what I did with Twilight Princess when I saw GameCubes going for 20 bucks and I think it was worth it. I'll leave my comments about motion controls out, since we've already gone down that rabbit hole, but when I deride Nintendo just remember how many Nintendo games occupy my list of best games ever.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by sek929 

Link to the Past is among my top 5 favorite games of all time, and even compared to games of today I can find very little to say negative about it. The graphics and art direction are fantastic, the music is iconic, the dungeons are amazing and complex without being impossible (cept maybe the Ice Dungeon) and you are allowed near total freedom in what you feel like doing. I completely disagree that LttP is just a copy of LoZ. LoZ was a very rough template and LttP is the polished final product realized to its full potential. Just the ability to use the magic mirror in the dark world to access otherwise inaccessible areas in the light world had dozens of implementations. The difficulty curve ramps up in perfect harmony with your increasing abilities and each new boss battle tests a different aspect of Link's arsenal. I consider SNES to be the golden era of Nintendo, when they led the pack in technology and games, and LttP is a fine example of what a perfect, or near perfect, game looks like.

Funny you'd say this, because I'm not a fan of the game. I'm not into being challenged with hand/eye coordination challenges, I much prefer puzzles. This game is still too "gotta practice over and over and over and over again so that I can get to the end with enough hearts so that I can start practicing on the boss" for me.

Ocarina of Time added more RPG elements to the table, fleshing out characters within the world instead of just the world itself. Now talking to people was just as important as smashing their pots for rupees. Still used the dark world/light world combo but it still felt fresh, there was nothing quite as jarring in the old games as once you get the master sword and jump to the future where a bustling town centre is now full of horrifying zombies lurching about. The usual item fare was pretty much exactly the same as before, sans the Ocarina and songs that allowed for different solutions to certain problems, but more or less it's get the hookshot, beat the boss that has a weakness to hookshots. Highpoint of the game for me is the desert temple, where you use mirrors to direct light around the dungeon. Getting the horse or the biggoron sword damn near required a FAQ, and I wish they didn't make such awesome items so incredibly obscure to get. Still another one of the finest games ever made, and it appears plenty of people share that sentiment.

Yeah, that trading series was one of the most complex in the entire series!

Wind Waker is a game I barely played, not because I disliked it, but because I was a young swinging bachelor by then and didn't play big involved single-player games. To me it bared little resemblance to the Zelda games before it, but for what it's worth, I felt alienated from it because of the lack of the Hyrule I knew and loved. The art direction was however fantastic, and from the first time an enemy burst into a pile of purple/black cell shaded smoke I was very impressed. Between this and Majora's Mask (which i was instantly turned off from due to the inclusion of a timer, something I think is completely un-Zelda) I feel like I am missing a decent hunk of Zelda cred, and I would love to go back and play them proper one of these days, but that'll probably never happen. I'd most likely play MM first anyways.

This is interesting, because MM is revered as one of the best Zelda geek games, maybe because of the challenges and rewards of obtaining all of the masks. Some people cite the three day cycle as a good thing, but I'm not so crazy about it either. It is tolerable once you learn the song to slow the time to half time though, that gives you plenty of time to do stuff. I like the weirdness and darkness of the game though, and there are some great dungeons and things to do. This is definitely a fun game...

Some Zelda geeks have been working on HD textures to replace the textures in Ocarina of Time with more Wind Waker like textures, with interesting results.

Twilight Princess is the only game I can say felt like a complete re-hash. It was Ocarina 2.0, and shared not only the same driving action, but the same villans, the same areas, and the same items save for a couple. I got very far in the game, around 60 hours in, but never finished because really, what was I going to miss, Ganon for the 4th time? I definitely enjoyed it, no question there, but I never felt enthralled by it in the way Ocarina or Link to the Past sucked me in. The more I played it the more I felt myself gazing into my closet, yearning to play the classics again and forget this newest version.

I bought my older sister Skyward Sword, and for what it's worth she loves it. We both played the original on a rented NES many moons ago, and both played through LttP extensively. Who knows, maybe in a few years when Wiis are like 40 bucks I'll pick up a copy and the system just to play it, that's what I did with Twilight Princess when I saw GameCubes going for 20 bucks and I think it was worth it. I'll leave my comments about motion controls out, since we've already gone down that rabbit hole, but when I deride Nintendo just remember how many Nintendo games occupy my list of best games ever.

In case you missed my saying this, you can play Wii games using the Dolphin emulator if you have a fast enough computer, don't mind downloading/pirating/burning/buying Wii discs, and can shell out the $30 or whatever for controller plus add-on Wiimote Plus adapter. You can emulate the Nintendo 64 just fine too, and it doesn't require a fast machine at all. You'll just need a USB adapter for the N64 controller.

Thanks for your comments, they were interesting!

Maybe we should do another thread like this for Mario or Final Fantasy some other 293482093 year franchise so we can analyze why it has lasted? You didn't offer any theories about the longevity of the series, but it is still interesting to hear what appeals or doesn't appeal. In a way this addresses that question

[besson3c]

Speaking of emulation, I must admit that I finished LttP via my emulator and making liberal use of save states. I found the game much more enjoyable that way rather than having to redo stuff 2398402934809 times.

[sek929]

I already have a working N64, I don't think they broke anyways, so getting Majora's Mask up and running won't be a problem. Doubt my iMac has the juice to run Dolphin, plus I like playing console games on the proper hardware, I'm a purist like that! I can easily get WW for my GameCube so that only leaves SS once the Wii prices bottom out. Hell, I can probably borrow the Wii from my buddy now that he uses mostly his 360 anyways.

Don't see what made LttP so difficult, I didn't find it very demanding as far as hand-eye coordination and such, but I've always had good reflexes so maybe that's the case. Like what was mentioned in ibook_steve's link, even dying in a dungeon and getting booted back to the entrance wasn't always the worst thing since great level design meant you were usually not very far away from the last place you were working on.

I think Zelda has staying power because it appeals to everyone in a very cartoony, innocent, and yet very serious engaging way. A timeless tale of good vs evil and the story of the creation of a hero from simple beginnings. Couple that with the fact it is one of Nintendo's flagship properties and you can always count on the game being fun to play, free of bugs, and made by people who truly love the series and want to see it continue and evolve. Zelda and Metroid are the only two franchises I miss from Nintendo at this point, Mario lost me a long time ago.

[besson3c]

I actually find that I prefer emulation as long as the emulation is decent. I like save states, I like the portability (I own a Macbook Pro), and I like the enhancements where available.

[mentholiptus]

The music is fantastic.

[skyrim]

I am a fan of Zelda, and this article is just amazing. I do not have all consoles and cannot play them all.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by skyrim 

I am a fan of Zelda, and this article is just amazing. I do not have all consoles and cannot play them all.

Sure you can! They all play via emulators. The only one I don't have fast enough hardware for and therefore haven't played is Spirit Tracks.

[besson3c]

My favorite post from that so far:

I created an account just to respond to this. I consider myself a gamer, maybe not so hardcore anymore, depends on your definition (though I did beat Dark Souls ZOMG), but I would say I average about 2 to 3 hours a day on games. I enjoy a variety of games, from FPS to RPG, and own a 360 and 3DS.

Anyway, The very first Zelda I played was OoT (my first system was a SEGA Genesis, no NES or Gameboy), and it blew my 12 year old mind. The amount of content was staggering, it was for sure my first game logging over 40 hours into the main quest.

Now, getting into this business of how much easier modern games are and hold your hand, and spoon feed you and blah blah blah blah. Yes, it is true that OoT is not a particularly 'hard' game to beat. The game would try to keep pushing you forward in your quest, giving you hints and suggestions about where you should visit next. But to really master the game? It takes all of the skills you mentioned were necessary to beat the older handheld Zeldas. Revisiting areas and using newly acquired items to open hidden paths, finding magic bean planting sites, hunting down golden skulltulas and poes: none of these things are easy and require exploration and experimentation.

In later years my fondness for OoT led me to try out earlier games in the series, including the original LoZ and Link's Awakening. And I agree that these games took more patience and skill to beat than OoT. But you what? It didn't make them any better. I still used all the same skills that led me to master OoT: exploration and experimentation. Except I used them just to get past a certain point in the game instead of finding an extra heart container or a golden skulltula. You can argue that moving along further in your quest is more rewarding for you personally, but I like having to push myself to find all of these extras and hidden secrets.

So what Nintendo made the game a little more accessible to the mainstream gaming population by making the main quest a slight bit easier? All of the exploration and experimentation wasn't removed; it was just shifted. It spread the content. It gave people a choice; they could simply move on with their quest if exploration really wasn't their thing, or they weren't in the mood for it at the moment, or they could do all of the exploring they wanted and more likely than not find a reward for their efforts.

I just don't get it. I enjoy having options in my games, where I know i can move on with my quest (and return later, of course) without scouring through the environment if I'm not feeling like it that moment. I guess how I can see 'dumbing down' Zelda is a big turnoff for you, but it's not like they removed the content, and your post about the "good old days o' zelda" comes off as very closeminded to anything resembling a modern game. Stick with your gameboy and the original LoZ, I'm playing OoT on my 3DS and reliving one of the greatest gaming experiences around.

[tommelvin]

I'm impressed. You're truly well informed and very intelligent. You wrote something that people could understand and made the subject intriguing for everyone. I'm saving this for future use.

[besson3c]

Why thank you tommelvin! Welcome to MacNN, I hope you stay, you seem like a nice person with such great judgment and...


.. Oh you're not real

[Tyraell]

Thank you!

[knifecarrier2]

Originally Posted by sek929 

I'll preface my post with the games I've played.



Link to the Past is among my top 5 favorite games of all time, and even compared to games of today I can find very little to say negative about it. The graphics and art direction are fantastic, the music is iconic, the dungeons are amazing and complex without being impossible (cept maybe the Ice Dungeon) and you are allowed near total freedom in what you feel like doing. I completely disagree that LttP is just a copy of LoZ. LoZ was a very rough template and LttP is the polished final product realized to its full potential. Just the ability to use the magic mirror in the dark world to access otherwise inaccessible areas in the light world had dozens of implementations. The difficulty curve ramps up in perfect harmony with your increasing abilities and each new boss battle tests a different aspect of Link's arsenal. I consider SNES to be the golden era of Nintendo, when they led the pack in technology and games, and LttP is a fine example of what a perfect, or near perfect, game looks like..

Same. I played both nintendo versions, got frustrated rather quickly (it was super easy to die, no real direction), but LTTP was something entirely different. It was an open world, with characters you could interact with, puzzles abound, and most importatntly, great to talk about/share secrets with. My friend Ben and I ATTACKED that game a whole summer once, and we got about 90% of the way through it. I never finished it, until just about 2 years ago. How satisfying.

After this game... I felt that the N64 version sucked. I had some friends that played it, but honestly what really pissed me off was the art direction. In LTTP, the charcters were limited via very small sprites. In OoT, Link was turned into a 3d (no offense here) faggy looking kid. He had stupid ass anime hair, stupid ass giant eyes, and he looked like a complete bitch. I know the gameplay is probably great, but the fact that everything just looks like some stupid japanese toy just turned me off from the whole series. I liked Zelda, but I wanted it to grow up with me, not stay some kids bullshit happy kiddy time with giant stupid anime eyes. You know what Christopher Nolan did with batman? That's what I wanted from Zelda.

[P]

Originally Posted by knifecarrier2 

I liked Zelda, but I wanted it to grow up with me, not stay some kids bullshit happy kiddy time with giant stupid anime eyes. You know what Christopher Nolan did with batman? That's what I wanted from Zelda.

Sounds like you'd like Twilight Princess. Also the second half of Ocarina of Time (adult Link) is a lot darker, not sure if you ever got that far. That's one of the things I liked about Ocarina of Time - that it started with a happy little walk in the woods with some cartoonish monsters to defeat and then switched to a much darker world rather unexpectedly.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by knifecarrier2 

Same. I played both nintendo versions, got frustrated rather quickly (it was super easy to die, no real direction), but LTTP was something entirely different. It was an open world, with characters you could interact with, puzzles abound, and most importatntly, great to talk about/share secrets with. My friend Ben and I ATTACKED that game a whole summer once, and we got about 90% of the way through it. I never finished it, until just about 2 years ago. How satisfying.
After this game... I felt that the N64 version sucked. I had some friends that played it, but honestly what really pissed me off was the art direction. In LTTP, the charcters were limited via very small sprites. In OoT, Link was turned into a 3d (no offense here) faggy looking kid. He had stupid ass anime hair, stupid ass giant eyes, and he looked like a complete bitch. I know the gameplay is probably great, but the fact that everything just looks like some stupid japanese toy just turned me off from the whole series. I liked Zelda, but I wanted it to grow up with me, not stay some kids bullshit happy kiddy time with giant stupid anime eyes. You know what Christopher Nolan did with batman? That's what I wanted from Zelda.

I feel like the 3D game art style has been a constant experiment and in a state of flux until Skyward Sword. SS wasn't a perfect game, but I think the art style pretty much is the best of all worlds:






I don't really understand this whole masculinity angle though. Link has always been a pre-teen or teenager, although I guess this was ambiguous in a LTTP. I don't really get into the stories though, so it doesn't much matter to me how Link looks or what age he is.

[P]

In the older games, Link is indeed a kid as described by the manual, but it is certainly not apparent from the games.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by P 

In the older games, Link is indeed a kid as described by the manual, but it is certainly not apparent from the games.

I like the kid like aspect of the games, it has sort of a fantastical whimsy to it. Nintendo strayed from this with Twilight Princess in trying to make the environment more Skyrim like, only it didn't have the console hardware to come anywhere close to pulling that off.

What Rob probably didn't like the most was the cell shaded art styles from Wind Waker, Phantom Hourglass, and Spirit Tracks. This certainly had a kiddy quality to it the way that the characters were expressive, but I think what they probably were striving towards originally was a comic book-like quality.

Majora's Mask was interesting in that it might have been the darkest game in being the most demented in a Tim Burton sort of way, but with a similar art style to Ocarina of Time. I liked what they did with both MM, OoT, and like I said, Skyward Sword. Wind Waker, despite being a pretty old game, still looks surprisingly beautiful even by today's standards. It Rob wants Chris Nolan Batman, I don't know how Nintendo could have pulled that off while making the game beautiful, and it seems a little counter intuitive to release a new game that looks worse than Wind Waker.

[knifecarrier2]

Well.. i just started playing skyrim a few weeks ago, and I'll be damned if I am not CONSTANTLY yearning for the zelda theme song to start playing whenever I leave a dungeon/interior/house/shop and go back into the wilderness. It would be awesome!!!!!!!!!!!

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by knifecarrier2 

Well.. i just started playing skyrim a few weeks ago, and I'll be damned if I am not CONSTANTLY yearning for the zelda theme song to start playing whenever I leave a dungeon/interior/house/shop and go back into the wilderness. It would be awesome!!!!!!!!!!!

You mean the classic old school original Zelda 1 theme song?