vanguard333

(I'm responding to the whole thing but cutting it so my reply isn't too long) I'm currently playing Valkyria Chronicles; I just finished chapter 11 (My reaction to it: "it is a sad day for rain", "But, it isn't raining." "(crying) Yes, it is raining."). Incidentally, I'm playing it after having played VC4. Low-manning definitely is a good idea most of the time; the only times where it isn't that I can think of are times where you want to leave units behind at the starting base, either because you need to defend it or, in the case of chapter 10 part 2, you can unlock a shortcut from the base to the next part of the map. 2 CP every time I want to use one of the tanks is really irritating and makes me miss that, in VC4, tanks only used 1 CP like every other unit. That said, the second tank is actually useful in this game as an armoured flamethrower that's a lot more powerful (and has greater range) than the shocktrooper flamethrowers. VC4 provides both a second tank and an armoured personnel carrier, and you will pretty much always want to pick the APC over the second tank. Scouts are definitely overpowered in this game because they just have such high movement, and this creates a problem because you want to clear the missions in few enough turns to get A rank for maximum rewards (including royal weapons), but you also get rewards for destroying the tanks and defeating the enemy leaders & aces, and the story missions are not replayable until you beat the game. There were one or two times early on where I felt like I had to choose between securing A rank and getting some of the rewards, though thankfully that was just one or two times. This next chapter, however, looks like it will be another one of those cases: two enemy aces (with one of them being a tank) and I can only get A rank if I clear the mission in one turn. I agree about the rest of the classes being better balanced. Personally, it isn't greater power that I wish lancers had; it's greater accuracy. Most units do have accuracy issues early in the game (even the snipers for some reason), but the lancers take it up to eleven. Your only options for destroying enemy tanks in one hit (shooting the radiator) is only really feasible either through shooting at almost point-blank range or saving just before then and retrying over and over again until you get it right. Not only that, but I'm on chapter 12 now, and the lancers are my only units that still have accuracy issues. And, unfortunately, this isn't something that VC4 fixed. I can't say anything about 2, but I can say that 4 is mostly a straight improvement over 1. Admittedly, in terms of gameplay, it seemed to more be about refining the formula than expanding on it, though there is still some expanding on the formula. As I mentioned, there's now an APC (though that might have been in some of the other games; I don't know), there's a new unit type called grenadier that basically uses portable mortars (and it is really useful, though enemy grenadiers are a serious pain), a ship becomes your base halfway through the game and that provides additional options beyond orders, there's now a "command" action where, once per turn, an infantry leader unit (someone who provides an extra command point when deployed) can order up to two nearby units to follow them, and there's a new type of unlockable side-missions called "Squad Stories", where up to three of the non-main-character members of the squad have their own little story and mission; it provides more missions and it also fleshes out the characters a lot more. As far as refinements go, there are a ton. Some big ones include snipers being more accurate from the start (and having intercept fire when they become elites), shocktroopers having improved movement that puts them somewhere between scouts and the other units, order-stacking no longer being nearly as overpowered, missions no longer requiring clearing in absurdly few turns to get A rank, story missions being replayable, tanks now just using 1 CP, etc. Even without getting nerfed, Scouts are no longer overpowered; it's now just one particular scout that's overpowered: Minerva Victor, and she's both a leader unit and one of the main characters, so odds are that you're going to use her a lot. What infamous sand chapter? If you're talking about chapter 7 (the one where the prince fights you using that giant tank and Selvaria eventually shows up), I actually quite liked that one as a sort-of "boss fight" chapter. I liked how there are only a small handful of enemy units other than the boss (thus keeping the focus on the boss), I liked that it's made clear to the player that Selvaria will show up but you don't know exactly where (I guessed completely wrong, though thankfully most of my units were already hiding, so when one or two of the ones that weren't hiding were defeated by her, I simply loaded an only-slightly-earlier save and moved them into hiding nearby, and I incidentally had my tank nearby, so I fired a mortar at the new enemy units and took out most of them, leaving the rest to be brought down by the tank's interception fire). I thought it was cool that you have to be systematic and employ hit-and-run (or rather hit-and-hide) by targeting the turrets on the tank with the lancers to destroy them, and then sending someone up the tank when the radiators are exposed to drop a grenade down the radiators (and I like how the fact that each radiator can be destroyed in one hit by dropping a grenade down them is hinted at by the radiators being shaped like bins), and then, once you do destroy all three radiators, blasting the tank with lances and the Edelweiss is a very fun moment. …But I can definitely see how it would be infamous; the radiators are only exposed on turns where he has to shoot debris that's in his way, so if you don't knock down all those pillars in time, it's basically game over, and if your infantry units are in plain sight when Selvaria shows up (though why would they be?), they're going to be destroyed.

I know you weren't replying to me, but I fully agree with that first sentence; I don't consider anyone an "enemy" for liking/disliking something that I dislike/like; in fact, I love hearing different opinions on a piece of media because I find different interpretations fascinating and I often learn something from it; be it something that I didn't notice when watching the piece of media or something else. As for the second paragraph, I haven't seen either DragonBall Z or SAO, so I have no opinion on either of them and can't agree or disagree. Very true; the characters in MHA are really good (except Mineta of course, but at least him getting comeuppance for his actions is always good for a laugh).

Uh... what? I wasn't angry at all; if that's how it came across, that was absolutely not my intent, and I apologize for the miscommunication. I was just trying to clarify something while also replying to your stab with a (not meant to be mean-spirited in any way, so again: sorry if that was unintentionally how it came across) stab. That was all. I see. I don't really read manga, so I wouldn't be able to compare them. Okay. Yeah; 86 isn't really in any of your preferences; I was just recommending it because I saw it and it was really good. Drifting Dragons would definitely fall into that "slice-of-life" category though despite being fantasy.

No, not defend it. I just wanted to discuss it. If you notice, I made a response for every show he listed that I've seen. Besides, I'm honestly surprised that it didn't bring you running before I even had the chance to notice it. Anyway, by any chance, now that the first seasons of Drifting Dragons and TONIKAWA (the previous two anime that I recommended) are finished, have you had a chance to try either of them? Oh, and fairly recently, I also mentioned and recommended a new show called 86 EIGHTY-SIX and posted the trailer for it. It's a really good show and it just finished the first half of its first season (it's split-cour; they haven't said when the second half will release). (I'm responding to the whole thing but cutting it down so my reply isn't too long) I see. Honestly, I can completely understand that; I honestly was on-the-verge of just dismissing it as mediocre a couple times while watching it (particularly after a certain scene at the end of episode 9), but I stuck with the show all the way to the end because it intrigued me, and I'm honestly glad that I did. In regards to your criticisms of its first half: 1. I honestly didn't see him as passive, except maybe for the first few episodes. But, I can definitely see where you're coming from; his driving motivations that he mentioned at the start of the show, such as gaining enough power to liberate his island home of Sicily Sistina from the Rossini family, did go understated until the Rossini family appeared at that meeting, and since he's a fish-out-of-water, he does defer a lot to Siluca at the start. You'd probably enjoy part 2 then a lot more in this particular regard: the first three episodes are about him going back to Sistina and attempting to liberate it from the Rossini family, then there's the conflict between him and Milza that's both political and personal, and he does take charge a lot more. 2. Um... their neighbours attempting to quickly dogpile them is what happened, it's exactly what Siluca and the other advisor said would happen, and it's exactly what Siluca wanted. It was insanely risky and definitely an example of Siluca overplaying her hand (something she does a lot in the earlier episodes and that others call her out on), but it meant that their opponents came to them. As for them wanting to change sides getting rejected, I'd have to watch it again, but I'm pretty sure the reason wasn't that Siluca might've been plotting something (though it does make sense that one would be hesitant to accept someone who seems willing to change sides at the drop of a hat), but that it would set a very dangerous precedent or something like that. Again; I'd have to watch it again. 3. She's not the best fighter in the world; she's powerful thanks to being an Artist (someone who uses magic to enhance their physical attributes, like that guy who works for Lassic that can turn into steel), but her losing to those knights was to demonstrate that even she can be overwhelmed. 4. I completely agree about the faction conflict being poorly explained; it's probably one of my biggest issues with the show. As for that specific example, the princess' exact motives are intentionally kept a mystery until part 2, but I think it was explained at some point (can't remember when unfortunately) that the reason that monster attacking the wedding threw everything back into war was the fact that it obviously wasn't random; it was deliberate sabotage, and someone had to have summoned that creature. It's not even close to the best explanation ever written, but I just thought I'd try to answer that one.

I've only seen the first and third ones you listed (FMA:B and Code Geass). FMA:B is absolutely fantastic; one of the best shonen anime if not the best shonen anime. Code Geass… had some really interesting concepts; real shame how those concepts ended up in execution. My Hero Academia is definitely good, and Deku is definitely a good protagonist. As for what you said about Black Clover, Asta only screams a lot in the first few episodes, and that was mainly because it was the voice actor's first ever role. After those first several episodes or so, the screaming gets seriously dialed back and the voice actor improves a lot. I know you're referring to the type of shonen protagonist rather than the screaming specifically, but I thought it was worth pointing out. Huh; I've heard people say Grancrest is good, I've heard people say Grancrest is bad, but I've never seen someone say it was mediocre before. That's new. What conveniences and a**-pulls? I don't recall any such things except maybe Theo encountering Siluca, and that one I give a partial-pass to because: 1) it's right at the beginning, so there's some allowance there, and 2) Theo's basically a vagabond at the start of the show, so it's not implausible. I agree about the show rushing from point a to b and not taking the time to properly introduce the viewer to the setting; that is absolutely one of its biggest problems. I wouldn't say that the setting is unimmersive though; it's fairly well-realized with the different factions and cultures as well as Chaos and the Crests and such. Funny that you describe it as "video gamey" since the original light novel was developed in parallel to a tabletop RPG. I suppose that bit about the protagonist is true early on, but it quickly got deconstructed with characters beginning to suspect that Theo's just a puppet for Siluca, and when Siluca learns about that, she begins trying to avoid just setting everything up for him and Theo starts taking a lot more initiative, and I kind-of liked that and I thought it was an interesting way to develop their dynamic. I haven't seen Shield Hero so I don't really understand the comparison. By the way, given your list of anime includes stuff like Grancrest, FMA:B and Code Geass, I think you would really like 86 EIGHTY-SIX which I mentioned earlier in an earlier reply.

Thanks for the answer. I don't know if it's fortunate or unfortunate, but as much as I want to play it blind, the fact that I already know a fair amount about the game means I'll be going in semi-blind at most (I'll still avoid walkthroughs as much as possible as I want to see how much stuff that I don't already know and can figure out on my own). I'll make sure to play the Song of Time often; I won't be a Majora's Mask player that tries to cram as much as possible into each cycle. Very true; Path of Radiance is my favourite video game, but it is definitely infuriating how easy it is to lose progress on battles because there's only a suspend-save during battles. Thanks for the answer. I wasn't trying to list all the changes, but I do remember Captain Keeta being rendered a joke was one of them, as was making the Twinmold fight infuriatingly long when just making it that you don't get the Giant's Mask until after slaying one of them without it was enough. Yeah; I heard about the owls being turned into permanent saves, which was probably to accommodate the game being on a portable console (and because the original save system was born out of technical limitations). The one complaint I've heard is not the addition of the new save system, but that the old one was taken away. Yeah; I figured that would be a problem when I heard about the removal of the old save system.

I agree; pre-promoted units are not inherently base units; that's one reason I mentioned that the only two pre-promotes I ever see anyone recommend are the two with absurdly high growths. Palla is probably one of the few bases units I have seen people recommend.

I have to say, getting a notification that someone quoted me in a topic I had never heard of was a weird experience. Also, I've never heard the idea that pre-promotes are generally better than growth units. I always figured that it's more complicated than that and that it's more down to how viable each individual unit is, so I never really considered "pre-promotes vs growth units". To answer your question, Shadow Dragon is definitely a game that largely favours growth units over pre-promotes. The only two pre-promotes that I ever see anyone recommend are Wolf and Sedgar due to their extremely high growths. The units I usually see recommended the most are ones like Caeda, Ogma, Barst, etc.: units with high growths.

That would make a lot of sense, especially since no one seems to have any problem with Ocarina of Time on the Collector's disc. I see. That makes sense. I was just curious. It was news to me as well, as neither I nor my brother ever had any issues (though I didn't play much of it). It's interesting to see that I'm far from alone in that regard, and there are almost just as many people saying, "I never had a problem" as there are people saying, "It happened to me a lot/it was a big problem."

1. That's funny (the thing about Mission Impossible for the N64), and that developer room thing is rather cool. I can't really return to any of my old N64 games as I no longer have them or the N64; my family got rid of it when we got the GameCube. That said, I probably wouldn't want to go back to any of them, as the only ones we had that I remember was stuff like Mario Kart 64, a Duck Dodgers game, and Iggy's Wrecking Balls. 2. I never got to the Shadow Temple as a kid (not because I couldn't, but because I simply never got that far); I played it the first time a couple years ago. I already knew about the temple having mechanical blade traps and a weird ship level. I personally wasn't unnerved by it, but it is definitely unnerving. As for under the well, I skimmed through it and avoided exploring most of it simply because I don't like the design (not the atmosphere, but the whole "one wrong step that you can't see because the floor's an illusion, and you fall into a pit filled with redeads and other other annoying enemies" aspect of it). I will say, it makes sense that this formerly Shiekah village has such things, and the current village is so peaceful because of Impa's efforts to change the village into something better than it used to be. 3. Well, that is the point: Hyrule as kid Link is the ideal, and Hyrule as adult Link is what happens if Ganondorf wins. Most games can only show you an ideal your trying to protect, or a ruined world you're trying to restore, and Ocarina of Time utilizes both of them and the striking contrast. That atmosphere makes for a great motivator, as the player has a good idea in their heads of what they're trying to restore when playing as adult Link; you know how it should look, and you know what'll happen if you let Ganondorf win. For me, I couldn't finish it either because I moved on to other games or because I was cowardly as a kid when it came to the dungeons and boss fights. I didn't play Majora's Mask a lot since certain moments gave me nightmares (which makes a lot of sense, since some of those scenes were literally created from the dev team's nightmares). These games were definitely important for me as well, but for a different reason: they introduced me to the medieval fantasy genre, and with that came a lot of my hobbies and interests: swordsmanship and studying medieval history and Arthurian Legend are some of my hobbies, and I'm currently writing my own fantasy novel. That all started either directly or indirectly from Ocarina of Time.

I see. @EricaofRenais I heard that the 3DS remake changed a lot of stuff from the original, and not all of those changes were good: namely changes to the boss fights, over-brightening, the Zora swimming getting tied to magic, Deku Link's water-hopping being nerfed in such a way that it makes the swamp a lot more tedious, saving only being done through the owl statues, ice arrows only working on sparkling water, etc., were not well-received. That, combined with me already having the Collector's disc and not knowing about the crashing because mine never crashed, led me to choose not to buy the 3DS remake. What did you think of the 3DS version? That was my experience as well, though I didn't get far into the game. My brother got all the way to the Great Bay Temple and he doesn't recall it ever crashing. And I never noticed frame rate issues (though they were probably there). I never figured out how to use PoR save data for RD, so I never had that problem or knew it existed. What eye? The only version in which Odolwa has an eye on his head as a weakpoint is the 3DS remake, which gave eye weaknesses to all four temple bosses. The GCN version didn't change Odolwa at all; he was originally a boss where you could try a ton of different strategies and items, and he compensated by using a ton of different attacks throughout the boss fight. The 3DS version, as far as I know, took away every form of damaging him and made it that you had to use the deku flowers to stun him, then strike his new eyeball weakness. Thanks everyone for answering. Given all your answers, I think what I will do is I will try the version on the Collector's edition and see how it goes. If it doesn't crash, then excellent. If it does, then I'll find a different version (like one of the virtual console versions).

I can certainly see at least a few good potential reasons why: it's a great game that stands the test of time, it's quick to get into as there's little tutorializing, and it doesn't take hundreds of hours to complete (unlike RPGs as you mentioned). I know what you mean, but it's less that I drop them and more that other things come up, and yeah; some RPGs can take a very long time to finish. How does it tend to feel when you finally do come back and finish a game after going a long time without playing it?

For context: I recently set up my old GameCube and finished Ocarina of Time on the Collector's Edition that came with the GameCube. I figured that it would be a good idea to then move on to Majora's Mask. I haven't played the game since I was a kid, but I don't remember there ever being any problems when my brother or I played it. However, when I decided to look online to see what people had to say about the Collector's Edition, I saw a ton of complaints about Majora's Mask on the GameCube randomly freezing and crashing, which is especially bad for a game like Majora's Mask since you save by going back to the Dawn of the First Day with the owl statues enabling the player to suspend-save the game. I don't have another copy of the game (though I could probably get one via Wii U virtual console, but then I'd have to set up my Wii U; ah, the pains of moving), so I want to know: was it really that bad? Did it really have these kinds of problems, and, if so, then how frequently does it occur? Was the freezing caused by anything in particular that could be avoided, or was it completely random as I've seen quite a few people say it was?

I am a fan of The Legend of Zelda; it and Fire Emblem are my two favourite video game franchises, and I've been a Zelda fan for far longer than I have been a Fire Emblem fan. I became a Zelda fan when I was very young and my family got a GameCube and, with it, the Legend of Zelda Collector's Edition, which had the original game, Adventure of Link, Ocarina of Time, and Majora's Mask. I didn't like the first two games, and Majora's Mask gave me nightmares, but I played Ocarina of Time a lot, and it's safe to say that it made me a Zelda fan... which is the reason it has bugged me to no end that I never actually finished the game, or even came close to finishing it. A couple years ago, I sat down, started a new file, and set out to finish the game. I made it all the way to the Spirit Temple before having to move, and then I never even got the GameCube set up before having to move again. But now, I have finally sat down and finished the game. I have to say... it's kind-of weird; going back to the game after all this time, and thinking about what I thought of it then and what I think of it now. I mean; can you really call it nostalgia if you never actually played a significant chunk of the game until fairly recently? What I can say is that, outside of graphics, the game has aged remarkably well (and even then, certain moments still look decent). I tried Mario 64 on the Switch via 3D All-Stars, and while it is certainly still a very functional game today that has aged well in most places, it took a while to get used to certain quirks about Mario's movement that later games got rid of (like him turning in a wide circle if turning 180 degrees from stop instead of simply turning around in place). With Ocarina of Time, I can't really think of anything except that the Wii U and the Switch have made me too used to gyro aim and going back to aiming with just a stick is rather annoying in comparison. But that's not really the game aging so much as the console and controllers aging. So... yeah. Anyone else have this experience of having a game for a long time and never actually finishing it until years later?

Thanks. I already knew about a lot of that stuff like the original NES Metroid not aging well and lacking a map thanks to some videos I've seen dissecting the series (a particularly good one was a video about the series by a YouTuber named Nerrel; I found out about his channel because of a video he made on the Majora's Mask remake). Thanks. As I said though, I feel like it would probably be better for me to try the one with the less fluid controls first since I know I'm going to be trying more than one game in the series. Plus, that idea of telling the story using pure atmosphere sounds really neat. The main reason I'm interested in trying the Metroid series right now is that I want to try something dripping with atmosphere where I can explore and get lost (while also experiencing some more classic Nintendo titles that I somehow never played). So, in short, the list of ones to definitely play is: Super, Fusion, Prime (either the trilogy or just the first one), and probably Dread after it releases. Thanks, everyone.

I'm not a fan of the Metroid series, and in fact I've never actually played a Metroid game before, but I'm somewhat familiar with the series and I think it's cool that Metroid is finally getting a brand new game. Metroid has received almost as many accolades as Mario and The Legend of Zelda, but it's never had the widespread success that those series have had. Perhaps this will be a big first step in the series having greater success (or at least regaining some of the success it used to have). I might get this game one day, but probably not on day 1 or even close. I know they said this game would be a good starting point for new players, but I still feel like I should play Super Metroid first simply because it and Prime are the two Metroid games that keep appearing on "top ten games of all time" lists. Plus, it's probably good to start with the older games since I know I want to try them, rather than play them after playing a newer game that probably has more refined controls and stuff like that.

So... I'm currently borrowing a set of joy-cons from a sibling that has their own Switch (cleaning my joy-cons failed, so I'm going to have to send them in). However, I promised to only play a game that would be "gentle" on the joy-cons, so no Monster Hunter Rise. Instead, because there's a sale on the Nintendo e-shop, I decided to purchase a game I'd been meaning to get, and at half price: Valkyria Chronicles Remastered. It's a tactical RPG, so it should be "gentle" on the joy-cons, and I'd been meaning to play the original Valkyria Chronicles because I really enjoyed Valkyria Chronicles 4. I have to say, it's always interesting trying an earlier game in a series after starting with the later ones. I expected stuff like there not being grenadiers or APCs, but I did not expect stuff like not being able to redo story missions, or being asked if I want to play on easy or normal for each optional skirmish rather than being asked that once before starting the story campaign. @Shanty Pete's 1st Mate Thanks for the suggestions. By the way, is it possible to get the joy-cons fixed for free even if the one-year warranty has expired? I once heard from someone that it's possible because of the current lawsuit, but I've been having trouble finding anything to verify that, and I'm concerned because, well, the one-year warranty has probably expired by now. I do have a GameCube controller adapter because of Smash Bros. Ultimate, but it's not plugged in right now and I'd have to find it (I'm still unpacking after my recent move).

And not just the hug; don't forget all their adorable victory high-fives, them holding hands at the end of the game, or Zelda telling Byrne, "When [Zelda and Link] are together, no one can defeat us!" before she and Link then look into each other's eyes and blush... completely failing to notice that Byrne is ignoring them and leaving the room. Yeah; every now and then I see someone try to claim that Skyward Sword was the first Zelda game to give Link and Zelda's dynamic an overtly romantic tone, and I keep having to point out to them that Spirit Tracks not only did that before Skyward Sword, but went even further with it than Skyward Sword did. I suppose, though I usually prefer when they break away from various old tropes like those. To be clear, a fully-restored Ganondorf would be cool to see. That said, if we do get a fully-restored Ganondorf in the game, I hope we get to fight Mummy-Ganondorf first since it's such an interesting concept with a lot of potential.

Well, she was a spirit in most of that game. Also, you could directly interact with her outside the Spirit Tower, though admittedly only to the same extent as other companions (i.e. talking to them). I see what you mean; Spirit Tracks was great, but something that went even further in terms of them adventuring together would be great. I've never played Ico, but I've heard of it, so I know what you mean. I was even thinking of stuff like Link and Zelda helping each other up ledges (though they don't really need that thanks to the climbing mechanics), or Zelda grabbing metal objects with magnesis so you can shoot lightning at those objects for aoe damage and such. The two of them resting under a tree like that does sound adorable and like something the Link and Zelda in Spirit Tracks would've done if Zelda had been corporeal in most of that game. I could see something like that, though villains using Zelda's lifeforce to restore/empower their own is a bit of an old Zelda trope (Vaati in Minish Cap, Bellum in Phantom Hourglass, Demise in Skyward Sword, etc.).

Agreed; there's almost-certainly going to be a Pokémon direct within the next couple of weeks. I'm perfectly fine waiting, as I've been more looking forward to Monster Hunter Stories 2 news, which we did get. I'm looking forward to the demo (as well as the actual game). Speaking of which, did anyone else watch the treehouse for Stories 2? The person playing the game said that the late grandpa is the protagonist of the first game, but not only did Capcom say that that was not the case, but there are characters in Stories 2 that are from the first game and they've only aged maybe 15 years at most; most notably Lilia, who was the same age as the Stories 1 protagonist and is a teenager/young-adult in Stories 2. The person playing the game really should've fact-checked.

I agree. It is rather obvious that it sold well because of the BOTW connection. I hadn't thought about Zelda having her own side-story. That could be interesting. Same; I much would've preferred a "Link and Zelda travel together" game; that's what I was referring to when I said that I wanted Zelda to be Link's companion and referenced Spirit Tracks. If you're talking about Link and Zelda in general rather than specifically BOTW Link and Zelda, then Spirit Tracks is a Link & Zelda adventure. I really hope she isn't playing her usual role again; especially right after BOTW had her be the one imprisoning Ganon for a change. Anyway, on rewatching the trailer, I just noticed that there's a moment where Link has a flamethrower shaped like a dragon head and it's attached to the shield. On the one hand, I'm kind-of disappointed because the shield's still on the left arm and I was hoping that Link's right arm getting covered in the green stuff would lead to him going back to being left-handed. On the other hand, the flamethrower thing doesn't look like a unique shield and instead looks more like some kind of shield attachment, so that could be really interesting.

I don't know; I saw quite a few people saying they didn't find out it was an alternate timeline until they played the game and that they felt like they got ripped off. It honestly wouldn't surprise me if a large number of people either didn't play the demo, pre-ordered the game, or understandably wanted to avoid "spoilers" until they got the game. I'm not saying that they'd be a majority of the sales or anywhere close, but would the hype and attention that the game got have been nearly as much as it was if not for how it was misleadingly marketed? But I'd honestly rather not keep talking about it. Now that you mention it, yeah; that DLC schedule is very weird.

Yeah; we can only hope. Please don't remind me about the success of Age of Calamity. Normally, I'd be happy to see a Zelda spin-off do well, but with Age of Calamity, I can't help but wonder how many of its sales were from people who were misled by the marketing and wouldn't have bought it if not for the false-advertising.

Yeah; I was hoping for the return of the idea of Zelda being Link's companion; it was easily the best thing about Spirit Tracks and I've been wanting to see it return. I hope it is in the game. Maybe they're separated for a while and then end up reuniting and working together?

I didn't really care for more of the stuff that was shown off. Here are my thoughts on the things that did catch my eye: Smash Bros. DLC Fighter: New Smash Bros. news is cool, but I have no idea who this fighter is. Age of Calamity: the DLC expansion didn't catch my eye until Aonuma said, "More missions in this game that occurred 100 years before the events of Breath of the Wild" The game's been out for several months now, and they're still lying?! At this point, it just feels like they're rubbing it in. "We really fooled most of you, didn't we?" Skyward Sword HD: I find it baffling that they didn't say anything new about the game. Remember how, for Wind Waker HD, they couldn't stop showing off stuff like the swift sail and the other new things in the game, and the same for Twilight Princess HD? Combine that with the only QoL feature they've mentioned so far (besides the stick controls) being locked behind an Amiibo that doesn't even come with the game (unlike the Wolf Link amiibo for Twilight Princess) is baffling. I have less and less hope that there will finally be a left-handed mode that'll enable me to actually play the game. Breath of the Wild Sequel: This pretty much saved the E3 presentation for me. Having floating islands is a great idea, mummy Ganondorf is as scary as it was two years ago, Link's powers now being tied to his arm rather than the Shiekah slate seems interesting and has a lot of potential, and the bokoblins now having mobile bases built on top of Stone Taluses is a really cool idea.