Game Cunts

[McGinnis]

Really the only occasionally useful sub-weapon is the cross, since it stays on screen for almost forever (if the level design is accommodating enough).

And you can throw three of them at a time (I think you might even be able to throw four)

You see, the superior 2D Zeldas didn't force you to learn such an unintuitive control scheme because Link was blocking automatically

That's one of the things I hated about the early 2D Zeldas, that you had no shield control. You basically had to line yourself up perfectly and stand still to block a projectile. At least thankfully by Link's Awakening they allowed you assign the shield to a button that you could press (but then, the Game Boy only had two buttons)

I also reckon the Skyward Sword videos are full of their classic tism:
>NPC tells you where to go
>skip the NPC dialogue
>WTF dude where am I supposed to go?!

I would question how that would be possible because Skyward Sword (the original at least) is insanely, annoyingly hand-holdy. But then, they are retarded so I guess they'd find a way

[VoiceOfReasonPast]

They always do. Mostly by not paying attention to what's happenin on-screen.

And you can throw three of them at a time (I think you might even be able to throw four)

Actually there's a separate line of power-ups that determine how many of a sub-weapon can be on screen at once.
You see them spammed in Dracula fights because there's this invisible platform under the stairs leading up to his throne room that gives you all the power-ups.

That's one of the things I hated about the early 2D Zeldas, that you had no shield control. You basically had to line yourself up perfectly and stand still to block a projectile.

Well, The Legend of Zelda is basically Baby's First Ys, so of course the early games where autistic about proper positioning.

(Early Ys games didn't have an attack button. You just run into shit, and damage is determined by who was lined up better.)

[McGinnis]

Actually there's a separate line of power-ups that determine how many of a sub-weapon can be on screen at once.

Did you think I didn't know that?

It is only three though. I can't remember if there's a Castlevania game (in which case it'll be Rondo of Blood) that will allow you to throw up to four or if I've just misremembered that entirely

[Gendo's Ocular Dickhole]

I would question how that would be possible because Skyward Sword (the original at least) is insanely, annoyingly hand-holdy.

I'd argue it's a toss up between Skyward Sword and Twilight Princess in that regard, with the latter having the easiest progression of any Zelda game ever, to the point of having a "push the A button to win" mechanic which was most Zelda games between 2002 - 2011.

[McGinnis]

I'd argue it's a toss up between Skyward Sword and Twilight Princess in that regard, with the latter having the easiest progression of any Zelda game ever, to the point of having a "push the A button to win" mechanic which was most Zelda games between 2002 - 2011

I replayed Twilight Princess (and Wind Waker) fairly recently and while Twilight Princess was the beginning of the bullshit (I really don't need to be told every time I boot the game up that a blue Rupee is worth 5 and a red rupee is worth 20) neither are anywhere near as bad as Skyward Sword.

[VoiceOfReasonPast]

Wasn't that also the time they got more serious with pretending like these games have an actual timeline? What with Skyword Sword being the "first" game?

It is only three though. I can't remember if there's a Castlevania game (in which case it'll be Rondo of Blood) that will allow you to throw up to four or if I've just misremembered that entirely

You never go above four.

[McGinnis]

Wasn't that also the time they got more serious with pretending like these games have an actual timeline? What with Skyword Sword being the "first" game?

I dunno that Nintendo were ever 'serious' about a timeline.

[VoiceOfReasonPast]

Serious = Indulging the retards who plaster their whole basement walls with timeline theories

[McGinnis]

I mean, you could always put the Zelda games into a general sort of order (Zelda 2 after the first one, A Link to the Past before both of them, Ocarina before that) but I don't think the whole idea of branching timelines really became a fan theory until Twilight Princess came out and it became obvious that The Wind Waker and Twilight Princess really couldn't co-exist.

So I guess after that Nintendo said 'Sure, there's a timeline. Yeah, sure. Buy this book and you can find out what it is'.

[VoiceOfReasonPast]

And they basically just copied the popular "Oot split the timeline" theory with the addition of a third divergence because there's a timeline generated from Ganon winning in OoT.
It's pretty much a quantum timeline, but only when OoT is involved.