Want proof that they don’t know how to make Zelda? Here you go: http://iwataasks.nintendo.com/interviews/#/3ds/how-nintendo-3ds-made/4/9

Miyamoto: So, what is it that makes it interesting as a game? The foundation lies in the puzzles that have appeared in The Legend of Zelda franchise since the first game. It’s taking that traditional series material and skillfully transposing it to 3D that really makes the game The Legend of Zelda. When we took series elements and used 3D composition, things just got more and more interesting.

Of course! Of course that is the reason everyone played Zelda: PUZZLES!

Iwata: Ah, yes, I see. In other words, as long as you kept the basic composition of the fun of 3D and the traditional puzzle-solving, you were free to design however you liked. Then lots of new things and Zelda series traditions that worked well just soaked in.

Miyamoto: Yes, that’s right.

Oh, I see! That is what has made Zelda such a success ever since Ocarina of Time: “The fun of 3D!!” and traditional puzzle-solving!

Also, they might as well be acting as if Zelda 2 never existed, bahahahaha!

Miyamoto: Right. There are people who wrote the story, and of course, if you have no story, you’re in trouble. But, more than the story itself, I think the various character settings and other factors are what make the fundamentals of the game come to life. In other words, it isn’t that there’s a certain worldview and a certain story around which the characters and items and landscapes are constructed. The heart of Ocarina of Time lies in what the individual designers composed with the elements produced by the person in charge of writing the story.

First he says, “No story = BAD SITUATION!!” LOL! Zelda 1 & 2 had no story except for a small amount of NPCs with one-liners and a title screen filled with a few paragraphs that you couldn’t even read if you didn’t wait for a minute or so.

Then he says the “Heart of Ocarina” lies in what the designers did with the elements of the story. This could either refer to the content, which would be good, or the cinematic/story elements that plague the game industry.

Miyamoto: It isn’t about skill or quality. Again, it’s the same with the first Star Wars: when I look at Ocarina now, the graphics are really rough. So rough that I think it’s a wonder people actually played it.

Haha, he wonders why people would play a game with such horrible graphics! Man, when does this stuff end?

Then they go on about the joys of “cinematic camera angles.” LOLOLOLOL!

This just confirms everything you’ve been saying. Even after all of this time, they STILL won’t get the ideas of “3D!” and “PUZZLES!!” out of their heads.

I had about a dozen emails telling me of this Iwata Asks. At first, I was going to do a snarky post where it would start off with a parade full of elephants, big Pokemon balloons, and flamingos. Then it would remind the reader, “Once upon a time, Nintendo had no idea what Zelda was,” and quote Iwata and the Zelda team asking each other what Zelda was and offering no answer (see the Iwata Asks for Twilight Princess). Then the post would declare for everyone to celebrate for Nintendo finally discovered what Zelda was: it was the opposite of what Malstrom says. (Since even with what Miyamoto and Iwata said, there is no definition of Zelda offered. It is only a response to say, “It IS about puzzles,” or “It IS about story.” Since the definition of Zelda apparently revolves being the opposite of whatever I say, I would use this power for good. And then the post would be giving a list of things that are and are not Zelda but using reverse psychology. I would proudly proclaim Zelda was about camera angles, NPC soap operas, and puzzles, and warn Nintendo not to even dare do things that Zelda is not such as ‘vast overworld’ or ‘arcade-like exciting gameplay’ or ‘RPG elements’.

But how would such a sassy post be productive? Regardless, the ‘Unfortunate-Person-From-Nintendo-Assigned-To-Read-This-Site’ has been quite busy lately. For his constant, cruel, crushing pain for having to read this site, it is past time for Nintendo to give him a raise.

The reason why those comments were made was that Nintendo was trying to communicate their viewpoint better. But I don’t think their point came across to many. I have an inbox full of emails responding to this saying, “Are these guys idiots? How can they not know what Zelda is?”

However, I think I understand what Nintendo was trying to communicate there. What synced it into place wasn’t their explanation but Miyamoto bringing up Star Wars. It is all about Star Wars. This wasn’t the first time Nintendo has mentioned Star Wars in describing themselves. Read Reggie Fils-Aime column in Brandweek, prior to the Wii launched, where he talks about Star Wars all throughout it. So far, I was only concentrating on the disruption aspect of the piece. I never thought Nintendo was referring to Star Wars and special effects in a literal sense.

I plan to write an article on this subject. Many of Nintendo’s “creative” actions suddenly click into place when you enter ‘Star Wars’ into the context.

The communication problem really exists on my end. How do we, gamers, communicate to Nintendo of the direction they went wrong? Much of the time, we’ve thrown up out hands in despair. But with Star Wars, we now have a way to communicate.

The source of the cancer behind Nintendo’s Core Market (Nintendo is unable to hold onto their customers as each console generation shows decline) is misunderstanding why Star Wars was so phenomenal. The myth is that Star Wars was popular only because of its special effects.

Nintendo believes the driving force behind gaming is special effects. This is why Iwata keeps talking about ‘surprise’. It is why Miyamoto refused to go back to 2d Mario even though 3d Mario doesn’t sell so well. It is why Nintendo is about to launch the 3DS, a handheld game device (whose job is to provide games on the go) to have ‘special effects’ with the 3d effect. While we complain all of this adds nothing to the gameplay, Nintendo is OK with it because they believe special effects is what makes video games interesting. It is why Nintendo can, on one hand, warn parents about the harmful effects of eyestrain 3d gaming has and recommend a break every thirty minutes while simultaneously, with a straight face, say that the 3DS will make gaming more ‘mainstream’.

Behold Ocarina of Time! When we, the audience, discuss it, we might argue sounding like the following. I would say: “This game is just Link to the Past in 3d. Much of what it is good about it is because it is using the building blocks established in previous Zeldas.” You might say: “But what about other things you could do like riding a horse and other adventures that are not part of the main quest line?”

Nintendo doesn’t believe in one side or another. Instead, Nintendo is on a different planet. The do not even view Ocarina of Time in any sort of gaming context. Their context is that of special effects. Ocarina of Time, as you heard The Miyamoto say, is interesting only because of the special effects. Puzzles, for example, became ‘more interesting’ because of the special effects. So the Ocarina of Time re-release on the 3DS to Nintendo is ‘more interesting’ not because it has new content. Not because rigid gameplay mechanics got smoothed out. It is more interesting because it has more ‘special effects’. Shigeru Miyamoto is George Lucas in Japanese. Except this George Lucas makes video games instead of movies.

George Lucas never understood why Star Wars was so popular. By thinking it was special effects, he crammed the new Star Wars movies with as many special effects as possible. The movies were a ‘massive hit’, but this momentum was based on the fanatical audience of the original trilogy (which seeped into pop culture). The movie industry completely ignored the cancer as they only looked at the sales numbers and went ‘oohhh, special effects’. The new Star Wars movies ignored fundamentals of what makes good movies (such as good directing, good acting, good dialogue, etc.). I cannot get a Star Wars fan to watch the new Star Wars movies now for that reason. The ones who liked the new Star Wars movies were children who grew up with it. But as they got older, they began to hate Jar Jar Binks equally as they joined the ‘old school’ Star Wars fans. To this day, people describe those Star Wars movies as ‘kiddy’.

Is it not remarkable how Old Nintendo and New Nintendo fit the Old Star Wars and New Star Wars paradigm?

George Lucas, once declared a genius, is today declared an idiot. Star Wars fans hate him. If Nintendo keeps going the ‘Star Wars’ direction, it is probable that Miyamoto will have the same fate.