Zelda fans seem to be in one of two camps on Twilight Princess. Some think it was a great iteration on Ocarina of Time, fixing nearly all of its flaws and adding things that weren't possible in the N64 classic. Others accuse it of playing it safe and starting the series' stagnation until Breath of the Wild's arrival. I've grappled extremely hard with both arguments over the years. You can tell from my rating that I love this game, but believe it to be flawed. I'm going to address the most significant gripes critics and fans have before getting to why I think this game is not only underrated, but one of the best Zelda games.
The biggest complaint I've seen is the two-hour tutorial. This lasts from the moment you press Start to arriving in the first dungeon. I understand this argument a lot, especially when you consider that previous Zelda games had more elegant tutorials. The key difference with Twilight Princess (and Skyward Sword) is that it has a greater focus on character development than past games. You will spend enough time with the village children that you actually feel the urge to rescue them after they are kidnapped, even the two brothers that bully Colin. Not only that, but you are transformed into a wolf against your will. Both Link and the player are unfamiliar with this new body and the surrounding Twilight, which unsettles the player as much as it intrigues. The bug hunts required to restore each section of Hyrule could have been more interesting, as evidenced by Skyward Sword's silent realms, but there is something to be said for how Twilight Princess forces you to traverse these initially unfamiliar environments in a unique way.
I've seen some people argue that Twilight Princess really doesn't get going until Midna's desperate hour. I don't agree with this because of the emotional weight threading Link's initial journey to rescue and help the village children. You rescue Colin from King Bulbllin, which is not only one of the coolest sequences in a video game, but also emotionally strong because you have a connection with Colin. This wouldn't have been nearly as effective if the game asked you to rescue him with little context. Later, you escort Ilia and the sexy bar owner Telma to Kakariko Village to save a dying Zora prince. This act, of course, allows Link to gain the Zora's trust, but it's made extra effective by how Ilia saved the Zora prince at the cost of injuries that damaged her memory, as well as the beautiful remix of Ocarina of Time's Serenade of Water when Link visits the graveyard for the Zora tunic. These moments address the reason Link set out on his adventure in the first place while slowly revealing more about the greater threat to Hyrule.
Another big issue many detractors seem to have is that Twilight Princess tries too hard to be edgy, unfavorably comparing it to Majora's Mask. The creepy cutscene in Lake Hylia definitely supports this argument. Even I think it clashed very hard with the game's overall tone, but this is basically the only instance of that happening. The game has its dark moments, but it also has plenty of light-hearted ones. If you didn't cry when the two Yetis in Snowpeak Ruins confessed their love for each other, there's definitely something wrong with you. Zelda games have always had a balance of light and dark storytelling moments. May I remind you that the cutesy Wind Waker has red-eyed zombies with paralyzing screeches?
The last notable gripe I've seen is that the game is too easy. I won't bother denying this, as it's one of the easiest Zelda games in existence. Now that I've played Dark Souls, which has a lot in common with Zelda, I can comfortably say that the combat of Twilight Princess didn't reach all of its potential. I believe it had the most interesting combat ideas in the series, but the enemies needed to be much harder and varied. I didn't mind the bosses being about spectacle, as they were still fun to fight. I especially loved the Zant fight for how each phase gradually becomes more insane, befitting of how warped and pathetic he really is. I know many didn't like that Ganondorf was in the game, but without him, Zant's character revelation would not have worked.
If you are familiar with the series and dislike Twilight Princess, this is probably the point where you will argue that most of its scenarios were attempted in some capacity in Ocarina of Time. Nobody can doubt Twilight Princess follows closely in that game's footsteps, but just how close is too close? The game's structure was unchanged, but you can see the developers made attempts to improve on the weaker elements of Ocarina. Midna is an improvement over Na'vi, horseback combat is actually fun, and minor characters in the story are given enough screen time that you actually care about them.
More than anything, Twilight Princess wants to take you on an adventure of epic proportions. Introducing cinematic elements was a logical way of accomplishing this. Was it perfect? Of course not. But even at its wobbliest, Nintendo demonstrates a level of skill that few developers have matched. It would have been so easy for the Zelda team to take advantage of the game's cinematic focus and overindulge in underdeveloped set piece gimmicks or unskippable cutscenes that take away the player's control for long stretches of time. Twilight Princess is not like that despite the aforementioned missed potential. It knows it's a game at the end of the day. The only question is whether you want to go on the journey it offers. I say you absolutely should.
At the end of the day, The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess is an iterative sequel. It is an oddity in a series that is always trying to surprise players. Because it was a one-off exercise, however, I do not mind that Nintendo went back to the Ocarina template. It laid the groundwork for deeper storytelling in the series and many Zelda fans would probably still be upset at the company if every game in the series was including radically different gameplay elements. Twilight Princess is a reminder to Nintendo and gamers longing for change that a straightforward sequel is okay every once in a while. As long as the power that comes with a series like Zelda is handled responsibly, whether that's with new gameplay experiments or adding onto an existing foundation, there is no reason to be worried for its future.
The biggest complaint I've seen is the two-hour tutorial. This lasts from the moment you press Start to arriving in the first dungeon. I understand this argument a lot, especially when you consider that previous Zelda games had more elegant tutorials. The key difference with Twilight Princess (and Skyward Sword) is that it has a greater focus on character development than past games. You will spend enough time with the village children that you actually feel the urge to rescue them after they are kidnapped, even the two brothers that bully Colin. Not only that, but you are transformed into a wolf against your will. Both Link and the player are unfamiliar with this new body and the surrounding Twilight, which unsettles the player as much as it intrigues. The bug hunts required to restore each section of Hyrule could have been more interesting, as evidenced by Skyward Sword's silent realms, but there is something to be said for how Twilight Princess forces you to traverse these initially unfamiliar environments in a unique way.
I've seen some people argue that Twilight Princess really doesn't get going until Midna's desperate hour. I don't agree with this because of the emotional weight threading Link's initial journey to rescue and help the village children. You rescue Colin from King Bulbllin, which is not only one of the coolest sequences in a video game, but also emotionally strong because you have a connection with Colin. This wouldn't have been nearly as effective if the game asked you to rescue him with little context. Later, you escort Ilia and the sexy bar owner Telma to Kakariko Village to save a dying Zora prince. This act, of course, allows Link to gain the Zora's trust, but it's made extra effective by how Ilia saved the Zora prince at the cost of injuries that damaged her memory, as well as the beautiful remix of Ocarina of Time's Serenade of Water when Link visits the graveyard for the Zora tunic. These moments address the reason Link set out on his adventure in the first place while slowly revealing more about the greater threat to Hyrule.
Another big issue many detractors seem to have is that Twilight Princess tries too hard to be edgy, unfavorably comparing it to Majora's Mask. The creepy cutscene in Lake Hylia definitely supports this argument. Even I think it clashed very hard with the game's overall tone, but this is basically the only instance of that happening. The game has its dark moments, but it also has plenty of light-hearted ones. If you didn't cry when the two Yetis in Snowpeak Ruins confessed their love for each other, there's definitely something wrong with you. Zelda games have always had a balance of light and dark storytelling moments. May I remind you that the cutesy Wind Waker has red-eyed zombies with paralyzing screeches?
The last notable gripe I've seen is that the game is too easy. I won't bother denying this, as it's one of the easiest Zelda games in existence. Now that I've played Dark Souls, which has a lot in common with Zelda, I can comfortably say that the combat of Twilight Princess didn't reach all of its potential. I believe it had the most interesting combat ideas in the series, but the enemies needed to be much harder and varied. I didn't mind the bosses being about spectacle, as they were still fun to fight. I especially loved the Zant fight for how each phase gradually becomes more insane, befitting of how warped and pathetic he really is. I know many didn't like that Ganondorf was in the game, but without him, Zant's character revelation would not have worked.
If you are familiar with the series and dislike Twilight Princess, this is probably the point where you will argue that most of its scenarios were attempted in some capacity in Ocarina of Time. Nobody can doubt Twilight Princess follows closely in that game's footsteps, but just how close is too close? The game's structure was unchanged, but you can see the developers made attempts to improve on the weaker elements of Ocarina. Midna is an improvement over Na'vi, horseback combat is actually fun, and minor characters in the story are given enough screen time that you actually care about them.
More than anything, Twilight Princess wants to take you on an adventure of epic proportions. Introducing cinematic elements was a logical way of accomplishing this. Was it perfect? Of course not. But even at its wobbliest, Nintendo demonstrates a level of skill that few developers have matched. It would have been so easy for the Zelda team to take advantage of the game's cinematic focus and overindulge in underdeveloped set piece gimmicks or unskippable cutscenes that take away the player's control for long stretches of time. Twilight Princess is not like that despite the aforementioned missed potential. It knows it's a game at the end of the day. The only question is whether you want to go on the journey it offers. I say you absolutely should.
At the end of the day, The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess is an iterative sequel. It is an oddity in a series that is always trying to surprise players. Because it was a one-off exercise, however, I do not mind that Nintendo went back to the Ocarina template. It laid the groundwork for deeper storytelling in the series and many Zelda fans would probably still be upset at the company if every game in the series was including radically different gameplay elements. Twilight Princess is a reminder to Nintendo and gamers longing for change that a straightforward sequel is okay every once in a while. As long as the power that comes with a series like Zelda is handled responsibly, whether that's with new gameplay experiments or adding onto an existing foundation, there is no reason to be worried for its future.