Post by: Smash_Brother on February 13, 2006, 07:24:35 AM
Best Buy has it slated for Nov now.
Unless they're full of it, looks like TP will be a Rev title (kinda).
Post by: Pale on February 13, 2006, 07:27:14 AM
Post by: Smash_Brother on February 13, 2006, 07:31:00 AM
Launching the game alongside the Rev not only touts the backwards compatibility but it will also sell people on the controller concept.
Besides, what more solid of a "launch" title can you get?
Post by: Bill Aurion on February 13, 2006, 07:33:06 AM
Second, I don't trust magical changing release dates that aren't put out by Ninty themselves...That said, a delay is near 100% likely...
Post by: TMW on February 13, 2006, 07:35:58 AM
'sides, you can't have a delay if there isn't an official release date.
Post by: Smash_Brother on February 13, 2006, 07:43:16 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion
First of all, did this really need a new topic?
Second, I don't trust magical changing release dates that aren't put out by Ninty themselves...That said, a delay is near 100% likely...
I think it's big enough news to justify getting it out in front of posters.
Isn't there a link to submit news somewhere on PGC?
BB is the first one to confirm a release, to my knowledge (or even speculate on one). I've never seen a retailer be too late in their estimated release date. If they're going to be wrong, it'd be too early.
Post by: JonLeung on February 13, 2006, 08:03:46 AM
I can't remember if Pokémon Red/Blue (GB) came out before or after the GBC...but I know I got a GBC the Christmas that year (1998) with Pokémon, and I didn't have a Game Boy before that (other than the Super Game Boy, I mean).
I can't recall any really big PSX games that came out after the PS2. I don't think any big PS2 games are slated for after the PS3 will come out. Same with Xbox/Xbox 360.
There are still some games coming out for the GBA, but after the DS came out, I don't recall any GBA killer-apps. Forgive me if I don't think WW: Twisted! and DK: King Of Swing aren't. I'm enjoying Drill Dozer right now, in fact, but I don't see any of those as "killer-app". At least nowhere near the level of a Zelda game!
Post by: Ian Sane on February 13, 2006, 08:18:08 AM
I hope they don't delay it. I'm just so f*cking BORED right now. Give me the damn Zelda game I've been wanting since 2000 already, damn it!
I don't think it's that important for Twilight Princess to be a killer app for the Rev. First of all this is a last gen game that uses the "traditional" game design model. So if THAT'S the killer app then it just makes the Rev look weak as hell. How is the remote the "future" if a traditional game smokes the crap out of the entire Rev lineup? How does it help Nintendo if they sell the Rev based on a game that doesn't need the remote features to work? The Rev killer app SHOULD be a game that makes good use of the remote and sells the concept. If it isn't then it was all for nothing. If traditional games are the killer apps then Nintendo just spent months hiding everything and freaking everyone out with an odd controller for nothing. Plus now we've got news that the Cube controllers don't work with Rev games. Therefore anyone who buys a Rev for Twilight Princess has to buy a Cube controller as well unless the whole game is remote compatible which I doubt. The "killer app" nature of the title is severely damaged if one has to buy a special controller for it.
I think it's more important for Nintendo to please the loyal Cube owners who are starving for games yet are still hanging on. As more time goes by with no games released the pressure to buy an Xbox 360 NOW (unless the shortage problem remains) and play new games NOW is going to overcome the patience to wait for the Rev particularly when there's a Cube game RIGHT THERE waiting to be released but is being delayed to add Rev features or to coincide with the Rev launch. It happened last gen so it will happen again.
Post by: Bill Aurion on February 13, 2006, 08:20:43 AM
Stop being so freaking stubborn and buy a DS, dammit!
Post by: nitsu niflheim on February 13, 2006, 08:38:08 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on February 13, 2006, 08:39:14 AM
Edit: dang it. This is a response to Bill's comment. It made more sense when I thought it would follow right after his post.
Post by: vudu on February 13, 2006, 08:40:27 AM
QuoteHe has a DS. He just has no taste in games.
Stop being so freaking stubborn and buy a DS, dammit!
Post by: JonLeung on February 13, 2006, 08:42:58 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
I have a DS.
Then play some games on it.
Like Nintendogs or Kirby: Canvas Curse or WarioWare: Touched! or some other games that use the touch screen that you called "gimmicky" and implied wasn't used much.
Now hold on here...even if you truly believed that, you're saying you'd buy a DS even if you don't use its features but you won't buy a Revolution even if you didn't always use its features?
*play's devil's advocate again*
(Why does "gimmicky" come out as "sparkling innovationy"? o_0)
Post by: mantidor on February 13, 2006, 08:49:00 AM
The selling point on many people's eyes, the graphics, are already outdated. They shouldve just stick to the toon shading and let the fanboys cry, we could've had a more beautiful game, what a shame.
Post by: Smash_Brother on February 13, 2006, 08:50:02 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian SaneI think it's more important for Nintendo to please the loyal Cube owners who are starving for games yet are still hanging on. As more time goes by with no games released the pressure to buy an Xbox 360 NOW (unless the shortage problem remains) and play new games NOW is going to overcome the patience to wait for the Rev particularly when there's a Cube game RIGHT THERE waiting to be released but is being delayed to add Rev features or to coincide with the Rev launch. It happened last gen so it will happen again.
While I agree with the sentiment, the GC is a lost cause.
Releasing TP alongside the Rev with bonus Rev-only features using the Revmote is a good way to encourage sales of the Rev while at the same time still acknowledging the GC userbase.
I agree that the Rev NEEDS a killer app which relies entirely on the Revmote, but there are a great deal of players who will ONLY buy a Nintendo console once Zelda is released on it and this is a great way to rope them in as well.
Post by: Bill Aurion on February 13, 2006, 09:20:23 AM
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on February 13, 2006, 09:20:37 AM
If Zelda comes out close to Rev, I won't be buying a Rev until I'm done with Zelda. I want to see how Zelda plays out as A GAMECUBE GAME. Then later i'll see how the Rev makes a difference, if any. I'm not going to mix up the experience right out the door.
Post by: UncleBob on February 13, 2006, 09:25:05 AM
I don't care if this game comes out tommrow for the GCN or launch day for the Revolution as a Revolution-only title - I just want the game to be great.
Post by: Ian Sane on February 13, 2006, 09:43:08 AM
I buy a system when it has games for it I want. What I was talking about the Rev is that it doesn't do Nintendo much good to try to sell the Rev with a traditional game when they're trying to sell the Rev concept. I personally don't really care as long as games I like are released on it. But what if Nintendo sells a lot of Revs with Twilight Princess but then the people who bought the console for it aren't interested in Nintendo's remote games? What if they just want more epic "traditional games" like the very one Nintendo sold them a console with? Now Nintendo is stuck either having to abandon their remote games to make more traditional titles for the userbase or they risk having these people jump ship by sticking the remote games. Miyamoto said that Twilight Princess will be the last Zelda game as we know it. Well then it's just a total TEASE to sell Revs based on that title because the next Zelda may not be anything like it. That might not sit well with anyone who bought a Rev for TP.
Nintendo has to sell the Rev on the strength of the remote because that's the key difference between the Rev and the competition. Without it the Rev is just a PS3 with no HD support and inferior hardware.
Post by: mantidor on February 13, 2006, 09:45:05 AM
Post by: Smash_Brother on February 13, 2006, 09:50:01 AM
Reggie has dropped some HUGE hints that TP will be using the Revmote and it's fully plausible that, given the extra time Nintendo now has, that this can become a reality in more ways than simply fishing.
Nintendo knows they need to sell the concept of the Revmote more than anything else this gen. Given the circumstances, I highly doubt TP's pull on the Rev would focus around a bunch of fishing games.
Post by: Bill Aurion on February 13, 2006, 09:51:37 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: mantidor
oh yeah Majora's Mask definately stopped the ps2 launch and hype...
The point was that the PS2 didn't bring down any potential Zelda sales...
Post by: animecyberrat on February 13, 2006, 10:01:32 AM
Post by: Bloodworth on February 13, 2006, 10:10:11 AM
Quote
now we've got news that the Cube controllers don't work with Rev games. Therefore anyone who buys a Rev for Twilight Princess has to buy a Cube controller as well unless the whole game is remote compatible which I doubt.
It says GC controllers don't work with Rev games, but that doesn't mean Rev controllers don't work with Cube games. You really don't expect them to make people buy extra controllers for virtual console stuff do you?
Post by: mantidor on February 13, 2006, 10:28:21 AM
And sadly that will detract from the core game too, the attention is split, is not really a GC game any more, but neither is Rev game. That rev functionality is the dumbest idea Ive heard in the history of dumb ideas, and royally screws up the GC owners who wanted the game, is worth of companies like EA, not Nintendo.
Post by: JonLeung on February 13, 2006, 10:49:33 AM
Maybe I'll have a chance to go to E3 this year and I would like to see it, but those who attended last year's E3 may get a sense of deja vu.
Post by: Ian Sane on February 13, 2006, 11:54:04 AM
You're right. That wouldn't make any sense. I think I got a little confused there.
"I wouldn't be downplaying the decision until we see how much or how little the Revmote will be used in TP. If it's used for fishing, yeah, then 'WTFs' all around. However, if it's used to swing the sword, aim the bow, throw the boomerang, etc. etc. then I think it's safe to say that the selling point for TP on the Rev will BE the Revmote."
To do that effectively would require them to make the game twice. The game wouldn't work on the Cube unless they really dumbed down the motion control to merely assign gestures to button presses which would be pretty pointless and would probably hurt the appeal of the remote as a result. mantidor describes it pretty well. Something like a fishing game makes the most sense because they can make it fully use the remote and then remove it from the Cube "version" because it's not a requirement to beat the game.
Post by: Artimus on February 13, 2006, 12:33:30 PM
Post by: Smash_Brother on February 13, 2006, 12:34:47 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian SaneTo do that effectively would require them to make the game twice. The game wouldn't work on the Cube unless they really dumbed down the motion control to merely assign gestures to button presses which would be pretty pointless and would probably hurt the appeal of the remote as a result. mantidor describes it pretty well. Something like a fishing game makes the most sense because they can make it fully use the remote and then remove it from the Cube "version" because it's not a requirement to beat the game.
No, it wouldn't.
The application of the controller is situational. Remember that, with the analogue nunchuck, it will behave just like a regular GC controller, just a disjointed one. From there, the interface could be made to behave differently depending on whether or not you have a GC controller or a Rev controller present. Z-targeting could go into a first person perspective to swing the sword (or claw enemies as a wolf, since Link'll be spending a great deal of time as one) while you continue to move with the analogue stick in the other hand.
Nintendo has roughly 8 additional months to get TP ready and to be an additional selling point for the Rev. I know they've made some severe f-ups in the past, but I don't think anyone at EAD is dumb enough to think that "Link's Big Fishing Adventure" is going to sell Revs when the game will work just fine on the GC.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on February 13, 2006, 12:39:51 PM
You can close the thread now.
Post by: Shecky on February 13, 2006, 01:38:57 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: mantidor
I think Nintendo is the best developer around, but even them in my opinion wont be able to make a flawless game that uses both the GC controller and the remote, for the game to trully use the remote it must be completly revamped, it would be so mediocre to map remote functionality to things that a button can do, like Ian has mention so many times. Why swing a remote to simulate a slash when you can do it with a button? It can only make a difference if also enemies' attacks are changed accordingly, which means revamping the whole combat mechanics, probably going as far as changing bosses mechanics completly. Is the same to any 3D sensing functionality anyone can think off.
And sadly that will detract from the core game too, the attention is split, is not really a GC game any more, but neither is Rev game. That rev functionality is the dumbest idea Ive heard in the history of dumb ideas, and royally screws up the GC owners who wanted the game, is worth of companies like EA, not Nintendo.
I agree with you 100%; tried arguing it myself in several threads... Seems like a lost cause getting others to understand this point though ;-p. My challenge still stands: Think of a cool use of the remote in a zelda game, paying attention to details including what you have to do *and* what the game needs to do. Then tell me how you would attain that same experience with the GC controller.
Shecky's prediction: Zelda's bonus will likely be a minigame or subquest that lays behind a closed door (one that only opens on the REV). That minigame will use the new controller. Also, game will be playable in backwards compatibility with the shell and motions may be used to speed up some common tasks (ie shake the controller to giddy up your horse or mount - mimic manipulating the reins). Finally, we'll see a game in about 1-2 yrs that uses the same engine, built for the REV and it's features.
Post by: Mario on February 13, 2006, 01:58:21 PM
Post by: Ian Sane on February 13, 2006, 02:07:55 PM
So Nintendo then has to make the game TWICE with two completely different control methods and different game mechanics to support these two methods. There's no way Nintendo is doing that kind of work unless they're going to delay it to next year or later.
Post by: Infernal Monkey on February 13, 2006, 02:11:34 PM
Post by: Smash_Brother on February 13, 2006, 03:08:05 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian SaneSo Nintendo then has to make the game TWICE with two completely different control methods and different game mechanics to support these two methods. There's no way Nintendo is doing that kind of work unless they're going to delay it to next year or later.
Again, the application of the controller is situational.
Let's take the mounted combat as an example.
The mounted combat is not the whole game. It's a situation within the game which involves the player in fighting while on horseback.
While playing on the GC, mounted combat sequences could be governed by controlling the speed of the horse while timing attacks to slay foes and deflect incoming projectile attacks.
While playing on the Rev, mounted combat sequences could go to a first person perspective where you use the Revmote as the handle of your sword and thusly slash foes with it or block incoming projectiles with it.
Contrary to popular belief, this will not require the entire game to be rebuilt from scratch in order for it to work seamlessly into the gameplay. With the Rev, you get bonus fight scenes that are impossible with the GC.
And the "You can do it with the push of a button" argument fails because it ignores the entire premise of why we have the controller in the first place: pushing a button is not immersive. Pushing a button to stab an enemy is not as fun as, say, pantomiming the action of driving the blade into its torso.
Technically, there's nothing you cannot do with the push of a button. Powerstone was renown for long, drawn-out combo attacks which happened with the press of a single button. The result is that the game was not very interactive and thus was not fun.
We as players want to feel connected to the game: the most fun I have is when I absolutely lose myself in the game and you could balance plates on my head without me noticing. Again, just because pushing a button can make Link swing his sword doesn't mean that it won't be more enjoyable to give the game another level of depth which allows me to control his sword directly.
Why would I want a button to be the trigger when I could instead make my arm into Link's arm?
Like I said, situational, like the knife-fights in RE DS which only happen once every so often, yet they're fun and a good change of pace from the standard gameplay. There's no reason that parts of the game cannot include Rev control without the need to redo the entire game arising.
Post by: Mario on February 13, 2006, 03:20:59 PM
Quote
Why would I want a button to be the trigger when I could instead make my arm into Link's arm?
Because I don't have a Revolution controller. This is a GameCube game, GameCube can not do that.
There is going to be a Zelda game on the Revolution as well you know.
Post by: Smash_Brother on February 13, 2006, 03:37:37 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Mario
I disagree 10000000000%, combat is a fundamental aspect of the game, it's not a one time gameplay mode like the shooting gallery. I don't want to be limited in my fight scenes because i'm using a GC controller.
Who said you would be? The mounted combat on the GC is not going to suffer because of Rev support. The mounted combat on the GC is going to be exactly how it was always intended to be, but the mounted combat on the Rev could take advantage of the controller for a different style of fighting.
It's all a goddamn theory anyway. They did it with RE DS to make use of the touchscreen. Nintendo making use of the Rev controller in such a manner is far from inconceivable.
Quote
Because I don't have a Revolution controller. This is a GameCube game, GameCube can not do that.
There is going to be a Zelda game on the Revolution as well you know.
Quote
Reggie: Exactly. I think that our senior management has made it very clear that bringing Zelda: Twilight Princess out on GameCube is important, that we want to satisfy the GameCube fan base and have it be on that system. You've said the obvious, which is that [because] Revolution's backward compatible, it will almost effectively be a launch title for Revolution. The trick will be what makes it special to play on Revolution, and to the extent that we could create something like that, boy, wouldn't that be fantastic? Certainly one of the things that I would love to see is something that makes Zelda, when it's played on Revolution, do something magical. And I think that any Nintendo fan would love to see that.
Sorry if you're pissed, but unless Reggie is blowing smoke out his ass (and from what I've seen, Reggie seldom does that), then it's already in the cards.
Post by: Mario on February 13, 2006, 03:42:51 PM
Quote
Who said you would be? The mounted combat on the GC is not going to suffer because of Rev support. The mounted combat on the GC is going to be exactly how it was always intended to be, but the mounted combat on the Rev could take advantage of the controller for a different style of fighting.
I know, but it would just feel like i'm missing out.
Quote
They did it with RE DS to make use of the touchscreen.
RE DS isn't a GBA game.
I saw Reggie's comment before, and it makes me sad. However I think if it's implemented in a way outside of the main path / storyline (which combat is certainly a part of), then it would be ok. For a fishing mini game or something. Maybe it's something else too, maybe putting TP into the Revolution could give you a free NES download, or do something to the Rev interface?
Man, I like how we know pretty much nothing about both Zelda TP and Revolution, so ANYTHING could be going on behind the scenes right now.
Post by: Smash_Brother on February 13, 2006, 03:47:06 PM
I imagine mounted fight scenes in TP will be like sailing in WW: you don't do it because you want to so much as you have to in order to get from place to place. The Revmote being used in those situations will be a "magical" novelty more than anything but I don't think GC owners will truly be missing out.
Post by: King of Twitch on February 13, 2006, 03:52:03 PM
Post by: mantidor on February 13, 2006, 04:26:11 PM
I notice all this thanks to the Wind Waker, I was among the people who hated the graphics, but I found myself having an incredible time with the game, how could I if Link looked like a badly drawn powerpuf girl? that forced me to put my eyes away from the graphical style and notice all these little details, this excellence in design and development, the clever puzzles and absolutly flawless control the game had, I even started to appreciate those huge eyes, (specially in certain cabaña who had a secret passage
). Thats why I cant believe they'll just put rev features into a game thats not made with those in mind! I just cant believe it.
Post by: capamerica on February 13, 2006, 05:17:26 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: JonLeung
I can't recall any really big PSX games that came out after the PS2. I don't think any big PS2 games are slated for after the PS3 will come out. Same with Xbox/Xbox 360.
Final Fantasy IX came out for the PSOne after the PS2 was released. Final Fantasy IX was released 4 months after the PS2 release in Japan on Final Fantasy IX came out 07/07/2000, The PS2 was released on 03/04/2000.
In the US Final Fantasy IX also came out after the PS2, Final Fantasy came out 11/13/2000 and the PS2 came out 10/26/2000. Not a big time differnce but still if Square wanted they could have easly turned Final Fantasy IX into a PS2 launch title, that would have given the PS2 one hell of a system seller. But insted Square released it on the PSOne.
I know when I went to get a Playstation to play Finall Fantasy IX (I played Final Fantasy VII and VIII on the PC) I picked up a PS2 insted of a cheap PSOne, I figured that if I'm going to buy a system I might as well go with one that will last me awhile in the long run.
I'm more then willing to bet that if Nintendo does infact hold off the release of Twilight Princess till the Revolution's launch it will get alot of people to who don't own a GameCube to pick up a Revolution insted. Hell if Nintendo is really smart they will release a Bundle pack for Zelda:TP and the Revolution.
Post by: Smash_Brother on February 13, 2006, 05:52:29 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: mantidor
You see Smash_brother, thats the sign of a bad game and a bad developer if they just force gameplay methods into a game like if it was some sort of canvas, and thats why clones of Nintendo games are never as good. Do you think that EAD will just put a huge plain for the horse to ride and some enemies? The enemies are specifically designed to be fought in this plain with a GC controller, even the land itself is layed out in such way that it takes the biggest advantage of the GC controller, the design of things like caves, rivers, forest, paths, you name it. Horsebak with the remote opens so much posiblities that they would be wasted if they just map the controls into TP horseback fights from E3, unless the redo the monsters you fought, the land you cross, and basically the whole thing. Nintendo doesnt make games like that ( and thats why Im so shocked about these rumors), they dont think "you know, a maniatical moon crashing in the land would be so cool, lets make a game about that!", "first person perspective is popular so lets make a Metroid game this way!" First and most important for them is and always will be the gameplay, everything else comes as bonus.
I think that's being awfully presumptuous about a game we know little to nothing about. All we've seen from the trailers is Link riding across various plains battling enemies while mounted (on a large boar, of all things). We have no idea the extent to which these scenes will be in the game, nor do we have any reason to believe the Rev would be used to enhance them. After all, everything I'm spouting is theory.
Also, the first-person perspective is no stranger to the 3D LoZ games: ever since OoT, the bow and slingshot have both been usable from a 1st person perspective, often requiring the player to do this to beat bosses and solve puzzles. Since the Rev's controller is plainly built for FPS situations, who's to say that won't be a place where the controller becomes applicable?
I think people are making a bigger deal out of this than is necessary. If I play TP on my GC and I push a button in order to make Link swing his sword instead of pantomiming the action or I use the analogue stick instead of pointing the controller at where I want Link to shoot his arrow or fire the grappling hook, I'm not going to lose sleep that night because there are people playing it on the Rev enjoying slightly more features than I am.
Besides, who here isn't going to buy a Rev anyway? It's easily their most promising console to date, what with the backwards compatibility, online focus, and a massive library of retro games to download. Even if the controller sucked, it already has a ton going for it.
Post by: Mario on February 13, 2006, 06:20:40 PM
http://www.gametab.com/news/488853/
Post by: Smash_Brother on February 13, 2006, 06:29:14 PM
Not too many games released on a saturday. I think this is an early april fools joke.
Post by: Bill Aurion on February 13, 2006, 06:30:35 PM
MAKE UP YOUR MINDS!
Post by: Mario on February 13, 2006, 06:31:15 PM
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on February 13, 2006, 06:36:27 PM
We'll just do the best we can with Chibi-Robo.
Post by: Smash_Brother on February 13, 2006, 06:36:44 PM
Gamestop and Ebgames list it for the first of August, which at least falls on a Tuesday (a normal day for releasing games).
Bestbuy has it for April 1st, which is a saturday, a day on which games and movies are NEVER released.
I think we need to wait for Nintendo to confirm or deny this.
Post by: Mario on February 13, 2006, 06:38:33 PM
Gah, SPEAK NINTENDO! SAY ANYTHING!
Post by: TMW on February 13, 2006, 07:15:17 PM
APRIL
APRIL
APRIL
I will pistol whip (read: severely frown at) the next person that says it won't be out in April.
I'm looking at you, Bill.
Post by: Bill Aurion on February 13, 2006, 07:25:12 PM
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on February 13, 2006, 07:31:44 PM
NEVER HAPPENING
NEVER HAPPENING
NEVER HAPPENING
NEVER HAPPENING
NEVER HAPPENING
NEVER HAPPENING
NEVER HAPPENING
NEVER HAPPENING
NEVER HAPPENING
NEVER HAPPENING
NEVER HAPPENING
NEVER HAPPENING
NEVER HAPPENING
NEVER HAPPENING
NEVER HAPPENING
NEVER HAPPENING
NEVER HAPPENING
Post by: TMW on February 13, 2006, 07:58:18 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion
It won't...
Post by: IceCold on February 13, 2006, 08:27:00 PM
Post by: JonLeung on February 14, 2006, 03:50:15 AM
I am a big Zelda fan. My birthday is on April 7.
Sincerely,
Jon
Post by: Ian Sane on February 14, 2006, 06:32:17 AM
While playing on the Rev, mounted combat sequences could go to a first person perspective where you use the Revmote as the handle of your sword and thusly slash foes with it or block incoming projectiles with it."
So for many situations the game plays completely differently? I would consider that making the game twice. It's just an insane amount of work.
"And the 'You can do it with the push of a button' argument fails because it ignores the entire premise of why we have the controller in the first place: pushing a button is not immersive. Pushing a button to stab an enemy is not as fun as, say, pantomiming the action of driving the blade into its torso."
Waving my arm is only immersive if the character responds exactly as I moved my arm. Otherwise it's just a more difficult way of doing a button press. It has to be incredibly responsive and Nintendo just doesn't have the time to make Zelda have that kind of control while still making the game completely playable and GOOD on the Cube. Plus immersion isn't the purpose of games. That's just a BS term American devs who making boring realistic games use. Immersion is the purpose of virtual reality or simulation and that's not the same thing as gaming. The real purpose of gaming is to provide entertainment. And a game is much more entertaining if the controls are as easy to use. So if something can be assigned to a mere button press it should because it's precise and easier to do than anything. Motion control should only be used when it provides an easier way to control the game and in Zelda's case it wouldn't. It would either be more physically tiring for the user for no reason or if used properly it would make the sword fighting considerably more complex then it really needs to.
Part of Zelda's charm is that it has always allowed you to do so much with minimal button pressing while at the same time making you feel in control. Things like assigning items to a button and the auto-jump and z-targeting and context sensitive buttons are all examples of this. And the game is always designed so perfectly that none of these things feel like a limitation. There is never a situation where you need a jump button so auto-jump works. In Link's Awakening I can only use two items at once including my sword but I never need to use more than two at once. A part of the beauty of Zelda is that you can have an exciting sword fight with only a few button presses and everything is easy to pull off and very natural. Once you start having motion controlled fighting suddenly things are way more complex and with Zelda that's kind of losing the point. That's ultimately why Zelda clones have never been in the same league as the real thing. The copycats always think they can improve the formula by making things more complicated.
April sounds good for a release date though it's coming up pretty fast so I imagine we would get an announcement soon.
Post by: mantidor on February 14, 2006, 07:14:25 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_BrotherQuote
Originally posted by: mantidor
You see Smash_brother, thats the sign of a bad game and a bad developer if they just force gameplay methods into a game like if it was some sort of canvas, and thats why clones of Nintendo games are never as good. Do you think that EAD will just put a huge plain for the horse to ride and some enemies? The enemies are specifically designed to be fought in this plain with a GC controller, even the land itself is layed out in such way that it takes the biggest advantage of the GC controller, the design of things like caves, rivers, forest, paths, you name it. Horsebak with the remote opens so much posiblities that they would be wasted if they just map the controls into TP horseback fights from E3, unless the redo the monsters you fought, the land you cross, and basically the whole thing. Nintendo doesnt make games like that ( and thats why Im so shocked about these rumors), they dont think "you know, a maniatical moon crashing in the land would be so cool, lets make a game about that!", "first person perspective is popular so lets make a Metroid game this way!" First and most important for them is and always will be the gameplay, everything else comes as bonus.
I think that's being awfully presumptuous about a game we know little to nothing about. All we've seen from the trailers is Link riding across various plains battling enemies while mounted (on a large boar, of all things). We have no idea the extent to which these scenes will be in the game, nor do we have any reason to believe the Rev would be used to enhance them. After all, everything I'm spouting is theory.
Its not presumptuous. remember OoT? the big Poes that went away in a straight line when you were in horseback? that was made that way because if the ghost start dancing around the horse it would be simply imposible to hit it with an arrow, analog stick doesnt offer that kind of presicion, but apparently the new remote does, that alone opens a whole lot of posibilities for enemies, and it would indeed be a waste if they just map the remote to hit a poe who goes into a straight line. This is a very simple example of the care that Nintendo puts in design, and if they promise to make the best zelda game ever, we have no option but to get absurdly hyped for it, and espect at least the same level of care in the design.
Post by: Bill Aurion on February 14, 2006, 08:12:39 AM
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on February 14, 2006, 08:21:52 AM
[Yuji Naka] I concur. COCONUTS ARE GOOD FOR U!
Post by: capamerica on February 14, 2006, 08:46:26 AM
Story from Joystiq.com
Post by: MysticGohan on February 14, 2006, 08:48:49 AM
We'll see heh.
Post by: capamerica on February 14, 2006, 09:21:21 AM
Might be another mistake cause if you go to GameStop Zelda:TP is listed for June 1st.
Post by: KDR_11k on February 14, 2006, 09:24:57 AM
Post by: stevey on February 14, 2006, 10:54:41 AM
Post by: kirby_killer_dedede on February 14, 2006, 11:27:45 AM
Post by: mantidor on February 14, 2006, 11:39:43 AM
Post by: kirby_killer_dedede on February 14, 2006, 11:46:53 AM
Post by: Smash_Brother on February 14, 2006, 12:00:25 PM
Quote
So for many situations the game plays completely differently? I would consider that making the game twice. It's just an insane amount of work.
Mounted combat is one situation, and like I said, theory. Aiming in first-person mode using the controller would be obvious but wouldn't be "magical" in the least, as Reggie put it.
Quote
Waving my arm is only immersive if the character responds exactly as I moved my arm. Otherwise it's just a more difficult way of doing a button press. It has to be incredibly responsive and Nintendo just doesn't have the time to make Zelda have that kind of control while still making the game completely playable and GOOD on the Cube.
While I'm not going to claim that I have any clue how plausible or non-plausible it is, I DO know that you lack the same knowledge. Connecting the point in 3D space to a wireframe model might be easier than you'd think, or it could be harder. All I'm saying is that ruling it out on a technical basis is impossible because no one here knows what the system will and will not do.
Quote
Plus immersion isn't the purpose of games. That's just a BS term American devs who making boring realistic games use. Immersion is the purpose of virtual reality or simulation and that's not the same thing as gaming. The real purpose of gaming is to provide entertainment. And a game is much more entertaining if the controls are as easy to use. So if something can be assigned to a mere button press it should because it's precise and easier to do than anything. Motion control should only be used when it provides an easier way to control the game and in Zelda's case it wouldn't. It would either be more physically tiring for the user for no reason or if used properly it would make the sword fighting considerably more complex then it really needs to.
Immersion isn't the purpose, having fun is the purpose and immersion is very often a means to that end. MGS, ED, and RE4 were all fun games because they had storylines which pull the player into them: if you're involved, you're immersed. What's the likelihood of enjoying a game when I can't give two sh*ts about the story and its characters (aka PD0)?
Moreover, what you consider complex and tiring, I might consider fun and engaging. I don't think games today are in danger of being too complex, quite the opposite. Most games are so devoid of depth and complexity that it's shameful. I hate when developers tone down a game in order to appeal to a broader audience for fear that the idiot masses won't be able to relate to the game because there's too much thinking required.
Quote
Part of Zelda's charm is that it has always allowed you to do so much with minimal button pressing while at the same time making you feel in control. Things like assigning items to a button and the auto-jump and z-targeting and context sensitive buttons are all examples of this. And the game is always designed so perfectly that none of these things feel like a limitation. There is never a situation where you need a jump button so auto-jump works. In Link's Awakening I can only use two items at once including my sword but I never need to use more than two at once. A part of the beauty of Zelda is that you can have an exciting sword fight with only a few button presses and everything is easy to pull off and very natural. Once you start having motion controlled fighting suddenly things are way more complex and with Zelda that's kind of losing the point. That's ultimately why Zelda clones have never been in the same league as the real thing. The copycats always think they can improve the formula by making things more complicated.
Waiting for the "counter" signal to appear so you can mash the A button is not "exciting". I play Zelda because the puzzles are enjoyable, as are the bosses. The regular fighting encounters are boring and not worth the return in actually doing them, especially when the enemies respawn whenever you reenter the room.
I distinctly remember that, in OoT, I was shocked when the female Gerudo prison guards were actually able to hit me with my shield up because it was the first time in the entire game where the melee combat was forcing me to think beyond "shield, attack, repeat". Windwaker was ridiculously easy, the only "challenge" coming from Ganondorf's fight at the end (and I only burned 2 of 3 fairies on that one).
I'm not advocating a full revamp of Zelda from the ground up to use the Revmote, but I think the incorporation of the controller into the game for something "magical" (as Reggie himself put it) is going to entail something more than a fishing minigame.
Quote
Originally posted by: mantidor
Its not presumptuous. remember OoT? the big Poes that went away in a straight line when you were in horseback? that was made that way because if the ghost start dancing around the horse it would be simply imposible to hit it with an arrow, analog stick doesnt offer that kind of presicion, but apparently the new remote does, that alone opens a whole lot of posibilities for enemies, and it would indeed be a waste if they just map the remote to hit a poe who goes into a straight line. This is a very simple example of the care that Nintendo puts in design, and if they promise to make the best zelda game ever, we have no option but to get absurdly hyped for it, and espect at least the same level of care in the design.
Fair enough, but remember that I'm just tossing out a theory here. I don't know what they actually intend to do, although, by Reggie's own words, I'm confident that they intend to do something which involves the Revmote in some part of the actual gameplay (and not a minigame).
Post by: stevey on February 14, 2006, 12:23:08 PM
Um, reggie want it as far away form the revolution launch a posible.
EGM: Speaking of Zelda, best-case scenario, it's a few months away from the Revolution launch, worst case scenario is it's coming out at the same time. Is there ever a point where you believe that it would be better to switch it over to Revolution? Or does it not matter, since the Revolution will be backward compatible with Cube games?
Reggie: Exactly. I think that our senior management has made it very clear that bringing Zelda: Twilight Princess out on GameCube is important, that we want to satisfy the GameCube fan base and have it be on that system. You've said the obvious, which is that [because] Revolution's backward compatible, it will almost effectively be a launch title for Revolution. The trick will be what makes it special to play on Revolution, and to the extent that we could create something like that, boy, wouldn't that be fantastic? Certainly one of the things that I would love to see is something that makes Zelda, when it's played on Revolution, do something magical. And I think that any Nintendo fan would love to see that.
link
Post by: Ian Sane on February 14, 2006, 12:23:33 PM
I don't know if it's Reggie being inaccurate or NCL just changing their minds willy-nilly about these sorts of things completely ignorant of the negative effect that breaking promises and even outright lying can have on Nintendo's image. NOA is probably kept in the dark most of the time so NCL either just gives them a canned answer that doesn't really have any bearing on reality or NOA just makes a "guess" so that they have a better answer than "I don't know".
I figure Mario 128 has been rethought a couple of times. It likely started as a Cube title but then at some point Nintendo decided to move it to the Rev probably because they figured they couldn't get it done in time to make a Mario launch game for the Rev, something the Cube sorely lacked. Nintendo always plans their next gen well ahead of time. The remote is directly related to their non-gamer strategy which is pretty new. The very concept didn't even really exist until a few years ago. So the Rev probably started off as a "normal" console with Mario 128 in the works for it.
Then Nintendo decides to do this whole blue ocean non-gamer routine which seems to be in direct response to the success of Warioware. It seems like that triggered the whole concept. So Nintendo decides they have to rethink their controller. That takes time. In fact I think the reason we haven't seen any Rev game yet is that it took so long for Nintendo to reinvent the wheel they probably haven't had enough time to have a game far enough along to show. So during this huge redesign Mario 128 is on the backburner. Nintendo comes up with the remote. Now Mario 128 has a problem. It wasn't designed with that type of controller in mind so now it too has to be redesigned.
I've always felt that the Rev controller is the result of someone saying "we have to be innovative and inviting to non-gamers" and then they tinkered with the idea until they came up with the remote. But they didn't necessarily have any actual ideas for the thing as they created it. Or at least it isn't like the N64 controller that was largely created as they made Super Mario 64. So they now have to go "okay what can I do with this?" Mario 128 is expected to showcase the new controller but was probably initially not designed with the controller in mind so EAD is stuck with the difficult task of either seemlessly transfering their original idea to the remote or coming up with a new idea outright with a limited amount of time to do it.
My reasoning for the remote being developed without any ideas is based on my impression of the DS touchscreen. Nintendo launched the DS with only a port as the lone first party launch title and the initial uses of the touchscreen were pretty meh. It suggests to me they thought of the idea but had to scramble for ideas to launch the system in time. Connectivity was largely the same way: a neat feature in theory that Nintendo clearly had no ideas for until after they created it.
Post by: Ian Sane on February 14, 2006, 12:30:55 PM
Oh I agree that Wind Waker's fighting was pretty weak. I was talking about the N64 games. I probably should have, you know, mentioned that.
There's an example of an exciting complex fight pulled off with a streamlined control interface.
Post by: Requiem on February 14, 2006, 02:21:52 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: JonLeung
Dear Nintendo,
I am a big Zelda fan. My birthday is on April 7.
Sincerely,
Jon
You stole my birthday! I want it BACK!
Too bad, you can't steal both of my birthdates you bastard!
I do have two birthdays...............think about it
Post by: Hostile Creation on February 14, 2006, 04:00:22 PM
Chill the f*ck out.
Post by: Bill Aurion on February 14, 2006, 04:18:18 PM
Post by: IceCold on February 14, 2006, 04:27:51 PM
EDIT: The most users ever online was 1383, on Mon November 01, 2004 at 9:51 AM.
Post by: Dasmos on February 14, 2006, 05:34:15 PM
QuoteQUIET! You both stole my brother's birthday...!
Originally posted by: RequiemQuote
Originally posted by: JonLeung
Dear Nintendo,
I am a big Zelda fan. My birthday is on April 7.
Sincerely,
Jon
You stole my birthday! I want it BACK!
Too bad, you can't steal both of my birthdates you bastard!
I do have two birthdays...............think about it
Post by: Smash_Brother on February 14, 2006, 06:09:18 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
Oh I agree that Wind Waker's fighting was pretty weak. I was talking about the N64 games. I probably should have, you know, mentioned that.
Fair enough, but I personally think the fighting in all of the 3D Zeldas wasn't very engaging and it was only the boss battles and puzzles which made the games what they are (and the excellent storyline, of course). Arguably, the boss battles ARE puzzles so it's the points where the game makes me think which I find the most fun, just like how I mentioned that the Gerudo guard battles were among the most memorable because they violated the formula.
Post by: Requiem on February 14, 2006, 06:55:50 PM
Why would Zelda have to be FP in order to play well? Changing the view to FP would require alot of retooling to the game. Why not instead make it third-person as it always has been.
I have come up with a control scheme that I think is very pratical, but I'm sure it has its problems. Anyway, the point is that Zelda could control beautifully if it were to stay in third-person (even if its just for fighting and the like).
Go here to read the control scheme (scroll down a couple posts)
As for Manditor:
I finally understand your complaint. When Nintendo concentrates on a game and how it must be controlled, the game is essentially tooled to make the controller limitations as transparent as possible. Your Big Poe example fortified this point.
Now your saying that if TP were to use the Revmote for the entire quest, its potential would go to waste. A valid point.
However, who cares? You may feel gipped, but you must come to terms that you are not playing Zelda Revolution. So any potential you feel was lost, is not lost at all. You are simply playing Zelda TP, but with a revmote. It is still intended to be played on a GC, but the REV allows for a taste of the future. Plus, can you honestly tell me that 6 months before Zelda REV is due, that you wouldn't be playing TP using the Revmote?
Post by: wandering on February 14, 2006, 10:38:35 PM
Quote
Nintendo always plans their next gen well ahead of time. The remote is directly related to their non-gamer strategy which is pretty new. The very concept didn't even really exist until a few years ago. So the Rev probably started off as a "normal" console with Mario 128 in the works for it.
Then Nintendo decides to do this whole blue ocean non-gamer routine which seems to be in direct response to the success of Warioware. It seems like that triggered the whole concept. So Nintendo decides they have to rethink their controller. That takes time. In fact I think the reason we haven't seen any Rev game yet is that it took so long for Nintendo to reinvent the wheel they probably haven't had enough time to have a game far enough along to show. So during this huge redesign Mario 128 is on the backburner. Nintendo comes up with the remote. Now Mario 128 has a problem. It wasn't designed with that type of controller in mind so now it too has to be redesigned.
I've always felt that the Rev controller is the result of someone saying "we have to be innovative and inviting to non-gamers" and then they tinkered with the idea until they came up with the remote. But they didn't necessarily have any actual ideas for the thing as they created it.
So, to simplify, you think meetings in Nintendo went something like this:
'hey, WarioWare sold well, let's focus on non-gamers now!'
'okay, but we need to throw together some stupid gimmick at the last minute for our next system to do that!'
'okay, how about 3-d motion control!'
I doubt this very much. I think you're being colored by your negative view of the controller.
What's far more likely, is that Nintendo has been playing with motion control for a long time. Miyamoto has probably wanted to use it for years.
Quote
My reasoning for the remote being developed without any ideas is based on my impression of the DS touchscreen. Nintendo launched the DS with only a port as the lone first party launch title and the initial uses of the touchscreen were pretty meh. It suggests to me they thought of the idea but had to scramble for ideas to launch the system in time.
Or maybe the DS was rushed to market to beat the PSP? And maybe, in fact, Nintendogs proves Nintendo's stance that they were kicking around ideas for a touch-screen gameplay in a handheld well before the eventual creation of the DS? Nah.
Post by: couchmonkey on February 15, 2006, 04:50:16 AM
Anyhooo, glad to hear EBGames flubbed. I still wouldn't be surprised if this game gets delayed a little, but I'm hoping for an earlier launch.
Post by: Smash_Brother on February 15, 2006, 06:18:01 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Requiem
Why would Zelda have to be FP in order to play well? Changing the view to FP would require alot of retooling to the game. Why not instead make it third-person as it always has been.
Sorry, that's just my desire for a first person slasher showing through.
I mention the FP sequences because it would be the easiest to map the controls there to the remote.
I like the control scheme you laid out, though.
Post by: Ian Sane on February 15, 2006, 06:51:49 AM
I think that it would be a poor first impression. No one really asked for a new standard so Nintendo has to show that they're really onto something and not just pushing a novelty to attract attention. If all they do is map button presses to gestures then they're not doing anything to justify a major change. All they've done is found a more awkward way to do what we could do before. So it's incredibly important that Nintendo demonstrates right away that the remote really is the future. If Twilight Princess is the first game a lot of Rev owners buy then they have a tainted first impression because all they're playing is a Cube game with the remote.
Imagine if the N64 didn't launch with Super Mario 64. Imagine it launched with an arcade conversion of Street Fighter Alpha. That game uses digital control and is better suited for a d-pad than an analog stick. Imagine if that was the game Nintendo pushed the analog stick with. The stick would have never taken off the way it did because for a game like that the analog stick is just a clumsy imprecise substitute for the d-pad. The fact that they sold N64s on the strength of a game that really demonstrated how crucial the analog stick was for future gaming is why the analog stick took off.
Post by: Smash_Brother on February 15, 2006, 07:34:37 AM
Mario 64 was what it was because it was a fun game. The analogue stick was only "necessary" for the game because the situations in the game which required its use worked well toward making the game fun and challenging.
Again, I don't think a game which uses only the remote and no nunchuck would be necessary. I just think a game has to be more fun through using the remote than it would through using the standard controller to sell its appeal.
Basically, anything to say "You couldn't do it this way without the Revmote" would suffice, so long as doing it that way was more fun.
That doesn't mean that a game which uses the remote entirely isn't a good idea, but I think that a "standard" game which uses the remote in entertaining ways is more important than a so-so tech demo which uses the remote alone.
Post by: trip1eX on February 15, 2006, 09:58:32 AM
Zelda:TP is still scheduled for April 1st 2k6.
Just because a retailer has some backwards date on their computer system means jack. It was just a weak lameass rumour that was quickly thrown around cause some people get bored with reality.
Post by: Bill Aurion on February 15, 2006, 10:02:35 AM
Hahaha!
Post by: Pale on February 15, 2006, 10:09:10 AM
They are freaking d00md.
Post by: vudu on February 15, 2006, 10:37:05 AM
At least it's still coming out for GameCube.
Post by: JonLeung on February 15, 2006, 10:48:22 AM
If I waited until 2500, not only would I have Twilight Princess, but perhaps hundreds of other games in that series alone...as well as Mario Party 502...
Post by: Smash_Brother on February 15, 2006, 10:49:29 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: JonLeung
If I waited until 2500, not only would I have Twilight Princess, but perhaps hundreds of other games in that series alone...as well as Mario Party 502...
I don't intend to buy 502, as I hear 503 will finally introduce online play.
Post by: Ian Sane on February 15, 2006, 10:56:46 AM
Post by: Bill Aurion on February 15, 2006, 11:19:07 AM
Post by: JonLeung on February 15, 2006, 11:31:57 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion
Thankfully it's not my pre-order...I'm not even going to bother getting the game at all, because Nintendo won't even exist in 500 years!
That's right, it'll be Ubertendo, in a time when the prefix "uber" is back in fashion, and it'll be a monopoly of all interactive video entertainment. Actually, it'd probably be an evil empire, and several planets that they've conquered will be named after fictional characters that they used to call "video game characters". Planet Zelda will be a pleasure planet.
Post by: Bill Aurion on February 15, 2006, 12:59:10 PM
We are pleased to let you know that the estimated arrival time for this pre order is 2/15/06 till 2/22/06 this is when we are expected to have it shipped to us.
Thank you,
Paul
Best Buy Customer Care Team"
Hahahahahahahahaha!
Post by: Nile Boogie on February 15, 2006, 01:50:03 PM
It mocks my pain.
I wish it dead.
I want this game.
I hate this thread.
Post by: Requiem on February 15, 2006, 02:12:28 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
"However, who cares? You may feel gipped, but you must come to terms that you are not playing Zelda Revolution. So any potential you feel was lost, is not lost at all. You are simply playing Zelda TP, but with a revmote. It is still intended to be played on a GC, but the REV allows for a taste of the future."
I think that it would be a poor first impression. No one really asked for a new standard so Nintendo has to show that they're really onto something and not just pushing a novelty to attract attention. If all they do is map button presses to gestures then they're not doing anything to justify a major change. All they've done is found a more awkward way to do what we could do before. So it's incredibly important that Nintendo demonstrates right away that the remote really is the future. If Twilight Princess is the first game a lot of Rev owners buy then they have a tainted first impression because all they're playing is a Cube game with the remote.
Imagine if the N64 didn't launch with Super Mario 64. Imagine it launched with an arcade conversion of Street Fighter Alpha. That game uses digital control and is better suited for a d-pad than an analog stick. Imagine if that was the game Nintendo pushed the analog stick with. The stick would have never taken off the way it did because for a game like that the analog stick is just a clumsy imprecise substitute for the d-pad. The fact that they sold N64s on the strength of a game that really demonstrated how crucial the analog stick was for future gaming is why the analog stick took off.
Ian, we both don't know how well the revmote will work, but you have the most pessimistic of views.
Even if Nintendo doesn't change any of the gameplay to make the revmote appear more exciting, what's wrong with tweaking the controls so that it at least plays well? Nintendo could tweak the camera, the items, the fighting, and the horse-back riding to accomadate the revmote. And you now what? It could play brilliantly, especially with Nintendo behind the reigns.
Manditors concern was about the REVs gameplay potential and how it would be lost if TP were to be fully playable with the revmote. Your concern is that it would be a "meaningless" or "sloppy" conversion of control; a conversion that would only make the flawless design awkward. You must realize that those are two different complaints.
Its laughable to think that the control scheme we have today is the best there ever will be. Come on....think outside the box a little.
As for your Mario - streetfighter analogy, that really doesn't apply here. Think of it this way....OOT was rereleased on the GC, and it played better because of it. Yet, if Nintendo really wanted to make OOT special, or even, say....magical, they could have implemented the WW control scheme to make it that much better. Would you bitch about how they not only provided the original control scheme, but also the new one, the one we hadn't yet experience? Would you bitch about how sloppy or meaningless the conversion was even if it played alot better? For your sake, I hope not.
Post by: Ian Sane on February 16, 2006, 06:27:53 AM
I think that's a pretty different experience. The Cube controller is not THAT different from the N64 controller for example, at least not as different as the Rev is from the Cube. The Wind Waker scheme isn't that much different either. It would be a pretty minor change. I don't think Nintendo ever really had to sell the Cube controller because it wasn't that big of a change and it was very similar to the widely received dualshock. And Ocarina of Time was never being pushed as a potential system seller for the Cube. It was just a freebie with a pre-order. There was no pressure so it didn't matter what people thought of it.
It's not hard to come to the conclusion that using the remote merely to replace buttons is a more awkward. Buttons are digital: on or off. It's incredibly easy to determine if you are pushing the button correctly. Motion control doesn't have that. There's a lot of room for it to interpret what you do. You might think you're doing a sideways motion but in reality you're half an inch off so it think you did a diagonal up motion. The analog stick has physical resistance to it and when you stop moving it goes back to the same centre position every time. There is no resistance with motion control. You stop moving when you hold the remote still but that could be in any position. And of course waving a wand is more physically tiring than pushing a button.
Motion control only makes sense to use when what you're doing can't be done any other way. It's just like how an analog stick only makes sense to use when you don't want digital control. I have NEVER played a game designed for a d-pad that played better on an analog stick. It's just more imprecise and harder to use. I've never played a game designed for digital shoulder buttons that didn't play worse with analog shoulder buttons. I think it would be the same way with motion control. Games rarely play well when shoehorned into a control scheme they aren't designed for. They're at best workable but rarely as good.
And since Twilight Princess is being pushed as a system seller it is responsible for selling this new control concept and show that it's something worthwhile. It can't do that if it's just a Cube game using the remote.
I don't think the control scheme we have today is the best there ever will be but I do think that for the games designed for it it's the best. I love the analog stick but games that were never designed for it play like crap on it. Game control is just too precise to just convert something to something else without compromising the way the game plays.
Post by: Smash_Brother on February 16, 2006, 08:49:28 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
Game control is just too precise to just convert something to something else without compromising the way the game plays.
You still seem to be saying that any inclusion of Revmote control in TP will compromise the way the game is played. I fail to see the correlation in, say, using the Revmote to aim my hookshot as opposed to an analogue stick and Zelda being compromised as an enjoyable title.
I don't think anyone here is talking about redoing the entirety of TP to work with the Revmote (I know I'm not). I'm talking about using the Revmote in a few choice places in the game where using it wouldn't interrupt the continuity of the gameplay.
But then again it might go MUCH further than that, as Reggie's quote still stands. As long as the Rev controller has all of the buttons which the cube does, there's no reason why it would be "compromised" on the Rev, but I wouldn't be surprised if Nintendo wants to do more than just that.
Post by: King of Twitch on February 16, 2006, 10:46:04 AM
Post by: vudu on February 16, 2006, 10:56:14 AM
Quote
I am Frank with Best Buy Customer Care.
We are pleased to let you know that this pre order shipped on 11/24/98.
Thank you,
Frank
Best Buy Customer Care Team
Post by: Bill Aurion on February 16, 2006, 10:59:23 AM
Post by: KnowsNothing on February 16, 2006, 11:03:59 AM
Post by: Requiem on February 16, 2006, 04:11:08 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
"OOT was rereleased on the GC, and it played better because of it. Yet, if Nintendo really wanted to make OOT special, or even, say....magical, they could have implemented the WW control scheme to make it that much better. Would you bitch about how they not only provided the original control scheme, but also the new one, the one we hadn't yet experience? Would you bitch about how sloppy or meaningless the conversion was even if it played alot better?"
I think that's a pretty different experience. The Cube controller is not THAT different from the N64 controller for example, at least not as different as the Rev is from the Cube. The Wind Waker scheme isn't that much different either. It would be a pretty minor change. I don't think Nintendo ever really had to sell the Cube controller because it wasn't that big of a change and it was very similar to the widely received dualshock. And Ocarina of Time was never being pushed as a potential system seller for the Cube. It was just a freebie with a pre-order. There was no pressure so it didn't matter what people thought of it.
It's not hard to come to the conclusion that using the remote merely to replace buttons is a more awkward. Buttons are digital: on or off. It's incredibly easy to determine if you are pushing the button correctly. Motion control doesn't have that. There's a lot of room for it to interpret what you do. You might think you're doing a sideways motion but in reality you're half an inch off so it think you did a diagonal up motion. The analog stick has physical resistance to it and when you stop moving it goes back to the same centre position every time. There is no resistance with motion control. You stop moving when you hold the remote still but that could be in any position. And of course waving a wand is more physically tiring than pushing a button.
Motion control only makes sense to use when what you're doing can't be done any other way. It's just like how an analog stick only makes sense to use when you don't want digital control. I have NEVER played a game designed for a d-pad that played better on an analog stick. It's just more imprecise and harder to use. I've never played a game designed for digital shoulder buttons that didn't play worse with analog shoulder buttons. I think it would be the same way with motion control. Games rarely play well when shoehorned into a control scheme they aren't designed for. They're at best workable but rarely as good.
And since Twilight Princess is being pushed as a system seller it is responsible for selling this new control concept and show that it's something worthwhile. It can't do that if it's just a Cube game using the remote.
I don't think the control scheme we have today is the best there ever will be but I do think that for the games designed for it it's the best. I love the analog stick but games that were never designed for it play like crap on it. Game control is just too precise to just convert something to something else without compromising the way the game plays.
So I'm going to take a stab in the dark here and say that you don't like the idea of swinging Link's sword.
That's cool...let's put that point aside then because we can't argue opinions.
How about using the revmote to aim you bow while on your horse? Wouldn't that be a more precise and better experience then the analogue stick? Imagine feeling an effortless glide of freedom as you aim your bow from right to left.
What about using your revmote in general to aim? That would definitely be quicker and more precise than any analgue stick. But what's even more profound is the possibility to aim AND move at the same time.
Don't you hate how you have to stand still while your aiming any item? That will change with the Revmote. You can now run and point your bow at multiple objects as you dodge a boss's attack. You could also run and jump off a cliff only to fire your hookshot at the last second to cross a giant gap.
And what about controlling the camera? I thought WW's camera control was superb, but now it could be even better. You could swivel the camera left or right of you simply by pointing left or right. Manipulating the Revmote would be the most accurate way to control the camera because it can sense x, y, and z.
Anyway, enough with this rant....I'm just giving you something to think about.....
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on February 16, 2006, 04:20:43 PM
Ultimately, I think a Mario platformer would utilize this mechanic to an even greater extent (throwing Bowser for the first time in Mario64 was awesome, but i haven't seen much new with that kind of impact in a Mario title since).
Post by: Artimus on February 18, 2006, 09:56:58 PM
There, I said it.
Post by: Bill Aurion on February 19, 2006, 03:03:20 AM
Post by: nitsu niflheim on February 21, 2006, 02:16:17 AM
Post by: couchmonkey on February 23, 2006, 05:49:35 PM
