Messages

426

TalkBack / Re: Project Café Game Concepts

« on: May 30, 2011, 03:28:12 PM »

I'd say the flaw with this idea is that it's assuming that multiple touch screen controllers will be widely accessible. I don't think that will be the case. Considering how much such a controller would cost, it would pretty much create for the same situation the original had. I have a feeling this 'touch screen controller' is going to be more of a standard peripheral, rather than the standard control method. Considering the Wii's success, completely abandoning the remote concept seems like it would be a pretty dumb move on Nintendo's part. It's my guess that a remote will remain the standard controller. And this touch screen device will have more auxiliary-like purposes--  it will allow you to take taking the action with you around the house and/or for acting as multi-functional add on, like occasionally doubling as a keyboard. That being said, I'd only expect it to be widely used for single player experiences, and the console may not even support multiple ones at a time.

427

TalkBack / Re: Chrono Trigger Releasing on Virtual Console May 16

« on: May 12, 2011, 09:50:05 PM »

Um, how is this "DS" news?

The game was also released on DS in 2008.

I'm going to get this as soon as I can get the Reggies. Wish my new job had started already...

No duh... I own it. My point was this article has nothing to do with the DS release, and at the time they had it only classified as "DS" even though it was clearly about Wii.

428

TalkBack / Re: The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time 3D Impressions

« on: May 12, 2011, 02:16:27 PM »

I know they were trying to shoehorn a hint system here into a game that never had it but I like a subtle "fortune" way of doing it versus blantantly hitting you over the head and telling you what to do.

A game that never had it? Um, OoT actually had two hint systems (Navi and Saria). Both functioned in the same manner as ALttP's fortune teller except they were free.

Since adding a third seems like overkill, perhaps Navi's unsolicited hinting (which was always a major complaint among players) will be removed and these new Gossip Stones are to replace it since so many found it so annoying.

429

TalkBack / Re: Chrono Trigger Releasing on Virtual Console May 16

« on: May 12, 2011, 02:04:12 PM »

Um, how is this "DS" news?

430

TalkBack / Re: Nintendo Announces Wii Successor, Launching in 2012

« on: April 25, 2011, 03:49:15 PM »

I'd love to see the console launch with Pikmin 3, a slew of third party games, and a special Zelda pack containing a directors cut version of Wind Waker and Twilight Princess.

I'd also love to see it be made of solid gold, cost only $1, and have the ability to grant wishes!  :

431

TalkBack / Re: Nintendo Announces Wii Successor, Launching in 2012

« on: April 25, 2011, 03:44:08 PM »

Wii Stream Cafe(TM)

Wii Stream  "Striim" Cafe(TM) 

432

TalkBack / Re: Nintendo Announces Wii Successor, Launching in 2012

« on: April 25, 2011, 03:35:52 PM »

Now that's official, I just want state my predictions for the record, before it's revealed:

• Obviously, the hardware will offer full HD and be on par with, if not significantly more powerful than Xbox 360 and PS3.
• The standard control method will be an upgrade of the basic Wii Remote design.
• The system's "gimmick" will be a wireless streaming feature that will allow for the display to be transferred for viewing on other devices such as a standard multi-functional 6-inch touch pad, or to the 3DS, so a user can play away from the TV when desired, allowing for portability around the house, and freeing up the TV for others to use without disrupting gameplay.
• The 6-in. touch pad, will be a separate peripheral, and NOT part of the standard controller. It will have multiple functions (such as a keyboard, secondary view perspective, writing pad, etc.). It will also have a stand so it can be propped up when desired.
• The system's name will not be revealed this year.

Now, that my predictions have been made, let's wait and see just how accurate I am...

433

TalkBack / Re: Rumor Round-up: Nintendo's Next Console

« on: April 20, 2011, 01:09:17 PM »

Hasn't Nintendo intentionally fed false rumors about upcoming products before?

Yeah, all those talks about "online plans" for the Gamecube.

Once again, the key term here is "intentionally false". Abandoned plans obviously don't qualify.

434

TalkBack / Re: Rumor Round-up: Nintendo's Next Console

« on: April 19, 2011, 11:29:34 AM »

Hasn't Nintendo intentionally fed false rumors about upcoming products before? Seems like they did do that with the Wii before it was unveiled, but I can't put my finger on the specifics.

There were a number of false rumors about the Wii-- I think the most infamous and widely believed one was that it would use 3D projection, but that rumor was never supported by Nintendo. Nintendo did confirm DVD-playback, VGA support, and SSB at launch, none of which actually happened-- but those were all things that truly were initially planned, just ditched at the end-- not intentional false reports meant to mislead. As far as I know, Nintendo has never intentionally done that.

435

TalkBack / Re: Rumor Round-up: Nintendo's Next Console

« on: April 18, 2011, 09:14:20 PM »

Nintendo isn't savvy enough to successfully intentionally spread misinformation. Also, if they're trying to win over third parties, telling different things to different companies, some of which are lies, is not a good way to do that.

Again, I was saying any false leaks would have been aimed at the press, the not developers. The developers would obviously be shown the legitimate working hardware. Of course doing that means potential leaks, and Nintendo knows it  so they purposely have some of their own employees give false info to leak out simultaneously, thus making any legitimate leaks indistinguishable. Companies have been known to do this.

436

TalkBack / Re: Rumor Round-up: Nintendo's Next Console

« on: April 18, 2011, 07:02:17 PM »

Okay, here's my thoughts on this:

Some of these details are so off-the-wall and impractical that I'd easily assume they were just another  part of the regular flow of misinformation constantly being spread across the Internet-- except there seem to be way too many consistencies from too many independent sources for it not to have some legitimacy. Having a controller that has motion controls, dual analog sticks, and a 6-inch touch screen can't possibly be part of the same hardware. I'm thinking it's one of two possibilities: Either Nintendo has purposely concocted multiple false leaks to throw the press off, or at some of these features are in fact for a separate peripheral, and not part if the standard controller. My guess is that the touch-screen is something separate, and the rest will all be part of what will essentially be the standard controller. After, piecing all the reports together (excluding the touch screen), and using some common sense, I've concocted my own concept design:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v292/bman87301/cafe-1.jpg

Basically, it's an update of the Wii remote design, but more ergonomically shaped, and with an added 3DS-style analog circle slider as well as additional face buttons and a shoulder button (when it's on its side), which more or less removes the need for a separate Classic Controller. The B trigger is now analog-pressure sensitive. The Nunchuk is essentially the same only now with a phone-styled coiling cord, and an analog Z button (to go along with the analog B on the remote).

P.S. In case you can't tell, the button on the very top, above the D-pad and Circle slider on the remote is the POWER button.

437

TalkBack / Re: Next Nintendo Console to be Announced in June?

« on: April 14, 2011, 06:42:06 PM »

NEW DETAILS

IGN is reporting that the system is fully backwards compatible and that Nintendo may have a pre-announcement this month.

Does that include GameCube titles?

438

TalkBack / Re: Next Nintendo Console to be Announced in June?

« on: April 14, 2011, 06:30:10 PM »

Then how about catering to both crowds-- just call it the Wii60!  : : : : :

In all seriousness though, I'm almost willing to guarantee the name will be "Wii [something hardcore sounding]". Mark my words, it'll something along the lines of "Wii Nitro", "Wii Nexus", "Wii 3000"... something that will appeal to both casual and hardcore audiences.

439

TalkBack / Re: Next Nintendo Console to be Announced in June?

« on: April 14, 2011, 06:23:10 PM »

They can't use the name Nintendo either because that has a bad rep with the "hardcore" crowd. Also yes get rid of the Wii name, who cares about the brand recognition to the 80+ million who bought Wiis.

Then how about catering to both crowds-- just call it the Wii60!  : :

440

TalkBack / Re: Next Nintendo Console to be Announced in June?

« on: April 14, 2011, 06:06:24 PM »

If this does turn out to be true, I think we'll have our answer on why Skyward Sword was delayed... *cough* GameCube *cough* Twilight Princess *cough*

441

TalkBack / Re: Next Nintendo Console to be Announced in June?

« on: April 14, 2011, 06:00:13 PM »

This certainly would explain the recent drought of upcoming Wii releases. If it's true, I just hope they don't try going too hardcore and release something with a $400+ price tag. The recent increases in food and gas prices have hit me hard and have already forced me to put off getting a 3DS (and I'm sure that's likely one of the reasons 3DS has hit a slump already). And they better not try anything stupid like ditching motion controls as the standard just to appease the outspoken minority.

442

TalkBack / Re: Developer of The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time 3D Revealed

« on: April 12, 2011, 06:11:43 PM »

They must have clothed the fairies.  It would be the only way... (off the top of my head)

I've seen a screenshot of the Great Fairy already-- she's just as scantly clad as ever, so that can't be it. Perhaps they're taking into account the reduced screen size, and considering the action to be less intense in smaller resolution-- but even taking that into account it still doesn't add up since you've got to figure the low resolution of the old N64 models couldn't possibly be considered more graphic than the new hi-res 3DS models no matter how small the scale.

443

TalkBack / Re: Developer of The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time 3D Revealed

« on: April 12, 2011, 06:00:49 PM »

It just could very well be that our standards as a global society have changed since Ocarina of Time released, so what once was considered somewhat troublesome to the ratings board is now seen as incredibly minor.  Consider that since Ocarina of Time released, we've had stuff like God of War; Bulletstorm; Dante's Inferno; Doom 3; Splatterhouse; etc.  Our standards for what is considered "gory" or "explicit" is much higher now than it was in the 90s.  By comparison, what's a few pixelated clouds of blood being coughed up in one scene in an otherwise extremely tame game?

Is there an echo in here? Because that sounds an awful like what I already said...  But if that is the case, it's a little interesting that as recently as four years ago, unless I'm mistaken, it was still considered 'PG' worthy when it was re-released via the Wii Virtual Console.

444

TalkBack / Re: Developer of The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time 3D Revealed

« on: April 12, 2011, 04:01:04 PM »

Maybe the blood from Ganon's mouth is removed for the G rating?

No, that wouldn't have mattered. That was already removed early on and only appeared in very early copies of the game, so that couldn't have been the reason. I find this pretty odd considering the updated graphics  should make it more worthy of a higher rating. It could just be that the standards have gotten less strict over the years.

445

TalkBack / Re: If I Were in Charge of Zelda

« on: April 12, 2011, 09:54:47 AM »

I think you should guys should consider renaming this feature from "If I Were in Charge of Zelda" to "How to completely destroy the series even more so".

446

TalkBack / Re: If I Were in Charge of Zelda

« on: April 07, 2011, 12:42:38 PM »

LOL... I can't say I blame you for hiding in a corner. It's true that the Zelda canon has gotten pretty complicated and confusing over the years, and it's far from straightforward and full of gaps, but there actually is an official order to the timeline that has been confirmed by Aonuma and Miyamoto. You said "A common belief is that Majora’s Mask takes place in an alternate timeline that starts right after the end of Ocarina of Time".  It's hardly just "a common belief", because that part is official canon. If you took the time to do a little more research before posting this you'd know Aonuma and Miyamoto have established the following order at one point or the other:


ALttP> LA
^
TP
^
OoT (past)>MM       

---
WW> PH
^
OoT (future)

Where the other games fit in is anyone's guess, but at least that much is established.

I actually already summarized how they all fit together in a previous post:

He got the Triforce by tricking Zelda and Link into opening the entrance to where the Triforce was kept. Link then experienced an alternate future where Ganondorf only obtained the Triforce of Power (whereas he had the full Triforce in ALttP) while the other two parts went to Zelda and Link, who battle and defeat him and ultimately seal him away in a confusingly similar way to how he was said to have been sealed away in ALttP's history, yet clearly not the same since here, there are only six sages instead of the seven, and they weren't all human either so they couldn't be the ancestors of the maidens from ALttP. This is soon proven to be the case as Zelda then sends Link back to the past where he closes the gate by returning the Master Sword while Ganondorf was still off in the Sacred Realm, thus preventing him from returning, instead allowing him to obtain the full Triforce but leaving him unable to return, which would lead up to the ALttP history instead, but apparently not before he ends up meeting some guy named Zant and causes more trouble.

Oh yeah, also:

Even though that other timeline was prevented, it still somehow existed and resulted in Hyrule being flooded generations later which apparently led to the Zoras somehow evolving into a birds and Ganondorf turning into a statue... But it's apparently not worth explaining, since it all takes place in a defunct timeline anyways, so we're apparently just supposed to ignore it for now and pretend it never happened (unless of course they change their minds and try to resurrect the idea in the future).

As convoluted as it sounds, it does fit together (aside from the Wind Waker timeline which clearly wasn't at all thought out.)

It's really not up for debate over when MM takes place. The official story puts it after the events of OoT (which ends with Link returning to the past and averting everything that would have happened in the future). OoT Link's only contribution to the main timeline was up to when he lifted the Master Sword, allowing Ganondorf to enter Sacred Realm. After that, the timeline changed since Young Link closed the seal by returning the sword locking Ganondorf inside (allowing Link to move on with his life and somehow wander into a land called Termina located in an other dimension, as so many young boys do).  Besides, the plot to WW is that Link never returned to save Hyrule which is why it flooded, so even if Link did die during MM, nothing would affect those events anyways.

I have to say I'm a little disappointed to see a staff writer make this kind of mistake in an official article. When we want to read hastily written, uninformed rants filled with biased ideas and misinformation we'll just read the forums! :-P

447

TalkBack / Re: If I Were in Charge of Zelda

« on: April 06, 2011, 11:53:46 AM »

Nintendo has to try to please both me and Bman.  And they also have to try to please Nicholas who wants a more Metroid style design.  There are so many directions to go in and so many different elements of Zelda that different fans prefer.

That thinking is part of the problem in the first place. It's not possible to please all the people all the time... and trying to cater everybody usually just alienates the majority. Nintendo needs to focus on the mainstream Zelda audience and ignore the fringe ideas... at least for use in Zelda games...  but one of Nintendo's biggest issues is that they don't embrace new franchises enough. They usually just try to capitalize on the name recognition of established franchises and too often try to incorporate new ideas into franchises where they don't belong, rather than using them in new franchises where they'd work better. They need to build upon the structures what work in established series, not make something completely different with old characters thrown-in to connect it for name recognition (Majora's Mask). Of course, they also need to make sure the people recreating that structure understands what exactly makes it work in the first place, otherwise you're just going to get an incomplete idea that brings a lot back, but fails to fully hit the mark (Twilight Princess).

Aonuma has great ideas, they just don't fit in Zeldas, and he doesn't understand what makes old Zeldas work well enough to recreate them.

448

TalkBack / Re: If I Were in Charge of Zelda

« on: April 06, 2011, 10:52:04 AM »

Considering Skyward Sword is going to be the very first Zelda in the timeline (I know, lol zelda timeline) that will tell the story of how the Master Sword was made, it's virtually impossible for Ganon to be the villain of this game.  Unless of course they do a Terminator style storyline were Ganon has traveled back in time to prevent the Master Sword  from ever being created.

Actually I was referring to the proposed by idea in the article, not Skyward Sword which wasn't part of discussion. We can't really make any assumptions on Skyward Sword plot-wise until it's out. Sure, it's supposedly going to be the first game chronologically, but then again we were also told that Wind Waker would take place exactly 100 years after OoT. We were also told TP would have more dungeons than OoT and would have fully orchestrated music. With Aonuma's lack of understanding of the story, along with Nintendo's apparent  refusal to allow to let things stray too far from OoT, we can't make any assumptions... especially any based on logic. Sadly, based on the current path the series has been going, that whole "Terminator" premise seems frighteningly all too likely. That's why I'm not at all getting my hopes up for this game... I'm just going to assume for the worse, then if it's not I'll be pleasantly surprised.

449

TalkBack / Re: If I Were in Charge of Zelda

« on: April 05, 2011, 05:42:23 PM »

Since Aonuma took over the series there has been a lot less dungeons and a new emphasis on NPCs and too many side quests-- and that just doesn't work in a Zelda game. What recent Zeldas have really been lacking is an emphasis on dungeons.  Don't get me wrong, I loved concept behind Majora's Mask. It was brilliant in its own right... but not as a Zelda game.  They should have reworked it with original characters and made it its own franchise. Presenting it as a Zelda game doomed it to be a failure.

See this just demonstrates the tremendous task that Nintendo has before them.  My attitude about Zelda is completely the opposite.  I feel that Zelda has gotten better as more sidequests and NPCs are introduced.  To me if you're just going to focus on dungeons it might as well be a linear action game with levels.  I find it annoying when some Zelda games towards the end just start going dungeon-dungeon-dungeon with no breathing room in between and my favourite games are the ones that go back and forth.

You kind of just proved my point. I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that your first Zelda experience was probably with OoT or later. If that's the case then obviously you look as the series differently than myself, who has played every game in order from the time they were released. If Majora's Mask were its own game instead we wouldn't be questioning which direction the Zelda series should go in based off it because it would be comparing apples and oranges.  Majora's Mask was a good game. Star Fox Adventures was a good game too, but it played nothing like previously SF game... for one thing it wasn't even originally intended to be Star Fox-related at all.  The end result was was terrible as a Star Fox game.  To someone whose first experience was with SFA and they enjoyed it, that person is going to want more of the same. That's where the problem lies. If SFA were released as Dinosaur Planet as it was originally designed to be, DP fans would be separate from SF fans. But instead, Nintendo wanted to cash in on SF64's success, so they stamped the SF brand on DP and look what happened to SF after that-- they tried to cater to bother audiences with Star Fox Assault and the series fell apart after that. If point is, if a game is part of an established series, it has to follow the traditions of its predecessors. If it strays too far away from them, it should be its own game.

450

TalkBack / Re: If I Were in Charge of Zelda

« on: April 05, 2011, 02:28:12 PM »

This is a subject I have so many strong opinions about, I could literally write an entire book on it. But I'll try to restrain my self and keep this as brief as possible. First off, Zelda games have gotten too linear in recent years, and there definitely needs to be more freedom but a lot of what  you seem to be suggesting sounds like it might going too far and crossing into Metroid territory-- it certainly shouldn't go that far. Besides, a lot of that is exactly what they've already been doing in more recent games to make up for the lack of dungeons. Instead we get stuck with unavoidable boring fetch quests which bogs down the game and slows down the story progression. The source of the problem is  too much busy work between dungeons in the first place.  If they combined a full set of dungeons with the same fetch quests, things would would be bogged down even worse.
 
 Since Aonuma took over the series there has been a lot less dungeons and a new emphasis on NPCs and too many side quests-- and that just doesn't work in a Zelda game. What recent Zeldas have really been lacking is an emphasis on dungeons.  Don't get me wrong, I loved concept behind Majora's Mask. It was brilliant in its own right... but not as a Zelda game.  They should have reworked it with original characters and made it its own franchise. Presenting it as a Zelda game doomed it to be a failure.
 
 The dungeons are the core of the series and what makes a Zelda game. And while NPCs and side quests are great additions,  but most of them need to be optional and they definitely can't be made the main focus of the game. OoT did it perfectly, after that they started going overboard.
 
 Nintendo needs to look back at the original design and how it evolved. In the early days, there was little story and virtually no side quests.  The first game had a full set of nine initial dungeons and after that there was a second quest with nine more-- a total of 18 dungeons total. Starting with ALttP, they added in more story elements and side quests, while it resulted in less dungeons (three in the first quest, eight in the second), it made for better balance an overall better presentation. That same basic structure was continued in OoT, which is generally considered one of the greatest games of all time. It was a clear winning formula, so since it wasn't broken there's no need to keep trying to fix it. Go back to that structure and then just come up with a new story and plot device.
 
 As for story, your idea of splitting up the Triforce's resting place sounds great and certainly could have worked at one point, but you're overlooking another reoccurring problem in recent Zelda games-- story redundancy. The origin of Ganon and the Triforce has already been told, expanded deeper, redundantly retold, and inconsistently retold again to the point of ridiculousness:
 
Ganon is a magical blue pig who used to be a human thief named Ganondorf who found the Triforce which transformed him and gave him his power.

Later this was expanded upon:

He got the Triforce by tricking Zelda and Link into opening the entrance to where the Triforce was kept. Link then experienced an alternate future where Ganondorf only obtained the Triforce of Power (whereas he had the full Triforce in ALttP) while the other two parts went to Zelda and Link, who battle and defeat him and ultimately seal him away in a confusingly similar way to how he was said to have been sealed away in ALttP's history, yet clearly not the same since here, there are only six sages instead of the seven, and they weren't all human either so they couldn't be the ancestors of the maidens from ALttP. This is soon proven to be the case as Zelda then sends Link back to the past where he closes the gate by returning the Master Sword while Ganondorf was still off in the Sacred Realm, thus preventing him from returning, instead allowing him to obtain the full Triforce but leaving him unable to return, which would lead up to the ALttP history instead, but apparently not before he ends up meeting some guy named Zant and causes more trouble.

Oh yeah, also:

Even though that other timeline was prevented, it still somehow existed and resulted in Hyrule being flooded generations later which apparently led to the Zoras somehow evolving into a birds and Ganondorf turning into a statue... But it's apparently not worth explaining, since it all takes place in a defunct timeline anyways, so we're apparently just supposed to ignore it for now and pretend it never happened (unless of course they change their mind try resurrect the idea in the future).
 
Clearly, Ganon's story has already been told to death. It's time to move the story forward, not complicate it more.