Author Topic: Nintendo France confirms Rev controls for Zelda (Read 14938 times)

Bill Aurion · « **Reply #25 on:** February 28, 2006, 09:15:31 AM »

"As for this violent battle stuff, geez Nintendo we just didn't want Zelda to be a cartoon."

Who's "we"? Excuse me while I go VOMIT in disgust...

Ian Sane · « **Reply #26 on:** February 28, 2006, 09:37:11 AM »

"Who's 'we'?"

Would you prefer if I said "those who preferred the Spaceworld 2000 look to Wind Waker" instead of "we"? Anyhoo that's what I mean.

Smash_Brother · « **Reply #27 on:** February 28, 2006, 09:39:05 AM »

Personally, I think the cel-shading engine should have been used for a new Kid Icarus or Earthbound game.

mantidor · « **Reply #28 on:** February 28, 2006, 09:47:10 AM »

If Nintendo is insane enough to really make Zelda a "violent" game Ill fully blame Ian and all the people who whined so much about the Wind Waker style, and I will beat them to death with a baseball bat on top of that ok not really

Its a really far-fetched idea, but the mere thought of it made my stomach to revolt, the translator really had the poorest choice of words, because I still cant believe a Nintendo Rep said Zelda was going to have a "violent" anything.

Smash_Brother · « **Reply #29 on:** February 28, 2006, 09:50:35 AM »

Well, how violent does "violent" need to be?

In WW, I slashed creeping vines that spewed green blood everywhere. I lit enemies on fire and stabbed and slashed them to death.

And I drove my sword right into Ganondorf's forehead.

What exactly could Zelda include while still maintaining a T rating which would be more "violent" than what we've already seen?

I think it's a poor translation and I highly doubt you have anything to worry about.

Bill Aurion · « **Reply #30 on:** February 28, 2006, 10:31:23 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
Would you prefer if I said "those who preferred the Spaceworld 2000 look to Wind Waker" instead of "we"? Anyhoo that's what I mean.

No, I prefer "people who are incredibly shallow and don't deserve to play the Zelda series."

Smash_Brother · « **Reply #31 on:** February 28, 2006, 11:04:46 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion
No, I prefer "people who are incredibly shallow and don't deserve to play the Zelda series."

Shallow money still counts as legal tender.

If TP doesn't outsell WW, I'll eat my cats.

Ian Sane · « **Reply #32 on:** February 28, 2006, 11:06:17 AM »

"If TP doesn't outsell WW, I'll eat my cats."

I don't know. It might not considering how unpopular the Cube is and how late it's being released.

Smash_Brother · « **Reply #33 on:** February 28, 2006, 11:10:53 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
I don't know. It might not considering how unpopular the Cube is and how late it's being released.

I know that danger is there, but I've just heard too many stories about gamers, after 3-4 years of owning an xbox, who saw the TP screens/videos and now feel as though they bought the wrong console to believe otherwise.

That, and I do strongly believe it'll be one of the games basically everyone buys with a Rev.

nemo_83 · « **Reply #34 on:** February 28, 2006, 12:19:04 PM »

They better figure out real fast whether or not they are going to include remote functionality in the sourcecode. I want to know if I can now throw away the Cube and skip on the "Cube version" and pick up the "Revolution version" which is not different other than expensive packaging and three hundred cents more burning on the disk.

The violence, considering its Nintendo, is exagerated. I would welcome it, to be able to cut off limbs using the remote on Revolution, to cut away whatever you swing. It would require you to actually hit the weak points on enemies rather than leaning on the targeting.

UncleBob · « **Reply #35 on:** February 28, 2006, 12:28:27 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Smash_Brother
If TP doesn't outsell WW, I'll eat my cats.

A Backstreet Boys CD might outsell WindWaker, but that doesn't mean it's better. :Þ

MaryJane · « **Reply #36 on:** February 28, 2006, 12:39:20 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: vudu
Quote
As for this violent battle stuff, geez Nintendo we just didn't want Zelda to be a cartoon. You don't have to go all "Warrior Within" on us. Look at Majora's Mask. That's what we want when we say we want a "mature Zelda".
But didn't you know ... Liiiiiink ... stands alone.

Too funny vudu, i'm still laughing.

Anyway, what's wrong with violence. I say give me gore, blood, head rolling around, limbs being detached, bloody impales, maybe even some blood curdling screams. I don't get you guys at all. You say you want more realism in games, more immersion, and good graphics do that? No! When you swing a sword damage is done. Make the damage more real, by making it more explicit. I'll tell you what, get a sharp sword, or better yet get a master sword, a sword so strong it can repel the greatest evil in the land... then swing it at someone's neck, if their head doesn't fall off, then i'm wrong the LoZ games are real enough. Maybe it's just me, but I love movies like Gladiator, Braveheart, The Patriot. I mean dismemberment is a part of war and fighting, you want realism, you better be ready for blood and gore. Of course, if they make the game without it, I'd be just as satisfied.

stevey · « **Reply #37 on:** February 28, 2006, 12:48:59 PM »

Their wont be two versions or rev controls/stuff in tp, reggie said so just a few week ago in spike

that the only thing this zelda has going for it on the rev is that the game with play on it and that all and has said that for a year now what dont you get! die! die! Why wont this fake lieing story die!!!

Smash_Brother · « **Reply #38 on:** February 28, 2006, 12:52:18 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: UncleBob
A Backstreet Boys CD might outsell WindWaker, but that doesn't mean it's better. :Þ

GTA outsold WW tenfold. Doesn't mean it's better, either.

But Nintendo could still use that money.

Ian Sane · « **Reply #39 on:** February 28, 2006, 01:04:37 PM »

"A Backstreet Boys CD might outsell WindWaker, but that doesn't mean it's better. :Þ"

It won't be hard to make a better Zelda than Wind Waker. I love that game but it is easily the weakest of the 3D Zeldas and one of the weakest of the EAD titles. And that has nothing to do with the graphics either. Actually that's more of a huge compliment to the Zelda series as a whole that a game as good as Wind Waker is one of the weaker efforts.

"Anyway, what's wrong with violence."

It just seems inappropriate. Zelda never had to have gore or anything like that before to be affective. If you're striving for realism then it makes sense but Zelda isn't realistic. It has elves and magic and monsters and all sorts of non-realistic elements. It's funny that Twilight Princess's look is considered realistic because it's actually quite stylish. The characters for example aren't to realistic scale. Their eyes are too big for example. It's not a cartoon but it's not photo-realism either. I would consider realistic violence in Zelda to be as out-of-place as the visuals in Wind Waker. My biggest problem with those graphics is that they were totally different then the Zelda style I was accustomed to*. Blood and guts would be the same sort of departure.

Plus Zelda is supposed to be kid-friendly. It doesn't have to be super cheery to do this but it shouldn't be overly dark either. Nintendo found a happy-medium with the N64 titles and they shouldn't overcompensate in either direction.

*someone is going to say that Wind Waker's graphics are more true to the original game. I don't see the resemblance and feel Ocarina of Time is pretty much exactly what I figured the 2D Zeldas would look like in 3D. Wind Waker's style to me is like Paper Mario.

Artimus · « **Reply #40 on:** February 28, 2006, 01:08:23 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
I would consider realistic violence in Zelda to be as out-of-place as the visuals in Wind Waker.

You've never played the SNES, GB or NES Zeldas!? Wow! You need to, they're so good.

Ian Sane · « **Reply #41 on:** February 28, 2006, 01:11:49 PM »

"You've never played the SNES, GB or NES Zeldas!? Wow! You need to, they're so good."

I've played all the Zeldas, smart guy (well except the CD-i ones). Read the asterisk in my last post.

mantidor · « **Reply #42 on:** February 28, 2006, 01:15:47 PM »

oh please Ian, Link's hair is even pink in a Link to the Past, all the monsters look cartoony, all the NPC are cartoony and super deformed, seriously did we play the same game?

RiskyChris · « **Reply #43 on:** February 28, 2006, 01:16:22 PM »

Wind Waker is not far from what I'd envision Link's Awakening from looking like, ideally.

pudu · « **Reply #44 on:** February 28, 2006, 01:16:57 PM »

Hmm lets see...the Rev comes with 512 MB of built in Flash Memory. How much memory would it actually take to add Rev functionality to TP (or any other game they might want to for that matter). I'm not saying they should make a habbit of this but they could first release it on cube and then announce that the rev will be able to download a small free patch to make it then work with the revmote. They could also release it with two versions as long as they made a patch for those who already bought it on Cube and now own a Rev.

Smash_Brother · « **Reply #45 on:** February 28, 2006, 01:19:18 PM »

[defending Ian] I'd chalk that up to graphical limitation rather than inherent style. Remember, Miyamoto even admitted the reason the Mario Bros. have mustaches is due to the fact that he couldn't draw mouthes. [/defending Ian]

Since OoT is the first Zelda game in 3D, I'd use that as a guideline for what the franchise is "supposed" to look like. From what I understand, no one complained about it.

Ian Sane · « **Reply #46 on:** February 28, 2006, 01:43:51 PM »

The ultimate example of the difference in styles is comparing A Link to the Past to Minish Cap which is done in the Wind Waker style. The Moblins for example look totally different. Ideally the games would look virtually the same if they were the same style.

All I know is when I first saw Ocarina of Time it was exactly what I envisioned A Link to the Past in 3D looking like and the first time I saw Wind Waker I was like "WTF is this cartoon sh!t". Plus whenever an enemy from a previous game appeared in Ocarina I recognized it while in Wind Waker I usually didn't at first. This is just how I see it and someone else could interpret things differently.

The graphic limitations arguement is one I support. When NES and SNES games were made typically I imagined they were supposed to look a certain way but couldn't because it wasn't possible. Even now I don't see 2D graphics as a literal respresentation for something. When I see a short midget in a 2D RPG I don't think of a midget. I assume they're full sized people. I never saw Link as a stubby disproportioned big headed midget. I saw the sprite and thought he was an elf like you would see in Lord of the Rings.

One thing that also doens't fit to me is that cel-shading looks find of flat. The 2D Zelda games didn't appear flat. There was always effort put in to make the 2D art have depth. When I see graphics with depth to them in 2D I assume that transfered over to 3D they'll have more subtle colouring and lighting and such.

None of the Links in the 2D Zelda had pig feet and cat eyes.

mantidor · « **Reply #47 on:** February 28, 2006, 01:44:11 PM »

No, the thing with Ocarina is that it was 3D and that simply blew us all away, the graphics themselves took a second stand, the game lacks some sort of art direction like Majora's Mask, the Wind Waker or even the handheld games like the Minish Cap, by any standards is pretty generic, but the added dimension was impressive enough to make the game outstanding.

The way I see it, most people think that doing OoT clone would be enough, but it simply isnt, the impression Ocarina made was so strong that I can understand what Ian and Smash Brother think, but if Nintendo wouldve just made Zelda with this "realistic" style for GC you wouldve end up dissapointed, because what made Ocarina so big wasnt the generic fantasy "realistic" lack of art direction, was the innovation in bringing a 3D world to life, and having the Wind Waker in realistic graphics wouldnt have the slightest chance to achieve the same effect. Theres a reason why we are geting a wolf and Midna and crazy cellshaded world and god knows what other new things for Twilight Princess.

Chris1 · « **Reply #48 on:** February 28, 2006, 04:52:21 PM »

Does anyone remember that inteview when Miyamoto said that the Wind Waker was how he envisioned Zelda all along? I remember reading that some time ago.

RiskyChris · « **Reply #49 on:** February 28, 2006, 05:01:57 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
The graphic limitations arguement is one I support. When NES and SNES games were made typically I imagined they were supposed to look a certain way but couldn't because it wasn't possible. Even now I don't see 2D graphics as a literal respresentation for something. When I see a short midget in a 2D RPG I don't think of a midget. I assume they're full sized people. I never saw Link as a stubby disproportioned big headed midget. I saw the sprite and thought he was an elf like you would see in Lord of the Rings.

One thing that also doens't fit to me is that cel-shading looks find of flat. The 2D Zelda games didn't appear flat. There was always effort put in to make the 2D art have depth. When I see graphics with depth to them in 2D I assume that transfered over to 3D they'll have more subtle colouring and lighting and such.

None of the Links in the 2D Zelda had pig feet and cat eyes.

The giant head in LTTP really gave away the fact that Link was disproportionate.

Did you even play Wind Waker? The lighting took away any feeling of a flat world. I used to think like you until I actually got my hands on the game and played. The artistic style completely trumps OoT's (which, by any standard lacks art).

News:

Author Topic: Nintendo France confirms Rev controls for Zelda (Read 14938 times)