Post by: Avinash_Tyagi on February 18, 2005, 10:21:41 AM
There will definitely be Zelda game on the DS
The concept of The Legend of Zelda: Four Swords was an experiment for possible DS games, and to see what double screens could produce.
However it would be “shameful” not to have a true Zelda along with a Four Swords-eqsue version, so is that possibly two DS Zelda games already?
The Legend of Zelda for the GameCube is finished, but Nintendo are remaining tightlipped about everything; title, theme, everything. (So no Gates of the Realm. None)
Link’s next adventure on the GameCube will be out in Japan at the end of the year, and “will be very, very beautiful.
Cubed3.com
Post by: kirby_killer_dedede on February 18, 2005, 10:27:25 AM
Post by: Avinash_Tyagi on February 18, 2005, 10:29:53 AM
Post by: vudu on February 18, 2005, 10:32:04 AM
QuoteAnyone else find that sentence hysterical?
Eiji Aonuma’s exact words can be found at Jeux-France
Post by: Bill Aurion on February 18, 2005, 10:38:14 AM
Sounds more like Aonuma is disappointed that Four Swords inspired the DS, yet a DS version still hasn't been showed...(irony)
Post by: Pale on February 18, 2005, 10:44:25 AM
Post by: Avinash_Tyagi on February 18, 2005, 10:44:55 AM
Quote
The gameplay ideas we came up with for Four Swords provided examples on what kind of games would be possible on the Nintendo DS and what kind of advantages the double-screen would enable. It was all theoretical, but today we realize it's a pity -- a real shame -- that we haven't created a demonstration of a real, great Zelda game for DS."
Sounds more like Aonuma is disappointed that Four Swords inspired the DS, yet a DS version still hasn't been showed...(irony)
Probably depends on who has the better translation, though in truth I'd be surprised if a "real" zelda game wasn't in development for the DS, wouldn't you?
Post by: PaLaDiN on February 18, 2005, 11:24:17 AM
It seems to me that Four Swords DS has undergone a transformation into a better Zelda DS. Who knows, Four Swords might be the multiplayer part.
The rest of the translation is accurate... Zelda GC is already done and will be beautiful, Eiji was 200% involved and it's set after WW.
Post by: joshnickerson on February 18, 2005, 12:00:00 PM
Actually, that does make more sense. Target it for a holiday release, and since it's finished, we won't have to worry about any possible delays.
Post by: Bill Aurion on February 18, 2005, 12:01:59 PM
Post by: Avinash_Tyagi on February 18, 2005, 12:03:21 PM
Post by: PaLaDiN on February 18, 2005, 12:22:24 PM
"Le prochain épisode de Zelda conçu pour GameCube est déjà achevé" means "Zelda GC is already done."
If there's a translation error, it's Jeux-France's fault.
Post by: Savior on February 18, 2005, 01:14:53 PM
Post by: PaLaDiN on February 18, 2005, 01:40:05 PM
Post by: Hostile Creation on February 18, 2005, 01:50:29 PM
Quote
Anyone else find that sentence hysterical?
I saw the irony in it, yes
Post by: Savior on February 18, 2005, 03:38:58 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: PaLaDiN
Oh dear God, I sincerely hope it isn't 3D. I want a proper 2D Zelda... don't halfass it by switching dimensions and hoping the mainstream is satisfied.
Good for you, just buy Four Swords, ill buy a new 3D Zelda. We both can be happy
Post by: Bill Aurion on February 18, 2005, 03:53:21 PM
Post by: Savior on February 18, 2005, 04:06:53 PM
Its going to be better than the Four Swords, trackers spinoff junk anyways
Post by: PaLaDiN on February 18, 2005, 04:24:44 PM
I'm hoping that means it's going to be celshaded again.
Probably not though... oh well.
As for better than 4 swords... it's 3D, so not likely. Most likely it'll be another OoT... most overrated game ever and epic disappointment after LttP.
By all means, enjoy your apple. It's got worms in it.
Post by: Caillan on February 18, 2005, 05:23:39 PM
I'm not too fussed whether or not it's 3D or 2D.
Post by: Djunknown on February 18, 2005, 05:38:50 PM
Some other intresting tidbits:
Quote
Le prochain épisode de Zelda conçu pour GameCube est déjà achevé mais je ne peux absolument rien en dire de plus
" the next Zelda [concept] for the gamecube is already finished, but I can't absolutely say can't say anyomore"
Brackets mine. Concu is the past tense of "conceive" but I took a more loose translation as concept. Because as you read more:
Quote
Ce prochain grand Zelda, qui fait suite chronologiquement à l'épisode WindWaker, sortira au Japon à la fin 2005.
"This next big Zelda, which follows after [chronologically] after the Wind Waker, [come out] to Japan at the end of 2005"
the word "Sortira" literally means "Go out" so I took a looser translation here. So the big man is shooting for a late 2k5 release for Japan? That's why it makes sense that they have the concept down of what the next Zelda's going to be like, not that its 100 percent complete.
Also, it may seem Aonuma wasn't lying about this being a sequel to Wind Waker. Maybe it'll be like the releationship betwen OoT and Wind Waker? We'll see.
Post by: Bill Aurion on February 18, 2005, 05:39:12 PM
Post by: Savior on February 18, 2005, 05:45:17 PM
oh and i know its unrelated to the Ds... but the stuff on the GCN Zelda is interesting... after Wind Waker? so its Wind Waker link on Epona? not OOT link?
Post by: Bill Aurion on February 18, 2005, 05:48:16 PM
And yes, it's most likely Wind Waker Link...It's definitely not OoT Link...
Post by: Mario on February 18, 2005, 05:49:11 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Savior
By your logic, its pointless to make 3D Games on the Ds! i mean theres Mario Sunshine why make Mario DS?
Uh, no. That's your stupid logic that you just made up on the spot.
Quote
oh and i know its unrelated to the Ds... but the stuff on the GCN Zelda is interesting... after Wind Waker? so its Wind Waker link on Epona? not OOT link?
It is Epona? I don't think so.
Post by: Savior on February 18, 2005, 05:55:52 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: MarioQuote
Originally posted by: Savior
By your logic, its pointless to make 3D Games on the Ds! i mean theres Mario Sunshine why make Mario DS?
Uh, no. That's your stupid logic that you just made up on the spot.Quote
oh and i know its unrelated to the Ds... but the stuff on the GCN Zelda is interesting... after Wind Waker? so its Wind Waker link on Epona? not OOT link?
It is Epona? I don't think so.
Quote
I think 3d in handhelds is pointless
Not stupid logic to me.
Sure looks like Epona from the Screen Shots... but who knows
Post by: Bill Aurion on February 18, 2005, 06:00:30 PM
Post by: Savior on February 18, 2005, 06:05:47 PM
Some new horse racing mini games would be killer
racing for rupees!
Post by: Caillan on February 18, 2005, 06:13:13 PM
Quote
Using toon-shading would be the only thing that would get me to accept a 3d handheld Zelda...There's absolutely no reason to have the same 3d style on both console and handheld...
We've already got a toon-shaded Zelda, and we're getting the other style as well. It doesn't matter what they use for the handheld one, there'll be one with the same on the Cube as well.
Quote
Uh, no. That's your stupid logic that you just made up on the spot.
Bill said that having a handheld Zelda game with the same graphical style as a console Zelda game is stupid. Both Super Mario 64 DS and the sidescrolling one use graphics similar to Sunshine's. Therefore both games will suck, or something.
Post by: Bill Aurion on February 18, 2005, 06:40:44 PM
Post by: PaLaDiN on February 18, 2005, 07:10:54 PM
Brackets mine. Concu is the past tense of "conceive" but I took a more loose translation as concept."
The interview was French. There's no way that translates even loosely to what you're saying because concu means "that has been conceived". The conception was already finished a long time ago, what he's saying is already finished now is the Zelda game itself.
What he's saying is "The next Zelda, that was conceived for Gamecube, is already finished."
"the word "Sortira" literally means "Go out" so I took a looser translation here. So the big man is shooting for a late 2k5 release for Japan? That's why it makes sense that they have the concept down of what the next Zelda's going to be like, not that its 100 percent complete."
No, actually. "Sortira" is future tense of "sortir". It means "will come out".
It's possible the interview itself required translators for Eiji who didn't do their job right (this was a French magazine directly interviewing Aonuma if I'm not mistaken). In which case those translators should get fired.
The part of the interview that supports your argument better is this:
"Je suis engagé à 200 % dans son développement", which means "I am 200% involved in its development.", when they should have used "je me suis engagé", which is "I involved myself". That means he's still involved in its development.
So either the article writer or the interview translator needs to be beheaded.
Post by: Ian Sane on February 18, 2005, 07:15:13 PM
I agree with Bill in that it would be good for Zelda DS to differ from the Gamecube Zelda. There's a couple different takes on Zelda now and since there are multiple systems to work with they might as well try different things out. When the new Cube Zelda was first shown some people were upset because they preferred Wind Waker's style. My arguement at the time was we were getting the best scenario because we were getting BOTH styles. It was the perfect compromise. Everyone got something they wanted and those of us who are less superfiscial got TWO games we were interested in. Everybody won.
I don't feel that they absolutely must do something different on a portable than they do on a console but I think it's a better approach. Otherwise why even make seperate systems? If both consoles and portables have the exact same types of games then just make one system that can act as both.
Personally I want Zelda DS to be 2D because I'm afraid 2D is going to get killed off by the PSP and I want to see it survive. I love how when Nintendo decided to make Metroid Prime they made a direct 2D sequel to Super Metroid at the exact same time. They kept the classic format alive while also going off in an exciting new direction. They've done this so far with Zelda as well and I want them to continue to do this. Otherwise it will be like Mario where we wonder if we'll ever see a new 2D Mario platformer ever again.
Post by: Caillan on February 18, 2005, 10:34:32 PM
"Using toon-shading would be the only thing that would get me to accept a 3d handheld Zelda..."
"But anyone should realize that playing the same looking game on both the console and handheld is stupid..."
"It's not the graphics that gets to me, it's the GAMEPLAY...Since that's what we do right? We PLAY games..."
Okay then.
Post by: KnowsNothing on February 19, 2005, 04:49:54 AM
Quote
Otherwise it will be like Mario where we wonder if we'll ever see a new 2D Mario platformer ever again.
It's coming to the DS
Post by: Ian Sane on February 19, 2005, 08:07:06 AM
No it's not. We're getting a 2.5D Mario game. That's not technically the same thing. Not stylistically the same anyway.
Post by: thepoga on February 19, 2005, 08:30:58 AM
The GBA was perfect for it too!
Post by: norebonomis on February 19, 2005, 08:43:19 AM
Post by: thepoga on February 19, 2005, 09:34:55 AM
Post by: TMW on February 19, 2005, 09:56:07 AM
==
As for the game front...I just want some Zelda action for my poor, underused DS. Is that too much to ask?
Post by: Pale on February 19, 2005, 11:57:46 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on February 19, 2005, 07:55:52 PM
It's hard to explain but it just seems like it has to be sprite based or it doesn't feel like a 2D platformer. Otherwise it feels like one of those pre-Mario 64 crappy polygonal games that were made solely to please the brainwashed masses who refused to except anything 2D. Sprites just look better than polygons. I consider polygons a 3D gameplay necessity. If there is no need to go polygonal from a gameplay perspective there's no point in using them because they look worse. When I want to play a 2D game I want it to be really 2D like how games were ten years ago. The nostalgia plays a big part in it.
Post by: nemo_83 on February 20, 2005, 01:07:06 PM
Post by: Pale on February 21, 2005, 03:36:05 AM
QuoteLike Donkey Kong Country? Come on, that was a great game. It was sprites, but it still looked like it was rendered.
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
Otherwise it feels like one of those pre-Mario 64 crappy polygonal games that were made solely to please the brainwashed masses who refused to except anything 2D.
Post by: darknight06 on February 21, 2005, 04:29:21 AM
Post by: Pale on February 21, 2005, 05:28:51 AM
Post by: KDR_11k on February 21, 2005, 06:41:33 AM
Post by: Pale on February 21, 2005, 10:13:37 AM
Post by: thepoga on February 21, 2005, 10:21:35 AM
Post by: darknight06 on February 21, 2005, 12:18:20 PM
Post by: cat_cube on February 21, 2005, 12:47:41 PM
Post by: Myxtika1 Azn on February 21, 2005, 05:28:50 PM
Post by: thepoga on February 21, 2005, 06:31:39 PM
Post by: Pale on February 21, 2005, 08:17:53 PM
Post by: KDR_11k on February 22, 2005, 05:42:34 AM
Pale: I dunno about DKC since I've never played it but MvsDK was definitely weaker than DK'94. Either way, I think the rendered sprites hurt the game's atmosphere.
Post by: couchmonkey on February 22, 2005, 06:31:51 AM
As for a new Zelda, I'll take absolutely anything Nintendo gives me. I would kind of like to see them try something that combines different perspectives. Maybe like Paper Mario, only the camera could switch to a totally overhead view in certain puzzle situations.
Post by: Ian Sane on February 22, 2005, 06:58:44 AM
I consider Super Mario RPG to be the best looking game ever made. It just looks PERFECT and it uses pre-rendered sprites. So I don't have a problem with pre-rendered sprites in general. But there's a certain mood and setting that it works better with. MvsDK did NOT have the correct mood and setting. In that case it looked out of place. I think it's mostly because the box art had flat cartoon art so the style they went with in the game didn't fit the style they used in the design. There wasn't as much detail either. It has to be just so and Nintendo didn't get it right with MvsDK. It's like how FMV can work great but Nintendo royally goofed it in Super Mario Sunshine.
Anyway I prefer pre-rendered sprites for a 2D game over polygons for a 2D game because of two reasons. First of all pre-rendered sprites look much smoother and don't look as blocky. Second sprites allow for better animation. They use frame-by-frame so we don't have as weird pantomime crap like we see often with polygons. You also don't have to worry about how the polygons interact with each other. There's less clipping and if there is something like light or rain you don't have to worry about it interacting with the polygon in a weird manner. With sprites if you want the character to enter the light you just make another lighter sprite. Though not as realistic it allows for consistency so you don't have the whole look ruined due to random goofs.
Post by: darknight06 on February 22, 2005, 11:11:21 AM
The resolution plays a significant part of that too. Part of the reason DKC on GBA looked worse in some respects have everything to do with the 64 vertical pixel difference between the SNES and the GBA. Make the sprites too big and you'll have a situation similar to what Mega Man and Bass suffered through to an extent on the GBA, graphics taking up too much screen real estate. (though I will give them credit for some clever cropping) Technically speaking, there was no reason for DKC to come out inferior looking given the hardware spec is a bit more than that of an SNES, other than the GBA screen. Now the DS takes the brightness and color issue out of it since it's backlit, so if they were to do something like this on there instead, it SHOULD be every bit as good, if not FAR superior to the SNES.
I actually have to agree with you on MvDK's style. What that game needed was a solidly drawn true 2D cel aninated look to it instead of the 3D rendering they did. Yeah, it looked slick but it had no life to it. It kinda felt like, "here's your graphics" instead of "here's your world."
I can give you another reason to like sprites over polys in a 2D world. Sprite collision detection is just boxes, 3D models need collision spheres which can be a lot more iffy at times.
Post by: Aussie Ben PGC on February 22, 2005, 10:09:36 PM
Quote
Anyway I prefer pre-rendered sprites for a 2D game over polygons for a 2D game because of two reasons. First of all pre-rendered sprites look much smoother and don't look as blocky. Second sprites allow for better animation. They use frame-by-frame so we don't have as weird pantomime crap like we see often with polygons.
Back in my day, we had to live with a four frame walk cycle! Sometimes our sprites would change shape for no apparent reason!
Ah, Cranky Kong -- where would I be without you? And I'm not talking about the new disgustingly helpful Cranky Kong, either. "Don't worry boys, you'll get better." Ugh.
Post by: PaLaDiN on February 22, 2005, 11:08:36 PM
Post by: darknight06 on February 23, 2005, 01:57:31 AM
Post by: KDR_11k on February 23, 2005, 05:20:19 AM
Bullshit. To your physics engine there is no difference between sprites and models, if you don't have a third dimension there is no reason to use three-dimensional collision shapes. You'd still have your hitboxes. Works the other way around as well, Doom doesn't have hitboxes despite using sprites, it uses cylinders.
Post by: Aussie Ben PGC on February 23, 2005, 12:19:47 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: darknight06
Rare did it on the GBA DKCs.
I was actually thinking Namco with their disgustingly pleasant Cranky in Donkey Konga, but hey, whatever floats your boat.
Post by: thepoga on February 23, 2005, 05:08:19 PM
Post by: Kirby (cheat wizard) on March 03, 2005, 04:11:23 PM
Post by: KDR_11k on March 04, 2005, 07:15:18 PM
Post by: Flames_of_chaos on March 04, 2005, 08:11:13 PM
