Showing 141 to 160 of 1,934
141. Posted: Fri 18th Jun 2010 20:31 BST
Actually, while I'm right-handed, I do sometimes switch out to hold the nunchuck on the right / remote on the left. Of course, I only do that to vary the motion of both arms and thereby mitigate carpal tunnel. It's somewhat challenging to do, but your brain adapts after a few minutes (or after getting brutally killed a dozen times, when I did this with RE4).
Aw, that's rough Wario. This new Zelda game certainly doesn't seem to be built in your favor
3DS Friend Code: 2277-7231-5687
Now Playing: Animal Crossing: New Leaf
142. Posted: Fri 18th Jun 2010 20:37 BST
Nah, that'll be fine; the fact that the sword motions really allow the use of your entire arm to swing should be relatively light on the wrists. For instance, I've been playing Punch-Out! lately (with the nunchuck and balance board controls enabled) and while I'm working my arms to the point of being tired, that's actually easier on the wrists than most games which require smaller, repetitive motions. WSResort is also easy to play without issues, and this seems close to that game in controls.
Twitter is a good place to throw your nonsense.Wii FC: 8378 9716 1696 8633 || "How can mushrooms give you extra life? Get the green ones." -Lakitu 64Join us in the epic Nintendo Life Wii Music Thread
143. Posted: Sat 19th Jun 2010 16:14 BST
Timeline concerns is the only thing that can ruin this game... forget about the Story!
Nice triple post there!
144. Posted: Sat 19th Jun 2010 16:44 BST
I love how people (myself included) seem to care so much about a timeline that doesn't exist
145. Posted: Sat 19th Jun 2010 22:16 BST
Well, Miyamoto himself has stated at some point that there is a timeline, and so is Aonuma. Also, how could have Niko from the Wind Waker be in Spirit Tracks as an old man, if there were no timeline? What about all the elements in Wind Waker's story, which referred to Ocarina of Time (glass paintings of Ocarina's sages etc.)? I think that there is indeed a timeline, but it's just not so strict.
Edited on Sat 19th June, 2010 @ 23:07 by Faron
146. Posted: Sat 19th Jun 2010 22:28 BST
So this game is motion plus? I'm thinking it does, judging from the sword movements in-game. I haven't seen people physically playing it, just footage from cameras and whatnot and the interview I saw confused me (something like, "First we thought to use it, but then removed it, then added it" or something, some convoluted crud). I'm cheap and don't really feel like paying over $80 for Zelda if M+ is needed, since I'll likely never use the thing again.
Edited on Sat 19th June, 2010 @ 22:29 by Ark
147. Posted: Sat 19th Jun 2010 22:47 BST
You need M+ to play, Nintendo has said more than once. They might package it with an M+ though.
Loose your heart like a clumsy bell.
148. Posted: Sun 20th Jun 2010 05:02 BST
This is the new Link. The righty Link.
Technically, this is the first righthanded-exclusive LOZ title (TP was also GameCube).
Edited on Sun 20th June, 2010 @ 05:05 by The_Ink_Pit_Ox
Friend code: 5370-0444-3461
Animal Crossing City Folk Code: 3053-5977-0373
149. Posted: Sun 20th Jun 2010 05:17 BST
This is the new Link. The righty Link.Technically, this is the first righthanded-exclusive LOZ title (TP was also GameCube).
If I remember right Link was left handed in the gamecube version of TP and right handed in the wii version.
150. Posted: Sun 20th Jun 2010 13:53 BST
vonseux wrote:Im positive there will be a left hand option.Prepare to be disappointed. From Aonuma's recent interview with IGN:IGN: In past Zelda games, people noticed that Link was obviously left-handed. And I know that all the Zelda games are stand-alones -- but in this particular game, will there be a lefty option for left-handed people?Aonuma: It's interesting because people say "all you have to do is switch it." But in reality, it's really hard. You have to change all the models -- you have to make two of everything. So really you're making two complete games, one left-handed version and one right-handed version. We just can't do that. For Twilight Princess, what we did was just create a mirror -- we flipped everything. And if that worked I guess we could do it that way, but again having to create two games is not something we want to do. We just hope that people will play it right-handed.
Im positive there will be a left hand option.
Prepare to be disappointed. From Aonuma's recent interview with IGN:
IGN: In past Zelda games, people noticed that Link was obviously left-handed. And I know that all the Zelda games are stand-alones -- but in this particular game, will there be a lefty option for left-handed people?
Aonuma: It's interesting because people say "all you have to do is switch it." But in reality, it's really hard. You have to change all the models -- you have to make two of everything. So really you're making two complete games, one left-handed version and one right-handed version. We just can't do that. For Twilight Princess, what we did was just create a mirror -- we flipped everything. And if that worked I guess we could do it that way, but again having to create two games is not something we want to do. We just hope that people will play it right-handed.
Oh no! After all my real life Left handed sword fighting I just wont be able to play this game now! =(
I am actually left handed, and I remember my first day with Red Steel, I thought "I'm never going to be able to play a FPS game aiming with my bad hand" That thought, is history. It's still just a game, and spending time with it anyone can still master it, no matter what handed you are.
EDIT:My first impression while watching Skyward Sword on E3 Live, was a small bit of embarrassment for Miyamoto because the game appeared broken. He couldn't show off what will probably be Nintendo's biggest Wii game. The control was obviously being interfered with (you could see even sword swings seemed inaccurate, let alone the bomb throws and especially the bow & arrow). I know, and I think everyone understands at the end of the day, that the experience we get in our living rooms with a game, cannot be mimicked by a demonstrator at an event like E3.
Edited on Sun 20th June, 2010 @ 14:07 by Dazran303
MY YOUTUBE CHANEL - Subscribe for HD Nintendo WiiU & 3DS Videos! :)
FACEBOOK PROFILE - Add me as a friend on Facebook!
TWITTER! - Follow my Tweets!
Wii Code - 6317-6829-6296-8143
MK Wii FC - 0989-3228-3318
Nintendo Network ID: Dazran3o3 | Twitter: Dazran303
151. Posted: Sun 20th Jun 2010 14:39 BST
Kid_A wrote:I love how people (myself included) seem to care so much about a timeline that doesn't existWell, Miyamoto himself has stated at some point that there is a timeline, and so is Aonuma. Also, how could have Niko from the Wind Waker be in Spirit Tracks as an old man, if there were no timeline? What about all the elements in Wind Waker's story, which referred to Ocarina of Time (glass paintings of Ocarina's sages etc.)? I think that there is indeed a timeline, but it's just not so strict.
I think the problem is you're thinking of a timeline in two different ways. One is a physical object that is officially claimed to be stored somewhere and consulted when new games are made, and the other is a suggested timeline which is the passive result of having more than one game in a series.
Regarding the former, yes, it's been officially claimed many times that it exists...but I personally don't believe that. If it was true, the games would be much more clearly defined as to where they occur in relative time, but with the exceptions of direct sequels (such as the Wind Waker ones that you mentioned) you don't get much of that. Just Ganon, Link and Zelda recurring among a series of interchangeable, recognizable elements. I think the official timeline is just something they tell people to keep them quiet about questioning anything too deeply. After all, how on earth would it account for A Link to the Past, which was marketed (and titled) here as a prequel and in Japan as a sequel? It would seem the official timeline, if it does exist, would have to be flawed to all heck in order to account for that...rendering it somewhat useless.
The second is a passive sort of timeline that occurs when people play games and recognize elements from other games, like your stained glass example. It's pretty safe to say that X is followed by Y if Y specifically refers to events that unfolded in X, but that's just causality. Nobody's doubting that...what Kid_A was saying is that the "official" timeline doesn't really exist.
Some of the games do refer back and forth to one another, and fans pore over those moments in order to reconstruct what must be correct...but the fact that nobody's come up with a single timeline that everyone can agree with does suggest that there is not an official one. Or, again, if it is, it's so screwed up internally that it doesn't matter.
As long as a game's internal story is coherent, it's not worth worrying about how it connects to the greater series.
NL Forum Moderator / Part-Time Reviewer / One-Track Lover
Noiseless Chatter, my pop culture blog that will change your life
Wii U Account: ChickenBrutus (add me!)
Mega Man No Damage Runs, and more
152. Posted: Sun 20th Jun 2010 14:56 BST
Yes, I approach the Zelda games as a sort of loose mythology, one for which contradictions are irrelevant. I prefer that for my core Nintendo series in general, as it gives them a greater sense of freedom, and it's fun to see how they've rethought the different characters or familiar locations within a different version of the myth. Similarly, I don't need to know if this is the 10th or 20th time Bowser took the princess, because in a way it is always the first time, just retold in yet another new way.
153. Posted: Sun 20th Jun 2010 15:47 BST
I think they make Zelda games, with newcomers in mind, who might not have played the previous title, or know anything about the series, so its always an easily accessible, but still a highly rewarding experience for everyone.
154. Posted: Sun 20th Jun 2010 20:08 BST
I just read this from some forum: In one of the latest Iwata Asks, Eiji Aonuma discusses his latest work, The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword, with Nintendo's CEO, Satoru Iwata. During the interview, he dropped some interesting tidbits when comparing it to his last console Zelda title, Twilight Princess, which took most gamers between 40-50 hours to complete. He noted that Twilight Princess was "too big," and didn't feature enough content to properly take advantage of the game's scale.As a result, Skyward Sword is going "back to basics" and that they're going to "boil it down and make it denser." He went on to explain that they first determined what the core elements of Zelda were that made it fun in order to build a strong foundation, before building a "compact yet solid playing experience" around those fundamental elements.
"That's what the new game's about."
So instead of 50 hours long adventure, we propably return to "good old" 20 hours. I don't know if this is a good thing :/
Edited on Sun 20th June, 2010 @ 20:09 by Faron
155. Posted: Sun 20th Jun 2010 21:03 BST
I know that would be a pretty bad thing for us, and a pretty good thing for Nintendo: much less development hours but same income = much greater profit. I laugh at these companies when they say, lets simplify the game, lets move to 2D instead of 3D, lets make it shorter, because it is like returning to the roots. I say, to the roots of what? Is next Zelda going to be 2D 16 colours and hyper low res to be really in the good path to the roots?
156. Posted: Sun 20th Jun 2010 22:33 BST
He never said it was going to be shorter. He said it was going to be denser. Twilight Princess takes a long time to complete, but there isn't all that much to do. In context it sounds much more like they're giving the player more to do in those 40 hours, perhaps more dungeons instead of bug collection and snowboarding.
I like shorter games, myself. I'd probably even replay Twilight Princess if it had a more manageable play time. A good game will have you wanting to play it again and again, in which case a shorter play time is not detracting from the experience but making it more convenient. Less can be more.
157. Posted: Mon 21st Jun 2010 00:00 BST
It looks good in my opinion. Twilight Princess really felt to me like a rehash of old ideas and puzzles, at least Skyward Sword shows some new items and funny motion puzzles. Looking forward to it.
"Time flies when you throw your watch in the sky."3DS: 0946-2616-2379
158. Posted: Mon 21st Jun 2010 03:03 BST
the last time they talked about density over length was majora's mask, which is my favorite zelda. compared to ocarina of time it's got a smaller world and half as many dungeons, but there's so much more to do and see that it feels like there's more game there to play. i hope they're taking this game the same direction
goldeneye- 5447 4748 5174
159. Posted: Mon 21st Jun 2010 10:16 BST
I dont understand. So between lets make it shorter and denser and lets keep it the same size and lets make it denser your choice would be the first one??
ZTP was not that empty at all, and all the big open spaces had a purpose, even when main task to be done in these big spaces was complented, it was still quite enjoyable to ride by them just watching the surroundings and listening the great musics, or just looking for secrets here and there. I've never got bored running from here to there in ZTP.
Looking at the screenshots with so poor textures/polys, and with these intentions to "boil down" the size I get the impression that big N needs easy and quick money again (same as with NSMB).
160. Posted: Mon 21st Jun 2010 14:33 BST
Yea, I know some like it, but I find it empty and boring, and Nintendo must not be in complete disagreement or they wouldn't have felt the need for the warp system.
But the choice was never between longer/denser and shorter/denser. They only mentioned high density versus low density.
Edited on Mon 21st June, 2010 @ 15:42 by Adam