Phantom Hourglass was definitely well received Mr Haru. 90% on metacritic and 5 million sales (4th best selling game in the series) and most importantly of all, I quite liked it (except for that ocean king place)
I actually quite liked the concept of the ocean kings temple, going back with new weapons and seeing how effective you're then was pretty fun.
Makes me wish they apply the same concept to an (optional) dungeon in a new Zelda. You find it early on, but as you advance in the game and get new tools you can traverse more of it and more efficiently.
Phantom Hourglass was definitely well received Mr Haru. 90% on metacritic and 5 million sales (4th best selling game in the series) and most importantly of all, I quite liked it (except for that ocean king place)
I actually quite liked the concept of the ocean kings temple, going back with new weapons and seeing how effective you're now was pretty fun.
Makes me wish they apply the same concept to an (optional) dungeon in a new Zelda. You find it early on, but as you advance in the game and get new tools you can traverse more of it and more efficiently.
Wow, the link seems like a whole lotta BS. They are picking all the easy, low-hanging fruit, but they are also pointing out things that are likely not what would be shown a year and a half away from launch.
Also, Link is left handed, so the game's going to support the Wii Remote.
No, the wiimote won't be used, it is definitely confirmed that zelda u will use the gamepad (no mention of pro controller tho). Link must be right handed for some canonical reason, such as this Link being the same Link or related to SS Link.
Just like supporting the gamepad doesn't preclude the Pro controller, it doesn't preclude the Wii remote. Link has never been right handed for anything other than a technical reason.
Nintendo has been pretty willing to include a waggle option in many of their games. They have experience with it and they understand some of their fanbase prefers it. There is no reason to assume it won't support the Wii Remote given what we've seen so far.
(I was editing my post as you responded btw)
I guess right now there's no way to tell, but personally, I think the wiimote being used is unlikely, since I assume zelda u will have the same control scheme as WW HD. Also, there will be no one-to-one swordstrikes in this game, which we can see in the game awards footage, so adding wiimote functionality would be a step back from SS's motion. You would just shake the wiimote a little for Link to strike, like in TP (which was really annoying imo). If I know anything about Nintendo's past patterns, it's that they dislike staying in one place for too long, and incorporating the wiimote would keep them from moving forward.
TP's controls could be a little more tightly controlled, but I thought they were fine. I liked SS's controls themselves, but I thought their implementation caused problems. Combat became a lot slower and less action focused, and secondary items and specials kills took a side seat, so that combat could focus EXCLUSIVELY on directionality. That's the core problem with building a game around a control scheme rather than using a control scheme to improve a game. But to each is own.
I don't see how incorporating the Wii remote would be moving backwards any more than incorporating the Pro Controller. Nintendo could be said to have moved forward with both controllers, dropping the Wii Remote without building upon it would really be moving back.
I think WWHD didn't really change the controls much because they were mostly translating directly from WW, and just adding the motion aiming (because it's a million times more accessible). Zelda U is being built from the ground-up though.
I'm just saying that having wiimote compatibility would add nothing to the experience except the ability to shake something instead of pressing a button. WW HD also gives you a map in your hands, switching items without pausing, and off TV play.
From my edit I said: Nintendo's trying to push the gamepad, so they won't make this game compatible with the wiimote. That would be like saying, "Yea, buy our gamepad, even though you can use all your old controllers which make the gamepad seem un-needed, you should just listen to us and buy it anyway." Letting you use the wiimote would be downplaying the usefulness of the gamepad, something which Ninty can't afford to do right now. BUT their inclusion of the pro controller in WW HDis offsetting all the points I can make, so I think I'll end by babbling here
Since there is no way to prove what Ninty is gonna do, I reaaaaaalllllllly want to make a bet with you.
But the ability to shake something instead of pressing a button is as big a difference as rumble vs. no rumble. For players including myself, it makes the experience wholly more engaging and immersive. There is the added benefit of it being more intuitive for new players.
To me, Nintendo has pretty clearly shown that there isn't much that you absolutely need the Gamepad and nothing else for, and they've shown that their aware of this by including options in games like Mario Kart, Hyrule Warriors, or Splatoon.
Currently Playing: Steamworld Heist, The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask, Tales of Graces F
Phantom Hourglass was definitely well received Mr Haru. 90% on metacritic and 5 million sales (4th best selling game in the series) and most importantly of all, I quite liked it (except for that ocean king place)
I actually quite liked the concept of the ocean kings temple, going back with new weapons and seeing how effective you're now was pretty fun.
Makes me wish they apply the same concept to an (optional) dungeon in a new Zelda. You find it early on, but as you advance in the game and get new tools you can traverse more of it and more efficiently.
Preferably without the time limit
The big surprise is that when you reach the last floor, it tells you your time, and from then on you have a timer every time you go back in so you can beat your times.
TP's controls could be a little more tightly controlled, but I thought they were fine. I liked SS's controls themselves, but I thought their implementation caused problems. Combat became a lot slower and less action focused, and secondary items and specials kills took a side seat, so that combat could focus EXCLUSIVELY on directionality. That's the core problem with building a game around a control scheme rather than using a control scheme to improve a game. But to each is own.
I don't see how incorporating the Wii remote would be moving backwards any more than incorporating the Pro Controller. Nintendo could be said to have moved forward with both controllers, dropping the Wii Remote without building upon it would really be moving back.
I think WWHD didn't really change the controls much because they were mostly translating directly from WW, and just adding the motion aiming (because it's a million times more accessible). Zelda U is being built from the ground-up though.
I think Skyward Sword could have been a fantastic new IP centered around motion controls. Like you said, it was just not the best fit for a Zelda game given that the sword was never really the focal gameplay segment of the 3D Zelda games.
It all sounds plausible, except for the "someone from Nintendo told a Gamestop employee" part. I can't imagine someone from Nintendo spilling development beans on someone at Gamestop. The only things Gamestop (or any shop) hears from Nintendo is when they can sell certain games!
Anyway, I really do hope we see a trailer at E3 but don't think it will happen. Nintendo said it WON'T be at E3, because they want to focus on 2015 games. Wich could potentially mean a very boring E3, because I can't imagine many cool games still planned for 2015 that we haven't seen or heard about. But we'll see.
"Remember, Mario Maker is one of their big AAA holiday releases"
Yeah, Nintendo will put all their bets on that game. It's Mario, how can it go wrong?! And then next year they scratch their heads because Wii u had another bad holiday. They just never learn!
I wouldn't doubt the sales potential of Mario Maker.
It depends on the pricing. I will laugh if they think they can get away with pricing it at $60. Unless it comes with a whole developer-made set of levels, essentially making it a full Super Mario game with a level editor.
I wouldn't doubt the sales potential of Mario Maker.
It depends on the pricing. I will laugh if they think they can get away with pricing it at $60. Unless it comes with a whole developer-made set of levels, essentially making it a full Super Mario game with a level editor.
This exact same thing is said about every first party Nintendo release ever. For some reason, nobody seems to feel that Nintendo's games are worth $60.
Trailer for literally anything except 3D Zelda or Mario drops
"Is this a full game or an eShop game?"
So Anakin kneels before Monster Mash and pledges his loyalty to the graveyard smash.
I wouldn't doubt the sales potential of Mario Maker.
It depends on the pricing. I will laugh if they think they can get away with pricing it at $60. Unless it comes with a whole developer-made set of levels, essentially making it a full Super Mario game with a level editor.
This exact same thing is said about every first party Nintendo release ever. For some reason, nobody seems to feel that Nintendo's games are worth $60.
Trailer for literally anything except 3D Zelda or Mario drops
"Is this a full game or an eShop game?"
Most of Nintendo's games are worth the $60. But not recently. Not Captain Toad, not Canvas Curse, definitely not those Project games, and not Mario Maker, unless there's some ridiculous depth to the game they have yet to show off. Everything else that's been retail released, I'd say is worth the price they set.
^Shouldn't we wait and see about the two Project games, next to nothing is actually known about them yet and they haven't even been announced as retail games.
Most of Nintendo's games are worth the $60. But not recently. Not Captain Toad, not Canvas Curse, definitely not those Project games, and not Mario Maker, unless there's some ridiculous depth to the game they have yet to show off. Everything else that's been retail released, I'd say is worth the price they set.
Captain Toad and Kirby were $50. Everything else you mention isn't released yet.
So Anakin kneels before Monster Mash and pledges his loyalty to the graveyard smash.
^Shouldn't we wait and see about the two Project games, next to nothing is actually known about them yet and they haven't even been announced as retail games.
We should, I didn't mean to imply that we know they're retail games or know their price, but based on what we were shown, I don't really think they're worth full retail price. Plus Miyamoto said he'd probably incorporate Project Guard into StarFox. Granted, both of them seemed like glorified tech demos, I was surprised they were even mentioned in upcoming release calendars
Most of Nintendo's games are worth the $60. But not recently. Not Captain Toad, not Canvas Curse, definitely not those Project games, and not Mario Maker, unless there's some ridiculous depth to the game they have yet to show off. Everything else that's been retail released, I'd say is worth the price they set.
Captain Toad and Kirby were $50. Everything else you mention isn't released yet.
Are you sure they weren't $40? Because I know for sure that they were €40 in Europe.
Well, I just looked it up, both had an MRSP of $40 at launch.
Most of Nintendo's games are worth the $60. But not recently. Not Captain Toad, not Canvas Curse, definitely not those Project games, and not Mario Maker, unless there's some ridiculous depth to the game they have yet to show off. Everything else that's been retail released, I'd say is worth the price they set.
Captain Toad and Kirby were $50. Everything else you mention isn't released yet.
Nope. $40. And I know, I'm saying it would be funny if they think they could price Mario Maker at $60. I expect it'll be a budget title, though.
Most of Nintendo's games are worth the $60. But not recently. Not Captain Toad, not Canvas Curse, definitely not those Project games, and not Mario Maker, unless there's some ridiculous depth to the game they have yet to show off. Everything else that's been retail released, I'd say is worth the price they set.
Captain Toad and Kirby were $50. Everything else you mention isn't released yet.
Nope. $40. And I know, I'm saying it would be funny if they think they could price Mario Maker at $60. I expect it'll be a budget title, though.
I would have paid $60 for Captain Toad, one of my favorite Wii U games.
People keep saying the Xbox One doesn't have Backwards Compatibility.
I don't think they know what Backwards Compatibility means...
Forums
Topic: The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild
Posts 2,341 to 2,360 of 15,161
Please login or sign up to reply to this topic