Topic: The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild

@Dezzy: I'm sure they'll have plenty to talk about at E3 without BotW.
@Haru17: Are you mad about having to wait, or do you think it's a bad idea?

@Nicolai It's an untraditional release time — practically unheard of for a title as prominent as Zelda. The only recent examples are The Last of Us (2013) and Batman: Arkham Knight (2015). Those games both seem to have done well, but they also released on very established systems. Who knows what this will do to Zelda's sales.

Don't get me wrong, it'll be great to have a game to play during the summer months... I just don't know.

@Haru17: I can't think of a reason why it's bad timing, so it's probably fine. At least, compared to March. It probably would sell better in November, but no one wants to wait that long. Plus, this may or may not be a legitimate concern, but the longer the Switch goes without it (if it turns out that it is the game everyone is waiting for before getting the system), the more time and chance you give 3rd parties to write the Switch off as a failure. Maybe >.>

That's why it should come out day-and-date... Mario would make a great summer game, with Retro's project slated for holiday 2017.

@Haru17: Even Michael Pachter understands the powerful appeal of Breath of the Wild, so I'm sure everyone knows to wait until Breath of the Wild before giving a final judgement on the Switch.

Pachter's even worse than these recent professional leakers in how much he's held up to his own record.
Guy might as well be reading tea leaves.

@Dezzy: @DarthNocturnal: I wasn't trying to make a point by bringing up Michael Pachter, I was just saying that everyone understands the sheer anticipation for the new Zelda if even dopes like him pick up on it.

_{Note to self: never mention "Michael Pachter" again.}

So, let me get this straight: You're confident that people in the video games space will not rush to judgement on a current topic?

Well, hell, man — I don't know what to say to that, hehe. They will!

@Haru17: Of course the general consumer behaves this way, but companies have professionals whose job is to understand the market. They're probably going to be interested in the Switch's first holiday season regardless; especially if the Switch ends up being as promising as it is rumored to be. Not saying I'm 100% certain the Switch will be a success, I just don't think Zelda's release date matters as much, as long as it is still this year. Certainly 3 months won't hurt it at all.

Well, it'll do something. I'm not crying for doom here, I just don't have an abundance of faith in buisness types. They all too often choose to monopolize the market.

How does businessmen's desire to monopolize the market have any bearing on 1 game at all?

The revserse: Nintendo thinks that they don't need Zelda at launch. However, if the system doesn't sell in overwhelming numbers at launch, other publishers may decide that they're fine with dropping Nintendo systems and further monopolizing the console market. EA already has, and Bethesda has only just come out of that position. Just see what happens if Nintendo gives them and excuse.

@Haru17: I guarantee you that the Switch is going to sell the 2 million or so that they're making for launch, just like the Wii U did, and that most are going to be paying closer attention to the months after.

@Haru17

Lol, that wasn't deducible from what you said.

@Dezzy I imagine that was why you asked me about it and I explained it to you.

Brilliantly.

I can't wait to get one of the 3 switches the closest gaming store to me will have at launch.

I mean, if a scalper doesn't get them first.

@Meowpheel Can we talk about how effed up the term "scalper" is? Like, how did that even adopt that meaning? I blame my region — the western United States.

It's a trading term. Quick and early trades in order to profit.

On topic, I agree nintendo needs a strong launch. They even said as much themselves, after wii U and all that.

And it doesn't mean strong launch = zelda. I do agree it would really help, yet it doesn't mean it's the only way. If I was a developer I sure wouldn't want to release in the month surrounding zelda. Most people buy only one game in a while.

Perhaps not having zelda at launch is better for third party developers, otherwise we'd just be buying mario and zelda and see you in a month or so.

I swear to god, if that Ubisoft Mario RPG has rabbid partners I will scream through my socks!

Then again, their UbiArt engine — which I assume it would be made in — does hold promise.

I just don't understand why they wouldn't have Zelda at launch given how much time they've had to plan this launch. It would just make sense to deliberately sync them.