Forums

Topic: The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess HD - OT

Posts 921 to 940 of 1,760

jariw

.

Operative wrote:

And has it been confirmed that the "biggest game to date" from Tantalus a year ago was this? Didn't they say it was a 3rd party game?

"It is a ‘port’ but more of a complete rework for the Wii U: a bit like the work we did on Deus Ex: Human Revolution – Director’s Cut.

I can’t say what the title is but it is very exciting and is for an absolute top notch publisher.

This game will be credited Tantalus … it’s not an MA / 18 or ‘hard core’ game which ME-3 and DX:HR are."

[Edited by jariw]

jariw

jump

Morpheel wrote:

1001st, actually.

Also it's the 1001st post rather than the 1001st poster which would imply there's 1001 different people in this thread.

Nicolai wrote:

Alright, I gotta stop getting into arguments with jump. Someone remind me next time.

Switch Friend Code: SW-8051-9575-2812

TuVictus

jariw wrote:

.

Operative wrote:

And has it been confirmed that the "biggest game to date" from Tantalus a year ago was this? Didn't they say it was a 3rd party game?

\"It is a ‘port’ but more of a complete rework for the Wii U: a bit like the work we did on Deus Ex: Human Revolution – Director’s Cut.

I can’t say what the title is but it is very exciting and is for an absolute top notch publisher.

This game will be credited Tantalus … it’s not an MA / 18 or ‘hard core’ game which ME-3 and DX:HR are.\"

Thanks for the info. Doesn't change what I said but I'm glad that was cleared up

TuVictus

Nin10dad

Trailer imminent. Possible direct too?

nintendad.co.uk

Twitter @nintendad

Switch - SW-5274-3655-0708

Dezzy

CaviarMeths wrote:

Plateface wrote:

TP is hardly a big game. This is a lazy port, there is no getting away from that.

Are you unemployed? Because calling developers "lazy" is incredibly ignorant and out-of-touch.

That's a silly response. The fact that the version some guy made in his spare time looks better than the one Nintendo are selling shows that Plateface's point is entirely justified. Tantalus seem to have taken about 2 years just to update some textures. It might not necessarily be laziness of the developers. Maybe Nintendo deliberately wanted to do it on the cheap so asked for a minimal job.
You can't seriously say it's not a disappointing port though. It's really not too much to ask for them to at least update the models if you're selling an old game at full price (one that you can already play on the system)

[Edited by Dezzy]

It's dangerous to go alone! Stay at home.

Chandlero

Dezzy wrote:

That's a silly response. The fact that the version some guy made in his spare time looks better than the one Nintendo are selling shows that Plateface's point is entirely justified.

Did you play the version of this guy? Does the version run on the WiiU? Uses this version a second screen and touch screen? Are there any graphic errors or glitches?
Otherwise it is a moot point.

(I find that the Dolphin version of Wind Waker looks better the HD version of Nintendo but I would never say that therefore you can see that they were lazy. They just have other more important stuff in development to do.)

Personally, I won't pay 50 bucks for a game that I already played regardless of the changes in graphics or gameplay they made. However, there are people that didn't play the original and I am glad that they can play the game in a modern setting.

[Edited by Chandlero]

@CaviarMeths: Because only the unemployed are ignorant and out-of-touch.
Brilliant.

Kai_

Shinion

@Dezzy: it doesn't prove it though. Gearbox Software for example, acted in an utterly disgraceful way with their handling of Colonial Marines, with the stuff we learnt after its launch (because everything we 'knew' of it before was BS) ponting to outright lies and deceit, going beyond the pale and it would be generous to say they were 'lazy'. When you compare that to this, I still don't see why people are so enraged, if it's not the remake that you wanted, don't buy it, and let the rest of us have our fun with it. Nintendo/Tantalus haven't lied, been deceitful or tricked anyone so why are people so wound-up about this? They're upping the resolution of a (near enough) 10 year old game and improving on the general performance of it by cutting down load times and improving on the UI with the default control scheme being the one that the majority wanted. That still not enough? Then I'll say it again. Pleeeease just forget this game exists. Your whining is doing no one any favours.

PS that wasn't directed at anyone in particular. If you've posted 20+ times complaining about a port you don't want to buy, then you can interpret this as being directed at you.

Shinion

Dezzy

Chandlero wrote:

Did you play the version of this guy? Does the version run on the WiiU? Uses this version a second screen and touch screen? Are there any graphic errors or glitches?
Otherwise it is a moot point.

What kind of bizarre non-argument is this.
The discussion was whether the developer could have done better.
We said "yes they could". Your reponse is "well they haven't, so it's moot". That's not moot. That's just answering a completely different question.

"Do you wish you were a millionaire?"
"Yes!"
"Well you're not!"

Untitled

[Edited by Dezzy]

It's dangerous to go alone! Stay at home.

jariw

Dezzy wrote:

That's a silly response. The fact that the version some guy made in his spare time looks better than the one Nintendo are selling shows that Plateface's point is entirely justified.

Well, that's a silly response. If some guy make a version for hardware with no clear limitations (=PC) that can be completely unoptimized, and you compare that with a console version that has very strict hardware limits, that's even beyond silly.

It's not lazy to not provide 1440p+ on the Wii U. It's impossible.

jariw

JoyBoy

Dezzy wrote:

Chandlero wrote:

Did you play the version of this guy? Does the version run on the WiiU? Uses this version a second screen and touch screen? Are there any graphic errors or glitches?
Otherwise it is a moot point.

What kind of bizarre non-argument is this.
The discussion was whether the developer could have done better.
We said "yes they could". Your reponse is "well they haven't, so it's moot". That's not moot. That's just answering a completely different question.

"Do you wish you were a millionaire?"
"Yes!"
"Well you're not!"

That's not even close to the point he was making.

For me, I couldn't even care about this game even if I wanted to. A NEW Zelda which looks amazing is (probably)coming out this very SAME year.

SW-7849-9887-2074

Dezzy

jariw wrote:

and you compare that with a console version that has very strict hardware limits, that's even beyond silly.

Really? Here's something they'll be charging the same price for:

Spanjard wrote:

That's not even close to the point he was making.

Has everyone forgot the basic idea of how to argue today? Don't just say "you're wrong". Explain why.

[Edited by Dezzy]

It's dangerous to go alone! Stay at home.

jump

Dezzy wrote:

Don't just say "you're wrong". Explain why.

You're wrong because...I'm right!

Nicolai wrote:

Alright, I gotta stop getting into arguments with jump. Someone remind me next time.

Switch Friend Code: SW-8051-9575-2812

Octane

@Dezzy: Let's not forget, Zelda U required planning; probably years of working on concept art of new environments, characters, bosses and enemies, a completely new engine, programming, 3D modelling and many more things that were already finished in TP.

Octane

Dezzy

Octane wrote:

@Dezzy: Let's not forget, Zelda U required planning; probably years of working on concept art of new environments, characters, bosses and enemies, a completely new engine, programming, 3D modelling and many more things that were already finished in TP.

Indeed! Although that's only true with hindsight. They could have decided to go all out with a proper AAA remaster, like in that early tech demo we saw (as I think quite a few people were expecting early on in this thread).
To take the devil's avocado though, part of the problem is just the publishers rigid allegiance to this fixed price structure with games, which I don't know enough about economics to know what the reason for is.
When you get overcharged for a game like this, part of that is just because you're getting undercharged for other games, like Zelda U and Xenoblade X (which I got for £33, surely one of the best value gaming purchases in my entire life).

[Edited by Dezzy]

It's dangerous to go alone! Stay at home.

faint

@Dezzy: they farmed out twilight princess because a remaster is cheaper and less work. If twhd was like that tec demo you wouldn't get Zelda u due to the number of years it would take to make twhd took like that tec demo.

[email protected]
friend code: 0103-9004-2456

faint

@Dezzy: during the snes days they charged what they felt a game was worth. I think earth bound was around 100 bucks in the U.S. Tho my memory is foggy.

[email protected]
friend code: 0103-9004-2456

Spoony_Tech

@faint: Not at launch it wasn't. I would've never paid that. Now what it actually costs I can't remember. Now about some of those launch N64 games, that's a different story.

John 8:7 He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone.

MERG said:

If I was only ever able to have Monster Hunter and EO games in the future, I would be a happy man.

I'm memory of @Mr_Trill_281 (rip) 3-25-18

Switch Friend Code: SW-7353-2587-4117 | X:

This topic has been archived, no further posts can be added.