The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild

Re: Zelda (Wii U)

4cd76e90017b2d868daf9712904221f4.jpg


^that scene from twilight princess
 
Re: Zelda (Wii U)

In a recent interview, Aonuma has stated that he plans to push the hardware to its limits with this game.

They are really making a big deal of how big this game is gonna be.
 
Re: Zelda (Wii U)

Well the game's being delayed to 2016

 
Re: Zelda (Wii U)

They could at least gone far enough into dev time to show more at e3.

Oh well.
 
Re: Zelda (Wii U)

Party Fever! said:
The more development time, the better the game.
Yeah look at Duke Nukem Forever. It was supposed to come out in 2001, and 10 years later it finally came out and--oh...right
 
Re: Zelda (Wii U)

supermariofan said:
Party Fever! said:
The more development time, the better the game.
Yeah look at Duke Nukem Forever. It was supposed to come out in 2001, and 10 years later it finally came out and--oh...right
Nintendo isn't the same developers as Duke Nukem Forever.

I think a better comparison is what happened to Barlw. Still a great game by itself, but it was delayed twice and it turned out to pale in comparison with Meele competitive-wise.
 
Re: Zelda (Wii U)

Mario Party Σ said:
supermariofan said:
Party Fever! said:
The more development time, the better the game.
Yeah look at Duke Nukem Forever. It was supposed to come out in 2001, and 10 years later it finally came out and--oh...right
Nintendo isn't the same developers as Duke Nukem Forever.

I think a better comparison is what happened to Barlw. Still a great game by itself, but it was delayed twice and it turned out to pale in comparison with Meele competitive-wise.

Competitive-wise, but content-wise it blew Melee out of the water.

TP was delayed, and it was a more complete game. SS was delayed, and it was a more complete game, even if the motion controls was a bit...touchy. I just know that when it comes to delays for Zelda games, they always turn out a lot better than the demos/videos we see of their progress. I mean, just look at the beta elements of Twilight Princess, and the end result that came.

"A delayed game is eventually good, but a rushed game is forever bad." - Miyamoto.

As for E3, I'm sure they'll enlighten us with a few pictures or maybe a small trailer, but I think that just the demo is cancelled, which is fine with me. I would be disappointed in them if they don't share a bit of information on it, but so far this game is going down the path of Twilight Princess in terms of development time, which is fine with me.
 
Re: Zelda (Wii U)

There are quite a few examples of what happens when you don't delay a game. Delaying a game even only by a couple months allows a lot of content to be added into the game or bugs to fixed. If you just rush a game, it's just a sign of being greedy and not caring about the project.
 
Re: Zelda (Wii U)

I hope they're not planning to pull the same "we'll make this game a title for our current system AND a launch title for our next one" bullshit again, and then waste all of their additional development time on porting the game instead of working out the kinks.
 
Re: Zelda (Wii U)

Lapis Lazuli said:
As for E3, I'm sure they'll enlighten us with a few pictures or maybe a small trailer, but I think that just the demo is cancelled, which is fine with me. I would be disappointed in them if they don't share a bit of information on it, but so far this game is going down the path of Twilight Princess in terms of development time, which is fine with me.

They said the game won't be shown at the E3

btw, delaying a game does have its consequences as well, especially if you do it at the wrong moment. See: Rayman Legends.
 
Re: Zelda (Wii U)

Baby Luigi said:
Lapis Lazuli said:
As for E3, I'm sure they'll enlighten us with a few pictures or maybe a small trailer, but I think that just the demo is cancelled, which is fine with me. I would be disappointed in them if they don't share a bit of information on it, but so far this game is going down the path of Twilight Princess in terms of development time, which is fine with me.

They said the game won't be shown at the E3

btw, delaying a game does have its consequences as well, especially if you do it at the wrong moment. See: Rayman Legends.

They said that the playable demo on the stage will not be at E3.

Genji said:
I hope they're not planning to pull the same "we'll make this game a title for our current system AND a launch title for our next one" bullshit again, and then waste all of their additional development time on porting the game instead of working out the kinks.

Given that they aren't going to announce whatever NX is until next year, and that they are really pushing the Wii U for this year and into next year, I doubt that would happen. NX is probably 2017 at the earliest, and Zelda U is probably going to be released way before the next console.
 
Re: Zelda (Wii U)

Lapis Lazuli said:
Mario Party Σ said:
supermariofan said:
Party Fever! said:
The more development time, the better the game.
Yeah look at Duke Nukem Forever. It was supposed to come out in 2001, and 10 years later it finally came out and--oh...right
Nintendo isn't the same developers as Duke Nukem Forever.

I think a better comparison is what happened to Barlw. Still a great game by itself, but it was delayed twice and it turned out to pale in comparison with Meele competitive-wise.

Competitive-wise, but content-wise it blew Melee out of the water.
But, Barlw paled when it comes to game-play, which is the meat and potatoes of these games.
 
Re: Zelda (Wii U)

Mario Party Σ said:
But, Barlw paled when it comes to game-play, which is the meat and potatoes of these games.

Not really; I mean, maybe if you did tourneys and stuff, but it was and is still fun to play and the gameplay difference is not that drastic. I just don't let that overlook the rest of the game, which is truly amazing.
 
Re: Zelda (Wii U)

Lapis Lazuli said:
Mario Party Σ said:
But, Barlw paled when it comes to game-play, which is the meat and potatoes of these games.

Not really; I mean, maybe if you did tourneys and stuff, but it was and is still fun to play and the gameplay difference is not that drastic. I just don't let that overlook the rest of the game, which is truly amazing.
It's not that truly amazing. Soundtrack's decent, taking pictures is nice, roster is O.K., Subspace Emissary sucks, AI is not fun to fight against, Mario looks and sounds like crap, and Stage Builder is barren. The absolute best thing was the special mode thing, though.

Master of the House said:
Lapis Lazuli said:
Mario Party Σ said:
But, Barlw paled when it comes to game-play, which is the meat and potatoes of these games.

the gameplay difference is not that drastic.
Pfft.

Good one.
This. What's seen cannot be unseen.
 
Re: Zelda (Wii U)

Master of the House said:
Lapis Lazuli said:
Mario Party Σ said:
But, Barlw paled when it comes to game-play, which is the meat and potatoes of these games.

the gameplay difference is not that drastic.
Pfft.

Good one.

Well, I'm sorry that your melee goggles are too tight on your face. Just because it isn't melee doesn't mean it automatically makes it terrible. It's a lot different, and different physics, but I stand by my statement and acting like it's not a valid point shows that you can't overlook the fact that Brawl was more than floaty physics.
 
Back