Topic: IMPRESSIONS: The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess

[ruby_onix]

Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold
Hey... I thought of that idea!

I think just about everyone wanted the four diamond buttons and the second trigger within a couple minutes of the remote being unveiled, but then I think you suggested moving the D-pad to the bottom, which perfected the entire change.

I'm totally willing to give you credit for it, because I think it's a great idea, and I'm just annoyed that Nintendo wouldn't hear it.

[Svevan]

Quote
Originally posted by: mantidor
Something I dont understand though is the D-pad/A button reachability, the remote is really small, you should be able to reach any button with your thumb easily, right?.

Surprisingly, no. Jonny mentioned this in his first Metroid impressions as well. Bloodworth luckily has long fingers, so he said he didn't have any problems in that regard.  

[mantidor]

I do have long thumbs fortunately there was this paper model to be printed and glued together to make a moniker for the remote, Im feeling like doing that just to see.

[trip1eX]

My bad.  I thought the d-pad was just meant to select your weapon and not hold it down while aiming and let go of the d-pad to fire the weapon.  All the article said was that the d-pad was for weapon usage and I took that it was just for selecting weapons.  It did reference the first article to it's credit which at the time I didn't go back and read.  If you're making a big point about the d-pad dealio you should have quickly explained what the d-pad did right there and then tho.    It does seems like quite a strange system.  So I can see why you all thought it was awkward.

Definitely the problem is they are taking the same GAmecube Zelda control system and mapping it to the wiimote instead of building a control system from  the ground up for the wiimote.  I did expect some of this because after all we know the game spent most of it's life as a 'Cube game and it might be too much to go back and redesign the game around a whole new control system.

Still I can think of a couple of ways to fix it.

Scheme #1:  Why not make the 'b' trigger fire all the weapons.   Use the d-pad to select the sword, bow or boomerang.  At the same time make the help key part of the menu rather then the up direction on the d-pad.  The up direction can then be used to select an additional item. The beauty here is it would be alot more comfortable using the 'b' button to fire the bow and boomerang.  The downside is you have to shift back to the sword  using the d-pad everytime you want to use it.

Scheme #2:  Another similar scheme is to make the down direction of the d-pad the fire button for weapons and items.  The other 3 directions select the weapon or item you want to use.  The help button is moved to the menu screen.  The thinking here is the down direction is closest to the 'A' button and you should be able to reach it pretty easily with the top of your thumb without shifting your grip.  This would also give you simultaneous use of your sword because the 'b' trigger would always be used for the sword as it is now.  So you could  have the sword and another item at your disposal simultaneously with no need to shift your grip or select the 2nd weapon/item. Sort of a compromise between the first scheme I listed and how WindWaker is.

Scheme #3:  Wiimote or nunchuk gestures are used to select weapons instead of the d-pad.  Could be used in place of the d-pad weapon/item selection in schemes #1 and #2.  The thinking is gestures would allow you to even more quickly switch between weapons/items.  These would be simple gestures like twist the wiimote left or right to select bow or boomerang.  Then use bottom direction of d-pad to fire as in the 2nd scheme above for example or you could use it conjuction with scheme #1 where the 'b' trigger is always the 'fire' button for every item/weapon including the sword.  Nunchuk could also be used twisted left or right to select a weapon or item.

I think I like scheme #3 best.  

The other thing I might do away with is Z-targeting.  It seems there is less of a need for this as aiming, imo will prove to not  as clumsy with wiimote compared to the analog stick.  Or I would map the Z-targeting button to the d-pad which frees up the nunchuk button for something more useful.  

[Rize]

I agree.  If the Wii version doesn't allow gamecube controller usage (like Smash Bros. apparently will) then I may very well get the GameCube version.  It will be a tough decision... it's too bad they split the games.

[wandering]

Quote
Originally posted by: ruby_onix
BTW, has it been confirmed that TP will actually come in two different sold-seperately SKUs, and it's not just two different builds of the game? Like, is there any chance that the Wii version be included as a free "bonus disc" inside the case of the GameCube game?

If they did that, everyone would just give the version they weren't going to use to a friend.

Quote
Originally posted by: Jonnyboy117
Zelda on Wii currently plays just like Zelda on GameCube except that it's easier to spin attack and much harder to aim ranged weapons.  Unless Nintendo makes some dramatic improvements to these controls or includes an option to play with the Classic or GameCube controller, I will be buying the GameCube version of Zelda.

Well, the fact that Miymoto actually came in and insisted that the aiming be made harder (the designers wanted the game to compensate for hand movement from button presses, Miyamoto said actually aiming with a bow would require the archer to skillfully aim and compensate for movement) makes me think the aiming might not be as bad as a quick play-through might indicate. [edit: oh, triplex has already said this]

I dunno, though. They have screwed up one of these transitions before (Mario 64 DS).

Quote
Originally posted by: MechaG2
It's funny, I've read people complaining about using the touch screen to control Mario & the gang in Super Mario 64 DS, but I found it extremely easy to use. Their have been a lot of situations like this in the past. I'm not saying I'm a fantastic gamer, I just can't help but wonder how adept a lot of these critics are.

It's not about being adept, it's about recognizing that something is worse even though it's still useable. I'm fairly adept at Windows XP, that doesn't mean I don't think OS X is a much better operating system.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

Quote
Originally posted by: wandering

Well, the fact that Miymoto actually came in and insisted that the aiming be made harder (the designers wanted the game to compensate for hand movement from button presses, Miyamoto said actually aiming with a bow would require the archer to skillfully aim and compensate for movement) makes me think the aiming might not be as bad as a quick play-through might indicate. [edit: oh, triplex has already said this]

I guess we're riding the line between functionality vs. tangible realism, eh?

Personally, I favor the aiming on Wii.  Aiming apparently involves actively controlling and compensating for the natural instabilities of your arm, rather than pushing an anal-log stick and letting go to notice how the aim wonderfully stays perfectly still in past games (unless it's RE4).  Even mouse-aiming schemes demonstrate this.

Little has been done in aiming mechanics to drive the point across that the weapon is held in your hand(s), typically in the air.  This brings several uncertainties beyond pointing at your target, mainly holding your weapon still.  Using a mouse or an anal-log stick, if you took your hands off the controls after centering on a target, you DIRECTION WON'T CHANGE! AMAZING.  If you let go of your real-life bow or hookshot or Wii Remote, it WON'T keep the aim you once had! OH SNAPS!  As such, long range aiming with a Wii Remote may initially be difficult because long range aiming with a real weapon IS DIFFICULT! WHOA!

In my camp, aiming is something that involves PRACTICE.  It goes beyond your thumbs (or your fingers + wrist that conveniently have a desktop + cushy mousepad to REST ON while you DRINK STARBUCKS AND EAT PIZZA).  Don't whine until you've had a chance to practice with the Wii Remote and develop REAL SKILLS.  You can whine afterwards, when you realize YOU SUCK.

For the record, I'm crazy.

 

[mantidor]

I still think that you can pull the remote backwards to shoot arrows, maybe first you point, then you keep pressed A and that mantains the aim in place, an then you pull back and release the button to shoot. or maybe you could use the nunchuk, you raise both, push A and  only pull the remote back while the nunchuck reflects the shaking of the hand holding the bow, that way is not an easy aim and Pro will like it!  Add realistic physics for the arrow and the bow can be used for some interesting puzzles.

Its not that I like that implemented in TP, but for future Zelda games on the console.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

I like where you're heading, tho there's lots of weird details to be worked out.

Like, let's focus on aiming itself first.  I don't like the part of pressing A to keep the aim in place while you pull back -- when one pulls an arrow back, the forces in your arms and in the bow can make your muscles unsteady, so extra compensation is required and thus you're still responsible for aiming until the arrow completely leaves the bow.  Plus, the scheme doesn't work when you apply it to moving targets.

Using the nunchuk combo, i don't see how you can comfortably follow the screen while aiming with the controls which are being held up while mimmicking the pull-back motion -- aiming the Remote while pulling it back is destined for failure.  It would make more sense to let the Remote represent the bow (a be the pointer for aiming), while the nunchuk gets pulled back -- that way, you're still aiming in a reasonable position (at your hip or wherever you want) throughout the process.  But that doesn't work anyway because the position of nunchuck isn't tracked by the hardware.

I can simply agree "pulling back something" is a logical way to determine the power of the shot.

[NWR_pap64]

Quote
Originally posted by: Jonnyboy117

Quote
Originally posted by: pap64
- E3 isn't really a good enviroment to play games: You have lots of people watching and waiting for you to finish and a limited time. I think this seriously affects how a game plays, especially a game like Zelda. It just doesn't beat sitting down with the game in the comfort of your own house and play it. This seems one of those games that are best enjoyed and understood playing at home instead of a large, noisy game enviroment.

That's a completely valid point to make if we were complaining about the story or music or overall game design.  But it's irrelevant to the controls.

Quote
- This is an early demo: You guys have to remember that a lot of these demos are running on early hardware, so you are bound to have bugs in the demos. Like Bloodworth mentioned on the Wii forum E3 is mainly a big focus group in which they gather information from the gamers and implement that info onto the final game.

Zelda has been in development for over two years, and if it was delayed last summer so it could be launched with Wii, they've had nearly a year to work on the new controls.  So I don't buy this argument either.

Quote
So I think a better idea would be to wait till the game is finally released and see how it plays then before declaring it a lost cause.

I'm just saying that the game's controls need a complete overhaul or I will buy the other version, which conveniently ships on the same day and is in fact the same game.

Quote
And your lack of faith towards Nintendo is EXTREMELY disturbing, Ian.

Just use your Force Choke to take care of him.

Don't tell me that my claims are unvalid and irrelevant...

First, the controller thing IS relevant. You see, when you are in a calm, quiet room on your own you have the patience and the time to sit down and learn the controller throughly and take the time to get to know it better. I doubt you can do that at E3 since you have like 10 minutes to play the game and there are people waiting for you to finish the demo. It doesn't make for an enjoyable gaming enviroment...

And dude, just because the game has been in development for over a year and appeared at E3 it doesn't mean that the game is finished.

I'll use as an example. Writers do something called "rough drafts". What they do is write an early version of a poem, story or essay. It is there where they put their ideas, lay them all and write them as best as possible. The thing is that with the draft the writer sometimes goes back to it, changes some paragraphs, erases unnecesary ideas, asks for second opinions and such. Once he does all the changes he then writes the FINAL version of it.

This is the same deal with Twilight Princess Wii. The demo was to try out how people react to the controllers and see what needs to be fixed before the release.

I won't doubt that the E3 DEMO had controller issues, but my qualm with your preview is that you are passing judgement on the game based on a quick E3 demo that is not even final or even running on final hardware.

It would've been better if you had written this at the end of the preview:
"So overall, the E3 demo of Twilight Princess failed to wow us with the Wii controller. However, the game is far from final and may see changes before its release. Stay tuned for further previews as the game moves along".

Saying stuff like "The bittersweet truth about Zelda on Wii" makes you sound like you lost hope on the game because you played a demo of the unfinished game.

I say wait till the game is released and THEN make a final judgement.

The people at Nintendo are not idiots. THEY KNOW that they need to sell the revolution of the Wii the best way possible and selling games with faulty controls will not do it. I know that they are still working the bugs out of the controller, the hardware and the games. Nintendo are buggers when it comes to quality in their  games.

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

IT'S GAME INFORMER'S ETERNAL DARKNESS REVIEW ALL OVER AGAIN!

AUUUUGH!

[Ian Sane]

"Little has been done in aiming mechanics to drive the point across that the weapon is held in your hand(s), typically in the air."

So what?  Seriously I don't care about that sort of thing at all.  I like the fact that when I'm playing a videogame reality is compromised to make it a more fun experience.  I don't want to have to have real aiming skills for a videogame.  Part of the fantasy is that I can fire a bow and ride a horse and sword fight without any real effort on my part.  Hell, one of the things I LIKE about Nintendo games is that they don't throw in that sort of bullsh!t.  I never play Nintendo games where my character constantly needs food or there's one hit kills because it's more realistic or if I make the wrong decision I can get permanently stuck in a 10 hour+ game.  There are a lot of games out there where attempts at realism hurt the fun.  Aside from Fire Emblem's permanent deaths Nintendo games are typically friendly about that sort of thing.

Plus it's incredibly ironic that the whole point of the remote stuff was to streamline games and make them simpler for people that are intimidated by today's games.  Yet here Zelda is being made MORE COMPLICATED by removing the streamlined method and making it harder, and thus more intimidating, to aim.  HUH?

[Kairon]

Clearly, this will be the last Zelda in this style.

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

[IceCold]

Quote
Saying stuff like "The bittersweet truth about Zelda on Wii" makes you sound like you lost hope on the game because you played a demo of the unfinished game

This I agree with; that title really was  unnecessary..

[Svevan]

In regard to Pap's post, which I will quote below: firstly you must know that Jonny is the person you were previously arguing with, and I am the one who wrote the impressions. We share the same opinion, but you were speaking to him as though he wrote the offending article - this needs to be clear, since I am hear to defend (somewhat) my position, rather than fall back on Jonny.

Quote
Originally posted by: pap64
I'll use as an example. Writers do something called "rough drafts". What they do is write an early version of a poem, story or essay. It is there where they put their ideas, lay them all and write them as best as possible. The thing is that with the draft the writer sometimes goes back to it, changes some paragraphs, erases unnecesary ideas, asks for second opinions and such. Once he does all the changes he then writes the FINAL version of it.

Let us agree that the game is not finished. Your comparison to a rough draft is fair in some respects, but Zelda is the last game on the show floor (aside from maybe Metroid) that I would call rough. Either way, rough drafts are sent to publishers or peers to be edited - if your response to the rough draft was "it's no good, but I'll bet you'll get it right eventually," why even bother reading it? I played the game to criticise it, to find its flaws. There were some games I played at E3, Metroid on Wii, Chibi-Robo on DS, and more that I cannot fault in any way. The rough draft of those products look great. If someone hands me a bad rough draft, I'll take out my red pencil and mark it up.

Quote
Originally posted by: pap64
This is the same deal with Twilight Princess Wii. The demo was to try out how people react to the controllers and see what needs to be fixed before the release.

And that is precisely why I posted my article. Why do I pass such a harsh judgement as "I will not buy this game?" Well, what I saw was not buggy, not incomplete. It felt like it was ready to ship, as though they had perfected their idea. The problem is that their idea is incomplete, a failure. I got to play it and try, and I disagree with the philosophy, not the quirks.

Quote
Originally posted by: pap64
I won't doubt that the E3 DEMO had controller issues, but my qualm with your preview is that you are passing judgement on the game based on a quick E3 demo that is not even final or even running on final hardware.

This game is too far along to pass it off as "not final" or use the "dev kit" defense. This game looked sharp. From afar I wanted to play it bad. When holding the Wii Remote, I felt like I was playing Zelda through a glass darkly. Also, the phrase "controller issues" makes it sound like I disliked the button mapping and thought the movement was too jerky, or something else minor. My opinion goes far beyond that.

Quote
Originally posted by: pap64
It would've been better if you had written this at the end of the preview:
"So overall, the E3 demo of Twilight Princess failed to wow us with the Wii controller. However, the game is far from final and may see changes before its release. Stay tuned for further previews as the game moves along".

I wouldn't have posted that because the game is so freaking close to final I could taste it. Here's what I did post:

"It also goes without saying that Nintendo has got way more up its sleeve for this game. With the promised length and dungeon count, there must be items that will use innovative controller features."

and this:

"Zelda: Twilight Princess looks to be a fantastic game, and no one should be without a copy when it comes out. However, Nintendo must allow the Wii version to be played with a GameCube controller as well as the Wii Remote, otherwise the risk to the hardcore gamer (this game's primary audience) will be too high. If Nintendo is open-minded enough to allow this option then those gamers on the fence can give it a chance without regretting their purchase."

I did not make it clear enough in the last sentence that "give it a chance" meant playing Zelda with a Wii controller. What I'm saying is that Zelda could work on Wii, but no one will take the risk if they're forced to give up the GameCube controller option. Based on what I played at E3, I don't want to take that risk; for someone who hasn't played it at all, you seem very willing to take it.

Quote
Originally posted by: pap64
I know that they are still working the bugs out of the controller, the hardware and the games.

Once again, we're talking about something beyond bugs. This is an entire design philosophy. Nintendo specifically told us before the show started that playing was believing, and in a majority of the cases, they were correct. And hey, I'll go ahead and add coal to your fire: Zelda is an awful game to play at E3. The quick fix of WarioWare or the action platforming of Mario can be judged much quicker. That's why I went back on the third day to play Zelda again, just to make sure, and my opinion changed. At first I felt like the game controlled poorly, but after the second play I felt that it controlled in an adequate way that didn't work well with or take advantage of the Wii Remote, and didn't give me any extra control vs. a regular GC pad. (Every "bug" that I mention in my impressions is with the Wii Remote itself: sensitivity, nunchuk accelerometer, and D-Pad placement.)

Part of the reason for my opinion is that the game was built from the ground up for GameCube, and is being reworked for Wii rather than built from scratch. If Nintendo wanted to make Zelda with Wii controls an extra bonus for those who played the GC version in their Wii, that would be one thing; Nintendo has instead touted that this is the first time Zelda will launch with a system of theirs. Is it a big deal? Yeah. Should I be impressed? Yeah. Was I? No.

My final note is on journalism. I think it is very important to understand that I am a voice amongst a sea. I am somewhat in the minority on my Zelda opinion, but amongst the staff we were pretty much split down the middle. Tycho at Penny Arcade just commented on Zelda and had similar thoughts. I hope in one sense that my opinion is proved to be correct when you all get to play it, but as a gamer I hope that I am dead wrong, or that Nintendo will take great pains to improve it (which, as a fanboy, I believe will happen). If E3 really is a giant focus group, then they should listen to all voices, not just the congratulatory one. Otherwise, what's the point of sending the rough draft to anyone?

And why are you reading PGC? I would assume that you wanted to hear the news, whether it was good or bad. I don't think you wanted us to feed you recycled fanboy opinions. What I think you want, and what I think PGC does, is give a full spectrum of opinions from 20 some staffers. I am not the definitive voice on Zelda in the gaming world, or even on PGC, but I am the ultimate decision maker with my cash. As a journalist, I wanted to share with you, the reader, exactly how I felt, since I too am a gamer. If the only thing you walk away with is "Pfft, he's cracked, did you hear what he said about Shadow the Hedgehog?" then more power to you. But if my impressions have given you more caution about a very important moment in Nintendo gaming, then I have succeeded. I only want you to think - I don't want to think for you.

And Pap, I agree with you on one thing: upon rereading my impressions, I did not make clear enough that I am going to re-review the entire scenario when the game is released. I worded my impressions in a direct manner because the game was on a too high pedestal. I hope you can take the content of my message with you and throw away the tone when it is innappropriate.    

[Kairon]

I don't think that Nintendo fanboys should fear Zelda on the Wii being imperfect. This was a business decision more than anything else, so of course art will suffer. What's important though, at least for us in the Americas, is that we don't have to experience that suffering at all: we can pick up the GC version and play it like its meant to be played. Now would I start worrying about the next Zelda: it will be built from the ground up for the Wii and not resemble todays Zelda's too much in that respect, TP is the last Zelda of it's kind.

As Nintendo moves forward we should expect more of this: a company that is learning that artistry %100 of the time is sometimes counter-productive, and that a little business sense at the expense of a little idealism can go a long way.

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

[Requiem]

Well Evan, even though you bring up some good points, I have no choice but to trust Miyamoto over you.

I'm not sure where I read it (some kotaku interview I think), but he stated that once he got use to playing Zelda with the Wiimote there is no way he could go back. Then later said something about how ridiculously fun it is....

Plus, I think your getting ahead of yourself. Your not thinking about the possibilities. Sure you've played a compact dungeon, and sure the Wiimote may have seemed a little annoying then, but to completely dismiss it as "too much of a risk" is almost ignorant.

Remember the first time you played OOT? I thought that was amazing. I didn't know what the hell I was doing, but in time, I learned to love the control scheme. Even if it was harder, and at first, more annoying then my precious Snes outings. However, I digress...

Remember when they were demostrating Zelda to the press and they said something about how at times you would wield you Wiimote exactly like a sword. They failed to tell us, but I think I know in what situations that might come in handy.

Could it be Boss battles? Maybe a few....

Could it be Mini-games? Most likely....

Could it be Horse-back riding? Most DEFINITELY....

If there's one thing Miyamoto is about, it's fun. And though sword fighting with the Wiimote would be fun, Miyamoto is right, it would be too tiring since it happens too often. However horse-back riding seems to be a perfect fit. Though there seems to be a sizeable portion of horse-back riding, the game's focus is on dungeons. Dungeons are at least half the game in all Zelda's and this one promises even more. That leaves horse-back battles as a somewhat rare delicacy. And if you can wield your Wiimote as your sword, what a delicious bit of gameplay that might be.

Also, unlike ground battles, the enemies in horse-back battles don't last very long due to the enemies flying of their beasts in one hit. Also, unlike ground battles, the Wiimote would feel much more intuitive and actually feel like an upgrade. Even aiming would feel more intuitive, even if the only reason is that you can aim and direct your horse at the same time.

[mantidor]

I have to say, Im going to trust Evan above Miyamoto, no way in hell he's going to say the implementation isnt good, even if thats the case. Evan and PGC are for the time being our imparcial source along with the other impressions, all we can do is read them all, specially the negative ones, and try to deduce what would this control be for us. For me there has never been doubt, Im going with the GC version.

[Requiem]

Well maybe, but Miyamoto has never lied. He doesn't lie. If he didn't like the controls he would of said we are still working on them or something to that respect.

In fact, he wouldn't have been as enthusiastic as he was. If he thought the GC controls would have been better than that's how it would have been. I mean look at SSBB. It proves that if Wii controls don't better the situation, then they are not used. But he said could never go back to the original! That's a bold statement. And that's a little more than PR to me.

Also, has Miyamoto ever constructed a control scheme that wasn't comfortable or wasn't fun?

Never ever never never.  

[Kairon]

Quote
Originally posted by: Requiem
Well maybe, but Miyamoto has never lied. He doesn't lie. If he didn't like the controls he would of said we are still working on them or something to that respect.

In fact, he wouldn't have been as enthusiastic as he was. If he thought the GC controls would have been better than that's how it would have been. I mean look at SSBB. It proves that if Wii controls don't better the situation, then they are not used. But he said could never go back to the original! That's a bold statement. And that's a little more than PR to me.

Also, has Miyamoto ever constructed a control scheme that wasn't comfortable or wasn't fun?

Never ever never never.

Um....Radarscope?

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

[vudu]

The only thing Miyamoto did with Radarscope was turn it into Donkey Kong.  He didn't have anything to do with the original game (AFAIK).

[NinGurl69 *huggles]

Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
"Little has been done in aiming mechanics to drive the point across that the weapon is held in your hand(s), typically in the air."

So what?  Seriously I don't care about that sort of thing at all.  I like the fact that when I'm playing a videogame reality is compromised to make it a more fun experience.  I don't want to have to have real aiming skills for a videogame.  Part of the fantasy is that I can fire a bow and ride a horse and sword fight without any real effort on my part.  Hell, one of the things I LIKE about Nintendo games is that they don't throw in that sort of bullsh!t.  I never play Nintendo games where my character constantly needs food or there's one hit kills because it's more realistic or if I make the wrong decision I can get permanently stuck in a 10 hour+ game.  There are a lot of games out there where attempts at realism hurt the fun.  Aside from Fire Emblem's permanent deaths Nintendo games are typically friendly about that sort of thing.

Plus it's incredibly ironic that the whole point of the remote stuff was to streamline games and make them simpler for people that are intimidated by today's games.  Yet here Zelda is being made MORE COMPLICATED by removing the streamlined method and making it harder, and thus more intimidating, to aim.  HUH?

Valid concern, but my frustrations come from the flaws that accompanied the so-called traditional simplied controls.  For example, you've got aiming, and you've got strafing.  Offer them at the same time, then strafing BECOMES A MEANS OF DODGING AND A FREAKING AIMING MECHANIC.  And the industry has gotten used to this.  What's the result?  STRAFE-DANCING IS A STANDARD GAMEPLAY STRATEGY.  Thanks for breaking the illusion, game makers.  All the efforts in making realistic visuals, and MY SATISFACTION, have went down the toilet, since it now looks like a water pistol fight among children.

About "streamlined" control mechanics, that involves some perspective.  Remote vs. Analog; they both require practice.  But try to get the point across to somebody new to aiming-style-gameplay that "pushing DOWN" on the analog stick makes your screen "look UP".  But wait!  It's different for some games!  And some games let you invert things!  And some games don't!  WHAT'S GOING ON?  Whereas with the Remote, tilting the forward end up is undoubtedly looking up.  IS THAT SUPPOSED TO BE COMPLICATED?  IT'S NOT NATURAL?

"to streamline games and make them simpler for people that are intimidated by today's games"
and i'm not sure how i should be reading this.  Was Nintendo supposed to take existing games and make them less complicated?  I don't think that's the case nor the reality of it.  E3 showed the Remote exists to 1) improve/expand the functionality of established game types, 2) allow for simpler games to be made that are still VERY INVOLVING.  To me, "existing games" are complicated due to all the OPTIONS AND OBJECTIVES PLAYERS ARE BOMBARDED WITH.  Cuz apparently, games aren't very involving unless they ask they ask a lot from the player otherwise they won't sell in today's market and stuff and stuff and stuff and stuff.  The Wii Sports/Music/sparkling innovationDemos show Nintendo's approach to "simple" is simplifying/streamlining the presentation of objectives while keeping the player ACTIVE AND INVOLVED.  Zelda's not being marketed to these players!  Nintendo's not asking Brain Training customers to learn Structural Bridge Design!

And really, the heart of the issue may turn out to just be sensitivity.  Prime3's expert scheme seemed to yield good results, but Zelda's didn't.  So Zelda is doomed, no question about it, and it can't be fixed.......................  COME. ON.


P.S. everyone should buy the GC version of Twilight Princess.  Even people who don't have GameCubes and will get Wii.  I don't want Nintendo to sit back and see it was ok to make us WAIT.
&^#@$(%^#(^#!&&*&$$#%*(^$#@^$t#@*&$%t#

[Jonnyboy117]

Miyamoto's statement about not being able to go back to the GC version was in reference both to the controls and to the widescreen display.

Part of the cause for this whole argument is that Nintendo had decided for some bizarre reason to sell two nearly identical versions of Zelda.  And since Wii is backwards compatible, all Wii owners will have the choice to make between the GC and Wii versions.  The Wii has a distinct advantage with its widescreen display, but many of us don't have a widescreen TV yet.  That leaves the controls as apparently the only other difference between versions.  So it's natural for the controls to be a deciding point, especially when the Wii controls are clearly NOT universally preferred, at least in their current state.

And again, this argument that the game is early just does not float.  Zelda has been in development for years, and the Wii version has supposedly been in the works since around the time that the delay was announced last year, which would also make it one of the earliest Wii games in development.  There were third-party demos with better pointer support than Zelda had, which is ridiculous, and most of the other Wii demos had more logical, intuitive uses for the controller (fishing notwithstanding).

[wandering]

Quote
Miyamoto's statement about not being able to go back to the GC version was in reference both to the controls and to the widescreen display.

At least this bodes well for Nintendo's widescreen support....

Anyway. You guys could very well be right about the whole control issue... but I'm going to wait until impressions come in from people who have played with the wii controls for several hours before deciding which version to buy.

[ruby_onix]

Quote
Originally posted by: Jonnyboy117
Part of the cause for this whole argument is that Nintendo had decided for some bizarre reason to sell two nearly identical versions of Zelda.

Quote
Originally posted by: Nintendo
After much discussion, the Zelda development team has requested extra time to add new levels, more depth and even higher quality to Zelda: Twilight Princess. Consequently, we're announcing a new global launch in 2006, after the conclusion of this fiscal year (March 31). We'll provide a specific date at a later point in time (LOLz, no we won't). While this may come as a disappointment to many eager fans, it will absolutely enrich the game and make it a multi-million seller (if we count all the different versions). BTW, we will also be enriching ourselves, since we'll be charging extra for these sold-seperately improvements. That's just good business. Hey wait? Why didn't we just launch the GCN version right now? Ah well. No biggie. See you next year!