We store cookies, you can get more info from our privacy policy.
Wii

North America

The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess

by Evan Burchfield - May 14, 2006, 10:37 pm EDT
Total comments: 77

The unfortunate truth about Zelda on Wii.

Zelda on Wii is so bittersweet. On one hand, I am happy to see both a Metroid and Zelda game at system launch, and both games look stellar and fun. The design for this Zelda looks mature and deep, and the promises of a hardcore game are likely to be fulfilled. The other hand, though, is that when playing Zelda on the show floor, I did not feel as though I had any extra depth of control or enjoyment with the Wii Remote. I really wanted to put the thing down and play the game with a GameCube controller. Wasn't playing supposed to be believing?

Bloodworth's impressions already detail the complex control scheme, so I will not repeat it here. Overall, I find the control on Wii to be in some ways just as good as previous Zelda outings, and in other ways too complex with a high learning curve. First of all, the basics work; movement, Z-Targeting, sword, action button, all perform traditionally and responsively. What does not work is the D-Pad item usage. The D-Pad is just too far up on the Wii Remote. Switching between items on the D-Pad is laborious since you must reposition your hand to reach it. Nintendo seems to have gone out of their way to make your thumb naturally rest on the A button, but at the cost of alienating the D-Pad from normal gameplay usage. This is an inherent problem with a vertical controller, and will not be alleviated unless the buttons are repositioned. Another problem with the D-Pad is that it just doesn't feel good to use items on it, especially when compared to the C buttons or the X, Y, Z combo from Wind Waker.

The Nunchuk spin attack is a much better control element, but it is occasionally difficult to engage. The Nunchuk's accelerometer seems to be responsive, but also specific. If you don't do precisely what the game wants, your character will just sit there. However, there are accelerometer problems with a lot of games in Nintendo's booth, which again means the problem is with the Wii controller, not the game.

Finally, the aiming in Zelda is of major concern. Sensitivity of the Wii Remote is an issue across the board, and is hardly worth repeating here. Much more worthy is the problem of gameplay necessity. When playing Metroid or Red Steel, you are always aiming your weapon – the Wii Remote is an extension of your hand, and the on-screen action relies on your constant participation. There are portions of the Zelda demo, large portions, where the motion sensitivity in the Nunchuk and the Wii Remote are unused. When moving across the landscape, using items that do not require aiming, and even when fighting most enemies, the Wii Remote is useless. When I switched from doing these traditional actions to aiming a bow, I found I had let the Remote drop like I would a normal gamepad. Since the Remote was now pointed at a downward angle, my bow would point at the ground as well. Your posture during normal gameplay and aimed gameplay does vary and part of the learning curve for Wii is learning to control it.

In summary, the Wii Remote is essentially a GameCube pad cut in two while playing Twilight Princess. Only long-range items require the special functions, and these are emphasized in the demo for a reason. The Wii Remote's button placement is not appropriate for most games, Zelda especially, and performing the expected motions on the controller consistently (particularly the Nunchuk) is difficult. No one wants to play a game where pressing a button on the gamepad works only half the time.

So what are we left with? Is Zelda on Wii going be worthless? Hardly. On the E3 show floor it is impossible to hear the sound coming from the speaker on the Wii Remote, and “immersive sound" is a feature I am greatly anticipating. 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. However, so far it seems that to use an item, you hit the D-Pad, and that's it. Where's the revolution in that?

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, for one, will take the soft (read: GameCube) option if Nintendo opts for a hard-sell.

Talkback

trip1eXMay 14, 2006

I wouldn't worry too much. They've got 6 months to iron out the controls. Believe me they'll be heavily worked over between now and then. Hell they'll probably let you point and click on the weapon icons to switch between them. I also imagine alot of it is you in that you're new to the wiimote and used to a regular controller. I used to play pc fps games with keyboard only. I had a hard time switching to the mouse at first even tho it was superior. I was all over the place with it. It tooks weeks before I finally stuck with the mouse. It just takes awhile to fine tune new fine motor skills. Zelda is more a 'hard-core' game too and so I don't think that audience will be as fickle as you make them out to be.

Also I wouldn't doubt the wiimote itself is fine-turned between now and November.

Last of course is Nintendo's track record. They always make some pretty fine AAA games. And Zelda being one of the major launch titles for Wii I have faith they'll make it happen.

SvevanEvan Burchfield, Staff AlumnusMay 14, 2006

I thought that might be the case, so I revisited the game on the third day after further Wii playing. I found that I was better at some actions, and that the control did not "bite" as I first thought. However, the design behind the control scheme is still asinine, and Nintendo's window to fix it is not 6 months, but something closer to 3 or 4. I agree with your faith in the company, and there's little chance Nintendo would screw this game up if it were released for a regular system. Of course, this is not a regular system; it is unproven. At E3 we saw some excellent things, but we also saw some pretty sad things, and some of them were Nintendo's. My faith is in them, they're in my prayers. Let's hope for the best.

Ian SaneMay 14, 2006

I'm reading these sort of impressions a lot regarding Zelda so I have a feeling I'll be getting the Cube version.

One thing I'm noticing about the remote is that when it comes to a game like WiiSports there's tons of praise. And it makes sense. The whole point of WiiSports is the remote. The game just wouldn't have any reason to exist without it. But with other games there are some iffy impressions and these seem to be the more traditional games that have motion controls mapped to them. Now Zelda makes sense because at it's heart it's a Cube game. But Red Steel and Metroid Prime 3 have some concerns as well and they're Wii originals. I think part of it might be that they're games that under normal circumstances would have been built with a traditional controller in mind. We've played that type of game before so we can compare to the "old way" of doing things. So if the remote doesn't quite work as well for it as it should we're going to notice. Something like WiiSports we won't notice it because it's not taking a traditional control scheme and trying to map it to something new.

I've been very impressed with Nintendo's E3 showing but I'm only impressed by the games, not the implementation of the controller. Actually I can't help but think "boy this looks cool. Too bad I have to work with that controller to play it." WiiSports is the exception. I certainly don't think the remote is a better way to play videogames. Judging from impressions it sounds like what I expected. It works well as a specialty controller for a couple of unique games but not really as a normal controller.

One thing that is good about it is that it seems to have rejuvenated Nintendo as this has been the most impressive showing they've made in years. They haven't demonstrated something really substantial to justify the concept but it has given them a creative spark. It's like a placebo. Nintendo thinks they've found something that will allow them to innovate and that enthusiasm has postively affected their output. Only the best of their output is really no different than what was possible on the Cube. Their attitude has improved and their games look more exciting as a result. But the games aren't really benefiting from the new controller.

SvevanEvan Burchfield, Staff AlumnusMay 14, 2006

I see you flew to this thread like a fly to pudding.

Let me correct you on one thing: Metroid was freaking awesome and perfect for the controller. It played far better than the Cube games and felt faster. I could accuse those who gave Metroid mixed impressions of being bad gamers, but they could say the same thing about me and Zelda. I just hope someone else on staff (I think Pale really liked Zelda) will post refuting impressions.

It's these hands on reports that really make me hope the wii-mote had scalable sensitivity. Did you get the impression that the ability to make it less sensitive would help with aiming? I saw a lot of people complain that the constant twitching of their hand made aming really difficult at long range. I'd feel better if they used their current aiming system, but once you line it up you can lock your aim and no amount of minor twitching will take you off your target. I just get the sinking feeling I'm going to empty a whole quiver without hitting the target. Granted, the E3 demo does drop you right into a level; hopefully the game will be a bit more gentle with the time you have to master aiming.

Beyond the twitchy issues, I'm curious about the current configuration of the remote. Are there any pictures that have a 1:1 scale of its current configuration? I'm curious to see the gap between the A button and the D-Pad for myself.

Shin GallonMay 14, 2006

I'm more than likely geting the Gamecube version also, because I want the Gamecube controls. It'd be nice if the Cube version supported widescreen, though...oh well, can't have everything.

IceColdMay 14, 2006

Quote

Beyond the twitchy issues, I'm curious about the current configuration of the remote. Are there any pictures that have a 1:1 scale of its current configuration?
IGN had a great model of the controller where you could move it around and see the size and everything, but I can't find it now..

I'm with Evan on this one. I didn't play much of Zelda because the lines were incredibly long and it just doesn't interest me in the form of an E3 demo. The level set up for E3 did not seem to give a good impression of how the game is played, whereas the Metroid demo did. Anyway, from what I did play on Zelda, I did not find any evidence that the new control methods make the game more fun than when I played it on GameCube last year. The actual implementation, at this point in development, is a far cry from the fantasies we've all had of swinging the remote like a sword and pulling the remote back to draw the bow or swinging the remote over the shoulder to throw the boomerang. 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.

NWR_pap64Pedro Hernandez, Contributing WriterMay 14, 2006

Not that I doubt your opinions since you DID play the game at E3, and maybe this the hopeful side of me talking, but I think you guys are being too hard and negative on TP Wii.

You guys have to remember two things:
- 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.

- 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.

Nintendo has put A LOT of effort into the games and the controllers so I know that even as we speak Nintendo could be hard at work fine tuning the controller and the games before the release. I'm sure this is what happened with the Zelda Wii demo.

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.

So a phrase like "The unfortunate truth about Zelda Wii" is best reserved when the FINAL game is released and you spend more than 10 minutes playing it, Evan.

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

ruby_onixMay 15, 2006

Quote

What does not work is the D-Pad item usage. The D-Pad is just too far up on the Wii Remote. Switching between items on the D-Pad is laborious since you must reposition your hand to reach it. Nintendo seems to have gone out of their way to make your thumb naturally rest on the A button, but at the cost of alienating the D-Pad from normal gameplay usage. This is an inherent problem with a vertical controller, and will not be alleviated unless the buttons are repositioned. Another problem with the D-Pad is that it just doesn't feel good to use items on it, especially when compared to the C buttons or the X, Y, Z combo from Wind Waker.

I've said it before and I'll say it again.

Replace the D-pad and A button with a traditional four-button diamond. That means you're losing a button, right? No problem. Put in a second trigger, to match the nunchuck. You still want a D-pad? Sure, put it on the bottom of the remote, instead of those two redundant buttons. Voila! Problems solved. And now you can use the remote for more Virtual Console games than just the NES.

Of course, I'm wasting my breath by saying it, because Nintendo's committed.


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?

Edit: Yeah, I just checked the press conference video. Reggie says Nintendo will "launch two different versions". That kind of sucks, because making the Wii version a bonus disc wouldn't force anyone to choose, and it would deflect all of the negativity they've drawn due to the "it's a GameCube-only game, because we owe it to GameCube fans" insisting that Nintendo was doing, as well as all the complaints that Wiimote control is a "tacked-on gimmick".

ArtimusMay 15, 2006

Hmmm...IGN felt it gave the game a fresh feeling. They also got a lot more play time. I wonder if this isn't just a learning curve problem.

I've been fearing this all along. I'm going to pre-order this game, and I'm torn between which version I want to pre-order. I've been looking forward to this Zelda game for ages. I have also been looking forward to Wii for ages, but I really don't want the experience of playing games with this new controller to overshadow the experience of digging into this new game.

Wii developers (Nintendo included) really need to stick to games that were built from the ground up to work with the Wii controller. This reminds me of when the DS launched with Mario 64. Mario 64 was not easy to control with the touch screen like Nintendo seemed to believe. Fast forward 18 months, and the DS has loads of games that are great, because they were built from scratch with the DS in mind.

As of right now, I'm leaning toward the Gamecube version.

Has anyone heard if there will be any additional polish in the graphics on the Wii version?

mantidorMay 15, 2006

As the broken record I am Ill say it again: The implemention is suffering because this is after all a GC game.

My example was always analog stick into a Link to the Past, but Mario 64 DS is an even better example that has been brought up recently, I really dont think the remote itself and the hardware are bad, being too precise is of course better than not being precise, but they arent free to experiment further into the possibilities of the remote because the game is still linked to the GC version (and Im very happy about that). I really dont like this suggestion of Wii exclusive items, its already enough for the ones who want the GC version that we have to wait longer and are not going to get the graphical improvements, even if they are minor.

CalibanMay 15, 2006

I'm still getting the Wii version, I can adapt to control schemes pretty quick unless they are extremely annoying.

Mario323May 15, 2006

They will probably include an option to plug in your Gamecube controller to the Wii and play it like you would on the Gamecube. Isn't it just a Gamecube game? They aren't releasing a gamecube and Wii version, right? Sorry if they announced this and I missed it--its hard to keep up on all this E3 stuff. I think they mentioned that Gamecube controllers could be used in Super Smash Brawl, so couldn't they do this for the Zelda Wii version? Seems so. I think the Wii version might have better graphics because in the Wii footage there was a noticable difference in less "jaggies" and smoother textures.

mantidorMay 15, 2006

Two versions were confirmed for TP right at the conference, one for GC, one for Wii.

mantidor, your sig is way awesome.

YenRugMay 15, 2006

I got the impression, from watching the conference demo of TP, that Navi could be used to select the "d-pad" buttons on screen rather than having to use the d-pad itself; was that not the case in the demo you got to play on the show floor, or did you not try that option? Either way, I'm getting a Wii and Zelda for it, it's a new way to play and I'll take the time to learn rather than be fixed on playing the same way as I did on the GC.

BloodworthDaniel Bloodworth, Staff AlumnusMay 15, 2006

No, what you do with the cursor is click on items in the menu to set them to one of the directional buttons.

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.

Ian SaneMay 15, 2006

"Hmmm...IGN felt it gave the game a fresh feeling."

What an odd thing to say about a game that hasn't been released yet. Do they mean it freshens up the Zelda franchise or Twilight Princess itself which they probably have played a fair bit but the rest of us haven't?

Hostile CreationMay 15, 2006

Well, I imagine Twilight Princess would essentially feel like Wind Waker, Majora's Mask, and Ocarina of Time with traditional control, so it could probably go either way.

Still not sure which version I'm going to get. It'd be nice if the Wii version supported a Gamecube controller (since the controller is compatible with the system), but I may just get it for cube. We'll see.

MechaG2May 15, 2006

I've read a lot of impressions on Zelda: TP for Wii and the majority have been very favorable to the controls. Granted, it's not finished yet and they still have some tweaking to do, but I'm sure Nintendo will get them ironed out by launch.

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.

ArtimusMay 15, 2006

Quote

Remember playing Majora's Mask back on the N64? Despite the novel three-day setup, some players found that it felt a bit too similar to The Ocarina of Time and thus simply wasn't as exciting and fresh. I have a feeling Twilight Princess might have turned out the same way. It's a gorgeous game filled with great puzzles and characters -- and apparently it's a longer and more involved quest than any Zelda game before it -- but it's firmly rooted in the TOoT-style of gameplay. Well, not anymore. The changes the control setup in the Wii version adds to the game profoundly impact the game's feel. Fishing feels new. Blocking feels new. Shooting arrows feels new. Even the spin attack has a new twist to it. So even though you may encounter a familiar looking puzzle, the new control dynamics give everything a fresh coat of paint. Yes, you can get excited now.


Peer Schneider, IGN

SvevanEvan Burchfield, Staff AlumnusMay 15, 2006

That's an interesting point, Artimus, but I disagree with Peer's comparison. I warmed up to the three-day chronology of Majora instantly - it didn't effect the very core of the gameplay, just the game design. If anything, I hear people saying Majora should have been more like TOoT. However, Peer is very correct: this is an entirely new way to control Zelda. And I'm absolutely willing to try it on someone else's Wii before I decide not to buy it. It could be that it takes an hour to get used to.

I've seen people of all types pick up the N64 versions of Zelda and love them. Sadly, I don't think those same people will have access to Zelda on Wii (it's not for them, I guess).

trip1eXMay 15, 2006

I'm buying the Wii version no matter what. I mean the whole bow and arrow thing where you'll hear your bowstring tighten as you pull the wiimote back is something I won't miss.

I really think a big part of the controls is a learning curve issue. Even Miyamoto said it's probably harder for those weaned on current game controllers to get used to the wiimote. Again my first attempts at using a mouse for fps games drove me back to keyboard-only because I was worse with the mouse. Ultimately, of course, the mouse was superior.

Another analogy is Tiger Woods. Every couple of years he revamps his swing in order to get better. AT first this results in him getting worse tho. He takes a step backwards while making the adjustments. Only later does the payoff happen and he takes a couple steps forward.

The only issue I really see is the switching between weapons with the d-pad. That doesn't seem like it can be improved without ditching that scheme completely. The only good news about that is I don't think you'll need to rapidly switch between weapons like you would in an action game.

NinGurl69 *hugglesMay 15, 2006

Majora's Mask was exciting and fresh. The similarities distanced themselves once the game demanded more from your core mask abilities. Boo to the who didn't get so far!

OH HEY IT'S A TOWN WITH PEOPLE, AND THEY ACTUALLY HAVE THINGS TO DO IN ADDITION TO STANDING AND REPEATING TEXT!

IN-KEEPER ANJU AND THE MUSIC BOX HOUSE FTW

mantidorMay 15, 2006

Playing Zora Link was a game on its own, oh how much I wish for a return of that in TP!

That IGN guy doesnt know what the hell he's talking about, MM was rejected for being so different, and Ive never heard someone saying "its like ocarina" except him.

RequiemMay 15, 2006

You guys are fogetting what the hell he is talking about: Controls. The story may have changed, but MM essentially controlled like OOT.

He figured TP would to, but he found out that the Wii made it feel fresh and new. A rare experience to be sure. Maybe something akin to playing OOT for the first time?

mantidorMay 15, 2006

Again, Zora Link. When I mentioned him it was because that was exactly a fresh experience from a controls perspective, finally you could swim properly in the game. Theres a reason Aunoma and team decided to include a wolf, you know. In other words, the fresh experiences are going to be there in TP plenty, without the need of rev functionality.



Ian SaneMay 15, 2006

"Remember playing Majora's Mask back on the N64? Despite the novel three-day setup, some players found that it felt a bit too similar to The Ocarina of Time and thus simply wasn't as exciting and fresh."

I actually liked the fact that it controlled like Ocarina of Time. I like a franchise for a reason and when I play a sequel I want that basic feel to be similar. I picked the game up and knew how to play it instantly. But it was still a very different sequel with an emphasis on side quests. It was like someone made a basic control scheme and then two people made two totally different games with it (actually that kind of is what happened). Majora's Mask is the perfect sequel. It plays like the first game but adds a whole bunch of new and different sh!t to make it a different experience. If anything the complaints I hear about Majora's Mask are that it's too different.

Majora's Mask in my view demonstrates a key misconception regarding the whole Wii in general. There's this idea about the Wii that the remote is a necessity for innovation. Somehow Twilight Princess is supposed to be more fresh and exciting because it has a different control scheme. Why? Isn't it still about going through dungeons and solving puzzles? How is having a different way to control shooting a bow going to change the overall game design? Majora's Mask is true innovation. They didn't change the controls they changed the game on top of the controls. They took the Zelda formula and created a vastly different game around it, that still felt like Zelda. If Twilight Princess feels too much like Ocarina of Time it will be because of how the game itself is laid out, not because the controls are mapped a certain way.

Super Mario Galaxy didn't grab my interest because it uses the remote. It grabbed my interest because of the design of Mario jumping between planets. That idea is unique and that's why it grabbed my interest. The same idea could be done with a different control scheme and I still would be intrigued becaues Super Mario Galaxy introduces a new exciting concept while still feeling like Mario. It isn't just a Super Mario 64 clone with different controller mappings.

trip1eXMay 15, 2006

Miyamoto says "This is a kind of a slightly different case then what I just explained, but one example I can give would be with The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess, which as you know takes advantage of the Wii remote for aiming with the bow. Some people found that when they were aiming with the bow, as they release the button to fire the arrow your aim would move slightly, and that would make it more difficult to hit the enemy. So the natural thinking was that maybe on the software and programming side we could make it so that even if your aim moves just a little bit as you release you'll still hit the target, kind of almost like an auto-aim type of feature. That was kind of the natural thinking in terms of how we could improve that.

But I went back to the team and I said, well, you know, if you think about it though aiming a bow is not something that's very easy to do. So the fact that you have to be very precise adds reality, it adds realism to the game. So rather than try and take that type of aiming system and change it into something that's more along the lines of a shooting game, it's better to retain that type of realism and challenge the player to really kind of get into the feeling of shooting a bow. I think often times people kind of have these old habits in creating games, that they always tend to try and resolve issues in the same way, even though resolving that issue may not be the best solution for that particular piece of software."

trip1eXMay 15, 2006

Q: This more active gaming style is a departure from today's gaming, which tends to be sedentary. What's the backup plan if gamers aren't willing to follow into that more active sort of gaming? Do you see more games being made for the classic controller?

Miyamoto says "Of course we will have games that will be functional with the classic controller as well. And in fact if you try Zelda in the living room setting on the show floor you'll see that you can actually sit back and with very little motions play Zelda and have a very good time with it. Those gamers who aren't interested in doing those very sweeping motions, they don't have to. But in fact, I think, they're going to find as they're playing that they're gradually going to start doing those motions because it's so much more fun to actually be that involved in what is going on the screen and it adds that much more realism and I think there a large number of players out there that are really excited for that type of control scheme.

Even when you're just sitting there with this more laid back style of gameplay, I think everyone's going to find that just using the pointer in and of itself is very convenient and a very good addition to the control experience as well."

Smash_BrotherMay 15, 2006

It's still 5-6 months until this game hits store shelves. I'm not at all worried about it.

Nintendo has all that time to tweak and fine tune the game and the controls. I have zero concerns.

Quote

Originally posted by: Ian Sane Majora's Mask is true innovation. They didn't change the controls they changed the game on top of the controls. They took the Zelda formula and created a vastly different game around it, that still felt like Zelda.


I...disagree with that statement strongly.

I found so much about MM sparkly innovationy. Look, the whole world runs on a 3-day cycle that is predictable and that you can easily jump to the very beginning of! Look, more masks! And look! MORE MASKS!

I mean...ick. MM was a friggin' true sequel to me, not in the Nintendo sense, but in the Call of Duty and Call of Duty 3 sense. It had great production values, but no Miyamoto magic.

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Hater of games

ruby_onixMay 15, 2006

Quote

Originally posted by: Hostile Creation
Still not sure which version I'm going to get. It'd be nice if the Wii version supported a Gamecube controller (since the controller is compatible with the system), but I may just get it for cube. We'll see.

No. The GameCube controller isn't compatible with the Wii. Those ports are inaccessable to Wii games, and only function when the system is in "GameCube mode". Wii games will control exclusively with the Wiimote.

And you people thought I was crazy to complain about such a thing.

Oh wait. I'm forgetting the Shell. The Shell is perfect. The Shell will be tailor made, in different forms for each and every game that could possibly use one. And free. They will come free with those games. Yeah, I forgot.

mantidorMay 15, 2006

I really would prefer they could spend working this 5-6 months polishing the GC version instead of tweaking some controls Im not going to use. I understand the reasons behind the decision of putting rev features, but they couldve also promote the standalone GC version as a launch title and promote the backwards compatibility at the same time, then the console wouldve had the best of both worlds, traditional and new games, thats the direction I would've liked. Afterall Aunoma said TP is for the hardcore Zelda fan, it makes no sense to put features so "anti-hardcore" so to speak, the audience of this game isnt going to be scared away by complex controls at all.

I do disagree with Ian that Mario Galaxy could be made with normal controllers, and any other rev game, just the fact that they were made with the remote in mind changes the game design completly, what happens is that now is harder to understand, because all we the normal bunch have is videos and hands on impressions, Again, this is a demo, and it has a long way to go.

ShyGuyMay 15, 2006

An excerpt from Kaplan Joystiq interview:

Quote

JS: With regards specifically to Smash Bros., that is a title that is not necessarily going to be using the Wii motion control.

PK: It may or may not, but I guess it's still in development, so let's talk when it's done.

JS: One of the developers said at the event where it was unveiled, "Don't throw away your GameCube controllers." That would imply that maybe --

PK: That would apply to Zelda too, and Virtual Console games...



This would seem to imply that the cube controllers can be used on the Wii Zelda and the virtual console.

ruby_onixMay 15, 2006

Yeah, I just read that and came back here.

It's just more hinting and teasing, and it conflicts with Reggie's clear statement from February about it being a hardware limitation.

http://www.planetgamecube.com/newsArt.cfm?artid=11050

I'm not sure how to take it. It's possible that they changed the hardware, but they're not allowed to say that they did, because of the all-important hardware secrecy and specs not mattering and whatnot. Or it was never really a hardware limitation, and more of a strongarm tactic, which they didn't want the public to know about but now they can't afford so they're backing off. Or the hints from Perrin and E3 are just lies meant as a delaying tactic, so that when people finally get peeved about the controls in the Wii version of Zelda they might be scattered and not have a unified voice.

None of which are scenarios that I like. But I'll take one of the two that result in non-borked controls.

mantidorMay 15, 2006

Kaplan is always very ambigous, while Reggie goes to the point, thats good, but gives chance to end up looking like a liar, examples: Mario 128 shown at last E3, TP to be released in April, TP not having Wii features, etc.

Smash_BrotherMay 15, 2006

Keep in mind that stuff Reggie says might change after he says it, effectively making him LOOK like a liar when he's really not.

Kaplan is ambiguous because she's afraid of saying something which people might call her on later.

IceColdMay 15, 2006

Quote

Originally posted by: ruby_onix
Replace the D-pad and A button with a traditional four-button diamond. That means you're losing a button, right? No problem. Put in a second trigger, to match the nunchuck. You still want a D-pad? Sure, put it on the bottom of the remote, instead of those two redundant buttons. Voila! Problems solved. And now you can use the remote for more Virtual Console games than just the NES.
Hey... I thought of that idea! face-icon-small-tongue.gif

Quote

Originally posted by: trip1eX
I'm buying the Wii version no matter what. I mean the whole bow and arrow thing where you'll hear your bowstring tighten as you pull the wiimote back is something I won't miss.


That was not in the E3 demo at all. To use the bow, you just press down on the D-pad to pull it out, then press again to shoot an arrow. You don't pull back the remote and "let go" or anything like that. Same problem as with the sword, when you don't really swing it around like in Red Steel. That's exactly why some of us are complaining about Zelda's controls...they just complicate the game without adding any immersion because they are underused and poorly at that.

PaleMike Gamin, Contributing EditorMay 15, 2006

It was actually hold down the button to pull it back and the release the button to shoot, but same difference. face-icon-small-smile.gif

trip1eXMay 15, 2006

Ah no pullback? Ah well. It doesn't seem like the controls are complicated tho. What's complicated about aiming while holding a button and letting go of it? It sounds like more fun than moving that analog stick to aim with the bow. Analog stick bow aiming in the mini-game you played with the fish in Windwaker sucked arse.

I threw a quote up above in another post that I found in an E3 Endgadget/Joystiq interview that said Miyamoto didn't want to make it easier to aim and hit a target with the bow. Designers complained your aim 'shook' when you pressed the button to shoot an arrow. He actually said yeah, but it's realistic. That's how a bow is in real-life. And so it stayed in there. I just think aiming will be fine.

The only beef I read that doesn't sound good is the d-pad thing, but it doesn't seem to be a big dealio in a game like Zelda where, at least in the last one, it doesn't seem like you need to rapidly switch weapons while playing. They could change this too to pointing and aiming at the icons to switch.

I looked at the wiimote again and the d-pad is awful close to the A button. CAn't you press the 'A' button with the the middle of your thumb and use the top of thumb to control the dpad? I do that with the Gamecube controller and the 'A' and 'Y' buttons. Is the d-pad as tiny as on the Gamecube? Maybe they need that one on there if it isn't. But that wouldn't be good for games when the thing is turned sideways.

Anyway I guess I always saw Zelda on the Wii as a Gamecube game with enhanced features for Wii instead of a 'for the Wii from the ground up' game. And that's exactly what it seems like we're getting. I didn't really expect the 'full-fledged' wii treatment here.

RequiemMay 15, 2006

Any word on aiming and moving at the same time?

I know it might be hard, but I bet i'll master the Wii in no time. Hell, I bet the learning curve is still MORE FUN than the original. Then once you master it, it's like butter. Silky smooth immersion.

AnyoneEBMay 15, 2006

Requiem: I asked the same question a few days ago: http://www.planetgamecube.com/forums/messageview.cfm?catid=28&threadid=15993

SvevanEvan Burchfield, Staff AlumnusMay 15, 2006

Good question, Requiem and AnyoneEB: Yes you can aim and move at the same time. Since you're holding the D-Pad to enter aiming mode, and moving the Wii-remote to aim, the control stick is free to move your character. This was actually fairly vital during the boss battle, and it is definitely a positive function of the Wii controls in Zelda.

mantidorMay 15, 2006

Im actually happy about the implementation so far, my biggest fear was swinging the remote to swing the sword, I knew it was going to be tiring and get old really quickly and Nintendo seemed to agree, the bit about the arrow is not what I expected though, I really thought it was like pulling the bow string, but maybe doing that isnt as easy as I thought.

My criticism has always been that the implementation cant really go beyond that, Nintendo is mapping buttons to gestures here, its kind of hard to make it more intuitive or natural without modifing the core gameplay mechanics of the game, something they cant do, they dont have the time to do such heavy modifications right now anyway.

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?.

ruby_onixMay 15, 2006

Quote

Originally posted by: IceCold
Hey... I thought of that idea! face-icon-small-tongue.gif

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.

SvevanEvan Burchfield, Staff AlumnusMay 15, 2006

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.

mantidorMay 15, 2006

I do have long thumbs fortunately face-icon-small-smile.gif 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.

trip1eXMay 15, 2006

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. face-icon-small-smile.gif 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.

RizeDavid Trammell, Staff AlumnusMay 16, 2006

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.

wanderingMay 16, 2006

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.

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 *hugglesMay 17, 2006

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.


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.

mantidorMay 17, 2006



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 *hugglesMay 17, 2006

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_pap64Pedro Hernandez, Contributing WriterMay 17, 2006

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 *hugglesMay 17, 2006

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

AUUUUGH!

Ian SaneMay 17, 2006

"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?

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

~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com

IceColdMay 17, 2006

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..

SvevanEvan Burchfield, Staff AlumnusMay 17, 2006

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.

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

RequiemMay 18, 2006

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.

mantidorMay 18, 2006

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.


RequiemMay 18, 2006

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.

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

vuduMay 18, 2006

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 *hugglesMay 18, 2006

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#

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).

wanderingMay 18, 2006

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_onixMay 18, 2006

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!

KDR_11kMay 19, 2006

I still wonder whether the GC controls will remain an option in TPWii.

KnowsNothingMay 19, 2006

Yeah me too. I'm thinking that might be the deciding factor for me, although I'm still open to the Wii version since I think it'd be a cool fresh experience (despite all the negative press.)

RequiemMay 21, 2006

Quote

Originally posted by: 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).


Well whatever. The fact of the matter is you played a small portion of the game and if the game had amazing horse-back gameplay and amazing Twilight wolf control, you wouldn't know.

Share + Bookmark





The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess Box Art

Genre Adventure
Developer Nintendo
Players1

Worldwide Releases

na: The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess
Release Nov 19, 2006
PublisherNintendo
RatingTeen
jpn: The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess
Release Dec 02, 2006
PublisherNintendo
Rating12+
eu: The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess
Release Dec 08, 2007
PublisherNintendo
Rating12+
aus: The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess
Release Dec 07, 2007
PublisherNintendo
RatingMature
Got a news tip? Send it in!
Advertisement
Advertisement