The latest Mailbag is in! Discussed in this round are Anime games, Wario World, LAN gaming, Zelda's future direction, and what this E3 will mean for Nintendo. Feed the Mailbag!
Pedro asks, Do you think anime-themed games will get more space in America?
There's DBZ: Budokai for the PS2 and it's selling like hot cakes... and I see
people complaining about Konami's GC support, but then again there is a Yu-Gi-Oh
title for it in Japan. Do any of you have an idea if One Piece: Treasure Battle
will ever be released in the U.S., since it's being published on the US version
of Shonen Jump?
Rick Says: I don't think anime has anything to do with it. I think it
has to do with them being popular programs, regardless of the genre of the
program. I also think it has a lot to do with those shows being aimed at kids,
more than anything else.
Alex Says: I'm a gigantic fan of Anime. There are some great
stories out there that could be perfectly translated into console form. When
watching the imaginative film, "Spirited Away," all I could think about was,
"wow, this could make for one hell of a great game!" As far as titles which have
tried: I don't think a single one of them have found the magic format. "The Wind
Waker" successfully incorporated a lot of anime influences. I don't think
Nintendo suffered much by missing out on a DBZ port.
Jonathan Says: One Piece is a far cry from Dragon Ball Z. But
yeah, in typical publisher fashion, at least a few companies will try to jump on
this bandwagon, whether it really exists or not.
Mike Suzuki Says: With the
growing popularity of anime in the US, I'd expect to see more and more Japanese
anime-based games making their way to other markets. Of course, the series'
popularity will usually be the determining factor. If a show is on TV and
develops a decent following, then a publisher might just take a chance and bring
a game based on that show over. As for One Piece, unfortunately, I think it'll
be a while before it comes over (if it ever does). Being in the US Shonen Jump
is a first step towards popularity, but that's not quite the same as having a
weekday or Saturday morning TV show.
Jeremy asks, What does having Treasure as the developer for Wario World do to
the status of the game? To me that seems like it can't go wrong, but I haven't
heard anything real promising about it yet.
TYP Says: Wario World held some promise last year, but it
lacked...for the lack of a better word...personality. I can only hope this was
due to its VERY early state. Treasure has a pretty good track record, but they
aren't flawless from what I've read. There has been no mention of
transformations, which has me worrying about the game's Wario factor, but if
Wario World turns out to be a fun, side-scrolling brawler with a Nintendo
franchise slapped on (and hours of Martinet commentary if we're lucky) I'll
probably still be happy.
Alex Says: From what I've read and seen, it looks like the
developers over at Treasure played too many Crash Bandicoot games before
creating Wario World. There's still not enough info. available to know if the
end product will turn out to be a Crash Rehash. I agree with Michael that the
game has yet to show us a "personality" of its own. I'm a sucker for
side-scrollers, so even if Treasure doesn't come through for the greedy
anti-hero, I'll be all over his GameCube debut like stink on Isle Delfino
sludge.
Jonathan Says: The only 3D game like this Treasure has made in the
past is Stretch Panic for PS2, which is considered a mediocre, though very
funny, platformer. Still, Wario World has surely come a long way since we saw it
at E3 last year. I don't think Nintendo will let them release it until it's
quite satisfactory. Wario World has already been delayed several months from its
original date, so it seems Nintendo is pushing Treasure hard to get it right.
Mike Suzuki Says: I'm not sure that having Treasure as Wario
World's developer is either a positive or a negative. Most acclaim for the
company has come from the shooters they've made. Wario World looks to be an
action/platformer/brawler so we'll have to see what Treasure can do with that
type of game. Last year's E3 demo was very rough and didn't impress many. We'll
have to see how it is at E3 this year, though. They've had a year to work on the
game so hopefully it's come a long way.
Manunited asks, After GameSpy announced that they were developers for the
Cube, it left a lot of us thinking, "Dear god LAN and online gaming finally!"
Since that time people have quieted down, but we are all left with that burning
question, what games other than Mario Kart could we expect to see with LAN
support, and when will the GameSpy software begin circulating into games?
Rick Says: I am under the impression that Miyamoto is VERY high on
the LAN gaming concept, more so than Internet due to the simplicity of it. That
said, I expect that we're going to see Nintendo get behind LAN gaming in a big
way at E3. It will surprise me if we don't see most (if not all) of Nintendo's
titles with some sort of LAN gaming feature. GameSpy's technology will NOT be
used in the games directly, but rather, will be a great way to get these games
online in an "unofficial" way.
For those unfamiliar with the idea, GameSpy offers an "Xbox Tunnel" software for
the PC that lets your computer emulate an Xbox to some degree, but is actually
sending network communications to the GameSpy server over the internet, making
your Xbox think it's on a local network, when in reality, you're talking to the
other connected Xboxes. In basic terms, it allows you to take games with LAN
play, but not internet (like Halo for the Xbox), and play them online. It's my
understanding that what we're going to see from GameSpy for the GameCube is
going to be very similar in nature, albeit this time, developed with Nintendo's
knowledge.
Alex Says: Two games that I would love to get "LAN-y" with would
be: Pikmin 2 and the second Animal Crossing. Something as simple as the original
Mario Bros. (before it went "Super") could be included with a bigger game
("Mario 128?" *drool*) and would be a lot of fun.
Jonathan Says: LAN gaming has actually been possible with systems
like the original PlayStation, PS2, and Xbox already, but it's not often used by
consumers because setup can be rather confusing and involve a lot of extra
hardware. It's also usually not very practical to set up multiple TVs and
systems in the same room. Expect Nintendo to offer solutions to these problems
when it starts pushing LAN gaming on GameCube.
As far as the games, LAN features can be nice for first-person shooters and
racers, but Nintendo is going to be really excited about the cooperative
possibilities it offers. I expect to see co-op LAN modes included in games like
Pikmin 2 and Star Fox Armada. F-Zero is also an obvious candidate for
head-to-head competition, alongside Mario Kart: Double Dash.
Mike Suzuki Says: As others have said, Pikmin 2 and Animal
Crossing 2 are good candidates for LAN gaming. Star Fox Armada could have it,
too. I'd love F-Zero to have LAN support, but that seems to be too far along
with no hint of LAN support whatsoever. Here's hoping that they've been keeping
that feature a secret and will show it at E3. I wouldn't rule out LAN support
for any new EAD titles unveiled at E3 as well as LAN support from Namco, Capcom,
Electronic Arts, and other 3rd parties with which Nintendo has strong relations.
TYP Says: As I mentioned in news comments, I think LAN gaming could
be great for GameCube, but I am concerned that many games will only support two
GameCubes. Limiting LAN gaming to two consoles makes the programming much
simpler, and a patch cable connecting two GameCubes directly is bound to be
easier to the average consumer. I certainly hope Nintendo doesn't throw 3+
system gaming out the window in order to make things friendlier! A cable similar
to 1st party GBA link cables and compatible with hubs would fit the bill nicely.
NewYork5A asks, Given the choice, would you rather the next Zelda game
feature the same graphics used in The Wind Waker, or the infamous Lost Graphics
Engine of Spaceworld 2000? I never minded the turn that The Wind Waker took, and
wouldn't mind seeing it again. Hardware still isn't good enough to do a
completely realistic Zelda justice, and the tiny imperfections would be much
more noticeable, taking you out of the game and making it less immersive. Also,
Zelda is a fantasy game, and many of the elements of the Zelda universe just
wouldn't look right in complete realism. I imagine things like the Moblins, a
talking boat (think Knight Rider) and even Link (sportin' some true-to-life
tights) coming off as rather creepy in Real Life-O-Vision. In addition, while
other developers are striving for realism, Wind Waker's presentation is
creative, stylish and even daring. Why look like every other game on the market
when you're capable of doing something much cooler?
Mike H. Says: I enjoy the way Wind Waker turned out, and I respect
Miyamoto for taking something of a calculated risk and sticking with his gut
feeling, allowing Wind Waker to grow into what it became. It's simply a terrific
game. That said, I do also appreciate the darker and more "realistic" graphic
formula of the old Zelda demo. If not for Zelda, I'd like to see it incorporated
into another new title that might be more suitable.
I would first like to see how far Nintendo can go with cell-shading, pushing the
envelope in how far they can perfect it with better animations and a higher
resolution.
TYP Says: NewYork5A makes a good point about a darker and
"realistic" Zelda: it would probably creep people out. I doubt EAD would want to
make a Zelda game that does this, as Miyamoto and Aonuma are both firm believers
in making games accessible to as wide an audience as possible. However, if
designed and marketed properly it could still sell quite well among older
gamers. If this darker game were ever to come into existence it would almost
certainly be developed by a 2nd or 3rd party. I wonder if Silicon Knights would
be interested in telling a tale concerning the more disturbing aspects of
Hyrule...
Rick Says: The problem with making a realistic game is that once
you start playing with "real world" looks, you're shackled to "real world"
physics. We instinctively know when something isn't reacting the way it
"should". Ever watch a movie with computer generated graphics, and no matter how
good those graphics are, you can always tell that it just isn't real?
When you're playing in a "fantasy" world, you get to have the player suspend
their disbelief. This isn't the real world any more, so you can accept things
that you know wouldn't react a certain way under real world conditions. I think
the problem with a "realistic" version of Zelda is that it could never be
realistic enough. It would always be missing the life that Miyamoto manages to
breathe into his games.
Of course, there's also been the debate that the Zelda series was never very
realistic, and that the graphic style used in Wind Waker is less of a departure
from previous efforts than the Spaceworld demo was. Sure, it looked really neat,
but it was very different, and wasn't very true to the world Miyamoto spent
years establishing.
Alex Says: I was surprised at how much I loved the look of The
Wind Waker. Nintendo dared to do something entirely different with the
cel-shaded design. I think the next game should be just as bold visually. That
doesn’t mean that it necessarily has to be the “darker” Zelda, but I think it
should be something that we haven't seen (in the series) before.
Jonathan Says: I don't see Nintendo
making a Zelda game as realistic-looking as that demo. Maybe if Zelda eventually
gets handed off to an outside developer, like Silicon Knights...but that's not
likely to happen anytime soon.
VicJun asks, We all now that Nintendo had a fiscal year in 2002, and there
struggling big time in this mother of all console wars, but do you think E3 will
be a turning point in the war for Nintendo?
Mike H. Says: A lot of people were saying that 2002 was going to
be one of the biggest years in Nintendo's history, with all of the games like
Mario Sunshine, Star Fox Adventures, Metroid, etc. And surely enough it was. But
it didn't turn things around for the company in terms of their placement in the
game wars. They're still fighting tooth and nail for 2nd place with Microsoft
just as they were a year ago. I don't think many believe the momentum is really
going to change for this generation. Nintendo will largely stay the course and
be aggressive where they feel they need to be successful today. How Nintendo
plans to change the rules next time around, if they choose to, is still unknown.
Alex Says: I don't think any E3 that went before has meant more
than 2003's does to Nintendo's future. This is "make or break" time for the
company. I think they need to respond to consumer wants by announcing some
Internet play (the only reason my GameCube modem isn't gathering dust, is
because it's situated at the bottom of my console), a more aggressive
advertising campaign, a competitive price drop and really letting the gamers out
there in the world know about the GameCube Game Boy Player. It's no secret that
even the most devoted PS2 and Xbox owners love the Game Boy Advance. I believe
the most important announcement Nintendo could make is that they are
implementing the player into all future GameCube consoles. People would see the
GameCube as two systems in one. Even if the Cube didn't drop in price, the
"two-for-one" would be incentive enough to pick one of the machines up.
Jonathan Says: E3's influence is
widely misunderstood. A company's showing at E3 can make a huge difference in
how they are viewed by the press, which has some eventual bearing on the
company's performance. But most casual gamers, who hold the vast majority of
money in the gaming market, don't even know what E3 is, much less which
companies performed the best at the show. E3 is a fantastic venue for the press
and hardcore fans, but it really has only a small effect on what happens on down
the road towards Christmas. Case in point: many show-goers agree that Nintendo
has had one of the best, if not the very best booth for the last few years. But
that success at E3 has not really done much for the company in the long run.
Mike Suzuki Says: I think Jonny's
pretty much hit the nail on the head. E3 is a big deal for media and enthusiasts
but it doesn't necessarily correlate to real world sales. E3 2001 had many
show-goers praising the GameCube and wondering how Xbox would sell (Halo had
some serious framerate issues at that show) but when the systems finally
launched, they were pretty much on the same ground. So while it'd be nice for
Nintendo to have a good show in 2003, I'd hardly say that the show will be a
turning point for Nintendo.