Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×

Next Zelda Title Delayed Again 125

Posted by Zonk from the nintendo-you-are-truly-cruel-deities dept.
John Callaham writes "Nintendo's Reggie Fils-Aime has officially confirmed that the long awaited Gamecube title Zelda: Twilight Princess will be released this fall." From the article: "File-Amie also said that the game would be a Gamecube title and that there were still no plans to turn it into a game for Nintendo's next-gen Revolution console." He also took the opportunity to mention that the original DS will be phased out in late autumn, in favour of the DS Lite.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Next Zelda Title Delayed Again More

Next Zelda Title Delayed Again

Comments Filter:

  • It will likely work for both (Score:4, Insightful)

    by solidtransient ( 883338 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @12:38PM (#14761552) Homepage
    It will be a Gamecube game, but from what I hear they want to release it when the Revolution ships because of the backwards compatibility that the Revolution should have. I mean why not? right? New Zelda, might as well get that cool new system to play it on. I'd do it.
    • that's a crappy reason to delay one of the most anticipated games ever. I hope they're just doing it for actual gameplay reasons, which seems a lot more likely.
      • Its not a crappy reason if it can be played on a Revolution and use the new controller for new gameplay.
        • Ah yes, the new controller. If that thing is used to control Link's sword, I'm going to have to reserve this game exclusively for when I'm home by myself. My geekiness is not strong enough to do that in front of other people.
        • " Its not a crappy reason if it can be played on a Revolution and use the new controller for new gameplay."

          So?

          Make the Gamecube version now and put the Revo features in a re-release [gamespot.com] of the game two years later that Nintendo mails to you for proof of ownership of 5 Revo games. Or something [gamespot.com].

          I hope they're using this time to make the game better for the GameCubem and not to add Revo functionality. Every time Nintendo announces another delay, people (or at least me) anticipate more dungeons. If they are

      • Re:It will likely work for both (Score:4, Interesting)

        by aichpvee ( 631243 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @12:47PM (#14761641) Journal
        Even if they don't add Revolution-specific features it's a smart move on Nintendo's part as a lot of people are going to buy Revolution who don't own GameCube. Given that it is one of the "most anticipated games ever" it's a no brainer to release it when there are more people who are able to play it without buying a system that they'll never play another game on.

        Though personally I wouldn't be getting too excited about it unless they've made some serious changes since last time they showed it off. So far it looks like more of the same for the ever more tired 3D Zelda formula. I can't wait till the first Revolution Zelda since Miyamoto has promised that Twilight Princess will be the last Zelda in this mold.
    • Or, you know, you could save yourself a good hundred+ dollars and just buy a GCN.
    • I haven't bothered sifting through the rumours over the Revolution, but will it offer any sort of improvement over the original when running GC titles ? Sort of like some gameboy carts had enhanced graphics when used in a GBA or if anyone remembers the Super Game Boy for SNES.

      I'd tend to think that Nintendo will build Revolution-exclusive content into the GC disc, to offer a little "bonus" for console buyers. For some people, this little extra would be enough to justify the hardware upgrade.
    • If they wanted to lure people into buying the revolution, they'd be better off making the new Zelda revolution only, so that you have to buy the console to play the game. Backwards compatibility is a reason NOT to buy the revolution.
      • Backwards compatibility is a reason NOT to buy the revolution.
        Really, I think you should say that backwards compatibility shouldn't be the only reason to buy a Revolution. I would rather it be backwards compatible than not. If it is, I can sell my GC for $40 and put that towards the new Zelda AND a Revolution.

  • Short timeline (Score:3, Funny)

    by the_demiurge ( 26115 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @12:44PM (#14761618) Homepage
    The game was originally planned to be released in fall 2005.
    Then the release got pushed back to April of 2006.
    Now they say it's coming out fall 2006.

    Maybe this will be like Half-Life 2, coming out almost exactly a year after it was supposed to.
    Did Nintendo got their code stolen too?
    • Probably just the typical production-manager-has-no-clue-and-is-guesstimatin g syndrome.

    • Re:Short timeline (Score:5, Interesting)

      by tukkayoot ( 528280 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @01:00PM (#14761755) Homepage
      I think the official explanation is they realized as the game was nearing completion that it played too much like "The Ocarina of Time 2", so they went back to work on it to include some new gameplay to make the experience feel more fresh and original.
    • Half life's source code theft, contrary to popular belief, had NOTHING to do with the game being released a year later. For those who got a hold of the source, it was a half-botched upgrade of the current hl engine(which in turn had a very large portion of quake 1 code). The engine was not feature complete, and all they had was a bunch of tech demo levels(poor ones at that). They didnt have it done plain and simple, and the code theft was a convenient excuse. Nintendo on the other hand has failed to deliver
      • I know that wasn't the cause. That was the irony in my original statement: they are delaying the game because they don't have the game done yet.

        The only problem I have with that is if they knew they weren't going to have the game done when they made the original release date. It seems like a lot of games set up an early release date that they know they can't fill just to build up press and hype.
      • Yeah, I remember checking out that leaked code, it was a mess. Rather funny how Valve managed to blame the delays on the source code theft, since the source code theft actually exposed how far behind schedule they were.
    • One year is not a long delay. Kingdom Hearts II was supposed to be out two years ago, it's finally coming out at the end of March (or someone is going to die). There's another game I heard of that kept getting delayed a year or so ago (not Duke Nukem Forever), the first delay was so that they could "take advantage of the all new ASCII graphics".
    • Oh you know, they're probably just delaying it so it doesn't have to compete against their own titles in the crowded GC market.

  • I don't really mind... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by oahazmatt ( 868057 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @12:55PM (#14761716) Journal
    ...During a time when consoles and games are both rushed out the door before they're ready, Nintendo is taking its time with their products. Sure it may aggravate some people, but only the hardcorest of the hardcore gamers.

    • Re:I don't really mind... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Spleener12 ( 587422 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @01:35PM (#14762014)
      Yeah, better they take their time than release another Wind Waker (before you say anything, I had no problem with the graphics, but the game *desperately needed* at least 6 more months in the cooker to finish the obviously cut dungeon(s) and fix things like the horrendously flawed sailing system.)
      • Flawed sailing?

        That was the best part of the game! That and the "Sploooooosh!" guy.
      • No arguments about the cut dungeons, but out of curiosity, what did you think was wrong with the sailing?

        • Re:I don't really mind... (Score:4, Interesting)

          by EggyToast ( 858951 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @05:40PM (#14763466) Homepage
          Sailing was fine. It was just that there was way too much of it in the early game. If they had shrunk the ocean so that the little teeny islands were closer together, it wouldn't've changed the game at all, but it would have meant less time holding one direction on the joystick for 5 minutes.

          Even reducing the ocean by 15-20% would've made the game less tedious.

          I personally really enjoyed the game, but I have no problem wishing that they had added the dungeons and gotten rid of the triforce hunt and reduced the vast, vast ocean.

          • Re:I don't really mind... (Score:5, Interesting)

            by cgenman ( 325138 ) on Tuesday February 21, 2006 @01:10AM (#14765542) Homepage
            The vast, vast ocean was to mask loading times.

            Which is a fundamental problem, when it comes right down to it. If you load between islands, that means that each island needs to be far apart that you have a full loading time between them. You also need to have enough time that if the player turns back around, they don't see empty space but rather the island they were just going to. So you need twice a single island load's worth of time between islands. And remember that the island needs to be loaded by the time the player can get a reasonably good look at it, so that's another 1x there...

            Now tripling your island's load times is bad enough, but the game frequently has you traveling halfway across the map to get to somewhere... As such your current island unloads, the next one loads, that one unloads, the one after that loads, etc, etc. For a reasonable jaunt around the map you may be hit with 21x the basic load time.

            And so you have to give the player something to do during all of that time. Unfortunately, this means more random island encounters you must find, more wind to change the direction of, more underwater treasures to dredge up... More junk to do that slows down the travel further.

            I probably would have bit the bullet, shrunk the ocean 80% or so, and added a load pause when the player was within a few feet of the shore. It would have broken immersion, but it would have been a heck of a lot less tedious.

            • "The vast, vast ocean was to mask loading times."

              Not entirely. Certainly the game did some loading during sailing, but it didn't need a full map square to load the next island. The warp song cutscene (which loaded a completely new area at "random") was much quicker than the journey between two islands by boat.

              What the ocean did mask was draw distances. The game only draws the geometry for the islands, creatures, NPCs, guard towers, and submarines that are located in the same square on the map as the p

          • Holding one direction on the joystick?

            I turned the boat until it was going the way I wanted, then let go of the stick.

            Still could have done with things being a little closer together, though.

        • First of the ocean was a lot of the time just solid blue, no texture, no difference in color, nada, plain solid blue-screen blue, that just doesn't look very interesting when you have to look at it for longer periouds of time. Secondly there was really nothing todo, steer in the direction you want, set wind in the right direction (watch always boring wind-spell animation) and wait. Would they have had any WaveRace-like water-dynamics or anything that actually made sailing fun it might have been interesting,

        • Re:I don't really mind... (Score:4, Interesting)

          by Spleener12 ( 587422 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @07:29PM (#14764106)
          First off, it took forever to get anywhere. This itself would be bearable if it wasn't for the other two problems.

          Second off, changing direction was a pain, you had to stop, pull out the Ocarina of Time^H^H^H^H^HWind Waker and play that song. EVERY TIME.

          Third, because of the implementation of the sailing itself (the "sail" being an item you have to have out), you could do only two things while sailing: jump, and rotate the camera. Wooo. It would be much more bearable if you could pull out your bow and perform sail-by shootings, or pull out your telescope and sightsee (which is otherwise a completely useless item who functionality is actually duplicated by the camera you get later.) And the chance of coming back to a shark munching on your ass was just barely high enough to make getting up and getting something to eat/going to the bathroom a bad idea.

        • The sailing got old... (Score:3, Insightful)

          by 7Prime ( 871679 )

          It was really cool for the first few hours, and then after a while, it became a total chore: play the wind song, wait 20 seconds for the wind song to play, point in the right direction, put down controller and wait 5-10 minutes, pull up to island. After a while, when you get that song of gails, or whatever the one is that gives you warp spots, it becomes a little faster, but it's also one more song you have to play. After doing this 40-50 times, it gets old really fast, especially in a series where you trad

        • Hrm, any chance you guys just... sucked at the sailing?
          I mean, no offense or anything, but come on.
      • Actually, my main problem with the sailing *was* the graphics. The cel-shading made the characters and buildings and so forth look great. The water though wasn't great it was *boring*. And there was so much of it. Staring at the flat blue oceans with the little inverted V crests was mind-numbing. Personally I would have loved something like Waverace's water, and I think it would have actually gone very well with the rest of the graphical style. Swirling around a vortex in a rain storm that actually -l
    • Not all games that are delayed are good in the end. I'll save my praise or curses for whenever the game actually makes release.
      • True, but not taking the time needed to polish a game just so you can hit a release date pretty much garuntees suckage. No zelda has completely disappointed yet, I'll give Nintendo the benefit of the doubt.
    • During a time when consoles and games are both rushed out the door before they're ready, Nintendo is taking its time with their products. Sure it may aggravate some people, but only the hardcorest of the hardcore gamers.

      I think you've got it backwards. The hardcore gamers understand the market and have been very disappointed with the dearth of quality release titles and are willing to wait. It's the pussies that don't have the balls to wait for a good game that bitch about it.

  • In his immortal words... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by wilgibson ( 933961 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @12:56PM (#14761717)
    "A delayed game is eventually good, a bad game is bad forever." -Shigeru Miyamoto
    • "A delayed game is eventually good, a bad game is bad forever."

      Then Duke Nukem Forever is going to be one hell of a game!
    • Dai Katana.
      • Actually it's one word, Daikatana.
        • And it's still WRONG because when you combine the kanji for "ookii" and "katana" you should use the on-yomi for BOTH kanji; it thus becomes "daitou" (perhaps "taitou"[1]). Yes, this is a Japanese (and Chinese[2]) word. If they absolutely wanted to use the word "katana" it should have been "oogatana" (or ookatana?); combining on-yomi and kun-yomi just sounds awkward.

          [1]WWWJDIC gives "taitou" as the main reading (http://jp.msmobiles.com/cgi-bin/wwwjdic?1MDJtait o u [msmobiles.com]), but my IME (Microsoft IME 2002) only conve

    • Immortal words or not, they are a logical fallacy. The intended implication is that a game delays are directly linked to improvements. As a previous poster mentioned, if that axiom were true, Duke Nukem Forever would logically be the best game ever. Of course this still remains to be seen, but I highly suspect such a statement would be false.
  • I remember hearing that a Zelda title might be a launch title [eurogamer.net] for Revolution. I assume this would be different than Twilight Princess? Anyone have any information on this?
    • There is this rumor: http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3146578 [1up.com].

      If they are launching this November, it might make the Zelda game a lauch title of sorts. Maybe its a strategic move as much as it is a move to polish the part. Naturally, this is all crazy speculation on my part.

    • Re:Two Zelda Titles in 2006? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by tukkayoot ( 528280 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @01:20PM (#14761907) Homepage
      I remember hearing that a Zelda title might be a launch title for Revolution. I assume this would be different than Twilight Princess? Anyone have any information on this?

      This seems very unlikely to me. Two AAA Zelda games being released within 1 year of each other? It could happen, especially if Zelda Revolution is radically different from Twilight Princess and is being worked on by completely seperate development teams, but I would think that the Twilight Princess delay would at least somewhat push back the release of the next Zelda beyond the release of the Revolution, unless the Revolution is delayed into 2007 (I don't even want to think about that happening).

      Twilight Princess will likely sate our Zelda craving for a while, so releasing a new Zelda game soon after almost seems like a not-good idea. I may still be striving to unlock everything and do all the miniquests when the Revolution comes out, so I won't be starved for a Zelda game the same way I'm anticipating the next real Mario platforming game (which the GameCube rather lacked -- I thought Sunshine was a let down), a Super Smash Brothers Melee, a Mario Party (the type of game that is just perfect for the Revolution) and a Metroid, which seems like a franchise that is evolving in such a way that it also is an ideal Revolution title. Give me all or most of these games at our near launch, and I'll be perfectly content to wait a year for a new, awesome Zelda game.

  • Damn them! (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 20, 2006 @12:56PM (#14761722)
    Damn them for not releasing a half finished game like Wind Waker, which everyone adored from start to finish!

    • Re:Damn them! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by LordKronos ( 470910 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @04:05PM (#14762993)
      Please. Wind Waker was an awesome game. They did an incredible job with the graphics, and an even better job with the game engine and game play. However, a bunch of thick skulled people apparently were feeling a little insecure about their masculinity, and thought they couldn't play something with cartoon graphics (even though the fact that you are portraying a kid in the game fits well with the kid-cartoon style graphics) and some fun/creative puzzle solving (yes...not EVERY "puzzle" requires chopping someone's head off or doing a hooker) made them feely a little too much like girly men.

      As a result, Nintendo had to scrap a brand new rendering engine which had just been written from the ground up for Wind Waker. The process of rewriting it from scratch AGAIN probably accounts for a significant portion of the delay of this title.

      But OOOOOHHHHHHHHHH!!!! This ones going to have realistic look graphics. What a totally new concept. Not like we've ever seen that before. Heck, the coders could take a dump in the box and everyone would love it as long the poo was photorealistic.

      • Re:Damn them! (Score:3, Interesting)

        by CastrTroy ( 595695 )
        I think the problem he's refering to is that when you go and hunt for the triforce pieces, there's no dungeons. You just go in and get them. Extemely boring and repetitive. I don't know if this was the way Nintendo wanted it, or whether it got cut short and they had to release it without the dungeons. Either way, it felt like it was missing a whole lot of levels. Had they added actual dungeons to find the triforce pieces, the game would have been about 3 time as long though. Other than that, I have to
        • I seem to remember several dungeons in the game. Were the triforce piece themselves hidden in the dungeons? No. But the dungeons were an integral part of the game. Just because they did things a little untraditional (made the triforce play a smaller part of the overall game and made the other milestones much bigger) you are going to complain that there's no dungeons? If you take the time to explore all the details of the game, it's PLENTY long, too.

          • Re:Damn them! (Score:1, Insightful)

            by Anonymous Coward
            If you take the time to explore all the details of the game, it's PLENTY long, too.

            Thats part of the problem with many gamers behavior. If you set up a giant world, filled it with fun things to do, and just happen to put the finish line a little too close to the start line, then a number of gamers will make a mad dash to a finish then cry that the game was too short and boring.

            On the other hand, if you force everyone to go through each of your fun little things, a number of other gamers start sobbing about
            • i think you're almost right, though id think the reason nintendo chose the route they did is that one group of gamers are complaining because they're idiots who dont make full use of the game they have (waaaa! its too short! i dont wanna play all the extra optional content), the other group are complaining about something outside of their control (ie. the game forcing you to do every side quest)

            • Thats part of the problem with many gamers behavior. If you set up a giant world, filled it with fun things to do, and just happen to put the finish line a little too close to the start line, then a number of gamers will make a mad dash to a finish then cry that the game was too short and boring.

              The trick to solving this, ladies and gentlemen, is to show the gamer what she can do.

              Simply put, have a quest log that shows the main and optional quests. Show the gamer what she's missing if she's going so fast th

              • Example of the above: The "happiness book" in Majora's Mask (I forget the actual name for it). It let you know that you were supposed to help Anju and Kaffe, but you already knew that beating the game was actually just a matter of solving the canyon dungeon. So, sometimes you did the dungeons, and sometimes you helped people. It was the best Zelda.

          • Re:Damn them! (Score:3, Insightful)

            by Chris Burke ( 6130 )
            I pretty much agree with you, and I loved the game, but it is also pretty clear that the entire Triforce search aspect was tacked on to increase the number of hours in the game. Remove the necessary sailing around to the islands, and then to the locations where you grab the Triforce pieces, and you've probably knocked 20% of the length of the game off.

            Not that you can't spend a lot of time trying to find everything if you so choose, and not that a shorter game is really that bad. Beyond Good and Evil was
        • (Pre-note: I am a rabid Zelda fan, and I thoroughly enjoyed WW through and through.)

          Remember, the dev team wanted to improve the triforce piece hunt, but they rushed it out the door. I, for one, am glad that this game is being delayed if it means that it will be the best it can be.

      • Re:Damn them! (Score:5, Insightful)

        by rohlfinator ( 888775 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @07:09PM (#14764014)
        "However, a bunch of thick skulled people apparently were feeling a little insecure about their masculinity, and thought they couldn't play something with cartoon graphics..."
        Right. Everyone who finds any fault with Wind Waker is insecure about their masculinity. My favorite game of the generation is frickin' Pikmin, and I was underwhelmed with Wind Waker after a bit. The graphics were not its biggest problem.
        "...and some fun/creative puzzle solving (yes...not EVERY "puzzle" requires chopping someone's head off or doing a hooker) made them feely a little too much like girly men."
        Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask had fun/creative puzzle solving. Wind Waker's puzzles were mostly rehashes of the puzzles from those two games, with a few exceptions. Nothing in WW even compares to the Water Temples in either of the N64 Zeldas, or the Forest Temple from OoT. Dungeons in WW felt like a series of independent rooms, rather than single coherent structures. Wind Waker also had too few dungeons, and the (arguably) most boring one was repeated twice. While Majora's Mask had only four dungeons, even the first one was quite challenging. The trading sequence was much more interesting in OoT, and the NPC interactions were better in MM, compared to WW's "sail all over the planet to talk to the same three guys over and over". Finally, WW's combat was painfully simple (I didn't die once on my first playthrough).

        As a disclaimer: I don't hate Wind Waker. I highly enjoyed the game, and it's a lot better than most third-person adventures. But there were noticeable gameplay flaws with the game, and it was a bit of a letdown after the excellence of OoT and MM. To suggest that anyone who finds fault with it is a "graphics whore" is just plain shortsighted.

      • Actually, the biggest problem I had with WindWaker was with the PAL conversion for the Australia release messed up the timer for some of the 'race' events. This problem isn't specific to WindWaker though, it is common to many NTSC->PAL converted games where there is a small speed up in the internal timer on the game, making it nearly impossible to complete 'against the clock' events. One day I'll beat that bloody penguin in Mario 64. And let's not mention Sphinx and the obstacle course there, where an ab

      • I disagree I purchased a gamecube just for the game.

        It made me lose my confidence in the zelda genre. The gameplay was too hard and awkward and the puzzles were not as challenging. All the levels seemed teh same after awhile and it got boring. It was missing alot of familiar weapons and items and the rest were not that good. I thought it was lame that it was harder to die even though you get killed alot easier.

  • I for one... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by MorderVonAllem ( 931645 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @12:57PM (#14761733)
    ...am glad it will be delayed. Usually this means that the game will be that much better. Going by Nintendo's track record, it will be true.

  • Give me more portable, 2d Zelda goodness! (Score:4, Interesting)

    by antifoidulus ( 807088 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @01:01PM (#14761763) Homepage Journal
    Seriously, while I will eventually buy Twilight Princess, I really pine for a new Zelda game on the DS. Minish Cap was the best single player experience I have had in a long, long time!
  • From the article: "File-Amie also said that the game would be a Gamecube title and that there were still no plans to turn it into a game for Nintendo's next-gen Revolution console." His real name is Reginald "Reggie" Fils-Aime. Interesting that the article didn't mess his name up the first time. Anyway, if Nintendo/Shigeru Miyamoto/Eiji Aonuma needs more time to work and polish the game, then that's even better. After Zelda is released, the Gamecube will be pretty much dead anyways.

  • NOOOOOOO!!!! (Score:1, Offtopic)

    by Avacar ( 911548 )
    KHAAAAAAAAAAANNNNNNN!! Wait, that's not right. I mean: NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
  • I recently picked up the following Zelta titles: Oracle of Ages Oracle of Seasons The Minish Cap Link to the Past for GBA I think that will keep me busy until this fall.

  • Misleading Headline - "Again?" (Score:5, Insightful)

    by HarvardFrankenstein ( 635329 ) on Monday February 20, 2006 @01:20PM (#14761905) Homepage
    The headline is misleading, saying that the game has been delayed "again". Saying it was delayed again implies that they had delayed it, set a new date, and then delayed it one more time. They never set a date after the first delay. A better headline would have been "Delayed Zelda Arrives in Fall".
    • It was meant to come out for Christmas 2005. It was delayed to about April 2006. It has now been delayed *again*.
      • The first delay [ign.com]: "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. While this may come as a disappointment to many eager fans, it will absolutely enrich the game and make it a multi-million seller." The original statements just said it was going to be released at a date after April. People were hoping that it would be released in April, but a date was never given.
      • No, they said it would be pushed back "after March 2006". They never gave a date beyond that, and the April date was simple speculation.
    • Yes, exactly what I was thinking. And I actually thought it was assumed that the game was coming out this November... but now this is confirmation.
    • Not true, in a sense.

      First of all, no firm date has been set ever, it's primarily been estimated dates but they did once say they planned on releasing it for Christmas. That was their first intended date, because it would be in time for the last game rush before the Revolution came out. The second estimate was spring, now it's fall. The articles all imply that these are promises, but really they are only estimates, there are no promises. However, if you let things slide too long and you let the estimate
  • Was talking to the clerk in GameStop today. He mentioned something about two versions of Zelda coming...

    Version one being a Gamecube release, and version two being a Revolution release. He speculated that version two will be the same game, but with optimizations for playing with the Revolution's controller.

    Where to GameStop employees get this info? Is it even accurate? Only time will tell, I guess.
    • Here's another rumor I heard.

      People that work at game stores are full of shit. They definitely don't have any industry connections. Treat their insider knowledge the same as the idiots from Best Buy/Walmart and you'll go far.

Slashdot Top Deals

Anyone can make an omelet with eggs. The trick is to make one with none.

Close