Quantcast
Eiji Aonuma wants the next Zelda to provide “a unique experience that is beyond your expectations”

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Eiji Aonuma wants the next Zelda to provide “a unique experience that is beyond your expectations”

Podings said:
Soleron said:

He's still trying to "surprise". Not giving people what they want but what he THINKS they want.

How about a really solid by-the-numbers Ocarina clone with maximum production value.


Well I for one would absolutely NOT buy that.

 

I think it's great that Aonuma still wants to surprise people.

"For one" is exactly the point.

VGChartz type of people cannot sustain the kind of games they want. Everyone on here is all Vita this and Wii U that, which is starkly different from the wider market.

Giving people what they want =/= Giving the Core what they want



Around the Network
Soleron said:
spemanig said:

...

And frankly, Nintendo makes so much money off cheap to make games like Mario Kart and NSMB that it can afford to take monetary liberties on lesser selling franchises.

So Nintendo are a charity to keep up what the hardcore want it to make using casual money?

What they should have made with that money is Wii Sports 2, NSMB Wii 2 and Wii Relax/Vitality Sensor.


It has nothing to do with being charitable. Wii Sports will never cost as much money to develop as Zelda, but it will always sell more and be exponencially more profatable. Zelda on a Wii fit budget wouldn't sell, and not making a Zelda game would completely alianate an entire audience that won't buy a console with out it. That is obvious. I don't know what kind of point you were trying to prove, but you definitely didn't prove it.



Well, this is new.

Read.

spemanig said:
...


It has nothing to do with being charitable. Wii Sports will never cost as much money to develop as Zelda, but it will always sell more and be exponencially more profatable. Zelda on a Wii fit budget wouldn't sell, and not making a Zelda game would completely alianate an entire audience that won't buy a console with out it. That is obvious. I don't know what kind of point you were trying to prove, but you definitely didn't prove it.

You are a Nintendo exec. You have $50m in capital gained from good sales of Wii Sports.

Do you invest it in:

a) Wii Sports 2, NSMB Wii 2 AND Wii Relax/Vitality Sensor

b) Zelda

Wii Sports is cheaper than Zelda and exponentially more profitable (you said this). AND you can afford to develop the other two games with the budget saved vs Zelda. Therefore Option a) gives a far greater return for the same money invested. Why choose b) at all?



Soleron said:
spemanig said:
...


It has nothing to do with being charitable. Wii Sports will never cost as much money to develop as Zelda, but it will always sell more and be exponencially more profatable. Zelda on a Wii fit budget wouldn't sell, and not making a Zelda game would completely alianate an entire audience that won't buy a console with out it. That is obvious. I don't know what kind of point you were trying to prove, but you definitely didn't prove it.

You are a Nintendo exec. You have $50m in capital gained from good sales of Wii Sports.

Do you invest it in:

a) Wii Sports 2, NSMB Wii 2 AND Wii Relax/Vitality Sensor

b) Zelda

Wii Sports is cheaper than Zelda and exponentially more profitable (you said this). AND you can afford to develop the other two games with the budget saved vs Zelda. Therefore Option a) gives a far greater return for the same money invested. Why choose b) at all?


...Because the audience that buys Zelda in NOT the audience that buys Wii Sports. You don't simply ignore an entire consumer audience for an audience you already have. The point of making a business venture is to get as many different people to but your product as possible. Option A) only works for selling software, since your audience has already purchased the hardware. In order to expand and diversify you're install base, you would NEED to invest in Zelda.

You're failed logic is seriously nausia inducing. By your logic, Sony and Microsoft should only be investing in Call of Duty, because it clearly eclipses the sales of games like The Last of Us. Sure, they'll only sell 15 million lifetime sales, but Call of Duty would have a 100% attach rate every year, right? 15 million software units sold every year is worth not expanding you're library to a higher diversity of content that'll sell less and cost more but will sell more hardware and collectively more games, right?

Right.



Well, this is new.

Read.

How about using Lindsy Lohan as the model for Zelda? Wouldn t that be the opposite of type cast?



Around the Network

Maybe they should let sega make a mech warrior game. Not only does mech fans have nothing on other consoles, no other gamepad has the possibility of so many quick action commands.

Mech fans are probably too small a group but it would be a fun experiment



Aielyn said:

I ignored nothing. I'm not asserting that NSMB U is a bad game. I'm asserting that it's not moving hardware in the way that NSMB Wii did, and the reason for that is that people who wanted that sort of game could have bought NSMB Wii with a Wii for a lot less money.

I take great issue with people who go "clearly the problem is with the Wii U hardware" - there's nothing wrong with the Wii U hardware. It functions exactly as you would expect, and is to the 8th generation what the Wii was to the 7th generation - lowest in power by a noticeable amount, but makes up for it with new ideas that weren't present in the previous generation, while its competitors continue with bumping the poly count and shader effects and don't do much else to change things up (unless you count anti-consumer actions like ramping up microtransactions, blocking used gaming, etc).

The Wii U has its problems, but Wii U sales aren't because of the hardware. With the right game, the system will sell hugely well. Wii was sold out for 2 years primarily because of one game - Wii Sports. It wasn't just a system-seller, it was a system-definer. Wii U has not had such a title, yet. I don't doubt that NSMB U will end up selling a huge number of copies in the long run... but people are not going out to gaming stores to buy Wii U in order to play that game. They went out and bought Wii for NSMB Wii, just as they went out and bought Wii for Wii Sports.

NSMB U is a great game. But if you want four player NSMB gameplay, you can get that for a lot less with a Wii. It won't sell the Wii U. 3D World will do better, although I expect it to primarily work during Christmas itself, rather than at launch, because there hasn't been a Mario title like it before (of course, it's still 3D Mario, so it won't do as well as NSMB Wii did). And the "NSMB U was at launch, and has a high attach rate" is completely irrelevant. Like I said, NSMB Wii made people go out and buy a Wii for THAT ONE GAME ALONE. NSMB U isn't able to do that. Which is no slight on the game itself. Few went out to buy a Wii for Mario Galaxy, and it sold well over 10 million copies, and was one of the greatest games of all time.

And to bring that back to the issue of Zelda... the exact same thing would apply with regards to a new Zelda, if it were too much like an old Zelda. It needs to be fresh and different in order to really be the sort of system-seller Nintendo needs it to be... and to be remembered fondly 5 years after release. Compare attitudes towards Wind Waker, Majora's Mask, and Twilight Princess. The most Ocarina-like of these was Twilight Princess... and while quite popular initially, it wore off quickly, and most people place it below WW, MM, OoT, and often Skyward Sword, too. Majora's Mask, which broke a lot of the traditions of Zelda, and threw all sorts of new things into the mix, is now called for as the game for Nintendo to remake - and when people talk about the style they'd like it in, they all point to Wind Waker's graphics - which were initially lambasted.

Twilight Princess sold so well because it was the Wii's premier launch "core" game. This gave it the sort of momentum it needed to get it into lots of homes. Zelda U won't have that benefit, as it will release likely 3 years after system launch (I'm expecting November 2015). It needs to be a fresh game, with its own feel and nuances. Note that I don't mention gimmicks - that's because I'm not saying it needs a new gimmick. It needs to feel like its own game, and not a paint-by-numbers imitation. If reviewers would start with "It's like a new Ocarina of Time quest, but in HD", then it has failed.


Wow! Incredible, I think I disagree with every single sentence that you've written here. You seem to not have a clue about what you're saying.

@NSMB Wii. People went to buy Wii for NSMB Wii? Prove it. I've just analysed the sales charts for Wii and can't see any real difference from the year before or after, in fact the Wii sold less YoY the week the game was released than the year before!! People didn't buy a Wii for this game. People bought this game, cause they already had a Wii. This game is the most obvious case of a game that you buy when you have a console, but don't buy a console for and the crazy attachment rate of NSMBU shows it. All your arguments here are just absurd. People aren't buying Wii U, cause they can play NSMB on Wii? If that was true, there would have never been a single sequel! And people somehow are buying millions of CoD every year, even though it's almost the same game.

Neither NSMBU, nor NSMBWii is a system seller. They are both impulse purchases that you get when you own a console.

@Zelda. I don't even know with what to start. Who cares how it's gonna be remembered after 5 years? It's now that matters, cause you're selling the game NOW, not in 5 years. WW sold badly when it was released and it still sells like crap now, so who cares if you think of it more fondly than of TP, which sold almost twice as much? But most importantly - remembered by whom? For me TP is much better than WW. Who helds WW in a higher regard than TP? A bunch of Nintendo fanboys, whose number is pitifully low, thus making them totally irrelevant? Look at all the "I want a mature Zelda" threads and see how many people want a TP-like game. You wanna know why they are more important than N fanboys who want a cartoony Zelda? Cause they won't buy a Wii U for a cartoony Zelda, but they will buy Wii U and a mature Zelda, while fanboys will buy both regardless, they already have a crazy number of cartoony N games on the Wii U. And just look at the cartoony defenders, who, as you say, "place TP below WW, MM, OoT, and often Skyward Sword" - they sure are turning the WW HD into a runaway success (just like they did with the original WW)! Nintendo sure should cater to them instead of the millions of people who buy mature Zeldas, thus making them the best selling games in history of the franchise. After all the remake of WW HD sold only 7 times less than the remake of OoT and it gave its struggling console a much smaller boost (mind you - 3DS was selling like crap when OoT was released). So yeah, take the word of a handful of forum screamers over the wallets of millions of people, who indicate a totally opposite purchasing pattern - that's always a good and wise choice.

Remaking MM with WW graphics is just batshit crazy! It's the first time I hear about this absurd idea, where did you even take it from? Nintendo would have to be braindead to make that happen. I haven't heard about a more ridiculous idea in a very, very long time. That would make this remake sell even worse than WW HD! I can't even express just how idiotic this idea is.

I don't care about your excuses about why TP sold so good. The facts are plain and simple - mature Zeldas sell better and they move hardware. Cartoony Zeldas sell worse and don't move hardware - it's as simple as that. And by taking the opinion of a handful of forum fanboys, who are oblivious of the reality, and considering them as "people" (thus the voice of all people interested in Zelda games), implying that they are any kind of a real force on the market is just laughable. Their voice is the least important - sales prove it.

Mature Zelda appeals to people who don't own a Wii U. A cartoony one appeals mainly to people, who already own it or will get it next year regardless. That is why Nintendo can't listen to these fanboys. What do you think the general reaction is gonna be if N shows the next Zelda with cartoony graphics? Everyone is gonna laugh at it for not being like the tech demo and ignore it as yet another game for kids. On the other hand, nobody would do that if it had mature graphics like the tech demo shows, everyone would take it seriously. And that's the huge difference. Wii U needs games that are respected, not laughed at.



Wii U is a GCN 2 - I called it months before the release!

My Vita to-buy list: The Walking Dead, Persona 4 Golden, Need for Speed: Most Wanted, TearAway, Ys: Memories of Celceta, Muramasa: The Demon Blade, History: Legends of War, FIFA 13, Final Fantasy HD X, X-2, Worms Revolution Extreme, The Amazing Spiderman, Batman: Arkham Origins Blackgate - too many no-gaemz :/

My consoles: PS2 Slim, PS3 Slim 320 GB, PSV 32 GB, Wii, DSi.

Soleron said:
spemanig said:
...


It has nothing to do with being charitable. Wii Sports will never cost as much money to develop as Zelda, but it will always sell more and be exponencially more profatable. Zelda on a Wii fit budget wouldn't sell, and not making a Zelda game would completely alianate an entire audience that won't buy a console with out it. That is obvious. I don't know what kind of point you were trying to prove, but you definitely didn't prove it.

You are a Nintendo exec. You have $50m in capital gained from good sales of Wii Sports.

Do you invest it in:

a) Wii Sports 2, NSMB Wii 2 AND Wii Relax/Vitality Sensor

b) Zelda

Wii Sports is cheaper than Zelda and exponentially more profitable (you said this). AND you can afford to develop the other two games with the budget saved vs Zelda. Therefore Option a) gives a far greater return for the same money invested. Why choose b) at all?


Well that's exactly what Nintendo did and where their current problems come from. They ignored the gamers, invested in casuals. Now the casuals are gone and when Nintendo looks at gamers, gamers go like "LOL! You must be kidding me! I'm not touching your stuff anymore, have fun with your casuals, I won't let you screw me over again".



Wii U is a GCN 2 - I called it months before the release!

My Vita to-buy list: The Walking Dead, Persona 4 Golden, Need for Speed: Most Wanted, TearAway, Ys: Memories of Celceta, Muramasa: The Demon Blade, History: Legends of War, FIFA 13, Final Fantasy HD X, X-2, Worms Revolution Extreme, The Amazing Spiderman, Batman: Arkham Origins Blackgate - too many no-gaemz :/

My consoles: PS2 Slim, PS3 Slim 320 GB, PSV 32 GB, Wii, DSi.

burninmylight said:
the_dengle said:

No thanks, I gotta drive.


You can't handle a drink marketed to kids? Must be a hard life. But in case you missed it when I first quoted you, I was in agreement with everything you typed.

Nah I got it, just messing around. :P Better than participating in the actual conversations people are having in this thread... I don't want no part of that.



From Wikipedia

According to the last reported numbers provided by Nintendo, Wind Waker sold only 3.07 million copies worldwide, far below the 7.6 million set by Ocarina of Time.[59] Aonuma would later comment in 2007 that he was "convinced the reason the Wind Waker did not perform well was because of its toon-shaded graphics style. It was something that you either loved or hated, and there was nothing that we could have done about it."[60] As a result of Wind Waker's poor sales, Aonuma decided that "the only thing we could do was to give the healthy North American market the Zelda that they wanted," which led to the creation of The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess.[61]

I always thought Wind Waker sold like 4.5 million copies for some reason. Wow. It was a border line bomb, even on 22 million GameCubes, to only sell 3 million ... yikes.