Carl2291 said:
I see you didnt answer the question. It matters because of choice. You could have a brand new 3D Zelda on 3DS, but it would make your wait for a brand new Zelda on WIi U longer. A top-down game isnt going to take as long to develop as a 3D game built from the ground up. Think about it that way if 2D is annoying you. Yeah. The 3DS Zelda is gonna be a top-down Zelda. The "positive" from this, if you didnt want a top-down Zelda, is that it should make WIi U Zelda closer than it would be, if EAD3 was working on a 3D Zelda for 3DS. You seem to be annoyed because you wanted a 3D Zelda. Youre still gonna get your 3D Zelda - On Wii U. In the form of Wind Waker first, followed by a brand new game. This game is keeping with the traditions of handheld Zelda games being from a top-down perspective. 3D for home consoles, 2D for handhelds. Seems fair to me. Ocarina 3D was the blip, the showcase, like Super Mario 64 was for NDS. |
I'll answer your question as long as you acknowledge the budget points I made. 3 years, that's what it would take with a team of 100. Wii U version would take a team of 200 the same. Guess what Nintendo has the money to do? Hire a team of 100 and a team of 200. A new 3D Zelda should have been in development since Ocarina of Time port finished production and 3D Zelda on the Wii U should have been in development as soon as they finalized the hardware 4 years ago. Guess what they didn't do? Put into production 3D Zelda for the 3DS and start working on Zelda Wii U. What did they do? Put into production a cheap game for the 3DS, instead of allocating resources into a better game, and working on technology to enhance Wind Waker. Wind Waker is in no shape or form near ready, so what were they doing for 4 years? Killzone: Shadowfall is finished and is being polished as we speak and the PS4 isn't out, what's Nintendo's excuse?
Edit: I'm over estimating the Wii U's production, it's probably 3.
