Jon-Erich said:
Pavolink said:
Jon-Erich said:
1. Wind Waker was able have a smoother development process since the Oracle games were outsourced. This meant that Nintendo was able to jump straight from Majora's Mask to Wind Waker. Also, Twilight Princess used the same engine as WInd Waker. This could have easily cut back on development time. Again, Skyward Sword didn't take 5 years to make. It took 2 years before they could start making it.
2. Do you know who else does that? Shigeru Miyamoto. Satoru Iwata also did it during the development of Earthbound. I'm sure you've heard of Shigeru Miyamoto's 'upending the tea table'?
http://www.zeldadungeon.net/wiki/Upending_the_Tea_Table
Given that Eiji Aonuma worked under him for many years, it would be no surprise if his methods are similar. Shinji Mikami used to take similar approaches with the Resident Evil series. Wether it's Iwata, Miyamoto, Mikami, or Aonuma, they cared more about making a good game than getting a game out on time. Besides, we still got plenty of Zleda games. Sure they weren't all 3D console Zelda games, but what would you rather have, one or two really good 3D Zelda games, or three or four medicore ones?
3. Actually, PS2 couldn't handle open world games. Ever play Shadows of the Colossus? Remember the framerate that game was running at? The PS2 almost couldn't handle it. Imagine playing an entire Zleda game at that same frame rate. Then, try to imagine what combat with multiple enemies would have been like. There's a reason why Shadow of the Colossus was almost devoid of life. It's true that GameCube could have handled such a game a little better, but not to the point where we could have gotten a decent Zelda game out of it. As for Wind Waker, most of that game was empty. Most of it was an ocean. It's not very hard to make a game like that using GameCube hardware.
But to create a huge open world game that's seamless and doesn't cut off at any point with multple terrain and many moving enemies and objects on the screen at once? PS2 or GameCube couldn't do anything like that. The Wii was basically an overclocked GameCube so that system couldn't do anything like that. Besides, if you look at the evolution of the Zelda series, it would seem like Zelda U is the direction the devleopers had been trying to take the series in since Ocarina of TIme. With OOT, the developers challenged thmeselves to have a huge 3D world instead of relying on a Super Mario 64-style hubworld. Wind Waker attempted to create a huge open world game by focusing on the ocean as the main setting. Twilight Princess tried to created a more expanded version of OOT's overworld. Skyward Sword attempted something similar to Wind Waker but with the sky instead of the Ocean. Now they have the hardware to do something they've been attempting to do for nearly 20 years. It's not anyone's fault. They just had to wait for the right hardware to come along.
Also, the reason I asked about playing the NES Zelda is because you didn't seem to get what he was saying.
|
1. They could have outsourced A lInk between Worlds, only game released by the Zelda team since Skyward Sword. Game was vey similar to A Link to the Past.
2. That's one of the worst things ever. They normally scrath good ideas or cut content. Like whatever they done with the Paper Mario in Sticker Star.
3. And what about Xenoblade? Dragon Quest VIII? Okami? Yes, Zelda team is lazy.
And before Aonuma announced Zelda HD, I though going for a Zelda NES like game will be the best after the linearity of Skyward Sword. Yes, they keep getting lazy.
|
1. Hell no. Not that one. Maybe they could have outsourced Phantom Hourglass or Spirit Tracks but Not A Link Between Worlds. That game has been the best game released in years. Besdies, after the turmiol that they faced with Capcom and the Oracle games, I doubt Nintendo would ever outsource any Zelda game that isn't a spinoff or a remake.
2. You call it one of the worst things ever but it has resulted in some of Nintendo's best games ever. It's always better to get a good product out than it is to get an okay product out on time. Also, imagine if we things the way you think they should be. Ocarina of Time would been reduced to being Super 64 set in the Zelda universe. If Shinji Mikami cared only about getting a game out on time, we would have never gotten the Resident Evil 4 that we ended up with. We're talking some of the most influential games ever. They ended up the way they did because the creators knew when to slam on the breaks start over. They chose to ignore the intended release in order to create a better product and the world is a better place because of it.
3. Those games don't even come close to what Nintendo is trying to achieve. Also, lazy? No. If they were lazy, they would make OOT over again, give it a coat of realisitc graphics in order to to appease the Western gamers and then have it out by the holidays even if it's full of bugs and glitches in order to appease the shareholders.
Aonuma's problem isn't that he's lazy and doesn't care. It's the opposite. He does care. Maybe a little too much. He still cares in an industry where people have been taught to stop caring. We've seen where not giving a shit has led companies. Look no further than Sega, Capcom, and Konami. Then there are those companies in the West who give us broken products at launch and expect us not to care about it. Why did they do this? Because they cared about getting a game out by a certain date in order appease the shareholders. Not because they cared about the product.
|
