Your thoughts on Legend Of Zelda: Breath of The Wild?


I'm actually disappointed* that Skyrim is coming to the Switch, because -

a) it's a five year old game
b) everyone that wants to play it can on pc, mac, Xbox and Playstation - in varying flavours
c) the new game will cost £40ish when you can get it for a tenner on other systems
d) because of a), b) and c) it won't sell so Betheda will cancel further support.

Although I really hope I'm wrong :)

*I'm not disappointed about the game itself, it looks great. I'm just concerned that the devs won't see the Switch as a valid target in future if it tanks.
 
d) despite a), b), and c) it'll still sell because of excessive marketing. It will be hyped down people's throats like there's no tomorrow. Looking casually around the internet I'm currently seeing way more wants than do-not-wants, and I can only see it improving as more gameplay is shown.
As a PC player I wouldn't bother, there is not really anything Bethesda can bring to the Switch that would trump any of the mods I had installed, but the XBox and Playstation players are likely candidates to market a killer upgrade like this to. Remember, it wouldn't be the first modern remake that anyone had done. There's existing precedent to suggest that, yes, people really will rebuy a favourite game that's only a few years old just to get a modest graphics boost.
 
Looking casually around the internet I'm currently seeing way more wants than do-not-wants, and I can only see it improving as more gameplay is shown.
I would also want Skyrim on the Nintendo Switch, but when it comes to actually paying for it, I think I'll pass.
With all the hype going on right now, there are a lot of people who just say they'd want it, but when they actually see the price tag and the hype gets slower, it's a different story.

As a PC player I wouldn't bother, there is not really anything Bethesda can bring to the Switch that would trump any of the mods I had installed, but the XBox and Playstation players are likely candidates to market a killer upgrade like this to.
:eek:I'm outta here!
 
I have Skyrim on PC and will be getting the remaster Free. I did rebuy Oblivion and Morrowind on Steam sale so I could run them on my laptop without carrying my disks, I couldn't use no CD patches as they didn't work with the script extenders. I won't be buying Skyrim on the Nintendo because I won't be buying a Nintendo branded Nvidia Shield and I will already be able to run it on the go with the GPD Win.
 
I'm actually disappointed* that Skyrim is coming to the Switch, because -

a) it's a five year old game
b) everyone that wants to play it can on pc, mac, Xbox and Playstation - in varying flavours
c) the new game will cost £40ish when you can get it for a tenner on other systems
d) because of a), b) and c) it won't sell so Betheda will cancel further support.

Although I really hope I'm wrong :)

*I'm not disappointed about the game itself, it looks great. I'm just concerned that the devs won't see the Switch as a valid target in future if it tanks.

I'd say that the novelty of being able to play a game like this on a handheld will mitigate the concerns for many (me!) ..whether it/other AAA games remain viable to be played like this is another matter (battery life notwithstanding) time will tell I guess.
 
Last edited:
I'd say that the novelty of being able to play a game like this on a handheld will mitigate your concerns for many
Not for me. I already have it on my 360. I won'y buy it again, even just to support the devs or/and Nintendo. Yes, I'd love to be able to play it on/off-screen, but I'd rather play something newer/different to a game I've had since it first came out years ago - especially when you look at comparisons between the original and enhanced and see very little improvement.

I'm sure (and hope) it'll sell well (if the Switch sells well too), because there will be peeps that don't have it already and it will be new to them, or those like yourself that want to be able to play it as a handheld game. Another issue though is if there are loads of new games at the start of the Switch's life and players have to choose between Skyrim and a new Mario, Metroid and Zelda game as well as many others.

Maybe Bethesda will understand that and know that the whole porting (middleware) business was quick and easy and it's not taken much work to get it running on the Switch, but to big business money talks. If it doesn't sell...

As I said, I hope I'm worng and it does sell like hotcakes (although strangely, despite the video, it's not actually been confirmed as a Switch title yet!).

March 2017 can't come soon enough! Hopefully the id-January briefing will allay all fears and really show what we can expect. :D :D :D
 
Well, thus far, it's doubtful Skyrim is even coming to NS, so I wouldn't be to worried about it one way or another.

despite the video, it's not actually been confirmed as a Switch title yet!

Yep, I already said that. It might just have been a demo piece - testing the capabilities. We'll know more about the Switch (not necessairly Skyrim) in January and hopefully we will get some 100% guaranteed games to look forward to.

BTW Chris, you really don't have to be constantly so negative about Nintendo you know. ;) You can just ignore them and pretend that they don't exist. Like 99% of other people! :p
 
BTW Chris, you really don't have to be constantly so negative about Nintendo you know. ;) You can just ignore them and pretend that they don't exist. Like 99% of other people! :p
Ignorance is never easy with something (or someone) you formerly liked very much.
 
I was just passing along the information as it stands. If anyone wants to believe "N" at face value, that is fine to, as I was a lamb once as well.

No matter what I may or may not post, I am a long time fan, as Jumpman is a reference to you know who. Most of my negativity listed here is from a place of love, as I hate what this once great company has become. But at the end of the day, it is what it is:|

Chris
 
Yeah, I know you're a long time fan, as am I. Nintendo isn't the same as it used to be because nothing is as it used to be. And pretty much every comment you've made over the last 5 years+ has said the same thing - it's not just these recent comments.

Anyway, yeah, I know Nintendo haven't seemingly put a foot right for a while, but you also have to look at what they are up against nowadays. It's not their hardware or software that's let them down though (more software could have helped though!), but their marketing and lack of information. This is where I feel that Nintendo have failed, time and time again. They do deserve criticism for that - the other stuff, not so much. I really hope that Nintendo realise that they are all set to make the same mistakes if they don't actively push the Switch. They definitely do need to be more open.

I don't agree that Nintendo has become any worse than it ever was - it's still doing exactly what it's always done. That's what need to change.
 
I'd still say Nintendo have been pretty good with their handheld lineup. The 3DS isn't quite where the DS was for me, but that's mainly due to region locking, DRM and micropayments that this platform introduced (well, technically, the DSi was first with DRM locked digital software, but I never had one of those). Plus battery life - the DS had legendary battery life, while my 3DS charger has a permanent socket it lives in (albeit one I can switch off). But some of the games have been exemplary - its Zelda game has been the first of those I've really enjoyed since Wind Waker, and it's received modern classics in the terms of its Mario 3D game and a brand new Fire Emblem game (haven't played the latest one, as I don't have a New 3DS).
 
While I agree that in certain areas they haven't really changed much over the years, and that is where the problem lies, as the industry has changed and they are not able to adjust accordingly and any business who doesn't adapt to their current market is going to have issues. A perfect example would be how Apple refused to offer larger screen phones, and that allowed for loss of business to Android and Samsung specifically. They finally had to give in to compete.

On the other side of the coin, I personally find the level of quality way down in most "N" games these days. At least in generations gone by, if a game took years to produce, at least you knew it would be something special. Now they have not improved production times at all, and the quality is down, and they charge the most for games, with the least amount of price reductions in the industry, and that makes no sense at all.

Miyamoto no longer follows his own advice, about a bad game released is bad forever, but a delayed game is eventually good. I don't see that happening anymore.

Chris
 
On the other side of the coin, I personally find the level of quality way down in most "N" games these days. At least in generations gone by, if a game took years to produce, at least you knew it would be something special. Now they have not improved production times at all, and the quality is down, and they charge the most for games, with the least amount of price reductions in the industry, and that makes no sense at all.

Miyamoto no longer follows his own advice, about a bad game released is bad forever, but a delayed game is eventually good. I don't see that happening anymore.
Care to give a few examples? I haven't bought a Wii U, but I bought a Wii second hand, and while I've been relatively selective in the games I've bought for it, they've all been better than Ice Climber on the NES, or (shudder) NES Open Golf. Mario Galaxy 1+2, Donkey Kong (and Kirby's Yarn for the kids) all show a level of polish and challenge that's a step above a whole slew of anything published by Traveller's Tales or Sega for the system.
 
Nintendo games on the WiiU are excellent. Those who don't recognize that fail to recognize they have evolved themselves and cannot apreciate those games anymore.

I play Mario 3D world, Captain Toad, Mario Kart 8, those are among the best games Nintendo has created. I never liked Smash Bros but those who do also seem to think the WiiU version is the best one.
 
They're all good, but Mario 3D world is too short, for example, compared to previous Mario games.
We spent weeks of daily playing to finish Super Mario World.

Super Mario Sunshine and Galaxy also took a while to play through... but Mario 3D world? A couple of days, isn't is?

That's only the problem with Mario 3D world... Smash Bros and Mario Kart 8 are excellent in that regard (though I'm not a fan).

And some games don't seem well-balanced and polished to me anymore:
Wind Waker... after a few dungeons, you have hours and hours of boring saling, then a couple of dungeons. Biggest disappointment ever for me.

I never finished the Train-Zelda on the 3DS, as I found the train rides to be too annoying at some time.
And Phantom Hourglass... doing the same dungeon over and over again, yay.

Skyword Sword also had its gameplay extended in similar ways:
For example, you couldn't warp from an owl statue to another owl statue in a different area.
Nope, you had to go back up to the sky, fly to the other area and get back down again. That often took 5 minutes without anything happening. Just a simple warp would've helped.

Also, you had to fight the same boss over and over again with minor changes (yay). And you played each area twice, with a bit of an extension to the area each...

Skyward Sword was a great game, don't get me wrong. But it didn't feel as polished to me as previous Zelda games did.

Link to the Past, Ocarina of Time, Twilight Princess... those also took long to play through. But you didn't have to do anything twice, you never had to backtrack for a long time, it always was interesting.

A fine example though is A Linke between worlds. That was a really, really awesome Zelda game. It wasn't boring to find all secrets, no backtracking, very polished game.

Mario had similar issues.
Mario Sunshine was great, but Mario Galaxy had similar issues like Zelda:
To get to some areas, you had to run quite a long time through the main map to reach them... damn, if I want to just play a level, I don't want to spend 5 minutes to get there.
Even worse: the special levels you could only reach with certain star constellations.
To play some levels, you had to wait a certain time you do that. Totally pointless and annoying, extending the time you need to play a game even further.

So yes, they still have a few great games, but they've also started to make gameplay-mistakes (in my opinion) to extend the playthrough time.
Something that's a no-go as the games aren't cheap.

I can't really think of a game before the Wii-period where that happened.
 
They're all good, but Mario 3D world is too short, for example, compared to previous Mario games.
We spent weeks of daily playing to finish Super Mario World.

Super Mario Sunshine and Galaxy also took a while to play through... but Mario 3D world? A couple of days, isn't is?

That's only the problem with Mario 3D world... Smash Bros and Mario Kart 8 are excellent in that regard (though I'm not a fan).

And some games don't seem well-balanced and polished to me anymore:
Wind Waker... after a few dungeons, you have hours and hours of boring saling, then a couple of dungeons. Biggest disappointment ever for me.

I never finished the Train-Zelda on the 3DS, as I found the train rides to be too annoying at some time.
And Phantom Hourglass... doing the same dungeon over and over again, yay.

Skyword Sword also had its gameplay extended in similar ways:
For example, you couldn't warp from an owl statue to another owl statue in a different area.
Nope, you had to go back up to the sky, fly to the other area and get back down again. That often took 5 minutes without anything happening. Just a simple warp would've helped.

Also, you had to fight the same boss over and over again with minor changes (yay). And you played each area twice, with a bit of an extension to the area each...

Skyward Sword was a great game, don't get me wrong. But it didn't feel as polished to me as previous Zelda games did.

Link to the Past, Ocarina of Time, Twilight Princess... those also took long to play through. But you didn't have to do anything twice, you never had to backtrack for a long time, it always was interesting.

A fine example though is A Linke between worlds. That was a really, really awesome Zelda game. It wasn't boring to find all secrets, no backtracking, very polished game.

Mario had similar issues.
Mario Sunshine was great, but Mario Galaxy had similar issues like Zelda:
To get to some areas, you had to run quite a long time through the main map to reach them... damn, if I want to just play a level, I don't want to spend 5 minutes to get there.
Even worse: the special levels you could only reach with certain star constellations.
To play some levels, you had to wait a certain time you do that. Totally pointless and annoying, extending the time you need to play a game even further.

So yes, they still have a few great games, but they've also started to make gameplay-mistakes (in my opinion) to extend the playthrough time.
Something that's a no-go as the games aren't cheap.

I can't really think of a game before the Wii-period where that happened.
 
Mybe the Switch will get something like a Suspence Mode, where you can just pause the game, and push a Button,
and then the Switch will fall asleep and you can remain to play when you have time..

This also works great on PSP , DS and 3DS, so i cant see that the Switch ditnt get this funktion...

I like the Trailers of the new Zelda Game, lets hope it will get some background musik, unlike the Trailer..

My last 3D Zelda was Majoras Mask, as im Handheld Only Gamer...
 
WOW, some examples uh? First off, ED stated many of the issues I have had with certain games, so I could leave it there, but I'll give some of my own thoughts as well.

Let me first say that even when "N" made less than stellar games 20 years ago, the games where still better than most, as their level of game making was so high over others in the industry, even a turd shined over the competition. But as in any industry, you get to a point where kids who grew up inspired by them, are now making games, and where once so-so games did OK, now the level of quality from many different sources is just off the charts, and they are pretty much still just making the same games again and again, often making them worse than previous titles.

So as an example, lets go with 2D Mario titles. Let's start with the DS Super Mario Bros, an excellent title not really doing anything new, but had a level of polish and was nice to play. Now look at the Wii, Wii U, and 3DS versions and you'll see pretty much the exact same game, with the only changes being whatever the newest system offered in regards to uniqueness, so the Wii version now has motion controls, or the 3DS game now has 3D, but each game is the same.

Now like I said, 15-20 years ago, that was fine, as an average Mario title was better than most, but now we have a title like Rayman Origins, a 2D platform that is filled from top to bottom with content, and just flat out fun as hell. And where that game shined, within 2 years a sequel was made that was just as nice, with new and added elements(new areas, new mechanics, new challenges, etc.). If I'm playing 2D Mario I'm now playing the same water, desert, ice and boss levels of 30 years, and a boss in 2D Mario games is always 3 hits to kill unless it's Bowser, and that hasn't changed in forever(no surprises anymore).

Another example would be Mario Kart, a decent series, and it's kart racing, so how much can really be done? Enter the DS game, an excellent MK title that added in an Awesome single player challenge mode, that was almost a whole game on it's own, along with online play and the standard set of tracks. Now that game did have some cheating online due to "snaking", but since this was "N" first MK online, they can be forgiving in regards to that, as you don't know what's possible in that arena until it happens, so not a big deal. But instead of keeping and expanding the challenge levels in new games, it was completely remove, and the game has all but returned to the same game as every version before. Sand, ice, water maybe a few new weapons, and some new gimmick like driving on walls, and you have the same game as before being sold for 50-60 dollars.

Now, let's look at Sonic Transformed from a few years back, now not as polished as Mario Kart, but I played it for 2 weeks straight when it was released, and I didn't come close to unlocking all the content that game had to offer, and within 1 week, MK would be over, everything unlocked, and now I'm stuck playing that crap online game with "blue shells", no thank you. Now where SEGA doesn't have the resources or talent pool that I'm sure "N" has, but they offered a killer game, at a discounted price, that to me is better than any MK game except for maybe the DS one.

And Sonic Transformed was the closest I think I have come to a kart racer that rivaled Diddy Kong Racing of N64 fame. Rare at their best, understood how to take a great "N" title, and improve it any every way, shape and form, and we got great new titles like Banjo and Diddy racing. They really did make "N" look bad at the time. Sadly they went down the drain as well, but you can see what should have been done in regards to improving popular titles.

As ED stated with Zelda WW, it' has tons of "filler" to stretch and pull the game in to length, instead of actually have real "content", and while WW was a beautiful game, this was the beginning of the new "N" you now see. Lazy short cut game production. Like I said, it wasn't a bid deal ages ago, but now I play Indie titles that are better than most "N" titles now, and that's not counting the other big name developers in the industry.

Lets take a look at Mario Sticker Star of the 3DS from a few years ago, my GOD what happened here. I don't even know where to start with that game, while nice and polished in graphics, I couldn't get half way through without throwing my hands up and wondering if a child had made the game. There is no rhyme or reason to almost anything in the game, puzzles that even with a guide, you want to punch someone in the nuts as they make no sense at all, and the list goes on and on. Now I'm all for trying new things, and sometime things work and sometimes they don't, and over the years, I've seen many game from many publishers that are scrapped years in to production as an idea just isn't working, and I think at a time "N" lived by this level of thought, but now they seem "desperate", and some of the game choices really reflect that. As some games should never be released as they are.

Now lets move on to two of my favorite IP's, Star Fox and Punch Out! Now in our industry, there are many games by publishers that get new releases annually, games like CoD or Sports games, where only new stats and basic elements see change. And titles like this sale solid numbers to their loyal followings. So with 2 games like SF & PO, these are basic titles that should see annual releases as the base gameplay should never change and just new elements like levels or fighters could be added, and a great, while not new game is released and you sale it to a fan base that is happy.

But instead, we get a new PO game once every blue moon, and while there have been many SF titles over the years, only the first two where worth a damn. You get the new Star Fox that was only really made, not because Miyamoto had great new ideas, or story, or anything he wanted to do, but Iwata was under share holder pressures due to the Wii U having this expensive controller that did NOTHING for games, but add an extra screen that worked better with the DS line. So we get ZERO, a game that was made really just to show what the tablet could do, but instead of offering anything "NEW" in regards to the actual game(as it was pretty much the N64 game remade), we only get new controls which in practice breaks a game, that was fine in regards to control.

Why does "N" insist on fixing what isn't broken? Then when a title like this sales poorly, "N" loves to blame fans as they didn't support the game, so then they tell everyone how the game wasn't supported, so they won't do any new titles. What complete and utter BS! You make a turd game, and then instead of saying we fucked up, and apologies and say we thought fans would like this, but we should have just stuck with what works, they instead play the blame game like my 10 year old when he gets in trouble, it's really a joke at this point. Now if that same game came out in 12 months, and sucked, and was $20-30 dollars, fans would probably have a different mind set, but when something like this takes 2-3 years to produce, and cost full price, its a sad state of affairs to say the least.

Alright guys, there's some of my thoughts, and I've gone on way to long, as I have work and family responsibilities to tend with, as I can't give excuses to why I didn't get something done today(like you know who). LOL

Chris
[doublepost=1477926702,1477920626][/doublepost]OMG, I almost forgot one of the greatest examples I could show of low quality and that goes to their 3D Classic line-up of games, which was all but abandoned on their own 3D device due to poor sales of the crap games that where released at a premium price. We got Urban Champions which was a terrible game when it was released, but for some ungodly reason, they decide to offer it in 3D, and charge good money for it. They gave what I consider to be a low level of effort, and the sales reflected that, and as I already stated, they blamed the masses, and scrapped the line. Who here wouldn't want an original version of Mario Bros or Punch Out in 3D? But they give us Excitebike, Urban Champion and Kid Icarus(which was the only game they even tried to improve).

SEGA's M2 division has made some of the best 3D games available for the 3DS, and there are several games that are the best versions available anywhere including the arcade versions.

Read this: http://blogs.sega.com/category/sega-3d-classics/

This shows someone taking care to preserve a rich history of great games and memories, and then you look at what great games "N" has in it's history, and the games they chose to offer in 3D, and you'll see it done right and how it is done wrong. Like I said above, no way in hell does SEGA has the man power and resources of "N", but you can see here how one is being true to their history of games, and the other trying to make a fast buck on a blind fan base.

Chris
 
Last edited:
Back
Top