Support NeoGAF

[Shikamaru Ninja]

All of them bombed because they were partially held back by their previous gen design. Eternal Darkness looked better as a N64 game than it did as a GC game (comparing the machine's strength). SFA just plain sucked obviously, and RE0 really didn't do anything for the GC, even though it looked like a GC game. It's like a curse.

Whoa Whoa there! SFA didn't bomb! It just sucked! That game definitely didn't suffer from the GameCube adaptation but Nintendo's stupid implementation of the Star Fox ip and Rare's horrible game design. (I still got love for RARE)

ED failed to become a big seller, and so did RE0. But I don't think that is because of the GameCube. I am inclined to believe it is more about the marketing and limited GameCube audience.

Meaning I think Zelda will rock on Revolution. Screw you LAMECUBE lovers. Aonuma is the man.

 

[Doc Holliday]

They need to move zelda to Rev and everyone should be working on launch games. GC got screwed by nintendo wasting resources on the n64 when it was a dead system. Get it right this time damn it!

 

[JJConrad]

GC got screwed by nintendo wasting resources on the n64 when it was a dead system.

It did? They did? When?

I'd say the GC got more screwed by Nintendo not releasing any console games in the 6 months before the Gamecube's launch.

 

[Dragona Akehi]

Whoa Whoa there! SFA didn't bomb! It just sucked! That game definitely didn't suffer from the GameCube adaptation but Nintendo's stupid implementation of the Star Fox ip and Rare's horrible game design. (I still got love for RARE)

ED failed to become a big seller, and so did RE0. But I don't think that is because of the GameCube. I am inclined to believe it is more about the marketing and limited GameCube audience.

Meaning I think Zelda will rock on Revolution. Screw you LAMECUBE lovers. Aonuma is the man.

I just don't see a point, personally.

They've been promising it for GC all this time, and if they turn around and do a bait and switch (which is what they'd be doing if you are right), they're going to piss off more people than they're going to please. Better hardware is all well and good, but after the August delay they should have stopped saying "YES GC BOUND" "NO IT HASN'T BEEN MOVED TO REVOLUTION" ad nauseum.

Having some future-proof stuff that's unlockable by playing on a Revolution is probably the best route. No backlash, and some neat stuff.

It isn't about being a "LAMECUBE LOVER" or the game not "ROCKING ON REVOLUTION", it just doesn't make sense to royally piss off the fanbase that is looking forward to the title. Not every GC owner is buying a Revolution day number one.

It's just rather silly.

 

[Trident]

They should just pack the case with two disks. One for GC, one for Rev. Ain't no shame in it!

 

[Shikamaru Ninja]

It isn't about being a "LAMECUBE LOVER" or the game not "ROCKING ON REVOLUTION", it just doesn't make sense to royally piss off the fanbase that is looking forward to the title. Not every GC owner is buying a Revolution day number one.

Most are already pissed off. The hardware has been abandoned by developers and consumers. North American sales were horrible this year for Nintendo and the GameCube, but have you seen Japan GameCube sales???? The bottomline is Nintendo is a company with share holders, I don't think this high budget game is going to recoup the money Nintendo wants to see in the currently active GameCube consumer base. This will be the lowest selling Zelda game in Japan if is released domestically on the GameCube.

 

[GaimeGuy]

Question, Shikamaru: How accurate are the IGN specs to what you know of the Revolution's specs?

I'm not saying I don't believe IGN, but usually there'd be some other media outlet or site that would have confirmed these specs by now, but no one has gotten anything.

 

[Shikamaru Ninja]

I don't know shat about the specs. It does make sense though..

 

[Gahiggidy]

Trying to pass TTP as a next-gen-revolution game will only hurt Revolution's mindshare as peopel will assume its representative of the graphics the console can output.

 

[Dragona Akehi]

Most are already pissed off. The hardware has been abandoned by developers and consumers. North American sales were horrible this year for Nintendo and the GameCube, but have you seen Japan GameCube sales???? The bottomline is Nintendo is a company with share holders, I don't think this high budget game is going to recoup the money Nintendo wants to see in the currently active GameCube consumer base. This will be the lowest selling Zelda game in Japan if is released domestically on the GameCube.

Not necessarily. Remember how all those PSX games tanked, post PS2 launch? They didn't. If anything the PS2 proved that backwards compatibility isn't just something to put on a box. Obviously the PSX was doing better then that the GC is now, but it's the same thing really.

Zelda on GC would encourage Revolution sales along with GC software sales. More people will pick up some old cheap GC titles to augument what will probably be the traditionally anemic launch lineup for any new system. If anything Zelda on GC would do two things: keep new Revolution owners happy and old GC owners who don't want a Revolution yet happy as well.

It's like GBA games on DS. Same principle. GBA software was what saved the DS for its first miserable few year or so. By making Zelda Revolution only you're taking away yet another market (smaller, and annoyed perhaps, but one that still exists. It isn't like every GC owner just burned their GC into ashes due to lack of releases).

In addition, don't forget that most of the art assets for Zelda are already done. Remaking them to higher spec is a total pain in the ass. Either you end up with a half-baked looking title, or you delay it infinitely.

 

[Ninja Scooter]

Not necessarily. Remember how all those PSX games tanked, post PS2 launch? They didn't. If anything the PS2 proved that backwards compatibility isn't just something to put on a box. Obviously the PSX was doing better then that the GC is now, but it's the same thing really.

its not the same thing at all, not even on the same planet, because, like you said, the GC is not the PSX, not even close.

 

[Dragona Akehi]

its not the same thing at all, not even on the same planet, because, like you said, the GC is not the PSX, not even close.

You're still going to get more sales by leaving it GC and having Revolution compatibility than Revolution only.

Whatever happens, if the game does go Revolution only, it's going to annoy more people than it pleases. Nintendo shouldn't keep repeating it is a GameCube release.

 

[GaimeGuy]

I don't know shat about the specs. It does make sense though..

But if you can't tell us, then who can? ;_;

 

[Ninja Scooter]

You're still going to get more sales by leaving it GC and having Revolution compatibility than Revolution only.

Whatever happens, if the game does go Revolution only, it's going to annoy more people than it pleases. Nintendo shouldn't keep repeating it is a GameCube release.

i don't neccesarily think so. Obviously this is just speculation, but if they rework it and release it as a Rev launch title, that could be huge for the system. As a launch title, it might not sell as many overall copies as some kind of combo"GC/Rev" release, but maybe the mindshare and hype for Rev by having a one of the biggest franchises in teh world available at launch with some new gameplay mechanics would be worth it for Nintendo.

 

[Dragona Akehi]

Art assets. As I said above, they're probably almost all done. They're either going to have to overhaul them (and possibly cause MORE delays) or have a shitty looking Revolution launch title. (Even if it is only GameCube TURBO.)

I think it's silly, but I wouldn't put it past Nintendo to do so. It isn't logical, but when is Nintendo ever logical?

 

[Shikamaru Ninja]

Not necessarily. Remember how all those PSX games tanked, post PS2 launch? They didn't. If anything the PS2 proved that backwards compatibility isn't just something to put on a box. Obviously the PSX was doing better then that the GC is now, but it's the same thing really.

Zelda on GC would encourage Revolution sales along with GC software sales. More people will pick up some old cheap GC titles to augument what will probably be the traditionally anemic launch lineup for any new system. If anything Zelda on GC would do two things: keep new Revolution owners happy and old GC owners who don't want a Revolution yet happy as well.

1. In this case I don't think it is the same thing realy. GBA/PSX hardware and software were still selling ridiculously at the time. That is the luxury of being the market leader. The GameCube hardware and software are not selling.

2. Zelda on GC with "revolution support" is a gamble. From a marketing standpoint Nintendo would rather bill the game as the reason to purchase a Revolution. Retailers arent even stocking GameCubes anymore, getting rid of shelfspace for more XBOX/PS2.

3. Zelda on GameCube will overshadow every Revolution game (outside of maybe SSB3 which may not make it by December). I mean how can u explain that Zelda on GameCube is 100x more expansive and fun that Cooking with Chef Miyamoto and Wario Ware. Quite frankly no Revolution game will be able to compete with Zelda because Zelda has a bigger team and more development time than any game at Nintendo right now.

 

[Dragona Akehi]

Revolution isn't a GameCube. It's an entirely different set of ethics as far as gaming is concerned.

Zelda is being billed as "epic" (whether that's true or not), while Revolution is being billed as "DS part deux: Grandparents Play Me Too!".

So what does it matter that Zelda is 10028098430820948324 times bigger, more "epic" etc? Entirely different market. Right guys? That's what Nintendo keeps saying, after all. Right?

 

[Shikamaru Ninja]

Zelda is being billed as "epic" (whether that's true or not), while Revolution is being billed as "DS part deux: Grandparents Play Me Too!".

Well yes. Noted. But Nintendo wants its 2 markets. The hardcore who stick around for Metroid and Zelda, and this new market that wants to play Nintendogs, Brain Training, and Fishing. That is their target base.

 

[Dragona Akehi]

The hardcore will shit themselves in delight if Zelda has some waggle wanding in it even if it's a GC game. Annnnd, that appears to be what they're doing.

These are Nintendo fanboys we're talking about. Not that hard to please.

So why isolate that casual GC owners that aren't going to pick up a Revolution right away (if at all)?

 

[Ninja Scooter]

casual GC owners

these don't exist.

 

[Dragona Akehi]

these don't exist.

You'd be surprised. I know of at least four of them personally. (It is a frightening thing.)

 

[Shikamaru Ninja]

Am i wrong in saying in Nintendo GameCube being Nintendo's worst console ever? The N64 was such a beloved console of mine.

 

[Dragona Akehi]

GameCube has Fire Emblem. N64 does not. You do the mathematics.

That answers the question for me, personally.

But hey, what do I know? The game that Nintendo fans are hailing as the Great White Hope of Fapdom is the most unappealing Nintendo title I've ever come across. (Asides from Prime. Ugh.)

 

[Shikamaru Ninja]

Fire Emblem was good. I do feel Nintendo half assed on the presentation though.

N64 wins because it had so many great and unique multiplayer games at the time. The GameCube drops the ball big time unless you love Mario sports.

 

[Dragona Akehi]

Fire Emblem was good. I do feel Nintendo half assed on the presentation though.

N64 wins because it had so many great and unique multiplayer games at the time. The GameCube drops the ball big time unless you love Mario sports.

I thought the presentation was spectacular. In game graphics however... It definately shows that it is IntSys's first entirely 3D game...

As for multiplayer games: I don't play them often, so I'm obviously slightly biased in that area.

 

[Ninjarabe]

So why isolate that casual GC owners that aren't going to pick up a Revolution right away (if at all)?

because the casual GC owners doesn't care anymore about new GC games

the reasons why Nintendo should release the game on Rev are those mentioned by Shikamaru Ninja :

1 - Nintendo would rather bill the game as the reason to purchase a Revolution
2 - Zelda on GameCube will overshadow every Revolution game

and N64 FTW

 

[Dragona Akehi]

because the casual GC owners doesn't care anymore about new GC games

But the casual GC owners are frothing at the bit for the NEWOMGMATOORZZELDAZASSFAPFAPFAPITY!

 

[JJConrad]

1. In this case I don't think it is the same thing realy. GBA/PSX hardware and software were still selling ridiculously at the time. That is the luxury of being the market leader. The GameCube hardware and software are not selling.

2. Zelda on GC with "revolution support" is a gamble. From a marketing standpoint Nintendo would rather bill the game as the reason to purchase a Revolution. Retailers arent even stocking GameCubes anymore, getting rid of shelfspace for more XBOX/PS2.

3. Zelda on GameCube will overshadow every Revolution game (outside of maybe SSB3 which may not make it by December). I mean how can u explain that Zelda on GameCube is 100x more expansive and fun that Cooking with Chef Miyamoto and Wario Ware. Quite frankly no Revolution game will be able to compete with Zelda because Zelda has a bigger team and more development time than any game at Nintendo right now.

1. Nintendo's own software still sells stronge. Nintendo still benefits from keeping the Gamecube alive.

2. Wouldn't Nintendo have a better chance at keeping its shelfspace if they kept Zelda on Gamecube? If Nintendo announced that Zelda was a Rev title today, their remaining console shelfspace would gone tomorrow. Dissappearing from the market does not seem like a very wise strategy.

While I know its only anicdotal, I've actually seen the GCN shelfspce expand in my area recently. The Xbox has lost its space to the 360, the PS2 a little to the PSP, the GBA to the DS, but the GCN has actually filled-out.

3. Zelda would overshadow those games regardless of the system its on. Zelda on Gamecube will probably overshadow most PS3 and 360 games too because ... its Zelda! As a Gamecube game, Nintendo could better posistion each games release so that they don't hurt their other games sales as much.

 

[Taker666]

1. In this case I don't think it is the same thing realy. GBA/PSX hardware and software were still selling ridiculously at the time. That is the luxury of being the market leader. The GameCube hardware and software are not selling.

2. Zelda on GC with "revolution support" is a gamble. From a marketing standpoint Nintendo would rather bill the game as the reason to purchase a Revolution. Retailers arent even stocking GameCubes anymore, getting rid of shelfspace for more XBOX/PS2.

3. Zelda on GameCube will overshadow every Revolution game (outside of maybe SSB3 which may not make it by December). I mean how can u explain that Zelda on GameCube is 100x more expansive and fun that Cooking with Chef Miyamoto and Wario Ware. Quite frankly no Revolution game will be able to compete with Zelda because Zelda has a bigger team and more development time than any game at Nintendo right now.

Unless of course Zoonami are still making "Game Zero" for Nintendo and have moved it to the Revolution as a launch title. That game will have been 4 years in the making.

 

[AndoCalrissian]

I just don't see a point, personally.

They've been promising it for GC all this time, and if they turn around and do a bait and switch (which is what they'd be doing if you are right), they're going to piss off more people than they're going to please. Better hardware is all well and good, but after the August delay they should have stopped saying "YES GC BOUND" "NO IT HASN'T BEEN MOVED TO REVOLUTION" ad nauseum.

Having some future-proof stuff that's unlockable by playing on a Revolution is probably the best route. No backlash, and some neat stuff.

It isn't about being a "LAMECUBE LOVER" or the game not "ROCKING ON REVOLUTION", it just doesn't make sense to royally piss off the fanbase that is looking forward to the title. Not every GC owner is buying a Revolution day number one.

It's just rather silly.

Apparently you weren't around when Nintendo was trumping connectivity. Many, many people were outraged that you had to use a GBA to unlock certain things (such as Metroid in Metroid Fusion). Imagine how people might feel if you required them to buy a whole different console.

It's a similar situation if it goes all Revolution. At least then the game benefits from feeling entirely new rather than a GCN rehash with DPD stuff thrown in at the last minute.

Given Nintendo GCN's install base, it is likely that the game would sell better than it would on Revolution, at least at first. If Nintendo sells 1 million Revolutions at launch, the tie ratio would likely have to be 1:1 for the game to sell many in the first month (all territories combined) as it would on GCN. Tie ratios stopped being 1:1 when games were no longer packed in. That said, the game would probably have decent legs as the Revolution base increases.

Nintendo's in a tough situation. Had Zelda come out this year they would have been fine. But pushing it back so far and still promising it for GCN has caused quite a mess.

 

[Dragona Akehi]

Apparently you weren't around when Nintendo was trumping connectivity. Many, many people were outraged that you had to use a GBA to unlock certain things (such as Metroid in Metroid Fusion). Imagine how people might feel if you required them to buy a whole different console.

It's a similar situation if it goes all Revolution. At least then the game benefits from feeling entirely new rather than a GCN rehash with DPD stuff thrown in at the last minute.

Given Nintendo GCN's install base, it is likely that the game would sell better than it would on Revolution, at least at first. If Nintendo sells 1 million Revolutions at launch, the tie ratio would likely have to be 1:1 for the game to sell many in the first month (all territories combined) as it would on GCN. Tie ratios stopped being 1:1 when games were no longer packed in. That said, the game would probably have decent legs as the Revolution base increases.

Nintendo's in a tough situation. Had Zelda come out this year they would have been fine. But pushing it back so far and still promising it for GCN has caused quite a mess.

Your entire post is what I was trying to get at, you know.

Some neat Revolution bonuses (even just revmote for alternate control for fishing) = Happy GC people and Happy Revolution people. Everyone wins.

 

[AndoCalrissian]

Your entire post is what I was trying to get at, you know.

Some neat Revolution bonuses (even just revmote for alternate control for fishing) = Happy GC people and Happy Revolution people. Everyone wins.

You didn't read my post then. Not everyone is happy with that solution because a lot of people want to be able to access every single thing with the GameCube, which they could not do if there were Revolution specific features.

Revolution people won't be happy if the game doesn't recieve a) full integration of the controller and b) a justifiable graphical upgrade. If it doesn't have those things, they might as well scrap the Revolution controls and release the game earlier because it would still be playable on Rev anyway.

 

[JJConrad]

Apparently you weren't around when Nintendo was trumping connectivity. Many, many people were outraged that you had to use a GBA to unlock certain things (such as Metroid in Metroid Fusion). Imagine how people might feel if you required them to buy a whole different console.

It's a similar situation if it goes all Revolution. At least then the game benefits from feeling entirely new rather than a GCN rehash with DPD stuff thrown in at the last minute.

The outrage over connectivity came about when it required people to use a gameboy/gamecube to unlock features already present in the game. Connectivity was nothing but a key. Being able to use the Rev's controller to play the game is a completely different situation.

How would porting the game to Rev make the game not feel like a GCN rehash? It is!

And again, there is no evidence that the game was delayed just to add Rev hooks. These features were (most likely) added because of the delay.

 

[SantaC]

Making TP Revolution only would be stupid and it wont happen.

 

[Shikamaru Ninja]

Making TP Revolution only would be stupid and it wont happen.

Will it happen? No one knows but Nintendo. But it certainly wouldn't be stupid unless you have a really good reason to support why it would be.

Right now, logic points to Revolution in my opinion. Well as to what would be smarter to do, not what is going to happen.

 

[AndoCalrissian]

The outrage over connectivity came about because it required people to use a gameboy to unlock features already present in the game. Connectivity was nothing but a key. Being able to use the Rev's controller to play the game is a completely different situation.

How would porting the game to Rev make the game not feel like a GCN rehash? It is!

And again, there is no evidence that the game was delayed just to add Rev hooks. These features were (most likely) added because of the delay.

So buying a GBA to unlock special features in what is essentially a GCN game is different than buying a Revolution to do the same how? I'm not saying it was the whole issue, but it was part of it. People who didn't want a GBA for any reason found themselves in a situation where they had to have one if they wanted to unlock every single thing in a game. Vice versa for people owning a GCN. The only difference here is that you would only need one game, rather than 2 (1 for GBA and 1 for GCN).

Porting the game to be specific for Revolution with full integration of the DPD and a graphical upgrade makes it new and not a rehash.

And you're right, there is no evidence. It could very well be what you're saying. I'm not claiming there is evidence for that, but it seems likely that it was partially delayed for that reason, or a potential reason for it to be delayed further.

 

[JJConrad]

So buying a GBA to unlock special features in what is essentially a GCN game is different than buying a Revolution to do the same how? I'm not saying it was the whole issue, but it was part of it. People who didn't want a GBA for any reason found themselves in a situation where they had to have one if they wanted to unlock every single thing in a game. Vice versa for people owning a GCN. The only difference here is that you would only need one game, rather than 2 (1 for GBA and 1 for GCN).

The outrage was because the Metroid Fusion Suit was already on the Metroid Prime disc and the only thing preventing people from getting to it was connectivity. Connectivity was an artificial obstacle. I think there is a little bit more preventing someone from using the Revolution's controller on the Gamecube than just a key. Perhaps Nintendo should let people use the new control scheme while playing the game on the Gamecube; it might be funny watching you swing you controller around and get frustrate because nothing is happening.

Porting the game to be specific for Revolution with full integration of the DPD and a graphical upgrade makes it new and not a rehash.

But its still a port and the GCN roots will still be present. You can't truly believe that full integration is possible and this game still being released in 2006?

 

[SantaC]

Will it happen? No one knows but Nintendo. But it certainly wouldn't be stupid unless you have a really good reason to support why it would be.

Right now, logic points to Revolution in my opinion. Well as to what would be smarter to do, not what is going to happen.

since rev is BC, I doubt that it will be rev only.

 

[Dragona Akehi]

Thing is with the whole revolution thing and Zelda, it's a bonus. It isn't the entire game ZOMG REVOLUTIONFIED or anything. It's probably just an alternate control for some of the minigames or something. If they manage to make Zelda completely playable on the revmote, that would be nice.

It's more like Link's Awakening DX or the Oracle games type bonus rather than the Metroid bit. Where is the army of discontent for that? It's a little bonus. Not something locked away on the disc that you could OTHERWISE access if not for a stupid little connectivity thing. This revmote mode is entirely separate: a bonus.

 

[AndoCalrissian]

The outrage was because the Metroid Fusion Suit was already on the Metroid Prime disc and the only thing preventing people from getting to it was connectivity. Connectivity was an artificial obstacle. I think there is a little bit more preventing someone from using the Revolution's controller on the Gamecube than just a key. Perhaps Nintendo should let people use the new control scheme while playing the game on the Gamecube; it might be funny watching you swing you controller around and get frustrate because nothing is happening.

Right, but there was extra cost involved there to access extra features on the same game. Same here, except the extra features could be new to gaming as a whole. That will make the extra cost worth it to some people, and make others even more annoyed.

But its still a port and the GCN roots will still be present. You can't truly believe that full integration is possible and this game still being released in 2006?

Given the supposed nature of the Revolution's graphical and processing capabilities, many games may very well have GCN roots in them. Nintendo is basing the tools for Revolution on those of GameCube. That's it. They're giving more processing power and graphical power, but it's all going to be very similar to GCN. The big change is the controller, but given more power, a better looking game is still expected, GameCube roots or not.

 

[Gahiggidy]

GOd help us all if this is a "replacement" for a Super Mario launch-game.

 

[SantaC]

well unless nintendo has reworked all textures or highered the poly count to run on specific on Revolution, the game is going to be out on GC.

 

[Taker666]

Thing is with the whole revolution thing and Zelda, it's a bonus. It isn't the entire game ZOMG REVOLUTIONFIED or anything. It's probably just an alternate control for some of the minigames or something. If they manage to make Zelda completely playable on the revmote, that would be nice.

It's more like Link's Awakening DX or the Oracle games type bonus rather than the Metroid bit. Where is the army of discontent for that? It's a little bonus. Not something locked away on the disc that you could OTHERWISE access if not for a stupid little connectivity thing. This revmote mode is entirely separate: a bonus.

Agreed . In my opinion it gives the game extra value.

Play and complete it on the cube and then when the Revolution comes out it gives you a damn good reason to play it again as it may be a very different experience.

 

[AndoCalrissian]

Thing is with the whole revolution thing and Zelda, it's a bonus. It isn't the entire game ZOMG REVOLUTIONFIED or anything. It's probably just an alternate control for some of the minigames or something. If they manage to make Zelda completely playable on the revmote, that would be nice.

It's more like Link's Awakening DX or the Oracle games type bonus rather than the Metroid bit. Where is the army of discontent for that? It's a little bonus. Not something locked away on the disc that you could OTHERWISE access if not for a stupid little connectivity thing. This revmote mode is entirely separate: a bonus.

It is similar. People become annoyed when they find they can't access everything without having to buy something else. I never said there was an army, but people get annoyed. A few little bonuses aren't going to justify buying a new console for many people just so they can play them, and it could annoy them that they aren't getting the full Zelda experience.

It doesn't affect me personally, as I have a GCN and I'll have a Revolution, I'm just laying out another somewhat likely situation.

 

[JJConrad]

It is similar. People become annoyed when they find they can't access everything without having to buy something else. I never said there was an army, but people get annoyed. A few little bonuses aren't going to justify buying a new console for many people just so they can play them, and it could annoy them that they aren't getting the full Zelda experience.

It doesn't affect me personally, as I have a GCN and I'll have a Revolution, I'm just laying out another somewhat likely situation.

But you're supporting ditching the Gamecube version and making it Revolution only. In that case, everybody has to buy new hardware to get "the full Zelda experience." Wouldn't that annoy a whole lot more people than just adding this bonus?

 

[Zerodoppler]

To release it for Revolution only would be a total waste. To snub Gamecube owners of a game that "kinda works" with the revolution like mario64 did for the DS is not something I could see them do. And as SantaCruzer said, the rev is backwards compatible. The revolution will get its own Zelda one say, built from the ground up for the revmote.

 

[Dragona Akehi]

It is similar. People become annoyed when they find they can't access everything without having to buy something else. I never said there was an army, but people get annoyed. A few little bonuses aren't going to justify buying a new console for many people just so they can play them, and it could annoy them that they aren't getting the full Zelda experience.

It doesn't affect me personally, as I have a GCN and I'll have a Revolution, I'm just laying out another somewhat likely situation.

The equivalent of Colour Dungeon DX and Ring Shop Advance is an integral part of the "Zelda Experience TM"?

 

[AndoCalrissian]

But you're supporting ditching the Gamecube version and making it Revolution only. In that case, everybody has to buy new hardware to get "the full Zelda experience." Wouldn't that annoy a whole lot more people than just adding this bonus?

Do not make me say what I did not say.

Apparently you weren't around when Nintendo was trumping connectivity. Many, many people were outraged that you had to use a GBA to unlock certain things (such as Metroid in Metroid Fusion). Imagine how people might feel if you required them to buy a whole different console.

It's a similar situation if it goes all Revolution. At least then the game benefits from feeling entirely new rather than a GCN rehash with DPD stuff thrown in at the last minute.

Given Nintendo GCN's install base, it is likely that the game would sell better than it would on Revolution, at least at first. If Nintendo sells 1 million Revolutions at launch, the tie ratio would likely have to be 1:1 for the game to sell many in the first month (all territories combined) as it would on GCN. Tie ratios stopped being 1:1 when games were no longer packed in. That said, the game would probably have decent legs as the Revolution base increases.

Nintendo's in a tough situation. Had Zelda come out this year they would have been fine. But pushing it back so far and still promising it for GCN has caused quite a mess.

Unless I said something elsewhere that I don't remember. I personally think it should be one or the other. I don't want Zelda on GCN with only tiny little bonuses when playing on the Revolution. If it's going to have anything to do with the Revolution, I want it to be all Revolution.

I don't want a dual version, and I don't want a Zelda: Twilight Princess DX to come out on Revolution. Give me one or the other and I'll be satisfied.

 

[AndoCalrissian]

The equivalent of Colour Dungeon DX and Ring Shop Advance is an integral part of the "Zelda Experience TM"?

I'm pretty sure there were a few people annoyed with that. I wasn't one of them, and I also never bought Link's Awakening DX.

 

[JJConrad]

I'm sorry for mistating your view. I'll fix it:

But you're supporting ditching the Gamecube version and making it Revolution only or scrapping the extras altogether. In that case, everybody still has to buy new hardware to get "the full Zelda experience," or we all get "the partial Zelda experience" with no chance of getting "the full." Wouldn't that annoy a whole lot more people than just adding this bonus?

Better?