Support NeoGAF

[Smiles and Cries]

I'm hoping HD Zelda was going on at the same time as Skyward Swords

I want my HD Zelda 2 years into WiiU just launch it when the PS4 come out

 

[BurntPork]

I'm hoping HD Zelda was going on at the same time as Skyward Swords

I want my HD Zelda 2 years into WiiU just launch it when the PS4 come out

I highly doubt Sony will sacrifice the generation by waiting that long.

 

[Javier]

HD development is much harder than Wii development. If SS took five years to make, no way what he described would take less that 7. Zelda should stick to a three-year cycle.

Dude, you don't know that. Nintendo can be so secretive with their titles that I wouldn't be surprised if development for Zelda WiiU has already started, specially given the tech demo we saw at E3.

I wouldn't worry about there being a huge gap between the games, as they'll probably give us one (if not two) games on the 3DS in the meantime.

 

[BurntPork]

Dude, you don't know that. Nintendo can be so secretive with their titles that I wouldn't be surprised if development for Zelda WiiU has already started, specially given the tech demo we saw at E3.

I wouldn't worry about there being a huge gap between the games, as they'll probably give us one (if not two) games on the 3DS in the meantime.

Yes, because tech demos always indicate games in development!

And I'm strictly talking about console Zeldas.

 

[Javier]

Yes, because tech demos always indicate games in development!

And I'm strictly talking about console Zeldas.

It indicates they've already tested the series on HD territory, meaning they have something to go from.

And if you're strictly talking about console Zeldas, there's already a five-year gap between Twilight Princess and Skyward Sword, so your point is moot.

 

[bgassassin]

I gotta give some props for how you people manage to keep this thread alive so much given how little has really been shown

When you're a Nintendo fan you adapt pretty easily to them doing things like this for as long as they have..

That would require Steam support, wouldn't it.

 

[BurntPork]

It indicates they've already tested the series on HD territory, meaning they have something to go from.

And if you're strictly talking about console Zeldas, there's already a five-year gap between Twilight Princess and Skyward Sword, so your point is moot.

I know there's a five-year gap, and that was WAY too long. I don't want that to happen again, which was my point, so it's not moot. I don't even get why you said that it's moot.

And making a room in HD doesn't mean they can make a whole game faster, especially since they'll likely use a totally different art style.

 

[Emperor Bohe]

That would require Steam support, wouldn't it.

 

[IceDoesntHelp]

I know there's a five-year gap, and that was WAY too long. I don't want that to happen again, which was my point, so it's not moot. I don't even get why you said that it's moot.

And making a room in HD doesn't mean they can make a whole game faster, especially since they'll likely use a totally different art style.

Why is 5 years too long? Do you want a sequel every 2 years until you get bored of it (aka Resistance, Killzone, Ratchet and Clank, Gears of War, Halo, Call of Duty etc? 'Cause I sure don't. I'd rather wait 5 years for an excellent game, then a game that's just thrown out the window (I'm not saying any of the games I mentioned earlier are garbage).
Also, I heard somewhere on Gaf (not sure if its true) that Nintendo already develops the games in HD and then makes them SD. Is that true, or complete and utter bullshit?

 

[Smiles and Cries]

I highly doubt Sony will sacrifice the generation by waiting that long.

spill the beans man! spoil the fun... - oh

 

[Javier]

I know there's a five-year gap, and that was WAY too long. I don't want that to happen again, which was my point, so it's not moot. I don't even get why you said that it's moot.

And making a room in HD doesn't mean they can make a whole game faster, especially since they'll likely use a totally different art style.

Moot because if they got away with it once, they can do it again. Now that SS is coming out, nobody seems to even remember how long it's been since the last Zelda, specially since we've gotten PLENTY of Zelda over the past few years. I don't see why it shouldn't count because it wasn't on a console.

I stand by my prediction we will see an HD Zelda halfway through the console's life. Probably 3-4 years into. And it will be bigger than SS gameplay wise.

 

[IceDoesntHelp]

Moot because if they got away with it once, they can do it again. Now that SS is coming out, nobody seems to even remember how long it's been since the last Zelda, specially since we've gotten PLENTY of Zelda over the past few years. I don't see why it shouldn't count because it wasn't on a console.

I stand by my prediction we will see an HD Zelda halfway through the console's life. Probably 3-4 years into. And it will be bigger than SS gameplay wise.

Makes me think...I wonder if the Wii U will be the first Nintendo console (in the 3D generations) to only have one Zelda.

 

[Smiles and Cries]

And I thought all those DS Zelda's were overkill... I guess after 25 years we can stop now.

WiiU will be the Xenoblade Generation!

 

[Dreamwriter]

Dude, you don't know that. Nintendo can be so secretive with their titles that I wouldn't be surprised if development for Zelda WiiU has already started, specially given the tech demo we saw at E3.

I think it was Miyamoto who said that the tech demo has nothing to do with any real game in development, and is nothing like a Wii-U Zelda would be. He said the entire Zelda team was still concentrating completely on Skyward Sword.

Edit - These two things are what I was thinking of:

First, Nintendo described the tech demo as an “example of what Zelda might look like on this system if it were designed with the Twilight Princess art style.”

Later Aunoma said "The demo that we showed at E3 was really just more of a rough idea of if all we were to do was to take a Zelda game and put it in HD, this is what it might look like. We’re much more interested in looking at the power of the Wii U system and seeing how we can take advantage of that power to do things that we haven’t been able to do in a Zelda game before.... One of our goals with [Skyward Sword] is to be the first step in illustrating for people how the Zelda series can change and evolve."

 

[Log4Girlz]

You don't need beefier hardware for any of that though.

See Xenoblade.

I...I have to mod my Wii don't I

 

[Smiles and Cries]

I...I have to mod my Wii don't I

I modded my Wii and still don't have Xenoblade
I bet Skyward Swords comes with a force update that bricks my Wii :X

 

[Luigiv]

Be lucky it wasn't USB 1.0

Not really. Even the Wii had 2.0, so there was no chance of the Wii U being 1.#.

From what I hear, apparently 3.0 can overheat, so it might not have been a good fit for the system's small case.

 

[Jaded Alyx]

I...I have to mod my Wii don't I

Don't you want in on this glorious action?

 

[Smiles and Cries]

Don't you want in on this glorious action?

u evil jaded person

 

[Luigiv]

I modded my Wii and still don't have Xenoblade
I bet Skyward Swords comes with a force update that bricks my Wii :X

If you have the HBC then you can just sidestep disc updates. I doubt Nintendo will release a new update, anyway. The 4.3 disc updater can already differentiate between a modded 4.3 system and a vanilla 4.3 system (unlike previous firmware updaters), so releasing a new update won't really add any extra protection. Nintendo has pretty much all the can with the Wii's flimsy firmware set-up and they sure as hell aren't going to be adding any more features to it.

 

[Jaded Alyx]

My job is done here.

..For now.


*cue mysterious music*

 

[Smiles and Cries]

^^^ WiiU needs to be region free >_>

I made a funny

 

[MDX]

I've felt for awhile that Wii U would repeat the use of eDRAM (e1T-SRAM), but now I have a better understanding of its use and why. Also when looking at the idea of Wii U using a daughter-die, Wii's Hollywood already took a step in this direction by integrating the 24MB of 1T-SRAM that was GC's main memory onto Hollywood's chip.


Using a rough calculation (still working on getting the formula completely down so this is based on one method), Wii U would need (to avoid tiling) a minimum of 16MB for 1920x1080p with no aliasing and 64MB for 1920x1080p with 4xFSAA (based on the idea that FSAA is used as opposed to some other AA). This isn't completely accurate, but it at least gives a rough idea of what would be needed.

Flipper/Hollywood had 1MB of texture cache which was pretty big, but with today's much larger textures I would be under the impression that Nintendo would somehow increase that amount instead of going with what current GPUs have to reduce the burden on main memory (since I expect no more than 1.5GB).

Looking at Hollywood, I could just as easily see them go with 1GB of main memory, and something huge like a 64MB framebuffer, and 64MB texture cache. Not saying it will happen, but that sounds like something they would do by focusing on "smaller" amounts of fast memory over larger amounts of slower memory. This should pretty much free up the main memory for other things.


This to me helps point to that eDRAM being implemented as L2 cache. If there is any truth to the 16MB rumor, we're looking at Wii U's CPU having roughly over 62x the amount that was in Gekko.

You speculate that the WiiU will have no more than 1.5 gigs of total memory.
1 gig for the main memory. Leaving 500MB. 64MB goes to the TC & 64 goes to the FB.
Where do you think the rest of the 372MB could go?

 

[ThatObviousUser]

What ever happened with all of that? Do you have a link handy, or perhaps just a quick explanation?

Sony and MS lost, Nintendo one. The former two have to pay royalties to Immersion but Nintendo doesn't.

 

[Log4Girlz]

My job is done here.

..For now.


*cue mysterious music*

Now quick question, is the world seamless or are there loading zones? I bought Monster Hunter Tri because I was under the impression the world was huge and I remember one pic of the guy standing over a cliff and shit. Dude the map is connected by shoe-boxes, with leading between every area. I was indescribably disappointed.

 

[ThatObviousUser]

was SS even in development for 5 years?

They said it was when they announced the release date, but I highly doubt that except for maybe one or two interns testing out possible game mechanics for items and Aonuma jotting down story notes on his way to work.

We know the following:

• April 2008: The team was forming again to "work on new games."
• Part of this team was developing Spirit Tracks, part of it Skyward Sword.
• June 2009: At E3, it's said the story is almost complete but the graphics are definitely not. Concept art is shown.
• December 2009: Spirit Tracks is released and that part of the team rejoins with the Skyward Sword team.
• June 2010: Skyward Sword debuts at E3 with a single playable level. It seems like the graphics style and controls are near final, but the game isn't anywhere near content complete.

Seems more like three and a half years.

 

[Wichu]

Now quick question, is the world seamless or are there loading zones? I bought Monster Hunter Tri because I was under the impression the world was huge and I remember one pic of the guy standing over a cliff and shit. Dude the map is connected by shoe-boxes, with leading between every area. I was indescribably disappointed.

Each major area is seamless. I've played for over 30 hours and only come across 7 different loading 'zones' (the path from one area to another, such as from a cave into an open field). Each area is huge, and there are no transitions between sub-areas (e.g. no loading when you walk into a town from the field) - you'll barely notice it.

 

[Xane]

Now quick question, is the world seamless or are there loading zones? I bought Monster Hunter Tri because I was under the impression the world was huge and I remember one pic of the guy standing over a cliff and shit. Dude the map is connected by shoe-boxes, with leading between every area. I was indescribably disappointed.

This is one of the reasons why Monster Hunter Tri looks good.
Think about it. Each map section can stand completely on its own.
The BIGGEST advantage of this is not having to worry about complicated resource management.
You don't have to worry about streaming content as you move through different terrain and thus enables you to fully optimize the systems full capacity in each map section.
It is WAY easier to create beautiful sceneries this way without worrying at all about resource management.
This is especially true with the Wii's limited memory (64mb MEM2 + 24mb MEM1).

Personally, it never bothered me at all and I wouldn't mind if they keep splitting all the areas in future Monster Hunter installments.

 

[Jackano]

The BIGGEST advantage of this is not having to worry about complicated resource management.
It is WAY easier to create beautiful sceneries this way without worrying at all about resource management.

Except that this is a very poor coding style, just counting on the raw power of the system instead of controlling it in your app/game.

 

[Log4Girlz]

This is one of the reasons why Monster Hunter Tri looks good.
Think about it. Each map section can stand completely on its own.
The BIGGEST advantage of this is not having to worry about complicated resource management.
You don't have to worry about streaming content as you move through different terrain and thus enables you to fully optimize the systems full capacity in each map section.
It is WAY easier to create beautiful sceneries this way without worrying at all about resource management.
This is especially true with the Wii's limited memory (64mb MEM2 + 24mb MEM1).

Personally, it never bothered me at all and I wouldn't mind if they keep splitting all the areas in future Monster Hunter installments.

I wouldn't mind split off areas if they were larger than shoe-boxes. The game doesn't even look "beautiful" to me because I can't seemlessly run to areas I see in the horizon, I'm constantly jarred by the loading.

 

[AceBandage]

Just Cause 2 has one of the biggest worlds around, and that game is beautiful as is on current gen tech.

 

[BurntPork]

Why is 5 years too long? Do you want a sequel every 2 years until you get bored of it (aka Resistance, Killzone, Ratchet and Clank, Gears of War, Halo, Call of Duty etc? 'Cause I sure don't. I'd rather wait 5 years for an excellent game, then a game that's just thrown out the window (I'm not saying any of the games I mentioned earlier are garbage).
Also, I heard somewhere on Gaf (not sure if its true) that Nintendo already develops the games in HD and then makes them SD. Is that true, or complete and utter bullshit?

I said three years. The problem with waiting five years is that it'll always come at the end of the console's cycle, so we'll all be wishing we could see it on the new console. Two original Zelda games per console isn't asking too much. You don't need five years to make a good game, as most past Zelda games have proven.

Moot because if they got away with it once, they can do it again. Now that SS is coming out, nobody seems to even remember how long it's been since the last Zelda, specially since we've gotten PLENTY of Zelda over the past few years. I don't see why it shouldn't count because it wasn't on a console.

I stand by my prediction we will see an HD Zelda halfway through the console's life. Probably 3-4 years into. And it will be bigger than SS gameplay wise.

I'm not saying that they don't count. It's just that there's a difference between handheld and console Zeldas, and Nintendo doesn't always put as much effort into the handheld ones. And, honestly, I enjoy Zelda the most on a big screen. I'd rather them make a 2D Zelda for 3DS two years from now and release a 3D one on console the year after that. Two totally different experiences, where neither will get tired.

You speculate that the WiiU will have no more than 1.5 gigs of total memory.
1 gig for the main memory. Leaving 500MB. 64MB goes to the TC & 64 goes to the FB.
Where do you think the rest of the 372MB could go?

FYI, 1.5GB = 1536MB

 

[Log4Girlz]

I wonder what direction they will go with the artstyle of the next big zelda game. Wii-U truly has the power to do justice to any style they chose. The ballsiest move would to make the game look incredibly realistic. The thought of that is both revolting and fascinating.

 

[E-phonk]

RE: zelda (& other nintendo games) in HD

Going by how Nintendo worked in the past, I think they have been working on the basis "nintendo HD engine" for quite some time, that is compatible with the tools they use internally and is being finetuned for the WiiU hardware.

If I understand correctly every team starts evolving this basic engine according to their own needs afterwards, so while they might not have a full team working on Zelda HD at the moment, I'm pretty sure they have a small team at EAD3 experimenting with that new engine. Possibly the same team who did the E3 demo.

 

[Nuclear Muffin]

They said it was when they announced the release date, but I highly doubt that except for maybe one or two interns testing out possible game mechanics for items and Aonuma jotting down story notes on his way to work.

We know the following:

• April 2008: The team was forming again to "work on new games."
• Part of this team was developing Spirit Tracks, part of it Skyward Sword.
• June 2009: At E3, it's said the story is almost complete but the graphics are definitely not. Concept art is shown.
• December 2009: Spirit Tracks is released and that part of the team rejoins with the Skyward Sword team.
• June 2010: Skyward Sword debuts at E3 with a single playable level. It seems like the graphics style and controls are near final, but the game isn't anywhere near content complete.

Seems more like three and a half years.

Yeah, that sounds about right. The game obviously hasn't been in development since 2006, that's just stupid (and impossible, considering that it is built completely around motionplus, which wasn't available to devs until around April 2008)

But I do shudder at how long a HD Zelda would take to make...

 

[ThatObviousUser]

Yeah, that sounds about right. The game obviously hasn't been in development since 2006, that's just stupid (and impossible, considering that it is built completely around motionplus, which wasn't available to devs until around April 2008)

But I do shudder at how long a HD Zelda would take to make...

Well until WiiSports Resort was actually released, they were making it without MotionPlus. Then Miyamoto got Aonuma to look at it more and he decided to put it back in.

 

[Jaded Alyx]

Now quick question, is the world seamless or are there loading zones? I bought Monster Hunter Tri because I was under the impression the world was huge and I remember one pic of the guy standing over a cliff and shit. Dude the map is connected by shoe-boxes, with leading between every area. I was indescribably disappointed.

I'm late here, but it's definitely not like Tri. The areas are MASSIVE and can take a couple hours to completely explore (which is encouraged as finding new areas grants you EXP).

See that huge waterfall in the video I linked? You can jump off the cliff edge and swim there. It'll take you a long-ass time to reach it, but you can do it. Almost anywhere it looks like you should be able to get to, you can.

And as you can see, there are monsters roaming around - many of which are much higher level than you are.

 

[Nuclear Muffin]

Well until WiiSports Resort was actually released, they were making it without MotionPlus. Then Miyamoto got Aonuma to look at it more and he decided to put it back in.

No they started with motionplus, then they were having trouble with it so Aonuma gave up and took it out, with the game's development going on for 3 months without motionplus support. Later on Katsuya Eguchi convinced Aonuma to try again and lent him Wii Sports Resort tech and staff to help them out and that got the motionplus support back in.

http://uk.wii.ign.com/articles/117/...feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+ignfeeds/wii+(IGN+Wii)

 

[Javier]

I said three years. The problem with waiting five years is that it'll always come at the end of the console's cycle, so we'll all be wishing we could see it on the new console. Two original Zelda games per console isn't asking too much. You don't need five years to make a good game, as most past Zelda games have proven.

Speak for yourself. I for one I'm glad SS is not getting the Twilight Princess treatment and releasing on the Wii as it should, instead of getting a rushed port just to upscale the graphics and change the controls.

I'm not saying that they don't count. It's just that there's a difference between handheld and console Zeldas, and Nintendo doesn't always put as much effort into the handheld ones. And, honestly, I enjoy Zelda the most on a big screen. I'd rather them make a 2D Zelda for 3DS two years from now and release a 3D one on console the year after that. Two totally different experiences, where neither will get tired.

I disagree here. Even if the handheld titles are "smaller" by nature, I think the amount of effort put into them really shines within the system they're in. Link's Awakening is still considered one of the series' best (for a lot of people it's still THE best Zelda), and the Oracles weren't far behind. The DS entries aren't my favorites, but they're still enjoyable games in their own right, and I like them better than Wind Waker (a game I felt got really tedious early on, despite the gorgeous art). Haven't played Minish Cap so I hope that one is one of the Ambassador titles.

 

[BurntPork]

No they started with motionplus, then they were having trouble with it so Aonuma gave up and took it out, with the game's development going on for 3 months without motionplus support. Later on Katsuya Eguchi convinced Aonuma to try again and lent him Wii Sports Resort tech and staff to help them out and that got the motionplus support back in.

http://uk.wii.ign.com/articles/117/...feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+ignfeeds/wii+(IGN+Wii)

That doesn't mean that they didn't start thinking about story or gameplay mechanics. Concepts were likely being thrown around before the release of TP.

 

[BurntPork]

Speak for yourself. I for one I'm glad SS is not getting the Twilight Princess treatment and releasing on the Wii as it should, instead of getting a rushed port just to upscale the graphics and change the controls.

I disagree here. Even if the handheld titles are "smaller" by nature, I think the amount of effort put into them really shines within the system they're in. Link's Awakening is still considered one of the series' best (for a lot of people it's still THE best Zelda), and the Oracles weren't far behind. The DS entries aren't my favorites, but they're still enjoyable games in their own right, and I like them better than Wind Waker (a game I felt got really tedious early on, despite the gorgeous art). Haven't played Minish Cap so I hope that one is one of the Ambassador titles.

The GBA and DS ones were a lot less intricate than the console entries.

 

[ThatObviousUser]

No they started with motionplus, then they were having trouble with it so Aonuma gave up and took it out, with the game's development going on for 3 months without motionplus support. Later on Katsuya Eguchi convinced Aonuma to try again and lent him Wii Sports Resort tech and staff to help them out and that got the motionplus support back in.

http://uk.wii.ign.com/articles/117/...feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+ignfeeds/wii+(IGN+Wii)

...that's basically what I said.

 

[Nuclear Muffin]

That doesn't mean that they didn't start thinking about story or gameplay mechanics. Concepts were likely being thrown around before the release of TP.

Yeah probably, but actual production work couldn't have started until motionplus was available (early 2008). The development timeline that this interview infers also lends credence to this. The game had already been in development for "a couple of years" with motionplus in mind. The E3 2010 demo was in July (where the gameplay mechanics and control system was clearly finalised) so that places the game's development at the start of 2008.

Some basic ideas and concepts were probably drawn up but the game's actual development must've been at the start of 2008, meaning that the game itself would've been in development for around 3 years (just slightly shy off of Zelda OoT, which was probably in development for about 2-4 months longer)

 

[Javier]

That doesn't mean that they didn't start thinking about story or gameplay mechanics. Concepts were likely being thrown around before the release of TP.

But by that logic, it's also very likely that stories and gameplay mechanics for Zelda WiiU have already been discussed for a while, probably as early as Aonuma and his crew got access to the WiiU devkit.

 

[bgassassin]

You speculate that the WiiU will have no more than 1.5 gigs of total memory.
1 gig for the main memory. Leaving 500MB. 64MB goes to the TC & 64 goes to the FB.
Where do you think the rest of the 372MB could go?

1.5GB of main memory, not total memory. So in this situation, Wii U would have the FB and TC on top of the 1-1.5GB of main memory. That 1GB mention was a worst case scenario that I could see Nintendo going if they used that big of a FB and TC.

 

[Log4Girlz]

1.5GB of main memory, not total memory. So in this situation, Wii U would have the FB and TC on top of the 1-1.5GB of main memory. That 1GB mention was a worst case scenario that I could see Nintendo going if they used that big of a FB and TC.

Well Jonathan Blow says he heard it has a "lot more" ram. Goddammit a lot more has to be 4x as much ram minimum as the previous generation. 2 GB or bust! *sighs*

 

[-WindYoshi-]

The Wii U will have 16GB of ram, mark my words.

 

[Log4Girlz]

The Wii U will have 16GB of ram, mark my words.

In what form? Flash ram?

 

[specialguy]

The Wii U will have 16GB of ram, mark my words.

I know the Wii U wont approach it obviously, but amazingly 16GB of DDR3 is actually pretty affordable if you're building a PC now. Around $90 at newegg.

Of course, DDR3 probably wouldn't be too usable in a console AFAIK, not enough bandwidth, you'd need GDDR5 (whether DDR3+EDRAM for framebuffer would be ok I dont know), but still rather amazing.

 

[manueldelalas]

The Wii U will have 16GB of ram, mark my words.

It would be funny if it gor more RAM than internal memory =P