Papa Smurf

[quote name='James][font=arial']On the other hand, Final Fantasy VII is a classic for more reasons than its story alone.[/font][/quote] Like I've been saying, its impact was due to its presentation. It's a classic largely because of the presentation, not story or characters, especially considering that Final Fantasy VI shats all over it in those areas yet we don't see people flocking to FFVI as much as we do VII, lol. The reason people were attracted to FFVII in the first place was because it was the first true cinematic RPG. It played like a movie, right down to camerawork. With regards to how the game has aged, it's the complete opposite. The [i]story and characters[/i] haven't aged well, while the presentation still remains impressive. Graphically, the game doesn't look so nice, but the [i]techniques[/i] are still solid. As a film, Final Fantasy VII is still one of the better storyboards in the genre, and probably even in the industry itself. The quality of the graphics is irrelevant to the techniques and composition of the frame.

Ah, and here is where Retro gaming gets really interesting, because it [i]is[/i] entirely possible to logically explain why someone develops an emotional attachment to certain characters. Zidargh just hit one explanation: that he was too young to notice the problems with the game. A second way to explain emotional attachment to characters is straight-up character analysis. I notice that I keep bringing up MGS here, but apart from a few quibbles with the writing, MGS1 on PSX is one of the best games ever made, particularly with regards to the characters. We can absolutely logically explain why we're so sad when Psycho Mantis dies: because his humanity is finally revealed. It's like a Darth Vader moment, actually. Here you had this absolute monster of a creature who lacked compassion and engaged in brutally cruel interrogation methods (Psycho Mantis' methods were second only to Revolver Ocelot) and throughout the game, he tormented Snake. But when all is said and done, he's just as tortured a soul as Snake, Otacon, or Meryl is. When his mask was removed, his final wall fell and then he was finally ready to die...and he even helps Snake and Meryl. Totally tragic and noble at the same time. You just didn't see anything like that in FFVII. Sniper Wolf, another great example. Her entire death scene was tragically sad. She lived her life alone, even within FoxHound. Her sniper rifle was her only family; she loved the dogs, and they absolutely loved her (their affectionate response to her handkerchief) but she could never be part of the pack. When Snake puts her out of her misery, he does it like he's shooting a dying animal...and he is. Sniper Wolf is a villain, but only by definition. She's almost a tragic hero. Vulcan Raven. In MGS, the ravens were shown to be scavengers. Vulcan Raven is anything but a scavenger. He's a predator. His boss fight reflects this. Where all of the other boss fights in the game were pretty evenly matched and straightforward, this boss fight is totally cat-and-mouse...or raven-and-snake (*rimshot*). If you make a mistake during this battle, you'll pay for it dearly, much moreso than you would during any other fight, sans maybe the final few stages involving Metal Gear REX. But even as brutal and dominating as Raven is, he is still a warrior, and as such, there is still a creed he follows. He fights Snake as an equal, despite the obvious physical advantages. And when Snake bests him in combat, Raven acknowledges Snake's skill. True warrior. And a rather noble villain if you ask me. Gray Fox. Anyone who's played MGS knows everything I'd say about him, so I'll just say that he represents the past. This is why a line like "I-i-it's a ghost!" is so clever. The camo suit definitely makes him look like a ghost, but the real fun of such a line is that it's a commentary on his character. And what happens at the end of the game? Gray Fox redeems himself. Throughout the game, he's been holding onto the past (his fight with Snake, "Make me feel it. Make me feel alive again."). Now he finally lets go, which is one of the dominant themes of MGS; "Choose life, then live!" Naomi tells Snake at the very end of the game. But what about Revolver Ocelot? He's arrogant, never concedes. He runs away from Snake, defeat, and his past. In MGS2, he's taken on a few new surnames. This isn't coincidence, just like it isn't coincidence regarding what's happened to Liquid Snake. Both characters come back to antagonize Solid Snake because Ocelot and Liquid are broken men. They have no chance for redemption. In a sense, they're not even full people in MGS1, because they only have one goal in mind. For Ocelot, it's torture. For Liquid, it's revenge. But even though those two are fanatical, they still feel pain. Liquid's quest is all about mending the pain of knowing he isn't a real person, essentially. He can't focus on anything other than his past, and his relation to Solid Snake. He is consumed by the nightmare of the genome project, and in the end, is consumed by it through FoxDie, for which Snake was the delivery agent. You could focus on just one of these characters and easily write a seven page paper on them. Metal Gear Solid itself can easily become a forty page paper. With Final Fantasy VII, you'd be lucky to get a few pages out of Sephiroth. It's basically "minor Oedipus complex" and you're done. You'd barely get a page on any of the other characters.

Then again, Shin, I think the success there also had more to do with the presentation than anything else. FFVII wasn't just another SNES game. It was the first next-gen Final Fantasy title, appearing on the then brand-new PSX, a CD-based format that could support the type of game Square was looking to make. FFVII was going to be a cinematic tour-de-force, with a presentation previously unseen in the genre. CG movie clips, 3D backgrounds, sweeping cinematography, dynamic orchestrated music, and so on. The game was truly the first cinematic RPG. I don't think the story is what attracted people. It was the presentation where FFVII had the impact. The presentation set the bar for following games. The story, however, didn't, especially when we have Edgar, Sabin, and Locke from FFVI, who are total screwballs and act like a twisted, royal version of the Marx Brothers. [quote name='Zidargh']Firstly, calm the hell down. You seem to take discussions so frigging personally and you speak with so much angst. I'm trying to discuss my opinion, not shoot at you.[/quote] Dude, what are you on? There was nothing in quoted portion of my post that even implied I was taking things personally or speaking with "so much angst." If you can't see how much I was enjoying talking about the A-Team, then you're either blind or looking for something to moan about. lol [quote]Secondly, with regards to Mr. T. Do you believe Mr. T was merely like that as B.A Barrachus? His entire life, by your standards, would be a cliche of some sort then. Mr. T is still like that today, albeit without the bling. He remained B.A with his bloody 'rap' song.[/quote] Uh, hence...[quote name='Papa Smurf']Mr. T is a good cliche only when it's actually Mr. T.[/quote] [quote]However, I will leave this 'debate' with this one note. Every person I have ever spoken to about this game has strongly supported FFVII and stated that it had a brilliant story. I don't care, just as you don't care for the emotional attachment I had with this game, if you feel the story and characters are cliches.[/quote] Dude, [i]what[/i] emotional attachment? lol. What, like what happened to Aeris? Or Zack's backstory? Vincent? Barret? Tifa? Sephiroth? None of those characters ever had enough time to develop. Aeris was a flower girl, nothing more. She was two-dimensional the entire time. The Zack/Cloud history relied on a backstory/flashback that was only activated IF you happened to stumble into the correct room in Nibelheim. Vincent is Frankenstein without Mary Shelley powering his character. Barret is a clumsily written Mr. T. Tifa, a boring childhood sweetheart. Sephiroth takes on an Oedipal complex but possesses nowhere near the style and flair of the original play. Where's an emotional attachment to any of them? [quote]In my opinion, I feel that many games today expand upon the basic cliche that FFVII was and other games that FFVII was a cliche of. I absolutely loved the story, and I know many others did.[/quote] You do realize that FFVII was pre-dated by about...2500 years of literary history? It's not only games coming before FFVII...or FFVII being a "cliche of" other games. It's a matter of FFVII being a cliche in and of itself. [quote]I respect your opinion and arguments Papa Smurf. And what I meant by doing the research is just what Shinmaru stated.[/quote] Yeah. The research even points to what I'm saying. Final Fantasy VII was widely embraced not because of the story, but because of the presentation. The story and characters were way better in FFVI (even Kefka>>>Sephiroth, because Kefka's insane and he loves it), so obviously there was something other than the story to get casual gamers interested in FFVII.

Boo, firstly, cliches are only good and cool when they're used well. That's why A-Team was so awesome; because they managed to make the cliched main characters fun to watch. Plus, they had Mr. T bling-d out, cracking skulls, and an old, graying white guy who wasn't afraid of anything and would just run right into a bunch of terrorists. Even the idea of the A-Team itself was a cliche: ex-cons on the run who form their own crime-fighting unit. It was a live-action cartoon. And it worked because it was done so well, albeit in a corny way. Metal Gear Solid is another example. The characters there are tried-and-true character archetypes, and the brother vs brother conflict can be found in Shakespeare in varying forms. The cast of villains in the MGS series is a re-imagining of Shakespeare's antagonists. We've got witches (Fortune comes to mind, as well as Psycho Mantis), sprites (Vamp, Decoy Octopus), ghosts (Gray Fox), enchanted warriors (Vulcan Raven), Iago (Liquid Snake as Miller), clowns (Fatman)...the list goes on and on. MGS1 was amazing because it implemented those cliches well. MGS2...not so much. But the point still holds true. Secondly, Final Fantasy VII [i]didn't[/i] use the better cliches. Emo angst blonde kids aren't the better cliches. Undead gunfighters aren't the better cliches. Emo angst-driven love triangles aren't the better cliches. Mr. T is a good cliche only when it's actually Mr. T. Am I saying FFVII is a bad game? No. It does certain things really well. It's just that story and characters aren't two of them. What FFVII is known for--and what it did for the industry--is cinematic presentation.

[quote name='Zidargh'](Red XIII as Eeyore, lol. o_0)[/quote] Quiet, mopey animal. Loner. Has a "Geee" attitude through much of the game. He's Eeyore with Limit Breaks. [quote]What I meant was... I had gotten the impression by his post that he was almost saying it was a cliche of other games, saying like a modern RPG. And therefore in this sense, I'd say that the modern games would be cliches of FFVII.[/quote] He's not implying that at all. What he's saying is that there are better RPGs out there. And there are. Cliche characters were only one of his reasons for how FFVII isn't as good as others are saying. Plus, what in the hell does "cliche of other games" even mean, and how in the hell are you gleaning that from what he was saying? I don't even think "cliche of other games" makes sense. [i]Parody[/i] of other games makes sense. [i]Satire[/i] of other games makes sense. But nothing can be a cliche of other things. [quote]The game made a huge impression upon me for I had, at the time, played nothing like it, so yes, age does have something to do with it. Just because I have noticed some characters were carbon-copies of others, doesn't mean I feel any less about it. The nostaligia clearly outweighs its elements when compared to today.[/quote] The game making a huge impression on you is irrelevant to the presence of stock characters. Being too young to notice cliches does not mean they don't exist to begin with. [quote]All I was trying to target was the issue that seemed apparent to me that FFVII was regarded was cliche of 'other games' which [i]could[/i] have been modern day RPGs.[/quote] Chrono Trigger is from the SNES era. FFVII isn't a cliche of other games. It's a cliche in and of itself. [quote]By today's standards, it is a cliche.[/quote] Um, something like Barret/Mr.T was a cliche by the standards of the 1980s...and even going farther back to the 70s. Barret is totally a blaxploitation character. He's Mr. T with some tracings of Richard Roundtree (though without the style). By the standards of the A-Team, Barret's a cliche. Today's standards have very little to do with anything. And again, it doesn't matter how you responded to those cliche characters; your emotional response does not change the fact that they are cliche characters. Hell, The Graduate is one of my Top 10 films of all-time, but even though I love the film (and would totally get with 1960s Anne Bancroft if I could), I'm not about to minimize or ignore the fact that Mrs. Robinson hails from a long line of cinematic MILFs, a tradition started back at the birth of filmmaking. Most of the first black and white silent films at the start of the twentieth century were snuff films. That's one of the biggest reasons why I found your "study the industry and market" thing to be so amusing. Because it's the other way around. When you do industry research, the cliches become all the more apparent, just like Mrs. Robinson, a total MILF. Talking about impact of games, though I think it's kind of silly to bring up the impact, considering that FFVII's only impact had nothing to do with characters. FFVII's impact was on [i]presentation[/i]. Nothing more. It was one of the first cinematic 3D videogames, with broad, sweeping camera movements and high-dramatic angles. There were times when the camera swopped in down behind Cloud in Midgar for a low-angle shot of the Shinra towers. You had these moments throughout the game...and pretty much any time we had any of the WEAPON appearances. Just like how Zelda's impact was on gameplay and Z-targeting. Both games had an impact on the industry. Story was not one of them. And story and characters are what we're talking about here. Not the presentation. Not the gameplay.

[quote name='Zidargh']It's a cliche by today's standards, but back then, and especially for me (being young and experiencing nothing like it before) it was nothing of a cliche.[/quote] Age has nothing to do with it. You could be 5 or 55 and it wouldn't change the fact that Barret was clearly Mr. T, that the Aeris/Cloud/Tifa story was a re-telling of tried-and-true love triangle melodramas that pre-dated Shakespeare, that Yuffie is a psychotic Daddy's Girl, that Cait Sith is totally the Fool from Shakespeare, that Vincent is straight out of Poe, that Cid is a burnt-out disillusioned nobody who once had everything and now finds himself snuffing rocket fuel, and Red XIII is basically Eeyore from Winnie the Pooh. Those characters were always cliches; you just didn't notice it before. [quote]Do some research into the industry and market a bit more before you make statements like these.[/quote] *cackles maniacally*

As old as the news is, I still find it hilarious. You've got a delay in North America, strictly online ordering in Japan...Twilight Princess really should have been an either/or instead of this weird delay/quasi-cancel/preferential treatment tightrope balancing act. It would have made more sense to cancel one version...or just ignore the Wii like they implied they were going to do originally. This entire situation reads like a lousy soap opera or Vincent Price B-movie. lol [quote][color=#4b0082]Nintendo wants to move the game over to the Wii entirely but they're stuck with both versions because they were saying forever that the game would be released on the GCN.[/color][/quote] QFT

No, I don't think it's anything to do with her not wanting her child to be exposed to diversity. She's just a self-righteous twatty bimbo who needs to get burned at the stake. It would be a rather fitting end, as well, considering what she's bitching about here.

[quote name='James']I'll only say this once. Do not accuse me of "sniping" or not addressing your points. You have done that to me consistently throughout this thread.[/quote] Who's accusing? James, as far as I can tell, you have no points anymore. lol [quote]Secondly, you have been attempting to spin everything in a negative direction due to your personal view; there's a lot of justification going on here, lol.[/quote] James, you're making a terrible mistake here, because there is zero justification going on here, and Charles can most certainly attest to that, considering gaming conversations happen with him, in-person, more than anyone I know. [quote]Moreover...you have frequently been guilty of either not addressing my points, or running off on vague tangents that don't actually take issue with any of the fundamental points I have been making.[/quote] That's the thing, James. You haven't been making any points for a while now. You kept trying to come back to "change is change." That got killed pretty quickly when one points to the types of changes here. You've tried to say I'm arguing semantics when clearly you've just been ignoring critically important distinctions for whatever reason. You said I was taking quotes out of context, and then I showed you how the context is no different today. You told me about how it was so plausible to assume a "significantly more powerful system" and then I produced the quotes and interviews from Iwata & CO that directly contradict any such assumptions. You said that WiiTP is being treated better than other ports, but that's a complete lie by reading about three other ports and I listed them and the improvements (Madden 07, Marvel UA, and Far Cry). You tried to come back to how the Wiimote is a fundamental change to play control. That just got killed with nails in the coffin, and I provided examples of undeniable fundamental changes to play control to support what I was saying, and showed the major differences between the true and most important fundamental play control changes of the past twenty years (SMB and Super Mario 64 in particular) and what WiiTP is shaping up to be. And yet I've not been addressing your fundamental points? I think even Desbreko can see that I have. lol EDIT: [quote name='James']I actually didn't keep coming back to "change is change". This is an example of misinterpretation.[/quote] Oh really? [quote name='James']the point is that most games go through fundamental changes late in the development cycle. These changes are always different, but they regularly happen.[/quote] [quote name='Papa Smurf']So "change is change"[/quote] [quote name='James']Basically, yep.[/quote] I'm not taking anything out of context, by the way. And that quote progression proves that I've been understanding your point from the beginning. [quote]I made a clear distinction about the types of change we were discussing...I then made a general point about change. Not at all. Again, re-read my comments - I have frequently been making clear distinctions that you have been ignoring. I even attached examples to those distinctions.[/quote] The phrase you've been particularly fond of using is "these types of changes." That phrase establishes a common ground between the subjects. You've used "major changes" quite frequently, as well, again with the obvious goal of showing how major changes occur throughout development, and obviously trying to show that the changes in WiiTP are the "industry norm." I did not misinterpret anything. lol. According to what you've been saying, the changes in WiiTP are the regular stuff we see in any development cycle, only because the changes in WiiTP can be considered "major changes." I understand your point just fine. I obviously have been paying attention to your point. Otherwise I wouldn't remember jack about it. The problem with your point is not that you think I'm misinterpreting it. The problem with your point is that it's broad, vague, and does not survive scrutiny. None of the examples you attached do anything to help the point you're making--or they only support your point in that broad, vague sense that most people never find respectable in a critical analysis. Throughout the thread, you've said how it's perfectly appropriate, reasonable, usual, and normal that games undergo significant changes late in development cycles. But if you were to compare WiiTP to something like Prey, you see that the only similarity there is major change and nothing beyond that. The reasons for altering WiiTP are totally different. The timeframe in which the decision was made was much, much shorter. The respective contexts of those two games were as different as night and day. With Prey, the original game was a six-year-old FPS started in the mid to late 90s from 3D Realms, a dev house whose only true "claim to fame" is Duke Nukem 3D, and who have been working on Duke Nukem Forever for forever now. The reasons for changing that game were that it was totally archaic by any recent standards. There was no new system launching. There was no lack of foresight. There was no need to have something worthwhile as a launch title for a soon-to-be-released system that was giving the consumer total gimmicks in the launch line-up. That was not the case with WiiTP. The only reason we had any changes at all was because Nintendo needed a killer app launch title. They had nine months to re-do a handful of parts of the control scheme. They only had six months to re-do the sword control. And based on what we've seen, those six to nine months were nowhere near long enough. Nondiscriminatory, pre-canned sword attacks are evidence of that. [quote]The context is different today. We were talking about dumping existing code and building a new game for a new system.[/quote] Yes, and as Iwata's comments show, believing that Revolution was going to be "significantly more powerful" (or even a dramatic leap in terms of power that would necessitate a total scrapping of existing code) was a stupid assumption to make in the first place. Nintendo was never going for "more power." They were going for a different control scheme. Revolution was never going to be more powerful enough to where scrapping an existing game was going to be an option at all. [quote]This was also being said at a time when specifications were unknown - we were told they would be modest in comparison to other new platforms, but nobody knew we were dealing with what is essentially a modified GameCube.[/quote] You can read the quotes I referenced and see exactly how you're wrong. Anyone can read the quotes I referenced and see exactly why nobody in their right mind could have expected "significantly more powerful" than the GCN when it came to Revolution. 2-3 times more powerful turned out to be exactly that: a modified GCN. Iwata's comments point to major differences in the controller, not the hardware. Face it, James. You made a boo-boo. We all make boo-boos. And even as you made a boo-boo, Nintendo obviously still doesn't give a **** about the GCN TP anymore, and have obviously been giving WiiTP preferential treatment. To them, GCN TP might as well not even exist. And thus, it's been moved to the Wii. We all know they're only still releasing GCN TP just to save face with the consumer. You know this to be true. [quote]It is being treated better than other ports in general, lol. I never said it was being treated better than those specific games - I was referring to ports in general.[/quote] Yes, I'm aware of that. Comparing it to other ports (in the Wii launch line-up?) is a ****-to-**** comparison, however, and does nothing to improve the perception of WiiTP. Comparing it to other ports to show how good WiiTP is is a weak comparison to make in the first place. [quote]As far as how it compares to those games in terms of porting...I think it's still on the same level. So there's no issue there whatsoever.[/quote] Marvel UA has completely discriminatory motion sensing for combat. You do a slight jiggle with the Wiimote and you're throwing regular melee attacks. Wide sweep and you're tripping your target. Swing the Wiimote up and it's an uppercut. Swing the Wiimote down and you just smashed your target to the floor. Hold B and those directions become special attacks. Tilting the Wiimote controls the camera's angle. In Madden 07, you control the distance and angle of the kicks depending on how hard and fast you swing and how much tilt you have on the Wiimote. Passing, you control the pass. On defense, you can wave the entire controller (Wiimote+nunchuck) up in the air to try to swat the ball down. While running the ball, jukes are handled by jolting the nunchuck back and forth, as the nunchuck represents your legs. Straight-arming is performed by jolting the Wiimote to the sides, and you will straight-arm on the proper side. A right jolt is a right-armed straight-arm. Left jolt is a left-armed straight-arm. WiiTP has nondiscriminatory, pre-canned attack swings and an aiming system that hasn't changed. It's not on the same level at all, James. WiiTP is getting mediocre treatment compared to Marvel UA and Madden 07...two third-party launch title ports...and that's totally obvious. Nintendo is being shown-up for their own new system's launch line-up by third-party developers based in NEW JERSEY. [quote]This has nothing to do with how Super Mario 64 or any game impacts on game control in general - it has nothing to do with making comparisons to control changes over the last twenty years.[/quote] We're talking about [b]fundamental changes to play control[/b]. I provided examples of true fundamental changes to play control. I should have included Ocarina of Time, now that I think about it. The game design introduced what became a staple of most third-person action/adventure games that followed: Z-targeting and lock-on. The game design changed to reflect the move to a full 3D world, it changed to reflect the N64 joystick (with pressure sensitivity), and it even changed to reflect the use of the Rumble Pak (Stone of Agony shaped like the Rumble Pak, anyone?). All of that fundamentally changed gameplay, for both the Zelda franchise and the industry in general. My examples are far from redundant. And that is very clear, James. Nintendo's own history is [b]completely stacked against[/b] the "WiiTP's sword Wiimote is a fundamental change to play control" statement. If I'm so wrong and misguided, you should have no problem at all going in there point-by-point and destroying my entire analysis. It'll be easy if my argument is as full of holes as you say it is, or if my examples are as redundant as your blanket conclusion says. [quote]So, seriously...something is going wrong there. You either need to read our posts more carefully, or you need to make sure that you're picking up on the right points.[/quote] Oh, no, I think I'm definitely picking up on the right points here. If I weren't, it'd be a hell of a lot easier for you to correct me, and you'd be able to do it without such roundabout and dodgy "it's redundant because nobody else mentioned it" kinds of tactics, when the points in question are solid, valid, and totally relevant to the focus of the discussion. [quote]I'm honestly not going to keep going over this. Either move on with the discussion or don't post at all - both Desbreko and myself are tired of the constant tangents and misinterpretations. Moving on with the discussion and keeping the thread on track are not an option, so this part of the discussion ends here. lol[/QUOTE] So what other discussion could there be? There haven't been any new hands-on previews in weeks. How could the thread stay on track when there's no discernible track to begin with until WiiTP is released in November? This discussion is the only thing keeping this thread active right now. And remember! I would have been perfectly, perfectly content to have left my views on the matter at those one or two sentences a while ago.

I gotta first give props to Charles' cameraphone here. That thing is awesome, and it's convinced me to look into replacing my current cell phone with one. I think the cameraphone is better for a nerd than a Wii, actually. The proof there is the fact that we've got footage of a local diner run, marveling over the heavier-than-two-infants pasta bowl (managed to finish it off a few days ago, go me!) and Charles' mega-cool/hot fajitas. Smash Melee is a lot of fun, too. I'm glad we finally popped it in. One thing I found interesting about Charles' comments is the platforming levels, because I'd never noticed before until now. I'd always just went with it and played. I guess I'm so used to the levels that it doesn't register anymore. So it was really cool to get a fresh perspective on it. What I also found cool was how balanced the characters still are, even after five years. I was holding my own as Bowser surprisingly well, and Sheik no longer feels like such a powerhouse. She really feels slower than I remember her, I like it a lot. Some time away from the game does wonders to refresh your approach, it really does. And yeah, those later matches were insane. One final big single move is definitely right. I was up to...350%+ at one point, I think. All praises to the beat-hole in Hyrule Temple. lol. I'm not sure, but I think at the end, Charles was beating me more than I was beating him. Though I guess it really was anyone's win when both of us were looking at 200%, haha.

[quote name='James']I just don't have as much free time as Papa Smurf, so I can't answer every single point, but I can probably answer a few.[/quote] Um, James, it's the other way around. I don't have as much free time as you do. Your number of posts in this thread is [b]THREE TIMES[/b] the number of mine. You've got [b]30[/b], bested only by Desbreko at 34, while I'm clocking it at [b]11[/b], including this reply right here. My posts in this thread have been days apart on occasion. I had two posts the entire weekend. You were replying within seconds of new posts. Lack of free time was obviously never an issue for you previously, and I don't see why it would suddenly become an issue now. Plus, I reply occasionally at 4:00 am due to insomnia, and my previous reply was an on-and-off thing over the weekend when I found a few spare minutes here and there, so it?s not as if I had the luxury of sitting around for five or six hours to reply. And anyway, your method of reply should be the same as before: sniping in one or two little remarks about how I have an "inaccurate view" or that I don't know what I'm talking about, or that I'm looking to expose something sinister, or that I'm being unfair, or whatever other lame and misguided accusations you've been trying to throw at me and never actually addressing my points in any real, meaningful way. [quote name='James']Game control is what dictates how you interact with the environment or the character - changing that control equates to changing one fundamental element of the game.[/quote] [quote=Desbreko]I'm starting to wonder if you're purposely dodging the point here. Never did I say your accuracy matters; that has absolutely nothing to do with the argument at hand. The point is that aiming with a gun is a different experience than using a joystick. This is where you're wrong. Dictionary.com defines "experience" as, "1. a particular instance of personally encountering or undergoing something". Personally, as in you yourself, not the character in the game. What happens on screen in the game is not the whole experience; it also includes your physical actions taken in interacting with the game. Thus, aiming a lightgun or the Wii remote is a different experience than using a joystick. fundamental "1. serving as, or being an essential part of, a foundation or basis; basic; underlying: fundamental principles; the fundamental structure." [center] A change in the play control, going from a joystick to pointer control, is a fundamental change. That is, it changes the way you control the game from the ground up. The joystick and the pointer have nothing in common other than that they're both being used to aim.[/QUOTE] [img]http://www.ntsc-uk.com/reviews/nds/PhoenixWrightGyakutenSaiban/03.jpg[/img] [/center] It's not only the game control in the physical sense that dictates how one interacts with the environment or character. In order for a game control to truly dictate how you interact with the game, the game itself--the programming--must be altered to take advantage of that physical game control. Adding in a joystick to a game that formerly used the D-pad, for example, does not guarantee a different play experience, nor does it automatically equate to a change of one fundamental element of the game, because said fundamental element of the game--the play control--goes both ways: the physical and the game's design itself. That is why Super Mario 64 DS was so terrible; the game's design itself had not been sufficiently altered to support the touch screen controls (and plus it was a lame idea to port it over to begin with, because there was no way in hell to make the touch screen work for that game). This is why a game like Duck Hunt or Time Crisis will not undergo fundamental changes if you only try to play with a joystick; the game design itself still needs to be re-worked so that the fundamental elements of play control are changed. It?s why using a Wiimote instead of a joystick is only a window-dressing change instead of a fundamental change to the play control. If the game itself remains unchanged, you might as well be playing with a dildo or a Boston Terrier, because holding a different item for the physical controller is a very small part of the gameplay experience, and for the ?experience? (?a particular instance of personally encountering or undergoing something?) to change, there must be a greater change than just a different controller shell. And the controller shell is all that?s been changed in this case. In fact, Desbreko pointing to that definition of ?experience? hurts his case more than he thinks it helps. Because how are you personally encountering or undergoing something by aiming with the Wiimote? You?re only holding a different item with which to aim a targeting reticle. You aren?t changing; you haven?t undergone any profound gamer developments. The game isn?t changing; you might as well still be using a joystick to aim if there are not significant changes made to the game design. The item you use to aim is different, yes. But that sure as hell is NOT a fundamental change to play control. It?s a window-dressing. The controller itself has always played second fiddle, so to speak, to game design. Game experiences have changed in the past when the game has been changed along with the controller. Only then was there a fundamental change to play control. Examples include Super Mario Bros, Super Mario 64, and even Smash Bros Melee. In Super Mario Bros, using a D-pad instead of the Atari joysticks would have been irrelevant had the game not been designed to take advantage of the new precision of the D-pad. It would be virtually impossible to do a speed-run in SMB with the Atari joysticks, because SMB is a game about speed and precision, which is precisely what the D-pad was used and designed for. There was a fundamental change to play control because a game like SMB was designed to take full advantage of the D-pad. In Super Mario 64, going from the D-pad to a joystick wouldn?t have mattered had you not been entering full 3D space. It wouldn?t have mattered had the game simply been treated as a 3D version of the 2D Mario games. Had Mario not been programmed with movement sensitivity and could run or walk depending on how much you pushed the joystick, you would not have had a fundamental change to play control. It?s not as huge an example as the Mario Bros games are, but Smash Bros Melee is yet another game where there were fundamental changes to play control because the game took advantage of certain aspects of the GCN controller. The shoulder button pressure sensitivity, for example, would not have provided a fundamental change to play control had HAL not introduced the new shield system; the new shield system does have a profound impact on combat, as well, because you need to decide which strength and duration of your shield will be best for the situation. The nubby C-stick would not have provided a fundamental change to play control had HAL not realized its potential for quick smash attacks. Even something as simple as how the B, A, and X/Y buttons are arranged, as well. An oversized A button surrounded by kidney-shaped X and Y buttons would never have provided a fundamental change to play control if HAL hadn?t mapped conventional attacks to A and the jump function to X/Y. And that, however insignificant it may seem, is tremendously important when it comes to play control and gameplay. Because HAL built portions of the game around that new controller layout, certain acrobatic characters now could perform short, quick hops to lead into a spike, and anyone who?s had some time playing Marth or Sheik knows how much that?s changed the flow of the game?how much of a fundamental change to play control that was. Those are all alterations that change both the play control and the gameplay on a fundamental level, because the game design reflects developer attention. In WiiTP so far, however, the alterations are NOT changing the play control or gameplay on a fundamental level. All that?s happening is instead of aiming and shooting with the joystick, you?re using the Wiimote. The fundamental play control system is still identical, however. Fundamental change to play control would be if we needed to draw the bow string by pulling the Wiimote back to our jaw bone. If the game was re-programmed to recognize just how far we pull the Wiimote back in order to determine how far and fast the arrow will move, THAT is a fundamental change to play control. That would be something with the significance of Super Mario 64. Simply slapping a lightgun or Wiimote in your hand to replace a joystick is never going to be the end-all, be-all of fundamentally changing or changing the fundamentals of play control. The play control fundamentally changes because of the game design changing. And the controller changing is only a fundamental change to play control if the game design is changed to reflect the introduction of that new controller (see Super Mario 64). And quite honestly, we aren?t seeing changes to the game design when it comes to WiiTP?s Wiimote functions. We?re still doing the same thing in terms of gameplay. Shooting a bow hasn?t fundamentally changed yet. Attacking with the sword hasn?t fundamentally changed yet. All that?s changed is what we?re holding in our hands. How we?re physically interacting is changing. But not anything more than that. Fundamental changes to play control always have and always will depend on whether the game design itself reflects a new controller. [quote]So you're saying a change in the way you interact with the game isn't a fundamental change, yet increasing the speed of enemies is? That's a seriously incorrect use of the word "fundamental." A change in the speed of enemies is not a fundamental change. They're the same enemies, they simply move faster. That's tweaking a few variables in what is otherwise the same basic enemy.[/quote] As if putting a Wiimote in your hand instead of a joystick without significantly changing the game design to reflect that new controller is a correct use of the word ?fundamental?? lol. Come on, Desi, be sensible here. If the speed of the enemies is altered for a new controller (which is what I?ve been talking about all along) then it absolutely is a fundamental change. Do you think it wouldn?t be a fundamental change if they altered the speed of the enemies in Time Crisis when adjusting the game for use with a joystick or home console lightguns? That?s a case of the game design reflecting a new or different controller. [quote] The entire philosophy behind the Wii is built on this premise. The motion sensors and pointers are supposed to be a new, different, and easier ways to interact with--i.e. experience--games.[/quote] The philosophy behind Wii is largely POTENTIAL right now. You CAN do a lot of neat things with the controller. The IDEA behind the controller is potentially revolutionary. The GOAL of the Wiimote is radically different. But the EXPERIENCE of using the Wiimote depends on what the games are designed to do, on how the games are designed to expand gameplay and play control options to utilize the potential, the idea, and the goal of the Wiimote. WiiTP is not such a game. [quote name='Desbreko']It seemed to me that Alex was arguing that the Wii version is pointless and not worth buying under any circumstances. That was the impression I'd been getting, and I don't recall him ever making any distinctions. That's mainly what I take issue with.[/quote] When I?ve been talking about how you?re required to spend 300+ dollars to get to play with three or four piddly little Wiimote features? 300 dollars is the price to play WiiTP, Desi. If they?d included WiiTP as the pack-in game (which would have made a hell of a lot of sense, and would have even been more earth-shattering), then WiiTP would definitely be worth buying/playing since the lack of Wiimote features wouldn?t be as troublesome due to being able to get the game and the system for 250. Had they forgone WiiTP as a pack-in, they at least should at least release it with a lower price in the 40 dollar range; that?s industry standard for expansions/ports anyway. I had thought I was being totally clear throughout this thread (and really, I was being totally clear). We?re being expected to spend 300 dollars to play one game for a few months until we get better games than we see at launch. The Wii modifications to TP are minor at best and certainly are not worth dropping 300+ to try. [quote]You've got every right to criticize Wii-TP for things you dislike about it. But you don't have the right to tell other people what they should and shouldn't be excited about, or how they should or shouldn't spend their money. That's what I'm getting at here; you seem to be acting like your personal opinion of Wii-TP is fact and applies to everyone.[/quote] Des, do you look at the launch list and see anything else worth buying? Do you think Nintendo does? I certainly doubt that they do, because otherwise we wouldn?t be getting WiiTP as a rush-job port with a sole purpose of padding the launch line-up. The Wiimote features are minimal at best and we?re being expected to pay 300 dollars for them. That is nothing to be excited about. We don?t see people going ?Hot dog! I?m gonna pay 300 dollars to use a pointer wand thing to do stuff I can easily do with a joystick! Wheee doggy!? Why don?t we see that? Because people don?t get excited (in a good way) about stupid, exorbitant, quasi-price-gouging. And for 300 dollars, you?re only getting the GCN version of TP plus nondiscriminatory pre-canned sword attacks, an aiming system that hasn?t changed, and a weird defensive/offensive maneuver that had tons more potential than we see in WiiTP. Why are you excited about that? [quote]neither am I simply taking the bait, so to speak.[/quote] Uh, Desbreko?you?re paying 300 dollars on launch day because the only game you want to play is the exact game that Nintendo ported over to Wii to leverage Wii sales on launch day. You totally took the bait. lol [quote]Like I said, I'd be buying a Wii for numerous other games besides Wii-TP[/quote] And those ?numerous other games? are TBA 2007. Why get the Wii now? [quote]I'm confident that I have nothing to lose by buying it at launch, so why shouldn't I?[/quote] Because despite whatever confidence you may have, the system and games are still an untested technology. You and I both know there are going to be months (I?d figure at least four) following release where all sorts of previously unrealized technical issues are going to be cropping up all across the country. That?s always happened and it always will happen with new consoles, new operating systems, new computers, video cards, TVs, etc. It is NEVER a good idea to buy a new technology upon release. Waiting half a year is usually a very smart thing to do because by that time, the company will have had time to address any bugs that have popped up between then and launch. Occasionally, like with the original Xbox, there were some nasty issues, too. I can recall two. One involved the power block inside the Xbox being prone to melting or explosion or something. The second issue had to do with the disc drive breaking down. Granted, Nintendo?s products are of a bit higher quality than Microsoft?s, but the Wii features a lot more components and complex machinations than even the GCN did, and relies on a previously untried motion sensor/pointer/gyroscope method of control. We read about a few glitches in the hands-on previews of Metroid, Marvel UA, and Red Steel (all Wiimote-related, by the way), and the Wiimote had some quirks in WiiTP. Those types of bugs and glitches won?t be totally ironed out before launch. My advice is to hold off if you?re able to, because you?ll have a much better chance of having a clean experience. [quote]In the context of my argument the comparison is valid. The situation is exactly the same as with any other game in that there isn't enough time to include everything they'd like to. Thus, expecting everything you'd like is unrealistic. Simple as that. [/quote] Even in the context of your argument, the ?I wish we could have included this? statement, your comparison is invalid because other games do not apply here, because my point deals exclusively with WiiTP, and your argument tries to broadly apply that point to other games. What you?re trying to say is totally incoherent and further represents the kind of broad, bland, basic and naïve viewpoint that is now obviously required to defend Nintendo here. Anyone can see that the only way you or I can look at Nintendo?s actions positively is if we put on blinders to everything that matters and just focus on one or two vague ideas or conceptual arguments that don?t translate well at all to any other context?and that barely hold up in this context, on top of that. [quote]What you're getting into here is a bit beyond what I've been arguing, though. I don't presume to know what's best for Nintendo, or whether Wii-TP will help or hurt them in the long run. I may be able to make some slightly educated guesses, but I'm no expert. (And I kind of doubt you know much better than I do, but whatever.) So I can't really say anything either way about whether releasing Wii-TP is a good or bad move on Nintendo's part.[/quote] Desi, how long have you and I been playing video games? We?ve got, what, 20+ years between the two of us? We?ve been on the ?frontlines,? as it were, when new consoles were released. We saw the reactions to certain revelations of the past two decades. Hell, WE had some of those reactions to those revelations and announcements. We as gamers have been the ones deciding which system succeeded and which ones failed miserably. We know and feel what analysts only see on a graph. And you and I both know that what Nintendo is doing here is absolutely stupid. You and I both know they had better alternatives. Just like you and I both know they should have stuck to their guns and ignored the Wii entirely when it came to Twilight Princess. Just like you and I both know they?re blowing their leg off here with a 12-gauge by giving these weird mixed messages with WiiTP, GCN TP, the systems, the release dates, the arbitrary ******** delays and so on. WiiTP, as it?s been handled by Nintendo with such an obvious lack of planning ahead and foresight in relation to both the port itself and their launch line-up for Wii, is absolutely a bad move on Nintendo?s part. You know that just as well as I do. [quote]But my point was that, as someone who's playing the games, getting Wii-TP as it is is better than nothing.[/quote] ?Better than nothing? is still a variation of the ****-to-**** comparison. You don?t make WiiTP look attractive at all by comparing it to nothing. [quote]Sure, it may not take full advantage of the controller, but you said yourself that most of the other games are gimmicky as well, so how is Wii-TP any worse?[/quote] Yeah, do you see me snapping up a Wii at launch? Most of the other games are gimmicky, definitely. But at least some of the other ports are far more well-developed in terms of Wiimote integration than WiiTP, ports like Madden 07, Marvel UA, and Far Cry Vengeance. [quote]Again, arguing from assumption. You're assuming there will be a price drop or something before SSBB and the rest of the big titles are released, yet we have zero information to support that. Personally, I'd be really surprised if they dropped the price of the Wii so soon after launch, especially when it's already cheaper than both of the other consoles.[/quote] Des, look. The Wii only has their actual killer apps coming out next year, in 2007. They?ve released their console too early at a price that is really too high for what the Wii is (a slightly more powerful GCN/Xbox). You can point to the web browsing, news and weather features all you want, but they?re worthless to a gaming console and their inclusion here contradicts Nintendo?s original philosophy of ?only gaming? anyway. I?m sure Charles will say something about this in his reply, but it deserves to be repeated: Nintendo is now doing the exact same thing it criticized its competitors for doing. They?ve released a console too early, with too high a price, with a complete lack of worthwhile launch titles, without a clear and defined focus, and with a now painfully diluted philosophy behind the console. 2007 is when Wii should be hitting its stride, if it follows the pattern of the DS. 2007 is when the truly attractive titles and the killer apps are coming. 2007 is when Nintendo needs to make a difference. Reggie has already said how Nintendo makes money on Wii immediately, so I can?t imagine why 250 is going to remain the price for very much longer. I?m expecting the price change announcement either a few months before or at E3 2007. It makes good business sense and it?s a solid move for everyone. [quote]So, if the price doesn't drop, I stand to gain the control changes in Wii-TP. If the price does drop I'll have lost maybe $50. I'm fairly confident that I'll be buying more than just Wii-TP before the first price drop, so that's a risk I'm willing to take.[/quote] Okay, how is it a gain? You still bought minor control changes for 300 dollars. And how will you be buying more than WiiTP before the first price drop? The games you listed previously are TBA 2007, and Final Fantasy Crystal Bearers doesn?t even have a tentative release date yet. [quote]Fair enough. But if that's not the case, then I have to ask, why are you trying to dictate my preferences to me?[/quote] One, because I originally was going to leave my views on the matter at the one or two sentences last week. And two, because since you?ve started explaining this, I?ve seen absolutely no solid, valid reasoning for buying a Wii now as opposed to waiting to see what happens over the next few months. Your defenses of Nintendo have been asinine and foolish, your reasons for wanting WiiTP aren?t reasons at all, and generally, I don?t believe you?ve thought any of this through. [quote]Wait, let me get this straight. Just because an opinion is realistic and others agree with it, it's automatically an objective fact?[/quote] Yes. Exactly. You and I are the only ones discussing this here, right? We both agree that SSBM?s controls are close to perfect. Therefore, for the purposes of our discussion here, it?s an objective fact that SSBM?s controls are just about perfect. And go ahead and take a survey. Ask a few hundred experienced Smash Bros players what they think of the controls in Melee. Even better, ask a few hundred competitive Smash Bros players and ask a few hundred casual Smash Bros players. You think it?s just an opinion that SSBM?s controls are damn near perfect and have very little room for improvement? If they weren?t tight as hell, precise, and damn near perfect, you simply would not see SSBM being played at such high levels of competitive play. And that?s the truth. [quote]On a related note, why do you think so many PC games allow you to map keys however you like? They acknowledge that there is no perfect control scheme so they let you customize it to your liking.[/quote] Re-map options or not, you?ll often find gamers enjoying the industry standard ASDW. I forget which game it was that first introduced that control layout, but obviously it is regarded as a standard that few games and gamers deviate from. [quote]Efficient does not equal perfect. Perfect means that the given control scheme is the best it can ever be, for everyone and without condition. Efficient simply means that the control scheme isn't any more complicated than it has to be.[/quote] You don?t have the counter you think you do. Re-read what I said. I?m talking about efficiency in a discussion comparing the GCN controller to the Wiimote. I never said that the GCN controller is simply ?efficient? for Smash Bros. I said it was the ?MOST efficient? out of the two controllers, though this was implied the entire time. Now, since efficiency operates on a scale, you have less efficient controls and more efficient controls. And sometimes, you have the MOST efficient controls, like the GCN controller for SSBM. Note MOST efficient. And note I?ve been saying SSBM?s controls on the GCN controller are ?damn near perfect? and ?generally close to perfect.? Nowhere did I ever state the controls were perfect, and nowhere did I ever state that being efficient was being perfect. What I?ve stated is that the GCN controller is the ?most efficient? and that the controls in SSBM are ?damn near perfect,? the latter statement being one you agreed with from the start. [quote]No, my hands don't remain perfectly still while playing SSBM. But they certainly don't make fast, sudden movements either. I don't mean this as an insult or anything, but if yours do, I think you need to work on your scare reflex. Lol[/quote] We all jump a bit here and there with the regular GCN controllers. But do you really expect your hands to stay that still when you?re doing a smash attack with the joystick and the A button on the Wiimote? Remember that smashing with the GCN controller is much more stable than smashing would be with the Wiimote, since the controller is basically a nunchuck. Mapping anything to the motion sensor for a fighting game is a bad idea, especially when a flick of the wrist is usually all that?s required for the Wiimote to register action. [quote]Also, if the developers were smart about it, they'd let you disable the feature or remap it as you wish, maybe even set the sensitivity yourself.[/quote] If you?re going to be disabling it or lowering the sensitivity?why even bother with Wiimote functionality in the first place? Seems to me that disabling the motion sensor would defeat the purpose of ever bringing the game control to the Wiimote. See what?s happening here, Desbreko? Despite your best efforts in trying to counter my point regarding how amazing and damn near perfect the GCN controller is for Smash Bros, despite your best efforts to portray me as some arrogant, insensitive and opinionated authoritarian prick, despite your best efforts to provide examples of alternate control schemes?it all failed miserably, dude. [quote]Even in SSBM the C stick is completely unnecessary and I never use it.[/quote] It?s used for smash training for those new to the game, so they are able to get the feel of what a smash attack feels like. Once the player becomes proficient, however, it acts more as combo augmentation and edge-guards. I use it on occasion. It has its uses. [center]This post was brought to you by the letters S, T, F, and U, and: [img]http://blog.kir.com/archives/Nuclear_explosion_22.jpg[/img] [/center]

[QUOTE=James]You are referring to development time, right? Let's just establish that first. You're saying that it's unusual for these types of changes to occur so late in a game's development. What I'm telling you is that this is simply incorrect. Many games go through these types of changes (and more complex ones) this late in their development cycle. If that is not what you are saying, then please clarify it, because the point seems to keep changing.[/quote] James, indeed I AM referring to development time. And these changes, reasons, and decisions we see regarding WiiTP are unlike anything we've seen before. You're talking about the usual dev changes in usual dev cycles. I'm talking about a quick decision port at nine months away from launch so Nintendo could have something halfway attractive and decent at launch. [quote]The problem is that you are hair-splitting and running around in circles here. I am making distinctions, but you are ignoring them. So let me repeat: You are telling me that these changes are the equivalent of a shotgun wedding. They are not. Nintendo has had plenty of time to implement these changes - they've had almost one year. That is a long time in any game's development. Therefore, nobody should be concerned that Nintendo is simply riding roughshot over the game, because that simply isn't the case. *snip GCN-Wii tech similarities* So, to do a direct port, it would probably take a month or less - this is without controller changes or additions. If you work from this basis, Nintendo still had months (well over six months) to implement additions and controller changes. Most of this time would have been dedicated to testing and analysis. As a result, nobody can say with any degree of authority that this is a rushed port, or a port that suffers from the transition.[/quote] When there's only a nine-month window with which a company is adding in a small handful of features to a quickly ported game because the launch list is absolutely abysmal, and said features turn out to be less than impressive (and some downright laughable, like the vertical Wiimote swing occasionally translating into horizontal sword slices), that is most certainly "riding roughshot" over the game. [quote]First of all, I made that comment in August of 2005 - well before E3 2006 came along.[...]You have to remember that when the quote was made, the Wii's technical specifications were not fully understood by anyone outside Nintendo. In fact, this was even before the controller was unveiled (that was in October 2005).[...][b]At that point in time, the quote was assuming that the Wii was going to be significantly more powerful[/b]...it was also assuming that the game would be entirely redeveloped for Wii (rather than simply ported from GameCube).[...]Again, you're pulling out a complete red herring. This is a poor way to argue a case, Alex. lol Since you like bolding text, I'll bold my response. [b]I was talking about moving the game from GameCube to Wii...not simply porting it and releasing it on both consoles.[/b] It's just not worth pulling out random quotes and ignoring the context.[/quote] It was a stupid assumption to make, and a tragic mistake on your part. We know Nintendo's philosophy regarding the system arms race, and we've always known that Revolution was not going in the Tim Allen-esque "MORE POWER harharhorhararr" direction. We knew this from Iwata's comments circa May 2005 (three months before your comments), when he explained that Nintendo was going in the complete opposite direction with regards to Sony and Microsoft's arms race. We knew this from earlier that May, at E3 2005, when it was revealed that Revolution was going to be 2-3 times more powerful than GCN, while 360 was approximately 13-15 times more powerful than the current Xbox, and the PS3 was roughly 35x more powerful than the PS2. And as vague as those numbers were, it was asinine and foolish to conclude that Revolution was going to be "significantly more powerful" than GCN and then use that to explain why moving TP to Revolution wouldn't be worth it. Come now. Don't pass off those comments as "there was really no way of knowing at the time" because there most certainly was a way of knowing at the time: by reading. It wasn't some huge secret that Revolution/Wii wasn't going to be "significantly more powerful." That was totally obvious by how carefully Iwata was choosing his words. Nintendo wasn't going for more power; they were going for a different type of controller. [quote]Secondly, the comment must be taken in context - you yourself are pulling a classic O'Reilly by disregarding the quotation's placement in the discussion.[/quote] Here's a thought. The context hasn't changed at all. There you were talking about how it would be a poor business decision to move TP to the Wii. But that's exactly what happened, James. Nintendo has all but cancelled the GCN TP. They've arbitrarily delayed it so it'll release a month after WiiTP launches. They've given WiiTP total preferential treatment, even including forking the customer between dropping 300 dollars to play one game at launch since the rest of the launch list is totally forgettable or waiting a month to play a version of the game that might as well have been destroyed anyway. Face it. Nintendo doesn't give a **** about the GCN version. You might point to them still releasing it as proof that they still care. That's not proof of them caring at all; they're only releasing it to save face with the consumer. And that, my dear Aussie brethren, is totally obvious. Don't kid yourself here. Nintendo hasn't cared about the GCN TP for almost a year now. This situation is exactly the situation (barring one tiny delay announcement Nintendo needs to make today) that you and Charles were discussing back in August 2005. [quote]I am only referring to ports here.[/quote] As am I. Re-read that portion of my post. The changes made to games like Marvel UA and Madden 07 (both ports of other games) kick the **** out of what we see in WiiTP. Those two games right there offer far, far better implementations of the Wiimote functionality, [i]because they weren't quick, last-minute decision port-jobs[/i]. You tried to say that WiiTP is getting better treatment than other ports, and that's just a load of crap when you look at what the other ports have to offer. In WiiTP, that nine months gave us a sword control that makes no distinction between any type of swipe except for a jab, a shield bash that is nothing more than a jab with the nunchuck attachment, and bow control that barely qualifies as anything. In Marvel UA, however? Every direction in the swing of the Wiimote does something different. They condensed an entire control scheme onto a motion sensor and it sounds very solid. Madden 07 is giving us throw control, kick control (with slice influence depending on how much we tilt the controller), jukes, spins, stiff-arms, and even independent arm control to bat the ball out of the air. Even Far Cry Vengeance is being considerably improved, including feral attacks being mapped to the Wiimote motion sensor (and the Wiimote actually discriminates between directions here, unlike WiiTP). If you're talking about the total gimmick ports, then yeah, WiiTP is getting better treatment. But that's like comparing dogsh-t to catsh-t; in the end, after the comparison, both are still going to be sh-tty. [quote]You can talk about how you don't like the canned sword attacks, but every Zelda has had these - pressing the same button to achieve different swipes is no different to simply moving the controller.[/quote] When canned sword attacks was all the previous versions of Zelda could do, I was fine with that. It's when we could theoretically jerk-off the Wiimote and still go through the same canned attack swings where I get annoyed, because that is just totally sloppy and represents certainly a roughshot port. And jacking-off the Wiimote is not as exaggerated as you will want to imply; there is no discrimination between the Wiimote and the sword attacks. [quote]Right. What is your point? That the game had a multi-year development cycle and was delayed multiple times has nothing to do with converting the game to Wii. lol[/quote] Oh, it absolutely has something to do with converting the game to Wii. Nintendo said the delays were to add dungeons and such, right? At first, that seemed to be the case. Then they basically said to hell with the GCN version and jumped ship to Wii. That timing is way too good to be coincidental. I can see that. Charles can see that. Most people can see that. You can't. Why? [quote]I ignored neither of your options - I simply said that these are the only options you're providing. Both are biased and reflect your own inaccurate view of the development process.[/quote] Inaccurate view? Nintendo sees a sub-par launch line-up (and it is sub-par), delays GCN TP accordingly, takes nine months to add some minor, piddly modifications (and some modifications that are totally unimpressive) to the GCN TP, and then turns TP into a launch title for Wii. That's a quick, last-minute decision on Nintendo's part, and judging how the modifications are less than stellar Nintendo quality, I'd say that's a slap-dash port-job that happened only because they needed a launch title worth getting. That isn't an "inaccurate view of the development process" James. It's reality. Defend Nintendo all you want. They just ****ed themselves three or four times over. This entire release and port fiasco reeks of corporate slime. And that's obvious to everyone here except you and Desbreko. [quote]I'm simply not going to go into an entire debate about the launch list. I'm just not going to go there at the moment - I barely have the time to keep chasing my tail here, lol. Maybe we can discuss the launch lineup in a new thread when the system is actually available. ^_^[/quote] It wouldn't be an entire debate because apart from WiiTP, [i]there is no launch line-up[/i]. We have a few games of interest (Madden, Red Steel, Marvel UA) but like Charles said, those games are questionable quality-wise, so that still brings us back to square one: that if Nintendo didn't quickly port TP over to Wii and bare-bone the few modifications we have, they'd have nothing truly attractive at launch. [quote]Well, again...all of this is based on what? Ultimately it's based on an assumption.[/quote] It's not an assumption. It's an educated guess. Iwata has said TP is the last "traditional Zelda game." What have we had in the traditional Zelda games? Exactly what I was talking about in my previous quote. Stupid, slow, stationary enemies. Pattern-plagued boss fights. Slow, methodical pacing. [quote]Regardless how the AI behaves or how the levels are designed, playing Zelda on Wii is going to feel completely different because of the interaction method used.[...]movement and game interaction are fundamentally different on Wii - not necessarily better, but different. That's my point.[...]Whether or not the enemies are different isn't really relevant here. If you find it more difficult to aim your arrow with the remote, because of the added sensitivity and physical movement, this may change the way you approach certain situations in the game - it might make you more cautious, or if you are better with this system, it might make you more confident and more willing to dive into the action. In the end, it will have an impact on the overall game experience.[/quote] It'll only feel different if you can't take as much time as you want in shooting enemies or solving puzzles or whatever. No matter if you play with a joystick or a Wiimote, as long as the AI still behaves in the same ancient pattern-based loop (as per traditional Zelda games), the control won't feel any different because you're not required at all to react faster, to shoot faster, to aim faster, or to move faster. And if still you end up treating the game like another Time Crisis...the only impact the Wiimote will have is demonstrating how dated traditional Zelda is (and one of the greatest ironies regarding the port of WiiTP). It's the Halo PC port syndrome. You have a console game designed around a joystick that is suddenly moved to a free mouse control method without the AI being dramatically improved, which ends up being detrimental to the game to those who think about it critically, which makes the game substandard, which then proves without a doubt why it was a bad idea to do a port in the first place when all that was being added was window-dressing controls with never addressing the game itself. [quote]No...not at all. I'm not saying that casual gamers don't know about the GCN version being delayed - I'm saying that many simply won't care. Many casual gamers don't even play Zelda, for starters. lol[/quote] Then why say "Most people won't know or care" when referring to the GCN delay? Regarding your casual gamers/Zelda statement...I find the best places to observe gaming tendencies are in the stores, public places, etc. And you would be surprised just how many casual gamers play Zelda. You've got moms with their kids, high school students both male and female, college students...many casual gamers [i]do[/i] play Zelda. [quote]You are assuming that all casual gamers are Zelda players. Most are not. Most casual gamers (and non-gamers) don't even own a GameCube - and they are certainly not going to buy one just for Zelda.[/quote] So instead they're going to drop a little over 300 dollars for a system so they can play one game? Because of the controller? You mean the one that'll cost them 60 bucks a pop? Because of a back catalog of games that only presently consist of GCN games...a system said customer never even owned in the first place? Why would they want to buy older games for a system they obviously never felt was worth buying? Because the older games have dropped to rock-bottom prices, as well as the peripherals? If those older games are the AAA titles on GCN (and why would anyone buy anything else?), it's doubtful they'll find them for cheap. Hell, Mario Kart Double Dash still retails for close to release price. [quote]You also have to remember that many casual gamers simply aren't as informed as you or I. Plenty of people are going to simply say "Yeah, I'd rather play this game on a new system than an old one". Sure, it's not something you or I would say, but plenty will say it, I assure you.[/quote] You're so confident about that kind of thought process? Recent trip to EB Games demonstrated otherwise. Mom with two kids. Accessory purchase for the first DS. They look at the DS stylus selection (only version there is the Lite stylus). They ask for help because they're not sure if Lite is the same as what they need. The employee explains there are two different types of the stylus due to Nintendo releasing a redesigned version of the DS. The mom's reaction is not pleased at all. "What? We just bought this a few months ago and already they came out with a new one? *sigh*" The employee didn't say anything to try to mitigate her disappointment, because he knew she was right. The mom is a non-gamer. The kids are casual gamers. And the company they all were disappointed by was Nintendo. [quote]Well...let's put it in perspective. $250 for the system, $50 for the game, controller is included and no memory stick is required (game saves can be stored on the system's Flash ROM). So it's certainly not an expensive proposition - this is particularly true if you compare it to everything else that is available on the market in the next generation (Xbox 360 and PS3, for example).[/quote] Who cares about the price of 360 and PS3? Again, comparing **** to **** doesn't make anything look better. Plus, non-gamers will look at 250 and still cringe. Hell, even casual and hardcore gamers heard about Nintendo's pricing and were disappointed. Wii is a few times more powerful than GCN. Nintendo is selling a modified GCN for 250 dollars. That doesn't sit right with any gamer who's been following anything about the Wii. [quote]I don't quite know how you figure that Nintendo isn't intending to appeal to hardcore gamers with Wii.[/quote] Simple. Their entire mantra for Wii has been THE KEY IS BEING INCLUSIVE. Look at the demo videos for Wii, the early commercials, the current ads, the speeches by Iwata and Miyamoto. They mention the hardcore gamers, but their focus here is non-gamers and/or casual gamers. And yet as it stands, the hardcore gamers are still likely to be their only customers, because Nintendo made some very bad decisions regarding the pricing, the games, the ad campaigns...pretty much everything required to sell the system to the "Inclusive" target audience. [quote]No chance for preparation? [b]How does that have anything to do with hardcore gamers?[/b] [b] Hardcore gamers are already pre-ordering the thing[/b]. It's no different to any other launch in that sense.[/quote] Where are these pre-orders happening? Nowhere in the States, that's for sure, and North America is going to be one of the earliest launches (if not the earliest) for Wii. And no chance for preparation has everything to do with hardcore gamers, based on what you said: " For the hardcore gamers...well, WiiTP is a bonus if you own a Wii." Nobody owns a Wii yet. Nobody can even pre-order in the States. WiiTP can't be a bonus for hardcore gamers when those hardcore gamers aren't even able to reserve the system. Frankly, your defense of Nintendo here is incoherent. [quote]If these people are "hardcore gamers" and they've had the game pre-ordered for that long, then surely they would know that a month-long delay is absolutely peanuts for a Nintendo game. Start thinking about every Nintendo game that has seen a significant delay and it will start to become clearer.[/quote] Most gamers (usually especially the ones who pre-order games) know the difference between a development delay and an arbitrary ******** delay, James. Every other Nintendo game was delayed due to development. This month delay for GCN TP is an arbitrary ******** delay solely designed to leverage more Wii sales. [quote]The hardcore gamers will be the ones who will line up at midnight for Wii, too. The hardcore gamers are the ones who will still buy Zelda despite the delay. The hardcore gamers are the ones who will probably buy both Zeldas in some cases.[/quote] And they're going to be the ones truly supporting Wii in any way at all. Nintendo [i]will[/i] miss their target audience. I used to doubt that, but based on what happened in EB Games a while back, I no longer have any doubts in my mind, at least regarding how the Wii will do in the States here. [quote]It's not a federal case, it's a month-long game delay. Those of us who have been playing Nintendo games for years are used to much worse.[/quote] Again, difference between development delays and ******** arbitrary delays. [quote]Not at all. The translation would be as it says - we're getting a port. And it's a port that goes much further than many other ports. This is a good thing and not a bad thing.[/quote] That's not what those sentences mean at all. lol. When someone says "we're lucky we're getting this" or "better than nothing" does NOT imply "we're getting a port." The language used is nothing more than a different way of saying "at least we're getting this." James, don't try to re-define what you said, because what you said is plenty obvious to anyone here who can [i]read[/i]. You established a comparison between the WiiTP port and "nothing" when you said "the port is better than nothing." That comparison is [i]clear as hell[/i]. Any Linguistics professor would tell you that. And why did you compare WiiTP to nothing? Because you wanted to make it clear that we, the gaming public, were "lucky" to be getting anything. But in order to say that, you had to compare a game to nothing...and when the only way for a game to appear impressive is by comparing it to nothing, that speaks VOLUMES about how good the game actually is. And go ahead and compare it to something like Marvel UA or Madden 07 since it would be a stronger comparison, then watch as the piddly little offerings in WiiTP get completely obliterated by far deeper and much more precise and impressive port-jobs. [quote]As I keep saying, you don't have to buy the Wii version, nor do you have to like it. But that doesn't mean the port is somehow bad or Nintendo somehow did something wrong - it's okay not to buy it or like it, you don't have to justify that by trying to imply something sinister about it. lol[/quote] Sinister? James, I've been showing lousy business and development. That is far from trying to imply something sinister. [quote]First of all, I'm not conceding anything.[/quote] Yes you are. lol. You're conceding that this version with bare-bone modifications is good enough, and then comparing those bare-bone modifications to the GCN version. That's a ****-to-**** comparison again. [quote]No, it's an entire post that takes forever to respond to. Haha But good try! ~_^[/quote] Here's a thought. Concede the point instead of laughing about it. You tried to say I don't know the meaning of a sentence, yet I quoted myself in this very thread and proved you wrong. The only reason my long posts take any time to reply to is because I'm unpacking that single sentence. [quote]Anyway, I think the bottom line with all of this stuff is simply that the proof is in the pudding.[/QUOTE] Apart from it being quite possibly the worst phrase I've ever read in my life, it's the truth. The proof here that Nintendo has screwed up pretty much everything about the Wii launch and TP in both versions is blatantly obvious everywhere you look. Those that continue to deny it, even with all of the evidence present, are resisting what everyone else can plainly see. [quote name='Desbreko']Looking at what we are getting, Wii-TP has some advantages that will make it worth more than GCN-TP to some people.[/quote] Again, though, does that make it worth paying 300 dollars to play? That's all you'd be getting for a few months, easily. [quote]You can't just assume, "It's going to be like this," and base your arguments off that; it's an extremely shaky foundation.[/quote] Like I explained to James, and like Charles said, there are such things as safe assumptions and guesses. We've been told by Iwata & CO. that TP will be the last traditional Zelda game. That means everything we see in both WiiTP and GCN TP will change dramatically come Wii Zelda. And what I'm expecting in Wii Zelda is not so outrageous, especially considering the Nintendo hype machine for Wii Zelda has already started. Wii Zelda is guaranteed to blow every other Zelda game away, if only because it's going to be the first true Wii Zelda. We as consumers are perfectly within our rights to expect certain elements for Zelda on the Wii, and we're perfectly within our rights to use those expectations to judge a launch title port of a GCN game. Because that's exactly the kind of consumer environment Nintendo has established with the Wiimote and a console originally called "Revolution." [quote]Oh, I don't know, maybe with the words, "nothing to get excited about," and, "boring"? I don't know about you, but I'd use the word mediocre to describe something unexciting and even boring. The fact is, there are a lot of people out there excited about using the Wii controller for TP, and all you've been offering as to why they shouldn't be is, "I'm not excited so you shouldn't be either."[/quote] Considering that Nintendo made the decision to rush TP for the Wii launch so they could have something remotely resembling a killer app, I have every right to be as hard on them as I am. They put themselves out there for scrutiny and critical examination when they announced a Wii port nine months before launch. That right there is reason enough to be harder on them than usual, because that was a bone-headed move. Also considering that WiiTP is a first-party Zelda title for a new system...the fact that we're only getting the basics is boring and just not exciting at all. It's also embarrassing, to be honest. [quote]So what if the motion sensor control won't be as expansive as the first Zelda designed specifically for the Wii? Why should that stop me from enjoying what motion control there is?[/quote] If your standards are that low (no offense, don't mean this to sound as mean as it does), then by all means, go for it. But it's still a carrot designed to boost Wii sales. The good stuff is coming later, just like the DS. Super Mario 64 DS was the carrot back then. WiiTP is the carrot now. Neither were/are true killer apps. Super Mario 64 on N64 was a killer app. Super Mario World was a killer app. Super Mario Bros was a killer app. Even New Super Mario Bros was a killer app for DS Lite. [quote]So basically you're saying they should have been done Wii-TP all or nothing? Fully integrate the new controller into every possible action it could work well for or not release Wii-TP at all? That's a completely unrealistic expectation. I mean, do you realize that if game design took this approach nothing would ever be released? So many interviews with game developers include the question, "Is there anything you wished you could've included in the game but didn't have time for?" and almost all of them state that yes, there's always more that they wished to include but lacked time for.[/quote] Des, pointing to other games to try to broadly apply my point is a bad move, because WiiTP is [i]not[/i] like other games. This isn't some regular development cycle of a game that's coming out in the middle of a console's life cycle. WiiTP, like Charles said, [i]is[/i] the Wii launch. It was a late decision late in the development cycle that left little time to do anything substantial with the Wiimote features before WiiTP had to be on shelves. And because of that late decision, Nintendo painted themselves into a corner, so to speak: either delay WiiTP and lose pretty much Wii's launch, or release it with less than substantial Wiimote functionality and have gamers start questioning whether Wii is worth buying at launch, due to the gimmicky nature of its entire launch line-up. The most desirable option is never to announce a Wii version at all. This would have required significantly more planning ahead, however, because in addition to closely evaluating their options regarding WiiTP, they would have also had to make sure to have one or two killer apps at launch so they could fill the gap of WiiTP, as well as making sure the non-killer apps in the launch line-up make the system worth buying. [quote]So, like I've been saying this entire time, Wii-TP is not worth it if you don't plan on buying other games.[...]Before Wii-TP was ever announced I planned on buying a Wii for Super Smash Bros. Brawl, Super Mario Galaxy, FFCC: The Crystal Bearers, and possibly Metroid Prime 3: Corruption.[...]And I never buy a system before deciding what games I want for it. I simply don't have the money to do that and risk ending up with something I regret. The games make me buy the system, not the other way around.[/quote] So why even buy at launch? 3/5 of those games aren't even coming until 2007, and we both know there are going to be major deals later on, probably even as early as Q2 next year...I'd imagine right in time for Metroid and/or Smash Bros Brawl. If you'd only be getting WiiTP at launch, why spend 300 right there? Realistically, what is so needed at launch that you couldn't get for better later? This is one of the questions I asked myself. [quote]My mistake. Insert the word "preference" in place of "choice" and it still works, though.[/quote] You made another mistake before that one. I'm not justifying anything by bashing WiiTP. I made the decision a while ago, and I went through a pretty bizarre decision process before arriving at said decision. Charles can confirm this. My reasoning I've been stating here came before my decision to pass on Wii until I can get my hands on Metroid. There's no justification, because it's [i]only[/i] a justification if the thought process comes [i]after[/i] the decision in question. Which it doesn't. So I'm not trying to justify anything for myself here. [quote]You're saying I can't recognize a statement as a personal opinion simply because I happen to agree with it? I don't even know how that's supposed to make sense.[/quote] Des, when have you known me to consider the very idea of an opinion, especially when I know I have a very clear and realistic view on a topic, and when I know that you agree with me in the first place? [quote]Yes, I like SSBM's controls. Yes, I think they're about as close to perfect as they can get. Yes, I wouldn't like it if they made you use the Wii remote. I agree with you on every count, but notice all of the "I"s in there? They reflect my personal tastes, not an objective standard of quality. Saying, "I like this way the best, therefore it is the best way," is completely illogical.[/quote] Careful, Des. I don't think it's the best way because I like that way best. I like that way best because it's the best way. It all comes down to efficiency. My assessment of the controller is a matter of efficiency before personal taste. And the GCN controller, as we have both illustrated, is the most efficient controller for Smash Bros. [quote]You're just repeating something we both know: The GCN controller works well for SSBM. [b]You say nothing about why the Wii controller is bad for SSBM, however[/b]; only that it's good for FPSs and adventure games.[/quote] Because I let you do that for me. See below. [quote]GCN --> Wii Control stick --> Nunchuck control stick A button --> A button B button --> B button X/Y buttons --> Control cross down L/R buttons --> Nunchuk Z button Z button -- > Nunchuk C button C stick --> Remote motion sensor (hard, fast movements up/down/left/right) Control cross up --> Control cross up There you go; SSBM's control scheme mapped perfectly to the remote and nunchuk. And from there you can make more use of the motion sensors however you see fit.[/quote] Are you kidding? You've mapped the C-stick controls to the motion sensor. Do your hands stay perfectly still the entire match? Does anyone's hands stay perfectly still the entire match? Smash Bros is a game that depends on precision and speed. All you need is one of the typical "oh holy crap" arm jerks and your character just got smashed out of the arena because no matter what those hard, fast movements would be, they just totally interrupted your attack sequence. You just helped prove my point, Des: It is impossible for the Wiimote to handle Smash Bros with the same type of precision and accuracy in a typical, fast and heated match as we see with the GCN controller. [quote]That's nice. But I'm afraid the number of hours you've played means jack squat in this argument, so you can stop trying to impress me.[/quote] I'm sure that I am. lol. I'm just warning you beforehand that I've been playing Time Crisis for a very long time. You weren't even in middle school yet and I'd already logged a significant amount of playtime on the game when the original debuted in arcades. [quote]Home and arcade versions have nothing to do with this, neither does the quality of Guncons, and the speed of the game doesn't either.[/quote] Desi, if the home and arcade versions have nothing to do with this, [i]then don't bring up joysticks in the first place[/i]. The home versions of the game are the only place joysticks could be used. [quote]In the first case, you're physically taking aim with the gun and your accuracy depends on how well you can aim and steady the gun, whereas in the second case all you're doing is twiddling your thumbs around until the cursor moves over where you want to shoot.[/quote] You're physically taking aim with the gun because the game was designed to be used with a lightgun. The only reason your your accuracy and weapon proficiency matters is because of how blazing fast Time Crisis requires you to be...since it's a lightgun game. The only reason the joystick wouldn't perform in that "twiddling your thumbs around" way is if the game were dramatically re-programmed with a joystick in mind. This means altering the enemies, altering (increasing) the joystick's sensitivity, and altering the pace of the game. Plus, there are a few home conversions of arcade lightgun games where the joystick isn't as "twiddly" as you say. Area 51 on PSX, perfect example. Even Die Hard Trilogy's rail shooting sequence on PSX was a solid one because of the altered game design. You aren't making a solid comparison, Des. [quote]it's that the experience itself will be different.[/quote] The experience itself will only be different if the game itself is changed. [quote]The fundamental play control--the way you aim, using the pointer instead of a joystick, just like using a lightgun instead of a joystick--has changed, whereas the game itself--enemies being as slow as ever--has remained the same. So yes, Wii-TP will be the same game, but you manner in which you physically interact with it will be vastly different.[/QUOTE] That strictly physical change is not fundamental. It's altering a window-dressing. You're still taking all the time that you want to kill regular ranged and stationary enemies. There's still zero urgency. Plus, I sincerely doubt aiming with the bow is going to require such a huge change in how you move. Regular people won't be using their entire arms. Regular people will probably be barely using their forearms. The Wiimote is all about the wrist action...like in Charles' banner.

[quote name='James]I see what you are saying and in a sense you are right.[...']But we keep getting away from the issue at hand.[/quote] The issue at hand is that you keep trying to say that "Change is change" but such a phrase is empty and meaningless here. [i]Of course[/i] games change throughout their development. I never argued otherwise. What I've been saying is that the changes you've been mentioning are [i]typical[/i] for dev cycles. The very fast changes and decisions we've seen in the past nine months are [i]not typical[/i] for dev cycles. I called the WiiTP changes unusual, because they're the red-headed stepchild when it comes to dev time. [quote]Basically, yep. WiiTP is actually getting much better treatment than most other games get (as far as ports go). Bingo. Of course the game was going to change...of course most games change significantly. That's it, you got it. :catgirl: [/quote] Your responses here are just totally ignoring why I said what I said. I brought up "change is change" because you've been trying to lump in every development change with each other under the singular flawed umbrella concept of "change happens." You've since largely disregarded the use of exploring why certain changes happen and what they mean. You've been a stickler for making distinctions in the three or four years that I've known you, James. Dozens of your posts in the past have hyperfocused on making [i]minute distinctions[/i], especially when it comes to games. So why should this be any different? You know perfectly well that Nintendo didn't plan ahead at all for WiiTP. These changes were the Wii equivalent of a shotgun wedding. And I find this quote of yours from a while back quite interesting: [quote name='James from August of 2005][font=franklin gothic medium']If Nintendo were to upscale TP to Revolution, it would still conceivably end up on shelves well after the console's launch - not only because it isn't yet finished, but because Nintendo would have to go through and redesign most of the graphics for the more powerful Revolution system.[/font][/quote] But even in light of that, I'll still humor your O'Reilly-esque point distraction. You say that WiiTP is getting much better treatment than most of the other ports? The swordplay in WiiTP barely qualifies as swordplay (vertical swipes with the Wiimote translating to horizontal slashes is PATHETIC no matter how you try to spin it in Nintendo's favor). Marvel UA is getting a hell of a lot better treatment. Even Madden 07 is getting better treatment. Far Cry Vengeance's entire control scheme is being re-built to utilize the Wiimote as much as possible. Splinter Cell: Double Agent is seeing almost a dozen control changes, some of which are utilizing pressure sensitivity based on the Wiimote. If anything, WiiTP is getting mediocre treatment at best because the game only had nine months to be converted to Wii, whereas the other ports were at least being designed with Wii in mind from the start. Especially Marvel UA going to a specialty developer. [quote]Nintendo made the decision late last year I believe - a few months prior to E3.[/quote] Yes. [i]Six to nine months ago[/i] at the [b]tail end[/b] of a [u]multiple year[/u] development cycle after the [i]original[/i] target version had been delayed [b]three times[/b] in the span of [b]one year[/b]. [quote]But the reason you've suggested isn't really right, I don't think. I mean...you're kind of presuming that the only way they could have come up with this decision is by saying "oh my god, our launch line up is so bad that we really need to rush over a Zelda port!!!!"[/quote] There are two explanations, James, one of which you completely ignored either intentionally or unintentionally, as evidenced by the quote below: [quote]That's the only option? lol[/quote] I offered two options, James. That was made fairly clear by my use of "either" and "or". One explanation was a quick decision. The other was jerking players around for almost two years and hoping that most would be so enthralled by the tiny little carrot being dangled in front of their faces that they'd just completely ignore just how stupid and bone-headed the decision was. And so far, I'm thinking their plan worked perfectly. [quote]I don't really agree, but nothing will convince you until you play the games.[/quote] James, look at the launch list. You've got less than six original properties on there that are being designed specifically for the Wii from the ground-up (and even some of those are totally gimmicky, just like the DS launch line-up). [i]Everything[/i] [i]else[/i] is a port with very gimmicky Wiimote features. [quote][u][b]First of all, the tea table was upended long before any announcement about Wii[/b][/u]. That's actually a seperate issue - I was just clarifying what the term meant. lol Actually, TP changed dramatically early in its development. Within the first few months, Miyamoto basically had everything changed and re-examined. [b][u]But as I said, that isn't really related to what's happening with Wii[/u][/b].[/quote] So why even bring it up in the first place? You just explained how it was completely irrelevant when it comes to Wii. [quote]In terms of the latter part of your comment...I guarantee, the control changes significantly alter the experience. Aiming your bow with your arm and hand is very different from using only your thumb - that is an incredibly obvious observation and I'm surprised it's not making sense to you. Even playing a game with the analog stick is quite different from using a D-Pad (especially in a 3D game). I don't know why that aspect is even debatable. lol What? If it's still a targeting reticule? That has nothing to do with it. That's like saying "if it still has a health bar, it's not a fundamental change". That only relates to visual presentation...it has absolutely zero to do with how the game feels or plays. lol Forget about visuals for a second and imagine the feel of using that bow and arrow with the remote versus simply moving your thumb. Thumb movement versus entire arm and hand movement...big difference. The controls are still fundamentally changed, no matter how much you'd like to split hairs over the issue. lol Is the game itself changed? It's changed in the sense that it feels and plays quite differently, yes. If you don't regard that as a "fundamental change", fine. But that's just a different interpretation more than anything else.[/quote] No, you see, there's no fundamental change to play control when the game itself still performs like the typical traditional Zelda game: methodical and slow, with stationary ranged enemies, near-non-existent urgency to act in non-boss battles, enemy AI that is still plagued by stupid patterns, boss battles that are still plagued by stupid patterns...when all of that is still present, it does not matter whether you're using a joystick or a Wiimote. You can still take all the time you want and not have to worry about anything. The play control [i]does not[/i] change because you're not playing the game any differently, because the [i]game itself[/i] does not require you to play any differently. Desbreko mentioned Time Crisis. It's a [i]perfect example[/i] of what I'm talking about. That game is designed around a lightgun. It's a [i]speed-shooter[/i]. Try playing it with a joystick and you're royally f-cked. (Des, I edited my previous post with the actual reply, by the way) Now TP was designed around a joystick. It's a traditional Zelda game. It's a slower-paced, very methodical adventure game. Your approach to the game itself, to advancing through the game, and playing the game is no different whether you use a joystick or the Wiimote, because the game itself [i]has not evolved[/i]. It's similar to Halo when it was ported to the PC. On console, Halo and Halo 2 are amazing FPS, and probably the best-playing, best-handling FPS on Xbox. Try their PC versions, though, with a mouse, and you see major flaws in their design, the most glaring being that they're simple, simple games especially when it comes to AI and gameplay approaches. Halo did not evolve when it went to the mouse, and that was glaringly obvious to experienced FPS players. Same thing with WiiTP. It's the same game as the GCN version, with the same slowed pace that Halo and previous Zelda games (note: all games built around joysticks) have depended upon. And thus, until they revamp the [i]entire[/i] Zelda franchise, and rip all of that methodical pacing right out, you're never going to see actual fundamental changes of play control, because the traditional Zelda game itself will never actually require the Wiimote. For game(s) that [i]are[/i] introducing fundamental changes to play control, we've got Red Steel and Metroid Corruption. Those games are totally unlike anything we've ever seen before and their fundamental designs require the Wiimote to proceed. Try playing them with anything less and you're dead. And that's why they're the closest things the Wii's got to killer apps right now, if not the only killer apps on Wii so far. [quote]I don't think most consumers will know the difference - only the most hardcore gamers even know about the GCN version delay. So in that respect, I don't think most people will know or care.[/quote] So let me get this straight. It's basically the casual gamers/public who aren't going to know about the GCN version delay? If the casual people don't know or care about the delay, presumably they've already been sold on Wii and WiiTP, right? So then presumably they'd have been following that news, and rarely if at all has Nintendo released news about TP that didn't include information about both versions. I'd see that as a strong likelihood they at least knew something. But here's another problem with what you said. The only way a casual person won't care about GCN TP is if they're already sold on WiiTP. But 250 for the system, plus 50-60 for the game, plus a memory stick around 20-30, and controllers that cost 60...are not casual prices. Hell, even regular to "hardcore" gamers winced when they heard some of those pricings. You say that casual people won't care about the GCN TP delay. I think it goes even farther than that. Casuals won't even care about Wii when they see an immediate expense in the upwards of 400 dollars. So then it comes back to the "hardcore" gamers, which is the [i]complete opposite[/i] of what Nintendo has been striving to do with Wii in the first place. Instead of seeming [i]inclusive[/i] they've made a major mistake here and now seem even more [i]exclusive[/i] than they were when they only had the GCN around. Appealing to the "hardcore" gamers is not what Nintendo wanted to do with Wii. Also, WiiTP is NOT good for hardcore gamers, either, for two reasons. One, [i]there is no Wii-base installed[/i] yet, so it's impossible for anyone to have a Wii, and since everything is hitting on launch day, there's no chance for preparation. Stores aren't even taking pre-orders yet. And two, these "hardcore" gamers...the ones that know about the GCN TP delay...are the ones who have had the GCN TP pre-ordered for almost two years now. And they got [i]screwed over[/i] by the "pay attention to the birdie" launch dates trick. What's a month going to matter when it's been a little over a year of delays already? It's what that month represents that's really pissing people off; it's a broken promise, a discarded pledge. It's basically the final insult. WiiTP good for hardcore gamers? Not at all. It's horrible for hardcore gamers, especially the ones who stuck by Nintendo during all of the delays. It's the hardcore gamers that really kept Nintendo alive. They're the ones who bought RE4 when the GCN was on its last legs. They're the ones who were willing to go with Wind Waker even when it wasn't a complete Zelda game by any stretch of the imagination. It's the hardcore gamers who lined up at midnight in front of Gamestops and Best Buys when the DS Lite was hitting retail. [quote]That's how I see it, anyway. [b]It's good business[/b], but it's also a good deal for Wii owners (especially those who don't own a GameCube or who don't play their GCN anymore).[/quote] *cough* [quote name='James from August 2005][font=franklin gothic medium][b]Keeping Twilight Princess on GameCube makes a lot of sense for several reasons[/b]. First, it will help to attract the "late adopters" next year. Second, it will be an incentive for both GameCube owners [i]and[/i'] potential Revolution owners - if you own a GameCube already, you'll want to buy it. If you don't own a GameCube but you want a next generation system, you can still play it on Revolution. This way, the game has the maximum possible exposure.[/font][/quote] *cough* [quote=James from August 2005][font=franklin gothic medium][b]However, for Nintendo I think it makes more sense to keep it on GameCube[/b]. Between now and next holiday season, Nintendo could easily shift another 2-5 million units of hardware before the system "dies". Even then, during the holiday season next year, you'll find that there will be a lot of GameCube owners who still do not have a large number of the games that have been released. It comes back to the idea that most software sales occur in a system's so-called "dying years"[/font][/quote] So it was good business back then to keep TP as a GCN exclusive, and now it's good business to ignore TP GCN exclusiveness entirely? [quote]I don't view it as an "at least".[/quote] *cough* [quote name='James earlier in the thread][font=arial]You (and the rest of us) are lucky to be getting a Zelda anywhere near the console's launch[...]The fact that we're getting an enhanced version of the game at all is a pretty good thing.[/font][/quote] [quote=James earlier in the thread']The fact that it's coming out on Wii at all and with any changes is better than nothing.[/quote] Translation for both of those: "At least we're getting this." [quote]It's not defeatist in the slightest - I am just acknowledging that I'm getting extra. I just don't view that as a negative thing.[/quote] A concession is a defeatist statement. James, you're forgiving Nintendo because you got a carrot, plain and simple. What you're failing to realize is that carrot is nowhere near as healthy as it should have been. But you don't care because it's still a carrot. You're conceding to Nintendo that the carrot is good enough. But it's not good enough to anyone who's taken a step back and really thought about what's going on here with this entire Wii launch fiasco. What you're saying is totally defeatist optimism. It's a total concession. [quote]You're joking, yeah? You don't know the meaning of "single sentence", Alex. lol Funny stuff. :catgirl: [/QUOTE] [quote name='Papa Smurf earlier in the thread, before James even entered this portion of the discussion']And either way, I'll still be laughing because TP on Wii is nothing to get excited about anyway, seeing as how it's nothing but a boring port-job.[/quote] Funny stuff indeed, James, because I certainly see a...gasp! What is that? Is that...a single sentence?

[QUOTE=James]Absolutely, but not for the reasons you listed. What you're talking about is the overall concept - you're either glossing over or are unaware of the actual changes that took place in the game. The entire game was redesigned from the ground up. The new developer actually scrapped most of what had already been built - even the game engine was significantly tweaked. This is basically common knowledge in the industry and I thought it was common knowledge among most gamers as well, even those who barely followed the progress of Prey. Apparently that is not the case, lol.[/quote] Yes, they re-did it using the Doom 3 engine. They expanded the gameplay. Added loads of new content. It's a major, dramatic change. But it's the usual for the industry. It's happened before. We expect it...especially when it's a 3D Realms game from the mid 90s that was completely outdated by five or six years by the time Human Head was brought on board. But is it the "same type" of change we see in WiiTP? I'm not talking about the amount of re-programming required. I'm talking about what we regularly see in the industry versus what we're seeing in these very gimmicky Wii ports that all sound very knee-jerk when we really think about them. [quote]Right. So why are you debating this point when there is nothing to debate? We are dealing in semantics. What I am telling you is that games frequently undergo major revisions even within the final few months of development. This may or may not include graphics (texturing, modelling, animation), A.I. (changes to routines), additions of major elements (levels, modes, etc), control changes (mapping changes, modifications to allow the use of peripherals, etc) and so on. You are missing the broader point though. The changes we are seeing in Twilight Princess are unique to that game - but the visual changes in one game to the next are always unique to the game itself. The actual point is that major changes do occur in this period - controller changes included. At the end of the day, we can split hairs as much as we like...but the overall point is essentially the same here. On a development level none of this is particularly unusual. Right, but again, you are either missing the point or deliberately splitting hairs. The changes that each game goes through are always going to be different. Radically changing Super Mario Sunshine's levels is definitely different from changing Prey's levels - the style of each game is different and the demands for specific gameplay types are different. What's important is that each for each of these games, it was necessary to make major changes during the development cycle - even toward the end of that cycle. That is specifically what we are talking about. Going into the detail of "SMS is different from Prey is different from TP" is actually a seperate issue and it's also an obvious observation - every game is different and of course, the demands on developers are always different each time. You're implying that the addition of "a few new levels" is somehow not on the same level[/quote] The changes in other games were parts of the regular development cycle, or due to changing developers. The changes in WiiTP, however, were implemented so Nintendo could have a Zelda launch title for their new system. That is not part of the normal development cycle and the reasons for the change are not the normal reasons for the change. Sure, we could say that Nintendo was planning for it from the beginning, right? And stringing everyone along? That they planned to include Wiimote sword control from the very beginning, right? That they were just toying with the public with repeated denials regarding the rumors going around about the fate of TP on GCN? There are two explanations here. Nintendo either made a very quick decision earlier this year or they have been f-cking with everyone for almost two years now. Personally, I'd respect them more for the very quick decision. And this is coming from a guy who loves f-cking with people's perceptions. But either way, Nintendo made a lousy decision in terms of development. It was either a last-minute decision after seeing the reactions and realizing they didn't have a very strong launch line-up, or they were just messing with everyone's heads in the hopes that it would be a positive response when they finally dropped the big news. [quote]If you want to discuss games that have had their controls modified during development to run specifically on Wii, there are plenty examples of that. So Twilight Princess is not unique in that specific instance.[/quote] About 90% of the launch titles. And I'm just as displeased about them as I am with WiiTP. Very little in the launch titles aren't gimmicky. It's a DS launch line-up, hence my comments earlier. [quote]the point is that most games go through fundamental changes late in the development cycle. These changes are always different, but they regularly happen.[/quote] So "Change is change"? [quote]You're again picking up on the wrong point here. My article itself was speculative and it had nothing to do with what the actual game included. My point wasn't about the content of the article, it was about the actual demo footage - sorry if I didn't make that clear enough. The game's design changed massively from that first demonstration. It also changed again after E3 (where a playable build was shown). Again, this is normal.[/quote] Of course the game was going to change. Was there ever any other expectation from a demo trailer shown in 2001, shortly after the GCN had just been brought onto the market? [quote]This is not what's meant by "upending the tea table". The phrase relates to what I have been discussing here - specifically, the idea that even mid-way through a single game's development, it is sometimes necessary to actually start all over again...or at least, to change the game's direction or make significant modifications to fundamental aspects of a game.[/quote] And so you feel that "upending the tea table" applies to WiiTP? That the changes dramatically change the game? That a sword control system that sometimes doesn't even differentiate between horizontal and vertical waves of the Wiimote is upending the tea table? That those changes are significantly altering or modifying fundamental aspects of a game when there's really nothing new being introduced? Aiming the bow with the Wiimote? Swinging the Wiimote to attack with the sword? [quote]You can't really say that it was a good business decision and then say it was misguided; it was a clever and a good decision.[/quote] I can definitely call it a good business decision and then say it was misguided, because that's exactly what it was. From a business perspective, it was genius. They're forcing the customer to choose between two products. The first (and earlier product) will end up costing the customer somewhere around 300+ dollars. Or they wait a month and end up buying the GCN version at around 50 dollars. But from a consumer standpoint? That was a lousy move. It was totally misguided because it does send that mixed message of "We care about you but we care about this more" and it largely contradicts Nintendo's "we care about accessibility" mantra. And forking the customer between two pretty undesirable options from the consumer's point of view is not a good idea, because it may be good for business in the short-term, but longer-term, it's not good business. It alienates customers. It sure as hell alienated me, and I really don't give a shat enough to get my panties in a twist here. I may not even get TP on GCN. What I'm more annoyed with and pissed about here is how Nintendo has handled all of this, because they could have done much, much better. In fact, I don't see why GCN TP was delayed at all anyway. The consumer still would have had to make a choice: plunk down 300+ for the Wii or buy the GCN TP for 50+. There was no solid reason to delay GCN TP. And honestly, Nintendo could have easily avoided the shitstorm from parts of the playerbase had they done what was perfectly reasonable: kept both games on the same release date. [quote]Okay, your first paragraph basically answers your own question. I'm not going to get into how it should be to make it 100% realistic...that is, again, a different discussion. What I will do is reiterate my original point, which you have further confirmed in your first paragraph; using the bow and arrow with the Wii remote feels quite different than simply moving an analog stick - the accuracy and the feel of the motion is a radically different experience. That's my point. Yes, it is, because with the stick you only have to move your thumb. With the remote you have to draw the bow, hold it, then release it. You also have to aim with your whole arm and hand, not just your thumb.[/quote] If it's still a targeting reticle it's not a fundamental change. If all that's required to fire the arrows any distance is the minimal draw movement we saw in the gameplay demonstration, that's not a fundamental change. It's simply the best that WiiTP can do at this point. I don't see fundamental changes until the game itself has been changed. Until we're no longer playing a traditional Zelda game. [quote]Skepticism? What have you been reading? lol. We must not be reading the same impressions. I can produce quotes if you really want me to, but I don't think it's really something that's necessary.[/quote] "I've been reading with total skepticism"=I'm reading with total skepticism. "Hands-on previews with total skepticism"=skeptical hands-on previews. [quote]If you want a Zelda that is built around Wii from the ground up, you'll have to wait. You would have had to wait regardless - so that's just the way it is. *shrug*[/quote] I was always planning on waiting. WiiTP was going to be something to pass the time until I realized there's zero there to interest me. GCN TP ftw. [quote]The fact that it's coming out on Wii at all and with any changes is better than nothing.[/quote] I think that's terrible rationale. "We've got this at least so all is well." It's a rationale that borders on defeatist optimism. It's a concession for something that really should have been better for being the first Zelda game on Wii. [quote]I just think you're making a major issue out of nothing, really. If you don't want "half a Wii game", then simply don't buy it.[/QUOTE] Honestly? I would have never written about my views on the matter as much as I did. I was content to leave it at a single sentence from a few days ago. [QUOTE=Desbreko]James made a lot of the same points I was going to, so there's not a ton left for me to say. But there are a few things here I'd like to respond to. [quote]So what if it's a port? Why does that matter at all?[/quote] Because I'd prefer totally original launch titles or at least titles that utilize the Wiimote in more than three or four ways. And anyway, as it stands, 90% of the launch list is comprised of bizarre port-jobs, Desi. Why do you think I'm waiting for Metroid? [quote]Maybe not enough to warrant buying a Wii if you weren't going to get one anyway, but comparing directly between GCN-TP and Wii-TP, Wii-TP is going to come out on top for people who want the motion sensor and pointer functionality.[/quote] That's the thing, Des. I [i]was[/i] going to get a Wii at launch. You saw how much I was looking at spending. It was a hair under 450. And included in that list was WiiTP. Of course I want the motion sensor and pointer functionality. But if I'm going to be dropping almost 500 dollars on Wii, I want that motion sensor and pointer functionality to do more than three or four things. And so far, only three or four things are precisely what 90% of the launch titles are offering, which, personal opinion aside, is entirely not worth 400-500 dollars. [quote]The problem here is that you're trying to compare Wii-TP to your idealistic notions of what the first real Wii Zelda will be like even though we have absolutely no information about the game.[/quote] If they're just my "idealistic notions", answer me this. Would you disagree with what I see the first real Wii Zelda implementing? Close to 1:1 swordplay? Bow-hunting where we're no longer using targeting reticles and where we're drawing the string back because the velocity and distance of the arrows will be based on proper bow handling? Are you saying you wouldn't love to see that? You, of all people? Are you saying that whipping the Wiimote around for the boomerang isn't something you'd much prefer over selecting targets a la traditional Zeldas? Or what about activating Din's Fire (or any other magic spell) by using the Wiimote like a scepter and swirling it around in different patterns for different spells? Before you decide to call me so idealistic, take a look at what I see in the first true Wii Zelda and ask yourself if you'd be so opposed to any of it. [quote]Yes, you really did. You said that Wii-TP is, "nothing to get excited about," and, "a boring port-job." That implies the port will be mediocre at best. Maybe you didn't mean it that way, but that's what you said.[/quote] Yes, because "nothing to get excited about" means exactly that: nothing to get excited about. And "a boring port-job" means exactly that: it's a boring port-job. Where did I even imply the game would be mediocre? [quote]Incidentally, unless the control changes actually make the game worse than GCN-TP, people have as much or more reason to be excited about Wii-TP as they are about GCN-TP. In other words, unless the changes are detrimental to the game, excitement can only go up.[/quote] I don't have any doubts the controls will control well, Desi. But for a flagship Zelda title on a new console, they're boring as hell...because they're just the basics. [quote]Wii-TP may very well be bait, to try and move more systems, but that's no reason to pass over the game.[/quote] To paraphrase an old high school friend who'd chastised himself for buying an Xbox solely for Deathrow, WiiTP would be a 300 dollar game then. [quote]I want to play TP with the Wii controller functionality, and I'm going to get a Wii anyway, so why shouldn't I buy Wii-TP?[/quote] What other games would you have been buying? Were you going to get the system first, regardless of the games? There it sounds like you'd decided to purchase the system before deciding on any Wii games. And like I said (and like you've known), I was originally totally sold on Wii and WiiTP, and I'd even figured on picking up Marvel Ultimate Alliance, including an extra Wiimote/nunchuck and a memory stick. But then I started wondering why I'd really want Marvel UA, especially without four controllers. So out that went. Then WiiTP would have become that 300-dollar game. [quote]you're doing nothing here but bashing Wii-TP to try and justify your choice of the GCN version.[/quote] You'd be right if I'd actually made a choice to buy the GCN version. Right now I'm not particularly interested in either version. In fact, I cancelled my GCN TP pre-order when it was delayed the first time. I've not since looked into pre-ordering it again. Now let's talk Smash Brothers since you apparently believe there's some massive contradiction here. Don't be so sure of yourself here, because you don't have me where you think you have me. Let's break this down in order of importance. [quote]Take notice of the parts I've bolded. The first two are undeniably personal opinions, yet you then try to use those as a base for a statement of fact. That doesn't work.[/quote] I was talking about how close to perfect SSBM's controls are. They're precise as hell. They hold up beautifully in casual [i][b]and[/b][/i] competitive play (and still hold up today, almost five years after release). Or would you disagree with that? It seems to me that if you agree that the SSBM controls are generally close to perfect and extremely precise, you can't really get on me for something you'd agree with in the first place, which makes your above excerpt just a tad misguided here. [quote]I can make that comparison because the situations are actually very similar; you'd see that if you'd look at the point I'm making rather than a bunch of extraneous details that have little or nothing to do with the actual point. You're saying Wii-TP is boring because it doesn't have enough Wii controller functionality; to quote yourself, "because it'll still be a current-gen Zelda game." Yet SSBB is going to be exactly the same way. It's not using the Wii controller at all, meaning there's most likely nothing in SSBB that couldn't be done on the GCN, short of graphical quality. (And before you try to use that, remember that you said, "I don't give two shats about visual improvements.") By your standards, then, wouldn't you consider SSBB a current-gen game and therefore boring? Your argument applies equally to both games.[/quote] Here's where you've got a flaw, Des: The GCN and Wiimote [i]complement[/i] each other. What one controller doesn't do well, the other does, and vice versa. The GCN controller sucks for FPS and general action-adventure due to the tiny D-pad, nubby C-stick, pressure-sensitive L and R buttons, and a Z button that could be much more responsive for heavy-duty gunfights if it weren't so mis-shapen. Wiimote, on the other hand? FPS and action-adventure [i]dream[/i]. It's a mouse in three dimensional space, dude. It can handle or has the potential to handle FPS and action-adventure a hell of a lot better than the GCN can. Why do you think I'm waiting for Metroid? Why do you think I'm waiting for the total Wii Zelda that makes total use of the Wiimote? Because FPS and action-adventure are the two strongest forte of the Wiimote. And since we're talking Smash Bros, the GCN controller is amazing for it. The pressure sensitivity of the L and R buttons, for example, features that suck in FPS, are incredibly useful in SSBM because of how the shield is implemented. You can either jam all the way down for a stronger shield, or you can lightly depress it for a larger but weaker shield. The C-stick is made for quick Smash attacks. If it had the same type of petal like the left joystick does, sliding your thumb off of the C-stick would be nowhere near as fast. The nubby quality of the C-stick usually detrimental to FPS [i]shines[/i] in SSBM. You don't need to use the D-pad in SSBM, so it being tiny is actually a good thing; it, like the C-stick's non-existent petal, never gets in the way. The only aspect of the GCN controller that needs work is the Z button, but even then, it still performs extraordinarily well. Once you get the timing down, grabbing falling items out of mid air is easy as hell, and dashing grabs quickly become second nature. So given all of that... [quote]So, in your opinion the game would not benefit from use of the remote, therefore you think the current control scheme is perfect. You cannot speak for others, however; I'm sure there's at least one person out there who would like to use the remote to play SSBB.[/quote] ...give me a control scheme on the Wiimote that could function in a fast and furious Smash Bros Brawl match with the same kind of precision and accuracy we see in SSBM on the GCN controller. [quote]So there's no real difference between using a lightgun and an analog stick in a game like Time Crisis? That's absurd and you know it.[/QUOTE] Time Crisis? lol. You do realize my years of arcade shooting were exclusively Time Crisis 1, 2, and 3? And that I've had plenty of playtime with the home versions? But if you want to try to use Time Crisis as an example...the arcade is still the only suitable place to play Time Crisis, Desi. The home versions sucked no matter if you played with the Guncon or tried to finnagle the joystick into doing what you wanted it to do. Even then, if you managed to get the hang of it, the joystick still sucked for playing the home versions of Time Crisis, because Time Crisis is a game of [i]speed[/i]. Hence why Time Crisis is the name of the game. The Guncon is the lesser of the two evils for the home versions, but it still sucks because it's so limited in what it can do. Often, the duck/cover button was somewhere on the gun itself, which created an awful and uncomfortable play experience. There's a reason why the home versions of Time Crisis were totally stripped-down to the point of being embarrassments. If you're trying to play Time Crisis with a joystick, you're out of your mind. Hell, if you're going to play Time Crisis in anywhere but an arcade, you're out of your mind. Anyway, it really has no relevance here, because we're not talking about crap joysticks in crap home versions of stellar arcade shooters. The experience changes between the home and arcade versions of Time Crisis because of the speed of the game. Had they designed the Guncon better, you might have seen better performance out of the Guncon. Plus, Time Crisis is a shooting game. It originated as a shooting game. The speed of the game is much too fast to be accurate with a joystick. This isn't the case with the Zelda series. Zelda has always been a very methodical game where enemies and puzzle targets would frequently stay in one place to let you shoot them at your leisure. The gameplay of WiiTP is no different. The ranged enemies were staying in one spot the entire time. Until they change the game [i]itself[/i], it won't matter if we're using a joystick or Wiimote, which is why changing from the joystick to a Wiimote in TP is not a fundamental change in play control. If they take a few cues from something like Time Crisis? A game that depends on speed, accuracy, and a (good) lightgun? Then we'll see those fundamental changes in play control. Until then, we're still playing traditional Zelda with traditional approaches...whether we're using the Wiimote or a joystick.

[quote name='James']Oh, sorry, I had the wrong game title. The game I meant was Prey.[/quote] So going from a 3D Realms FPS featuring portals that essentially disguised load times, lessened processor strain and had the potential for independent room construction to a Human Head Studios FPS that features portals used to disguise load times, lessen processor strain, and expand upon the original potential of independent room construction...is considered being "completely re-tooled"? [quote]Semantics. The point is that games undergo major revisions within their final months of development on a frequent basis. Levels and visuals are generally more difficult to change than a control scheme, too. Not really. Again, it's semantics and for what point really? The overhaul that TP is going through is really no different to what many other games have been through (though not specifically related to Wii). But even if you only include Wii, there are a few games that are now being moved over to the platform and are undergoing significant control changes. So there's not much to say here really. Actually, Star Fox DS changed a whole lot from what we first saw at E3. Entire levels were changed/added, the visuals were significantly overhauled and the controls were modified and tweaked.[/quote] How is this a game of semantics? You said that there are plenty of games that go through "these types of changes" but so far, I haven't seen anything yet in your examples that isn't the typical development cycle changes. Levels and visuals are the usual changes that occur. Those types of changes are to be expected. They're the usual stuff. By this point in time, we expect the visuals and levels to change. Hell, we even know that characters will likely change dramatically. But that absolutely is not the same type of changes we're seeing with WiiTP. This is not a game of semantics. I'm talking about what we would routinely see regarding changes during a game's development cycle versus what we rarely, if ever, see during a game's development cycle. And what we routinely see is your examples. What we rarely, if ever, see is what is being done with WiiTP. So I don't know why you insist that there's fundamentally no difference between adding in some bland and repetitive "Kill X number of enemies" missions in Starfox DS and what we see regarding the control scheme in WiiTP, because I certainly see tremendous differences between them, just like I see tremendous differences between Super Mario Sunshine's changes and WiiTP, just like I see tremendous differences between Prey and WiiTP's respective changes You appear to be getting at "Change is change," as if the addition of a few levels or graphical improvement is in the same ballpark as re-doing sword attacks to be used with a motion sensor for a game that was ported over to a brand-new, next-gen console so it could be a launch title. That's not the same ballpark. I don't even think you could consider it the same ****ing sport, to paraphrase Samuel L. Jackson. [quote]As for the wisdom of making the game as they did...I really have no comment on that. That will generally just come down to one's own opinion.[/quote] Don't know why Pulp Fiction is again popping in here (probably just the mood I'm in right now, lol), but you've got to have an opinion! I think it was a stupid move to do a Starfox (Missile) Command on a system that absolutely could support a Starfox game of N64 caliber and depth. The Starfox franchise had been dropped on its head twice out of two different games on a single system. Starfox Adventures and Starfox Assault. Missile Command should have been the last thing on anyone's mind when it came to making a Starfox game. [quote]Go and take a look at N-Sider's "Mario is Melting" article from 2001 and you will have a strong idea as to how significantly the game changed.[/quote] I read it. I watched the same trailer. Much of the article you wrote deals with hypotheticals and theories that don't have much support in the video itself. We're given very quick jump cuts throughout the trailer, but nowhere does it imply Mario's health would be based on the power of the FLUDD device, nor would wiping the sweat from his brow be any more significant than the obviously purely cosmetic aesthetic touch it was. Mario standing in the shade of the tree with the FLUDD device being empty is completely coincidental and doesn't have any relationship, even within the limited vacuum context of the trailer. Any changes that occurred were largely because the article was conjecture without any real, concrete details. And anyway, that trailer was a demo level with demo enemies. It was going to be changed. [quote]Ever heard of Miyamoto's famous "upending of the tea table"?[/quote] Yes. So let's talk about it. Did the FLUDD in SMS have any profound impact on later Mario games? Did it upend the tea table of the Mario franchise? Mario 64 certainly upended the tea table (still one of the best platformers today). Or perhaps a better discussion about Miyamoto's favorite catchphrase pertains to Zelda. Ocarina of Time certainly did some fabulous things for both the platforming genre and the Zelda franchise. It absolutely upended the tea table for the industry. It set a new standard. Wind Waker? Not so much. It definitely introduced some fun ideas regarding character design with Link's eye movement, but overall, it was a fun and simple summer game that didn't have a very tremendous impact, just like SMS. Twilight Princess. It's the last hurrah for traditional Zelda games before Wii takes over. We assume it represents the finest traditional Zelda game we'll ever see. Its goal basically is to have the traditional Zelda game go out with one last amazing bang. But upending the tea table? I don't tend to view "last hurrahs" as necessarily starting the revolution. So what about Wii itself then? It's got the [i]potential[/i] to upend the tea table, and developers obviously are totally excited about that potential, but it'll still be a year or so yet until we know if Wii truly upended the tea table. Certainly Wii may have a lasting impression on the industry and inspire developers and designers to be more inclusive in the future, but whether we'll see a true revolution remains to be seen. Currently, the Wii is a lot like the DS: brand-new technology initially supported only by gimmicky launch titles. It'll still be another year or so before we see the Wii equivalents of Brain Age or Metroid Hunters. [quote]It's not a bone-head play in any respect. WiiZelda is being developed parallel to Twilight Princess, lol. I guarantee you, this port hasn't had any significant impact on the development schedule of the next Zelda.[/quote] It absolutely was a bone-head play. lol. Nintendo is a company that prides itself on customer confidence and making sure its customers know that Nintendo isn't going to ditch them. That's been their message for a while now. That's the message Iwata and Miyamoto have been conveying for as long as I can remember, and that was sure as hell the message when they promised GCN owners that Wii wouldn't get preferential treatment when it came to Twilight Princess. That Twilight Princess wasn't going to jump ship to Wii and leave GCN owners with nothing. Granted, GCN is still getting Twilight Princess, but that's almost an entire month after Wii, and the damage has already been done. Twilight Princess was going to be the last hurrah for the GCN. It was going to be one last thank you to the gamers who stuck by the Gamecube when everything looked bleak as hell, who supported the Zelda series even after Wind Waker turned out to be half of a game. Twilight Princess, for all intents and purposes, was a game for GCN owners. That's what Nintendo had been guaranteeing them. Twilight Princess would basically ignore the Wii. But then that changed. TP was announced for the Wii. Okay, it kind of bothers gamers, but they kept faith in Nintendo. The GCN TP was still coming. And plus, it appears that both versions will have a simultaneous release. There was even talk of a dual disc version. Gamers were still happy with that. They weren't getting slighted. But then that changed. Now WiiTP is going to have a release date of November 19th, and GCN TP is going retail in the middle of December. This is basically a corporate sliming. "Sorry, but we're focusing on WiiTP more now because we want it to have an earlier launch so it coincides with our new system's release, but don't worry. We haven't forgotten you. You'll still get your version of the game a month or so after we've released WiiTP." All of that happened because Nintendo wanted launch sales for Wii. Can I blame them for being smart businessmen? No. They made a good move from a business standpoint. But that doesn't mean it wasn't a stupid bone-headed move from a customer standpoint. Whether or not WiiTP would have been cutting into development of Wii Zelda was never my point anyway. I wasn't implying that focusing on one detracted from the other in terms of development time. What I was getting at was the decision made was annoying, stupid and wholly misguided...because it was. It alienated the customers who believed what Nintendo had pledged. It gave a very bad impression as to what Nintendo really wants to do here at a time when public trust is absolutely critical, because we've seen the reactions to Sony's bizarre stagings. At this point, Microsoft is the most reliable company because we know where they stand more than either of the other two. They're totally dedicated to the 360. There is no mixed message from them...well, at least the mixed messages have been minimal. But what Nintendo pulled recently with Twilight Princess is absolutely sending mixed messages. It's only natural for a company to more favor their new system coming out. But not when they've already pledged to continue to support a previous console with a game that would have remained exclusive to said console based on all of the press releases up until Wii became an option. It's a matter of consumer confidence, really. [quote]Well, we keep kind of going back and forth here...the point is, you aren't happy with their decision and you don't think it's worth having TP on Wii. That's fine and you don't need to buy the game. That's another issue entirely.[/quote] So let's make it perfectly clear then. I think they shot themselves in the foot here from a consumer standpoint. Of course people are still going to buy the game no matter if it's GCN or Wii. But they'll certainly remember what happened. And we both know that consumers remember lousy experiences. [quote]That's coming from hands-on experience from colleagues who have actually played the game. Moreover, you only need to read any published article about the hands-on experience. There's plenty of evidence out there, you just have to read it.[/quote] The hands-on previews and experiences I've been reading with total skepticism for the past few months, right? [quote]I'm not saying that any of the items themselves have changed.[/quote] Nor am I expecting items themselves to change. I'm expecting new ways to use them that don't involve pre-canned swings... [quote]I'm saying that the way you use them has changed. This is a fundamental change and it has fundamental effects on gameplay - aiming with a freehand system is radically different from aiming with an analog stick. Yes, in both cases you are "aiming an arrow", but that's a shortsighted analysis - the feel is completely different in each case (and your own accuracy and game experience will also change as a result). So, yes, these are fundamental changes to play control.[/quote] ...or targeting reticles. Still calling it "aiming an arrow" is not as short-sighted an analysis as you think, James, especially when there are some incredible possibilities to make the Wiimote act like a real bow. In the gameplay demonstration, we both saw how the player was naturally drawing his arm back a bit, right? He's already using it like a real bow. But a real bow doesn't simply require you to point and shoot like we're still seeing in WiiTP. With a real bow, you need to hold the arrow in place while you draw that string back and keep your target in the sights placed along the bow grip. The velocity and distance of your arrow are going to depend on how far you draw the string back. You want to talk about something that's a fundamental change to play control? Holding the B button (you use your index and middle fingers to keep the arrow nocked), pulling the Wiimote back, having a closer view of the bow on-screen with the bow sights aligned near the center, with the velocity and distance of the arrow dependent on how far you bring the Wiimote back, and releasing the B button to release the arrow. That would be a fundamental change to play control. Simply transferring control of the targeting reticle from a joystick to the Wiimote is not a fundamental change to play control. [quote]As I said, we are still getting the Wii-based Zelda. So that's not an issue and it never has been.[/quote] And as I said, they aren't giving the first Zelda on Wii the proper amount of dev time because essentially, the first Zelda on Wii is a port of a GCN game that is not built around Wii at all...and what makes it Wii-related at all has very recently been added circa E3 2006. So really, considering the bizarre process we've been seeing regarding release dates, system debuts, game changes and all? They're not giving Zelda on Wii anywhere near enough time here. The motion sensor features in WiiTP are nowhere near as developed as WiiTP, the "flagship" Wii Zelda title apparently, need to be. The only reason, I see, that people are being so forgiving is that they're happy to get table scraps, essentially. I've consistently heard "We're lucky to get this" in the apparent defenses of Nintendo. And I'm sorry, but that's a load of crap. It's particularly a load of crap considering that Nintendo has been the only company over the past few years who has expressed an honest consideration for providing gamers with complete games. Releasing TP on Wii with the current motion sensor features is not providing gamers with a complete game. The first Zelda game on Wii [i]should be better[/i] than a mere port. Nintendo knows this but apparently, from what I can gather, they're just trying to get by through this weird port. If I sound overly cynical, thank you. I'd rather sound overly cynical than being content with what amounts to half of a Wii game. EDIT: And Charles, I hope Link still gets to play with his p-ssycat. Though I'm not entirely sure if it's still included. *crosses fingers* The franchise has been needing some good p-ssy action lately.

[quote name='James']A great example would be TimeShift. This game went to another developer before it was released and it was completely retooled.[/quote] Saber Interactive is still the dev team. The publisher was changed. And the core controls and gameplay has remained intact. The changes that took place were largely plot-related, as well. [quote]Other games go through similar shifts within the final year of development - even with a game like Super Mario 64, the bulk of the game's levels and visuals were added within the final year of development.[/quote] [i]Levels and visuals[/i]. Not re-doing portions of the control scheme. lol [quote]As I said, this is not unusual. Most Nintendo games are undergoing fundamental changes within the final six months of the cycle. Games that don't are the exception, not the rule.[/quote] Changes, yes. But not the kinds of changes we see in WiiTP. This WiiTP overhaul is still very unusual. [quote]Many games have changed dramatically after being shown to the public. Star Fox DS is one example[/quote] Starfox DS didn't change. lol. We still got the same short and Advance Wars-knock-off-in-space pale-imitation-of-classic-Starfox we saw at E3. And the game suffered terribly for it, because it didn't feel like Starfox at all; it felt like a half-baked version of Missile Command with free-roaming kill count missions thrown in. We know the DS is very capable of re-producing N64 games (even though Mario 64DS was kind of a dud in terms of control), so while the goal of Starfox DS was admirable, it was still a bone-head decision, because there was this great template of a game called Starfox 64 but the only flight missions we got in Starfox DS were direct rips of Katina in Starfox 64...but nowhere near as thrilling or exciting. [quote]another example would be Super Mario Sunshine - that game was massively changed after it was first shown to the public (and when it was shown, it was well into development).[/quote] And those changes might be? When I picked up the game at release, it didn't look or feel terribly different from the very first previews back in 2001/2002. [quote]What you're asking for is still more difficult to deliver than you understand. The bulk of Red Steel's development was concerned with remote sensitivity and movements - Nintendo do not have time to introduce such a system with Twilight Princess at this stage. The game would have to be delayed further to include the elements you are asking for. That's just the reality of it[...]Making something closer to Red Steel or a 1:1 movement would have been sufficiently difficult so as to warrant an extension of the development cycle[..]Yes, that's asking too much for Twilight Princess. You can not expect Nintendo to make that kind of inclusion at this stage[...]Is that a realistic expectation for a new Zelda game? Sure. But that's not what we're discussing here - we are discussing what Nintendo is doing with TP.[/quote] It would have taken longer development time, yes. And here's the solution: ignore porting an existing GCN game and focus on bringing the real Wii Zelda to gamers. That would have been the smart decision there. Instead, Nintendo made a straight-up bone-head play. [quote]No, I don't think so. You're clearly dissatisfied with these inclusions and the way they've been done - you are saying that we're getting something that is essentially a watered-down version of what we should be getting. That would indicate an implication of sloppiness on Nintendo's part. I wouldn't say it's a misinterpretation at all, lol.[/quote] Sloppiness? No. It's an implication of "Why the hell do we get this paltry game when these changes should have been introduced in the first real Wii Zelda game?" I'm not dissatisfied. I'm just no longer excited about it because I took a step back to really ask myself what is there to be excited about. [quote]But the game feels remarkably different on Wii, trust me.[/quote] That's coming from hands-on experience? [quote]This is what I would call a fundamental change. It will make a big difference to the way you play, particularly when it comes to puzzle solving and combat. Control is how we interact with the game environment...it's one of the most fundamental aspects of any game. So believe me, these changes make quite a difference. TP was designed for traditional controllers...on GameCube. Substantial changes were made to the Wii version so that the new controls would gel with the game's design. I don't think that a complete change to game control would classify as "sparse features" and I think if you actually try both versions when they release, this will become somewhat clearer.[/quote] Fundamental changes? Substantial changes? Complete change to game control? That's describing pre-canned sword swings, bow targeting, and jiggling the nunchuck for a shield bash, right? And those phrases aren't discussing new ways to use the Hookshot, grappling hook, bombs, magic spells, hammers, lassos, boomerang and so on? I'm sorry, James, but it doesn't sound like fundamental or substantial changes here. Because there's nothing fundamental changing. The game is still the same. Oh, wait, you can use the Wiimote to activate pre-canned attack sequences and aim the bow. Pardon the sarcasm, but that's such a dramatic change. lol. [quote]If you want to wait and ignore TP, that's totally fine. What I'm trying to say is that there's nothing sloppy or rushed or slap-job about Twilight Princess on Wii. That is the only point I am debating, because I don't think it's a reasonable point.[/quote] Again, the game could play extremely well. I don't care about that. Nowhere here have I been even implying the game is going to be sloppy. But I AM saying it sounds incredibly rushed and half-assed. They introduced these changes with 6 months left out of the dev process. They obviously felt that including some paltry little pre-canned sword swings was more important than resisting the allure of a Zelda launch title, and giving the first Wii Zelda the proper length of dev time? Then I feel their priorities are completely screwed-up and that WiiTP's motion sensor features are most certainly rush-jobs.

[quote name='DeadSeraphim][size=1][color=indigo][font=arial]CG hasn't lost it's edge, it's just become overstaturated.[/font][/color'][/size][/quote] Not really. If you don't think CG has lost its edge, and that the lame CG offerings of late are just due to oversaturation, compare Robots to Toy Story. The difference in quality is mind-boggling. If CG lameness was due to oversaturation, even Pixar would be suffering a hell of a lot more than it is. I agree with John that Cars was trite and annoying and obviously not up to the usual Pixar caliber. There's a very clear decline in film quality here, and that's not because of oversaturation; it's because Pixar are the ****** masters, whereas everyone else is two-bit hacks. But I will agree there's an oversaturation here. It's oversaturation of the Shrek variety. It's impossible to watch Shrek 1&2 and not be bombarded with what have become dated pop culture-isms and fast food ads. It's annoying as hell and that kind of bloated "OMFG lets use this reference" is what began sinking the industry. Funny now Pixar's films rarely have "Sir Justin" posters and those films are regarded as the best in the genre. There's more to the wide-spread acclaim than just that, of course, but I still think audiences pick-up on that crap in the Shreks of the genre. PLUS, if anyone still doubts why the genre is sucking now, off the top of anyone's head, which actors have done voice work for Robots or Over The Hedge? How many can you name? Now which actors did voice work for Pixar's The Incredibles or Monster's Inc? I don't know about you guys, but I sure as hell remember the voice actors in Pixar films a hell of a lot better than any of the other studios'.

[quote name='James']Control changes were made within the last five months. The game releases in November...so Nintendo have been making controller adjustments through the last few months of development. That is not unsual, regardless of the game and the platform.[/quote] "Controller adjustments" James? They're not just "controller adjustments." lol. It's an overhaul of what has been a perfectly suitable control scheme that has worked extremely well for multiple generations now, and for what would have still been a perfectly suitable control scheme for a [i]current-gen[/i] Zelda game...which is precisely what TP is, no matter which system it appears on. And I think that type of overhaul is entirely unusual, as I can't think of any game in recent memory that saw the type of radical change we saw in WiiTP, and in such a timeframe. I try to come up with other games and platforms to provide your point with some references and there's nothing I can recall. If you have a few games in mind, do tell. [quote]I think it comes down to unrealistic expectations though. If you actually consider how difficult it would be to have 1:1 motions for that type of game, it starts to make sense why Nintendo have chosen the existing method. This is especially true for a game that requires fast motions. You have to really consider the difference in the way different players are going to actually be using the remote (and being right or left-handed plays a part in this too). I think 1:1 motions would be great, but they are an unrealistic expectation at this stage, especially for Twilight Princess.[/quote] I never expected 1:1. I don't want to control every single slice, the pitch, the yaw, the angle, etc. But I DO want some type of influence more than what we're hearing about in WiiTP. If what we've heard is accurate, we're getting pre-canned attacks that are no different than smashing on the A button. Wanting something better than that--an motion sensing attack system with some more precision--is hardly looking for 1:1. Red Steel doesn't even have 1:1, and that's a game that entirely depends on a much, much more complicated swordplay than WiiTP ever will. But then again, Red Steel sounds a hell of a lot more advanced in terms of combat, and it appears it's pulling it off remarkably well, which begs the question: why are we given these paltry offerings in WiiTP? [quote]We can probably better determine whether or not the game will be negatively affected by the time it's released though - my advice would be to wait and see.[/quote] Wait and see is exactly what I'm doing. I'm waiting to see when the real Wii Zelda game is released. ~_^ [quote]This was the general impression I'd been getting from the thread, not from your specific comments. But that's irrelevant anyway - the Wii controls are not what I'd call "last minute changes" as such. They occurred toward the end of the development cycle but I think that "last minute" in this context is being used to mean "sloppy". And I don't think that's a correlation we can make at this stage.[/quote] I know a few people who took my comments to mean "sloppy." Perhaps the "general impression" here was coming from blatant misinterpretations on their part. [quote]So Nintendo is always making major changes even within the last six months of development; this is not unusual, it occurs with pretty much any game you can think of.[/quote] The [i]type[/i] of changes is important, though. Adding more dungeons is awesome. Wind Waker was lacking in dungeons. Visual style being changed in the first year of the dev cycle? If the style makes sense, sure. But more content or a different visual style is a pretty different "change" than what we're seeing here, and in the timeframe. Again, if you can think of some games that went through such a dramatic change in 4 months, after the dev team demonstrated said game to the public like we saw in WiiTP, please share. [quote]I agree that TP is a port. But it's unquestionably more than your standard port. It features visual improvements and fundamental gameplay enhancements.[/quote] More than a standard port? Visual improvements? I don't give two shats about visual improvements. The game was looking great on GCN itself. A graphical improvement was as unnecessary as porting TP over to the Wii was in the first place. Largely, I don't care how good or bad a game's graphics are. If I cared about visual quality, you wouldn't see me popping in classic N64 games or stuff like Smash TV each Friday night. I think it's tragic that so much of the gaming populace these days sees pretty visuals in remakes then starts drooling or whatever. Though I can't deny I wouldn't be opposed to a game like Starfox 64 or GoldenEye getting spruced up a bit for a re-release on one of the next-gen consoles, my interest in those re-releases would be for the gameplay, just like my lack of interest in WiiTP is because they aren't giving us anything truly new or Wii-exclusive when it comes to the gameplay. TP is still a traditional Zelda game. [quote]We aren't just talking a few new modes; we're talking about major changes to the way the game plays.[/quote] There are zero major changes to the way the game [i]plays[/i], though (TP, whether on GCN or Wii, is still a traditional Zelda game as per Iwata/Miyamoto). The changes are how we interact with the game. But fundamentally, nothing in WiiTP gameplay couldn't be done with traditional controllers, and that's because TP was designed for traditional controllers from the ground-up. [quote]I think you're just asking for way too much, honestly. You (and the rest of us) are lucky to be getting a Zelda anywhere near the console's launch.[/quote] I'm asking for way too much when I want more control in a Zelda game where the controller itself basically functions as an extension of whatever weapon Link is currently holding? lol. That's not asking for too much at all; on the contrary, that's asking for what should have been done in the first place. And if that means we don't get a Zelda title anywhere near the console's launch (not like N64 and GCN really launched with a Zelda title anyway)? I'm totally eager to wait, because it also means that GCN owners won't get snubbed since Nintendo would have made good on their word that Wii wouldn't get preferential treatment when it came to Twilight Princess (but we see that turned out to be a load of bull anyway with the GCN TP delayed until December). I'm totally eager to wait because it means that we'll be getting a true Wii Zelda as opposed to a port-job. I'm totally eager to wait because it means we'll be getting a better product. [quote]Some may ask whether or not it's even worth making a Wii-specific version of Zelda...but I think that's the wrong question.[/quote] It's certainly the wrong question because the question I'm asking is the complete opposite: Given what could be done with a true Wii Zelda game, why is it even worth porting a current-gen Zelda game and adding in a few pretty sparse features that don't really utilize the Wiimote to as full an extent as a true Wii Zelda game would? The answer is fairly obvious: launch sales.

[quote name='SunfallE][color=RoyalBlue]It is poetic justice in the sense that the predator brought it upon themselves. Not that the show itself is any form of justice.[...']But in the end, as I stated before, it?s a self inflicted problem that the predator brought upon themselves and in that respect I don?t feel sorry for them at all. Whether they are caught on this show or by the police without all the media nonsense, it is still in my opinion poetic justice when they find the police waiting for them instead of the minor they thought they were going to get their hands on. [/color][/quote] No, it would be poetic justice if the pedophile ended up getting gang-raped by corrupt police officers. If the pedophile was abused sexually when he arrived in the house? THAT is poetic justice. He goes there to have sex--to take advantage of a minor? So then he gets taken advantage of instead. That is poetic justice. A pedophile getting arrested isn't...because there's no symmetry there. If he gets gang-raped in the shower while in prison? That's better. It's closer to poetic justice. But then that's not justice, really. It's just gang-rape in the shower. Nothing about the show is poetic justice, mate.

James, I see what you're trying to get at, but considering players were still hitting B to swing the sword at E3 2006 and now just recently we've been informed the sword control has been changed to the Wiimote motion sensor (if you can provide a source that dates those changes to long before E3, I'd appreciate it)...I don't think anyone can say these control scheme changes [i]weren't[/i] last minute decisions--especially when it comes to the development cycle of Twilight Princess. If what we're hearing regarding the sword attack execution with the Wiimote is true (no distinction made between left/right swipes, pre-canned attacks, etc), then this is entirely a last minute type of change; the Wiimote control options we have are almost insulting because they're so basic and stripped-down compared to what the first Wii Zelda game should be. I've not been calling this thing "last minute" because of it being a port. To do that would be completely stupid. I know a Wii version has been announced for a while now. I know it's been in development for a while now. I'm annoyed that it's a port in the first place, absolutely. But I'm not about to call WiiTP a "last minute" game because it's a port...and I don't believe I've said or implied anything regarding that in my posts here. What I do believe I've been saying (and rather clearly) is that it's obvious these recent changes (sword-Wiimote functions, Link's hand change, etc) are totally last minute decisions because they've only appeared within the past four or five months. And maybe it's just me, but four or five months in a game whose development cycle has been going on pretty much since Wind Waker was released is entirely "last minute." And honestly, I don't think WiiTP is even "darn close" when we're talking about being designed for the Wii...because it wasn't designed for the Wii at all. It's a GCN game. If we had bomb control, a boomerang control that involved more than just a re-iteration of the targeting system from previous Zeldas, new types of spell activations, grappling hook innovations, and so on...then I'd be more inclined to describe it as "darn close." But at that point, I'd rather just have a true Wii Zelda game.

[quote name='Desbreko][color=#4b0082']In that case I have to question why he'd say it's not worth getting on the Wii.[/color][/quote] Because it's a port. It's not a Zelda game designed for the Wii from the ground-up. I don't know why you're having such a hard time grasping this, Desi. See, I used to be really excited about the bow crap, just like I used to be really excited about the shield bash and sword swings. Then I thought about it a bit more critically. And when I did that, TP on the Wii is not exciting at all, because it's the same thing as the GCN version, except here we get some basic Wiimote functionality which sounds no different than hitting the A button. So why bother with the Wii version? Why not wait until we get a full-fledged Wii Zelda with much more precise (and by "precise" I mean accurate) Wiimote functionality? I never once implied that WiiTP is going to suck because it's a port. It'll play well, I'm sure, but that was never anything close to what I've been talking about anyway. I'm passing on WiiTP because it's a GCN game. It could be the greatest Zelda game in the history of mankind and I still wouldn't buy it because it'll still be a current-gen Zelda game. Again, I can't understand why you still seem to be thinking I'm saying something like "The game is going to suck because it's a port." What I'm saying is more like "The game is boring because it's a port." And being boring or being a port has absolutely nothing to do with how it may play. If I buy TP, I'm buying it for GCN, because apparently I can tell the difference between bait and a real treat. lol [quote name='Desbreko][color=#4b0082']I mean, you're not going to fault SSBB for using GCN controllers, are you? In that respect it's in the same boat as TP yet I don't see you calling it boring.[/color][/quote] Pardon me, Des, but how in the hell do you make that kind of leap? lol I criticize WiiTP because it's a simple port with some Wiimote functionality added in last-minute in what is clearly a way to get people to buy Wii at launch, because let's face it...there's really no "must have killer app" in the launch titles. Plus, it's not as if we've been seeing any fundamental changes in how Zelda is played (even Iwata or Miyamoto have said how TP will be the last traditional Zelda game). TP will still play like a conventional Zelda game. Swinging the Wiimote is not doing anything to open up gameplay options; it's just replacing a small facet of gameplay. But we know Nintendo wants the Wii to open up gameplay options, right? Then where are the other Zelda items? Boomerang? Grappling hook? Bombs? Hookshot, even? Hammers? Magic attacks? Think about that for a moment. What we're getting in WiiTP is piddly compared to what a full-fledged, "from the ground-up" Wii Zelda game should be. You might argue that maybe Nintendo is keeping those items close to the chest, right? It's a month before launch. They would have said something about them by now. Regarding Smash Bros Brawl on the other hand? If they didn't use the GCN controllers I'd be annoyed, because as far as I'm concerned, SSBM had a damn near perfect control scheme using the GCN controllers. The game itself simply would not benefit from the Wiimote like Wii Zelda would. Generally, I don't see fighting games utilizing the Wiimote in any real productive ways. Most fighting games just don't have the depth that the Wiimote can explore in the adventure genre. I mean, think about it. What would play more precisely in Smash Bros Brawl? Making sideways jabs with the Wiimote to replace the traditional physical attacks we usually would perform with the A button? Or using the traditional GCN controller scheme that still performs damn near flawlessly? When it comes to precision, one control scheme (GCN controller) certainly is the superior there. In short, I criticize WiiTP because it's an example of the Wiimote being unnecessarily utilized. Just like I would criticize Smash Bros Brawl if it tried to do the same thing with the Wiimote.

New episode just aired earlier tonight. I'm having fun. Who else is? [spoiler]That trunk was insane[/spoiler]. I like the cop's character. Very oafish. I am looking forward to where the CIA/FBI characters go...they were such bitches.

[quote name='Desbreko][color=#4b0082']I'm going to laugh so hard if, when TP is released, it turns out I was right.[/color][/quote] And either way, I'll still be laughing because TP on Wii is nothing to get excited about anyway, seeing as how it's nothing but a boring port-job. The only Zelda on Wii in my mind is the Zelda game made specifically for Wii.

[QUOTE=r2vq][color=#007520]It would be strange to try to compare walkthroughs, screenshots, and play experience between the Wii and the GCN if the maps are reversed... -r2[/color][/QUOTE] Don't read into the awful translation and misplaced grammar.

I'm sorry, did I just see someone describe this show as "poetic justice"? lol. Sorry, but the idea of the show is noble (catching online predators) but I can't see how anyone could ever describe it as "justice" let alone some weird highly romanticized distorted notion of the idea of justice. If Dateline were to simply gather the information and inform the police officers, then it would be justice. If Dateline weren't [i]broadcasting[/i] this crap on national television in what is clearly more an attempt to humiliate/expose rather than protect children, then it would be actual justice. If the host of Dateline or whoever weren't strolling out in front of a camera crew, then it would be actual justice. If the show did something other than "DATELINE SPECIAL" then it would be actual justice.