-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Nintendo: Launch Revolution with Zelda: Twilight Princess ?
- Thread starter Shikamaru Ninja
- Start date
definitely, makes all kinds of sense.
some rev bits would be nice, but, even if it's just a gc game, it's still better to launch along side rev.
yes, gc is dead, worldwide. new gc games aren't selling well. mario baseball will probably end up 100-150k in japan, and it should be 300-400k. same with pokemon xd. pc did over 2 million worldwide, xd will be lucky to sell 1 million on a bigger installed base.
there are people who would love to play tp but will stay away from gc. launching with rev, a new, cool looking system, with a new interface and backwards compatibility to nintendo's entire catalogue will gain buyers who wouldn't buy gc.
zelda tp looks spectacular, i say move it, and kirby, to rev launch. this will also send a very clear message that rev can also play brilliant traditional videogames, not just ones that use the new interface.
some rev bits would be nice, but, even if it's just a gc game, it's still better to launch along side rev.
yes, gc is dead, worldwide. new gc games aren't selling well. mario baseball will probably end up 100-150k in japan, and it should be 300-400k. same with pokemon xd. pc did over 2 million worldwide, xd will be lucky to sell 1 million on a bigger installed base.
there are people who would love to play tp but will stay away from gc. launching with rev, a new, cool looking system, with a new interface and backwards compatibility to nintendo's entire catalogue will gain buyers who wouldn't buy gc.
zelda tp looks spectacular, i say move it, and kirby, to rev launch. this will also send a very clear message that rev can also play brilliant traditional videogames, not just ones that use the new interface.
Ninty, please don't release Zelda TP on a dead console. GameCube is all but dead.
Yes, some gamers will be disappointed, but many of those who don't want TP as a Revolution launch window title may want to spend their $$$ on the PS3 rather than the Revolution.
There's no doubt in my mind that moving Zelda TP to Revolution will be a huge boost for Nintendo and a blow against Sony.
The lifetime sales of Zelda TP will be much greater on Rev., than on the dead GC.
If you want the best game of all time, then buy revolution. If you can't afford both PS3 & Revolution, then Nintendo should force you to make a choice. :lol
Yes, some gamers will be disappointed, but many of those who don't want TP as a Revolution launch window title may want to spend their $$$ on the PS3 rather than the Revolution.
There's no doubt in my mind that moving Zelda TP to Revolution will be a huge boost for Nintendo and a blow against Sony.
The lifetime sales of Zelda TP will be much greater on Rev., than on the dead GC.
If you want the best game of all time, then buy revolution. If you can't afford both PS3 & Revolution, then Nintendo should force you to make a choice. :lol
Here's a thought.
Conker: Live and Reloaded, despite being one of the best looking games on current generation consoles, is terribly outdated in terms of gameplay design.
Zelda isn't even in the top 10 of our best looking console games, nor does Nintendo aspire to such things. So we'd have a "Revvofied" Twilight Princess with almost 3 (or 8, depending on your perspective) year old gameplay, on brand new consoles.
Nintendo should release this Zelda on the Gamecube and close the book on the current batch of 3D Zeldas. It's the most acclaimed series in history. Does anyone really want a Zelda game that wasn't built from the ground up on its home console?
Conker: Live and Reloaded, despite being one of the best looking games on current generation consoles, is terribly outdated in terms of gameplay design.
Zelda isn't even in the top 10 of our best looking console games, nor does Nintendo aspire to such things. So we'd have a "Revvofied" Twilight Princess with almost 3 (or 8, depending on your perspective) year old gameplay, on brand new consoles.
Nintendo should release this Zelda on the Gamecube and close the book on the current batch of 3D Zeldas. It's the most acclaimed series in history. Does anyone really want a Zelda game that wasn't built from the ground up on its home console?
http://darthno.ytmnd.com/Mejilan said:
Yoshi
Headmaster of Console Warrior Jugendstrafanstalt
Because they would be canibalizing each other. Zelda, Mario, Smash Bros and Metroid wpuld crush the new IP, it really had no chance and on top of that, 3rd parties wpuld really be pissed, because when there are 5 AAA titles by Nintendo at launch, who is goning to buy 3rd Party's stuff? Mario+Metroid+Smash Bros at launch (as Smash Bros and Metroid wouldn't really competitor), new IP later, like Pikmin on GCN and Zelda before Revolution comes out for GameCube. But with added content for Revolution (slightly bumped grafics, bonus dungeon using all these revolutionary things Revolution offers as a preview what to expect form a Revolution Zelda) and maybe even a bundle a t launch of Revolution Zelda+Revolution=250$ (if Revolution is launched at 199$). I wouldn't like having Zelda as a launch title, because I don't want my favourite two serieses (Mario&Zelda) competing for my play time.Shikamaru Ninja said:
The Bookerman
Member
SantaCruZer said:
Yeah, go ask Rare about it, and their.... Wall guy.
EternalDarko
Member
Just release the game on Gamecube. Seriously, i'd be completely pissed off if they put it on Rev, it's a current gen game; keep it that way. If they want they can have hidden game assets in the disc that can then be unlocked with Revolution to give the game a bump in graphics. But if they move it to Rev, I would be completely and utterly pissed off....maybe even to the point of not buying the rev cos of ninty's bad decisions (atleast not on launch).
I mean, what about the current fanbase? You think people, especially casuals will be happy with the fact that this game that they've been waiting for so long is now no longer coming for their system and they'd have to buy a new one to play what they were promised.
I think it would be a much better marketing decision for Ninty to tout the Rev's real use of backwards compatibility with the release of Twilight Princess; especially if the Rev will give it a boost in gfx (and maybe even gameplay). Think about playing the same game you bought through twice on 2 different consoles with the same disc and getting a slightly different experience with the Rev. It would surely hold on to the current fan base, and appeal to other gamers; showing their dedication to full use of BC rather than it just being a novelty.
Bottom line, release it on cube or people will be pissed. Think about the current userbase; Ninty will loose a lot of people if they go back on their word and fuck us over.
I mean, what about the current fanbase? You think people, especially casuals will be happy with the fact that this game that they've been waiting for so long is now no longer coming for their system and they'd have to buy a new one to play what they were promised.
I think it would be a much better marketing decision for Ninty to tout the Rev's real use of backwards compatibility with the release of Twilight Princess; especially if the Rev will give it a boost in gfx (and maybe even gameplay). Think about playing the same game you bought through twice on 2 different consoles with the same disc and getting a slightly different experience with the Rev. It would surely hold on to the current fan base, and appeal to other gamers; showing their dedication to full use of BC rather than it just being a novelty.
Bottom line, release it on cube or people will be pissed. Think about the current userbase; Ninty will loose a lot of people if they go back on their word and fuck us over.
Nightbringer
Don´t hit me for my bad english plase
Nintendo can add some extras that only can be enabled if you have a Revolution but the game will appear on the GCN.
Why?
Why the gamecube owners are waiting for the game since May of 2004 if Nintendo launches the game for the Revolution they will win a lot of unpopularity inside the GCN bases.
Why?
Why the gamecube owners are waiting for the game since May of 2004 if Nintendo launches the game for the Revolution they will win a lot of unpopularity inside the GCN bases.
Myoclonic Jerk
Member
The perfect solution would be 2 versions of the game..
GameCube = only the game
REV(normal DVD not mini) = game + extras + (if possible) pumped up textures + grass
oh and..
GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ZERRUUUUUUUDAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
GameCube = only the game
REV(normal DVD not mini) = game + extras + (if possible) pumped up textures + grass
oh and..
GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO ZERRUUUUUUUDAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Yup, I don't care if the Gamecube is dead or not, 18 million have been sold. It should just be released for Gamecube in 2006, and people can still play the game if they never owned a Gamecube if they just buy a Revolution. It's a safe bet. Zelda cannot be moved to the Revolution, it would take too much time, money and effort.Nightbringer said:
Here is what Nintendo should do:
Release Z:TP in the early spring, to let GC go out with a bang, possibly with some extra content for Rev hidden on the disc (maybe some easy technical improvements such as higher res. texture sets and subdivision patches).
Two or three months later release Revolution, a little before or after PS3, with a new Mario title.
That way all the people who wanted to play TP, but didn't want to put money on a dying horse (GC) can play that, when they are finished with Mario and want another big title for their new console. That way Nintendo can leverage the already installed GC base as well as having a very strong lineup in the launch window.
With some other decent titles, it could be the best launch in history.
Release Z:TP in the early spring, to let GC go out with a bang, possibly with some extra content for Rev hidden on the disc (maybe some easy technical improvements such as higher res. texture sets and subdivision patches).
Two or three months later release Revolution, a little before or after PS3, with a new Mario title.
That way all the people who wanted to play TP, but didn't want to put money on a dying horse (GC) can play that, when they are finished with Mario and want another big title for their new console. That way Nintendo can leverage the already installed GC base as well as having a very strong lineup in the launch window.
With some other decent titles, it could be the best launch in history.
Agreed.
While I can understand the benefits of having this new Zelda at the launch of Nintendo Revolution, I'd rather have it launch on Gamecube. I'm going to be waiting a good while before I consider buying a X360, Revolution or PS3. I want to wait and see which console truly has the best games that suit my tastes.
I still have plenty of use for my current three consoles. I'dont feel I need to jump into anything just yet. Seeing FFXIII running on PS3 hardware will probably give me a gaming erection.....I hope I have the will power to resist.
While I can understand the benefits of having this new Zelda at the launch of Nintendo Revolution, I'd rather have it launch on Gamecube. I'm going to be waiting a good while before I consider buying a X360, Revolution or PS3. I want to wait and see which console truly has the best games that suit my tastes.
I still have plenty of use for my current three consoles. I'dont feel I need to jump into anything just yet. Seeing FFXIII running on PS3 hardware will probably give me a gaming erection.....I hope I have the will power to resist.
nah just keep TP on the GC cause it wouldn't be fair to GC owners, it also wouldn't help the Rev much with bringing in new fans cause a game like Zelda just caters to their current fanbase, if Nintendo wants to expand their fanbase they'll need to launch the Rev with new franchises and not have them get overshadowed by games like Mario or Zelda
AssMan said:
Well it's not like Nintendo haven't fed people bullshit in the past. I mean Mario 128 was supposed to be on Gamecube and definitely shown at the past couple of E3s. Come next year with the Gamecube definitely dead it will be very easy for Nintendo to turn around and say "you will have to play it on the Revolution because we just had to add this really cool feature". Besides, remember Nintendo is a Japanese company. Right now they sell 12-14K GCs a month. In a year that will probably be down to a miserly 5,000 or 6,000 GCs a month.
Simple idea:
Keep building the game for the Gamecube
Stick game in a revolution box
slap "Compatible with Nintendo Gamecube" on the back
Sell it as a Revolution launch title/end of life Gamecube title
or if you're worried about "graphics" looking "dated"
Keep building the game for the Gamecube
Stick game in Gamecube box
slap "Comaptible with Nintendo Revolution" on the back
Sell it as a Revolution launch title/end of life Gamecube title
$$
Keep building the game for the Gamecube
Stick game in a revolution box
slap "Compatible with Nintendo Gamecube" on the back
Sell it as a Revolution launch title/end of life Gamecube title
or if you're worried about "graphics" looking "dated"
Keep building the game for the Gamecube
Stick game in Gamecube box
slap "Comaptible with Nintendo Revolution" on the back
Sell it as a Revolution launch title/end of life Gamecube title
$$
psycho_snake
I went to WAGs boutique and all I got was a sniff
Knowing Nintendo, they will probably keep it on GC even though it will be dead by then (GC's current state is seriously ill), so it would be smart to make it a revolution launch title. The game would help sell Revolution really well, especially if revolution is priced well. Everyone knows what Zelda is so it going to grab many poeples attention and if revolution is cheaper than the other consoles, then more customers will opt to by a revolution. After the announcement of the delay, I thought it was because Nintendo will move it to revolution. Would you guys think its possible that Nintendo would put it on both consoles?
I'm not sure what Gamecube fans everyone thinks are going to be pissed off. There are very few Gamecube fans left. Look at how badly Resident Evil 4 has done. It had pleanty of hype, the game kicked ass and it was nice and mature; yet no one bought it. I realize that Zelda is a bigger franchise than Residen Evil, but there is no way a game of that calibur should have sold only half a million copies to the "18+ million fan base" of the Cube.
The Gamecube fans have already abandoned the console, it's time for Nintendo to cut its losses as well and start fresh with the Rev.
The Gamecube fans have already abandoned the console, it's time for Nintendo to cut its losses as well and start fresh with the Rev.
So where are all these fans when it comes time to buy a great release like Resident Evil 4? And I'm pretty sure that Famitsu's most wanted rankings have been proven in the past to not always mean much when it comes to game sales.
I'm refering to the US numbers on the game. I'm not sure how well it's sold elsewhere, but I don't think it's done that well anywhere. Can you point me towards those other numbers?
Kroole said:
I'm refering to the US numbers on the game. I'm not sure how well it's sold elsewhere, but I don't think it's done that well anywhere. Can you point me towards those other numbers?
Ruzbeh said:
of course they have, selling barely 3,000 units weekly in Japan and barely 50,000 monthly here while other systems are moving 30,000 in japan weekly and almost 200,000 monthly in the US. if that isn't an abandoned systems I don't know what is.
GitarooMan
Member
Kroole said:
I assume you're talking worldwide. RE4 GC won't hit 1 million in US sales. On the other hand, no matter what Nintendo does with Zelda, I would be shocked if it didn't clear 1 million in the US. Now 2 million, that's up for debate...
GitarooMan said:
But that's pathetic for a Zelda release! This delay has set the game up to possibly be the worst selling Zelda (console) game of all time. I want Zelda and Nintendo to be successful, I just don't see why they wouldn't leverage this particular game in a way that would be more beneficial to them.
Exactly. I see no reason these people wouldn't move on to the Rev to buy Zelda.
GitarooMan
Member
suaveric said:
Um, I don't think Wind Waker has even cleared 2 mil in the US yet (it's very close), and that was released at the system's peak with a lot of time to continue selling. I think if Zelda:TP clears 2 mil in the US, it would be a massive success. Even 1-1.5 would be very solid, considering the late release.
GitarooMan said:
But these are sad numbers. Zelda and Nintendo deserve better, so why not port the game to the Rev where it can help sell the system so all of Nintendo's franchises don't keep seeing these huge drop offs in sales?
My point is this- Nintendo has little or nothing to gain by releasing Zelda on the Cube next year. But everything to gain by releasing it on the Rev in the first year of that console's life.
If Nintendo can get Z:TP done well on Revolution for its launch day then I'm all for it. Waited this long, I can wait a little longer.
Zelda is a system seller. Why waste it on the GCN? If Perfect Dark and Conker had been delayed and redone for the GCN at the beginning of this generation, we might have had a different outcome.
Zelda is a system seller. Why waste it on the GCN? If Perfect Dark and Conker had been delayed and redone for the GCN at the beginning of this generation, we might have had a different outcome.
JoshuaJSlone
Member
I know it's not the case in Japan, but US RE4 outsold all the other GCN Resident Evils.suaveric said:
That's not at all what he was talking about, though. You're talking about whether the system has a big future with new buyers. He's talking about whether the system has sales potential with the current owners. Surely we can't judge the interest of those who bought their systems in 2001-2003 by how many systems are selling in 2005.Error2K4 said:
See this is where I just dont understand this frame of mind. I'm a consumer that has bought a Gamecube, and promised a Mario 128 and this new Zelda. I've already been shafted of one, and now you guys WANT Nintendo to move this to Rev? I... dont understand. You WANT to have to pay for an entirely new console just to play a game fully intended for the one you bought before?
Why think like that. It doesnt make sense unless you're a Nintendo shareholder. As a consumer I want products promised to me, and I don't give a shit "whats more beneficial to Nintendo". Company loyalty is a retarded thing nowadays, you dont get anything for it except a lot of grief.
Revolution is coming with GC compatibilty, first time in a Nintendo home console as well. If people that dont own a GC, buy a Revolution, they can still buy Zelda if they want, and the other GC titles. But if you dont own a GC now, what with it being as cheap as a Twix, then the assumption that someone would buy a Revolution at full price at launch for Zelda, is retarded.
Nintendo understands that it needs the support of its loyal fanbase more than ever before they can 'expand' the market. Of course you have the delusional fans that "want whats best for Nintendo!" that have more money than sense, but to the rest of us rational thinking consumers, in relation to Mario 128 and Zelda: fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.
Why think like that. It doesnt make sense unless you're a Nintendo shareholder. As a consumer I want products promised to me, and I don't give a shit "whats more beneficial to Nintendo". Company loyalty is a retarded thing nowadays, you dont get anything for it except a lot of grief.
Revolution is coming with GC compatibilty, first time in a Nintendo home console as well. If people that dont own a GC, buy a Revolution, they can still buy Zelda if they want, and the other GC titles. But if you dont own a GC now, what with it being as cheap as a Twix, then the assumption that someone would buy a Revolution at full price at launch for Zelda, is retarded.
Nintendo understands that it needs the support of its loyal fanbase more than ever before they can 'expand' the market. Of course you have the delusional fans that "want whats best for Nintendo!" that have more money than sense, but to the rest of us rational thinking consumers, in relation to Mario 128 and Zelda: fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.
Shikamaru Ninja
任天å ã® å¿è
I think everyone who would agree to push the game to Revolution has full intention of buying a Revolution. So it's to my benefit as a Revolution consumer. Summer 2006 is pretty damn late. I wanted Zelda this November on my GameCube ... period. It's not happening, so I would prefer for the game to take advantage of more features and more development time and come on an exciting new platform as opposed to GameCube AD.
Luckett_X said:
Please, Nintendo never announced Mario 128. The game as never shown. How can you think that it was "promised" to you? And you're calling me a delusional fan?
If you're that big of a Zelda fan in the first place, you were going to buy the Rev for the Zelda after TP anyway. So why not let TP go to the Revolution where it can really shine?
..pakbeka..
Member
IMO, nintendo should stick with releasing it on the gamecube, in april or may, then, release a special version of the game on a revolution disc, with some minor upgraded graphics, a couple of new dungeons and some use of the rev's interface
and I hope the launch of the revolution is Q3 2005, any later than that and they'd have the same problems the GC had
and I hope the launch of the revolution is Q3 2005, any later than that and they'd have the same problems the GC had
I really hope that Nintendo sticks with the GC for this game. If they are really going to make the game for Revolution then it means it won't come out until next christmas. Upgrading graphics etc. will take quite some time....and.. I..I can't handle that. Ok, maybe I would but not as good as if it was released in april/may.