Zelda: Twilight Princess versions to be near-identical?

Doesn't the Cube support 480p, widescreen? I have plenty of games that can do it...

Viewtiful Joe, Soul Calibur 2, Madden, Mario Kart, Fifa

Am I missing something?

"The Wii version has a widescreen mode and runs at 60fps instead of the GC version's 30 fps, but that's the only graphical difference between them." Are we really talking about graphics or looks on the wii? I though graphics werent important only the wiimote! who cares how the game looks 30 fps or 60 fps (besides the average human can only see 32 fps). Also, last time I checked most wide screen are HDTV or are big which means you will be buying a system that does not support HDTV nor look good on big screen running at 480p. which is the main argument for not buying a 360 or PS3, "I don't have to buy a new tv.". So guys lets stick to the wiimote and lets not talk about graphics, widescreen or big tvs before I get nauseous. viva la wiiiii!

"besides the average human can only see 32 fps"

This is only partly true. Yes, the eye does only take 24 shots per second, but it is a myth that your eye cannot detect higher frame rates.

Basically, your eye does not take a shot instantly like a computer or camara does. The eye has a longer....exposure time. That is why your hand gets a motion blur when you move it too fast.

In the same way, if the computer displays 4-5 shots per "eye exposure", your brain WILL process all five shots and put together a smoother and seemingly more natural animation for you complete with the blurs and other nuances you are used to seeing in real life.

In short, the brain may only take in 24-30 shots a second, but it CAN (and does) interpolate extra data per shot.

About equating shaking with spinning: what motion would you suggest to replicate spinning? Spinning the controller? That clearly won't work. Spinning and shaking are both kind of like a vibration, so it sort of makes sense. Like if you move your controller in a small circle in the X-Z plane, that's similar to a quick shake of the contoller, which is what the remote picks up as spinning.

"This contradicts rumors that the title will leverage Wii's slightly superior graphics engine.." [emphasis mine]

C'mon Blake, "slightly" and "roughly double" are not the same thing. Bias is normal but if you're going to be obvious about it, you might as well try and be funny. Or instead you could insinuate that Wii is a waste of time in everything you write, and wonder why people complain about your writing...

Come on. Think about it eventually almost everyone here will get a wii (It will be the cheapest system). Then when everyone gets a GCN copy pass it once or twice they will realize that its the same as every LoZ game, trade it in, and get a wii version of the game. Nintendo will make more money.
NINTENDO WINS

The only reason that they have not released the GCN version is because of the time variable. If you have played GCN TP infinity times before launch of wii then by the time wii comes out you will PROBABLY not get the wii version.
NINTENDO LOSES

Of course I'm gonna get GCN and wii versions but i'll wait a while before I get the GCN version.

I always thought good graphic add to the experience of a game by making it more immersive. If you can't visually compel audiences then they may not be able to grasp what the writers/developers are trying to convey. Similar to how novel writers use detailed imagery to get the reader to imagine worlds they may not have ever seen had they not first imagined them. Imagine if Nintendo tried to use Nintendo 64 hardware to code Twilight Princess would the game be as effective at revealing the two worlds or the imagination of the developers? I think the answer is fairly obvious.

Another thing as I will say again visuals aren't everything, but because human sight (Stereoscopic 3-Dimensional, color vision) is one of our most developed senses it is no wonder visuals almost always grab our attention first. So although you can't really judge a game based solely on looks you can say however: "Wow that game looks crappy but it sure was fun!" or "Hey this game had fantastic gameplay and the visual quality really added to the experience!"

" Another thing as I will say again visuals aren't everything, but because human sight (Stereoscopic 3-Dimensional, color vision) is one of our most developed senses it is no wonder visuals almost always grab our attention first. So although you can't really judge a game based solely on looks you can say however: "Wow that game looks crappy but it sure was fun!" or "Hey this game had fantastic gameplay and the visual quality really added to the experience!" "

Good thing our sense of touch is also highly developed, which means, playing with a spacial controller will really add to the immersion into the game! And everyone here is talking like GC had crappy NES graphics. Look at a game like RE4, that was a great visual experience. Look at GTAIII, VC, and SA. The graphics are actually pretty horrible. But they are some of the top selling and most well known games and the best scoring reviewed games. Why? Not because of graphics, but because of gameplay.

They should have made it at least a little better on the graphics side, not simply Widescreen, but whatever.

What point were you trying to make by quoting me> Is this some type of flattery? I never saw a controller in a store that told me to play a game. I see it, hear it, then feel it. When you boil a pot of water (let's assume this is your first time) you don't go and touch it first. Your vision tells you that the pot maybe dangerous to touch because there is steam rising, your sense of hearing tells you the water is bubbling, if your sense of smell is good you might smell the water when it boils over and spalshes onto the hotplate etc, then you can feel the surroundings and sense the pot itself get hot. You never touch it first. My point was visuals along with sound are the first things that grab your attention.

Try just going up to a random girl and touching first without using your other senses first ie sight, sound, and smell etc. Either you will get slapped or she will say she got sexually harassed.

Zelda should have been just a Gamecube game. Why should I spend extra money to play it with an inferior controller?The Wiimote is a gimmick. It will die down in a few months and we will all pick up the classic controller.The Wii is just a Gamecube with a new controller.

Wii
- possibly twice the tech specs
- Virtual Console
- Connect24
- DVD media slot loading drive
- 512MB internal storage
- use of SD cards and external HDD to expand storage
- Bluetooth
- Wireless 811b/g
- free online play
- exclusive games

Nope. Doesn't look like a Gamecube to me.

Has any official sources said that the GC controls will be avaliable on the Wii version? If so, I'm still not touching it.

I bought my GameCube pretty much for one reason only: Zelda. I have only played one Zelda game on it so far, and hell if I take away the second. I don't have a widescreen TV (which are all HD anyway, so if you get one for LOZ, then you shouldn't complain about HD features on the PS3 or the 360) and I don't feel like dropping any money on a new system this year.

Oh, and martin just got totally owned. It's retarded for anyone to say that graphics don't matter in gaming, when it conveys story and emotion as much as the visuals in films do. What's more, the same who bash priority in graphics also claim that video games should be considered an artform.

That's why you call it the DualCube! They claim it's twice as powerful as the Gamecube yet that power has yet to be seen. It has a new controller thats going to make some games more complicated than they should be and this Virtual Console that everyone is going to go Blah-Hooo over is boring. If you want to play Wii online you have to have Wifi. At least with the other consoles Ethernet was included. It's ridiculous not to have it. In order to play Dvds you need a stupid add on. In this generation when DVD is extremely prevalent why did they tack this on as an accessory? And you Nintendo Fanboys insist visuals don't matter go back to the fuzzy graphics on the Nintendo 64 and try to play those games instead of recent titles. Now imaginine those same titles if the graphics were sharp and clear.

Yeah bladestar, the human eye can only see 32fps...and you are a complete f-ing moron.

People keep mentioning this, but has it been confirmed that the Wii version will allow you to use a GCN controller instead of the Wiimote? I have not seen this anywhere. Yes, it would seem to make sense to allow this, but Nintendo has been known to do things that, you know, don't make sense... ("Wii" anyone?)

Frankly, as much as I'd like the Wii controls to work with it, I am a bit worried that it'll be too complicated and "tacked on", but I also really want the Widescreen support. But, in case I hate the Wii controls, I would really like to have the Gamecube controls too... I just don't know if it will happen. Knowing Nintendo, they'll want to make it "Wii" only controls to enforce the "uniqueness" of the game on Wii. Anyone want to point me to an article that confirms differently?

@LongshotX great analogy. It is kind of frustrating how so many try to undermine graphics. Graphics have always being very important for video games. Everyone was dying to see what the next gen console would look like. This was the case from the first video game up until the wii. Now all of the sudden Nintendo comes and start telling people that graphics are not important, and we do not need them, just because it is cheaper for them to make a console without better graphics.

@joseph - You are an idiot.

Intelligence Quotient Scale:

Moron = 50-69

Imbecile = 30-49

Idiot = 29 & below

I'm gonna agree with these last few guys.

So vigirously defending the 'visuals don't matter in a game' argument seems alittle short sided, and very much makes you sound in denial.

No one said that a game has to be the prettiest visual experiance ever to be a good, or even PLAYABLE game. They were simply saying that better visuals ARE reasonable to ask for, and arguing otherwise is... shit, its stupid.

Why are people complaining about consoles supporting HD and widescreen? They all will also support SD too... so why the complaining? People (not necessarily on this site) complained that the 360 'looks like ass' on a regular SD TV. WTF? Not any worse than all those other consoles using SD. Yeah, it looks worse than HD, THATS THE POINT. HD is better. I dunno, maybe I didn't convey that well. I just don't understand why people complained when nothing about it made it look WORSE than normal on an SD TV. We had a LAN and a friend brought his 20" CRT for himself to play on... and GRAW looked amazing to me. Not like my HD TV, but damn good. I dunno. I guess I'm ranting.
Anyhow.

I think since I know I'm gonna get a Wii, I might as well buy the Wii version of TP. I've had tons of fun with MP:H on my DS, and that employs a control scheme thats FORCED upon you. Something different that requires movement.

I dunno. I'm not saying that it'd be smart for Nintendo to force 'Wii only' controls on us, but I personally am excited for the challenge it creates, no matter how little or grand. I'm think I'm making a good assumption that they wouldn't give you completely uncomfortable, unusable control scheme on the Wii, so I'm all go for it.

Also, I know someone else mentioned this... but why all the fuss? I heard Miyamoto said that they weren't forcing movement-centric controls on the player because it would get to tiring (for sword play, at least.)

I dunno. I think they're people too and will be able to use common sense on what we'll physically want and not want to do with a video game.

On second thought, those bastards ARE japanese. Its like they're super human or something! (except maybe in the pants region... tehehe)

Ok guys I'm going to post this one more time, please read! To all the people who have just suddenly said it ain't all about graphics anymore just because Nintendo says so read this because I swear you Nintendo Fanboys act like you are in a state of constant denial.

I always thought good graphic add to the experience of a game by making it more immersive. Ifyou can't visually compel audiences thenthey may not be able to grasp what the writers/developers are trying
to convey. Similar to how novel writers use detailed imagery to getthe reader to imagine worlds they may not have ever seen had they not first imagined them. Imagine if Nintendo tried to use Nintendo 64 hardware to code Twilight Princess would the game be as effective atrevealing the two worlds or the imagination of the developers? Ithink the answer is fairly obvious.

Another thing as I will say again visuals aren't everything, but because human sight (Stereoscopic 3-Dimensional, color vision) is one of our most developed senses it is no wonder visuals almost always grab our attention first. So although you can't really judge a game based solely on looks you can say however: "Wow that game looks crappy but it sure was fun!" or "Hey this game had fantastic gameplay and the
visual quality really added to the experience!"

@LongshotX

You DONT have to have wifi for the Wii. You can plug in via USB bud.

Anyway as i have stated elsewhere, graphically Twilight Princess looks awesome from all the videos and screens i have seen thus far. This being the case and as a 'cube swansong title, why the hell did Nintendo not share their obvious intimate knowledge of their hardware and teach third parties how to effectively use the 'cubes undoubted resources better?

Just because it says Nintendo on the box does not mean its your exclusive domain - take note Nintendo.

You don't need wifi, you can use a USB>CAT5 jack that costs all of $20, versus the wireless $100 adapter for XBOX, XBOX360. And, at least as far as I can see, wireless is more prevalent than HDTV and will be in more homes earlier.

"It has a new controller thats going to make some games more complicated than they should be"

I agree, but it will also make a lot of games more intutive and easier to play.

"and this Virtual Console that everyone is going to go Blah-Hooo over is boring."

That's your opinion. But cheap retro gaming and new indie games sound great to me. After all, indie developers can take some chances big developers can't = innovative, fun gameplay, ala Geometry Wars.

"in order to play Dvds you need a stupid add on. In this generation when DVD is extremely prevalent why did they tack this on as an accessory?"

Apparently you didn't read my earlier post. DVD playback costs money in licensing. Making an attachment passes on that cost only to the consumers who want the ability. I will never play video DVDs on the Wii, I don't want to pay $20 more for the ability.

"And you Nintendo Fanboys insist visuals don't matter go back to the fuzzy graphics on the Nintendo 64 and try to play those games instead of recent titles. Now imaginine those same titles if the graphics were sharp and clear. "

Visuals do matter. But my dad just bought a 360 and you know what I'm playing lately? Mario64. Why? Because it's amazingly fun, unlike anything on the 360 yet, IMO.

"You don't need wifi, you can use a USB>CAT5 jack that costs all of $20, versus the wireless $100 adapter for XBOX, XBOX360." what!? So you can't plug a CAT5 wire to the 360? This is misleading. You do not need to buy the XBOX 360 adapter. You can use a CAT5 cable. How about saying, "You don't need wifi, you can use a USB>CAT5 jack that costs all of $20 similar to the 360. Using wifi is optional; same as the 360."

"Visuals do matter. But my dad just bought a 360 and you know what I'm playing lately? Mario64. Why? Because it's amazingly fun, unlike anything on the 360 yet, IMO." That’s because you are 8 years old. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with you, it is natural. You see... as you grow older you will see that games like GRAW, BF:MC, Oblivion, or coming games like Gears Of War, Forza 2, Fable 2, Halo 3, Too Human will start to interest you. But first you have to grow pubic hair, grow some pimples and like girls (don’t worry you will get to that). You know there is a process for everything in life. Till then keep playing Mario 64. You should also try Super Mario Bross(1986) it is a great game.

Nintendo Wii
Wireless b/g - free
Ethernet - any USB adapter ~$20

MS XBOX, 360
Ethernet - free
Wireless - MS proprietary accessory $99.99

I have wireless in my home. To get the 360 online will cost $100. To get the Wii online is free.

If you have wired only, Wii online will cost you $20. BFD.

There is only one little problem. The wii does not exist, and you can't get it for free or any other price; which is why you are still playing N64 games. So let me update your list a bit:

MS XBOX, 360
Ethernet - free
Wireless - MS proprietary accessory $99.99

Did I forget to post the wii? No, it does not exist. So keep playing with your imaginary wii while we play with the 360.

Your argument would be valid if the wii would be on the market. How can some of you compare a product that does not exist with a product that is being in the market?

Um, we can compare it because it's in the same generation of console games and will be on the market in a few months.

If MS announced they were making a portable to be released December 2007, would it be illogical to compare the released information about it to the current DS and PSP? No, it would be okay because they would be competitors.

Don't worry about it. I wouldn't expect someone who has to throw around insults from the sixth grade and justify himself with games that do "not exist" to understand this train of thought.

i heard that Nintendo is making a classic controller, which is basicly a GCN controller. Check it out at:

http://www.gizmodo.com/gadgets/home-entertainment/wii-classic-controller-172694.php

http://www.gizmodo.com/gadgets/home-entertainment/wii-classic-controller-172694.php
wii classic controller