Metareview - Zelda: Twilight Princess (GameCube)
For Wii-less GameCube owners it's a no-brainer; you pro'ly been had your copy of Twilight Princess. But for those few Wii owners who are considering the GameCube edition, still unable to take decisive action, here are several takes on how the two versions match up:
- 1UP (100/100) - "Does the format really make a difference? It does, but ultimately those differences are fairly insubstantial ... Honestly, there are only three differences between the two editions of the game: a different control scheme, lack of widescreen support for GameCube, and the fact that each version is quite literally the mirror image of the other ... As a matter of fact, it's this version which has Hyrule's "true" layout; the game world was designed to echo Ocarina of Time's landscape, and the adventure feels just a little more nostalgic when certain areas accurately coincide with those from the previous game ... The lack of widescreen is more crucial; if you've become accustomed to seeing a more panoramic view of your games...the 4:3 visuals will feel downright suffocating ... And then there's the control scheme. Frankly, going from the Wii interface to the GameCube feels like a step backward; it's less immersive, less precise and considerably slower."
- IGN (95/100) - "Some gamers have resisted the Wii version of Twilight Princess because they feel that the new control scheme is unnecessary. The GameCube build of the title provides a more conventional alternative ... There are even a couple advantages to playing with a traditional controller over the Wii remote. For one, players who enjoyed titles like Wind Waker will understand immediately how to maneuver Link like a pro ... Where the GameCube build comes up short is the area of aiming ... [The] visual differences between the two versions of the game are minimal. While both incarnations support a progressive-scan mode, only the Wii build also features a 16:9 widescreen option. Meanwhile, some gamers have complained that the GCN title is riddled with more framerate slowdowns than the steady running Wii game, but we have not encountered these issues while playing ... As someone who has played both the GameCube and Wii versions of Twilight Princess, I can confidently state that I prefer the latter for its handful of extras, including what I consider to be enhanced controls and an exclusive 16:9 widescreen mode. That being said, though, I can certainly understand why purists might want to stick with the more conventional controls of the GCN build".
- GameSpot (89/100) - "Graphically, the GameCube version is roughly identical to the Wii release ... The combat controls are more conventional on the GameCube...but the Wii controls actually end up feeling more precise in a direct comparison ... Also, in what has to be the weirdest change, the entire GameCube game is a mirror image of the Wii version. Actually, it's probably the other way around ... You can't go wrong with either version of the game, but if you're still trying to decide, the Wii version is just a bit better." [Note: GameSpot scored Wii version 88/100]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Andy S. @ Dec 20th 2006 10:00PM
Seriously, though…what IS up with GameSpot's rating?
Lucas @ Dec 20th 2006 10:03PM
wtf is up with gamespot
Silver R. Wolfe @ Dec 20th 2006 10:04PM
They're just not impressed with it, nothing to get your panties in a bunch about.
Vince @ Dec 20th 2006 10:08PM
What's up with 1UP's rating?
I have never played a 100/100 game in my life.
These people need to calm down a bit, mind you I haven't played this new Zelda yet. :p
Craigo @ Dec 20th 2006 10:08PM
3 - You missed the point. They gave the GameCube version an 89, and the Wii version, which is "just a bit better," 88.
Spuky @ Dec 20th 2006 10:11PM
so if the Wii version is better, why does the other one is the one that gets the 8.9?
where different reviewers or what?
Seroth @ Dec 20th 2006 10:14PM
Wii version got a lower score 'cause Twilight Princess was a good GAMECUBE game. The Wii game should have to meet higher standards than a Gamecube game.
n_revolution9 @ Dec 20th 2006 10:15PM
Wikipedia Twilight Princess and you'll see the Gamecube version was the way it was meant to be played.
Huzzah!! @ Dec 20th 2006 10:15PM
What's up with 1up?? The GC version feels like a step backward, yet it gets a perfect 100???
Silver R. Wolfe @ Dec 20th 2006 10:16PM
Because they're rated for the system the game is on. That means that GC version is 89/100 for the GC.
Probot @ Dec 20th 2006 10:21PM
Why is anyone expecting a difference between the two versions? It is a GC game. That's not a knock against the Wii at all. The visuals were designed for the GC. And it looks good.
Zatos @ Dec 20th 2006 10:25PM
The 100/100 is a conversion of 1up's perfect 10 score. It's easier to compare that way.
Probot @ Dec 20th 2006 10:26PM
^I meant to say visual difference.
chethan @ Dec 20th 2006 10:29PM
Just like #5 said, Gamespot is messed up with their 88 for Wii and 89 for GCN even though "the Wii version is just a bit better." | Also Gamespot doesn't seem to be updating their site as frequently as they used to, and the same with IGN.
Josh @ Dec 20th 2006 10:30PM
I have it for GameCube, and I'm absolutely loving the game. I do hope to get a Wii in five days, but even if I had a Wii on launch day, I still would have waited for the GameCube version of Twilight Princess. The only reason is because I'd rather play the game without the mirror mode of the Wii version.
Whether the mirror mode affects gameplay or not doesn't concern me, but just knowing that everything is "off" on the Wii version would drive me crazy while playing it. I still don't understand why Nintendo thought they HAD to mirror the Wii version. It's unnecessary and just messes up the connections TP tries to make with OoT (since it only takes place 100 years after, if I remember correctly what was said before TP's release).
Ian @ Dec 20th 2006 10:35PM
I don't know how GS does their ratings but my guess is different reviewers so the guy who rated the cube version may have thought the Wii version was better.
DojoRacoon @ Dec 20th 2006 10:37PM
This pretty much cements my view that gamespot is not a valid source to go to for reviews. They seem to have an agenda. I used to go to gamespot for my gaming news but at some point I realized I was getting almost no info on any Nintendo products compared to all the PS3. So I switched to this site. I don't think gamespot necessarily has a biased against any particular company I just think they like their graphics a little too much.
Meophist @ Dec 20th 2006 10:38PM
5/5, 10/10, and 100/100 doesn't mean "perfect". There's no such thing as a "perfect" game as it's all subjective.
Josh @ Dec 20th 2006 10:41PM
Meophist (#18) said: "There's no such thing as a 'perfect' game as it's all subjective."
That's precisely why there ARE perfect games. ALL reviews are subjective, so if one person thinks a particular game is perfect, then that game IS perfect, at least to that one person.
Unless you can show me how to review a game objectively, then there are MANY perfect games.
Tatoolo @ Dec 20th 2006 10:45PM
I think I've read before that Gamespot often reviews games based on the console it is on and thus the competition it is up against. For instance, a game ported to all the major consoles will get different ratings based on the console - a FPS on XBox 360 has a lot of competition and should be given a score that represents how good it is for someone who owns that console.
So, they can say that the Wii version is slightly better while still giving it a lower score because it's not really in direct competition with the GC version. As a "next-gen" game, TP isn't all that one should expect, but for a game on a last-gen system, it's very good.
What really bothers me is how 1up says "Frankly, going from the Wii interface to the GameCube feels like a step backward; it's less immersive, less precise and considerably slower" and yet still gives the game 100/100. That very statement says that, even without direct comparison, the GC game is lacking slightly in immersion and precision.
Etheo @ Dec 20th 2006 10:53PM
Funny how no reviews mentioned the lack of a third item slot in the GC version... though I'm still very happy with the game :)
jayen @ Dec 20th 2006 11:35PM
I don't get this mirror image comment. Anyone care to explain?
Eligio J Rosa @ Dec 20th 2006 11:44PM
I don't hate the Gamespot review of Wii's LOZ:TP. I'm just glad to find a reason.
Andy S. @ Dec 20th 2006 11:52PM
jayen–
Nintendo took the GameCube version of TP, in which Link is and always was left-handed, and to compensate for the WiiMote being held in the right hand, created a mirror image of the game for the Wii so players swinging WiiMotes with their right hands would see Link act accordingly in the game.
And as far as GameSpot goes, look at some of the other games they ranked at 88/100. It seems out of kilter that they would put Zelda so low when all other review sites put it so high.
mike @ Dec 20th 2006 11:54PM
I'm with #23 , what exactly does mirror image mean? I have the wii version so does that mean the map and everything is the opposite (reversed) for the GC?
koheed @ Dec 20th 2006 11:55PM
Mirrow image is because on the Wii Link is right handed to fit the control scheme with Wiimote and Nunchuck. On the GameCube they mirrored the entire game so Link is back to his traditional left-handed self. Well, actually, it's the Wii version that is the true mirror.
I don't see how Gamespot could give a .1 edge to the GC version, but I do agree with their score. I don't believe this game deserve a near perfect rating.
Andy S. @ Dec 20th 2006 11:59PM
Case in point -
GameSpot:
Call of Duty 3: 8.8
Gears of War: 9.6
NCAA Football 07 (PS2): 8.8
Elite Beat Agents (DS): 8.9
I'm sorry, but I own Gears of War and Z:TP, and there's no way GOW is that much better. Here, someone may say, "Well it's the graphics, man." But look at Elite Beat Agents? If graphics are the determining factor here, Shouldn't that be around a 5? Call "fanboy" 'till you're blue in the face, but I for one know where to NOT go for my game reviews.
Freelancepimp @ Dec 21st 2006 12:05AM
I keep hearing this excuse that they are scoring based on the system it is on but yet reviewers are giving Wii ports lower scores due to the inferior graphics when compared to the XBOX 360 and PS3. What gives?
Negativecool @ Dec 21st 2006 12:25AM
I've never played a game that deserves a 100/100. And I've pretty much layed my hands on all killer-aps. I highly doubt this is the 1st...but hell, I'll giv'er a try.
BPM? @ Dec 21st 2006 1:05AM
#22 Etheo:
Actually, the Wii version has TWO more item slots than the GameCube version!
GCN: X and Y buttons
Wii: B trigger, Left, Right, and Down on the +Control Pad.
If being able to have two more items equipped at the same time isn't a plus for the Wii version, then I don't know what is!
Before anyone mentions it... Yes, I'm aware that you can't directly use most items on the +Control Pad. In most cases, pessing the +Control Pad swaps the position of that item with the one assigned to B. Exceptions being like the Iron boots or using a Bottle full of Oil (when you have your Lantern out).
djwoody @ Dec 21st 2006 1:06AM
ign put up a head to head for the insiders between the versions and the gamecube version came out at #1
Erick Gzz. @ Dec 21st 2006 1:34AM
29, it's simple, the review system is wrong. Check this out...
http://intelligentgamers.wordpress.com/
samfish @ Dec 21st 2006 1:40AM
I actually bought the Gamecube version the day before it came out at Target because I figured there was no way in Hell I'd find a Wii any time soon.
Then on Sunday, I drove past toy's R' Us late at night and there was no one there. I decided I'd go back in a few hours and if there was STILL no one there, I'd get a Wii...and give the gamecube version to my Brother for Xmas
Of course, I went back and sure as shit, only 2 or 3 other people were there! So I stood in line and bought a Wii.
Long story short, I've started over in TP and it's SO frustrating! I keep hoping someone figures out a way to use GC saves in the next few days, but alas...by the time that happens, I'll probably be back to where I was!
On the other hand...if you think a Wii is hard to find, try finding TP on the Gamecube. I'm lucky as Hell that I got one, it seems.
The moral of the story: BE PATIENT, KIDS!
NeverSage @ Dec 21st 2006 2:04AM
Ugh. The mirror image thing. So stupid.
Dan @ Dec 21st 2006 3:05AM
Yeah, as a lefty, I can't say I appreciate this mirrored crap. And no, Miyamoto, I don't prefer playing right handed, and can't really fathom how you do it. As it turns out, it doesn't make much of a difference, but it's still a bit frustrating. (Incidentally, the most frustrating game to play left-handed I've played is, without a doubt, Red Steel. Swordfighting was miserable.)
justchris @ Dec 21st 2006 3:21AM
@Tatoolo, if that's the case, then that makes Gamespot's review EVEN WORSE. If the review is tailored for the system the game is on, then TP should have gotten a much better score as it is clearly one of the best games available on the system. You certainly can't compare it to a PS3 or X360 game, because of the few games on those consoles in the same genre, it would also score markedly higher. Are you comparing it to games in a different genre, on different consoles in the same generation?
Having actually read gamespot's review, I don't necessarily disagree with their score, I disagree with the reasons they gave for the score. As far as I can determine, their judgement criteria was that they were expecting TP to revolutinize gaming as we know it, and all they got was the best adventure game they've ever played.
Grey Acumen @ Dec 21st 2006 3:22AM
Actually, I've talked to a friend about this who has played the Zelda Game. This friend also happens to be in the Halo 3 beta testing thing, so I'd say his info is reliable when it comes to this type of thing.
He specifically stated that there is the ability to shift between right-handed and left-handed Link, but it's buried in the In-game options.
I can't confirm this myself, yet, but I'm willing to speculate that if you set Link to play as a Lefty, everything will get mirrored back the way it's supposed to be on the gamecube.
If this is the case, I'm definitely going to be having fun, cause I'm going to do it the first time as a righty, but the second time will be the purist Lefty version.
PRguitarman @ Dec 21st 2006 3:31AM
WHAT'S THIS? A .1 SCORE DIFFERENT IN FAVOR OF THE GAMECUBE VERSION?? WHERE IS MY PITCHFORK!?
Seriously guys, chill.
Foetoid @ Dec 21st 2006 3:46AM
I've played games that deserve a 100/100 score. I believe TP is one of those games, it is longer and harder than OOT, even though it took me half as long to finish as i am ten or so years older. Soul Calibur (1 or 2) deserves a perfect score too. If you want good game reviews, go to Famitsu. It might be a japanese magazine, but it is THE japanese gaming magazine and thier reviews are spot on. OOT, Golden Sun and Soul Calibur 1 all got 100% ratings and i am sure more have followed. And i agree, there is NO way that GoW is better than OOT. GoW is a 10hr game unless your doing the max difficulty, and anything that takes less than 20 hrs to finish is trash.
I'd also like to point out that to all the Tony Hawk purists out there avoiding the Wii version of Downhill Jam cause of the totally redone controls, get it. I have finished Tony Hawk 1,2,3,4,UG 2, AW and Project 8 and as much as i LOVE the traditional controls, when you get used to the Wii controls (and it takes some getting used to after playing the other ones) it is well worth the purchase. The game is much more fun and still gets very difficult further in, probably more so than the others.
gok @ Dec 21st 2006 5:07AM
Any site/publication that give 100/100 score to ANY game loses all its credibility in my eyes. Cmon, 100 is a perfect score and there is no such thing as a perfect game. And 1up gives those scores WAYYYY too easily. They're just playing real game journalists.
DrXym @ Dec 21st 2006 6:07AM
There is no such thing as a 10/10 game and certainly not Zelda. It's hard to see why people are getting so hissy that one site DARED give it less than a perfect score. As the Wii version is almost identical to the GC version, it even have deserved a lower score. There is little excuse that a Wii title is released with last gen graphics on a console which claims to do more. At least the GC version uses the console to its limits and for that it should score higher.
If the 360's flagship title had XBox quality graphics & content, or if the PS3's flagship title had PS2 quality graphics & content, both system would be rightly be crucified. People would rightly question what the point was for buying a new system if the games were the same. Not so for Wii owners. Anything less than a perfect 10 for their beloved game sees them frothing and screaming like little girls.
What is particularly scummy is that the GC version costs MORE than the Wii version and was deliberately released later. Nintendo engaged in a spot of product sabotage to get their adoring fans to buy the new console rather than play it on the one they already have. This is the new model for Nintendo. I expect it will repeat in a few years with Wii 2 and the adoring fanboys will be first to defend them when it happens too.
Ln @ Dec 21st 2006 6:21AM
@Gok.
100/100 (or 10/10 in 1ups' case) does not necessarily mean they think it’s a Perfect Game in every conceivable way. What it obviously means is that they consider it a superb product. That’s' all it is. There’s no need to analyse or geek over the marks any further.
On a related note, many respected movie reviewers also manage give movies “top marks”, "A" ratings, or 5/5 or 10/10. Similarly, it doesn’t mean they consider these as movies as literally perfect in every way.
endust @ Dec 21st 2006 6:58AM
@Ln.
Good analogy.
The reviewers at Gamespot for both versions of TP, is the same guy: Jeff Gerstmann. Senior Editor, Senior Fatass. Blame him for giving GS the bad press, which IMO is warranted. What an idiot (and no, I'm not some crazy Zelda fanboy zealot). If Zelda has problems I would gladly acknowledge it, but I will also diregard piss-poor reviews, as such.
Big beN @ Dec 21st 2006 7:18AM
GAMESPOT SUCKS !!!
I mean if you're making a review, do a proper one... No way Twilight Princess that ALL the others sites give around 9.5 could be under 90%... It's nonsense
They even gave better rates to "Oracle of Ages" "Minish Cap"... C'MON !!&_!,:;àç&,
They just rates graphics... They give 8 to Ridge Racer 7... For what ? Graphics...
Kimosabae @ Dec 21st 2006 7:50AM
Yeah, so I'm about 20 hours into this game, and at this point, I lie in league with Gamespot's review, which I think is spot on. The general reviews for this game seem WAY inflated IMO.
Seems like Nintendo still has that iron clasp on the hearts of journalists and fanboys everywhere, totally preventing them from looking at their games more objectively.
Or maybe that's just my annual jade increase in regards to Nintendo talking.
Not to say the game ain't great, but the Zelda franchises' inability to evolve since OOT is causing the series to grow seriously stale on me. Not to mention the fact that game is stupidly easy, completely robbing me of any sense of accomplishment that could have been mustered from taking down those gorgeous bosses.
Meh.
And I'm telling any Nintendo fanboy preemptively to suck a fat one if they consider attacking this post. I'm probably a bigger Nintendo fan than you are.
-SynikaL
PurpleSfinx @ Dec 21st 2006 8:31AM
@ Grey Acumen: "This friend also happens to be in the Halo 3 beta testing thing" - The beta test isn't out for months yet. Even at Bungie they are testing an Alpha version. I don't get this.
About the mirrired thing: This is terrible for lore. What worse could they do? This reminds me of that WoW patch the other week when we logged in and the continents were suddenly a different shape. It seems like they just don't care.
@ Everyone saying the review is wrong or bullshit:
Reviews are opinions. If you don't agree with the review, go buy the game and don't trust them. They never said it was fact that the game is bad. You can't say they're wrong when they say the thought the game was 'X' good or bad. Yeah, you can think a guy is stupid for giving the game a bad review, but anything above 75% is hardly bad anyway.
Brent @ Dec 21st 2006 9:10AM
Is the reason that the game is mirrored due solely to Link being right handed in the Wii version? I would assume so. Regardless, I bought this game with my Wii on launch day and it rocks.
JJ @ Dec 21st 2006 9:41AM
To Foetoid and others:
Famitsu is a poor choice for a truthful game score. They have biases depending upon the publisher's pocketbook. Proof: http://www.kotaku.com/gaming/famitsu/famitsu-for-beginners-222494.php
Valderon @ Dec 21st 2006 10:12AM
To the person saying Gears of War is not a 9.6 vs Zeldas 8.9, I strongly disagree with you. Besides the fact that they are completely different genres of games I personally found Gears to be a more enjoyable experience. Im about half way through Zelda now and its good but its the same damn game Ive played since OoT. Thats not a bad thing but its certainly makes the game predictable and less exciting to me. I feel like wow... great I got the bow, let me guess now Im going to use the bow to kill the boss in this dungeon. Its tried and true but is doesn’t feel very new to me, its sort of stale. I think Gamespot’s review was dead on with Zelda. They were able to put the fanboy love and nostalgia aside and see it for what it is. Again all this crap is subjective different games for different people. Gears is an amazing game, and the feeling I got from gears was WOW!! the entire time. Zelda is like hanging at my moms house, it comfortable and I know what to expect.
Choke @ Dec 21st 2006 10:33AM
This pretty much cements my view that gamespot is not a valid source to go to for reviews. They seem to have an agenda
Shut up. Just stop typing. You can find just as many people who would echo you as you can find people who would say the same thing about their PS3 coverage or their 360 coverage.
I'm sorry, but I own Gears of War and Z:TP, and there's no way GOW is that much better.
What constitutes being ".8 better?" You guys nitpicking stuff like this have no idea how to present a point, other than just saying "they're wrong" or "I'm pissed."
No game is perfect. I'd guess Tetris would come the closest, but it's really difficult to compare a puzzle game like that to, say, Super Mario 64 or whatever. A perfect score should be unachieveable. Sites and magazines to it to get attention, not because they are serious, insightful journalists.