Rob

"They're not delaying TP so they can add Revo functionality. They're delaying it because I'm sure they're using every bit of time that they have to make that game better. They probably have the development team working on it 24/7. Then, with the added delay, they can add Revo functionality."

Truthfully, we don't, and probably won't, know either way. But, whatever they're adding, it will take time. Think of how many games have come out with control issues after being in development for a small eternity - even if they are/were just adding support for the Rev controller, I have no doubt that it's pretty involved and time consuming to do so (especially given additional rounds of testing, debugging, etc.). That's part of why my earlier rant was exactly that -a rant.

"If anything, everyone who says that Nintendo shouldn't be allowed to give Revo owners an extra insignificant perk is saying that Nintendo should be ripping off Revolution owners."

I'm not really saying that. Given what I said above, I honestly believe that adding anything at all for the Rev. would have a significant impact on release date. It's not like Nintendo to mention the worst case scenario (i.e. releasing this Fall) with reason. They didn't say it exactly (when do they ever), but that's how it sounds to me. With that in mind, I'm convinced that it will release this fall and Rev will be the main reason behind the delay.

"...Revolution support is not that big of a deal."

agreed

". . .they're not delaying the game because of it."

disagree, but only Nintendo knows for certain.

"From what I understand, developing for the Revolution is frightfully easy to do,"

Maybe, but all new systems have to have some learning curve. It may be easy, but that doesn't mean it won't take a lot of time to do (whatever "it" might be)..

"It can probably be added in a week or two."

No offense, but again, we just don't know.

"Who ever said it was being delayed because of new Revolution features? "

Truthfully, no one. I never said I was doing anything but speculating. To me, this is what the available data suggests.

"You are blaming Nintendo for using a "last generation" game?"

If (ha ha) Rev does launch in the Fall, Zelda will be a last gen game. If Rev does not launch in Fall, then maybe Zelda will have been delayed to tide over Nin fans until it finally does launch.

"For now though it is just moronic."

I can understand how it might seem that way, but I've been following Nintendo very closely for about 20 years now, and I believe this is exactly their speed given their track record.

"They are trying as HARD as they can to finish this Zelda and make people like YOU happy. . ."

Or they're planning for the future as best they can. I know they've said they're not competing in the next console war, but the truth is that they have to. Any company in this business survives on quality content AND installed user base. They have to have that in mind going in or this could be their last home console.

"The truth is they pulled people away from the Twilight Princess project to focus on the Revolution so they will have a great launch. This is one main reason why the game is being so delayed."

You might be right, and maybe I just missed that article. But if that's true, who's left to add Rev functionality. Maybe I should catch up on my reading.

By the way, I'm not a fanboy for one company or the other. The 'cube is my only system, though I've been sorely disappointed with it. My experience is that since the N64 they've just been getting worse and worse about missing/delaying launch of this/that/the other and we consumers (who are paying their salaries, so I'm not worried about their overtime and whatnot) are getting less and less quality content.

At least now we know why they're delaying it - to add this "special functionality" for Revolution. To me that says they really don't have much else to launch with it. Why else would they jerk Game Cube owners around like that?

There's too few titles as it is, but to delay a title for a system that will be outdated soon to try to impress future Revolution owners? Color me unimpressed. Zelda should be finished for the GC.

Nintendo, how about focusing on wrapping that one up and spending some time FOCUSED on NEW titles for the Revolution? Or is that too much to ask?

At least now we know why they're delaying it - to add this "special functionality" for Revolution. To me that says they really don't have much else to launch with it. Why else would they jerk Game Cube owners around like that?

There's too few titles as it is, but to delay a title for a system that will be outdated soon to try to impress future Revolution owners? Color me unimpressed. Zelda should be finished for the GC.

Nintendo, how about focusing on wrapping that one up and spending some time FOCUSED on NEW titles for the Revolution? Or is that too much to ask?

Assuming this delay report is accurate, would it really surprise anyone?

Nintendo is absolutely notorious for delaying. And the bigger the product the longer the delay (usually).

Anyone else here remember the KI arcade announcement, "Coming to your home September '95 only for the Nintendo Ultra 64" or some such? Then the system was delayed until the following year.

Has any Zelda game ever NOT been delayed? And only three major Mario games for the last three systems and three metroid games (two of which weren't really done by them). . .over 15 YEARS!

With all that in mind, I don't exactly have high hopes for Revolution either. For them, a Revolution would be releasing something on it's ORIGINAL release date.

I'm just waiting for the video clip of Miyamoto running out of the bathroom with his pants around his knees yelling "Ninten-Delay! Say Ninten-Delay!" a la George Costanza.