Ronnie

I want this Zelda game to have a great storyline and for the tone and mood to feel spot on. If that means it can have a population of quirky, lovable characters goofing off everywhere, then great. If the game is more similar to the original Zelda for NES and the world is more desolate and in ruin, and such things wouldn't fit, I'd rather they didn't try and shoehorn them in. I'm sure there'll be a great set of NPCs, regardless of which style they go with/fits the story.

Most of those fit Wind Waker perfectly, but it wouldn't fit in every game, potentially, including this one. I could say I want all of those things in The Last of Us 2 or Tomb Raider 3, but that would be ridiculous because they wouldn't fit the tone of those stories.

*rolls eyes* Anyway, back to something a bit more interesting...

Their YouTube page also has all the segments up

Likewise I'd hang off on a PSVR until at least a couple of good VR games come out. Nothing I've seen has tempted me, maaaaybe the X-Wing mission in Battlefront, but like Fighter Squadron, I suspect I'll only enjoy that for a few hours and then put it away to gather dust on my shelf.

GTA, COD and FIFA are the three biggest, most mainstream games there are, adored by millions of casual gamers who buy systems just to play those and nothing else. This is what annoys me about attitudes on this board. Nintendo have created huge buzz and are the talk of E3 and yet a lot of the praise on here sounds almost grudging and conditional. After years of negativity why can't people just enjoy the moment, for once. Not everything has to be "pfft it's good, BUT..." You claim this is "just one game", why not wait until they reveal their first year or two of NX software before making that call? They're obviously holding their cards close to their chest. As for Zelda being all they have, I seem to remember that a brand new IP, a Nintendo multiplayer online shooter of all things, selling over 4 million and Mario Maker just over three, as of the beginning of the year. And as for your comment about needing to see charm in the parts of Zelda we haven't seen, I can confidentially suggest right now that this game will have ten times more charm than the likes of Watch Dogs, Horizon and Ghost Recon Wildlands could ever dream about. Charm isn't usually lacking in Nintendo games. The article I linked to wasn't that gushing. If you want a properly raving article, you've plenty to choose from. Here's one... http://www.nintendolife.com/news/2016/06/hands_on_wide-open_wanderlust_in_the_legend_of_zelda_breath_of_the_wild I only posted that original article because of the quotes from Reggie and in particular that gorgeous screen shot.

http://www.theverge.com/2016/6/16/11951730/legend-of-zelda-breath-of-the-wild-reggie-fils-aime-interview-e3-2016

Add 'condescending' to the bullying and insulting way you speak to me. Still, at least we've wasted half a dozen posts arguing about the exact percentage Zelda trumped Battlefield 1; that's message board gold dust right there. Well done.

I was asking a question FFS!! And you jump on my back for that??

Three days of Battlefield 1, Zelda beat that by 90%, in a third of the time. There we go.

The zero lag wireless output on the gamepad is actually brilliant proprietary tech that Nintendo invented themselves. It's seriously impressive. They probably could have got the distance farther but it would have introduced lag and made syncing with the console a nightmare. I do agree with you though that it should have just been about off tv play and not dual screen gaming. Then again for things like Mario Maker, Zombie U and Wind Waker etc it works well, so maybe having an optional second screen would work best. Maybe that's what NX is.

Plenty of people have said it's not a big deal, that it's expected etc... Sigh. Ok, to allow for pedantry, it got more than double anything from the rest of the show with the exception of Battlefield 1 (which had the benefit of 3 days in the spotlight, as opposed to Zelda's 1 day), which it only beat by 190%. "Other openworld titles" + Zelda gameplay = win

The Wii was new tech and it was full of shovelware, people refer to it often, including this very board. It's not immature to suggest PSVR will be full of similar. Forgive me for being dubious that those "50 games by the end of the year" will all be quality experiences. As I said, in my opinion, Eagle Flight looked fun for about 5 minutes, much like a lot of the VR games we've seen so far.

How many of those 50 PSVR games will be shovelware that aren't worth the time of day? Or three quid tech demos like that bird flying rubbish

Nintendo gets hugely positive buzz and everyone shits on it, saying it's no big deal and should be expected. Standard. The graph is taking data from June 12th to June 14th. Zelda was announced on June 14th. It had the least time to collect data and still got more than double anything from the rest of the show. It's the talk of E3 and it has nothing to do with it being the only Nintendo game there. That's exactly it. It's the interactivity with the environment that sets it apart from the more scripted openworld games like Witcher 3. Its gameplay is far more varied than the usual stuff.

I never suggested we'd seen games that made an NX purchase worth it, especially considering we've seen a grand total of one game for it. Two if you count Just Dance. I suspect there'll be a few games that make it worth it though, which will be a step up from PSVR already.

I've not seen any game that makes a PSVR worth it tbh. The tech is amazing don't get me wrong, but so far they're all very short and underwhelming experiences. I'd wait for the inevitable second generation headset Sony will release a year or two later. That bird flying demo looked fun for about 5 minutes, ditto the Star Trek bridge thing.

Been thinking about that weird cut in the middle of the trailer. I wonder if they had proper footage of the end boss but chose to remove it at the last minute. Definitely seems like something was edited out

I think I must be the only person in the world who loved Sticker Star. That and Super Paper Mario are the only two Paper Mario games I've played though so I think it means I can appreciate them for what they are, rather than what they're not (TYD)

Yeah I appreciate it's hugely popular. I could easily be wrong but I suspect Banjo, like Goldeneye, was one of those games you had to play at the time to appreciate. I think if I went and played it now it wouldn't do anything for me.

I certainly didn't feel limited playing Nintendo's recent platformers, they were tightly designed and fun to play. Mario Sunshine has objectives per level, is the same true of Yooka-Laylee? All I'm seeing at the moment is a collect-a-thon. The platforming also doesn't look particularly interesting. Dunno, I worry it's a game that relies so heavily on nostalgia without modernising the formula for a 2016 game. What worked on the N64 might not necessarily work nowadays.

I've been watching lots of gameplay footage of this and I have to say I'm massively underwhelmed. It just doesn't look all that fun? I never played Banjo so don't have the sense of nostalgia to fall back on, so to me it just seems a really bland and paint by numbers platformer. I'd go so far as to say it plays like an iOS game, the moment to moment gameplay just seems boring. Maybe it's just me but it's certainly convinced me the game isn't for me, and I love 3D platformers, well, Nintendo ones at least.

Conversely, Nintendo went last, so had far less time to make an impression, which makes it running away with the buzz even more impressive. It's the talk of E3, and rightly so. Also, I suspect it'd still be a clear winner even if Nintendo had shown off half a dozen other games.

This is INSANE! And let's not forget Nintendo's booth (the same size as Sony and Microsoft's) is full of nothing but Zelda demos.

I have to admit I wasn't too wowed by Horizon, it felt like they just showed the same demo as last year with very little different. I mean it still looks great, but I was expecting a bit more this year.