Burny

If you're in Swiss, you'll apparently have it tomorrow.

They can be wrong no less. Galaxy 2 had the same effects as Galaxy 1 and must've reused about half the assets of first game in some way. Factually these parts had the same visual polish then. As for control complaints: From what I played of Galaxy 1, if there actually were any differences in responsiveness, I didn't notice them or they were so close to being esoteric, that it really shouldn't affect the ability to play the games.

Wow. That's some impressive imagination right there. :p Edit: Oh yeah, the rumor! No way to tell if it's true at this point. But assuming that it would again be the same team that made SMG1/2 and SM3DL and they'd try to hit launch sometime late 2012, that'd leave them hardly more than a year of development with the whole team. Sounds really unlikely they'd be done by then. Plus: As great as the Galaxy games were, I can't see Nintendo doing a third direct sequel.

Would love to get that bundle. No money to spare after Skyward Sword unfortunately. I still believe there'll be a 3DS redesign sometime next year with the circle pad addon though.

You could try sending the man a twitter message.

Euphoric Twitter quotes like this from reviewers playing the game don't make the wait easier (no spoilers!).

This was the most striking flaw of TP, imo. Vast, but lifeless and aside from the main story mostly unexciting. The Fallout (/Morrowind/Oblivion) comparison however is a bit off, because neither OoT nor Majora's Mask ever had that formula. That's because Zelda works in different ways than your standard stat-based, combat-centered, chose-your-way, free-roaming hero-simulator. In such games a bit of XP, a more shiny weapon or some hint/story note locked in a particularly difficult to pick treasure-chest or guarded by a particularly nasty monster is enough reward for exploration. In Zelda, it really isn't, because the game has none of those mechanics. Imagine an otherwise empty hovel at the end of Hyrule Field, guarded by some Stalfos, containing a chest with 100 rupees. Not very exciting, isn't it? There is no strong enough reward mechanism in Zelda for standard enemy encounters on the field and (so far ) no mechanic to collect items or improved gear in any meaningful way. The meaningful ways in Zelda to reward exploration are puzzles, that gradually open up previously inaccessible areas by means of new items, trading sequences or collection quests from NPC and hidden heart pieces. In that sense, the world in OoT and MM simply felt more densely populated than in TP.

I agree that a "full" 3D game would appear a likely path. Wouldn't even be surprised if they heavily relied on the "Circle Pad Pro" either, now that they have the option. They might even use Zelda as a major title to push the addon. On the other hand I could also see them trying their best to distinguish the game from the home console titles by going a different route. As SM3DL or Metroid Other M both show, there can just as well be a middle ground between the inherent 2D and 3D designs of a series. Personally I consider that path even more likely, as a "full" 3D title would be immediately comparable to the home console games and would therefore most likely require a "full" 3D Zelda budget and development cycle.

You do. It's been confirmed by Nintendo and has been asked several times here already. All games of the initial production are going to come with the CD.

Who said that it'd be "full" 3D? I don't remember that this was confirmed anywhere. For all my arguing that a full 3D Zelda with a scale comparable to previous console Zeldas is possible on the 3DS, I wouldn't be so sure that they're going to take this route. Especially with the comments from Iwata Asks in relation to the scope of Mario Galaxy and SM3DL.

I don't know what it is you don't understand, but again: there is no difference. The bolded part is exactly what all Zelda games and MH3 on the Wii do with every single area or room. Make the set pieces larger, connect them with loading screens and call them "overworld". You just seem to assume for some reason that these areas have to be small because they're on the 3DS. If you've bothered watching the MH3G trailer above, the areas don't appear to be any smaller than on the Wii. Except that it hasn't. We've seen at least one "boss fight" where you can move freely on the ground within the current area. As for scale of boss fights, you really should look at that MH3G trailer. The game basically consists only of "boss fights" combined with free movements and there are some XXL monsters, which don't have to hide behind the larger Zelda bosses. And behold: There is lava in Monster Hunter, too! And light... How did the 3DS manage that? I really don't know how you get the idea that the Gamecube can do things that the 3DS somehow can't, when 3DS games like MH3G and Resident Evil already go toe to toe with Gamecube games. If Nintendo wants to make a full 3D Zelda for the 3DS, they can.

Neither do I, but it makes no technical difference whatsoever. It's a full 3D game, the individual areas are on par with the Wii's MH3 and "overworld" in the sense of MH3 (and Zelda, mind) doesn't mean anything other than having areas with exits that lead you to the next area. MH3 was said to be a showpiece for the Wii and the 3DS replicates it. Only difference between Wind Waker and other Zeldas is how WW's overworld "seamlessly" connects levels (= fairly small islands), which happens in the "background" as you approach them. It's just a fancy way to hide when levels are loaded. The sea is also hardly more than a couple of waves in the immediate area of the boat, which get repeated as you go through them. Everything on the horizon doesn't get loaded until you approach it and is sometimes no more than a "placeholder" texture. Nothing a system with several times as much RAM as the Gamecube would be incapable of. If you mean Nintendo wasn't able to do a Galaxy-style game on the system, so they did SM3DL instead, then no. SM3DL looks visually on par with the Galaxy games, save the resolution and maybe slightly less geometry for the models and levels. And there is some footage where you get an overview of a level, which shows that the levels aren't necessarily much smaller than the Galaxy ones. The difference is in the way you move through them and how they are laid out. Hardware isn't the limit here, it's what Nintendo choses to do. Something on par with Wind Waker should be entirely possible.

I mentioned it above, but would you tell me how MH3G is cleverly hiding its shortcomings? Well, other than the 3DS rendering at a lower resolution than the Wii and probably being incapable of showing the same level of geometry - which is hardly noticeable due to the low resolution. Edit: About Super Mario Land: Those levels there seem to be a completely conscious design decision, so I consider it premature to hold it against the 3DS. Aside from that, the game has had a shorter dev-cycle than the Galaxy games, which might also have something to do with the more linear levels.

I don't see any reason why the 3DS shouldn't be able to reproduce games with the scale of Gamecube titles. It has more RAM than the Wii, with the "Circle Pad Pro" and the touchscreen it has a user interface that may even be superior and it offers more storage on its cards than the Gamecube's "mini"-DVDs did. Monster Hunter 3G seems visually on par with the Wii iteration for all intends and purposes, so a "Wii experience" is factually possible (apparently, even in 3D). Or are we arguing that a "Wii experience" is technically not up to par with a "Gamecube experience"? The one thing that probably would have to be reduced in comparison to stuff like Resident Evil is the model geometry.

At least we know that the soundtrack CD won't have annoying screaming fans.

When you arrive at a new area, there may always be a handful of enemies which are hard or downright impossible to tackle, if they're a couple of levels above you. For story purposes however, your level usually scales appropriately with the challenges and there should be no need to grind just for the level's sake. If you find an enemy too hard, just advance with the story and come back a little later, when your level will have increased "naturally" by fighting bosses, discovering new areas etc.

Given Nintendo's usual attention to detail, I wouldn't be surprised if you could. Is it known how the player gets to chose which item out of the seven he wants to use? I'm imagining they'll circle round players like the three shells and whichever item is at a certain position when the player fires gets used. Nicking the star out of a players arsenal which he saved up for special occasions sounds like another good opportunity to enrage people in Mario Kart.

Frankly, fair criticism is needed and probably does the game's creators more good than lyrically waxing about how their game is the best thing after sliced bread and glossing over its weaker parts. If the people behind the game read the reviews that is. The outrage over Eurogamer's 8 for Uncharted for example was embarrassing. I'm guessing whoever scores SS lower than a 9 will also have to face that fan rage, no matter if they make absolutely valid points. It's the stupid points like "I want to hammer my buttons, because you know: motion controls suck and my dog was killed by a Wiimote", that make a review unprofessional. Edit: Oh, that 8.8 for Twilight Princess from Gamespot. Watched the video review not too long ago and it sounded very positive and was fair. Can't say I disagree with the score either. Definitely closer to actually representing Twilight Princess than its meta score.

It mentioned that the game is technically being "outshone" by the Zelda demo from E3. The magazine was out then I believe. The review has been posted on their site yesterday.

To be fair, by default their comment system only displays the "featured" (?) comments. When all comments are shown, most contain the usual hype stuff.

*Sigh* Kotaku got their review copy and filmed the the first couple of minutes between the main menu and before the player takes control of Link (music is spectacular). Guess what the comments are all about? People hating on the Wiimote and complaining about the lack of Classic Controller support. Edit: Oh, and the usual "I've grown out of Nintendo" stuff of course.

Sounds more like she doesn't really play a lot of video games in her free time and neither cares much for them. If she's indeed supposed to be spokeswoman, the Taiwanese Sony guys should have briefed her better, otherwise they're just asking for that kind of faux pas.

But it does. It's obscured somewhat, just like Navi shouting "Link" (the "l" sound there is also hardly distinguishable), but definitely sounds like "Come on!". The question is if it's possible to extend that bubble by adding voice acting. Desperately clinging to traditions where they don't make any sense won't do so. There are always some ridiculous complaints being thrown around when it comes to Zelda. The people who shout for a deep plot and complain about having "another fire temple" for instance, probably won't care for Zelda unless it's been altered until it is no longer Zelda, but some Western RPG with Zelda skins. The complaints about the lack of voice acting however are definitely valid to some extend. Cut scenes in Zelda are getting so cinematic, that the addition of it would be a no brainer everywhere else, as animation on such a level doesn't quiet fit with mute characters. That voice acting can be very successfully combined with a silent protagonist and doesn't need to result in stereotypical over-characterized chatterbox for a main character has been shown by Half Life and Portal. Why shouldn't Nintendo try with Zelda? It could create just as much "magic" as it takes tradition away.

Me, for an instance. For the reasons I stated above. Although they certainly cannot be accused of being a charitable company, Nintendo seems to be extremely reluctant to add payed content to their games. And I can't say I'd complain.