Grazza Posted February 1, 2013 Posted February 1, 2013 Without meaning to deviate too much from the point; what do you mean by "Phantom Hourglass"-type solutions? Basically, running on a game engine that they wouldn't have bothered doing on console. Part of that was the controls, but it was also the way they combined these things: * Overworld was 3D, but on rails * Villages and dungeons were 2.5D * Some boss fights were 3D, others 2.5D As I say, a lot of that was due to not having analogue sticks, but I still think the DS was quite far off being able to do a proper 3D Zelda.
Dcubed Posted February 1, 2013 Author Posted February 1, 2013 Basically, running on a game engine that they wouldn't have bothered doing on console. Part of that was the controls, but it was also the way they combined these things: * Overworld was 3D, but on rails * Villages and dungeons were 2.5D * Some boss fights were 3D, others 2.5D As I say, a lot of that was due to not having analogue sticks, but I still think the DS was quite far off being able to do a proper 3D Zelda. It's nothing to do with not having analog sticks or "compromising" to fit the game on the DS; no not at all! The game is what it is because they wanted to create something completely different from past Zeldas and something that was designed to take advantage of the DS' functions to create a game that couldn't work on any other machine. Phantom Hourglass and Spirit Tracks could not exist on any other piece of hardware at the time (and even now, only the 3DS could really replicate the game fully) They didn't want to make a "proper" 3D Zelda, they wanted to make a DS Zelda game. That philosophy will not change if their future hardware can share code/art assets/engines etc; for them, it's just a cost saving measure and nothing more (multiplatform releases are already possible and they do connectivity across their handhelds and consoles when the games call for it anyway)
Rummy Posted February 1, 2013 Posted February 1, 2013 Basically, running on a game engine that they wouldn't have bothered doing on console. Part of that was the controls, but it was also the way they combined these things: * Overworld was 3D, but on rails * Villages and dungeons were 2.5D * Some boss fights were 3D, others 2.5D As I say, a lot of that was due to not having analogue sticks, but I still think the DS was quite far off being able to do a proper 3D Zelda. The overworld was 3D? I don't recall that. Even so...your main criticism/three criticisms are that...it was 3D, but it wasn't 3D? Personally I thought Phantom Hourglass was a brilliant mix of handheld with the new style, and also a cracking game and very worthy addition to the zelda series in that it actually felt very zelda! I'm just not sure what your point is about it that's particularly relevant to the current discussion, felt like it was just thrown in as something a bit vague sounding. It's nothing to do with not having analog sticks or "compromising" to fit the game on the DS; no not at all! The game is what it is because they wanted to create something completely different from past Zeldas and something that was designed to take advantage of the DS' functions to create a game that couldn't work on any other machine. Phantom Hourglass and Spirit Tracks could not exist on any other piece of hardware at the time (and even now, only the 3DS could really replicate the game fully) They didn't want to make a "proper" 3D Zelda, they wanted to make a DS Zelda game. That philosophy will not change if their future hardware can share code/art assets/engines etc; for them, it's just a cost saving measure and nothing more (multiplatform releases are already possible and they do connectivity across their handhelds and consoles when the games call for it anyway) I'd say I agree much more with this!
Jonnas Posted February 2, 2013 Posted February 2, 2013 I remember when the Zelda team said Twilight Princess was going to feature top-down puzzles (like in the 2D games), but combat would remain 3D (Just another promise that didn't realize). Phantom Hourglass and Spirit Tracks manage to alternate between the two planes seamlessly for boss battles, though. I think it works pretty well.
Grazza Posted February 2, 2013 Posted February 2, 2013 The overworld was 3D? I don't recall that. Even so...your main criticism/three criticisms are that...it was 3D, but it wasn't 3D? Personally I thought Phantom Hourglass was a brilliant mix of handheld with the new style, and also a cracking game and very worthy addition to the zelda series in that it actually felt very zelda! I'm just not sure what your point is about it that's particularly relevant to the current discussion, felt like it was just thrown in as something a bit vague sounding. Who even said I was criticising? For someone who doesn't want to derail the thread, you sure as heck are giving it a good go.
Hogge Posted February 4, 2013 Posted February 4, 2013 (edited) I'd actually like the next Nintendo handheld and home console to be the same, or at least come in the same package. Imagine carrying around on your portable console, playing it on the go. Then you come home, put it in the charging cradle, and it magically becomes your home console, punching out glorious HD graphics on to your TV and giving you the chance to connect your more ergonomical controller. This would be a treat for me, as I quite rarely get to use my 3DS. I just don't feel like watching the tiny screen when I can play on my 32 inch TV. Plus that I think that it's dumb to buy one set of games to have at home and a second to have on the move. This is why the UMD movie and music idea failed: who in their right mind will buy a movie that you only can watch on your portable console? So, if you follow that logic, wouldn't it be insanely successful to buy a system that fills both roles? Another solution could be that they are two different consoles, and that you slot the entire portable console in to your home console, like a cartridge. The idea being that the "home console" has a bigger hard drive and some extra chips that enable some graphical enhancements (higher resolution, real time shadows etc). The idea behind this being that the portable console can have a better battery life and be a bit lighter. Solutions like this already exist, just look at the Asus Padphone: Edited February 4, 2013 by Hogge
Dcubed Posted February 4, 2013 Author Posted February 4, 2013 I'd actually like the next Nintendo handheld and home console to be the same, or at least come in the same package. Imagine carrying around on your portable console, playing it on the go. Then you come home, put it in the charging cradle, and it magically becomes your home console, punching out glorious HD graphics on to your TV and giving you the chance to connect your more ergonomical controller. This would be a treat for me, as I quite rarely get to use my 3DS. I just don't feel like watching the tiny screen when I can play on my 32 inch TV. Plus that I think that it's dumb to buy one set of games to have at home and a second to have on the move. This is why the UMD movie and music idea failed: who in their right mind will buy a movie that you only can watch on your portable console? So, if you follow that logic, wouldn't it be insanely successful to buy a system that fills both roles? Another solution could be that they are two different consoles, and that you slot the entire portable console in to your home console, like a cartridge. The idea being that the "home console" has a bigger hard drive and some extra chips that enable some graphical enhancements (higher resolution, real time shadows etc). The idea behind this being that the portable console can have a better battery life and be a bit lighter. Solutions like this already exist, just look at the Asus Padphone: They've already said that they're not gonna do that. They'll still be separate hardware (with unique functionality), just using the same architecture.
Recommended Posts