Falcon_BlizZACK Posted January 12, 2015 Posted January 12, 2015 The more I think about it, the more I would have absolutely loved this to be on Wii U (and possibly dreading the 3DS version). MM success for me lie in its immersive qualities... Like running around aimless in Clocktown on the first day while builders are banging away making noise over there, whilst the sound of a dog barking can be heard in the distance. The music was powerful and dynamic too, with tracks that deserve a subwoofer. Im just moaning, but I guess it pains me that a MM HD will never ever happen now due to this one. I'm having the same feel I got from Smash Bros 3DS, where it just didn't feel as inviting and exciting as the Wii U version.
Fierce_LiNk Posted January 12, 2015 Posted January 12, 2015 They're changing it because it's being played on a handheld. The original save system just isn't a good fit on a console that is typically played in short bursts and likewise, if you're playing in short bursts, then it's harder to keep track of where everyone is and what they're doing because you forget where you are when you return to the game after a while. I always knew they would. MM is probably my favourite game of all time, but I can totally understand why it is not a good fit for a handheld as-is. If the original game isn't a good fit for a handheld, why alter it to make it fit on one? There's a perfectly functioning home console there that would be a great fit for the game, so why not just go for that instead?
Hero-of-Time Posted January 12, 2015 Posted January 12, 2015 If the original game isn't a good fit for a handheld, why alter it to make it fit on one? There's a perfectly functioning home console there that would be a great fit for the game, so why not just go for that instead? Most likely because it was the easiest option. Grezzo ported/remade OOT to 3DS so I imagine the same technique and tools were used for MM. Putting it on the Wii U would have cost more money and taken a lot more time. Given the option I would have preferred a home console version though.
Fierce_LiNk Posted January 12, 2015 Posted January 12, 2015 Most likely because it was the easiest option. Grezzo ported/remade OOT to 3DS so I imagine the same technique and tools were used for MM. Putting it on the Wii U would have cost more money and taken a lot more time. Given the option I would have preferred a home console version though. Oh aye, I know it's the easy option but I wonder if it's the best one. If the Wind Waker is worth the time and effort, surely Majora's Mask is too, even though it would have needed more work.
Wii Posted January 12, 2015 Posted January 12, 2015 Added to the above reasons is 8 million Wii U's versus >45 million 3DS's. I too would like to see it on the Wii U instead.
Dcubed Posted January 12, 2015 Posted January 12, 2015 If the original game isn't a good fit for a handheld, why alter it to make it fit on one? There's a perfectly functioning home console there that would be a great fit for the game, so why not just go for that instead? If you think about it, it makes sense. Look at OoT 3D and TWW HD. Both of those games were made in order to fix things that their designers held as regrets ever since they first released. Majora's Mask on the other hand? What regrets have any of the game's designers ever publically stated? As far as I know, it is none. So what value would a remake bring outside of better graphics? Pretty much nothing outside of a few things that the new hardware would bring (like touch controlled menus or gyro controls - things that these designers can indulge in with a new game anyway). Bringing Majora's Mask to a handheld allows them to re-imagine the experience and provide a new take that befits a different style of play. It brings value to the game that you would otherwise not get on a console without alienating fans of the original who would cry bloody murder at changing parts of the game for no good reason. THAT's why it makes sense! (That plus it allows them to re-use a lot of the tech and know how from OoT 3D - just like what happened with the original version of MM)
Ronnie Posted January 12, 2015 Posted January 12, 2015 The amount of work involved to port Majora's Mask to the Wii U and have it looking worthy of the console would be 10x the amount of effort that is going into the 3DS port. I'd rather they spent all that time and effort on Zelda U.
Sheikah Posted January 12, 2015 Posted January 12, 2015 (edited) If you think about it, it makes sense. Look at OoT 3D and TWW HD. Both of those games were made in order to fix things that their designers held as regrets ever since they first released. Majora's Mask on the other hand? What regrets have any of the game's designers ever publically stated? As far as I know, it is none. So what value would a remake bring outside of better graphics? Pretty much nothing outside of a few things that the new hardware would bring (like touch controlled menus or gyro controls - things that these designers can indulge in with a new game anyway). Bringing Majora's Mask to a handheld allows them to re-imagine the experience and provide a new take that befits a different style of play. It brings value to the game that you would otherwise not get on a console without alienating fans of the original who would cry bloody murder at changing parts of the game for no good reason. THAT's why it makes sense! (That plus it allows them to re-use a lot of the tech and know how from OoT 3D - just like what happened with the original version of MM) The main problem I see is that the visuals of the 3DS are already really dated (far more so than back when OoT hit 3DS), and that matters a big deal. To dismiss graphics as just 'one thing' seems pretty outrageous, given graphics is by far the measure that most justifies there being a remaster in the first place (in relation to just going with a straight port/re-release, perhaps with added touch controls like how Pikmin sort of was with motion controls). This is 2015 and to be honest, we'd really all be lying if we pretended that the lush presentation of Wind Waker wasn't one of the most striking/desirable features of its remaster. So when I see screenshots for the 3DS version of MM looking really jagged, I'm really not seeing this is as much of a remaster or worthy re-release. Sure a lot of the models look improved, but holy hell that resolution really lets it down. Touch screens in menus and whatnot; while nice, could ultimately have been done even better on Wii U. A new quick save and resume feature could also be done on console. So really, there's no justification other than time and effort as to why it went to 3DS. And when we all start giving people free passes on those two grounds then that will be sad times. Edited January 12, 2015 by Sheikah
yesteryeargames Posted January 12, 2015 Posted January 12, 2015 Anyone had any luck getting the us collectors edition pre ordered ? Really want that statue but I have had no luck
Ronnie Posted January 13, 2015 Posted January 13, 2015 So really, there's no justification other than time and effort as to why it went to 3DS. And when we all start giving people free passes on those two grounds then that will be sad times. Remastering an N64 game for a console three generations in the future would involve far too much work to ever be worth it IMO. You can't just improve character models and make the textures high res, the whole world needs to be remade. Would you really rather it took away from Zelda U development? OOT3D looked great on 3DS and I'm sure this will too.
EEVILMURRAY Posted January 13, 2015 Posted January 13, 2015 They're changing it because it's being played on a handheld. The original save system just isn't a good fit on a console that is typically played in short bursts and likewise, if you're playing in short bursts, then it's harder to keep track of where everyone is and what they're doing because you forget where you are when you return to the game after a while. How short is short bursts? Because the original 3 day cycle (if memory serves) is about 1 hour* and you try to play a Zelda game (especially this one) in 20-30 minute portions, then you're investing in the wrong series. *Naturally the first thing I did upon playing was bang out the Song of Time backwards.
Dcubed Posted January 13, 2015 Posted January 13, 2015 How short is short bursts? Because the original 3 day cycle (if memory serves) is about 1 hour* and you try to play a Zelda game (especially this one) in 20-30 minute portions, then you're investing in the wrong series. *Naturally the first thing I did upon playing was bang out the Song of Time backwards. Think about the design of handheld Zelda games (or indeed ALTTP GBA vs ALTTP SNES and how it was more lenient with where you could suspend and resume your game). Generally they feature short dungeons, compact worlds, lenient save systems and minimal amounts of cutscenes (and the cutscenes they do have are typically short and skippable). They also usually have a lot of sidequests that you can complete without much pressure on your time and are generally conductive to being played for hours or minutes at a time. OoT 3D is basically the one major exception and it does feel a bit like a square peg in a round hole. It's already pushes the comfortable limit of how long it should keep a player waiting on a handheld game (some cutscenes can last between 5-10 minutes even, and are unskippable to boot!) What reasonable progress could you make in OoT 3D in a mere 10 minute play session really? Not much in comparison to something like Minish Cap or Link's Awakening. MM is even less conductive to short handheld play sessions than OoT though because of how the 3 day cycle and the save system works. Surely you can see that?
Sheikah Posted January 13, 2015 Posted January 13, 2015 Think about the design of handheld Zelda games (or indeed ALTTP GBA vs ALTTP SNES and how it was more lenient with where you could suspend and resume your game). Generally they feature short dungeons, compact worlds, lenient save systems and minimal amounts of cutscenes (and the cutscenes they do have are typically short and skippable). They also usually have a lot of sidequests that you can complete without much pressure on your time and are generally conductive to being played for hours or minutes at a time. OoT 3D is basically the one major exception and it does feel a bit like a square peg in a round hole. It's already pushes the comfortable limit of how long it should keep a player waiting on a handheld game (some cutscenes can last between 5-10 minutes even, and are unskippable to boot!) What reasonable progress could you make in OoT 3D in a mere 10 minute play session really? Not much in comparison to something like Minish Cap or Link's Awakening. MM is even less conductive to short handheld play sessions than OoT though because of how the 3 day cycle and the save system works. Surely you can see that? It's going to be the same game that they're putting on handheld man. An updated save system like an owl in your pocket could have been done on console too, it's simply not justification as to why it going to handheld is a great idea. This kind of game doesn't lend itself to bursts of play, it's the kind of game you want to keep playing until you finish it.
Dcubed Posted January 13, 2015 Posted January 13, 2015 It's going to be the same game that they're putting on handheld man. An updated save system like an owl in your pocket could have been done on console too, it's simply not justification as to why it going to handheld is a great idea. This kind of game doesn't lend itself to bursts of play, it's the kind of game you want to keep playing until you finish it. I've already said why I think it makes sense, what you quoted has nothing to do with that. If they made the game on Wii U instead of 3DS (never mind the wider issues of budgets, sales etc), then it's much harder to justify making any sort of change to how the game works to the fans, who would cry foul at the game being "dumbed down". Making it for a handheld gives them an excuse to try a different take on the game's overarching structure however because these kinds of changes are necessary for the platform it's going on. Nintendo's designers are mainly interested in exploring new game ideas and gameplay concepts, not graphics and visual fidelity. To them, the chance to re-imagine and revisit their older ideas and concepts is much more interesting and fulfilling than just turbo charging the visuals. Read any Iwata Asks for any of their games and see how much time is spent talking about gameplay concepts vs talking about visuals; then the way that Nintendo's staff think about how games should be made should become clear to you.
Sheikah Posted January 13, 2015 Posted January 13, 2015 (edited) If they made the game on Wii U instead of 3DS (never mind the wider issues of budgets, sales etc), then it's much harder to justify making any sort of change to how the game works to the fans, who would cry foul at the game being "dumbed down". Not at all, they tend to make whatever changes they want anyway. They don't need fan approval to be able to make changes they want. Time saving mechanics were putting the swift sail and reducing the Triforce hunt in the console remake of WW, leaving purists to dust. Since when do Nintendo care about fan reaction? Voice chat, gamecube adapters, amiibo shortage. Claiming they couldn't have put something on console because they are too heavily governed by fan response is ridiculous, tbh. Making it for a handheld gives them an excuse to try a different take on the game's overarching structure however because these kinds of changes are necessary for the platform it's going on. I believe we might be arguing 2 different things here - what's needed for the handheld version and whether it should have instead gone to home console or handheld. Regarding the needs for the handheld version - the game will still be 3 days and will take the same length of time to complete those days. The only difference will be the save system. Coming back to what I was arguing, this change could be done on whatever system it goes on, and isn't necessarily just something they would consider for handheld (Nintendo's games seem more dumbed down these days generally). It'll still be the same long game that was designed for a console and is going to be played by most of us in long bursts. It's not a reimagined or changed game! Nintendo's designers are mainly interested in exploring new game ideas and gameplay concepts, not graphics and visual fidelity. Here's an idea, be interested in both. No compromises. Hello Wind Waker - a game that brushed up gameplay the required amount (again the swift sail, triforce hunt, bottle notes and miiverse) while also providing us with really nice, stand-the-test-of-time (and remake justifying) visuals. Make no mistake, I know why they're not going home console. Time and money - but that's all we're saying. I don't like the alternate idea that its because handheld will be a better fit or allow them to 'reimagine the game' as the reasons instead. It simply isn't being reimagined, they just shoe-horning a save anywhere system. Edited January 13, 2015 by Sheikah
Cube Posted January 13, 2015 Posted January 13, 2015 Personally, my ideal treatment for pretty much every N64 game is what Banjo-Kazooie, Banjo-Tooie and Perfect Dark got on the Xbox 360. Crisper graphics, but still with the N64 "look" and pretty much the same game with a few tweaks.
S.C.G Posted January 13, 2015 Posted January 13, 2015 Personally, my ideal treatment for pretty much every N64 game is what Banjo-Kazooie, Banjo-Tooie and Perfect Dark got on the Xbox 360. Crisper graphics, but still with the N64 "look" and pretty much the same game with a few tweaks. This is exactly what they should do when they launch N64 games for the Wii U VC. : peace:
Cube Posted January 13, 2015 Posted January 13, 2015 But they won't, due to Nintendo's dumb stance on being exactly like the original.
Serebii Posted January 13, 2015 Author Posted January 13, 2015 But they won't, due to Nintendo's dumb stance on being exactly like the original. But it's what they did with the N64 games on the Wii VC.
Agent Gibbs Posted January 13, 2015 Posted January 13, 2015 are we really arguing over assumed changes? right now we only know they've made a change to the bombers note book (seeks to suggest so it works on touch screen and has hidden events) and that Feather statues are in, but we don't anything more than the name...lets wait till the direct to eat each other alive, theres no need for the negativity yet
Blade Posted January 13, 2015 Posted January 13, 2015 But @Agent Gibbs it just wouldn't be N-E without all the negativity.
Glen-i Posted January 13, 2015 Posted January 13, 2015 But @Agent Gibbs it just wouldn't be N-E without all the negativity. Speak for yourself! I for one am excited by what exactly these changes could be.
Rummy Posted January 13, 2015 Posted January 13, 2015 The more I think about it, the more I would have absolutely loved this to be on Wii U (and possibly dreading the 3DS version). MM success for me lie in its immersive qualities... Like running around aimless in Clocktown on the first day while builders are banging away making noise over there, whilst the sound of a dog barking can be heard in the distance. The music was powerful and dynamic too, with tracks that deserve a subwoofer. Im just moaning, but I guess it pains me that a MM HD will never ever happen now due to this one. I'm having the same feel I got from Smash Bros 3DS, where it just didn't feel as inviting and exciting as the Wii U version. I hear ya brother. Out of everything I would have wanted as a HD console remake - it was probably this. Wish they'd done it rather than WW, but alas 'twas not to be
Jimbob Posted January 13, 2015 Posted January 13, 2015 I prefer it to be on the 3DS, Ocarina played well on the 3DS if there is anything to go by.
EEVILMURRAY Posted January 13, 2015 Posted January 13, 2015 They also usually have a lot of sidequests that you can complete without much pressure on your time and are generally conductive to being played for hours or minutes at a time. MM is even less conductive to short handheld play sessions than OoT though because of how the 3 day cycle and the save system works. Surely you can see that? Like I said, if you're expecting to play this in short bursts, then you're choosing the wrong game. Not every handheld game should be designed to play in short bursts. Some of us like a nice meaty game to get our teeth into for a nice session. Think about the design of handheld Zelda games (or indeed ALTTP GBA vs ALTTP SNES and how it was more lenient with where you could suspend and resume your game). Which is weird as the only way to save in A Link To The Past is to save and quit at the same time (apart from completing a dungeon) which sends you back to a set point. Forcing you to travel wherever all over again.
Recommended Posts