E3 2016 General Thread

[bob]

So do they get the crown? Do Nintendo get the crown?

[Falcon_BlizZACK]

Zelda, followed Revil and Horizon for me.

[Ronnie]

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.

[Falcon_BlizZACK]

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.

 

Same here actually, but it gave me memories of Jade Cocoon on PS1.

[nekunando]

I'll probably post my thoughts in the Other Wii U thread at some point. I feel like I can post in that one without the pitchforks coming out.

 

It shouldn't be like that I'm interested in hearing thoughts and impressions of games but don't want to have to hunt through different sections of the forum just to piece together the information!

 

Regarding Breath of the Wild, I'd like to know everyone's take on it as to me the game looks fresh and exciting but then I don't normally play similar games on other formats. In fact, if you swap out the franchise and the aesthetics for something else, maybe I just wouldn't be interested in the game at all!

[Kav]

A lot of E3 goers are interested in it...

 

[tweet]743128940416425984[/tweet]

[Fierce_LiNk]

It shouldn't be like that I'm interested in hearing thoughts and impressions of games but don't want to have to hunt through different sections of the forum just to piece together the information!

 

Regarding Breath of the Wild, I'd like to know everyone's take on it as to me the game looks fresh and exciting but then I don't normally play similar games on other formats. In fact, if you swap out the franchise and the aesthetics for something else, maybe I just wouldn't be interested in the game at all!

 

I think a lot of the reason why people are looking forward to it is because of its aesthetics.

 

My view on the game is that artistically something looks a bit off to me. @Eenuh and I were talking about it yesterday and we couldn't work out if it was just the feed but something doesn't quite do it for us. It's not as sharp as we both would like it.

 

In terms of the game, it looks fun to play. But, the stuff I saw yesterday doesn't address any of the concerns that I have with Zelda. Skyward Sword looked pretty great too, but it was a complete and utter letdown for me. My issues are with the narrative, interaction with other characters and with the world building. To me, this was all really poor with Skyward Sword and that's what I'm looking for in this next Zelda. The problem is that yesterday's information and playthroughs didn't touch on that (for reasons that I understand) so I'm still on the fence.

 

Also, I need proper clarification about how this game is going to differ on WiiU to NX. I can't say I've been happy with the WiiU purchase, but I've still been waiting for the next Zelda, which was one of the main reasons that I picked up in the system in the first place. If there's a great disparity between Zelda WiiU and NX, then that's not going to go down well with me and there would have to be other great NX stuff too in order to convince me to get the game.

 

So, whilst I did like what I saw, I'm still on the fence until I see how my issues with the series are addressed.

 

I've got to say that I still think it fucking sucks that Nintendo only really had this (and Pokemon) to show at E3. It doesn't help to shake the feeling that Nintendo are pinging all of their hopes on one game.

[Falcon_BlizZACK]

It shouldn't be like that I'm interested in hearing thoughts and impressions of games but don't want to have to hunt through different sections of the forum just to piece together the information!

 

Regarding Breath of the Wild, I'd like to know everyone's take on it as to me the game looks fresh and exciting but then I don't normally play similar games on other formats. In fact, if you swap out the franchise and the aesthetics for something else, maybe I just wouldn't be interested in the game at all!

 

I think its brilliant - and I have seen every video available.

 

I despised SS and to a lesser extent TPs linearity, and even with the little shown over E3 and how little this segment is compared to the world, its very easy to see this is not going to be a linear game - at the very least not as the aforementioned games.

 

Its refreshing. The sprawling, lush world and wildlife is like no other interpretation of Hyrule. I like the bold changes such as the omition of the classic overworld theme to differentiate and to state very boldly and immediately that this is different! In fact this is the only Zelda (outside of perhaps making a mission for myself in WW to complete the world map) where I don't just want to jump into the story first... I want discover the world over several in-game days, hunt and gather and cook combinations of food and potions to see their benefits. Hunt for treasure, new clothes, weapons - never really had this drive in a Zelda which typically gives you about three weapons and lesser choices of clothing.

 

And whats great is that these clothes and weapons and meal creations come with a reason - the stats - and that's just a great motivation for me. This is what aides exploration, and 90% of Zeldas weren't really good with this aspect of reward outside of rupees and hearts.

 

With the opening scene, I also can't wait to indulge in the storyline... BOTW has the most sensational opening yet. And the appearance of a race that were heavily tied with one Zelda and the seemingly mass appearance of a race that only usually appeared as extinct - this game seems to have incorporated the best of OOT, WW, SS and TP. Perhaps MM too if we hear of mass side quests and towns. Also visually, the water-coloured natural look, seems to have meld with the WW cartoony vibe (ala the enemy explosions) creating a unique HD Zelda look - the water and shrine rock heads look outstandingly HD in resolution, as do the fawner and environment in general.

 

Overall, I am pleasantly surprised and this is now my most anticipated Wii U title after Pikmin 3 - though admittedly I probably go for the new shiny NX version if they release together. Pleased that Nintendo have lived by their word for once with regards to REALLY shaking up the foundations of what a Zelda is and look to be sticking by it.

Edited June 15, 2016 by King_V

[dan-likes-trees]

Not even close. Irrelevant my arse

 

 

Well yeah, because Sony / Microsoft fans have more than one game to show, so obviously their social media discussion is more thinly spread.

 

Nonetheless, I'm really quite intrigued by it. I'm into the sense of verticality in the world design, and the general shadow of the colossus combined with NES Zelda vibe. Almost has a bit of No Man's Sky in the general mystery of exploration.

 

Nonetheless.. I'm with Drahkon when he mentions that it doesn't seem to do anything new. Not to ramble on again about Witcher 3, but the shadow of that game is going to loom large over this - most of the stuff we've seen, that game (and others) have done before, and better - and theyve had vibrant set of npcs and bustling locations to boot (I'm aware they're yet to show the towns but..). Hopefully the use of items , physics, and some fleshy main dungeons can make it distinct enough to withstand comparisons.

 

Anyway, I'm intrigued. Don't own a WiiU and have no interest in an NX so this'll have to be seriously good to justify the purchase after the stinker that was Skyward Sword...

[Ronnie]

Well yeah, because Sony / Microsoft fans have more than one game to show, so obviously their social media discussion is more thinly spread.

 

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.

[Ike]

Well yeah, because Sony / Microsoft fans have more than one game to show, so obviously their social media discussion is more thinly spread.

 

I'm not really sure it works like that...(?)

[Kav]

I think the interactivity with the environment is what's setting Zelda apart form other open-world games for me.

 

That there are over 100 dungeons (Trials) with rumour of a few main dungeons and that Link can climb absolutely everything, shield surf (which is so friggin' cool), hand-glide, chop down trees - to even form bridges across ravines - all this gets me much more excited than The Witcher 3... and I'm really enjoying The Witcher 3... but the world of Zelda has managed to grab me far more from just that brief glance at it!

 

Clear game of show in my eyes... and I was very sceptical!

[Blade]

I think the interactivity with the environment is what's setting Zelda apart form other open-world games for me.

 

That there are over 100 dungeons (Trials) with rumour of a few main dungeons and that Link can climb absolutely everything, shield surf (which is so friggin' cool), hand-glide, chop down trees - to even form bridges across ravines - all this gets me much more excited than The Witcher 3... and I'm really enjoying The Witcher 3... but the world of Zelda has managed to grab me far more from just that brief glance at it!

 

Clear game of show in my eyes... and I was very sceptical!

 

I really couldn't careless about the climbing or chopping trees to be honest. I want lots of things to do in the world for me.

[Kav]

I really couldn't careless about the climbing or chopping trees to be honest. I want lots of things to do in the world for me.

 

There are over 100 dungeons, you'll have plenty to do!

If they show enough towns with NPCs and side-quests aplenty (which is what you're getting at - as you've told me) it'll be the perfect game!

[bob]

I'm not really sure it works like that...(?)

I think the way that it works is that every console manufacturer has an certain amount of social media points, and they can share them out between whichever games they want. Nintendo knew this, and cleverly restricted it to one game. Genius.

[dan-likes-trees]

I think the way that it works is that every console manufacturer has an certain amount of social media points, and they can share them out between whichever games they want. Nintendo knew this, and cleverly restricted it to one game. Genius.

 

Hahaha

 

 

You see what I mean though right? If you only own a WiiU of course you're going to be discussing Zelda, where a PS4 owner who might only post one trailer has a whole host of games they might be interested in to pick from.

 

Plus as Ronnie points out Zelda had an entire day to itself, more or less, whereas on the previous day there were new trailers for what, 40 games, across the Microsoft and Sony shows?

 

Clearly Zelda's done well but I'm just sayin' that such a graph is hardly definitive proof of anything

[bob]

Le master trole.

 

 

I suppose that's a good point. If MS Sony and Nintendo had only announced one game each, then it might have been different. But I suspect the revealing of a new Zelda game will always be high on social media regardless of whatever else Nintendo show or how good it looks.

[liger05]

Hahaha

 

 

You see what I mean though right? If you only own a WiiU of course you're going to be discussing Zelda, where a PS4 owner who might only post one trailer has a whole host of games they might be interested in to pick from.

 

Plus as Ronnie points out Zelda had an entire day to itself, more or less, whereas on the previous day there were new trailers for what, 40 games, across the Microsoft and Sony shows?

 

Clearly Zelda's done well but I'm just sayin' that such a graph is hardly definitive proof of anything

 

Poor argument. If GTA 6 was showed in a 60 sec trailer it would of been #1. Likewise if Nintendo only showed off 1 game being paper Mario it wouldn't of been #1.

 

When Nintendo titles like MK show insane software attach rate numbers some use the same argument you have used by claiming there are less games on the wii u so it's not that impressive.

 

Makes no sense at all.

[Ashley]

I suppose that's a good point. If MS Sony and Nintendo had only announced one game each, then it might have been different. But I suspect the revealing of a new Zelda game will always be high on social media regardless of whatever else Nintendo show or how good it looks.

 

Yeah I'd say it's something like this. Zelda is always going to get a big buzz - it's a huge franchise that's been going for 30 years and there's a lot of extra buzz about this one seeing as its the first Wii U title, we've been waiting years, the Wii U's swan song etc etc etc.

 

However, it has taken up (at a very rough guess) 85% of Nintendo's time at E3. All those Nintendo fans, Nintendo sites and gaming sites can only tweet about Zelda. So they do.

 

I myself have watched a few trailers and outside of what I've tweeted for the site, I've only mentioned Spider-Man in a tweet responding to someone. That doesn't mean I think Spider-Man is game of E3.

 

Zelda may well have been the most talked about game during E3 anyway, but it will be inflated because it is Nintendo's prime focus. Nintendo is after all one of the most tweeted about video game companies.

 

It would be interesting to see how that whole graph looked if it was just looking at positive tweets.

[somme]

Even if Zelda had been shit it would have been at the top. As others have said, it's 30 years old and one of the best loved franchises and we haven't had a proper, new, 3D Zelda in quite a few years. At least Nintendo are being talked about for at least one good reason this year.

[drahkon]

Couldn't care less whether Zelda was the most talked about game or not, whether Sony won E3 or not, whether Microsoft was wrong to announce Scorpio or not...

 

It was a great E3. Objectively we had great announcements on Microsoft's and Sony's ends, and Nintendo has shown what might be a step in the right direction when it comes our beloved franchises.

 

All three major companies created a situation which could prove to be very successful and great for gamers in the future.

[Ronnie]

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.

 

 

I think the interactivity with the environment is what's setting Zelda apart form other open-world games for me.

 

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.

Edited June 16, 2016 by Ronnie
Automerged Doublepost

[Ashley]

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.

 

It, like all data, is open to interpretation. And that's what we're doing. Interpreting. Nobody is shitting on Zelda or Nintendo. They're merely discussing. Nobody has said it's not a big deal, of course it is.

 

And technically speaking it didn't get "more than double anything from the rest of the show".

 

 

(plus its a 10% sample, see previous comment about data)

Edited June 16, 2016 by Ashley

[Ike]

It'll be more interesting if they had data including yesterday where Nintendo did show more than Zelda. They showed Pokemon on Tuesday, and that's really far down the list.

[Ganepark32]

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.

 

But the thing is, nothing that was shown for Zelda is ground breaking or anything different to what we've seen in other open world titles. What we've seen is Nintendo realising that they've fallen well behind the curve, learning from recent titles and they've presented a title which carries and implements many of the hallmark mechanics of games which come out every other month on the other consoles/PC. Things like cutting down trees for bridges perfectly represents what your suggesting otherwise about the game, scripting, and it's going to be apparent throughout Zelda as it is in every other open world title.

 

I'm not doubting that it won't be mechanically sound nor that it won't be a good game nor am I having a go at you, but trying to present it as the next great open world title on the basis of what's been shown and comparing to say The Witcher 3, which has set a standard for immersion and interactivity with one of the most detailed and well designed worlds in a video game, is nonsensical.

 

The attention to detail which went into that game and it's quests has presented a standard which, from what I've seen in trailer and on Treehouse, is not apparent. Yet perhaps but I very much doubt we'll see anything that hits as hard as the Bloody Baron's quest in TW3 (Hell, I'd say we'd be lucky to get an overall story that matches the quality of that side quest).

 

My outlook on the game, it looks good for a more modern Zelda but compared to other games I've played in the past couple of yours or what's coming out in the near future, it looks ok at best, nothing special. Pretty much my feelings for this year's E3 as well, nothing special.