Skyward Sword had that as an option, I think. Not displaying controls, at least.
Gaming New Zelda WiiU Gameplay from The Game Awards 2014
- Thread starter WiiCube_2013
- Start date
- Views 11,472
- Replies 115
- Likes 2
Skyward Sword had that as an option, I think. Not displaying controls, at least.
Why am I getting a shadow of the colossus vibe from this one? It just more colors and bit more mini mobs.
I was hoping for the graphics of the wii u demo link. My eyes can't take too much cell shaded, that's like 2000.
I was hoping for the graphics of the wii u demo link. My eyes can't take too much cell shaded, that's like 2000.
We can only hope the true fidelity of the game wasn't properly captured from the gameplay shown on the TV.
The world looks kinda empty as fuck. Map size doesn't matter if there's nothing to do, it just makes going from dungeon to dungeon a long, boring stretch instead of a truly open world filled with quests and events to do.
I'm not exactly sold on it, especially since Skyward Sword was so shit and while I like that they're taking a new approach to Zelda, I feel like their still just years behind the open world genre.
I'm not exactly sold on it, especially since Skyward Sword was so shit and while I like that they're taking a new approach to Zelda, I feel like their still just years behind the open world genre.
It looks...okay? Maybe sort of promising?
The art style looks aesthetically pleasing, although I can't quite tell whether or not Link is male or female here, he's been transitioning a little more with each iteration of the series since Twilight Princess. The matrix-esque backflip slowmo bow looks pretty cool the first time, but seems like more of a boring gimmick to simplify combat. If there's anything Zelda doesn't need, it's further simplification of combat that already seems like a chore. Who the hell thought it would be a good idea to have a metallic striking noise indicate a hit? That's pretty much a complete 180 from the combat of every previous Zelda or action game. Dumb choice.
Visually the landscape looks pretty good, from the short tech-demo area we saw. The draw distance seems a little limited, and the world is sparsely decorated, populated and oversaturated with bloom, but this is still a WIP game. I really hope that the final product won't be Wind Waker with a horse. If you're going to wave your giant map around to try and sell the game, try to fill it with some interesting AI and lots of places to explore. Otherwise, what's the point? Other than trying to ape Bethesda games, of course. (But if this means getting to the open world without 10 hours of tutorials first, I'm all for it.)
The art style looks aesthetically pleasing, although I can't quite tell whether or not Link is male or female here, he's been transitioning a little more with each iteration of the series since Twilight Princess. The matrix-esque backflip slowmo bow looks pretty cool the first time, but seems like more of a boring gimmick to simplify combat. If there's anything Zelda doesn't need, it's further simplification of combat that already seems like a chore. Who the hell thought it would be a good idea to have a metallic striking noise indicate a hit? That's pretty much a complete 180 from the combat of every previous Zelda or action game. Dumb choice.
Visually the landscape looks pretty good, from the short tech-demo area we saw. The draw distance seems a little limited, and the world is sparsely decorated, populated and oversaturated with bloom, but this is still a WIP game. I really hope that the final product won't be Wind Waker with a horse. If you're going to wave your giant map around to try and sell the game, try to fill it with some interesting AI and lots of places to explore. Otherwise, what's the point? Other than trying to ape Bethesda games, of course. (But if this means getting to the open world without 10 hours of tutorials first, I'm all for it.)
This. Like hksrb25s14 said above, the gameplay we've seen does bring out a Shadow of the Colossus kind of vibe. That game had a huge, beautiful world, but in the end it mattered NOTHING because it was quite literally empty. To get to all the colossi you just had to ride the horse for long, boring times. Sometimes I'd set the direction, let the horse do the rest, and do something else while it's getting to the destination. If this Zelda game is anything like that, it's a huge step backwards. At this point I don't care much about open world vs. linear world.
Nintendo actually invented the open-world game on home consoles with the release of The Legend of Zelda in the 1980's, which was one of the first open-world graphical games ever. Super Mario 64 was one of the earliest examples of a 3-D open world game. I'm not sure where you are coming from at all. Zelda (except for a few exceptions) has always featured a large, open world, usually with each game featuring a larger map than the last.
Skyward Sword had the largest Zelda map ever, but because it was divided between four areas that were not directly connected, it felt a bit closed compared to past titles to some players. This is just upping the ante and, maybe opening up the map so you can travel directly between any two places.
In any case, it was a "real" open world and one of the best received open-world games of the last decade, which is generally true of any Zelda game (and most of the 3D Mario games as well).
I fear definitions may be being stretched somewhat there, moreover I would argue SM64 was classic (?) 3d levels with a rather nice level select, Zelda is much the same for me, doubly so if it is broken down into rooms/screens and dungeons. At this point I have not really done skyward sword so I can not say much there and this was going purely off that video.
This looks like it might be aiming at being some kind of answer to elder scrolls, might and magic and all that jazz, however this has several of the signs of the indy dev that just realised how much effort it is to make an enjoyable 3d open world game in the 2010s (or a slightly larger dev that thought it would go up against world of warcraft). Maybe I am looking too much into early code and level massaging would probably be something they look at later (though a lack of automated stuff does say great things), however as tightly scripted as the rest of that was I would have expected a tiny bit more effort on the game front.
This looks like it might be aiming at being some kind of answer to elder scrolls, might and magic and all that jazz, however this has several of the signs of the indy dev that just realised how much effort it is to make an enjoyable 3d open world game in the 2010s (or a slightly larger dev that thought it would go up against world of warcraft). Maybe I am looking too much into early code and level massaging would probably be something they look at later (though a lack of automated stuff does say great things), however as tightly scripted as the rest of that was I would have expected a tiny bit more effort on the game front.
It's very clear Nintendo wants to make a huge playable world in this next Zelda iteration and that very quickly begs the question: at what cost? Wii U isn't a very powerful console at the end of the day, with only 2GB memory and tri-core CPU. They can't possibly keep a big draw distance with high quality textures and lots of polygons on the screen, it's impossible. So what's the compromise? In Skyward Sword, they wrote off the limitations of the Wii by implementing a "bokeh" effect (blurring of the background). Attempts to render Skyward Sword at HD resolutions on capable PCs with Dolphin have shown that game would've certainly seen a lot of graphical benefit of more capable hardware.
The definition of open-world game is pretty clear. If most parts of the "world" (that is, the setting the game takes place in) is accessible at most times in the game, it is open world. If you are forced to progress through linear space and/or missions, it is not open world. Zelda and Metroid for the NES were two classic examples of an open-world game. Super Mario Brothers was a classic example of a linear game. These are examples taken straight from the Wikipedia article. You can have a "tightly scripted" open world game, especially if it has a lot of sidequests (example: Mass Effect). You don't have to have a completely non-linear plot to have an open world game.
1. The CPU of the Wii U actually seems to be reasonably good, perhaps even better than the one in the PS4 and XB1 in many regards. The Wii U CPU has three PPC cores dedicated to gaming (and it is believed games can shut down cores to overclock the CPU) plus at least two or three more ARM cores dedicated to running the OS. It is pretty unlikely that Wii U games will be limited by the CPU, at least no more so than the PS4 or XB1.
2. The Wii U GPU and RAM are primarily responsible for things like draw distances, lighting, and polygon count. It is true, the GPU power of Wii U is about 3 times as slow as the XB1 and about 5 times as slow as the PS4, but I don't think that really means much when Nintendo is optimizing the game for the system. There were plenty of games that looked great on the Wii, PS3 and 360, and all those were significantly less powerful GPUs (the Wii's GPU might be 50-100 times less powerful than the Wii U). It's certainly true that a lazy AAA port will probably look a lot worse on the Wii U than on the PS4 (and a lot worse on the PS4 than on the PC), but we're not talking about a lazy port. We are talking about a game designed solely to look good on the Wii U in the art style the designers have chosen.
3. The "capability" of the Wii 's hardware is not why games look better on Dolphin. The reason that they look better on Dolphin is that they are being rendered at the television's native resolution rather than being distorted by up-scaling (plus, they might add on a few after-effects like AA). You're getting the same exact rendering whether it is on the Wii or Dolphin. The only difference, is that the Wii renders it at 480p, which looks great on a CRT, but can get really distorted by the crummy analog upscalers in HDTVs.
The graphical benefit of Dolphin is not more powerful hardware. It is simply being able to render at the native resolution. No matter how good the Wii's hardware might be, it would never be able to render at 4K because it was only designed to output at 480p. The only exception might be AA on Wii games that didn't use it.
If we must define things like that then fair enough. I shall rephrase
If that is an example of what they are going with then they are going to run up against the likes of elder scrolls, might and magic and similar titles, however it looks like they are making many of the mistakes of lesser or lesser funded developers also attempting to ape such styles and I can not see the resulting game being all that good.
If that is an example of what they are going with then they are going to run up against the likes of elder scrolls, might and magic and similar titles, however it looks like they are making many of the mistakes of lesser or lesser funded developers also attempting to ape such styles and I can not see the resulting game being all that good.
That's a pretty bold claim from a few minutes of demo footage.
OOT had, for the time, a massive open world. Much of it (Hyrule field especially) had very little to do besides a few secrets or sidequests, yet the game is often considered the best 3-D game of all time.
The last Zelda game, just doing the primary quest and a few of the more obvious side quests, was easily pushing 60 hours, or 3-6 times the average length of a AAA game, out of the box, with no DLC. I find it highly unlikely that Nintendo is going to release a Zelda game where there is nothing to do, or one with silly kill 100 troll type sidequests.
Zelda has always had some of the largest, most interesting worlds in gaming. Games like Skyrim just upped the ante (in terms of size) and Nintendo is following suite.
I agree and the proof as they say will be in the pudding, however if they are going to all the effort of scripting and cutting together something like that then I doubt they would have ignored the gameplay in the middle of it all. If that is going to be the example of something to showcase the game with then I am going with justified pessimism at this stage.
We did some of N64 Zelda vs the world in various N64 (and how the N64 was something of a failure) threads. I am not really in a hurry to sing the praises of OOT though, especially not the "open world" parts of it.
Equally I do not doubt there will be much to do, however that is not necessarily what I am going for here as much as the world/level design (not the aesthetics at this stage) part of it all -- if it is all going to be minigames in a village then . Hopefully as we already saw that partially hamstring wind waker then they will not be in a hurry to repeat the concept.
We did some of N64 Zelda vs the world in various N64 (and how the N64 was something of a failure) threads. I am not really in a hurry to sing the praises of OOT though, especially not the "open world" parts of it.
Equally I do not doubt there will be much to do, however that is not necessarily what I am going for here as much as the world/level design (not the aesthetics at this stage) part of it all -- if it is all going to be minigames in a village then . Hopefully as we already saw that partially hamstring wind waker then they will not be in a hurry to repeat the concept.
Well, it could be possible when you think about it. So far the game hasn't got a subtitle, it's just "The Legend of Zelda". It appears to play in a similar function to the NES game with a large overworld that you have to explore to find dungeons and secrets. Zelda 1 is close to the end of the timeline but I think the high-tech arrows in the first trailer indicate that this Hyrule is more technologically advanced.
It's possible. Probable, no. But possible.
And regarding the empty space people are talking about now, here's what I noticed.
-The first trailer showed a random mini-boss event. I assume random events will occur frequently in the full game.
-The gameplay trailer was trimmed at multiple points. Perhaps just to speed things up but also to keep things secret. Miyamoto wouldn't have had such a positive reaction to the game if it was just ten minutes of riding around on a horse.
-Based on Link's appearance (still not donning green), this part of the game is right at the beginning. The story hasn't begun yet.
after studying the map and terrain more closely i now suspect this is just before or after the legend of zelda which is in the fallen hero (or what i like to call the spinoff 
) timeline. it's not a remake of zelda one though.
) timeline. it's not a remake of zelda one though.
The first open world game was Ultima ya dingus. The first Zelda is roughly open world, you'd look more towards Wasteland or other Ultima game as early open world examples.
Nintendo certainly didn't "invent" the genre. Even then, Nintendo may have brought forth many innovations 30 years ago but it means jack shit today. Just because they made a great game 30 years ago doesn't mean they'll make one today. That's pretty damn evident if you've played some of the half-assed crap they put out in recent years.
Meanwhile I can boot up GTA V and have a world full of cars, people, random events, sidequests, and just about a couple things every block in the game.
A house near a mountain, a dock, a desert (aren't deserts just the image people get of barren and empty), and a cart in the middle of the field are far from VIBRANT LIVING WORLD that people want in their open world games. Shadow of the Colossus has random shit everywhere but it doesn't mean anything or serve any purpose. It's just there.
I have to say I'm with Guild on this one.
...we are talking about the next flagship game from Nintendo, so they have to compromise on something to deliver the promise of a huge open world. They can't keep high quality textures all around with high polygon counts and a big draw distance. It's technically impossible. To follow your example, GTA V on PS3 looks like JPEG compressed vomit. GTA V on PS4 is far better. The only kinds of games where raw performance and processing power is required are open world games. You just can't create a game with the graphical level of e.g. The Last of Us on PS4, have a huge draw distance, lots of polygons, and high quality textures on a Wii U. You can't. It doesn't matter who is making the game, even Nintendo can't pull that off. My evidence to support this claim? For one, they went with cartoonish graphics again and not realistic graphics. It doesn't matter how Nintendo washes down this by saying it fits the "art style" or whatever bullcrap. It's by function and that is to ensure the Wii U won't explode while loading up the game. And secondly, what we've seen is pretty much a dead town. Who cares about a huge open world if there's nothing to do?
That Nintendo is optimizing the game for the system means nothing, zero, nil. It's a hard fact that the Wii U isn't a powerhouse of a console, which I'm very fine with. The games I've played thus far (Mario Kart 8, Smash Bros., Pikmin 3) have been amazing, just short of breathtaking experiences. However...
...we are talking about the next flagship game from Nintendo, so they have to compromise on something to deliver the promise of a huge open world. They can't keep high quality textures all around with high polygon counts and a big draw distance. It's technically impossible. To follow your example, GTA V on PS3 looks like JPEG compressed vomit. GTA V on PS4 is far better. The only kinds of games where raw performance and processing power is required are open world games. You just can't create a game with the graphical level of e.g. The Last of Us on PS4, have a huge draw distance, lots of polygons, and high quality textures on a Wii U. You can't. It doesn't matter who is making the game, even Nintendo can't pull that off. My evidence to support this claim? For one, they went with cartoonish graphics again and not realistic graphics. It doesn't matter how Nintendo washes down this by saying it fits the "art style" or whatever bullcrap. It's by function and that is to ensure the Wii U won't explode while loading up the game. And secondly, what we've seen is pretty much a dead town. Who cares about a huge open world if there's nothing to do?
Similar threads
-
Xdqwerty
what are you looking at?
-
-
-
-
-
-
@
AncientBoi:
And a part of my immediate family passed also. Sending my good suit to the cleaners for the funeral Saturday -
-
-
-
-
-
@
Xdqwerty:
@SylverReZ, may I ask you something? What are your favorite animes? (Aside of serial code lain)
-
-
@
Xdqwerty:
Mines are all the dragon ball animes. Im also enjoying Fullmetal alchemist and my hero academia+1
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
