Quote:The much anticipated Zelda bonus disc contains several games from the Zelda series; The Legend of Zelda, Zelda II: Adventures of Link, The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask and a 20-minute demo of The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker.
Each game has their own save file and the block amount that they take up can be found below.
The Legend of Zelda- 3
Zelda II: Adventures of Link- 3
The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time- 9
The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask- 21
The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker does not save and a 20-minute demo can be played in The first dungeon, the fortress or on Windmill Island. It should also be noted that the Ocarina of Time save file is different to that found with the bonus disc with The Wind Waker.
The Legend of Zelda and Zelda II: Adventures of Link have had slight graphical updates. Ocarina of Time has an improved framerate and a better control system than the Wind Waker bonus disc. Majora's Mask's screen resolution has also been improved
Cube-Europe
Quote:Ocarina of Time has an improved framerate and a better control system than the Wind Waker bonus disc
?
What was wrong with the controls on Ocarina? I'm playing through it again (in the Water Temple now) and I have no problem with the controls.
Yeah, I thought the OOT controls were PERFECT as they were, but we shall see, won't we? I think it's INSANE that those games take up that number of blocks, but whatever. I have room to spare. I suppose the MM save file has 3 save slots like the Japanese version AND the memo save of the US version. I wonder if, as the size of that save file would indicate, the memo save feature can now be used anywhere? That would certainly please ONE ABF here I know of (psst, I'm talking about ABF ;)).
And another ting :D, what sort of slight graphical improvements to the NES classics do they mean? Something like the smoothing effect done with Metroid 1? "Slight" would indicate it's just something like that...
In any case, we all approve, even the evil wizard!
Hmm... very minor improvements means you well might not notice them. Why is MM so large? I don't know... but it is saving a lot of stuff. MM has a lot of stuff that it needs to remember, after all... I'm not surprised that its significantly larger than OoT (which seems a bit larger than it should but isn't too bad). I am sure they won't change something as crucial as the save system... adding a third saveblock they well might do, however.
And as for the NES games... I don't know, seems like 3 blocks is more than it really should need. Oh well, 3 isn't much. :)
And since they haven't mentioned it... I'm really starting to wonder about Master Quest...
I don't think Master Quest was ever supposed to be part of the collection.
Quote:Originally posted by Dark Jaguar
In any case, we all approve, even the evil wizard!
Wait! He only looks half evil!
Quote:I don't think Master Quest was ever supposed to be part of the collection.
Since they never mentioned it I was certainly pretty doubtful... but still, I can hope, right? :)
You can hope, or you can buy the OoT/Master Quest disc from me for $100.
Ya know, I guess they never did mention it, but why would they NOT put it in? I can't think of any reason they would go to the effort of removing Master Quest.
And they wouldn't be "adding" a 3rd save slot, I wouldn't say. They would have to REMOVE it again since that 3rd slot was already in the Japanese version, and Japan wouldn't like them, and there wouldn't be reason to change it for the US release what with it being on a memory card. I wouldn't say they would totally change it. I'm just saying that, since they went and added the owl memo save in that game for US release way back when, they might well be expanding on it so the memo save could be done at any time. Wouldn't change anything. The thing is, how much data is saved is what matters, not how large the game is, and I don't think that those files really saved any more data than OOT, so the only thing I can imagine accounting for that data would be an any-time memo save (actually, not ENOUGH data for that, unless it's any-time memo save that puts you back in the last entrance you walked through type of thing). Well, that's my theory anyway...
Half evil? Well, only if you have that chromatist stereotype about red being evil and blue being good, Edenmaster! He's like, totally evil! And he wants SAPHIRES!
Quote:Originally posted by DMiller
You can hope, or you can buy the OoT/Master Quest disc from me for $100.
Or go to any game store in my town and buy it for 15 bucks.
The choice...is yours.
Quote:And they wouldn't be "adding" a 3rd save slot, I wouldn't say. They would have to REMOVE it again since that 3rd slot was already in the Japanese version, and Japan wouldn't like them, and there wouldn't be reason to change it for the US release what with it being on a memory card. I wouldn't say they would totally change it. I'm just saying that, since they went and added the owl memo save in that game for US release way back when, they might well be expanding on it so the memo save could be done at any time. Wouldn't change anything. The thing is, how much data is saved is what matters, not how large the game is, and I don't think that those files really saved any more data than OOT, so the only thing I can imagine accounting for that data would be an any-time memo save (actually, not ENOUGH data for that, unless it's any-time memo save that puts you back in the last entrance you walked through type of thing). Well, that's my theory anyway...
You are overanalyzing it. What did they do? I don't know. For the US I'm sure that they'll just port the one we got and maybe add a third saveslot (which is definitely an addition since its not the version we got...). For Japan? That's a better question. Will they port the one they got back then straight, or will they give them the additions added for our version? I have no idea...
I was under the strong impression they would do the porting bit in Japan, then with the US version they'd just re-translate the port using the translation they already have.
Look, the release here will definitely include all the stuff they added before. The question is if they'll add them in Japan too... I bet they will. They probably just took the US version and added the older Japanese language section to it for that version, with maybe some slight changes...
Quote:Ocarina of Time has an improved framerate and a better control system than the Wind Waker bonus disc
Ah-
HA!!
Do you guys remember when the Master Quest disc came out and I complained about the fact that Nintendo didn't improve OoT's framerate, some of you guys said "It's not possible because then the animation system wouldn't work", and I said how crazy that theory was? Well I was right, buckos!! So you can all SUCK ON THAT for a while!! Time to eat some of that humble pie! :D You can the thread over
here, btw. For the record, Dark Lord Neo, lazy, DJ, and Laser Link thought that 60 fps wouldn't be possible with OoT's animation system.
I love being right so often. And I bet you guys just
hate me because of it. :p Well you can kiss my shiny metal ass. :shakeit:
But I digress. Now of course for a game like OoT 30 fps is just fine, but since it is a simple, straight N64 port, you kind of expect a better framerate. 60 fps isn't
necessary, but it's a very welcome improvement.
And why are you people complaining about Oot's controls being improved? Even if the improvement ends up being bad you already have
two other copies of the same game that you could play instead. Yeesh.
Uhh... why should anyone care if OoT runs at 30 or 60? As long as its 30+ and steady, it really is completely irrelevant... now for a FPS or a racing game it might matter, but OoT isn't like that.
And we'll see if 'improved' means 60. :)
Oh, and there is very good reason to believe that when a game is designed for one framerate it won't run in others... I remember trying to run Moto Racer 2 for the PC at 60 (its a commandline option -- the game defaults to locking at 30)... the game ran so incredibly fast that it wasn't playable. Needless to say I dropped it back to 30...
Framerate doesn't always change the actual speed of movement in a game, it changes the number of frames of animation that are drawn every second. Now in some cases a bad framerate really can make the actual game speed slow down significantly, but the difference between 30 fps and 60 fps is all in the animation. You'd still be going as fast in F-Zero GX if it ran at 30 fps instead of 60, but the game would only look half as smooth. Improving OoT's framerate shouldn't make Link run faster, it should just make all of the animations on screen look smoother, as well as the scenery when it moves around you. 30 fps is fine for OoT, but 60 fps is better.
Well it made that game's speed change or something... it was a while ago, but I clearly remember the game being unplayable.
And what would increasing the framerate do to Zelda? Yeah, it'd make it smoother. The problem is the graphics engine! Doubters have a very good point... what if the game was designed to animate at a specific speed? If the framerate doubled then maybe the animation would too... that would be bad. Its quite possible that changing the framerate would require major reworking... I guess we'll have to wait to see if we learn what exactly they did about the framerate.
That's now how 3D animation works. You don't create individual frames like you would with traditional 2D animation, the computer does most of the work for you. Let's say you want to create a walking animation for a 3D model. It's not like stop-motion animation where you would move each limb a little bit and then take a picture frame-by-frame, but instead you would move a limb from point a to point b and let the program fill in everything in between. The number of frames you see per animation is dependant upon the media of the animation (game or movie) and the framerates. If a game is running at 30 fps then the time between the leg moving from point a to point b is going to be the same as how long it would take if the game were running at 60 fps, but the difference is that you would see fewer frames in that leg animation so it would look less smooth. Now 3D animation certainly isn't easy to do, but it's a different kind of difficult than 2D or claymation. Although of course it's not quite as simple as that because when you make a 3D animation for a certain fixed framerate (like film at 24 fps) you run into problems like subframe issues and other things like that, but that's a different story. I've seen OoT run at 60 fps and it does not change the actual speed of Link or anything else in the game.
But games still can be designed to run at a specific framerate in all kinds of ways... in many cases you cannot deny that (yes, even in 3d games) changing the framerate would require major retooling of the game engine to be workable, somewhat like resolution (shrinking stuff vs. redoing graphics for each rez).
Yes, as in the case of Doom 3 where the developer made it so that it couldn't go over 60 fps. But that has nothing to do with animation. They did that to balance out the framerate with everything else, so that the game would always be pretty balanced in terms of graphics. You are not going to run any faster at 60 fps than you will at 30 fps. The only thing the better framerate changes is the smoothness of everything. Same thing goes for Oot. Go play the ROM that you have and make sure that you have the framerate counter on. Boot up the ROM and your N64 cart (or GC disc) and run around at the same time. You're not going to run any faster. The only change you will see is a higher resolution and smoother animations.
Resolution also isn't much of an issue for 3D games. Again, play some of your N64 ROMs and try them at different resolutions. With 2D games and voxel-based 3D games (Outcast), changing the resolution makes the games look weird, but that's not the case with most polygonal games.
Quote:Yes, as in the case of Doom 3 where the developer made it so that it couldn't go over 60 fps. But that has nothing to do with animation. They did that to balance out the framerate with everything else, so that the game would always be pretty balanced in terms of graphics. You are not going to run any faster at 60 fps than you will at 30 fps. The only thing the better framerate changes is the smoothness of everything. Same thing goes for Oot. Go play the ROM that you have and make sure that you have the framerate counter on. Boot up the ROM and your N64 cart (or GC disc) and run around at the same time. You're not going to run any faster. The only change you will see is a higher resolution and smoother animations.
Resolution also isn't much of an issue for 3D games. Again, play some of your N64 ROMs and try them at different resolutions. With 2D games and voxel-based 3D games (Outcast), changing the resolution makes the games look weird, but that's not the case with most polygonal games.
I just have to disagree. About resolution... look, when you increase resolution everything shrinks. This is an objective and incontestible fact. So, in a top-down game, you can see farther if you do not adjust the art. That gives the person with the better computer a large advantage. What I was specifically referencing there was what Blizzard did with Warcraft III -- redid all the graphics for each resolution so that at all of them the sizes of everything would be the same, providing for increased quality and clarity at high resolutions without the unfairness inherent in the idea in many other games.
And as for framerate... well, I think all I need to do is mention my example of Moto Racer 2 again (and yes, that is a 3d game!) to show that changing framerates can definitely have unintended consequences... if you make a whole game designed for the controls to be at a specific speed and then suddenly they get twice as smooth you could majorly mess things up!
There's still a reason they didn't do it to start with, and that's likely it. What, ya saying LL and lazy, who are TAKING computer animation classes, are full of it? Are you taking those classes? We never said it couldn't be done, just that it wouldn't be that easy.
Quote:Sorry, OB1... this is one of those things where I wish I had been wrong, but unfortunately seem to be right.
http://www.gamespot.com/gamecube/ac...ew_6083637.html
Nice controls/porting impressions. Read! Unless you don't believe Gamespot?
Oh that's just great. You get a notice while playing MM which tells you that the game is fucked up because of the N64-to-GC conversion?? Talk about lazy porting beyond belief!
Quote:I just have to disagree. About resolution... look, when you increase resolution everything shrinks. This is an objective and incontestible fact. So, in a top-down game, you can see farther if you do not adjust the art. That gives the person with the better computer a large advantage. What I was specifically referencing there was what Blizzard did with Warcraft III -- redid all the graphics for each resolution so that at all of them the sizes of everything would be the same, providing for increased quality and clarity at high resolutions without the unfairness inherent in the idea in many other games.
What Blizzard did was very strange and is not what most PC developers do with their games. They use the same textures for all of the different resolutions.
Quote:And as for framerate... well, I think all I need to do is mention my example of Moto Racer 2 again (and yes, that is a 3d game!) to show that changing framerates can definitely have unintended consequences... if you make a whole game designed for the controls to be at a specific speed and then suddenly they get twice as smooth you could majorly mess things up!
I doubt what happened was that the game actually became much faster, but if that's what you said then fine. It could be that the developers did their calculations based on the number of frames per animation instead of the amount of time it takes for each animation (which is how it's done almost all of the time). Quake 3 is one of those games where the higher framerate you get then the higher you can jump off of ramps and things like that, but that is not how most PC games are programmed. If I hadn't played a ROM of OoT then I could believe that this was the case with that game, but I didn't and the speed did not change.
Quote:There's still a reason they didn't do it to start with, and that's likely it. What, ya saying LL and lazy, who are TAKING computer animation classes, are full of it? Are you taking those classes? We never said it couldn't be done, just that it wouldn't be that easy.
Actually you guys
did say that it couldn't be done. Of course it's not going to be easy for Nintendo to port some N64 games over the GC, but that should not be an excuse. They're
professionals and this kind of laziness is pathetic.
Quote:And I bet you guys just hate me because of it.
Eh, I could care less. Without knowing more none of us can say for sure whether the framerate can be improved. And, by the way, IGN says it is only running at 30fps.
Gamespot says that its running exactly the same as the previous NGC WW freebie disc, so yes, I think it is running at 30. (lazy people, never clicking links...)
Quote:Oh that's just great. You get a notice while playing MM which tells you that the game is fucked up because of the N64-to-GC conversion?? Talk about lazy porting beyond belief!
Yeah... having a note in WW that there's a problem in the emulation is definitely lazy. I just have to hope that its because its some really hard thing and not just sheer laziness... but it doesn't look too encouraging to see MM sound like its worse on the Cube than it was on N64.
Quote:What Blizzard did was very strange and is not what most PC developers do with their games. They use the same textures for all of the different resolutions.
It shows how much Blizz cares. If they were anyone else they'd have released the game with that unfairness fully present and people running at high rezes would see far farther... the graphics would all be way smaller (since increasing it reduces the size of everything if you don't redo the graphics), but you'd have a huge tactical advantage (like in many other RTSes). Them doing that was just showing how much attention they pay to the details...
Quote:I doubt what happened was that the game actually became much faster, but if that's what you said then fine. It could be that the developers did their calculations based on the number of frames per animation instead of the amount of time it takes for each animation (which is how it's done almost all of the time). Quake 3 is one of those games where the higher framerate you get then the higher you can jump off of ramps and things like that, but that is not how most PC games are programmed. If I hadn't played a ROM of OoT then I could believe that this was the case with that game, but I didn't and the speed did not change.
It was impossible to control, anyway... can't remember exactly what it was, but the game was barely playable.
The explanation of the control schemes for the NES games was nice, though... I think it'll work fine that way. And as for Master Quest... it looks like its not there.
Well, let's just say that I'm happy I got a N64 rom (yes, there is one...) of the thing. :)
Quote:Eh, I could care less. Without knowing more none of us can say for sure whether the framerate can be improved. And, by the way, IGN says it is only running at 30fps.
I was joking with that comment, yeesh.
And Oot is possible at 60fps with no change in speed.
Quote:Gamespot says that its running exactly the same as the previous NGC WW freebie disc, so yes, I think it is running at 30. (lazy people, never clicking links...)
I read it!
Quote:Yeah... having a note in WW that there's a problem in the emulation is definitely lazy. I just have to hope that its because its some really hard thing and not just sheer laziness... but it doesn't look too encouraging to see MM sound like its worse on the Cube than it was on N64.
You meant MM, right? :D
And I was hoping that I'd be able to let my nephew keep my copy of MM because of this disc. I hope it's not a big problem.
Quote:It shows how much Blizz cares. If they were anyone else they'd have released the game with that unfairness fully present and people running at high rezes would see far farther... the graphics would all be way smaller (since increasing it reduces the size of everything if you don't redo the graphics), but you'd have a huge tactical advantage (like in many other RTSes). Them doing that was just showing how much attention they pay to the details...
I don't know why Blizzard did that, but most developers don't because it's usually not neccessary.
Quote:It was impossible to control, anyway... can't remember exactly what it was, but the game was barely playable.
The explanation of the control schemes for the NES games was nice, though... I think it'll work fine that way. And as for Master Quest... it looks like its not there.
Well, let's just say that I'm happy I got a N64 rom (yes, there is one...) of the thing.
Of Master Quest? And how smooth does it run?
Quote:I was joking with that comment, yeesh.
And Oot is possible at 60fps with no change in speed.
That was a joke? I thought you were at least somewhat serious...
And OoT might be, but the question then is the quality of the emulator (if they just run a emulated rom on the disc, which I'm sure they do)...
Quote:You meant MM, right?
And I was hoping that I'd be able to let my nephew keep my copy of MM because of this disc. I hope it's not a big problem.
Yes, I did. :) And yeah, let's hope the issues are minor...
Quote:I don't know why Blizzard did that, but most developers don't because it's usually not neccessary.
I already told you why they did it! Its for competitive balance on B.Net! They don't want the people with powerful computers having a built in huge advantage like they do in any other topdown multiplayer game with changable resolutions...
Quote:Of Master Quest? And how smooth does it run?
Yeah, there's a N64 Master Quest rom. Haven't played it much, though... but I think it runs okay. Its based on OoT's engine and OoT is one of the games that runs fine...
Quote:That was a joke? I thought you were at least somewhat serious...
I was being smug in a jokingly manner.
Quote:And OoT might be, but the question then is the quality of the emulator (if they just run a emulated rom on the disc, which I'm sure they do)...
Then why the problems with MM if it's simply being emulated?
Quote:Yes, I did. And yeah, let's hope the issues are minor...
You know, most people are going to think that we're arguing since we're using quote boxes.
Quote:I already told you why they did it! Its for competitive balance on B.Net! They don't want the people with powerful computers having a built in huge advantage like they do in any other topdown multiplayer game with changable resolutions...
So the problem is that players would be able to zoom out further? That doesn't make any sense. If you increase the resolution in a 3D game then all it does is stretch the textures to fit the higher resolutions. Sort of like using a 640x480 resolution wallpaper on a monitor that's set at 1600x1200 and stretching it to fit the screen size. Of course it's great if there are different images for the different resolutions, but most developers don't do that. Well, it's a lot more complicated than that but I forgot the details.
Quote:Yeah, there's a N64 Master Quest rom. Haven't played it much, though... but I think it runs okay. Its based on OoT's engine and OoT is one of the games that runs fine...
Boot up the game and keep the framerate counter on. See if you notice a difference in actual running speed if it gets above 30 fps.
Quote:Then why the problems with MM if it's simply being emulated?
Uhh... I must assume that you haven't exactly got much experience with emulators, or you'd know that thats a dumb question. Emulators have to be so complex... compatibility is a huge problem and getting it high, especially for 3d systems, is hard. Then getting it to run well is even harder... there aren't any perfect N64 (free) emulators yet, after all... now I'm sure Nintendo could do a good job making a OoT engine-specific emulator if they wanted, but I bet they didn't put huge resources on something they are giving out for free like this, so some problems are to be expected...
Quote:You know, most people are going to think that we're arguing since we're using quote boxes.
Definitely.
Quote:So the problem is that players would be able to zoom out further? That doesn't make any sense. If you increase the resolution in a 3D game then all it does is stretch the textures to fit the higher resolutions. Sort of like using a 640x480 resolution wallpaper on a monitor that's set at 1600x1200 and stretching it to fit the screen size. Of course it's great if there are different images for the different resolutions, but most developers don't do that. Well, it's a lot more complicated than that but I forgot the details.
Before I continue, please go play Age of Empires, Command and Conquer (any that allow you to change resolution), Diablo II, Baldur's Gate II, Homeworld, or a hundred other games. Go to 640x480. Then go to 800x600 and higher if allowed. You should immediately notice that with the increased resolution, everything shinks... that farm that in 640x480 is 'x' in area is now '1/2x' or so. You can also see farther on the screen (in a topdown game, 2d or 3d -- the art, 2d or 3d, is shrunk by the increased resolution since everything takes up a static amount of space on the screen and when you shrink it you shrink the amount of space things take up, so you can see more stuff on the screen...). Argh... just go play Age of Empires or C&C (Red Alert 2 works well) and look at two resolutions, then go check Warcraft and do the same. You'd immediately see what I mean about how what Blizz did removes unfair competitive imbalance.
Now, of course, the issue is different for first-person or third-person behind the character games... I'm not sure exactly what happens there. Yeah, it just seems to stretch the textures osnto the same sized polys, which is why PSX/N64 textures look even more awful in high resolutions...
Quote:Boot up the game and keep the framerate counter on. See if you notice a difference in actual running speed if it gets above 30 fps.
I will. Later, after I reboot and I don't think stuff will crash if I try to open PJ64...
I've played plenty of N64 games on PJ64 and other emulators. I know that it's difficult to get it right, but that's because these are just a bunch of students and the like doing all of the work. Nintendo has the resources to do much better than them, so I expect more from the big N.
And those are 2D games, ABF. That's very different from changing the resolution of a 3D game, as all that basically does it sharpen all of the polygons and stretch the textures to fit the higher resolution. And PSX/N64 games look much better at higher resolutions. Things are less pixelated, less blurry. That goes for polygons and textures. Sin & Punishment looks a lot better in PJ64 at a high resolution than it does on the N64.
Quote: I've played plenty of N64 games on PJ64 and other emulators. I know that it's difficult to get it right, but that's because these are just a bunch of students and the like doing all of the work. Nintendo has the resources to do much better than them, so I expect more from the big N.
I would too... but still, the fact that in that amount of time those people still have major problems emulating both of those systems says something. Or how about the Jaguar and Saturn... just starting to get semi-competent emulators now...
Quote:And those are 2D games, ABF. That's very different from changing the resolution of a 3D game, as all that basically does it sharpen all of the polygons and stretch the textures to fit the higher resolution. And PSX/N64 games look much better at higher resolutions. Things are less pixelated, less blurry. That goes for polygons and textures. Sin & Punishment looks a lot better in PJ64 at a high resolution than it does on the N64.
Warcraft III isn't 2d. :) Neither is Homeworld, but that one's not topdown so its really quite different... you can probably tell if you look, though. And how about Age of Mythology or Rise of Nations or something like that? I'm sure they have the same problem...
And using high resolutions might make it look sharper, but IMO that's exactly the problem -- those games often look bad sharp! You can tell better how the polygons are supposed to fuzz on the edges... it looks sharper for sure, but I don't think that's always a good thing. Though it definitely depends on the game a lot too... some react to higher rezes fine. Still... I really think that N64 games overall look better on an N64.
Though if the emulation was perfect and not flawed in many ways like it is, I well might think differently...
WC3 of course isn't a 2D game which is why I'm wondering why Blizzard went through all of that trouble to change the images for the different resolutions. But whatever.
And higher resolutions for N64 and PSX games are great because it practically eliminates all aliasing problems.
Why don't you understand? When you have a fixed camera like WC3... I'm not so sure that 3d completely gets rid of the 'resolution lets you see farther' shrinking problem.
From the WC3 FAQ. :)
Quote:Does the game take advantage of 3D cards several generations ahead of the most advanced ones out at the time of release?
We built graphic scalability into the game so that Warcraft III can look as good as possible on whatever video card is used.
That's scaling, which means that the poly count (and etc.) changes depending on how good the video card you are using is. Doom 3 also uses scaling technology, as do many other recent PC games. It's not just used in order to solve the problem of different video cards, however. It's also used in several 3D games to change the poly count of characters and environments on-screen depending on how much is going on. So for instance, if you were playing say, Fable, and you were walking by yourself the poly count of your character and surroundings would be very high, but if you were to come across several other characters the engine would lower the poly count of all the characters on screen in order to maintain a good balance, so that the game doesn't experience any serious slowdown.
I seem to remember Blizz saying that they made different versions of the same stuff...
I'm sure it's already been stated here, but I'll just ask again: How can one get the disc without buying a new GameCube? All I know is from the commercials that offer the disc w/ the sale of a GC...and I don't need to buy a new GC.
Well, the other two methods are either getting a Nintendo Power subscription or registering two of four games (and as such, you'll need to buy two out of four games, or just get the registration number from a friend who doesn't care and was just going to throw the numbers out anyway).
To be more specific, you can buy one of these four games and they include a PIN number within the game case that you can use to register the games online:
1080: Avalanche
Mario & Luigi
Mario Kart
Mario Party 5
But it's not for persons, it's for products, which ALSO starts with a P!
...never mind then...
My disc should be in sometime next week.
Is it really worth getting without Master Quest? I mean, I don't really need second copies of OoT and MM, and as for the NES games they are good but not $20 good (NP)... and as for those four games, I might get 1080 (around or after christmas) but those other three I won't be getting anytime soon. Mario Kart? Later when it costs less, probably. Mario and Luigi? Looks quite good, but Sword of Mana and Fire Emblem are the two GBA games I want most, by far.
1080 hasn't been getting very good early reviews so if you want a snowboarding game you should definitely go with SSX3. Or better yet, just get Mario Kart.
According to reviews, the OOT included is "exactly like the one included with the Wind Waker bonus disk". I can assume this means Master Quest IS a part of it. I would THINK something like that would be mentioned if it WASN'T included, more so than if it was even.
I've seen that "OoT is exactly like it is in the bonus disc" line... but nowhere have I seen the words "Master Quest", so I'm very doubtful and think they might just mean that OoT is like it was in the bonus disc, since MQ would presumably be mentioned seperately...
And as for 1080/Mario Kart, it doesn't matter much since I'm not getting both, anytime soon, and I'm sure that this offer is going to be limited time...
Well MQ isn't really a seperate game so much as a remix. Maybe they assumed it was to be expected? In any case, while mentioning that it includes Master Quest is something they'd be expected to do, I'd think mentioning it DOESN'T include Master Quest would be even MORE expected of them. As such, the more likely of the two is that it is included.
Over-optimism just sets you up to be dissapointed...
First off, how amazingly chipper a fellow you are...
Second off, this is hardly over optimism. I just can't see any logical reason to doubt it'll be in there. It's more logical to assume it is.
Nintendo dissapoints us too much...
And I'd love it to be in there. I just get very suspicious when none of the mentions or previews mention it... I agree, it would be kind of strange for it not to be there... but either way, we'll know soon.
The reviews really aren't all that helpful are they? They neither say it is nor it isn't, which is totally lacking actual info that I desire. How rude! (Well, it is free and all, but...)
ANYWAY, this isn't the first time a review has managed to totally not talk about an actual major thing people want to know about. Prince of Persia's reviews totally forgot to include the all important sentence "Oh yeah, the entire original SNES game is included.". I had to read a stray Penny Arcade comment to find that out for myself, and considering how often I read those, it's a miracle I managed to find that data.