http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3152902
Seems Twilight Princess on the Wii will NOT in fact support using the Gamecube controller configuration.
If you ask me, there is no reason at all for this feature to be lacking. From reviews I've read, the Wii support in that game is pretty substandard anyway and a lot of things work better on a Gamecube controller. That may have changed, but give us the choice, and NO, I don't mean give us the choice by releasing a worse copy of the game on the Gamecube and saying "you can always BUY that as well", I mean give us the choice in the best version to give it the best of all worlds.
Hopefully between now and release there will be enough complaints that they will add GCN controller support to the Wii version as it should be (there is no reason, NO reason, they can't include something already in the Gamecube version in the Wii version, ALL things of GCN should be in Wii..., don't make me come in there!). If not that, maybe the game can be patched with proper support later. I don't want to see reviews of the Wii version saying "an otherwise better version marred by poor implementation of Wii control" or "stick with the Gamecube version". Don't do this Nintendo!
Also apparently some unique games will also be downloadable to the system through "virtual console".
Stick with the Gamecube version. ;)
But that one is WORSE in every other way! My solution, complain to people who can't do anything about it, is MUCH better!
Just do what we all know the hardcore Zelda fans will do and buy both, if you must... but really, unless the game doesn't control well at all with the Wii controller, just getting that one and forgetting the GC version isn't a bad idea...
The US is the only region getting the GC version anyway, or so I've heard.
I dunno what reviews you've been reading DJ but everything about Zelda's use of the wiimote has gotten praise save for a slight lag or a hyper-sensitivity that was officially said to be fixed or customizable in the final version.
The most negative reviews i've seen are from people who said that in their 5 minute demo of game X they couldn't get the controls down, while other reviewers (arguably reviewers who play more games) said that it felt second nature almost instantly. We have some saying "it's too delicate, too sensitive" which Nintendo (and other companies) mentioned that sensitivity and personal preferences of control scheme, TV type and size, distance from TV, etc will be saved the first time you turn on Wii and adjust the calibration of the wiimote and can be adjusted in-game just as you would turn the sensitivity of the anal sticks up or down in a FPS.
The wiimote quite simply does more; it's the superior controller. Just the fishing demo alone should make you realize that the wiimote is the way to go. Of course we know very little about the game and how moves are performed at this point, but i'm willing to bet the wiimote will be the better version if just because Nintendo is putting more time and effort in to it, as well as from a marketing viewpoint and the fact that their ass is on the line, not the horrible uncontrolable mess you're making it out to be.
It doesn't have as many buttons though. It could be fine, but the first reviews I read right after E3 said that while it worked fine for fishing (which is only part of the game and says nothing about the rest of the game), the controls for the rest of the game were more awkward. I'd personally prefer to have the old controller for most of the game and just use the wii controller for special instances where it would work better.
Now I haven't read any reviews since that point though, but my concern is standard gameplay as opposed to minigames and aiming the bow. If that's resolved it's fine, though I have my doubts. I wasn't making it out to be anything worse than what I've read. I'm just wondering why they don't just keep the original mode in. Would it really take any longer than 5 minutes out of the day to just dump in the GCN control method and an option menu to select it? If there are any problems, that would pretty much negate them.
It's just assurance. If they do include it, the controls will be fine even if Wii support is poor. If they don't, they run the risk. Why take the risk?
From IGN:
Quote:Let's cut to the chase: yes, it sure works. When I initially heard that Nintendo was adding Wii controller support to my most anticipated videogame, I was worried. After all, Zelda titles aren't really about pointing and clicking and more about fighting and puzzle solving. I had a feeling sword-slashing freehand controls would feel gimmicky in a third-person game and ultimately be far less accurate than the traditional lock-on/button control. In hindsight, I should have had more faith in Nintendo's Zelda team. The developer smartly integrated Wii pointer and nunchuck control to deliver something that not only works, but feels fresh.
Quote:The trigger button on the nunchuck lets you kick the game into a first-person camera view. And it's here that players experience the freelook function of the pointer for the first time. The experience with the aiming control is easily likened to using an analog thumb stick for the first time. Some players will struggle with the sensitivity of the on-screen target that shows what you're looking or aiming at. Other players (like me) only took a moment to adjust the controls. It helps when you watch someone else play first, of course.
Quote:The combination of the controller rumble, the audio feedback from the built-in controller speaker and the motion controls create something really special here. Nintendo's shown without doubt that the control setup enhances many of the actions performed in Link's world, but thankfully also exercised restraint and didn't overthrow everything we've become accustomed to over the years just for the sake of showing off the controller. I did experience some small hitches, however. For one, the action of throwing crates by shaking the nunchuck didn't always work. I'm confident that this is a bug that Nintendo will easily be able to fix as the spin attack worked like a charm every time. The second issue came up when trying to aim at a nasty little guy far away on a platform. The freehand controller had somehow gotten calibrated off-center, making quick aiming extremely difficult. It's unclear whether this was a bug with the game code or a problem with the freehand-aim control setup that Nintendo has yet to solve across all its titles. Luckily, I only encountered this problem once during my two walkthroughs of the dungeon demo area.
Sounds interesting. That said, it'd still be nice to include the old mode. As I said, why take unneeded risks when a safeguard like including the Gamecube controller configuration would be so easy to implement? It's like driving without a seat belt because you have air bags. Why not use both if the effort is so little?
This is Miyamoto and Nintendo, the flagship titles that are built not only as 'games' but also as a type of training to use the controller for its respective platform. Especially with it being a launch game. All of Miyamoto's/Nintendo's titles can be viewed as a manual for learning the controller for that genre type; Think of Mario 64 and the coins in a circle on the ground to give the player a chance to move in circles and feel out the mechanics - coins that are out of reach forcing the player to think of ways to get to it or forcing the angle of a level as to obstruct your view so that you use your camera buttons on the fly. Things like that trained players and got them ready for gaming on that platform. I've seen people that never played Mario 64 and jumped in to OoT... it's not pretty.
With Wii and its controller Nintendo realizes that Zelda will be the must have, so its using that as a way to get people accustomed to the wiimote. If it had the option of using the GC pad, EVERYONE would use it instead because they have more experience on it. Completely destroying the purpose of buying the console in the first place.
So you're saying it's a means of "control" eh? (My puns are the greatest in the world, only matched by that one in Othello, you know the one I mean.)
I can see that, but that's my choice to make. I didn't buy the game to get a forced prerequisite class out of the way, I bought it to play.
Let's see how well that worked with Mario 64 DS. In that remake, they had a touch screen mode but mercifully let you use the d-pad as a substitute. Now, neither one worked nearly as well as the analog stick, but the d-pad did in a pinch. Now, I could have "stuck it out" and forced myself to beat the game with the touch screen even though it worked pretty awefully, or I could actually have FUN with the game and use the d-pad even though it didn't work nearly as well as an analog stick would have. I did the former. I saved learning the controls for a later game, and it worked just fine. The later games used it to such a good degree that I wanted to figure it out and they became my first real experience.
So no, I don't buy the idea that by doing this they force you to adapt to it so you are ready to go for some future title.
However, the important thing above all else is whether or not this method works well. If it does, no problem. Just include the GCN method, the one it was designed around, as a backup just in case. Let me decide what I want to work with.
Nothing Nintendo has said so far would suggest otherwise.
Crazy early videos of people leaping around and stuff excepted? :)
Yeah, those are pretty stupid. Probably the only game where you'll jump around like that is Wario Ware, because that's the REAL way to play it!!
It just got some people into wrong impressions like 'you have to jump around over your couch and stuff in order to play Wii games', making those "your arms will get tired really quickly" complaints seem a whole lot more valid... :)
I agree, it was kinda like a double edged sword, on one hand using the promos where the players are fully, physically interactive with the game sparked major interest, but also raised some eyebrows when it came to the idea of playing a game for longer than the 20 second promo and not be able to sit in a relaxed position for the majority of gameplay. But the newer promos fixed that, showing players sitting comfortably unless the gameplay called for otherwise (Warioware) and projecting a much more realistic atmosphere of what to expect.
DJ/ I see what you're saying but using Mario 64 DS, a game that has been officialy branded as having lackluster control options (even by Nintendo themselves) is not a good example. Nintendo's DS flagship title was Nintendogs, Kirby, etc, games that used only the touch screen. Mario 64 DS is a quick sell and a way to show owners that the DS is capable of a portable N64 experience when it came to graphics. Your one example doesn't negate the idea of Nintendo implimenting and even enforcing archytipcal control setups in flagship titles to train the player on the new controller. Especially considering that Zelda will sell with a 1:1 ratio with the hardware.
This will be the first time when new game players are oddly moving their entire controller as they make jumps where it will actually DO something.
My example was used because Mario 64 was the only game that was a port of a game designed around another control scheme, as opposed to the rest that were designed from the ground up for the DS. I simply think they should provide the GCN controller setup. I don't want Nintendo to babysit me because they think I need to learn some lesson, I just want a game. That's why I want both in there, just in case. I don't care about the business side of things. If you want a middle ground, just make the wii setup the "default" one. Most people never bother with option settings anyway.
But Nintendo is a business, and Zelda will sell 1:1ith the new hardware, so its important that the game utilizes the specific control for that console, as well as take advantage of some of the Wii selling points like Connect24. Let me ask you, when Nintendo showed off Mario 64 for the first time, did you say 'I Hope you can control Mario with the d-pad'?
Zelda, unlike most ports, got an extra 2 years of development JUST to focus on using the wiimote, it might as well be a 'from the ground up' title by now.
Think about it: You want Zelda, you're worried about how the new controller will work, you want to use the GC pad because you might dislike the wiimote, you are the exact reason why Nintendo is making sure that people can only use the wiimote and (hopefully) love it. Nintendo wants to prove that the wiimote is so vastly innovative that you wont even want to go back to playing games with a control pad. When you take Zelda out of the box and throw it in, (on launch day) you're going to be confused, surprised, even frustrated - it will be totally alien to you and you will suck at it (just like we all will), welcome to the learning curve of a new controller. If the GC pad was optional you would just choose that instead of taking the learning curve of the wiimote, and that would obliterate everything Nintendo has been striving for.
In fact I think Miyamoto said that people used to the GC pad will take a longer adjustment period to the wiimote, where people who never played a video game before will pick up on it much faster.
Ultimately, if the wiimote isn't for you, the GC version looks exactly the same graphically, it lacks the Navi pointer icon and isn't widescreen but it's the exact same game. So, you have a choice; Maybe you should rent them both.