20th February 2006, 4:32 PM
There's more to it though, it was a mag that broke the story of Zelda using the rev controller - Nintendo denied it, the mag then blatently called Nintendo a bunch of liars, saying that they know for a fact that it does. Later, reggie said that Zelda is definitely going to be released on GC... in the fall, within weeks of the Revolution launch date.
Now this: "The trick will be what makes it special to play on the Revolution, and to the extent that we could create something like that, boy, wouldn't that be fantastic?" That's reggie from an upcoming EGM interview. think of what he's asking - 'Would the ability to use the revcon be enough to warrant interest in playing Zelda on the Rev?" And the answer is surprisingly no, i wouldn't spend 50 bucks on a game I already have just to use a different controller, but i would if it was graphically superior or had even more extras. By releasing a GC Zelda with Revcon compatability, you just lost out on some sales from people buying both versions, but of course the other version has be kept under wraps, otherwise everyone will just wait for the special edition.
The facts are:
* it will be released on GC
* The GC version will be playable on the revolution
that's it, the rest is just using logic, nintendo has pushed back a 'finished' game for an entire year or more for odd superficial reasons - 'We want to make it better'. An entire extra year of development raises alot of eyebrows, especially when consider Miyamoto's comment that progress on the new Zelda started shortly after the release of WW and that the Space World demo was from an early build of the new Zelda. So why would Nintendo push a finished game back for over a year, and then release it within weeks of their new console? There's only two viable answers:
The GC version will have extra Rev content.
There will be a seperate version released in the Rev launch window.
Now let's look at the Xbox360 launch titles - All of them were Xbox games that were updated with some flair for the new system. Just take game A, add some more textures, increase the poly count to make things less blocky, etc. When asked about the conversion with companies such as Rare, they said it took them about a year or less to convert an Xbox game to a 360 launch title. I think that logic speaks for itself.
My prediction is that Zelda GC will be released in the fall, have a few months to bask in the glory, and then at Rev launch 30+ days before Christmas 06, Nintendo will drop 'Zelda SE" which will be a graphically superior version with more bells and whistles but more importantly revcon compatibility. having a seperate version only makes more sense when you think about the 'best GC title ever' looking dated almost imeadiately when compared to the next gen revolution graphics. By releasing the second version, you solidify its hold on the market across two platforms for a loooong time, while having only the GC version, it will look dated when compared to the first Rev launch games.
It could go down this way too, you get Zelda GC, then a few months down the line you get a Rev, you throw in Zelda GC and the Rev asks you to connect to the wifi and d/l the new content to Zelda GC turning it in to the special edition when played on the Rev. It's more far fetched but technically sound.
Whatever the case, Nintendo will want to make as much money possible on this game, and they will want it to be popular for years and years. It's probably the most expensive game they've done since OoT and probably more so. Setting the GC launch back to fabricate a one-two punch of a GC and Rev version would make that idea concrete, one game spanning two generations, two consoles. From every angle you look at it, for the fans, for the money, for the business, spending a year to make a better version for the Rev off the GC version just makes sense.
Now this: "The trick will be what makes it special to play on the Revolution, and to the extent that we could create something like that, boy, wouldn't that be fantastic?" That's reggie from an upcoming EGM interview. think of what he's asking - 'Would the ability to use the revcon be enough to warrant interest in playing Zelda on the Rev?" And the answer is surprisingly no, i wouldn't spend 50 bucks on a game I already have just to use a different controller, but i would if it was graphically superior or had even more extras. By releasing a GC Zelda with Revcon compatability, you just lost out on some sales from people buying both versions, but of course the other version has be kept under wraps, otherwise everyone will just wait for the special edition.
The facts are:
* it will be released on GC
* The GC version will be playable on the revolution
that's it, the rest is just using logic, nintendo has pushed back a 'finished' game for an entire year or more for odd superficial reasons - 'We want to make it better'. An entire extra year of development raises alot of eyebrows, especially when consider Miyamoto's comment that progress on the new Zelda started shortly after the release of WW and that the Space World demo was from an early build of the new Zelda. So why would Nintendo push a finished game back for over a year, and then release it within weeks of their new console? There's only two viable answers:
The GC version will have extra Rev content.
There will be a seperate version released in the Rev launch window.
Now let's look at the Xbox360 launch titles - All of them were Xbox games that were updated with some flair for the new system. Just take game A, add some more textures, increase the poly count to make things less blocky, etc. When asked about the conversion with companies such as Rare, they said it took them about a year or less to convert an Xbox game to a 360 launch title. I think that logic speaks for itself.
My prediction is that Zelda GC will be released in the fall, have a few months to bask in the glory, and then at Rev launch 30+ days before Christmas 06, Nintendo will drop 'Zelda SE" which will be a graphically superior version with more bells and whistles but more importantly revcon compatibility. having a seperate version only makes more sense when you think about the 'best GC title ever' looking dated almost imeadiately when compared to the next gen revolution graphics. By releasing the second version, you solidify its hold on the market across two platforms for a loooong time, while having only the GC version, it will look dated when compared to the first Rev launch games.
It could go down this way too, you get Zelda GC, then a few months down the line you get a Rev, you throw in Zelda GC and the Rev asks you to connect to the wifi and d/l the new content to Zelda GC turning it in to the special edition when played on the Rev. It's more far fetched but technically sound.
Whatever the case, Nintendo will want to make as much money possible on this game, and they will want it to be popular for years and years. It's probably the most expensive game they've done since OoT and probably more so. Setting the GC launch back to fabricate a one-two punch of a GC and Rev version would make that idea concrete, one game spanning two generations, two consoles. From every angle you look at it, for the fans, for the money, for the business, spending a year to make a better version for the Rev off the GC version just makes sense.