The Legend of Zelda - Breath of the Wild

Status
Not open for further replies.

Do Make Say Think

& Yet & Yet
Jun 26, 2007
51,207
9,960
Wii U version cancelled?

http://www.gamerevolution.com/news/...-the-legend-of-zelda-breath-of-the-wild-38651

This would majorly suck. I have been looking forward to this Zelda forever, but have no immediate plans to buy a Switch. I have been planning to get the Wii U version.

I'm not going to buy a whole new console just for one game. I will be so angry with Nintendo if this is true.

Same.

The reason I got a WiiU was for this game. I have gotten a lot of quality time out of my WiiU but still...
 

aleshemsky83

Registered User
Apr 8, 2008
17,816
426
Messed up if true. As bad as the gamecube flopped it still got supported with a ton of great games. Nintendo is basically spitting on the few die-hards that actually supported their horrible wii u experiment if they do this.
 

MayDay

Registered User
Oct 21, 2005
12,661
1,146
Pleasantville, NY
Makes a lot of sense. People will buy the Switch for the game.

I won't.

I love me some Zelda. My favorite video game franchise.

But I'm not buying a new console for a single game, no matter what it is.

And we were promised a new Zelda for the Wii U. If they cancel, it will be a slap in the face.
 

67 others

Registered User
Jul 30, 2010
2,621
1,733
Moose country
As long as the exploration level is upped to original two NES game level, as well as difficulty, ill be happy.

Hell, as some Optional "Palace" type forays. Keep dungeons for the main game + Story and fans who want the hand holding tripe that Zelda became after the NES days will be happy and add some Adventures of Link/Zelda 1 Death Mountain second quest level difficulty Palaces for bonus gear and challenge with traditional bosses like Helmethead, Thunderbird and Shadow link. Some red Fokka's, Ironknuckles/Darknuts and Blue Wizzrobes in the normal level that will wreck today's easymode gamers and make them cry that the optional levels are impossible.

Despite the drop in difficulty, I still enjoyed LTTP, Awakening, and Ocarina of time. But no games since have satisfied me.

It does not need to be battletoads/Ninja Gaiden NES level difficult or even Zelda 1 second quest level difficult, but at least ramp it up to Mega man 1 or Ninja Gaiden black/Dark Souls 2 level difficult.
 

MayDay

Registered User
Oct 21, 2005
12,661
1,146
Pleasantville, NY
As long as the exploration level is upped to original two NES game level, as well as difficulty, ill be happy.

Hell, as some Optional "Palace" type forays. Keep dungeons for the main game + Story and fans who want the hand holding tripe that Zelda became after the NES days will be happy and add some Adventures of Link/Zelda 1 Death Mountain second quest level difficulty Palaces for bonus gear and challenge with traditional bosses like Helmethead, Thunderbird and Shadow link. Some red Fokka's, Ironknuckles/Darknuts and Blue Wizzrobes in the normal level that will wreck today's easymode gamers and make them cry that the optional levels are impossible.

Despite the drop in difficulty, I still enjoyed LTTP, Awakening, and Ocarina of time. But no games since have satisfied me.

It does not need to be battletoads/Ninja Gaiden NES level difficult or even Zelda 1 second quest level difficult, but at least ramp it up to Mega man 1 or Ninja Gaiden black/Dark Souls 2 level difficult.

The Zelda franchise isn't about extreme difficulty. It's about exploration and puzzle solving primarily.

If you want extreme difficulty vis-a-vis enemies, you should look into other games. Zelda was never meant to be super-hard, nor should it be.

The NES installments were only "hard" in the same sense and for the same reasons that most NES games were hard - due to the limitations of the system. Lack of ability to save progress, less precise controls, etc.
 

67 others

Registered User
Jul 30, 2010
2,621
1,733
Moose country
The Zelda franchise isn't about extreme difficulty. It's about exploration and puzzle solving primarily.

If you want extreme difficulty vis-a-vis enemies, you should look into other games. Zelda was never meant to be super-hard, nor should it be.

The NES installments were only "hard" in the same sense and for the same reasons that most NES games were hard - due to the limitations of the system. Lack of ability to save progress, less precise controls, etc.

???
You know the Original Zelda's had saves right? Like, complete progress saves.

Was nothing limiting about it. Nor limiting about the controls. Once you mastered the controls, the real hard things about the game was exactly What you described. Exploration and puzzle/ Dungeon +Palace solving.

The original Zelda was legendary for its exploration element. I literally had a hand drawn map showing where you needed to bomb every wall, burn every bush, push every block, blow the flute, etc to find passages.

AOL gets a bad rap for difficulty, but it really wasn't as hard as the first game, Great Palace aside. Some of the palaces were still mazes you had to solve, but the gameplay itself was easy unless you had no patience. It took me a quarter of the time to beat AOL as a 12 year old than it did TLOZ.

Let's not confuse either of these games for NINTENDO HARD type games like Battletoads/Ninja Gaiden/Castlevania 3. The gameplay itself was simple 2 button pattern recognition vs enemies. It was the searching and exploring that was hard. Making sure you had armor and Sword upgrades before tackling Wizzrobes, etc. You really had to dig in those original games to in stuff, whereas games of today spoon feed the answers.

When I see 20+ year olds fumbling with the 2 button controls today complaining about difficulty of old games, ill admit, I laugh my head off.
 

No Fun Shogun

34-38-61-10-13-15
May 1, 2011
56,443
13,345
Illinois
I'm in the stage where I'm actively avoiding anything about this game. Getting it, no questions asked, want as much to be unknown going into it as possible.
 

RandV

It's a wolf v2.0
Jul 29, 2003
26,868
4,973
Vancouver
Visit site
???
You know the Original Zelda's had saves right? Like, complete progress saves.

Was nothing limiting about it. Nor limiting about the controls. Once you mastered the controls, the real hard things about the game was exactly What you described. Exploration and puzzle/ Dungeon +Palace solving.

The original Zelda was legendary for its exploration element. I literally had a hand drawn map showing where you needed to bomb every wall, burn every bush, push every block, blow the flute, etc to find passages.

AOL gets a bad rap for difficulty, but it really wasn't as hard as the first game, Great Palace aside. Some of the palaces were still mazes you had to solve, but the gameplay itself was easy unless you had no patience. It took me a quarter of the time to beat AOL as a 12 year old than it did TLOZ.

Let's not confuse either of these games for NINTENDO HARD type games like Battletoads/Ninja Gaiden/Castlevania 3. The gameplay itself was simple 2 button pattern recognition vs enemies. It was the searching and exploring that was hard. Making sure you had armor and Sword upgrades before tackling Wizzrobes, etc. You really had to dig in those original games to in stuff, whereas games of today spoon feed the answers.

When I see 20+ year olds fumbling with the 2 button controls today complaining about difficulty of old games, ill admit, I laugh my head off.

To get into some more specifics I'm not really sure where the change occurred but between A Link to the Past and Twilight Princess there was a subtle change when pots containing healing hearts would respawn - when leaving the dungeon or simply be leaving the room.

When I went back and played ALttP on virtual console a few years back I wouldn't call it hard but that was certainly a noticeable distinction, where healing hearts were a limited resource for a dungeon run through.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad