A Nintendo community
for the fans, by the fans!
 Go to forum index
Zelda Wii U Delayed Until Possibly 2016
News reported by 
Editor
March 28, 2015, 00:25:56
 
Well this is a hookshot to the balls...

The Legend of Zelda for the Wii U is officially delayed until possibly 2016. This news comes from a Development Update video (seen below) that Eiji Aonuma posted on Youtube. Mr. Aonuma of course is the director of this upcoming Nintendo title.

While he doesn't explicitly say the game will release in 2016 for sure, the team is no-longer using 2015 as a focus and thus they aren't trying to release it by year's end. Will they still pull it off? Maybe... but it's not probable from the sound of it.


Sure our initial reactions are that of sadness, disappointment, or anger,... but could this be a good thing? Maybe it's obviously one? More time, more ideas, more polish... should be wonderful right? Anyone worried about a Twilight Princess situation where the game eventually has a weak release on the original system in order to be even 'more spectacular' on the next-gen system? We have no reason to believe this would happen but it'd be kinda crazy if it did.

Discuss in the comments below.

URL to share this content (right click and copy link)
Posted: 03/28/15, 00:25:56  - Edited by 
 on: 03/28/15, 00:30:40    
 
Why not sign up for a (free) account and create your own content?
 
I think a better title for this thread would have been "Some very interesting Wii U-related news."

I wonder if anyone will get this reference at this point...


Posted by 
 on: 04/01/15, 03:49:46
@Mop it up

Wasn't it one of the IGN goons trolling Nintendo fans?

I'm looking for the thread we had here...

EDIT: Here we go. It was the Rayman stuff.

What a chump.


Posted by 
 on: 04/01/15, 04:08:55  - Edited by 
 on: 04/01/15, 04:10:49
@Stephen
To be fair to Ready at Dawn I don't think it was their intention to make full of "anemic content and dull gameplay", they tried to do something very ambitious and came up short (no pun intended), I'm sure they realized just as much as we did that the final product was lacking. Nothing about that game seemed cynical to me, like they were trying to "pull one over" on gamers, in fact it seems like a ton of love and passion went into it's creation.

The thing about Visceral is super sad though, Dead Space was so good, one of last gens true gems. I didn't even play Dead Space 2 or 3, I couldn't stand to see what EA did to that franchise. It's like someone finally picked up where RE4 left off and the future looked so bright for survival horror, and EA in their infinite wisdom decided to force Visceral to abandon that path and instead jump on the Bro-shooter wagon.


Posted by 
 on: 04/01/15, 11:14:08
Technically the delay isn't even confirmed yet....right?


Posted by 
 on: 04/01/15, 11:44:49
@carlosrox

They've only committed to 'not committing to 2015'. They don't feel it's likely but they never flat out said NO.


Posted by 
 on: 04/01/15, 13:11:11
@Shadowlink

You say you're not trying to come across as hostile, but that is how you're coming off. Just take a breath and look at what I'm saying. We have confirmation that TP was delayed. We can argue that OoT was delayed. TWW met its release date. We can really stretch things to argue that SS was delayed.

So if we view all of the evidence in the light most favorable to you (i.e., we only count the 3-D console games even though you didn't say that originally, and we assume that OoT and SS really were delayed), then that means prior to the announcement of this delay, Zelda games were delayed 60% of the time.

If we view all of the evidence in the light most favorable to the other side of the argument (i.e., we count every Zelda game since you said every Zelda game, and we don't include OoT or SS as a delay since they're debatable), then that means prior to the announcement of this delay, Zelda games were delayed 6% of the time.

So regardless of whether the actual number of Zelda games being delayed is closer to 6% or 60%, nothing in the range of those percentages is a high enough frequency to count as a "standard" practice.

The fact that you want to fight about whether someone would count something as a delay proves that lots of people are going to view the OoT and SS situations as delays regardless of whether they actually were or not, so it's understandable how this misinformed stereotype has become so prevalent. It's just like the idea that Nintendo only puts out kiddy games. Some people still argue that Mario and Kirby and Zelda are kiddy, so even when Nintendo puts those games out, they think that's reinforcing the misinformed stereotype that they already believe.


Posted by 
 on: 04/02/15, 03:59:17  - Edited by 
 on: 04/02/15, 04:00:11
@DrFinkelstein
That's actually really weird to me. Why not just confirm 2016 then?


Posted by 
 on: 04/02/15, 12:00:24
@carlosrox

I guess if they somehow hit 2015 they'd be happy to launch it then. I don't quite know their logic right now.


Posted by 
 on: 04/02/15, 13:34:32
deathly_hallows said:
@Stephen
To be fair to Ready at Dawn I don't think it was their intention to make full of "anemic content and dull gameplay", they tried to do something very ambitious and came up short (no pun intended), I'm sure they realized just as much as we did that the final product was lacking. Nothing about that game seemed cynical to me, like they were trying to "pull one over" on gamers, in fact it seems like a ton of love and passion went into it's creation.

What was ambitious about it aside from the graphics tech? By all accounts the game is a very by the numbers third person shooter. I don't doubt they tried to make a good game but I think their idea of what a good game is doesn't resonate with a lot of people.

deathly_hallows said:
@Stephen
The thing about Visceral is super sad though, Dead Space was so good, one of last gens true gems. I didn't even play Dead Space 2 or 3, I couldn't stand to see what EA did to that franchise. It's like someone finally picked up where RE4 left off and the future looked so bright for survival horror, and EA in their infinite wisdom decided to force Visceral to abandon that path and instead jump on the Bro-shooter wagon.

I highly recommend Dead Space 2. That game is every bit as good as the original. It's 3 that was an absolute train wreck.


Posted by 
 on: 04/02/15, 13:41:21
@Stephen
Agreed about Dead Space 2. It's as good as the original. 3 is the one to avoid.


Posted by 
 on: 04/02/15, 14:24:12
Nonsene. 3 is awesome too. How in any shape or fucking form is it a "train wreck"? Just because it has completely unobtrusive micro transactions it doesn't mean everyone has to have a hate boner for it.

Damn fine game it was. Weapon crafting and combat was awesome. Awesome in single or coop.

And neither sequel are on the level of the impeccable first game anyway; a near perfect game (I don't care if I used the semi right or not).


Posted by 
 on: 04/02/15, 20:11:38  - Edited by 
 on: 04/02/15, 20:20:26
Browse    4  5  6  7