Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
GameCube (Games)

Nintendo Dismisses October Zelda Launch 70

Nintendo is dismissing rumours of an October launch for the newest Legend of Zelda title as nothing more than hearsay. From the story: "We haven't announced any potential release dates for the new Legend of Zelda title. Everything published to date is entirely speculation and we hope to announce more about the game at E3 in May."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Nintendo Dismisses October Zelda Launch

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 14, 2005 @05:58PM (#11937196)
    eh... this game was announced at E3 2004, which by my count is less than 1 year ago, so I'm not sure where you're getting your "4 years" from. Unless of course you're referring to the 'realistic Zelda' tech demo shown back at Spaceworld in 2000.

    Furthermore, no idea where you're getting 'delay, delay, delay' from either... Nintendo has made no official announcement as to a concrete release date. They have said the game will come out in 2005, so until they announce it's coming out in 2006, you're delay accusation is unsubstantiated.

    And saying that Zelda and Metroid are the only games worth playing on the GameCube makes your post seem even more trollish. I'm sure somewhere below we'll see someone mention some of the great games available of the Cube (Resident Evil 4 please)
  • by Ra5pu7in ( 603513 ) <ra5pu7in@gmail . c om> on Monday March 14, 2005 @06:02PM (#11937238) Journal
    Try finding Devil May Cry 3 in the first week. It's a balance of the initial expected sales and the actual demand. Sometimes way less sell than were expected (>1 million pre-orders doesn't tell you how many were duplicates by people covering all the bases) and sometimes early demand is even better than planned.

    It's also dependant on where you look and where in the country you are. When you live in a metropolitan area with populations over a million, games seem to sell out more often. Shop at EB Games and Gamestop and you'll find they routinely sell out - and never know how or when they'll get their next batch. Drive over to Toys 'R' Us and they might have a few copies sitting around. Ditto for Circuit City or Media Play or Fry's Electronics, which are not primarily game stores ... so they sometimes have a few copies sitting around.

    Pre-ordering a game is only necessary if 1) it has reached a certain level of hype, 2) you know the store you go to is likely to sell out, and 3) you absolutely must have it the first day.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 14, 2005 @06:31PM (#11937616)
    I wish they'd made a sequel to WW with the same style and engine. A true sequel, set a generation or two after the undersea bubble burst and the sea shrank, leaving behind much larger islands to explore... While I'll definitely get Zelda 2K5 regardless, I hope it's a sequel or otherwise an advancement of the story we've been playing and replaying for decades.

    Back to WW: I loved the cell shading. The only thing I can fault the game for is its brevity. Anyone who says it's a kiddie game never played it or must think the Ocarina and Majora Zeldas were also kiddie, because they all had the same gameplay. How immature do you have to be that the look of a game determines everything?
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 14, 2005 @06:32PM (#11937636)
    Perhaps you should actually try playing some of the games for the gamecube instead of just listening to what you're friends (who also haven't played any games for the gamecube) told you.

    Try out Resident Evil 4 probably one of the best games for ANY system in my opinion.
  • by SetupWeasel ( 54062 ) on Monday March 14, 2005 @07:09PM (#11938038) Homepage
    I wish they'd made a sequel to WW with the same style and engine.

    I'm so glad I'm not the only one who feels that way.
  • by focitrixilous P ( 690813 ) on Monday March 14, 2005 @07:24PM (#11938208) Journal
    Killer 7 looks decent, recieved some pretty get preview style reviews, has about every ESRB violence modifier, crazy cool art style.

    Donkey Konga: Jungle Beat comes out today, with arcade style play.

    Nothing really on the scale of a Zelda game, but when in the past few years has Nintendo been about Quantity rather than Quality? I'd rather have one epic every 6 months than a conveyer belt of mediocrity.

  • Sorry (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Mike Hawk ( 687615 ) on Monday March 14, 2005 @08:56PM (#11939088) Journal
    It was a POS. It was Ocarina+boat+flute-horse. It was so easy I finished the game without dying. You rarely fought more than one enemy at a time; the first Zelda was more intense. They have been using the same puzzles since A Link to the Past. Yes this is all negative. Yes I expect to get modded down, but this is not a flame, its accurate information. There is nothing left in Zelda to get excited about, except nostalgia, and they are selling that separately for GBA for $19.99.
  • Re:Sorry (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Guppy06 ( 410832 ) on Tuesday March 15, 2005 @12:03AM (#11940410)
    "It was so easy I finished the game without dying."

    So, did you do this while religiously following the hint books so you got all the heart containers and a full stock of bottles filled with grandma's soup? Because for me, who didn't look at the book until after beating it the first time*, that final swordfight with Gannondorf really smacked me around, much more than any of the end fights in OoT.

    * OK, I looked in it once: I couldn't figure out I had to shoot light arrows from the hip (sans L-targeting) at the giant doll thing in order kill it.

    "You rarely fought more than one enemy at a time; "

    As if! I still have nightmares about those damned swarms of dink-dinks (or whatever those little fuckers are called). And they were the easy ones. Personally, I had to fight multiple darknuts at the same time so often that I discovered that they can be duped into hurting each other.

    Come to think of it, that "enemies can hurt each other" mechanic got used a lot, and wouldn't be in the game (let alone noticable) if you didn't encounter multiple enemies at once.

    "the first Zelda was more intense."

    What do you mean by "intense," exactly? The game was good at the time, but without having your vision obscured by teary-eyed nostalgia, it's certainly not great by today's standard. If you're lucky, you might guess where the eighth labrynth by chance, but as for finding dungeons in the second quest, it was time to call Nintendo or get your hands on that first issue of Nintendo Power. Unless, of course, the thought of randomly bombing and burning everything for hours on end turns you on... And how are you supposed to know that the whistle opens up caves now?

    Or maybe you're thinking of the action elements? Sure, the darknuts are difficult, but there's no intelligence in they're difficulty. Miyamoto's first attempt at putting fencing in a video game involved enemies that changed direction at random and could only be hurt in 3 out of 4 directions. There are reasons why he chose a side-view perspective in the sequel for the action elements.

    If that's the kind of "intensity" you're looking for, go pick up a copy of Ikaruga, or maybe go back to FPS. These are supposed to be adventure games, and there's nothing adventurous in going up against a raw random number generator.

    "They have been using the same puzzles since A Link to the Past."

    Such as? After all, this is "accurate information" (and not, say, a statement of mere opinion), so you should be able to easily rattle off a list...

A committee is a group that keeps the minutes and loses hours. -- Milton Berle