63 replies to this topic

[Nameless_Joe]

Always keeping an eye out for new Zelda info, I ran across the following info:

"We must stress this is a rumour with a capital ‘R’, but a story has come to our attention that suggests that US development house Retro Studios, better known as the chaps behind the successful Metroid Prime trilogy, is currently working on a new Zelda title that could be announced as early as E3."

"February 2nd, 2008
Retro’s next title is a Zelda spin-off, which could be announced around E3. It’s supposed to be a “Fantasy-Adventure” title as Surfer Girl calls it. She doesn’t know if it’s for Wii or DS, but by the way it was described, she would think Wii. It is different from other Zelda titles.
The new Zelda has been described as “epic, cinematic, untraditional” and she said it is more like a sequel with radical gameplay changes than a spinoff with similar gameplay. It is a new entry to the Zelda series and not a spin-off of an existing Zelda title."

Just do a web-search for 'Retro Studios Zelda' to find more info.

[ESK]

I generally dismiss rumours like this, but a Retro-developed Zelda would certainly be interesting. The obvious point is they revitalised the Metroid series, a franchise that shared a lot of core concepts with Zelda, e.g. exploration, adventure, upgradeable inventory, bosses, etc.

The knee-jerk reaction is to assume it’s a first-person Zelda title, as was rumoured a year or so again, and I still think that would be an interesting concept, particularly on the Wii with one-on-one swordfighting and archery. I love the Elder Scrolls games for drawing you into a world with the first-person perspective so I’d love to see Retro do this with Zelda.

Even if it’s a third-person, Retro clearly have a head for puzzles so it might breathe new life into the dungeons and overall design. Also, the development house seem to be highly skilled at tapping into the Wii’s graphical power, so their realisation of Hyrule would almost certainly be a joy to behold.

Perhaps it’s not such a ridiculous rumour. Zelda has always been one of Nintendo’s hardcore series and Retro so far has been trusted with the publisher’s hardcore offering, i.e. Metroid Prime – considerably more ‘core’/’mature’ than Galaxy or Twilight.

That said, it’s just a rumour, and if ever Nintendo did give Zelda to Retro, I’ve a feeling it would be a spin-off rather than a canonical console Legend. Perhaps a Republic Commando-style crossbow-‘em-up where players play Hyrule’s soldiers as Gannondorf attacks the realm?

[Raien]

FPS Zelda was not a rumour; it was tested for the development of Twilight Princess, but was scrapped. I personally don't believe Zelda will move into the first-person, even if Retro's developing the game, because the depiction of a mythical Hero relies heavily on the third person perspective. Zelda is not as flexible as Metroid in that respect.

Edited by jhurvid, 05 February 2008 - 04:00 PM.

[Sir Deimos]

Well, Link is a bit more iconical than Samus ((not much though)) I personally would riot in the streets if I couldn't physically see Link on screen the whole time... with the green, and that wind sock on his head

[SOAP]

Maybe they'll have an option to switch perspectives. Elder Scrolls had that didn't it? Or was that just the PC version?

[CID Farwin]

Zelda + Retro = VERY YES!!!!!!

I find it irrelevant as to whether it's 1st person or not, I'll get it anyway. Of course that's assuming the rumor is true...

Given what Retro did with Metroid, I would like to see them take on Zelda. If the rumor's false, then I want retro to make a Zelda game anyway now.

Well, Link is a bit more iconical than Samus ((not much though)) I personally would riot in the streets if I couldn't physically see Link on screen the whole time... with the green, and that wind sock on his head calm.gif

I was veery uncomfortable with TP until I got the tunic b/w 'wind sock'.

[Chiaki]

Hm, I do doubt that it would be FPS (unless they made a Crossbow Training minigame or something). Retro though...I suppose it could work, Metroid is similar enough to Zelda. If Nintendo is involving another company to make a Zelda game though, I'd almost rather see Bioware making one, though I doubt that would ever happen.

As long as they put a lot of effort into it, and stick to the basics, it could probably work. And of course, this is just a rumor. I'm betting that Nintendo will reveal something soon, certainly if theres another company involved.

[Raien]

One big difference between the Metroid Prime trilogy and the Legend of Zelda series, is that Metroid Prime was the first game in the Metroid series to be brought into 3D, and it was decided then that the first-person perspective was most suitable for the exploration and gameplay. The Legend of Zelda series has already been brought into 3D with a successful control scheme in the third-person, so if Retro was given control of game development, they wouldn't be able to just "start from scratch".

And then let's not forget that Nintendo is eager to make the Zelda franchise appeal equally and strongly to fans in both Western and Japanese territories. But the Metroid series has always been known for appealing particularly towards Western gamers (Metroid Prime did nothing to change that), and I wouldn't be surprised if Retro was originally chosen because they knew how to appeal to Western gamers better than Nintendo did in Japan. In other words, there are no discernible reasons to hand the Legend of Zelda series to Retro, given that like the Mario franchise, Nintendo would rather take full control of Zelda development themselves.

[Nameless_Joe]

there are no discernible reasons to hand the Legend of Zelda series to Retro, given that like the Mario franchise, Nintendo would rather take full control of Zelda development themselves.

Nintendo didn't mind handing Zelda development off to Capcom/Flagship for the Oracle/Four Swords/Minish Cap titles; what's to bar them from farming work out to Retro? It took Nintendo ages to complete TP, they probably wouldn't mind if another company worked on the next Zelda. (which would allow the big N to focus on other franchises)

[Raien]

Nintendo didn't mind handing Zelda development off to Capcom/Flagship for the Oracle/Four Swords/Minish Cap titles; what's to bar them from farming work out to Retro? It took Nintendo ages to complete TP, they probably wouldn't mind if another company worked on the next Zelda. (which would allow the big N to focus on other franchises)

Nintendo have outsourced most of their game licenses to third party developers over the years, but when it comes to the really important titles, such as New Super Mario Bros., Super Mario Galaxy and Zelda: Twilight Princess, Nintendo EAD prefers to develop those titles themselves. Although Capcom did use to make spin-off Zelda games for Nintendo's handhelds, Nintendo EAD now has a second team to do that for them (it was this second team that made Phantom Hourglass). Nintendo doesn't need Retro, and I wouldn't expect them to employ Retro, on top of the two Zelda teams at EAD.

Edited by jhurvid, 05 February 2008 - 09:41 PM.

[Masamune]

I'd rather see Retro working on something new. Or reviving some other franchise... Battle Clash anyone?

[Fyxe]

I'd rather see Retro working on something new. Or reviving some other franchise... Battle Clash anyone?

I think Intelligent Systems could handle that perfectly fine. That said, a new Battle Clash for the Wii would be ideal. One with more depth and length, preferably.

[Egann]

I think that FPS Zelda is fine, but it's wholly inadequate for sword fighting. A person is alert to far more than a little screen can display, and even the Wii can't turn the screen as fast as a person's head can swivel. JK2 is the only game I have played with a half-decent swordplay engine (hence my avatar.)

I didn't play Metroid Prime much, but what little I did I wasn't particularly impressed by. The engine was too slow.

[Nameless_Joe]

Nintendo have outsourced most of their game licenses to third party developers over the years, but when it comes to the really important titles, such as New Super Mario Bros., Super Mario Galaxy and Zelda: Twilight Princess, Nintendo EAD prefers to develop those titles themselves.

Retro Sudios has been wholly owned by Nintendo since 2001, so it's not a third party developer, it's a subsidiary.

I think that FPS Zelda is fine, but it's wholly inadequate for sword fighting. A person is alert to far more than a little screen can display, and even the Wii can't turn the screen as fast as a person's head can swivel. JK2 is the only game I have played with a half-decent swordplay engine (hence my avatar.)

I didn't play Metroid Prime much, but what little I did I wasn't particularly impressed by. The engine was too slow.

The ability to switch to FP perspective could work very well; there's already been a stationary FP view for firing arrows from OoT onward, so moving and shooting isn't that much of a stretch. (Kinda had it where you ride and shoot, but the horse just runs in a straight line.) Link's Crossbow Training is a step toward a FPS mode that could be implemented to future Zelda games. Rare had a FPS part in Banjo-Kazooie (or was it Tooie?) when you carried the bird like a rifle and shot eggs from its mouth. That part came off (I thought) as both funny and interesting, and was only used in a portion of an otherwise platforming game. For swordplay, though, 3rd person still rules.

I'm a bit spoiled; Goldeneye (N64) was the first FPS I ever played and to this day, I still think it is one of the best. You could swivel and aim accurately with lightning speed (and a bit of practice). Newer FPS, including the Metroid games, are irritatingly slow in this regard. I'll be trying to draw a bead on something near the edge of the screen and before I can get it in my sights it'll be chomping my leg off. When a foul-tempered space monster is coming at you and there's time to think "Man, these controls are slow!", something's wrong.

[Raien]

Retro Sudios has been wholly owned by Nintendo since 2001, so it's not a third party developer, it's a subsidiary.

Doesn't matter. Third party OR subsidiary; Nintendo EAD reserves the main Mario and Zelda titles for themselves.

I'm a bit spoiled; Goldeneye (N64) was the first FPS I ever played and to this day, I still think it is one of the best. You could swivel and aim accurately with lightning speed (and a bit of practice). Newer FPS, including the Metroid games, are irritatingly slow in this regard. I'll be trying to draw a bead on something near the edge of the screen and before I can get it in my sights it'll be chomping my leg off. When a foul-tempered space monster is coming at you and there's time to think "Man, these controls are slow!", something's wrong.

It's probably because a lot of people get motion-sickness easily.

[Fyxe]

Metroid Prime's engine wasn't too slow.

Well, it wasn't. o.o What a very unusual criticism.

[Xkeeper]

What'd really make me happy is if Retro Studios -- assuming they are working on some Zelda title -- actually does something, you know, retro and makes a 2D, sprite-and-tile based Zelda.

None of this psuedo-3d Diamond/Pearl bullshit, none of that gimmicky use-only-the-motion-controls crap.

...

I should also mention that, as far as my knowledge goes, the Zelda franchise was farmed out to Capcom for Minish Cap, so giving it out doesn't seem like such a big thing.

[Veteran]

As far as I'm concerned, Metroid Prime 3's controls are the ONLY way to play FPS's.

[Nameless_Joe]

I haven't played Metroid Prime 3 yet; my comments were aimed at the first two Prime games.

[CID Farwin]

As far as I'm concerned, Metroid Prime 3's controls are the ONLY way to play FPS's.

Seconded.

[Runty Grunty]

It'd be pretty cool if Retro's "new take" on Zelda were to bring it into a different era. I.E. the cyberpunk age. That'd be hard to pull off, but it'd be crazy cool, imo.

Of course, most of you are gonna disagree with me...

[Nameless_Joe]

It'd be pretty cool if Retro's "new take" on Zelda were to bring it into a different era. I.E. the cyberpunk age. That'd be hard to pull off, but it'd be crazy cool, imo.

Of course, most of you are gonna disagree with me...

You're right, most people will disagree with you. Zelda is Nintendo's fantasy series, it fills a niche just like Metroid and Starfox fill the sci-fi action/adventure and aerial combat genres, respectively. Is there really any logical reason to have Link running around in a bastardized Star Wars/Matrix world? If you really need a sci-fi Zelda fix check out

Super Smash Brothers Brawl. It's adventure mode should appeal to you.

[Runty Grunty]

It'd be pretty cool if Retro's "new take" on Zelda were to bring it into a different era. I.E. the cyberpunk age. That'd be hard to pull off, but it'd be crazy cool, imo.

Of course, most of you are gonna disagree with me...

You're right, most people will disagree with you. Zelda is Nintendo's fantasy series, it fills a niche just like Metroid and Starfox fill the sci-fi action/adventure and aerial combat genres, respectively. Is there really any logical reason to have Link running around in a bastardized Star Wars/Matrix world? If you really need a sci-fi Zelda fix check out

Super Smash Brothers Brawl. It's adventure mode should appeal to you.

Okay, maybe I should've been more specific. Have you ever played Final Fantasy VI? Well, that's sort of in the steam age, so maybe that's as far as the Zelda series should go. I guess the idea of futuristic Zelda kinda sucks.

[D~N]

Link + lightsaber = awesome ;_;

[TheAvengerLever]

Good luck coming up with a Zelda-y name for THAT weapon.

[Arturo]

Fairy lightsaber?

[SnowsilverKat]

Maybe in the future the Master Sword's been refitted with a plasma blade. Also with guns. Because we all know that gun/sword hybrids are badass.

Wasn't there that April Fools thing a while back with a 'futurey' Zelda? I remember Link riding on a motorcycle that had the name 'Epona' emblazoned on the side.

[Xkeeper]

Fairy lightsaber?

Fairy chainsaw?

[CID Farwin]

Seriously, people; Zelda is a fantasy game. If you want a mesh of sci-fi and fantasy, well then there's plenty of games out there. I've said it before, I want my fantasy games to be fantasy, and my sci-fi to be sci-fi. That doesn't mean that I don't like games like Final Fantasy that mesh the two, just that if it's a fantasy game(e.g. Zelda) I want it to be fantasy, not sci-fi. Would you also like, say, an alien invasion of middle-earth? A Wizzrobe fight in Halo?

If you're that desperate, you can make fan fiction, make a fan game(It's good enough for me=)).

Link + lightsaber = awesome ;_;

Link + lightsaber = Super Smash Bros.

Okay, maybe I should've been more specific. Have you ever played Final Fantasy VI? Well, that's sort of in the steam age, so maybe that's as far as the Zelda series should go. I guess the idea of futuristic Zelda kinda sucks.

Well, that worked for FFVI. Don't feel bad, it's a good idea, it's just that Zelda's a fantasy game, a futuristic Zelda would just...not be Zelda.

[Jumbie]

If you're that desperate, you can make fan fiction, make a fan game(It's good enough for me=)).

Or make The Legend of Midna! That's what I'd like Retro to do, a perfectly bearable spin-off with a Zelda character, the most popular Zelda chara of all time, may I add. Though the Shadow World didn't seem too diverse the first time around, that could change. As for the sci-fi aspect, with the Twili it feels almost like magic and technology were twins. Sure, we don't see much technology, but it really seems like they've technicalized their magic, doesn't it?

Would you also like, say, an alien invasion of middle-earth? A Wizzrobe fight in Halo?

Lol, that one is the ultimate clincher! We all should bookmark that line for future reference

Edited by Jumbie, 13 February 2008 - 08:46 PM.