Zelda: Twilight Princess delayed...until next year

[VG_Maniac]

Yes, Nintendo has delayed the new Zelda game until next year. Nintendo said they will announce the new release date after March 21, 2006. :bawling:

here's the official word on IGN:

http://cube.ign.com/articles/642/642238p1.html

I know the game will end up being bigger and better because of this...but I'm really pissed off. I wanted that game to be released by Christmas so bad, and now that Nintnendo won't be releasing it...they have nothing big coming out this year. Microsoft is going to crush them this holiday season with the Xbox 360. Man, the Playstation 3 might even be out by the time Nintendo finally releases Twilight Princess! :angry:

[joeuser]

Bad move from Nintendo. I really hoped they bring something big for this christmas. But if it is not Zelda, what else is it? Are there any big titles announced for GC oder even NDS or GBA?

And what are the exact reasons? I mean, they are working on this title for quite a while. And I understand, they they like to bring a top quality product. Will they implement some new features? Or is it now a Revolution title? ;)

[GrandAmChandler]

Well, I agree this is a bad move, but hey if it isn't doen, it isn't done. I don't know, I think it would have sold more this year, than it will next year, especially with the new Xbox 360 coming out soon. I think the only "Must have titles" from Nintendo are the following, and they are all DS games!

Mario Kart DS
Animal Crossing DS
Nintendogs
New Super Mario Bros.

They would have sold a good amount of Cubes this Christmas too, that's a shame!

[Lasermouse]

My hunch is that this announcement is a sign that possibly, Zelda:TP might move from being the Gamecube's swan song to being a killer-app Revolution launch title later in 2006. Just a hunch on my part, I have no solid info to back it up. Despite the pain it would cause N' fans, such a move would probably make more sense for Nintendo in the long run since obviously, a new Zelda would shift more units at launch than Luigi's Mansion did. Of course, this is all idle speculation on my part, I could be wrong and they're simply putting more into the game as they stated. If such is the case, never mind.

- MP

[Leroy]

Eh, no difference to me. I'll buy Zelda Extreme whenever it comes out.

[Lothars]

Well I don't see this being a bad move, the game will be better for it

and well it may actually be a good way for the Gamecube to go out on.

so we will see.

[THATinkjar]

This news, in my opinion, shows (once again) why Nintendo are a first-class game developer. Nintendo realise this is the last (or, one of the last) significant release for the GameCube, and that Zelda fans across the globe will be devestated/disappointed by the delay, and yet they still decide to extend the game's development time.

Such courage at such an important time for Nintendo can only be applauded, in my eyes. Bring on Nintendo's DS lineup later in the year, I say!

[Daria]

In the long run I'd rather have the game that was completely tested and polished then the one that was rushed out the door for a christmas past.

I think it's a good move.

[segagamer4life]

I was looking forward to this comming out, but at least it SHOULD be even better if its being delayed.

[Rabid Peanut-Butter]

Indeed. I Wind Waker felt rushed and unfinished to me and I would be crushed if it happened to Twilight Princess as well.

[chrisbid]

majora's mask was released on the same day as the PS2, so there would be prescedent for the new zelda to be released the same day as the PS3

[sisko]

Bad move from Nintendo. I really hoped they bring something big for this christmas. But if it is not Zelda, what else is it? Are there any big titles announced for GC oder even NDS or GBA?

And what are the exact reasons? I mean, they are working on this title for quite a while. And I understand, they they like to bring a top quality product. Will they implement some new features? Or is it now a Revolution title? ;)

The Game Boy Micro will launch later this year. That should help cushion the loss.

[zmweasel]

This news, in my opinion, shows (once again) why Nintendo are a first-class game developer. Nintendo realise this is the last (or, one of the last) significant release for the GameCube, and that Zelda fans across the globe will be devestated/disappointed by the delay, and yet they still decide to extend the game's development time.

Such courage at such an important time for Nintendo can only be applauded, in my eyes. Bring on Nintendo's DS lineup later in the year, I say!

There's no "courage" in Nintendo not shipping TP this year. It's just a company struggling with the development cycle of a high-profile title--which is hardly a novelty, or an indication of "first-class" anything--or thinking about turning a last-gasp 'Cube release into a killer Revolution launch title, which would be brilliant. Why waste a great game on a lame-duck console?

-- Z.

[joshnickerson]

So THAT was that faint, collective "NOOO!!" I heard early this morning. It was all the Zelda fans. *L*

I'll admit, I did a few Vader-esque "NOOOOO!!!"s upon reading the news, but I'm not terribly upset right now. I think it's great that Nintendo is letting the game stay in development for a while longer and add more content, and not releasing an incomplete game. Yeah, Ninty could've gotten huge sales during Xmas, but guess what? It's ZELDA. It'd sell huge no matter what time of year it releases.

So yeah, I'm disappointed and a bit sad, but I sure as hell am still going to be first in line to buy it in April.

Not to mention, now I actually have time to play all my backlogged Cube games. LOL

[atomicthumbs]

GOOD!

For two reasons...

1) Everyone knows that it will be worth the wait.

2) I'm really damn busy right now and probably will be until early next year or so.

[le geek]

Good news for the Zelda game, bad news for Nintendo Financially.

What will Nintendo sell this Xmas for cube? Here's hoping the DS does well...

Ben

[Nature Boy]

Bad move from Nintendo.

I also disagree with this sentiment. A late game is only late once - a bad game stinks forever. Take your time Nintendo. Release it when PS3 launches or something :)

[Jumpman Jr.]

Thats the worst news I've heard in a while. I've been looking forward to this game coming out since I first saw the trailer, and now I need to wait even longer :( . The good news is, I know Nintendo is just trying to make it better. So I don't mind all that much.
So does this mean that it will be released after (or very close to) the release of the Revolution? Maybe it won't even be released on the Gamecube at all? I don't know...

[THATinkjar]

I wonder if this delay bodes well for a European release more along the lines with the rest of the world. I wouldn't want to be buying my copy in the summer of 2006!

[Dobie]

I'm actually kind of glad it got bumped. With the release of the Xbox 360 around the same time as the original Zelda release date, I was conflicted about which to dedicate time to upon release. Now with Zelda moved back, I can properly devote what little game time I have to Xbox, and then put it down for Zelda in March. Spreads out the gaming goodness a bit.

[dbiersdorf]

Good news for the Zelda game, bad news for Nintendo Financially.

What will Nintendo sell this Xmas for cube? Here's hoping the DS does well...

Ben

Game Boy Micros? DS? The handful of killer Nintendo titles making their way out the floodgates for the DS and a few on GCN (Batallion Wars anyone? Fire Emblem!?).

I agree that this will really hurt sales, and even though I know Wind Waker didn't sell up to Zelda standards because of the graphic choice, but at the same time I think the March release really hurt it as well.

BUT maybe Nintendo has further reasoning for this? The way I see it is both Sony and Nintendo don't find Microsoft as a huge threat so they can let them have the holiday season to themselves. But both Microsoft and Nintendo see Sony as a treat, especially after this generation.

Remember Microsoft announcing they are on target of releasing Halo 3 the day the PS3 launches. Well keep in mind that's in March-ish, also keep in mind Nintendo plans on releasing the Revolution very close, if not before, the PS3. Now even though Zelda would be on the GameCube, if it came out, say a few days before the Revolution launched, people would just wait to play it if they hadn't picked up a GameCube yet and just get a Revolution instead (thank the lord for backwards compatability, eh?).

Not only will the GameCube get a killer ap, but technically the Revolution would as well, which could coinside with whatever else they have planned for the Revolution launch (Super Mario 128 I assume). The combination could be devastating towards Sony.

I just hope the anticipated launch for Halo 3 wouldn't overshadow anything like Halo 2 did on EVERY great release holiday 2004 (minus GTA). That would hurt both Nintendo and Sony if that were the case.

[goatdan]

There's no "courage" in Nintendo not shipping TP this year. It's just a company struggling with... or thinking about turning a last-gasp 'Cube release into a killer Revolution launch title, which would be brilliant. Why waste a great game on a lame-duck console?

That's the only reason I can think of the game is being delayed. If Nintendo puts it out on anything but the Revolution after this Christmas season, no one is going to care. If it is a Revolution launch title, that is going to create some huge buzz.

[dbiersdorf]

That would only further delay the game. The fact that the Revolution is backwards compatiable will keep everyone interested.

Plus you guys act as if Zelda is some sort of mainstream game. This isn't a GTA or Halo, it has a hardcore following, they will buy it regardless.

[Jive3D]

This news does not bother me at all - This gives me more time to give OoT another playthrough before the Zelda tTP is released.

This delay can only make the game better.

Nintendo has plenty of other stuff to offer at holiday time - the Micro and the whole online portion of the DS scene.

So what if they are missing the holiday rush for Zelda - it's not going to change the fact that most of us are a little wary of Nintendo's latest moves, this is just another drop in the bucket. The game will still come out.

Anyone interested in Zelda will buy this game, no matter when it comes out - it's the kind of game that doesnt need a holiday season to sell through the roof. Gamers will want, gamers will buy.

I highly doubt that it would be delayed and turned into a REV title. I think that would truly be foolish, the cube needs a last hurrah.

[suckerpunch5]

NOOOOO!!! DAH! I am kind of bummed about this. Oh well, I still have the GCN Fire Emblem to look foward to.

And Total War for the DS! Yeah!

[Gunstar_Hero UK]

As upset as I am that I now have to wait even longer for Twilight Princess, I suppose the Delay is for a good reason. Which makes it a bit better..

Joe. :)

[MegaDrive20XX]

Bad Move Nintendo, that's gonna hurt your sales for Cube this Christmas season by far :(

Yet I think releasing it closer to the Revolution's release, maybe a bit confusing towards consumers. "Why buy Zelda for this old system when I could have a better system?" as an example

Luckily, the Nintendo DS may help the big N.

Yet, my question right now, is what does Nintendo have to deliver for GameCube this Christmas seaon? Since, Zelda was the biggest reason...

[njiska]

What the fuck is wrong with these people? Yeah I want a better game too, but there's a certain level of competition that must be maintained. This was there one chance at selling a lot of stock this christmas and just like E3, they fucked it up. Now christmas is ChristMS.

The only thing left for them to bank on is Mario Kart DS and it's online play and that still won't sell like a Zelda game.

I hope someone at Nintendo is banging his head against his desk in disgust.

[MrSmiley381]

Damn.

I just preordered it yesterday, too. Well, at least I have the time to acquire the money for it now. Although, I bet the DS titles will help Nintendo keep on it this Christmas.

[GrayFox]

Yes, I can't wait for all the angry parents yellin' about how it was supposed to be out this fall.

Ya know, because obviously, I control development times and such, and I'm making it come out next year.

[zmweasel]

That would only further delay the game. The fact that the Revolution is backwards compatiable will keep everyone interested.

Plus you guys act as if Zelda is some sort of mainstream game. This isn't a GTA or Halo, it has a hardcore following, they will buy it regardless.

Lemme get this straight: You think The Legend of Zelda--THE LEGEND OF FUCKING ZELDA--isn't a mainstream franchise? Please, PLEASE explain how you've come to this conclusion.

-- Z.

[MrSmiley381]

That would only further delay the game. The fact that the Revolution is backwards compatiable will keep everyone interested.

Plus you guys act as if Zelda is some sort of mainstream game. This isn't a GTA or Halo, it has a hardcore following, they will buy it regardless.

Also interested as to how it's not mainstream.

The T-Shirt I'm wearing right now says that it is mainstream.

[goatdan]

I was just going to post that Zelda is probably the most mainstream title that Nintendo has, but I now see that others beat me too it.

I also question anyone who says that the GameCube needs a final hurrah. Why? Wouldn't it be smarter to upgrade the graphics of Zelda and release it for the Revolution, so one of the most sought after new games is used to sell the brand spankin' new Nintendo system? Acting like a business, Nintendo should cancel it for the practically-dead-anyway GameCube and just bring it out for the Revolution. That would help them out a LOT.

[Kilik Kurosawa]

That would only further delay the game. The fact that the Revolution is backwards compatiable will keep everyone interested.

Plus you guys act as if Zelda is some sort of mainstream game. This isn't a GTA or Halo, it has a hardcore following, they will buy it regardless.

Lemme get this straight: You think The Legend of Zelda--THE LEGEND OF FUCKING ZELDA--isn't a mainstream franchise? Please, PLEASE explain how you've come to this conclusion.

-- Z.

i think he meant isn't

[joshnickerson]

I think there's one word that could sum up what Nintendo could do to stave off the Zelda fans until April.

Demo.

Nintendo just needs to press out a bunch of discs with the E3 demo on it, and either pop it into issues of NP, put it up as a registration bonus on Nintendo.com, or bundle it with Fire Emblem or Pokemon XD or other Cube titles (which would probably guarantee awesome sales of said titles).

That way, people get a taste of what's coming and it should whet their appitites until the release.

[Jumpman Jr.]

I think there's one word that could sum up what Nintendo could do to stave off the Zelda fans until April.

Demo.

Nintendo just needs to press out a bunch of discs with the E3 demo on it, and either pop it into issues of NP, put it up as a registration bonus on Nintendo.com, or bundle it with Fire Emblem or Pokemon XD or other Cube titles (which would probably guarantee awesome sales of said titles).

That way, people get a taste of what's coming and it should whet their appitites until the release.

I agree... Although, I think that would just drive me even more insane.

[WiseSalesman]

A delay, huh? I agree that this decision will hurt the big N in a big way this christmas season. If it wasn't going to be done, they shouldn't have tried to push the release date. I expect better of Nintendo than that (all though those expectations are all rapidly going downhill with every nintendo quote, ruined franchise or bad business decision).

Ah well. Maybe this will give them time to put some gameplay into it, something my launch copy of WindWaker seemed to be missing.

[PDorr3]

BUT maybe Nintendo has further reasoning for this? The way I see it is both Sony and Nintendo don't find Microsoft as a huge threat so they can let them have the holiday season to themselves. But both Microsoft and Nintendo see Sony as a treat, especially after this generation.


hah, this very well may be true :)

Also I agree with the demo part. If a demo of zelda was released specificaly to the new fire emblem I would DEFINITLY buy FE, since it will probably be a good game anyway, but otherwise I would have never bought it unless it had a zelda demo.

Yes I agree, packaging a zelda demo into a GC game would help sales ALOT this holiday.

But Im all for the delay, gives me more money and time to spend on the 360. Elder scrolls oblivion here I come! :D

[njiska]

I also question anyone who says that the GameCube needs a final hurrah. Why? Wouldn't it be smarter to upgrade the graphics of Zelda and release it for the Revolution, so one of the most sought after new games is used to sell the brand spankin' new Nintendo system? Acting like a business, Nintendo should cancel it for the practically-dead-anyway GameCube and just bring it out for the Revolution. That would help them out a LOT.

Zelda is Zelda, it will sell well regardless of how long it takes to release, but what about the people who bought a Gamecube already because they wanted Zelda? I know a couple of people that picked up a Gamecube just a few days ago because they wanted Zelda and decided to buy a cube now, while they had extra money. Sure they bought some titles that interested them to fill the void, but if it's delayed and released as a Revolution game they'll get burned and be horribly pissed off. Not to mention the people who already have a Gamecube and have been waiting for it that will be pissed off that after all that waiting they'll have to buy a new system at launch price, or wait even longer.

Twlight Princess must be released as a Gamecube game or else Nintedo will really piss off a lot of people. Even if it is released to counter the PS3, it's still means Ninetndo won't have a major hit launching for the christmas season. That's just not good business and even thought Zelda and Halo 3 launching at the PS3 would do major damage to Sony, which i'd love to see, i still question whether or not it's a wise business decision for Nintendo.

[dbiersdorf]

All those casual gamers aren't anticipating the next Zelda, they want the next GTA on PSP or Halo 3 on Xbox 360. You know the gamers who buy one game a year, which typically is Madden. The Zelda series is just so well made that it manages huge sales from actual gamers. Just because you can buy t-shirts from Hot Topic or some other stupid chain does not mean the mainstream will flock to Twilight Princess.

[Slimedog]

I also question anyone who says that the GameCube needs a final hurrah. Why? Wouldn't it be smarter to upgrade the graphics of Zelda and release it for the Revolution, so one of the most sought after new games is used to sell the brand spankin' new Nintendo system? Acting like a business, Nintendo should cancel it for the practically-dead-anyway GameCube and just bring it out for the Revolution. That would help them out a LOT.

Agreed. With proper marketing, including the afore mentioned demos, Nintendo could have the killer launch app that neither Sony nor XBox has. Its not like releasing this on the declining Cube would really help them much. Look at the Saturn. Their last few games were stellar nobody bought or cared. Better to start with a bang than end with one.

[Joker T]

:angry: Damn

I guess Resident Evil 4 is staying in my cube a little longer LOL

[CreamSoda]

Wow, what a surprise! :roll: :/

[studvicious]

I completely agree that this should be revamped into a Revolution launch title. They would move a ton of systems that way. Even though I want to play this game ASAP, I definately don't mind the wait - It will be a masterpiece.

Besides, what was Nintendo's big holiday game last year? (That didn't come out in January :hmm: )

[ubersaurus]

Oh thank god, I wanted to finish all the zeldas before this new one came out, and getting my friends together to 4 swords is a royal pain in the ass.

[DigitalSpace]

Disappointing, but whatever. It's Nintendo, so I'm used to it.

And maybe it's just me, but I don't see what's so special about the Game Boy Micro. It comes off to me like the colored N64s - cool thing to have in a collection, but not an essential replacement. I think the consumers Nintendo are trying to sell this to will be more interested in a DS and/or a PSP. That being said, I think some of the DS titles coming out will do more to help cushion the blow than the GBA micro will.

[Famidrive-16]

I'm not too surprised by the delay. Ocarina of Time was delayed a bunch of times and it turned out awesome. It still sucks to have to wait a full year though.

Hopefully that new Mario DS game comes out this year too...

[dan2357]

I also question anyone who says that the GameCube needs a final hurrah. Why? Wouldn't it be smarter to upgrade the graphics of Zelda and release it for the Revolution, so one of the most sought after new games is used to sell the brand spankin' new Nintendo system? Acting like a business, Nintendo should cancel it for the practically-dead-anyway GameCube and just bring it out for the Revolution. That would help them out a LOT.

Zelda is Zelda, it will sell well regardless of how long it takes to release, but what about the people who bought a Gamecube already because they wanted Zelda? I know a couple of people that picked up a Gamecube just a few days ago because they wanted Zelda and decided to buy a cube now, while they had extra money. Sure they bought some titles that interested them to fill the void, but if it's delayed and released as a Revolution game they'll get burned and be horribly pissed off. Not to mention the people who already have a Gamecube and have been waiting for it that will be pissed off that after all that waiting they'll have to buy a new system at launch price, or wait even longer.

Twlight Princess must be released as a Gamecube game or else Nintedo will really piss off a lot of people. Even if it is released to counter the PS3, it's still means Ninetndo won't have a major hit launching for the christmas season. That's just not good business and even thought Zelda and Halo 3 launching at the PS3 would do major damage to Sony, which i'd love to see, i still question whether or not it's a wise business decision for Nintendo.

I think there probably adding some extra content that can only be see or accessed by playing it on the Revolution. Kind of like the N64 games that kinda needed the expansion pack. This way you get a game for Both systems out there, gamecube owners still get there new Zelda title, The Fanboys will all run out and buy the Revolution just for the extras (I probably would).

Side Note....
Anyone hear of any GBA connectivity with this one yet?

[zmweasel]

All those casual gamers aren't anticipating the next Zelda, they want the next GTA on PSP or Halo 3 on Xbox 360. You know the gamers who buy one game a year, which typically is Madden. The Zelda series is just so well made that it manages huge sales from actual gamers. Just because you can buy t-shirts from Hot Topic or some other stupid chain does not mean the mainstream will flock to Twilight Princess.

I don't really understand your explanation, but I'll try to decipher it.

* Casual gamers aren't anticipating the next Zelda, so it isn't mainstream.

* The Zelda franchise sells to "actual gamers" because it's so well-made.

To illustrate your first point, you give three examples of franchises that are "mainstream"--the three hottest video game franchises in North America at the moment, and probably the only three with more brand recognition than LoZ. Hot Topic sells Zelda T-shirts because even casual gamers know what Zelda is.

Addressing your second point, the original LoZ was the first NES game to sell more than a million copies. Were all those 13-year-old kids "actual gamers"?

The LoZ franchise has been Nintendo's #2 franchise in terms of sales and promotion for 20 years. The GameCube might not be mainstream, but Zelda most certainly is.

-- Z.

[heybtbm]

This delay has nothing to do with making the game better.

Nintendo simply wants to start the next fiscal year off with a huge success because the Revolution is way behind schedule. This of course is a guess, but an educated one.

Predictions:

Zelda delayed purely for financial reasons (not neccesarily a bad thing for Nintendo).

Zelda will stay on Gamecube.

Revolution R & D is way behind schedule and won't be ready till Spring 2007.

Revolution will be the last Nintendo console.

"Killer App" is the lamest buzz phrase of all time and needs to die a horrible death.

...I'm guessing 4 out of 5.

[DTJAAAAMJSLM]

Ouch. I wanted the game, but it's nothing that I was absolutely dying to play right away. I can wait...

[GarrettCRW]

Lemme get this straight: You think The Legend of Zelda--THE LEGEND OF FUCKING ZELDA--isn't a mainstream franchise? Please, PLEASE explain how you've come to this conclusion.

Ladies and gentlemen, the board quote of the year.

IMO, unless Nintendo found a catastrophic bug during testing, Twilight Princess is going to be a launch title for the Revolution-and sell a shitload of copies and systems. As large as Zelda is, wasting it on an aging system that's going up against a heavily hyped system launch.The money Nintendo stands to gain by releasing Zelda alongside the Revolution pales in comparison to the money they'll lose this Christmas, I'd wager.

[Wavelflack]

Nintendo:

"We're sorry, but there is a chip shortage."

[cr0n0]

Maybe Nintendo is releasing it next year along with the Revolution to drive sales of the new unit. Maybe the Revolution will be able to take special advantage of the Zelda game in ways the gamecube could only dream off.
Just speculating...

[cr0n0]

Maybe Nintendo is releasing it next year along with the Revolution to drive sales of the new unit. Maybe the Revolution will be able to take special advantage of the Zelda game in ways the gamecube could only dream off.
Just speculating...

[Super Mario Fan]

I also question anyone who says that the GameCube needs a final hurrah. Why? Wouldn't it be smarter to upgrade the graphics of Zelda and release it for the Revolution, so one of the most sought after new games is used to sell the brand spankin' new Nintendo system? Acting like a business, Nintendo should cancel it for the practically-dead-anyway GameCube and just bring it out for the Revolution. That would help them out a LOT.

Zelda is Zelda, it will sell well regardless of how long it takes to release, but what about the people who bought a Gamecube already because they wanted Zelda? I know a couple of people that picked up a Gamecube just a few days ago because they wanted Zelda and decided to buy a cube now, while they had extra money. Sure they bought some titles that interested them to fill the void, but if it's delayed and released as a Revolution game they'll get burned and be horribly pissed off. Not to mention the people who already have a Gamecube and have been waiting for it that will be pissed off that after all that waiting they'll have to buy a new system at launch price, or wait even longer.

Twlight Princess must be released as a Gamecube game or else Nintedo will really piss off a lot of people. Even if it is released to counter the PS3, it's still means Ninetndo won't have a major hit launching for the christmas season. That's just not good business and even thought Zelda and Halo 3 launching at the PS3 would do major damage to Sony, which i'd love to see, i still question whether or not it's a wise business decision for Nintendo.

I think there probably adding some extra content that can only be see or accessed by playing it on the Revolution. Kind of like the N64 games that kinda needed the expansion pack. This way you get a game for Both systems out there, gamecube owners still get there new Zelda title, The Fanboys will all run out and buy the Revolution just for the extras (I probably would).

Side Note....
Anyone hear of any GBA connectivity with this one yet?


Exactly, I've been thinking that since I heard about this news. It kind of reminds me of the Oracle games, you know they had a special shop if you played the games on the GBA. But if they release it on teh revolution, they're fucking over the 18 million Gamecube owners, who now have to buy a Revolution to play this game. I would be seriously pissed off at Nintendo if they did this.

[PenPen]

They don't have to buy a new system. The game will still be released on the Gamecube, and the Revolution supports backwards compatability for the Cube.

I think it is quite a smart move. There are too many games released during the oct-dec area and less games during the feb-apr.

So you don't have to buy the Revolution to play the new zelda, but there might be something special that the revolution will take advantage of if you play it with the revolution.

[goatdan]

But if they release it on the revolution, they're f---ing over the 18 million Gamecube owners, who now have to buy a Revolution to play this game. I would be seriously pissed off at Nintendo if they did this.

It wouldn't be like this was the first time a game was announced on one system and then ended up on another because it would make good business sense. Remember Dinosaur Island for the N64? Sphear for the Jaguar? Stuff like this happens all the time.

Yes, people have bought the GameCube because they want to play the new Zelda, but I doubt that is the *only* reason they bought it.

And seriously -- does Nintendo want to release perhaps their only true mainstream title (Mario is mainstream, but is also viewed as kiddie, while Zelda will sell to the older crowd too) on a system that is the oldest on the market during the not-Christmas-season? At that point, the mainstream market probably wouldn't be too interested in buying a $100 "old" system when they could spend their money on a new PS3 or Xbox and get games there instead.

If Nintendo doesn't release it this Christmas season and they instead release it in April on the GameCube, they are extraordinarily stupid.


They don't have to buy a new system. The game will still be released on the Gamecube, and the Revolution supports backwards compatability for the Cube.

I think it is quite a smart move. There are too many games released during the oct-dec area and less games during the feb-apr.

The reason why so many games are released in the October-December area is because that is when the most games are purchased. Had Resident Evil 4 came out before Christmas, I think that sales of it (As well as GameCube hardware, which Nintendo was practically trying to give away and no one cared about last holiday season) would have been TONS better. But instead, they brought it out in January, when most people are playing the new systems and the new games they just got for Christmas, and / or don't have the money to buy expensive new games while they pay off their credit cards from buying gifts.

Releasing the game in Feb / April will do nothing but help bury the franchise further than the other GameCube Zelda games have... and I know that some of us enjoyed the cel shading graphics, but it was a BAD move for moving units.


So you don't have to buy the Revolution to play the new zelda, but there might be something special that the revolution will take advantage of if you play it with the revolution.

I don't think that one new shop or one new item in the game would be enough to make people want to get the Revolution. Nintendo needs to make this a Revolution launch game if they want their new console to sell at all. Will they do it? I doubt it. Nintendo likes to cater toward the hardcore gamers and not the general public, and the hardcore gamers want this game out sooner than later, and they want this on the GameCube.

And while I wish they wouldn't, something tells me that the game will still come out for the GameCube, in January or February, and Nintendo-fans will proclaim it as one of the most awesome games ever, but almost no one else will even notice.

[Chuplayer]

Y helo thar Zelda 64. Did anybody actually think this was coming out by the end of the year?

[sabre2922]

A little late to comment on this but here goes anyway.

I think if the big N does NOT release this on Gamecube it will be a bad move overall.

sure it will piss many gamers off but what will hurt them more would be sales #s the fact is that there are millions of GCs out there just waiting for the new Zelda even if it is the GCs swan song it would make more $$$ than if it were ported over to the Revolution whereas the best Scenario that Nintendo could hope for would be selling MAYBE a couple hundred thousand copies in the beginning instead of MILLIONS of copies that would be sold on the GC.

But hey thats just MY opinion so dont flame me for it ;)

I really wouldnt be surprised if it went either way though but Nintendo is usually more dependable that what Sega ever was back in the day so well see.

[Jumpman Jr.]

But if they release it on the revolution, they're f---ing over the 18 million Gamecube owners, who now have to buy a Revolution to play this game. I would be seriously pissed off at Nintendo if they did this.

I actually hope that they do this. I've had a Gamecube for a while, so I can't express my hate towards Nintendo by saying "I bought a Gamecube to play Twilight Princess on it, and now I won't be able to." But nonetheless, I would rather one of the most anticipated games to come out on the best possible console that Nintendo has got. If it came out on the Gamecube in March, people would also be buying a Revolution and I guarantee you that the Revolution owners would die for it to of actually came out for the Revolution.

[Super Mario Fan]

But if they release it on the revolution, they're f---ing over the 18 million Gamecube owners, who now have to buy a Revolution to play this game. I would be seriously pissed off at Nintendo if they did this.

I actually hope that they do this. I've had a Gamecube for a while, so I can't express my hate towards Nintendo by saying "I bought a Gamecube to play Twilight Princess on it, and now I won't be able to." But nonetheless, I would rather one of the most anticipated games to come out on the best possible console that Nintendo has got. If it came out on the Gamecube in March, people would also be buying a Revolution and I guarantee you that the Revolution owners would die for it to of actually came out for the Revolution.

I don't think that it would do more good than bad releasing it on the Revolution, it's not a good idea in my eyes. What about all the people who will want to playit, but can't afford a Revolution, or can't find one, they just got screwed over, when it's supposed to be on the Gamecube.

I'm going to strongly stick by my "Special Revolution unlockable content" theory. That would be the best of both worlds.

[Slimedog]

I'm going to have to side with the goat on this one. I'd go as far to say that if Zelda ships for the cube, then the Revolution will be Nintendo's last system. Additional content won't move systems and Nintendo doesn't need to worry about moving cubes at this point. Releasing Zelda on the cube won't sell an appriciable number of cubes. Not many people wait until the last game has shipped and the console has officially died to actually buy the console. They really need to focus on moving the Revolution if they want to avoid having their asses handed to them in the next generation battle. Zelda can instantly make them a contender if they release it for the Revolution, and no other game (barring some miracle new franchise) can do that. I can think of lots of examples of Sega releasing great games to finish off a system, and look where it got them.

[Super Mario Fan]

I'm going to have to side with the goat on this one. I'd go as far to say that if Zelda ships for the cube, then the Revolution will be Nintendo's last system. Additional content won't move systems and Nintendo doesn't need to worry about moving cubes at this point. Releasing Zelda on the cube won't sell an appriciable number of cubes. Not many people wait until the last game has shipped and the console has officially died to actually buy the console. They really need to focus on moving the Revolution if they want to avoid having their asses handed to them in the next generation battle. Zelda can instantly make them a contender if they release it for the Revolution, and no other game (barring some miracle new franchise) can do that. I can think of lots of examples of Sega releasing great games to finish off a system, and look where it got them.

But, the Revolution is backwards compatible, it can and will play on the Revolution regardless, of what system it is released on. I think If they release it on the cube, it will say somewhere on the box that it is "Revolution Compatible" so I still can't see any good reason for it to be a Revolution launch title.

[Slimedog]

I'm going to have to side with the goat on this one. I'd go as far to say that if Zelda ships for the cube, then the Revolution will be Nintendo's last system. Additional content won't move systems and Nintendo doesn't need to worry about moving cubes at this point. Releasing Zelda on the cube won't sell an appriciable number of cubes. Not many people wait until the last game has shipped and the console has officially died to actually buy the console. They really need to focus on moving the Revolution if they want to avoid having their asses handed to them in the next generation battle. Zelda can instantly make them a contender if they release it for the Revolution, and no other game (barring some miracle new franchise) can do that. I can think of lots of examples of Sega releasing great games to finish off a system, and look where it got them.

But, the Revolution is backwards compatible, it can and will play on the Revolution regardless, of what system it is released on. I think If they release it on the cube, it will say somewhere on the box that it is "Revolution Compatible" so I still can't see any good reason for it to be a Revolution launch title.

For the game to sell systems, it would have to be retooled to show what the Revolution is capable of. The reason launch titles get so much press is that they illustrate the benefits of the next generation of hardware. People look at the screenshots and decide whether or not its worth investing in the new hardware. Unless the next Zelda is made into a full-fledged Revolution title that drives people to purchase the new hardware, it won't benefit Nintendo tactically in the marketplace. Nobody bought a GBA so they could play GBC games.

[studvicious]

I still can't see any good reason for it to be a Revolution launch title.

Umm.. mainly so it would sell a lot of systems, and you know it will. Think about it, a new awesome Zelda game, with (hopefully) a new awesome Mario game could very well make it Nintendo's best launch EVER. I'm hoping that's what they're going to do. People would go nuts! Nobody likes to shell out some cash for a launch system and wait and wait and wait for a decent game to come out. I know that it's backwards compatable so if they did release it as a Cube game it still could be played on the Rev - but why?? If the Revolution is going to be 2 to 3 times more powerful than the Cube, then the game should make you want to pee your pants - every pair of pants you own in fact. It already looks gorgeous on the Cube, but imagine the graphics getting bumped up even MORE, and then (hopefully) they add some extra hours to the game play. Who on Earth wouldn't want that??

I have a Gamecube and I love it, but the fact is - it's dead people. Nintendo REALLY needs to start off with a bang in the next-gen and this is their best bet.

[Crush Crawfish]

Oh well, it sucks, but I've got such a huge backlog of games I haven't beaten that the wait won't be too big of a deal.

Anyways, I think Nintendo would be foolish to release it for Gamecube at this point. Ending a system's life with a killer title certainly sounds nice on paper, but it simply doesn't make much business sense. Imagine how well the Revolution would do at launch with a new Zelda and the promised Smash bros sequel! I know nintendo feels that they have a promise to keep to Gamecube owners, but overall, I think it's a bad move.

[ubersaurus]

If it was to come out on the rev, it'd have to LOOK like a rev game, which means it probably wouldn't come out until like, 2007. Seriously, brand new graphics engine? I don't mind waiting some extra months, but 2 years is really pushing it.

With that in mind, I expect it'll be a cube release. I mean, look at Halo 2. Since the 360 is coming out a year later, why didn't they just take that time to "bump up the graphics" and make it a launch title?

Because it'd still make money on the Xbox.

[Slimedog]

If it was to come out on the rev, it'd have to LOOK like a rev game, which means it probably wouldn't come out until like, 2007. Seriously, brand new graphics engine? I don't mind waiting some extra months, but 2 years is really pushing it.

With that in mind, I expect it'll be a cube release. I mean, look at Halo 2. Since the 360 is coming out a year later, why didn't they just take that time to "bump up the graphics" and make it a launch title?

Because it'd still make money on the Xbox.

If Nintendo decides to buffing and polishing the graphics to make it a revolution game won't take two years. Seriously, the Revolution is only 2-3 times more powerful than the cube so it isn't that huge a leap to make. All the hard stuff of the games production is pretty much out of the way so if Nintendo decides attack it with a legion of graphic artists, I'm sure they could hit whatever the Revolution's launch date is.

As for why Microsoft didn't do the same with Halo 2, the XBox is currently a much more commercially viable platform than the Gamecube. How many 3rd party publishers have stopped supporting Xbox? None that I know of, but Gamecube only has one or two still onboard. Plus, Microsoft is still cementing their position as a viable contender in the console market. Releasing Halo 2 just reinforces the public perception of XBox as a solid gaming system. The Xbox is Microsoft's first generation of hardware so they are rightfully treating it as if they have something to prove. Nintendo is in third place right now and does not have that luxury. Do you honestly think that a Gamecube release of Zelda will sell as many copies as Halo 2?

[goatdan]

But, the Revolution is backwards compatible, it can and will play on the Revolution regardless, of what system it is released on. I think If they release it on the cube, it will say somewhere on the box that it is "Revolution Compatible" so I still can't see any good reason for it to be a Revolution launch title.

It doesn't matter that the Revolution is backwards compatible. It isn't like any games that were released on the original Playstation after the PS2 came out set the world on fire. Besides that, it would just be bad marketing. Nintendo is sitting with a property that could really jump start their next generation. If they release it now, they have the potential to move it to the people that currently have GameCubes, but it will be greatly overshadowed by the fact that Nintendo doesn't have a new console.

As others have mentioned though, selling the new Zelda on any system that isn't the GameCube will piss off the Nintendo-hardcores, who feel entitled to get this game on the GameCube. And will they get their way? From watching what Nintendo has done lately, they like to cater to their small hardcore fanbase and kids with their games. That's why you see Reggie's face all over everything talking about how Nintendo will "kick ass" and whatnot. Not because it is what anyone else wants to see, but it is because that is what the hardcore people -- who will probably end up buying the Revolution -- want to see and hear.

Nintendo, other than their handheld division, really doesn't seem to have a grip on the fact that gaming has gone mainstream. They do still live in a world where they want to control everything. The DS and it's ad campaign have been a breath of fresh air, but what else does Nintendo even have to sell? Updated ports of Game Boy Advance games that are coming out for the GameCube, and not much more.

Nintendo needs to take a step back and either put something behind Reggie's whole "I kick ass" campaign by making games that kick ass -- including games that are mature themed, and perhaps doing some serious financial voo doo to get Grand Theft Auto and a Halo-esque game on their system.

Why is the GameCube considered kiddie? Because Nintendo maintains that image. And if Zelda comes out not at Christmas, on what will be by FAR the oldest hardware, Nintendo is screwing themselves on the ONLY more mature game that they have that is more mainstream. Which, by the way, they already did by producing the great for the hardcore N-fans who could realize how the graphics really enhanced the game, but just made it look stupid to all of the "mainstreamers."


As for why Microsoft didn't do the same with Halo 2, the XBox is currently a much more commercially viable platform than the Gamecube. How many 3rd party publishers have stopped supporting Xbox? None that I know of, but Gamecube only has one or two still onboard. Plus, Microsoft is still cementing their position as a viable contender in the console market. Releasing Halo 2 just reinforces the public perception of XBox as a solid gaming system. The Xbox is Microsoft's first generation of hardware so they are rightfully treating it as if they have something to prove. Nintendo is in third place right now and does not have that luxury. Do you honestly think that a Gamecube release of Zelda will sell as many copies as Halo 2?

The other reason that Microsoft did Halo 2 on the Xbox was because it was right before the Christmas season when Microsoft realized they could move a ton of systems with a hugely hyped game. And did Microsoft pull this off? Heck yeah. Not just did they establish themselves as a HUGE player -- the launch of Halo 2 had some of the most extensive media coverage I've ever seen for a game -- but they moved TONS of units. Zelda, going up against the great looking new hardware in a non-Christmas season will do nothing.

Anyone remember those Jaguar infomercials before Christmas where they promoted the "great" Jaguar games like White Men Can't Jump and Bruce Lee: Enter the Dragon? Not just did the Jaguar not move many more consoles, but the people who got them were pissed they didn't get a "real" console where they could play an awesome game like Ridge Racer. The Jaguar still had some great stuff in development at the time -- but not having anything for Christmas and trying to promote the stuff that came out way before it did nothing but bury Atari further.

And Nintendo is walking down the same path. They want to appease their hardcore fanbase because if they turn on them, they don't have much left... but in doing so, they'll probably overlook their ONLY known property to get the Revolution into more adult gamer hands early. Anything to keep the hardcore's happy.

I must apologize for anyone that thought that I was a hardcore Nintendo fan from having read my DS debates in the past, by the way. I'm not. I do love my GameCube. I'll argue hard and long that the GameCube is not the home of only kiddie games. But Nintendo purposely fosters that image and sells to kids and hardcores.

I'll admit to being a hardcore in some ways -- I liked Celda, I really enjoy playing cutesy games like Pikmin and stuff -- but I can't overlook the fact that the business decision would be pure stupidity. Selling to the "millions" of GameCube fans (most of which have long since traded them in for another system... I mean, Nintendo has practically been trying to give them away and people haven't bought them) simply won't work. The game could move a lot of copies by selling on the Revolution, as well as getting them some much-needed attention.

[Super Mario Fan]

But, the Revolution is backwards compatible, it can and will play on the Revolution regardless, of what system it is released on. I think If they release it on the cube, it will say somewhere on the box that it is "Revolution Compatible" so I still can't see any good reason for it to be a Revolution launch title.

It doesn't matter that the Revolution is backwards compatible. It isn't like any games that were released on the original Playstation after the PS2 came out set the world on fire. Besides that, it would just be bad marketing. Nintendo is sitting with a property that could really jump start their next generation. If they release it now, they have the potential to move it to the people that currently have GameCubes, but it will be greatly overshadowed by the fact that Nintendo doesn't have a new console.

As others have mentioned though, selling the new Zelda on any system that isn't the GameCube will piss off the Nintendo-hardcores, who feel entitled to get this game on the GameCube. And will they get their way? From watching what Nintendo has done lately, they like to cater to their small hardcore fanbase and kids with their games. That's why you see Reggie's face all over everything talking about how Nintendo will "kick ass" and whatnot. Not because it is what anyone else wants to see, but it is because that is what the hardcore people -- who will probably end up buying the Revolution -- want to see and hear.

Nintendo, other than their handheld division, really doesn't seem to have a grip on the fact that gaming has gone mainstream. They do still live in a world where they want to control everything. The DS and it's ad campaign have been a breath of fresh air, but what else does Nintendo even have to sell? Updated ports of Game Boy Advance games that are coming out for the GameCube, and not much more.

Nintendo needs to take a step back and either put something behind Reggie's whole "I kick ass" campaign by making games that kick ass -- including games that are mature themed, and perhaps doing some serious financial voo doo to get Grand Theft Auto and a Halo-esque game on their system.

Why is the GameCube considered kiddie? Because Nintendo maintains that image. And if Zelda comes out not at Christmas, on what will be by FAR the oldest hardware, Nintendo is screwing themselves on the ONLY more mature game that they have that is more mainstream. Which, by the way, they already did by producing the great for the hardcore N-fans who could realize how the graphics really enhanced the game, but just made it look stupid to all of the "mainstreamers."


As for why Microsoft didn't do the same with Halo 2, the XBox is currently a much more commercially viable platform than the Gamecube. How many 3rd party publishers have stopped supporting Xbox? None that I know of, but Gamecube only has one or two still onboard. Plus, Microsoft is still cementing their position as a viable contender in the console market. Releasing Halo 2 just reinforces the public perception of XBox as a solid gaming system. The Xbox is Microsoft's first generation of hardware so they are rightfully treating it as if they have something to prove. Nintendo is in third place right now and does not have that luxury. Do you honestly think that a Gamecube release of Zelda will sell as many copies as Halo 2?

The other reason that Microsoft did Halo 2 on the Xbox was because it was right before the Christmas season when Microsoft realized they could move a ton of systems with a hugely hyped game. And did Microsoft pull this off? Heck yeah. Not just did they establish themselves as a HUGE player -- the launch of Halo 2 had some of the most extensive media coverage I've ever seen for a game -- but they moved TONS of units. Zelda, going up against the great looking new hardware in a non-Christmas season will do nothing.

Anyone remember those Jaguar infomercials before Christmas where they promoted the "great" Jaguar games like White Men Can't Jump and Bruce Lee: Enter the Dragon? Not just did the Jaguar not move many more consoles, but the people who got them were pissed they didn't get a "real" console where they could play an awesome game like Ridge Racer. The Jaguar still had some great stuff in development at the time -- but not having anything for Christmas and trying to promote the stuff that came out way before it did nothing but bury Atari further.

And Nintendo is walking down the same path. They want to appease their hardcore fanbase because if they turn on them, they don't have much left... but in doing so, they'll probably overlook their ONLY known property to get the Revolution into more adult gamer hands early. Anything to keep the hardcore's happy.

I must apologize for anyone that thought that I was a hardcore Nintendo fan from having read my DS debates in the past, by the way. I'm not. I do love my GameCube. I'll argue hard and long that the GameCube is not the home of only kiddie games. But Nintendo purposely fosters that image and sells to kids and hardcores.

I'll admit to being a hardcore in some ways -- I liked Celda, I really enjoy playing cutesy games like Pikmin and stuff -- but I can't overlook the fact that the business decision would be pure stupidity. Selling to the "millions" of GameCube fans (most of which have long since traded them in for another system... I mean, Nintendo has practically been trying to give them away and people haven't bought them) simply won't work. The game could move a lot of copies by selling on the Revolution, as well as getting them some much-needed attention.

I guess we're going to have to agree to disagree. It seems that I'm not going to convince you that it's a bad idea, and you're not going to convince me that it's a good idea. We'll just have to see what decision Nintendo makes, and how well it's going to work out for them.

[boatofcar]

I think that Zelda should be a Revolution launch title. Why? Because I care about the future of Nintendo as a hardware developer, and the promise of a new Zelda on a new console as a lunch title will move systems faster than a new mario on launch day.

The only way you can argue this is that you want to whine because you'll have to buy a new system to play it, not because you think it's a dumb move my Nintendo.

I'd say more, but Goatdan has made the argument quite clear.