Talk:The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess HD

Latest comment: 2 years ago by (Oinkers42) in topic Merge discussion

Neccessary article?

edit

Do you really need an article for this? It looks to be more of a straight port compared to Wind Waker HD, and most of the new info we have can be summed up in a paragraph. Wonchop (talk) 17:32, 14 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

@Wonchop: I created the page as a redirect (before an IP editor turned it into an article) for the same reason: presently, there really isn't enough information available on the subject to warrant creating an article for it. I also think it's too early to firmly assess the game as a port, which almost certainly wouldn't deserve its own article, rather than as a remake, which could receive enough third-party coverage to necessitate an article of its own. We'll just have to wait and see. —zziccardi (talk) 23:14, 14 November 2015 (UTC)Reply
Scratch that—Reggie Fils-Aimé explicitly says port at around 2:17 in the presentation. —zziccardi (talk) 01:40, 17 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

Note: Consensus for splitting Twilight Princess HD out into its own article was achieved here. —zziccardi (talk) 17:12, 3 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Can you really call this a remake?

edit

The Wiki Page on video game remakes:

"A remake typically shares very little of the original assets and code with the original game, distinguishing it from an "enhanced port," partial remake, or remastering."

"A port is a conversion of a game to a new platform that relies heavily on existing work and assets. A port may include various enhancements like improved performance, resolution, and sometimes even additional content, but differs from a remake in that it still relies heavily on the original assets and engine of the source game. A port that contains a great deal of remade assets may sometimes be considered a remastering or partial remake."

From what we've seen so far on this game, the original assets have barely changed. The differences between the original are so superficial (the textures have slightly more detail) that there's no way this passes for a remake. It exactly fits the description of an enhanced port as shown above, so we should be using that terminology.

EDIT: I think this page was merged with the original Twilight Princess one while I was typing this — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.155.131.76 (talk) 18:45, 14 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi, 216.155.131.76. Your concerns are very similar to the ones Wonchop and I expressed in the section above. As I said there, we hardly know anything about the game at the moment; in other words, it may turn out that it is a fully fledged remake, not just an enhanced port. Who knows? For now, the page has been turned into a redirect and its contents have been merged into the original game's article, as you noticed. —zziccardi (talk) 23:24, 14 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

Nintendo EPD's role

edit

@Dissident93: I know what you mean, but, absent a source that explicitly says Nintendo EPD "assisted with production", I'm a bit uneasy stating that. It seems a little too close to original research for my liking; I'd rather play it safe and use the more general but perfectly accurate "co-developed" (especially since the Nintendo Life interview and YouTube videos make Nintendo's involvement seem substantial). Thoughts? —zziccardi (talk) 17:41, 8 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit

Is this worth mentioning? Neither Nintendo nor reliable sources have placed any emphasis on the feature, and it doesn't seem particularly noteworthy to me. —zziccardi (talk) 02:54, 11 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

I didn't revert this because I wasn't sure if it was true or not, but even if it is, it's still really not that notable. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 03:00, 11 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

German Review

edit

I recently saw that User:Maestro2016 tried to put a German review in the Reception section. While I agree with User:Dissident93's reason for reverting, I think it might be a good addition to this article's counterpart over on the German version of Wikipedia. From what I can tell using Google Chrome's translation feature, that review hasn't been used yet. --Super3588 (talk) 02:55, 3 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Super3588: Feel free to recommend the source on the German article's talk page. I'm sure editors there would be able to understand you even if Google Translate makes a mistake. (Don't forget—this is a collaborative project, so you're more than welcome to make changes yourself.) —zziccardi (talk) 14:20, 4 April 2016 (UTC)Reply
@Zziccardi: Done. Their talk page wasn't created yet, so we'll see if they see it or not. I also took what Google Translate spat out in German and stuck back in to translate it into English. It looked accurate enough, save a couple words (which could be because of their formal German definition). --Super3588 (talk) 22:57, 5 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

third release?

edit

the page says that TP is "the third game in the series released for wu". isnt this the second? BOTW was the third. unless theres some obscure game released somewhere? i cant find any info anywhere that mentions a game between WWHD and TPHD.

KRISHANKO (talk) 04:49, 8 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

KRISHANKO, I'm not sure if this (what I'm about to say) is whatever whoever added that meant when they said it, but Skyward Sword is available on the Wii U Virtual Console. It really shouldn't be counted, though, because then we'd have to count other games released on the Virtual Console like Ocarina of Time. Gestrid (talk) 06:46, 8 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

but thats just vc/backward compatibility (as you can use the wii disc, should you have it). it shouldnt count towards games released foremost for wu. because as you said, the other vc games that came out should also countKRISHANKO (talk) 08:29, 8 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

Merge discussion

edit

After clear consensus Talk:The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword HD, that page has now been merged into it's parent article The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword. I propose the discussion now onto this game. It appears relatively equal to SSHD's page in content and length, it similarly lacks it's reception section being fleshed out, and much of it seems unnecessarily stretched out and detailed in an attempt to justify the article's existence. If "Gameplay in The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess HD is largely unchanged from that in the original title", as are the graphics and artstyle, then what justifies this article? Mitchy Power (talk) 16:26, 19 January 2022 (UTC)Reply