Talk:The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess HD

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess HD redirect.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find video game sources: "The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess HD" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk

Video games: Nintendo

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game

This redirect is supported by the Nintendo task force.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Cossacks (video games series) (2 participants)
Rat Race (video game) (7 participants)
Red Barrels (2 participants)
The Campaign Trail (Web Game) (23 participants)
Paper doll (video games) (5 participants)
TheoTown (10 participants; relisted)
Old Grandma Hardcore (6 participants; relisted)
WePlay AniMajor (2 participants; relisted)
Zero Hour (video game) (6 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Neccessary article?

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?

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

@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]

I mean, it's not wrong to write it that way, but the only roles they were credited for in-game are supervising roles and other minor things like manual editing and localization. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 21:09, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Shrugs. I guess it doesn't make much of a difference. —zziccardi (talk) 22:07, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Feel free to change it if you want though. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 00:07, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

On including the Wolf Link Amiibo quick-load functionality

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

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?

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

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]

Support - the minimal changes/response to the HD version can be covered pretty easily in original game's article just fine. The current article is extremely bloated with various ways that the HD version is the same or fluff like "and on this date, the amiibo was announced" type fluff. Sergecross73 msg me 17:10, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support - The content can easily be covered in the context of the original Twilight Princess article, especially once the large amount of overlap (and the aforementioned fluff) is trimmed out.--Martin IIIa (talk) 00:35, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — per rationale above. Roberth Martinez (talk) 01:06, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I mean yeah, obvious merge candidate. I have the same rationale as before in the SSHD discussion. Axem Titanium (talk) 04:00, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I agree that the changes are small and a separate article is unnecessary._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 19:14, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Can, when doing the redirect, someone leave in some of the categories, particularly those not in The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess per WP:INCOMPATIBLE? (Oinkers42) (talk) 03:15, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Why would they be incompatible though? Is there a requirement to categorize all games under the exact title they are released under for that system? _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 23:09, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Generally. Especially if the game was marketed as a separate title, years after the original's release. (Oinkers42) (talk) 15:30, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]