Skip to content

Zelda: A Link Between Worlds Changed Slightly Because Of Nintendo 2DS

zelda_link_between_world_link

Eiji Aonuma has explained that The Legend of Zelda: A Link Between Worlds was tweaked late in development to better accommodate the recently released Nintendo 2DS console. However, Aonuma was quick to say that the game is definitely playable if you want to pursue the 2D route. He also reconfirmed that the game will be running at 60 frames per second. He says that the 3D effect is much more stable due to the higher frame rate.

“It’s not that you can’t play it with 2D, it’s just that it becomes clearer when you have the 3D effect on. We found out about the 2DS during development, not before, and we also made changes so that we were sure that you could still play and solve the puzzles only with 2D. It’s definitely still playable in 2D!”

“A Link Between Worlds is being developed with 60 frames per second, and previous Zelda titles were about half that, about 30fps. The reason for this is because the 3D effect is much more stable with a higher frame rate, with the 60fps. If it’s lower than it’s sometimes hard for your eyes to focus on the appropriate image. We think we’ve created a game that even those who found it difficult previously to see the 3D effect would be able to see it better and enjoy it more with this title.”

52 thoughts on “Zelda: A Link Between Worlds Changed Slightly Because Of Nintendo 2DS”

  1. I hope that most of the 3DS and WiiU games would be in 60 fps. Performance over graphics imo. I hope todays padawans would learn it soon.

    1. Patience young padawan, you need to understand that more options are needed to feel the force flew U. Dont get yourself to anger, it Sony and Microsoft you lead.

    2. +1

      Maybe U don’t speak for “EVERYONE” (the down syndromed are people, too) but I certainly agree. If I’m dishing out the extra money for a 3DS game, whose name was constructed on basis of “glasses free 3D” gimmick, I expect FULL stereoscopic 3D games.

    3. If they can’t handle time/production costs, then they should’ve weighed out the pros/cons before releasing. There’s no reason I or any other buyer should pay extra money for a mistake they now regret&don’t want to include.

    4. If a 2DS cost $20-30 less for not including 3D tech capacity, then I expect any game geared towards it or not including FULL stereoscopic 3D to be cheaper, as well. I refuse to pay full price or at all for lazy errors as such.

    1. Logic ain’t welcomed ’round these parts, Boy. Line up back with the rest of the herd if ya know what’s good for ye. *pulls out whip*

  2. Th 2DS I think will prove to be a money maker soon enough. I already have shown a couple of my friends the 2DS and it’s lower price point and they were interested for games such as Pokemon and Zelda. A lot of people don’t care about the 3D or even the way the console looks, they just wanna play the great games Nintendo puts out without paying for features they don’t need. I like it.

    1. You always have the option of turning off the 3D or blocking it entirely, I don’t see why those who are paying full price for a 3DS game to play what they promised the name would give us have to suffer for an error they now regret including.

    1. In battles I turn the 3D on and off to check the effect. I think everything’s just a little bit cleaner around the edges when 3D is on. Also, Victory Road looks really nice in 3D, it’s the only bit of the overworld that uses it.

  3. Man, this is a bit lame. The 2DS is going to hold back developers who actually want to use 3D to create something unique. There could have been some really interesting puzzles that utilized the 3D.

    1. Years ago, it was either Iwata or Miyamoto who mandated that ALL 3DS games be fully playable in 2D. The only thing Aonuma did was slightly tweak the game so that 2D play was even more comfortable. Nothing was taken away here. I’m sure if anyone has anything clever to use the 3D effect for, they’ll still use it.

      1. I wasn’t aware of that. Well, it does make sense for them to decide that, since some people simply can’t use the 3D feature due to eye problems and other reasons. Still, the decision to make all games playable in 2D kinda renders the 3D feature a complete gimmick, and an afterthought. Oh well..

        1. This is the same “Anonymous” from before. 3D is indeed a gimmick but Nintendo wanted to make games where the depth perception can be improved upon using 3D. So the gimmick is actually a way that developers can improve the player’s experience. I’ll site Super Mario 3D Land since even though you can get through the game in 2D, some areas are quite illusion heavy and the 3D effect, though not required, can be used to make the segments easier. I hope Russell (@rajgamemaster) sees this.

  4. You know what? I really like this. I own a 3DS XL and bought it for the games that were available at the time and because inevitably would need it for Pokemon (now). I almost never use the 3D effect, I think it is gimmicky and weird when it is forced. It felt shoved down my throat in Super Mario 3D Land, and I always dreaded playing those certain levels. While I would probably never buy a 2DS, I’m glad that developers are considering it, and making their games more accessible to those who don’t want to use the 3D effects

    1. I wouldn’t mind if the games geared more towards 2DS or w/o the inclusion of stereoscopic 3D altogether were cheaper. Just as the 2DS’s cheaper for strictly not including 3D tech, likewise I would expect the games w/o the feature to be cheaper, as well.

  5. Pingback: The Legend of Zelda: A Link Between Worlds: Änderungen am Spiel für 2DS vorgenommen | Gameplorer.de

  6. Pingback: Zelda Director Says Future Zelda Games May Not Run At 60 FPS | My Nintendo News

Leave a Reply

Discover more from My Nintendo News

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading