Author Topic: Zelda Twilight Princess .. Wii vs Gamecube  (Read 321 times)

June 25, 2014, 01:36:21 PM
Read 321 times

monjici

  • *****
  • Information Offline
  • Hero Member
  • Posts: 743
Hi,
I'm sure there is at least one Zelda fan here.
Anybody has any experience playing both Wii and Gamecube versions of Twilight Princess? I played a bit with the Wii version but didn't really like the controls. I was wondering if the GC version would be a better fit for me.

Thanks.

June 25, 2014, 01:45:54 PM
Reply #1

larryinc64

  • Custom Title
  • *
  • Information Offline
  • Omega
  • Cover Guru
  • Posts: 3807
  • Motament
    • Motament (My Art)
Everything is flipped in the GameCube version.
Link is Left handed, but to accommodate most people, he was made Right handed in the Wii version. This for some reason meant they had to flip everything.
The GameCube version lacks widescreen and controls like Wind Waker, If I remember this correctly.

June 25, 2014, 01:50:55 PM
Reply #2

Arseen

  • Amiibo lover extraordinaire
  • *
  • Information Offline
  • This one has about 10 percent of all posts
  • Oversight
  • Posts: 20562
I have only played bit of the NGC version, but the controls more nicely IMHO.

Only downsides are (I believe as I have not really played it) that the is only one item slot (Wii has 3) and hookshot and arrowaiming is harder on controller.

June 25, 2014, 02:46:39 PM
Reply #3

Megatron

  • *******
  • Information Offline
  • Devoted Member
  • Posts: 1718
  • "...I still function!"
    • Email
So it's already been said, but the game is flipped.  To be fair, the game started as a Gamecube game and was ported to Wii.  But the entire world is a mirror image.  If in the wii version a door is on the right, it's on the left in the GC version.  So if you're using a guide or walkthrough, make sure you're looking at the correct version.  And Link being left handed is a character trait that was blasphemy to remove...this is coming from an actual left hander.

-  The Wii version uses the Wiimote, which means it has a totally different control scheme. One advantage is that this allows for more accurate aiming with the bow and arrow.
- The Gamecube has free camera control, whereas the Wii version does not
- There are three slots for items in the Wii version, whereas the Gamecube version has only two
- The Wii has a widescreen 16:9 option, whereas the Gamecube only allows for 4:3

Other than that, they are pretty much the same.  The Wii version is a hell of a lot cheaper, but if you're like me, I hate the wii mote (and motion controls in general) and would rather play with a standard controller.  The Wii version MUST use the wii mote and nunchuck, no alternate controllers allowed.

There's also little stuff, like being able to use your shield on horseback, rotate the c stick for a swing attack and growl as a wolf by pressing B.  All these are GC exclusives.  Minor stuff, and kind of pointless, but it feels like a more controllable and interactive game. IMO.
« Last Edit: June 25, 2014, 02:49:33 PM by Megatron »

June 25, 2014, 02:58:19 PM
Reply #4

monjici

  • *****
  • Information Offline
  • Hero Member
  • Posts: 743
Is it a big handicap to have less item slots? I guess it was a cheap way of fitting stuff on the screen.

I still don't understand why they didn't make more GC games widescreen, especially for late games. Movies have been widescreen for quite a while!

June 25, 2014, 03:01:35 PM
Reply #5

Megatron

  • *******
  • Information Offline
  • Devoted Member
  • Posts: 1718
  • "...I still function!"
    • Email
I played the GC version first, never noticed it.  It just means you have to access your item screen more often.  For me it was a small price to have a more controlled environment.  As swinging the wii mote every time you attack can get tedious, and unlike SKyward Sword, it is very sloppy and imprecise.  But no, I never felt handicapped by having less slots.

June 25, 2014, 06:21:05 PM
Reply #6

Jeff

  • ***
  • Information Offline
  • Full Member
  • Posts: 186
    • Email
It is possible to force gamecube games to render in 16:9. It requires installing a backup launcher on a wii however.

June 25, 2014, 06:42:24 PM
Reply #7

Mick Dundee

  • ******
  • Information Offline
  • Dedicated Member
  • Posts: 1066
Just play the Gamecube version. (If possible) I enjoyed it way more. Its neat to see how much they pushed that little system with graphics at the end of its  life cycle.

June 25, 2014, 06:58:06 PM
Reply #8

monjici

  • *****
  • Information Offline
  • Hero Member
  • Posts: 743
It is possible to force gamecube games to render in 16:9. It requires installing a backup launcher on a wii however.

The real 16:9 or just the stretched 4:3?

June 25, 2014, 07:10:11 PM
Reply #9

Jeff

  • ***
  • Information Offline
  • Full Member
  • Posts: 186
    • Email
It is possible to force gamecube games to render in 16:9. It requires installing a backup launcher on a wii however.

The real 16:9 or just the stretched 4:3?
Real. Once in a while there will be glitches/pop ins, but overall it works well. Here's a video I made about it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B55nNrtTiL0
(btw, don't use swiss. I can send you instructions if you're still interested.)

June 25, 2014, 07:11:23 PM
Reply #10

MaSHoe

  • ***
  • Information Offline
  • Full Member
  • Posts: 230
    • Email
It is possible to force gamecube games to render in 16:9. It requires installing a backup launcher on a wii however.

The real 16:9 or just the stretched 4:3?

The only thing that will be stretched would be hud icons.

June 25, 2014, 10:49:56 PM
Reply #11

Ozzy_98

  • *****
  • Information Offline
  • Hero Member
  • Posts: 637
    • Ozzy's Blog
Nothing gets streached, but you can have some major glitches in most games.  Parts of the screen drawn, parts not.  Most huds will stay in the middle and wont draw all the way to the edges.  Some games it's not bad on, others it's unusable.
I still don't understand why they didn't make more GC games widescreen, especially for late games. Movies have been widescreen for quite a while!
I think some of the games were already pushing hardware limits, having more activity on screen would mean more processing needed.  And no one wants slowdown on modern games.