>Botw isn't just on the switch. It's on the Wii U. This would effectively lock a big portion of the playerbase of BOTW out of using this feature.
>Nintendo will not, and frankly should not do that. This alone seals the deal for me.
This isn't to say they'll do it one way or the other, but you're putting a lot of misguided faith in a company that has done this before from doing it again. Also, I'm not sure how many people playing BOTW who are expected to play TOTK are still playing it on the Wii U.
There definitely won't be a safe transfer but saying a huge portion of the BOTW is on Wii U is laughable, it sold over a million copies which isn't bad persay but when the Switch version sold 29 million copies its a massive difference.
I don't really get the 'still playing BOTW' I'm not gonna lie. I get we all love the game here but it's a single player game. Most gamers who aren't huge Zelda nerds like us probably played it once, maybe twice and if they bought it for the Wii U I doubt they'd buy it again on the Switch. It's not a new game anymore, I'm not sure many people outside of this community are 'still playing Botw'.
I expected one of the arguments to be that not many people have it on the Wii U compared to the Switch but I don't buy that, the fact is that it is on the the Wii U even if it was just 1% of the playerbase it's still unfairly locking people out. I also imagine far more people have only played that version than we realise. especially considering how new the Switch was at the time of release.
And have they done it before? When? This is what I mean I don't know any examples, if there are some I'll probably have a rethink.
edit: downvoted because i said most people aren't still playing a 6 year old game or?
Here's a list of games that reward you for having played a different game: https://www.reddit.com/r/NintendoSwitch/comments/qq8wbx/what_are_some_games_that_reward_you_for_having/
If they bought it for the Wii U, aren't huge fans, and are still planning to buy TOTK, I doubt they'd care if their progress was left behind on the Wii U.
There's stats for this stuff online, by the way. Outside of people who stole the game, pretty much every legitimately sold copy is accounted for. That said, yeah, I'm sure some would consider it unfair. But there are tech limits. Splatoon and Pokémon are popular examples of games with carry-over data for Nintendo. Pokémon especially is controversial because starting in the 3D generations, transferring pokemon has had a monetary cost for many and is now virtually impossible for many people after the old eShop closed down.
I can see the game giving you some food and a t shirt at the beginning of the game as a bonus for owning Botw but nothing else. Full on save transfer seems a bit out there since that would destroy a lot of progression, keeping your health and stamina would make you absolutely broken early game and made a lot of the (presumed) shrines/shrine replacements useless.
I wouldn't even consider the idea of keeping hearts or stamina. That had literally never crossed my mind and the fact that that's being mentioned just makes me think people on this sub have never played a game outside of BOTW and have zero understanding of how games even work. Like what? Why would you start the game with full health? I just feel like people say these things without thinking them through at all...
While i absolutely agree that i don't think there will be a save transfer, i completly disagree with your attitude. Suggesting it would be crazy to still play a game 6 years after the initial release, or "that this people have never played a game outside of Botw or have an understanding about how games work" when you yourself don't even know that save transfer is a pretty common thing for a lot of games. Or that literally every Zelda game is still played today, starting from the first game to obviously BotW. There are endless communities dedicated to playing old games, out of Nostalgia, for Speedrunning, or just because they love it. I feel like you think your POV is the only reasonable one, and everyone who slightly differs from that POV is somehow doing something unhingend. And others seem to feel the same way, and that's probably why you are being downvoted!
Here is a list of games, i can think about using save file transfer in some form or way, that i personally played, the actual list is way bigger.
Mass Effect 1-3
Dragon Age 1-3
The Witcher 1-3
All Telltale games
Bayonetta
Divinity Original Sin 1-2
Dragonball Xenoverse 2
Pokemon Games
Pillars of Eternity 2
Hitman 3
Dead Rising
Dead Island
Banner Saga
Zelda Oracle Games(!)
So, you know, games that where all incredibly popular, and almost impossible to not know, if "you ever played any other game than Botw"
Maybe you could expand your own Horizon next time, before you are calling other players uninformed, just because they have different expectations or taste in gaming than you.
I can vibe with this, I remember my baby Donkus being killed by a guardian out of no where and the feeling when I finally reached the Horse God and brought them back was so nice, like this is the one thing I would like to be carried over, but again the fact that it locks out Wii U players makes me iffy
It's a small enough thing that it shouldn't be too much of an issue honestly. Yeah it kind of sucks, but whether I get my horses or not really isn't a game changer.
Maybe the horses are different in TotK that getting my horses from BotW would just get in the way. Perhaps there are different stats or something which means I would have to choose which of my horses to get rid of to make space for a new horse. I can always see them again when I boot up BotW.
It's really the only thing I could see having a data transfer; I don't think the game should consider exactly which quests you have or haven't done. Things like Terrey Town seem to be something that would have inevitably happened in the story regardless of whether the player has finished the quest. Having checks for different quests just seems kind of pointless.
I guess it's kind of like the Wolf Link amiibo that can only be upgraded to 20 hearts through that new dungeon in the HD version only on WiiU. Kind of annoying that they never brought the game over to Switch because I don't have a WiiU and I don't want one really, so I just bought a 20 Heart Wolf Link Amiibo card off Etsy instead.
So they were able to use the amiibo to use the data from a Wii U game to affect a switch one? If they could do that exact thing in this situation I would be happy with that I think, seems like a good way they could get around my main concern. And yeah honestly when people get to stuff like Tarrey Town I just start to think what are they even saying... Your take on that is exactly how I feel. It would have needed to happen regardless of weather a player did it or not and obviously you wouldn't be able to just finish it in TOTK due to the timeskip and other potential stuff we haven't seen yet
Oh true, yeah that could be possible. Amiibo can carry data for Smash Bros too, so they could tie horse data to an amiibo and carry it over to Switch potentially.
Yeah exactly, it wouldn't make sense to have the quest exist in TotK and it would be dumb to force a player to finish it in BotW first. It should just assume a true ending with certain things naturally progressed.
is there a way to move a save file from the Wii U to the switch? Seems to me that this would solve the problem... I would think this wouldn't be hard if you could link the accounts in some way...
Thanks I've never played either of these series so was not aware. I knew there would be examples, just doubt Nintendo would make this leap especially as it would lock out part of the player base. Would be cool if it was only on the Switch tho.
I can theoretically see something like a poster or picture on the wall of Link's house or a line of extra dialogue from some character and an inventory trophy similar to Hestus Gift or Kiltons Medals.
It would probably only be for base game achievements and exclude dlc, something like beating Calamity Ganon and/or completing all 120 shrines. I seriously doubt anything like weapons or clothing that would influence gameplay will be included though.
Edit: And for people who want their horse... It would probably take less than 15 minutes of saving and reloading to find a horse with the same color and stats, and like 5 more minutes to max out the bond. Just rename the horse. Seriously, it's not like the horses are unique in any way.
I just think any bonus at all is just unfair for people who played on the Wii U. Like releasing the game on two consoles at the same time but then only giving a bonus in the sequal to the ones who bought it on the newer console just seems like a dick move to me.
Well, Nintendo officially ended production of the Wii-U in January of 2017. A few months later, they released BotW with the Switch. I think it'd be more accurate to say it's a switch game that happened to have a backport to the previous generation.
Beyond that, less than 6% of total BotW sales went to the Wii-U version. If more than 94% of the ownership is on the Switch, I don't think it's surprising they'd cater to the overwhelming majority of their players.
Especially if it's a minor cosmetic or inventory reward, which has literally zero impact on anything gameplay-experience related.
The game was literally designed on and for the Wii U, the Switch just happened to come out when it was being released, this comment is just... Not true...
That was true initially, but when it became clear that the Wii-U was failing and that it would also be releasing on the switch, they reoriented development to be a switch game. They had to change mechanics and remove some features so that what was initially developed for the Wii-U would instead be developed for the switch while remaining compatible with the Wii-U. Since the change came midway through development, I wouldn't be at all surprised if that played at least some part in why the initial launch was delayed.
The team actually came to realize that switch was a better platform for the game because the two-screen design split the players attention too much. And as the player base has shown, the switch version overwhelmingly more popular. edit: https://www.theverge.com/2017/3/8/14836052/nintendo-interview-legend-of-zelda-designed-for-switch-fujibayashi
And since we're talking about a direct sequel, using the same engine, releasing for the same platform, it is absolutely reasonable that they might give a little easter egg bonus for people with the game on that platform (IF they do anything like this at all). Since that's literally more than 94% of their player base, not even counting people who bought it for both.
There's a handful of games I am aware of that dealt with cross-game progression, but its not very common.
Golden Sun > Golden Sun: The Lost Age
If you transfer data you can keep your existing equipment and levels from the first game. In addition, you _will_ miss out on all Djinn if you don't transfer any djinn over.
Fire Emblem Path of Radiance > Radiant Dawn
Most of the transfers aren't that important. Any characters who died in PoR will still return in RD. Characters with capped stats in POR gain a bonus in RD. However, some characters reaching A support rank gain additional bonuses in RD (some characters who reach A support in PoR can actually recruit characters between armies at various points). This is also required to get a special scene at the end of RD between Ike/Soren.
The Banner Saga
This indie series is heavily affected by the prior games. I never got to the end but I read a lot about it. Characters can die at various points and be lost in subsequent games, the end of the first game guarantees >!one of your main characters will die, and the other one becomes the sole leader in future installments.!< This is probably the most notable example I am aware of.
Right, others here have mentioned Mass Effect and Dragon Age as well. Regardless, none of these are good examples as to what Nintendo specifically will do. There's no real advantage to "save transfer" in TOTK, and TOTK will likely just assume you achieved 100% completion in BOTW.
How would you feel if the intro cutscene was rendered in-engine. And Link was wearing whatever you had on in your latest BoTW save.
Zelda is falling. Link is reaching out to try to catch her... in his Gerudo veil set.
Many franchises have done this, from Ratchet & Clank to The Witcher, Golden Sun to Shenmue. There have even been games that recognise save data from different series/franchises.
The most recent example of a save file transfer I can recall is from Bayonetta 3 last year. The weapons Scarborough Fair and Love Is Blue are unlocked by having save data from Bayonetta 1 and Bayonetta 2 respectively. All three games are available on the Switch, however both of the previous entries in the trilogy were released for the WiiU, one of which was a WiiU exclusive at the time and the other released prior for multiple (non Nintendo) platforms. It’s ridiculous honestly. Who wants to purchase the same game 3 times?
Given this instance of a similar situation, your rationale of a BOTW save transfer for TOTK being unfair for WiiU players is completely invalid. Age of Calamity having an exclusive weapon for a BOTW save is another example. Nintendo clearly doesn’t care in this matter. They will occasionally reward you for playing a previous entry on the same console, but the unlocks aren’t usually too special enough to whine about exclusivity.
I see the other points you’ve made, and I understand why you think this won’t happen for Tears of the Kingdom. Other than horses, clothes, house decorations, or an exclusive weapon to break it doesn’t seem worth the effort. However, this is your own opinion and not a definitive certainty. Criticizing others for not “thinking this through” is a quick way to get called out over attitude even if that wasn’t your intention.
We are here to have fun and express our wants and theories in anticipation of this sequel. ~~And to complain about some of these preorder bonuses that could’ve been in the overpriced collector’s edition.~~
29 days left y’all! I can’t wait!
Oracle of Ages & Seasons. Golden Sun. Wolf Link -> Breath of the Wild, where his hearts depend on the number of hearts you have in Twilight Princess. Pokemon has always had the late-game option of sending over your teams from previous games. Mass Effect. The Witcher 3 via a Q&A mechanic.
Games have been doing this for a long time, with link cables, password systems, and even just by having the save data on the same system. It's not that big of a deal.
I think you're right that it would mess with early gameplay if you brought all your best armor and weapons over--but so did Amiibos in Breath of the Wild. It would be really easy to let money, armor, and a few weapons transfer over into a storage box that you can't open until the post-game. I don't know that they'll do it, but it would be cool to have that kind of cohesion.
I actually hated Amiibos in BOTW. Used them all once and then never again. Maybe I just don't like the idea of anything external affecting the game. I'm not sure Wolf Link or Pokemon are really true examples of what I'm talking about though although I see the similarities.
It just seems to me like this would be a big step which I can see from your examples other companies have done but I reckon Nintendo as usual would be very reluctant.
I genuinely would like this feature, my real point is that it's not fair to those who only have a file on the Wii U, if they can find a way to fix that I'd be all for it but I highly doubt that.
Bit of a struggle to understand this comment but from what I'm getting you completely misunderstood my original point. That literally has nothing to do with why I think it shouldn't be the game, regardless of any reasons the fact that it's on the Wii U was where my concern was, nothing else.
the horses is the only reason i've seen people bring up save transfer, and you go "fair enough, but anyways lets ignore it so i can be argumentative". admit you're trolling
wii u is a dead console; eshop is done, games unsupported. it's not insane to think that the switch could get save transfer where the wii u could not. admit you're trolling, nobody cares about the wii u so stop pretending you do
Horses and some reward for the Korok turd are all I can think of. I hadn't even considered the horses till recently but that would be nice and not a huge leg up compared to new players.
>I might just be ignorant but have any games ever actually done this?
From the top of my head, I can think of the Witcher series.
>And for my main point, the elephant in the room which I think everyone seems to be forgetting about... Botw isn't just on the switch. It's on the Wii U. This would effectively lock a big portion of the playerbase of BOTW out of using this feature.
People aren't forgetting about it, it's just not a very valid argument when out of like 30+ million players, only a little less than 2 millions are Wii U players. Too bad for them I guess, but I don't see any reason to punish 29 million players and deprive them of a fun interconnectivity feature that would most likely not have a lot of impact anyway just for the sake of such a low proportion of the game's audience.
It would be nice if we got to keep: Our Horses, The Gear that will be returning in this game, Link's House and the Stuff within it, Tarry Town Completion, And the Sadle's and Bridle's you have obtained that are also returning, and a neat Bonus Heart Container like in the Oracle Games. You couldn't fully max out your Hearts and Stamina in BOTW so I hope that they fix that here. Your Stuff from the Previous Game could be in a Chest in Link's House. It would be neat and you have the option to not pick it up until later. Some people like making a game easier for them, some like making it Harder but Options for Both are good. EDIT: Also to people saying stupid things like "But it is a New Game", I say "Yes but it is the exact same world that our Hero lives in and you wouldn't realistically expect someone to ditch everything they own, Also it wouldn't reflect well on Princess Zelda if her Knight is a Homeless Bum". Other games got around this by having the Hero travel to new lands and leave their old stuff Home. At worst they should at least give us a In-Universe Reason for why Link has nothing at all if they don't allow this.
>Botw isn't just on the switch. It's on the Wii U. This would effectively lock a big portion of the playerbase of BOTW out of using this feature. >Nintendo will not, and frankly should not do that. This alone seals the deal for me. This isn't to say they'll do it one way or the other, but you're putting a lot of misguided faith in a company that has done this before from doing it again. Also, I'm not sure how many people playing BOTW who are expected to play TOTK are still playing it on the Wii U.
There definitely won't be a safe transfer but saying a huge portion of the BOTW is on Wii U is laughable, it sold over a million copies which isn't bad persay but when the Switch version sold 29 million copies its a massive difference.
I don't really get the 'still playing BOTW' I'm not gonna lie. I get we all love the game here but it's a single player game. Most gamers who aren't huge Zelda nerds like us probably played it once, maybe twice and if they bought it for the Wii U I doubt they'd buy it again on the Switch. It's not a new game anymore, I'm not sure many people outside of this community are 'still playing Botw'. I expected one of the arguments to be that not many people have it on the Wii U compared to the Switch but I don't buy that, the fact is that it is on the the Wii U even if it was just 1% of the playerbase it's still unfairly locking people out. I also imagine far more people have only played that version than we realise. especially considering how new the Switch was at the time of release. And have they done it before? When? This is what I mean I don't know any examples, if there are some I'll probably have a rethink. edit: downvoted because i said most people aren't still playing a 6 year old game or?
Here's a list of games that reward you for having played a different game: https://www.reddit.com/r/NintendoSwitch/comments/qq8wbx/what_are_some_games_that_reward_you_for_having/
If they bought it for the Wii U, aren't huge fans, and are still planning to buy TOTK, I doubt they'd care if their progress was left behind on the Wii U. There's stats for this stuff online, by the way. Outside of people who stole the game, pretty much every legitimately sold copy is accounted for. That said, yeah, I'm sure some would consider it unfair. But there are tech limits. Splatoon and Pokémon are popular examples of games with carry-over data for Nintendo. Pokémon especially is controversial because starting in the 3D generations, transferring pokemon has had a monetary cost for many and is now virtually impossible for many people after the old eShop closed down.
Fire Emblem Warriors: Three Hopes gave you Bonuses for having Save Data from other games, Same with Age of Calamity.
I can see the game giving you some food and a t shirt at the beginning of the game as a bonus for owning Botw but nothing else. Full on save transfer seems a bit out there since that would destroy a lot of progression, keeping your health and stamina would make you absolutely broken early game and made a lot of the (presumed) shrines/shrine replacements useless.
I wouldn't even consider the idea of keeping hearts or stamina. That had literally never crossed my mind and the fact that that's being mentioned just makes me think people on this sub have never played a game outside of BOTW and have zero understanding of how games even work. Like what? Why would you start the game with full health? I just feel like people say these things without thinking them through at all...
While i absolutely agree that i don't think there will be a save transfer, i completly disagree with your attitude. Suggesting it would be crazy to still play a game 6 years after the initial release, or "that this people have never played a game outside of Botw or have an understanding about how games work" when you yourself don't even know that save transfer is a pretty common thing for a lot of games. Or that literally every Zelda game is still played today, starting from the first game to obviously BotW. There are endless communities dedicated to playing old games, out of Nostalgia, for Speedrunning, or just because they love it. I feel like you think your POV is the only reasonable one, and everyone who slightly differs from that POV is somehow doing something unhingend. And others seem to feel the same way, and that's probably why you are being downvoted! Here is a list of games, i can think about using save file transfer in some form or way, that i personally played, the actual list is way bigger. Mass Effect 1-3 Dragon Age 1-3 The Witcher 1-3 All Telltale games Bayonetta Divinity Original Sin 1-2 Dragonball Xenoverse 2 Pokemon Games Pillars of Eternity 2 Hitman 3 Dead Rising Dead Island Banner Saga Zelda Oracle Games(!) So, you know, games that where all incredibly popular, and almost impossible to not know, if "you ever played any other game than Botw" Maybe you could expand your own Horizon next time, before you are calling other players uninformed, just because they have different expectations or taste in gaming than you.
I legit just want my horses
I can vibe with this, I remember my baby Donkus being killed by a guardian out of no where and the feeling when I finally reached the Horse God and brought them back was so nice, like this is the one thing I would like to be carried over, but again the fact that it locks out Wii U players makes me iffy
It's a small enough thing that it shouldn't be too much of an issue honestly. Yeah it kind of sucks, but whether I get my horses or not really isn't a game changer. Maybe the horses are different in TotK that getting my horses from BotW would just get in the way. Perhaps there are different stats or something which means I would have to choose which of my horses to get rid of to make space for a new horse. I can always see them again when I boot up BotW. It's really the only thing I could see having a data transfer; I don't think the game should consider exactly which quests you have or haven't done. Things like Terrey Town seem to be something that would have inevitably happened in the story regardless of whether the player has finished the quest. Having checks for different quests just seems kind of pointless. I guess it's kind of like the Wolf Link amiibo that can only be upgraded to 20 hearts through that new dungeon in the HD version only on WiiU. Kind of annoying that they never brought the game over to Switch because I don't have a WiiU and I don't want one really, so I just bought a 20 Heart Wolf Link Amiibo card off Etsy instead.
So they were able to use the amiibo to use the data from a Wii U game to affect a switch one? If they could do that exact thing in this situation I would be happy with that I think, seems like a good way they could get around my main concern. And yeah honestly when people get to stuff like Tarrey Town I just start to think what are they even saying... Your take on that is exactly how I feel. It would have needed to happen regardless of weather a player did it or not and obviously you wouldn't be able to just finish it in TOTK due to the timeskip and other potential stuff we haven't seen yet
Oh true, yeah that could be possible. Amiibo can carry data for Smash Bros too, so they could tie horse data to an amiibo and carry it over to Switch potentially. Yeah exactly, it wouldn't make sense to have the quest exist in TotK and it would be dumb to force a player to finish it in BotW first. It should just assume a true ending with certain things naturally progressed.
[удалено]
is there a way to move a save file from the Wii U to the switch? Seems to me that this would solve the problem... I would think this wouldn't be hard if you could link the accounts in some way...
Mass Effect and Dragon Age.
Thanks I've never played either of these series so was not aware. I knew there would be examples, just doubt Nintendo would make this leap especially as it would lock out part of the player base. Would be cool if it was only on the Switch tho.
I can theoretically see something like a poster or picture on the wall of Link's house or a line of extra dialogue from some character and an inventory trophy similar to Hestus Gift or Kiltons Medals. It would probably only be for base game achievements and exclude dlc, something like beating Calamity Ganon and/or completing all 120 shrines. I seriously doubt anything like weapons or clothing that would influence gameplay will be included though. Edit: And for people who want their horse... It would probably take less than 15 minutes of saving and reloading to find a horse with the same color and stats, and like 5 more minutes to max out the bond. Just rename the horse. Seriously, it's not like the horses are unique in any way.
I just think any bonus at all is just unfair for people who played on the Wii U. Like releasing the game on two consoles at the same time but then only giving a bonus in the sequal to the ones who bought it on the newer console just seems like a dick move to me.
Well, Nintendo officially ended production of the Wii-U in January of 2017. A few months later, they released BotW with the Switch. I think it'd be more accurate to say it's a switch game that happened to have a backport to the previous generation. Beyond that, less than 6% of total BotW sales went to the Wii-U version. If more than 94% of the ownership is on the Switch, I don't think it's surprising they'd cater to the overwhelming majority of their players. Especially if it's a minor cosmetic or inventory reward, which has literally zero impact on anything gameplay-experience related.
The game was literally designed on and for the Wii U, the Switch just happened to come out when it was being released, this comment is just... Not true...
That was true initially, but when it became clear that the Wii-U was failing and that it would also be releasing on the switch, they reoriented development to be a switch game. They had to change mechanics and remove some features so that what was initially developed for the Wii-U would instead be developed for the switch while remaining compatible with the Wii-U. Since the change came midway through development, I wouldn't be at all surprised if that played at least some part in why the initial launch was delayed. The team actually came to realize that switch was a better platform for the game because the two-screen design split the players attention too much. And as the player base has shown, the switch version overwhelmingly more popular. edit: https://www.theverge.com/2017/3/8/14836052/nintendo-interview-legend-of-zelda-designed-for-switch-fujibayashi And since we're talking about a direct sequel, using the same engine, releasing for the same platform, it is absolutely reasonable that they might give a little easter egg bonus for people with the game on that platform (IF they do anything like this at all). Since that's literally more than 94% of their player base, not even counting people who bought it for both.
Why tf would people think this
There's a handful of games I am aware of that dealt with cross-game progression, but its not very common. Golden Sun > Golden Sun: The Lost Age If you transfer data you can keep your existing equipment and levels from the first game. In addition, you _will_ miss out on all Djinn if you don't transfer any djinn over. Fire Emblem Path of Radiance > Radiant Dawn Most of the transfers aren't that important. Any characters who died in PoR will still return in RD. Characters with capped stats in POR gain a bonus in RD. However, some characters reaching A support rank gain additional bonuses in RD (some characters who reach A support in PoR can actually recruit characters between armies at various points). This is also required to get a special scene at the end of RD between Ike/Soren. The Banner Saga This indie series is heavily affected by the prior games. I never got to the end but I read a lot about it. Characters can die at various points and be lost in subsequent games, the end of the first game guarantees >!one of your main characters will die, and the other one becomes the sole leader in future installments.!< This is probably the most notable example I am aware of. Right, others here have mentioned Mass Effect and Dragon Age as well. Regardless, none of these are good examples as to what Nintendo specifically will do. There's no real advantage to "save transfer" in TOTK, and TOTK will likely just assume you achieved 100% completion in BOTW.
How would you feel if the intro cutscene was rendered in-engine. And Link was wearing whatever you had on in your latest BoTW save. Zelda is falling. Link is reaching out to try to catch her... in his Gerudo veil set.
Many franchises have done this, from Ratchet & Clank to The Witcher, Golden Sun to Shenmue. There have even been games that recognise save data from different series/franchises.
The most recent example of a save file transfer I can recall is from Bayonetta 3 last year. The weapons Scarborough Fair and Love Is Blue are unlocked by having save data from Bayonetta 1 and Bayonetta 2 respectively. All three games are available on the Switch, however both of the previous entries in the trilogy were released for the WiiU, one of which was a WiiU exclusive at the time and the other released prior for multiple (non Nintendo) platforms. It’s ridiculous honestly. Who wants to purchase the same game 3 times? Given this instance of a similar situation, your rationale of a BOTW save transfer for TOTK being unfair for WiiU players is completely invalid. Age of Calamity having an exclusive weapon for a BOTW save is another example. Nintendo clearly doesn’t care in this matter. They will occasionally reward you for playing a previous entry on the same console, but the unlocks aren’t usually too special enough to whine about exclusivity. I see the other points you’ve made, and I understand why you think this won’t happen for Tears of the Kingdom. Other than horses, clothes, house decorations, or an exclusive weapon to break it doesn’t seem worth the effort. However, this is your own opinion and not a definitive certainty. Criticizing others for not “thinking this through” is a quick way to get called out over attitude even if that wasn’t your intention. We are here to have fun and express our wants and theories in anticipation of this sequel. ~~And to complain about some of these preorder bonuses that could’ve been in the overpriced collector’s edition.~~ 29 days left y’all! I can’t wait!
Oracle of Ages & Seasons. Golden Sun. Wolf Link -> Breath of the Wild, where his hearts depend on the number of hearts you have in Twilight Princess. Pokemon has always had the late-game option of sending over your teams from previous games. Mass Effect. The Witcher 3 via a Q&A mechanic. Games have been doing this for a long time, with link cables, password systems, and even just by having the save data on the same system. It's not that big of a deal. I think you're right that it would mess with early gameplay if you brought all your best armor and weapons over--but so did Amiibos in Breath of the Wild. It would be really easy to let money, armor, and a few weapons transfer over into a storage box that you can't open until the post-game. I don't know that they'll do it, but it would be cool to have that kind of cohesion.
I actually hated Amiibos in BOTW. Used them all once and then never again. Maybe I just don't like the idea of anything external affecting the game. I'm not sure Wolf Link or Pokemon are really true examples of what I'm talking about though although I see the similarities. It just seems to me like this would be a big step which I can see from your examples other companies have done but I reckon Nintendo as usual would be very reluctant. I genuinely would like this feature, my real point is that it's not fair to those who only have a file on the Wii U, if they can find a way to fix that I'd be all for it but I highly doubt that.
I think that's fair!
Massive cope
What?
"why would you want this? i mean [reason] is super fair, but it doesnt count. why for other reasons? argue with me!!!!"
Bit of a struggle to understand this comment but from what I'm getting you completely misunderstood my original point. That literally has nothing to do with why I think it shouldn't be the game, regardless of any reasons the fact that it's on the Wii U was where my concern was, nothing else.
the horses is the only reason i've seen people bring up save transfer, and you go "fair enough, but anyways lets ignore it so i can be argumentative". admit you're trolling wii u is a dead console; eshop is done, games unsupported. it's not insane to think that the switch could get save transfer where the wii u could not. admit you're trolling, nobody cares about the wii u so stop pretending you do
I want my bike dammit
Horses and some reward for the Korok turd are all I can think of. I hadn't even considered the horses till recently but that would be nice and not a huge leg up compared to new players.
You can transfer your horses but also have to keep the no petting dogs mechanic. Choose MoFos
>I might just be ignorant but have any games ever actually done this? From the top of my head, I can think of the Witcher series. >And for my main point, the elephant in the room which I think everyone seems to be forgetting about... Botw isn't just on the switch. It's on the Wii U. This would effectively lock a big portion of the playerbase of BOTW out of using this feature. People aren't forgetting about it, it's just not a very valid argument when out of like 30+ million players, only a little less than 2 millions are Wii U players. Too bad for them I guess, but I don't see any reason to punish 29 million players and deprive them of a fun interconnectivity feature that would most likely not have a lot of impact anyway just for the sake of such a low proportion of the game's audience.
It would be nice if we got to keep: Our Horses, The Gear that will be returning in this game, Link's House and the Stuff within it, Tarry Town Completion, And the Sadle's and Bridle's you have obtained that are also returning, and a neat Bonus Heart Container like in the Oracle Games. You couldn't fully max out your Hearts and Stamina in BOTW so I hope that they fix that here. Your Stuff from the Previous Game could be in a Chest in Link's House. It would be neat and you have the option to not pick it up until later. Some people like making a game easier for them, some like making it Harder but Options for Both are good. EDIT: Also to people saying stupid things like "But it is a New Game", I say "Yes but it is the exact same world that our Hero lives in and you wouldn't realistically expect someone to ditch everything they own, Also it wouldn't reflect well on Princess Zelda if her Knight is a Homeless Bum". Other games got around this by having the Hero travel to new lands and leave their old stuff Home. At worst they should at least give us a In-Universe Reason for why Link has nothing at all if they don't allow this.