we lost camera controls in TP. And the TP team isn't doing this game. Hence, no reason to expect it. you generally need two analog sticks for full manual control. And I'm pretty sure if Nintendo's main zelda team couldn't figure out a way to do it well, then this team might have some trouble to.

OP deserves a cookie for use of the phrase "waggleport ruminations"

we lost camera controls in TP. And the TP team isn't doing this game. Hence, no reason to expect it. you generally need two analog sticks for full manual control. And I'm pretty sure if Nintendo's main zelda team couldn't figure out a way to do it well, then this team might have some trouble to. After playing TP, I now feel that full control over the camera really was superflous for that type of game. 90% of the time I wanted to change the camera I wanted to put it straight behind me to line up a jump or whatever and I could just tap 'c' and have it exactly where I wanted more easily than if I had complete control over the camera anyway (and I now find myself missing it in other free-roaming 3D games that have full camera control instead). If they allowed you to double tap 'c' or something have it go a side-view, I wouldn't have missed free-control camera even once I don't think.

Oh man this is going to be a horrible decision. Replay Okami with waggle controls or with Shiranui skin?

the term 'waggleport' is awesome. The conceit, however, is not.

mmm, no new stuff... setting this zelda-esque game at 35 dollars would really rain money IMO. shit, I'd buy it for 35 dollars...

Camera controls could easily be done with the IR cursor. You could hold a button (probably C) and move the cursor to the sides of the screen to move the camera. It would be the same exact principle: right side of screen = right on stick. It could actually work better since your fingers are still over the main buttons being used.

Camera controls could easily be done with the IR cursor. You could hold a button (probably C) and move the cursor to the sides of the screen to move the camera. It would be the same exact principle: right side of screen = right on stick. It could actually work better since your fingers are still over the main buttons being used. That's exactly how I expected the camera to work in TP. I was really annoyed when it didn't.

Okami was overlong. There's a strong chance it was designed as a trilogy, and that the last two-thirds of the game were shoehorned in due to the imminent closure of Clover Studios. Either way, much of it feels like filler, yet it is probably worth a rental just to let its aesthetic make an impression.

How 'bout some actual information? IGN did an interview with one of the Ready at Dawn guys. Apparently Clover (or anyone who worked on the first Okami) isn't involved, and the content isn't changing one whit, aside from the controls. No news on how the non-painting bits control yet. http://wii.ign.com/articles/828/828620p1.html No new content? No thanks, I'm not buying the EXACT same game again just for new controls.

I'll think about it if it's a budget title. But yeah, no new content and probably no graphical changes is pretty bullshit.

Graphical changes may have been a bit uncalled for. Perhaps Capcom could have fixed the image tear.

Okami was overlong. There's a strong chance it was designed as a trilogy, and that the last two-thirds of the game were shoehorned in due to the imminent closure of Clover Studios. Either way, much of it feels like filler, yet it is probably worth a rental just to let its aesthetic make an impression. I don't think Clover Studios knew they were going to close down after the project. In fact, I'm pretty sure they closed because Okami was such a flop. I think the ending felt like a cliffhanger more than an Indigo Prophecy-esque "shit we're only going to make one let's just shove everything into the end."

Okami was overlong. There's a strong chance it was designed as a trilogy, and that the last two-thirds of the game were shoehorned in due to the imminent closure of Clover Studios. Either way, much of it feels like filler, yet it is probably worth a rental just to let its aesthetic make an impression. I don't think Clover Studios knew they were going to close down after the project. In fact, I'm pretty sure they closed because Okami was such a flop. I think the ending felt like a cliffhanger more than an Indigo Prophecy-esque "shit we're only going to make one let's just shove everything into the end." I thought the game was ending about 1/3 in. I experienced the same sensation about 2/3 in. At 3/3, the prospect of anything less than instant closure felt exasperating to me. You may be right about Clover Studios history, I will consult interviews. Gamasutra will be useful. Fuck Indigo Prophecy.

Cool. I loved this game. I shall purchase this port+.

All I want is for them to add widescreen support.

Well this is good news. I played the PS2 version for about an hour or so, but hated the paintbrush parts (I'm terrible at working the stick ), so the Wii version is probably a rental in the very least.

Update! Capcom responds to 'quick and dirty port' accusations. http://uk.wii.ign.com/articles/830/830125p1.html A few points here... I get the issues, I really do, but people seem to be missing a few things. We selected Ready at Dawn to do the port. These guys are all ex-Naughty Dog and ex-Blizzard, and they have already shipped their own titles that have ridiculously high review scores and sales (and have more on the way). Their attention to detail and technical prowess is among the best of any team I've ever worked with. If we wanted a cheap and dirty port, I could have turned around and picked any one of 50 houses and gotten it done for less and perhaps more quickly. Clearly, that wasn't the approach we sought for a variety of reasons (for the fans, for the reputation of our company, for the potential of the product, etc.). Lastly, if this were a quick cash in, let's face it, there's TONS of other products that had higher sales on other platforms we could have chosen to port, quickly and cheaply. Okami, as great as it was, wasn't a huge seller on PS2 such that its quick and dirty port would be assured "sales success" on a new platform. We picked a huge game (read: expensive, especially on testing costs), with a ton of moving parts. So, on the contrary, we have a lot to prove with this game and I know we, and RAD are up to the task. I apologize if I bristle at the accusation that this is a cheap port, but I do. Given that the only port we've done to date was RE4, which has a 90+ gamerankings score and provided AMAZING value for the platform, has this really been Capcom's modus operendi such that this allegation should be leveled at us? Zack & Wiki is getting better reviews than just about anything you'll see this year on Wii, except possibly Galaxy. Shovelware is not what we do. As I've said in prior interviews, we're getting the game up and running first. The game is enormous. If after we have everything working correctly, cleanly and as desired so as not to "break" the amazing experience that is Okami, we will worry about potential enhancements. As we are NOT at that point in the process yet, we are loathe to even mention any potential changes or enhancements for fear of disappointing the fans/media. So for now, if you MUST assume the worst, assume that you will have an amazing 40-60 hour adventure that is one of gaming's most impressive pieces of art to play in fantastic new ways. If you want to hope for the best, well, perhaps we'll have more to say in a few months, but for now we're going to have to ask for your patience. So they're not promising anything right now but maybe we're getting more than we thought.

Refreshing to see someone being passionate about the game they're working on, rather than like they're reading a PR script.

Refreshing to see someone being passionate about the game they're working on, rather than like they're reading a PR script. truly. that actually felt good to read.

Yeah, wow, that guy is to the point. "Shut the hell up and give us a few months."

This is fairly minor, but one thing I'd like to see is if they can redo the tree 'models' so that they aren't simply flat sprites. I didn't notice it often, but when I did it was fairly jarring.

Nice response from capcom.

This is fairly minor, but one thing I'd like to see is if they can redo the tree 'models' so that they aren't simply flat sprites. I didn't notice it often, but when I did it was fairly jarring. I thought it was only the black trees at the start that you had to restore that were only sprites. Lots of them were choppable and thus had to be 3D. I remember noticing the sprite-trees for the first time, I'd been playing for a long time already and I finally noticed - "hey, those neat-looking trees are actually flat!"

This is fairly minor, but one thing I'd like to see is if they can redo the tree 'models' so that they aren't simply flat sprites. I didn't notice it often, but when I did it was fairly jarring. I thought it was only the black trees at the start that you had to restore that were only sprites. Lots of them were choppable and thus had to be 3D. I remember noticing the sprite-trees for the first time, I'd been playing for a long time already and I finally noticed - "hey, those neat-looking trees are actually flat!" All of the trees that you can make grow are flat. The ones that are choppable are sprites as well, if you rotate the camera while they're falling they remain exactly the same even though the world shifts around them.