Talk:Cadence of Hyrule

Not the first time Nintendo has given out their IP to an independent studio
This article states: "While Nintendo has worked with larger third-party studios and publishers before on titles related to its intellectual property, such as with Ubisoft, Altus, and Capcom, Cadence of Hyrule is the first time that Nintendo has given out its properties to a small independent developer." and cites this article from IGN.

I am not certain if IGN even explicitly states this, but another Wikipedia article disproves this statement: List of Nintendo development teams (jump to "Affiliate companies")

On that list, multiple studios happen to be small and independent and have worked with key Nintendo IP, such as Next Level Games which is under 100 employees, independent, based in Canada and has worked on Super Mario Strikers, Punch-Out!! for Wii, Luigi's Mansion Dark Moon and Metroid Prime Federation Force, and indieszero, which is under 50 employees, independent, based in Japan and has worked on Mario Party-e and the NES Remix series. There may be others on the list that fit the criteria too. Again, Brace Yourself Games is smaller than any of these (although maybe some of these were smaller than they are now when they started working with Nintendo IP), but I think at the least it is incorrect to say that no independent game developer has worked with Nintendo IP before. It would be correct to say this is the first one to work with Legend of Zelda IP, though!

173.72.6.207 (talk) 02:10, 21 March 2019 (UTC) m0nt0y4173.72.6.207 (talk) 02:10, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Update: Actually I just realized that if vanpool counts as an independent studio, then they are the first ones to work with Legend of Zelda IP, not Brace Yourself Games. - m0nt0y4 173.72.6.207 (talk) 02:17, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Stands to reason. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 18:40, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Not disagreeing with this (or not sure the logic that IGN and a few other sources arrive at that), but I have readded it but changed the wording to reflect its one of the few times N gave an indie the proverbial keys, which is absolutely true and consistent. --M asem  (t) 22:42, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

The Smallest of Issues
Should the title say "Featuring" or "featuring"? This is confusing to me as I've commonly seen both ways of capitalization for words in the title that introduce something else, such as "featuring", "starring", "presents", etc. Does anyone know the preferred way? Thanks. --Bchill53 (talk) 23:48, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Both ways of writing seem to be happening. A small overview of how some reliable sources are writing it:


 * Nintendo: Capital F
 * IGN: Both ways
 * GameSpot: Capital F
 * Game Informer: Capital F
 * EuroGamer: Capital F
 * Game Revolution: Both ways
 * Gematsu: Lowercase f
 * Polygon: Capital F
 * Siliconera: Capital F
 * Shacknews: Lowercase f
 * Variety: Capital F
 * Nintendo Life: Capital F
 * Nintendo World Report: Capital F

Most people seem to use the capital F, so I guess I'll vote for that one as well.Stefvanschie (talk) 09:52, 23 July 2019 (UTC)


 * That was extremely thorough! Thanks for looking all of this up. I'll go ahead and change it if it hasn't been already. --Bchill53 (talk) 15:10, 30 July 2019 (UTC)