How do I convince people that Skyward Sword is good?
- Thread starter itsmeyouidiot
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I would just like to say that it does seem to be human nature to care what others think to a degree. I think that one of the only people out there who could claim to not care what others think and be telling the truth would be Chris-chan. Yes, that Chris-chan. Christian Weston Chandler.
The truth is, aside from unusual cases like this person, most people care quite a bit what others think about them and what they like.
The truth is, aside from unusual cases like this person, most people care quite a bit what others think about them and what they like.
You don't need to.
Any Zelda fan has already bought and played it, and judged it decent.
Anyone who hated the previous Zelda games is not going to be convinced otherwise by Skyward Sword.
The only people you would conceivably need to "convince" are the people who've never played a Zelda game before. And you could tell them that the media is over-exaggerating its flaws tremendously and understating its quality because it's a longrunning series: It's going to catch a lot of flak simply because it's widely known. Your best argument to convince this group of people is likely going to be "It's not like there's a lot of other quality titles coming out on the Wii right now." I mean, there's Rayman Origins and... that's it?
One other argument that I could give you is this: It shows you the "tutorial through gameplay"-concept that shows like Extra Credits have touched upon executed magnificently. ( http://penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/tutorials-101 )
Example (spoiler): forcing you to stab a water-holding plant to carry around water to open a door and later on having to fight a giant lava-hand by using that same mechanic to fling water at it is exceptionally subtle. Another example (spoiler): a dust-pile next to a lava patch slyly tempts you to pull out your bust bellows to blow the dust away... "Hey look, it also works on the crusty lava on the floor!" The game makes you feel smart at every turn, it's brilliantly designed on that front. It almost implements that Extra Credits episode word for word. It's humbling, if you have even the smallest aspirations about being a designer.
About the motion controls: They work amazingly well. But you have to remember one thing, which the first boss sort of drives home: Skyward Sword is not about twitch gameplay. I say again: It is not about twitch gameplay. You do not have to cross slash from left to right, twice, and couple it with a top to bottom slash in under three seconds. Ever. There is no enemy that requires you to do that. None. The controls have trouble registering it when you try to execute it too and will feel random and unresponsive. Instead, you can kill every enemy with ease by calmly readying your moves and executing them cleanly. The controller will then feel incredibly accurate and responsive. And if you do prefer to swing your wiimote wildly and haphazardly, there's packs of bats and small slimes to get rid of those urges.
Since this is turning into a massive wall of text, I might as well continue: Why do people complain about centering the view often? I've played some 15+ hours and I've had to re-center once. One time. Is it simply that people *have* to be aiming dead center at their screen or they become confused? Yes, using the bow can require some accuracy. But if my initial draw is offscreen and my target is 5 inches to the right, then just readjust your aim by 5 inches. There's no need to actually center your wii-mote on-screen again and then drawing a beat on your target. You were given wrists for a reason, use them.
Complaints about "it's the same as every other Zelda." are proof of idiocy. Call of Duty or whatever shooter puts out a new game every year or so and have no innovation whatsoever. Zelda puts out a new game every 3 years and implements new concepts (Upgrades, bug-catching, well implemented motion controls) and it gets accused of being "the same"? What's more, it's called a franchise people. Fans are going to want and willingly pay for the exact same game they enjoyed 3 years ago even if all that changes is some of the dungeons. In a year or two, I'll probably want to play "another Super Mario Galaxy game". Why would Nintendo not take my money? Yes, it's "the same", I agree. That's exactly what I want it to be. If I wanted it to be a game about an abused child escaping the clutches of it's religiously obsessed mother by crying at his fear a whole lot then I'll play The Binding of Isaac instead.
Complaints about the graphics are true, if facepalm-worthy. It's a Wii game, are you expecting crisp and clean graphics? Yes, it can use a couple of dozen passes with an AA filter. Yes, some textures are pretty... shall we say... "Quaint". But the aesthetic is what counts and Skyward Sword delivers. The handpainted cloudscapes or backgrounds work incredibly well. It's a beautiful and artistically wonderful world... but poorly rendered. If you prefer incredibly clean and crisp blandness then that's your call. Best not look for it in a Wii game, though.
Yes, the story is weaker than even Twilight Princess's. On the flip side though, it's much more rooted in Zelda lore than t'other one. I went "Ooooh, so that's where that came from." a lot more which makes the story more "relevant" if a lot more dull than TP's.
Yes, your support character is annoying. You can hold down "A" and speed through her dialogue though. Granted, not as fast as I'd like. They really should've done something about this point. But then, Navi was annoying as hell too. Didn't stop OoT from being superb. And this iteration doesn't stop SS from being good.
Padding? You mean forcing you back through old content with new items? Somehow, I feel people are abusing the term padding. I'm heading back to the forest temple but this time I can swim, dart out of the water onto higher platforms and hookshot my way around the place and snag up chests and cubes that were out of reach before. And I get to one-hit kill enemies that were "difficult" when I first came here. Yes. "Padding."
Fetch quests? Want me to name a couple of other games that abuse fetch quests? Ah, you know where I'm going with this? Good. For what it's worth, for every "bring me X" objective there's also a "Avoid monsters and speedrun through the area without weapons" part. Or a "good ol' brainteaser" part. Or a "dig down underground and 2D puzzle for a bit." segment. Or a "motion controlled rhythm" challenge. There's fetch quests, yes. There's variety, too.
Aaand, that's enough. I wrote this in three sittings, I enjoyed getting all that off my chest. To respond once more to the OP though, there's no real reason to convince anyone of Skyward Sword's worth. Either they like Zelda or they hate it or they're curious about it. The first group already bought and liked the game well enough. The second is just going to hate it for amusement's sake. The last category will pick it up because it's the best Zelda version available on the platform or they won't. So... yeah. Play the game. Enjoy it. There's no need for it to be another Skyrim that's praised and lauded and fawned over in every other thread on the escapist, even despite its glaring flaws. So much mindless fanboyism, once, was enough to make me gag, it doesn't need to happen twice.
Any Zelda fan has already bought and played it, and judged it decent.
Anyone who hated the previous Zelda games is not going to be convinced otherwise by Skyward Sword.
The only people you would conceivably need to "convince" are the people who've never played a Zelda game before. And you could tell them that the media is over-exaggerating its flaws tremendously and understating its quality because it's a longrunning series: It's going to catch a lot of flak simply because it's widely known. Your best argument to convince this group of people is likely going to be "It's not like there's a lot of other quality titles coming out on the Wii right now." I mean, there's Rayman Origins and... that's it?
One other argument that I could give you is this: It shows you the "tutorial through gameplay"-concept that shows like Extra Credits have touched upon executed magnificently. ( http://penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/tutorials-101 )
Example (spoiler): forcing you to stab a water-holding plant to carry around water to open a door and later on having to fight a giant lava-hand by using that same mechanic to fling water at it is exceptionally subtle. Another example (spoiler): a dust-pile next to a lava patch slyly tempts you to pull out your bust bellows to blow the dust away... "Hey look, it also works on the crusty lava on the floor!" The game makes you feel smart at every turn, it's brilliantly designed on that front. It almost implements that Extra Credits episode word for word. It's humbling, if you have even the smallest aspirations about being a designer.
About the motion controls: They work amazingly well. But you have to remember one thing, which the first boss sort of drives home: Skyward Sword is not about twitch gameplay. I say again: It is not about twitch gameplay. You do not have to cross slash from left to right, twice, and couple it with a top to bottom slash in under three seconds. Ever. There is no enemy that requires you to do that. None. The controls have trouble registering it when you try to execute it too and will feel random and unresponsive. Instead, you can kill every enemy with ease by calmly readying your moves and executing them cleanly. The controller will then feel incredibly accurate and responsive. And if you do prefer to swing your wiimote wildly and haphazardly, there's packs of bats and small slimes to get rid of those urges.
Since this is turning into a massive wall of text, I might as well continue: Why do people complain about centering the view often? I've played some 15+ hours and I've had to re-center once. One time. Is it simply that people *have* to be aiming dead center at their screen or they become confused? Yes, using the bow can require some accuracy. But if my initial draw is offscreen and my target is 5 inches to the right, then just readjust your aim by 5 inches. There's no need to actually center your wii-mote on-screen again and then drawing a beat on your target. You were given wrists for a reason, use them.
Complaints about "it's the same as every other Zelda." are proof of idiocy. Call of Duty or whatever shooter puts out a new game every year or so and have no innovation whatsoever. Zelda puts out a new game every 3 years and implements new concepts (Upgrades, bug-catching, well implemented motion controls) and it gets accused of being "the same"? What's more, it's called a franchise people. Fans are going to want and willingly pay for the exact same game they enjoyed 3 years ago even if all that changes is some of the dungeons. In a year or two, I'll probably want to play "another Super Mario Galaxy game". Why would Nintendo not take my money? Yes, it's "the same", I agree. That's exactly what I want it to be. If I wanted it to be a game about an abused child escaping the clutches of it's religiously obsessed mother by crying at his fear a whole lot then I'll play The Binding of Isaac instead.
Complaints about the graphics are true, if facepalm-worthy. It's a Wii game, are you expecting crisp and clean graphics? Yes, it can use a couple of dozen passes with an AA filter. Yes, some textures are pretty... shall we say... "Quaint". But the aesthetic is what counts and Skyward Sword delivers. The handpainted cloudscapes or backgrounds work incredibly well. It's a beautiful and artistically wonderful world... but poorly rendered. If you prefer incredibly clean and crisp blandness then that's your call. Best not look for it in a Wii game, though.
Yes, the story is weaker than even Twilight Princess's. On the flip side though, it's much more rooted in Zelda lore than t'other one. I went "Ooooh, so that's where that came from." a lot more which makes the story more "relevant" if a lot more dull than TP's.
Yes, your support character is annoying. You can hold down "A" and speed through her dialogue though. Granted, not as fast as I'd like. They really should've done something about this point. But then, Navi was annoying as hell too. Didn't stop OoT from being superb. And this iteration doesn't stop SS from being good.
Padding? You mean forcing you back through old content with new items? Somehow, I feel people are abusing the term padding. I'm heading back to the forest temple but this time I can swim, dart out of the water onto higher platforms and hookshot my way around the place and snag up chests and cubes that were out of reach before. And I get to one-hit kill enemies that were "difficult" when I first came here. Yes. "Padding."
Fetch quests? Want me to name a couple of other games that abuse fetch quests? Ah, you know where I'm going with this? Good. For what it's worth, for every "bring me X" objective there's also a "Avoid monsters and speedrun through the area without weapons" part. Or a "good ol' brainteaser" part. Or a "dig down underground and 2D puzzle for a bit." segment. Or a "motion controlled rhythm" challenge. There's fetch quests, yes. There's variety, too.
Aaand, that's enough. I wrote this in three sittings, I enjoyed getting all that off my chest. To respond once more to the OP though, there's no real reason to convince anyone of Skyward Sword's worth. Either they like Zelda or they hate it or they're curious about it. The first group already bought and liked the game well enough. The second is just going to hate it for amusement's sake. The last category will pick it up because it's the best Zelda version available on the platform or they won't. So... yeah. Play the game. Enjoy it. There's no need for it to be another Skyrim that's praised and lauded and fawned over in every other thread on the escapist, even despite its glaring flaws. So much mindless fanboyism, once, was enough to make me gag, it doesn't need to happen twice.
The main issue I have with people unable (or unwilling) to accept that a game might be enjoyable, even if it isn't perfect, is that if it was genuinely good but got criticisms that spread around and did it a huge disservice could damn the game or series, or worse, see a much hoped for sequel that is shit in comparison because they tried to change the things people griped about.
"It's too easy" and suddenly the next game is unbalanced or impossible. "you can't turn it off" so instead of toggling it, it just won't be there next time. "the voice acting was terrible" and the first game to have voice acting then becomes the last, or at least the last to have ENGLISH acting. These are of course inspired by a number of games I've played over the years and have infuriated me to no end because the developers don't bother listening to anything BUT the criticisms because as we all know, the naysayers tend to speak the loudest, and if you're in the vocal minority (even if you're part of the majority) you will be unheard or worse spurned.
I don't like to see people say "so what, it doesn't matter in the end cause you enjoyed it" because it most certainly does. It matters because as I said, it's what gets listened to, and it will be what the developers think of when the next game comes around, if it comes around. That's the problem with ignoring something.. it often leads to unfortunate issues people just didn't see coming (or were hoping wouldn't).
Now, I haven't played the game yet, hoping it will get here tomorrow. But I will say that if the game really does have voice acting like I heard.. that people will SHUT THE EFF UP about it and let those of us who actually LIKE having dialogue spoken in a language we can understand get on with enjoying it, and just give an option for no voice acting or that silly "leave it Japanese" option so many people love.
It's okay to not like certain aspects of the game or to not like it at all, but forcing that it's "awful" down our throats only hurts us in the end. So always, always think about what it is you're complaining about, and whether it actually impacts the game or series. If the camera angles aren't the best, go ahead and gripe, but don't condemn the game for it unless it makes the game unplayable. Likewise, if a game comes out and shoves an existing character's personality or presentation into the mud and making them a joke.. maybe voice a concern instead of gabbing on about how hawt they looked (female characters), or how funny their totally uncalled for comment was (male characters).
Sorry, kinda turned the topic towards something else, but those points still stand. I've seen good games and series go bad cause too many people wouldn't stop trashing it, or simply cause they didn't say anything, or .. and this mildly contradicts my whole point.. because they blindly accepted it when it wasn't the solid gold title. Obviously I'm thinking more like Ocarina of Time or Final Fantasy 7 with that last thing, cause it causes better entries to become undershadowed or the games themselves to be milked until it's puke.
"It's too easy" and suddenly the next game is unbalanced or impossible. "you can't turn it off" so instead of toggling it, it just won't be there next time. "the voice acting was terrible" and the first game to have voice acting then becomes the last, or at least the last to have ENGLISH acting. These are of course inspired by a number of games I've played over the years and have infuriated me to no end because the developers don't bother listening to anything BUT the criticisms because as we all know, the naysayers tend to speak the loudest, and if you're in the vocal minority (even if you're part of the majority) you will be unheard or worse spurned.
I don't like to see people say "so what, it doesn't matter in the end cause you enjoyed it" because it most certainly does. It matters because as I said, it's what gets listened to, and it will be what the developers think of when the next game comes around, if it comes around. That's the problem with ignoring something.. it often leads to unfortunate issues people just didn't see coming (or were hoping wouldn't).
Now, I haven't played the game yet, hoping it will get here tomorrow. But I will say that if the game really does have voice acting like I heard.. that people will SHUT THE EFF UP about it and let those of us who actually LIKE having dialogue spoken in a language we can understand get on with enjoying it, and just give an option for no voice acting or that silly "leave it Japanese" option so many people love.
It's okay to not like certain aspects of the game or to not like it at all, but forcing that it's "awful" down our throats only hurts us in the end. So always, always think about what it is you're complaining about, and whether it actually impacts the game or series. If the camera angles aren't the best, go ahead and gripe, but don't condemn the game for it unless it makes the game unplayable. Likewise, if a game comes out and shoves an existing character's personality or presentation into the mud and making them a joke.. maybe voice a concern instead of gabbing on about how hawt they looked (female characters), or how funny their totally uncalled for comment was (male characters).
Sorry, kinda turned the topic towards something else, but those points still stand. I've seen good games and series go bad cause too many people wouldn't stop trashing it, or simply cause they didn't say anything, or .. and this mildly contradicts my whole point.. because they blindly accepted it when it wasn't the solid gold title. Obviously I'm thinking more like Ocarina of Time or Final Fantasy 7 with that last thing, cause it causes better entries to become undershadowed or the games themselves to be milked until it's puke.
Well for some of us, they do. I can't stand Fi, the world feels a bit cramped despite appearences, the motion controls feel awkward to me (and shoehorned in, like how you can't equip things to the D-pad) and I just don't like the atmosphere. That's all just my opinion, though. If you like it, then great! You're a sight happier than several of us. If we think it's terrible or average, there's not much you can do about it.itsmeyouidiot said:
Yeah, damn a comic critic for not seeing "reason!"LilithSlave said:
Especially if that "reason" is wrapped up in tantrums.
LOL fact.
Then, according to itsmeyouidiot, you're not normal.Angry Camel said:
I repeat, according to the person who posted it.
I do appreciate the loaded diction he used. Anyone who disagrees just isn't normal. Or maybe we're all on a bandwagon. He's basically phrased it so the only true stance on the game is his own.
Genius.
nobody knows for sure, but this man has been brought in for questioning....zombieshark6666 said:
Asked for comment, he said "I am a man," then slugged the reporter.
This is coming from a Zelda fanboy who owns every Zelda game. (except the CD-i ones, they don't exist)
Skyward Sword is crippled compered to the rest of the series. The motion controls just take the whole leg off. I mean the final boss is hard, but the motion controls make him infuriating.
Skyward Sword is crippled compered to the rest of the series. The motion controls just take the whole leg off. I mean the final boss is hard, but the motion controls make him infuriating.
So... unanimous positive reviews both before and after the game's release, but one "negative" one (which did not include a traditional review score) equals bandwagon? Maybe consider for a moment that art is subjective and people can form their own opinions on things and don't do so based off of what other people say. For instance, people who actually played the game. I for one liked some of the early parts of the game, especially the Lanayru Mining Facility sections, but by the time I was revisiting these same areas for the third time doing more or less the same things, the game's appeal seriously waned.itsmeyouidiot said:
The motion controls were mediocre at best and got worse as the game went on and the challenge increased. The more movements you have to make and the faster you have to make them pretty much break the controls in half. The final bosses were awful in this respect. It kept losing calibration in the middle of a virtual one hit kill battle. Not cool. People complained about the overworld being empty in Wind Waker, but it was far far more barren in Skyward Sword.
There were also just bizarre design choices. Why is the tutorial/opening so freaking long? Why does the game have to load every time I land or take off from Skyloft? Why do I have limited dowsing slots and have to go back to the fetch quest giver to locate their item? How come when I die, I lose all my potions and my shield? Why do I have to reload a save in that situation? Why can't I use the infrared in the menus? What is the point of the day/night cycle? What's the point of upgrading items? Why do I have to sit through a dialog screen every fucking time I pick up a treasure? Why is Fi so useless? Why can't I auto z-target when I'm using projectile weapons, like in every previous 3D Zelda? Why can't I control flying with the analog stick (which when you think about it, was originally designed for airplanes)? Why can't I control swimming with the analog stick? There are enemies flinging projectiles at my bird guy, so why do I never get a weapon to shoot back? Why do I need to catch tumbleweeds with the bug net and why do I need tumble weeds to upgrade anything? Why does the bug net suck?
I am going to throw my two cents in here.
I am a huge Zelda fan, having 100% on nearly all of the games so far. I also enjoyed this version, considering it a vast improvement over Twilight Princess mostly due to the controls (I have the Wii version of TP).
Having said that, I agree with almost every complaint that Yahtzee had. Many a time the game had me swearing at it due to a sword swing that went off in the wrong direction or at a slight delay. The re-centering was irritating, but apart from the archery/pumpkin mini-game, I didn't mind it too much. I also was annoyed with having to run around for so long just to continue to the next dungeon. Padding is never good if you can easily tell it is padding.
As for Fi... good grief... I can't even begin to express how utterly irritating it was having it pop up constantly telling me things that I already know. Even assuming this was my very first Zelda game, I still can see the things that are right in front of my face! I also think that Fi has beaten Navi for worst guide in a Zelda game.
I also didn't like flying around so much, it felt like it should be faster to get from one place to the next. The game was also devoid of interesting secrets. I usually finish a Zelda game and then go online looking for all of the goodies I missed. This time around? Two items. I discovered everything in the game barring two items (a piece of heart and a "quest" for gratitude crystals). I look forwards to playing the hard mode, but I don't consider that a secret.
I have more issues, but I am veering away from my point. I enjoyed this game. I consider it one of the better Zelda games to play today. I do not regret my purchase and I have no desire to trade it in (unlike Metroid: Other M but that's another rant entirely).
I believe that video game series like Zelda have the right, maybe even the need, to be similiar to the old ones. I like how each Zelda game is comfortable, but it doesn't mean that they don't have flaws, and people like Yahtzee are quite good at picking out those flaws and showing them to their audience.
So, for the tldr crowd, I think that Skyward Sword is an excellent zelda game, but it has a ton of flaws that should not have been there.
Edit: I forgot to mention. There is no need to convince someone that a game is good or bad unless they are coming to you asking for your opinion. Don't be that guy, the one that forces his/her opinion on people who aren't asking for it.
I am a huge Zelda fan, having 100% on nearly all of the games so far. I also enjoyed this version, considering it a vast improvement over Twilight Princess mostly due to the controls (I have the Wii version of TP).
Having said that, I agree with almost every complaint that Yahtzee had. Many a time the game had me swearing at it due to a sword swing that went off in the wrong direction or at a slight delay. The re-centering was irritating, but apart from the archery/pumpkin mini-game, I didn't mind it too much. I also was annoyed with having to run around for so long just to continue to the next dungeon. Padding is never good if you can easily tell it is padding.
As for Fi... good grief... I can't even begin to express how utterly irritating it was having it pop up constantly telling me things that I already know. Even assuming this was my very first Zelda game, I still can see the things that are right in front of my face! I also think that Fi has beaten Navi for worst guide in a Zelda game.
I also didn't like flying around so much, it felt like it should be faster to get from one place to the next. The game was also devoid of interesting secrets. I usually finish a Zelda game and then go online looking for all of the goodies I missed. This time around? Two items. I discovered everything in the game barring two items (a piece of heart and a "quest" for gratitude crystals). I look forwards to playing the hard mode, but I don't consider that a secret.
I have more issues, but I am veering away from my point. I enjoyed this game. I consider it one of the better Zelda games to play today. I do not regret my purchase and I have no desire to trade it in (unlike Metroid: Other M but that's another rant entirely).
I believe that video game series like Zelda have the right, maybe even the need, to be similiar to the old ones. I like how each Zelda game is comfortable, but it doesn't mean that they don't have flaws, and people like Yahtzee are quite good at picking out those flaws and showing them to their audience.
So, for the tldr crowd, I think that Skyward Sword is an excellent zelda game, but it has a ton of flaws that should not have been there.
Edit: I forgot to mention. There is no need to convince someone that a game is good or bad unless they are coming to you asking for your opinion. Don't be that guy, the one that forces his/her opinion on people who aren't asking for it.
Excuse me mate? I would like you to visit every single major game reviewing-site and recite their review of this game for yourself. You will find that this game has gotten insane amounts of praise for MONTHS on end! Yatzhee is one of the first critics to actually make worth of his title and actually critizise the game for more of its merits than "you have to wave stuff" and "it's not hd!". That Skyward Sword has been bashed down by the public in an unfair and mindless matter is simply not true.
I have thoroughly enjoyed every single one of the 3d Zelda games so far. Wind Waker is my favorite game ever, and both OoT and TP are fantastic games. Skyward Sword however, didn't cut it for me. Was it the controls? No, not at all. Was it the cel-shaded graphics? Absolutely not. Was it the stamina meter? Are you kidding me? No, I will give a few comprehensive examples of what I'm talking about.
First of all, it looked awful by any kind of standards. I'm not talking about graphical fidelity here, but the way it was all presented, and the general art style of the game. Where WW was blessed with a hyper colorful, and nearly timeless look, and TP made use of clever graphical effects, and a slick artstyle to make really moody and beutiful settings, Skyward Sword did none of these things. Everything looks flat as a pancake. Every texture is shit, every object, like rocks, trees and buildings seem as if they're made of play-doh. The aesthetics feel incoherent, and it's not fun to look at. The game simply has some bad art design, that feels very uncalled for, knowing what Nintendo have been capable of from titles within the same series, as much as five whole years ago.
Then of-course it is the level design. Where every single game in the series has had a vast, seamless world, where every temple, settlement, treasure and secret are more or less hidden within its vicinity, Skyward Sword simply shits all over that concept. You get three very restricted areas to quest in, and some floating rubble where you shop and pull off sidequests. That's it. If there is anything that really really bugs me with the game, it's this. THE SKY IS DREADFULLY BORING! Where the ocean in tWW felt really vast and exciting, as you neared the contours of a great island, with waves crashing around your ship, and wind in your sail, the pathetic excuse of an air space in this game feels both restricted and empty (as stated by the previously mentioned Yatzee). It's as if the designers hadn't accounted for the third dimension of space when designing the game, and then not bothered with finding a solution to the problem. "It's fine! We'll just place out a few minigames and a shitload of treasure chests, and people won't notice!" Well guess what? I noticed. And it turned out to be shit.
Then, there is the actual land, which turned out to be a very restricted one at that. I just won't buy this sort of design-decision. From the looks of it, they have taken the aesthetic-design off of Super Mario Sunshine, and the level design from Metroid prime, and sprinkled some rupees over it. IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE AN ADVENTURE-GAME, NOT A LINEAR PLATFORMER! Yet again, I get the feeling of half-assedry seeping through these sections. Having some sort of connecting passages between the different areas, perhaps a town or settlement between wouldn't have been unmotivated, or felt strange? Having them all so strictly separate, and hugely different feels... fake. I feel left out of something. Same goes for the general planning of the dungeons where ,(spoiler), you have to visit the same exact areas over and over, and uncover "hidden" (as if you didn't all immediately see which areas would be left for later the first time you passed them?) parts of the world. The whole spirit vessel-business isn't even executed to satisfaction, even though the whole idea of you being ridded of all your advantages, and being at your most vulnerable for sections of the game is really really cool. Once again, I feel as if the designers have deliberately skipped a beat, and decided that it will have to do anyways. They might as well have called it "The Legend of Zelda: Close enough I guess..."
You know what I think? I think that the ideas and visions going into this game at a planning stage was really inspired and inventive. "What if Link lives on a floating island in the sky?" "What if he discoveres Hyrule underneath the clouds, and has to dart back and forth between the two worlds throughout the game, where keys to one world lies within the other?" "What if the main villain is really, really gay?" Then somewhere along the line, someone decided that "close enough" would do, and filled the unfinished product up with padding, and leaving an unfinished world on the ground, and an even more so in the skies.
Now, don't get me all wrong. Even though I feel the game is flawed through it's entire length, many individual parts of the composition are really, really good. The boss-battles for example. Really challenging and well designed at times. The upgrade system, working as intended, and then some! The temples, too small and underwhelming at first, but quite spectacular at the end. By any standard, Skyward Sword is a decent, or maybe good game. But if I am after a challenging boss-battle, of intricate platforming-section, the Zelda series is not where I would go looking. When I pop a Zelda-game in my console, I expect to be sucked into a vibrant and explorable world, full of secrets, colorful characters, and a varying landscape. I'm not saying that evolving and experimenting with the concept is bad, it's been 25 freaking years since the series started! What I am saying is that taking a lot of the joy out of the experience, and making no effort to replace it with something else is a bad way to do it.
Before Ben Croshaw put his review up, I felt very alone with this opinion. Everyone seemed to ignore, or not even notice the big gaping hole in Skyward Sword, where the atmosphere, and pure spectacle of the other entries had been. All you heard was "Best game ever made, and go seek help if you think otherwise!". I am GLAD that someone with actual impact on the game-reviewing business has put his foot down and said "hey, this is actually shit, and no amount of wii-remote gimmicks and colorful graphics is going to change that" When that bubble of praise was burst, who wouldn't expect many actual non-believers to crawl out of their shells, and say what's what? Especially on the same site where the claim was made?
I now realize this post got ludicrously long, but I guess I had to get it out of my system. But there you have it. Maybe I'm not the one who has to be convinced? Maybe this game, like every single other is susceptible to opinion, and general taste in games? For you, Skyward Sword might have been amazing. For me, it just wasn't good enough.
// Daniel S.
I have thoroughly enjoyed every single one of the 3d Zelda games so far. Wind Waker is my favorite game ever, and both OoT and TP are fantastic games. Skyward Sword however, didn't cut it for me. Was it the controls? No, not at all. Was it the cel-shaded graphics? Absolutely not. Was it the stamina meter? Are you kidding me? No, I will give a few comprehensive examples of what I'm talking about.
First of all, it looked awful by any kind of standards. I'm not talking about graphical fidelity here, but the way it was all presented, and the general art style of the game. Where WW was blessed with a hyper colorful, and nearly timeless look, and TP made use of clever graphical effects, and a slick artstyle to make really moody and beutiful settings, Skyward Sword did none of these things. Everything looks flat as a pancake. Every texture is shit, every object, like rocks, trees and buildings seem as if they're made of play-doh. The aesthetics feel incoherent, and it's not fun to look at. The game simply has some bad art design, that feels very uncalled for, knowing what Nintendo have been capable of from titles within the same series, as much as five whole years ago.
Then of-course it is the level design. Where every single game in the series has had a vast, seamless world, where every temple, settlement, treasure and secret are more or less hidden within its vicinity, Skyward Sword simply shits all over that concept. You get three very restricted areas to quest in, and some floating rubble where you shop and pull off sidequests. That's it. If there is anything that really really bugs me with the game, it's this. THE SKY IS DREADFULLY BORING! Where the ocean in tWW felt really vast and exciting, as you neared the contours of a great island, with waves crashing around your ship, and wind in your sail, the pathetic excuse of an air space in this game feels both restricted and empty (as stated by the previously mentioned Yatzee). It's as if the designers hadn't accounted for the third dimension of space when designing the game, and then not bothered with finding a solution to the problem. "It's fine! We'll just place out a few minigames and a shitload of treasure chests, and people won't notice!" Well guess what? I noticed. And it turned out to be shit.
Then, there is the actual land, which turned out to be a very restricted one at that. I just won't buy this sort of design-decision. From the looks of it, they have taken the aesthetic-design off of Super Mario Sunshine, and the level design from Metroid prime, and sprinkled some rupees over it. IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE AN ADVENTURE-GAME, NOT A LINEAR PLATFORMER! Yet again, I get the feeling of half-assedry seeping through these sections. Having some sort of connecting passages between the different areas, perhaps a town or settlement between wouldn't have been unmotivated, or felt strange? Having them all so strictly separate, and hugely different feels... fake. I feel left out of something. Same goes for the general planning of the dungeons where ,(spoiler), you have to visit the same exact areas over and over, and uncover "hidden" (as if you didn't all immediately see which areas would be left for later the first time you passed them?) parts of the world. The whole spirit vessel-business isn't even executed to satisfaction, even though the whole idea of you being ridded of all your advantages, and being at your most vulnerable for sections of the game is really really cool. Once again, I feel as if the designers have deliberately skipped a beat, and decided that it will have to do anyways. They might as well have called it "The Legend of Zelda: Close enough I guess..."
You know what I think? I think that the ideas and visions going into this game at a planning stage was really inspired and inventive. "What if Link lives on a floating island in the sky?" "What if he discoveres Hyrule underneath the clouds, and has to dart back and forth between the two worlds throughout the game, where keys to one world lies within the other?" "What if the main villain is really, really gay?" Then somewhere along the line, someone decided that "close enough" would do, and filled the unfinished product up with padding, and leaving an unfinished world on the ground, and an even more so in the skies.
Now, don't get me all wrong. Even though I feel the game is flawed through it's entire length, many individual parts of the composition are really, really good. The boss-battles for example. Really challenging and well designed at times. The upgrade system, working as intended, and then some! The temples, too small and underwhelming at first, but quite spectacular at the end. By any standard, Skyward Sword is a decent, or maybe good game. But if I am after a challenging boss-battle, of intricate platforming-section, the Zelda series is not where I would go looking. When I pop a Zelda-game in my console, I expect to be sucked into a vibrant and explorable world, full of secrets, colorful characters, and a varying landscape. I'm not saying that evolving and experimenting with the concept is bad, it's been 25 freaking years since the series started! What I am saying is that taking a lot of the joy out of the experience, and making no effort to replace it with something else is a bad way to do it.
Before Ben Croshaw put his review up, I felt very alone with this opinion. Everyone seemed to ignore, or not even notice the big gaping hole in Skyward Sword, where the atmosphere, and pure spectacle of the other entries had been. All you heard was "Best game ever made, and go seek help if you think otherwise!". I am GLAD that someone with actual impact on the game-reviewing business has put his foot down and said "hey, this is actually shit, and no amount of wii-remote gimmicks and colorful graphics is going to change that" When that bubble of praise was burst, who wouldn't expect many actual non-believers to crawl out of their shells, and say what's what? Especially on the same site where the claim was made?
I now realize this post got ludicrously long, but I guess I had to get it out of my system. But there you have it. Maybe I'm not the one who has to be convinced? Maybe this game, like every single other is susceptible to opinion, and general taste in games? For you, Skyward Sword might have been amazing. For me, it just wasn't good enough.
// Daniel S.
It's so rare that the perfect answer appears so early in a thread. There's no way I can improve on this except to say that OP needs to deal with it, and quite frankly look at how lightly Skyward Sword got off considering the berating many popular games get on this website.ComradeJim270 said:
This coming from the individual who will call people a horrific waste of human life if they dare to express anything other than undying love for a Nintendo game.LilithSlave said:
When you refer to someone who disagrees with you as refusing to "see the light" then you're so far past the point of no return that I doubt you remember what it looked like when you passed it.
You know, just like someone is able to dislike a game, they are also entitled to dislike a reviewer.
And I don't dislike Yahtzee because of his opinions of Link. I've had strong disagreements with every piece of his material I've ever encountered. Again, like other statements I've said, like Adam Sessler. Both of whom I find to be arrogant and ignorant.
And I don't dislike Yahtzee because of his opinions of Link. I've had strong disagreements with every piece of his material I've ever encountered. Again, like other statements I've said, like Adam Sessler. Both of whom I find to be arrogant and ignorant.
Yahtzee had a point that Nintendo keeps remaking games... its great that my future progeny will be able to grow up with Mario and Zelda games, but for any individual, once should be enough.
By dressing up as Link and coming over to their house, praising the game in iambic pentameter, whilst playing a lyre.
How can you convince them? You can't.
If people do not like something after trying it (And only AFTER trying it should they have an opinion on it) then they really don't have to like it. As many people have said, it all comes down to opinion.
My opinion? I found Skyward Sword to be fun, but i know that not everyone is going to share my opinion.
If people do not like something after trying it (And only AFTER trying it should they have an opinion on it) then they really don't have to like it. As many people have said, it all comes down to opinion.
My opinion? I found Skyward Sword to be fun, but i know that not everyone is going to share my opinion.