Spoiler Things Skyward Sword Could Have Done Differently/better?

[Ventus]

So after the definite, no questions asked success of a game called Skyward Sword released last November...I couldn't help but notice things that I didn't like about the game. While most people were cheering the game on calling it a definite 10/10 with no contest, I just couldn't help but feel vexed at such speech. The fans were going on about how the story and characters were absolutely flawless and as they were, my eyes became bloodshot at the first notice of such words. Disgusted, I started to rage on social sites such as Facebook, YouTube and so on...but it didn't help much because no one shared my views. So, to help quell my anger, I decided to open up this thread.

I personally feel like the enemy AI (Artificial Intelligence), learning curve, the story, most characters, the FINAL FREAKIN BOSS and definitely the Sky could have been done differently.

Enemy AI
All of the enemies in the game literally had a tracking device on them so that they would be forced to respond to the position to your sword. It was a huge limitation and a huge let down that I had to WAIT TO BE STRUCK BY THE ENEMY. I realize that the projected majority of SS players are newcomers however the learning curve could've been put to better use, y'know, BEFORE the actual dungeons themselves. Combat while it does pump adrenaline sometimes, wasn't as fast as I expected it to be. It didn't give me the feel that I got out of Twilight Princess combat. Better, more OFFENSIVE AI would be an additive for future Zeldas, and definitely would have worked with Skyward Sword.

Learning Curve
The learning curve of Skyward Sword, meaning the tutorials for ingame actions and so on...they were so drawn out and strewn across the game, I thought they'd never end. The game constantly has to hold our hand, even so much to the point that dungeons aren't filled with enemies like they should have been. Every new enemy encounter is a learning curve because of the ridiculous motions of each enemy. We cannot immediately strike to get the upper hand, again due to the enemy AI. We can't be STRUCK OURSELVES for a disadvantage, because the game forces us to learn each and every single new thing.

We have to get notifications in order for us to figure out for the FIFTEENTH DANG TIME that we picked up an Amber Relic. We need to have a four hour long introduction plus an accompanying tutorial dungeon for us to get the hangs of combat and moving about. We still have to let enemies sit around for fifteen seconds each time for them to strike, with a few obvious exceptions (namely, Ghirahim, who takes even longer, and a couple other special enemies like him). What's happened with you, Nintendo, that tutorials have to be entirely too long and FORCED at that?

Story
I don't even want to comment on the story. Nintendo, listen. We need a different story with each new release or else you'll telegraph your attacks like the novice you are aren't.

Characters
I've said this before and I'll say it again. We have a bunch of characters, of which we only have four characters that mean anything on the protagonist side, and only two characters that mean anything on the antagonist's side though the second one really doesn't mean much besides a final encounter.

Of the four protagonists, namely Link Zelda Groose Impa (LIZG), truthfully speaking only Link, Zelda and Groose mean anything OUT OF THE ENTIRE CAST OF CHARACTERS EXCLUDING THE TWO VILLAINS. Link and Groose are our two protagonists with Link on the Hero side and Groose on the comical side, while Zelda is our damsel in distress [yes, it doesn't seem so, but we still have to save her and get her back to Skyloft all the same]. Impa is just a side character who is the Link for Zelda in the meantime. That obviously needs to change. Pipit, Gaepora and maybe even Batreaux could've been part of the protagonist's crewboat. All of the Knight Academy, actually, should've been down at the Surface. Zelda, get that stupid look off of your face and ACTUALLY DO SOMETHING. No more singing, no more dancing, no more 'magic'. GET PHYSICAL.
Impa, WIPE THAT SMIRK OFF YOUR FACE BEFORE I STICK THIS BLADE OF EVIL'S BANE INTO YOUR CHEST. /rage

Nintendo could've introduced more than two villains. Yes, Ghirahim was cool, but he was useless in the end. Demise was a joke. We saw his ugly beast form three times, and his cool demonic form...well, that didn't last more than an epilogue. /waiting for better villains

FINAL FREAKIN BOSS
Demise. You're an absolute joke. You take no skill to beat. People can speedrun you in little less than 28 seconds. What in the heck is wrong with you? Where is your insane ability to warp dimensions? Where are the giant flying swords and lightning rods? Come on, up your game broski. For a final boss, you're as pathetic as Ganon of OoT.

The Sky
Nintendo, you've made the gameplay really great swordplay (just need offensive enemies), now where is the flight? After all, Sky is in the title too, so it should be emphasized just like the Sword was. We got a barren sky, just like Hyrule Field in TP except...a distinct lack of enemies. I know you can do better.

What do you feel [noparse]The Legend of Zelda:Skyward Sword could have done differently?[/noparse]

 

[ncud]

They could have at least made grunts when zelda talked, not giggles and screams

 

[Badwolf]

Wow, you really didn't like a lot of stuff... I just didn't like the new item system. I kept accidently pulling out the wrong item at the wrong time.

 

[Spirit]

VanitasXII - i love you!

I was thinking I was the only one, I too feel a little bit of rage and down right confusion at the people who absolutely lord SS, and a lot of these people who i have spoken to and read comments from have played a lot of other Zelda titles too. I wasn't too excited for Skyward Sword I admit but I still couldn't wait to play it as soon as I stepped through my front door. I wanted to love it and I tried really hard. But the more I played the worse it got.

I agree with your view on the story, the gameplay, the characters, enemy A.I, basically everything you said. But the thing i hate more is the level design. People have countered me saying 'we see new places each time' ... yes, we see new places each time... of the same places... and even then we get locked in a dungeon or put in a boat which also stops us seeing less of the new thing in the place we've already been, a desert is a desert, you open up a new place of the desert, its still the desert! And poor Faron wood having to pull double time for a water region... for the most pointless of reasons.

The only sword fighting section of SS that i liked was when Girahim summoned up n army just before the final boss and you had to cut your way through, i liked that part, but then it just felt like and hack and slash game which is then something that Zelda has always stayed away from because it would downgrade the series, but it was nice to just throw your arm and send them sprawling to the floor without being blocked.

After playing Wind Waker the sky felt too small and the bird felt too boring. Again people say 'no the sky was huge' ... no, the sky was tiny... the bird just didn't go very fast and aside from Skyloft, the awfully small Lump Pumpkin island and the place inside the Thunderhead which you only need to go to for one thing three times, there was absolutely nothing in the sky.

So things SS could have done better... All of it.

of course each to their own but it does feel that SS has some kind of hypnotic quality to it.

 

[Majora's Cat]

Enemy AI
All of the enemies in the game literally had a tracking device on them so that they would be forced to respond to the position to your sword. It was a huge limitation and a huge let down that I had to WAIT TO BE STRUCK BY THE ENEMY. I realize that the projected majority of SS players are newcomers however the learning curve could've been put to better use, y'know, BEFORE the actual dungeons themselves. Combat while it does pump adrenaline sometimes, wasn't as fast as I expected it to be. It didn't give me the feel that I got out of Twilight Princess combat. Better, more OFFENSIVE AI would be an additive for future Zeldas, and definitely would have worked with Skyward Sword.

Skyward Sword enemies are much tougher to breach than enemies in previous Zelda games. The poor artificial intelligence makes the enemies just slightly more manageable, as those without patience already have enough trouble taking down enemies with planned slices. The point of combat in SS is to think strategy a bit and draw out your duels with enemies. And I almost laughed out loud when you mentioned that you want SS enemies to react and respond more like TP enemies, because every single enemy in TP is a cakewalk - even the Darknuts.

More offensive AI would mean there is no possibility for Link to take on crowds of enemies. They're all best handled one-on-one, and when they all come charging at you, you have no way to defeat them all effectively. Remove the more strategic combat, and you're left with hack and slash combat system. More importantly, you contradict yourself when saying that waiting to be struck by an enemy (therefore they are the aggressors) is a negative thing while also wanting enemies to be more offensive. Say that you are allowed to make the first move with enemies and hit them - that means you are on the offensive, yet you want enemies to be more aggressive in future Zelda games. What?

Learning Curve
The learning curve of Skyward Sword, meaning the tutorials for ingame actions and so on...they were so drawn out and strewn across the game, I thought they'd never end. The game constantly has to hold our hand, even so much to the point that dungeons aren't filled with enemies like they should have been. Every new enemy encounter is a learning curve because of the ridiculous motions of each enemy.

We have to get notifications in order for us to figure out for the FIFTEENTH DANG TIME that we picked up an Amber Relic. We need to have a four hour long introduction plus an accompanying tutorial dungeon for us to get the hangs of combat and moving about. We still have to let enemies sit around for fifteen seconds each time for them to strike

If you ask me, some segments of the Lanayru Mining Facility were overloaded with enemies that are more easily fought by themselves. You can no longer defeat crowds of mindless enemies. It's really a matter of opinion whether you feel that these new learning curves are good things or bad things. The instructions in SS don't really last throughout the whole game, rather the descriptions and info for items do not become abridged. However, it's always been like that in Zelda games, so how is Skyward Sword any different?

And that bold part is obviously an exaggeration. I usually defeat Deku Babas with the first or second slice. The reason for the long introduction must have been because Skyward Sword is a much different beast than other games. And remember, most of the introduction was cutscenes. All you really had to do was sit back and enjoy the show. You learn how to use the sword and shield in a single dojo and learn how to fly in the air with a mini-game. The latter didn't give you very detailed instruction, so sometimes I actually felt like the game didn't teach you enough, then sent you off on your own.

Story
I don't even want to comment on the story. Nintendo, listen. We need a different story with each new release or else you'll telegraph your attacks like the novice you are aren't.

Zelda isn't about the story. It never was, and neither is Mario. Skyward Sword actually offered up a much better story than previous Zelda games, but don't ever expect them to make a game as story-focused as Heavy Rain.

Characters
I've said this before and I'll say it again. We have a bunch of characters, of which we only have four characters that mean anything on the protagonist side, and only two characters that mean anything on the antagonist's side though the second one really doesn't mean much besides a final encounter.

SS is very straightforward and focuses on plowing through dungeons and overworld areas like there's no tomorrow. The game did lack a bit when it came to characters (especially after Majora's Mask and Twilight Princess), but there's always only been a few main characters in any Zelda game. In Ocarina of Time there's Impa, Link, Zelda, Navi and Ganondorf. Wowie! At least Skyward Sword has an additional villain, which will be my next point.

Nintendo could've introduced more than two villains. Yes, Ghirahim was cool, but he was useless in the end. Demise was a joke. We saw his ugly beast form three times, and his cool demonic form...well, that didn't last more than an epilogue. /waiting for better villains

You can't be serious. How can you introduce more than two main villains without making them all seem lame? Demise's demeanor already made Ghirahim look like less of a man (as if he was much of one to begin with). Two's a party, but three's a crowd. I would have been severely disappointed if Ghirahim was the final boss because he's a bit too flamboyant and is too familiar to Link. After a few appearances, Ghirahim starts to become less of an intimidating villain and more of a stalker that seems to be interested in following two teens where they go.

Demise did make a short-lived appearance in the game, but his presence throughout lingered in the air. We were aware of his existence very early on, and expect great things from him. What Ghirahim did wrong Demise does right - we see Ghirahim and fight him so often that there's no shock value in his final battle. We fight The Imprisoned an equal number of times, but the ugly beast is nothing at all like Demise's true form. Demise was dark, powerful and unexpected, making the final battle with him quite unnerving.

FINAL FREAKIN BOSS
Demise. You're an absolute joke. You take no skill to beat. People can speedrun you in little less than 28 seconds. For a final boss, you're as pathetic as Ganon of OoT.

Really? If I remember correctly, his first form needs to be chipped away. His reactions are very quick, and it takes a little while to finally cast 30 blows on him. Then we toy around with him with lightning. I must admit that once you decipher his attack patterns and discern the method to defeat him, he becomes rather easy. However, he should pose a threat the first time you meet up with him. Additionally, Ganon from Ocarina of Time was pathetic? If a final boss that epic can be viewed as wimpy, then it's no wonder that you dislike Demise.

The Sky
Nintendo, you've made the gameplay really great swordplay (just need offensive enemies), now where is the flight? After all, Sky is in the title too, so it should be emphasized just like the Sword was. We got a barren sky, just like Hyrule Field in TP except...a distinct lack of enemies.

Flying was controlled spectacularly with the Wii Remote. It is empty like you said, but that's how skies are. Seeing as how the overworld is packed with a bevy of content and an abundance of enemies, it seems only fitting for Nintendo to want to add in the sky was your own personal playground to escape from the action that happens constantly throughout the game. The Sky could use some improvement, yes, but it's satisfactory for Nintendo's first stab at one. Imagine if it were packed with enemies attacking from all sides. It would know longer be a safe haven, but instead a nail-biting, inescapable torture.

Much like the Great Sea, the Sky could use some more islands and areas floating around. Nintendo hasn't been particularly adept with creating overwolrds fill to the brim with content lately, but they have taken a step in the right direction with Skyward Sword's Hyrule. The nonstop action of Hyrule and the serenity of the Sky balance each other out, so I found the two separate overworlds to be rather compatible.

 

[ZeldaPokemon25]

VanitasXII - i love you!

I was thinking I was the only one, I too feel a little bit of rage and down right confusion at the people who absolutely lord SS, and a lot of these people who i have spoken to and read comments from have played a lot of other Zelda titles too. I wasn't too excited for Skyward Sword I admit but I still couldn't wait to play it as soon as I stepped through my front door. I wanted to love it and I tried really hard. But the more I played the worse it got.

Funny because I'm actually confused as to why people absolutely love OOT and MM when I thought they were they were worse titles but I guess we think on a different perceptive. I wasn't too excited nor had a huge expectation but SS became my favorite after playing it twice and actually experiencing it instead of just playing it.

I agree with your view on the story, the gameplay, the characters, enemy A.I, basically everything you said. But the thing i hate more is the level design. People have countered me saying 'we see new places each time' ... yes, we see new places each time... of the same places... and even then we get locked in a dungeon or put in a boat which also stops us seeing less of the new thing in the place we've already been, a desert is a desert, you open up a new place of the desert, its still the desert! And poor Faron wood having to pull double time for a water region... for the most pointless of reasons.

So your telling me that a Gorge, sand sea, and mines of Lanayu Desert are the exact same thing as each other when they have completely different terrains and different challenges to offer. Its the same place in terms of being the desert but crossing a small ocean in a sand sea and walking through the mines in a desert are not the same thing. Why does it matter whether a desert is a desert or a forest is a forest three different areas of the desert over different ways to get by was actually refreshing to the level design of the overworld. I thought the sand sea was a nice refresher from the usual land location of the mines. At the bold...what? Isn't that same thing with previous Zelda games where you visit a location once for a level and get locked up in a dungeon and after your done you leave. Hey at least the overworld has more then just once a visit like in Peak Providence in TP and that has no purpose. Actually Faron woods having a water part I thought it was a nice challenge and good thing it only happens once in the game. By the way I personally find it hard to call something pointless like that when the purpose of was to get a part of the song from the water dragon which is essentially isn't pointless at all.

The only sword fighting section of SS that i liked was when Girahim summoned up n army just before the final boss and you had to cut your way through, i liked that part, but then it just felt like and hack and slash game which is then something that Zelda has always stayed away from because it would downgrade the series, but it was nice to just throw your arm and send them sprawling to the floor without being blocked.

Wait so you thought this was problem in SS but in TP this was no problem when that happens multiple times through TWW and TP? First of all Zelda has had this before in TWW with enter Hyrule Castle and pulling the Master Sword and in TP with the Bublins Base in Geurdo Desert and in Hyrule Castle when you first enter main building to be greeted by a huge group of Lizardfos.

After playing Wind Waker the sky felt too small and the bird felt too boring. Again people say 'no the sky was huge' ... no, the sky was tiny... the bird just didn't go very fast and aside from Skyloft, the awfully small Lump Pumpkin island and the place inside the Thunderhead which you only need to go to for one thing three times, there was absolutely nothing in the sky.

The sky's purpose was to transport Link from Skyloft to the overworlds and that's it. Other then visit a few areas like Thunderhead to progress the game and the Skyloft for getting things like shields, upgrades, items, and potions. The sky having nothing is reason its empty because its the SKY its supposed to be empty and the overworlds more then makes up for that considering that they are packed with areas. You say the bird was slow well Epona or better yet the Red Lion wasn't fast either even with the carrots or the winds. I just find it weird that in other games you don't seem to have this problem but SS its a huge deal...strange.

So things SS could have done better... All of it.

of course each to their own but it does feel that SS has some kind of hypnotic quality to it.

From what I summed up it seems your taste's have simply changed either towards the series or Nintendo themselves. There's nothing wrong with it either as my taste has changed towards other series too like Kingdom Hearts and its just something that happens with us. What's funny is that we already went over this and I disagree again. I guess we just have to agree to diagree then. By the way there's nothing hypnotic about liking a game and basically the same thing could be said with all the other Zelda titles just saying.

 

[MW7]

Enemy AI- You have a point. I like how the enemies were defensive minded because it was fresh for the series, but it would have been nice to have some offensive minded foes as well (besides the archers). Imagine if they could have randomized the bokoblins so that some acted defensively whereas others would instantly take a swing at you if you came into range. That would have been simple and made the combat much more diverse.

Learning Curve- I hate tutorials probably more than anyone but they have to cater to the masses. Please give us an option to skip the first hour+ of the game. The notification system was just stupid and no one can defend it- Nintendo just dropped the ball completely on that one by not giving an option to turn it off. People who defend the game say we nitpick but a flaw is a flaw no matter how small.

@ Majora's Cat- I really didn't want to sit back and watch the show. I'd watch tv or a movie for that- I bought the game for gameplay. Not that enjoying cutscenes is wrong if you enjoy them but can't Nintendo give an option to skip cutscenes for those that don't care for them.

Also related to the learning curve but not yet discussed, did anyone else feel that the game actually got easier the further you got. Obviously everyone is different, but I personally felt that I had mastered combat somewhere between the 2nd and 3rd dungeons (and that was the majority of the challenge of the game IMO). I also felt that the puzzles were at more or less of a consistent level in terms of difficulty- I mean that puzzles in Skyview Temple and Fire Sanctuary were on a comparable level of difficulty. Also of course there are some exceptions to my generalizations as well like I thought the 2nd and 3rd Imprisoned battles were the hardest part of the game and those occurred later on in the game.

Story- Sorry but I just wish Nintendo would scale back the story for Zelda games or at least make every cutscene skippable right from the start.

Characters- I liked how Skyward Sword handled the characters. The vast majority of characters you never had to talk to unless you wanted to, and the ones that were involved in the story were interesting. I'm not really sure what Vanitas means here. I view not involving the whole cast of characters as a positive thing because it leaves more of the game as optional. Involving all the characters in the story is something that would make the Zelda series so story based that I don't even think I could play it anymore.

Final Boss- I didn't have a problem with him. He wasn't the most original or difficult but as a duel he was good.

The Sky- Empty but I liked flying as much as any means of transport used in the series. Particularly I thought it was funny that Nintendo went from a train in the last game which restricts you to following the tracks and then gave you the total freedom of flying in Skyward Sword. The thing that bothered me is that it took to long to travel across. I think they should have either made your loftwing faster or add a lot more of the speed burst islands.


As for my own suggestions, I think they should have taken out at least one of the Imprisoned battles, turned the Song of the Hero quest into an entirely optional sidequest that leads to the boss rush (obviously altering some aspects as well- like throwing out the tadstones entirely), and made the game more nonlinear. The final suggestion would have simple to implement- they should have given you the 3 songs in the thunderhead at once so that you could pursue the 3 flames however you wanted. The added plus would be that the game would be less repetitive as you wouldn't have to go the thunderhead just to get a song 2 more times.

Also I mentioned in response to Vanitas that I wanted more options to skip cutscenes but I would like this to apply to dialogue as well. Skyward Sword seems to be moving the series further away from freedom. I think player choice is the second greatest asset of the series (dungeons are number one) and it's disappearing in some respects. In the ways that are simple to allow choice: allowing cutscene skips from the beginning, speeding dialogue, and nonlinearity Nintendo is just ignoring people like me. I know I'm in the minority but if it's incredibly simple to fix my complaints without the majority even noticing then it's common sense to do so.

 

[ALinkToSTI]

First post!!! Yayy.. Anyways, I'm glad to see people I can agree with. It's weird though, I thought I had a good idea on what "harcore" Zelda fans felt was essential to Zelda, but that all changed with this game. I was surprised to see so much people absolutely fall in love with the game. The enemy A.I would annoy me sometimes but it wasn't a big problem. The final boss was just ok, which I didn't have a big problem with either, but it was kind of blah. Everything else though I agree with you though. The story itself was not bad, I just had a hard time caring at all.. Everything felt so forced and gimicky, from Fi not shutting up, to the game being much more linear than the Zelda games before.. The learning curve you mention also falls in there, it just didn't feel open, like a fantasy, family-friendly version of Uncharted, with a lot more hand holding. I just felt like I wasn't experiencing the world, it felt so small.. I don't think the sky was done great, but my disappointment with it came more because of my disappointment with the world itself. The only people you can talk to are the citizens in Skyloft, which were not a lot, and it was the only town in the whole game.. I understand that there couldn't be any humans on the surface, but at least the new races could have some type of village or something. I've been playing all the 3D Zeldas (plus MC and LA) and although there's things that have been made better, I feel SS lost so much of what makes those older games great. It feels so empty and dead, maybe Nintendo couldn't make another Clock Town, but give us something to care about. I did really enjoy the game though, and it's tied for 3rd for my favorite 3D Zelda after MM and OOT (I think Wind Waker has the edge though)..

 

[Spirit]

ZeldaPokemon25, I just feel more fulfilled by every other home console Zelda game over SS, though i have noticed that those who dont like OoT or Mm seem to like SS a lot. They are very different games. I wouldn't say my tastes have changed towards Zelda or Nintendo, i dont own a ps3 or xbox360 so the wii is all i have to get a gaming fix, i dont hate skyward sword it just doesn't thrill me whereas WW TP OoT and MM all did with relative ease. Agreeing to disagree is our best option i think.

I missed the areas like the graveyard of OoT, and the haunting qualities of the Spirit temple and the sense of adventure of WW and the weirdness of MM, as always its personal preference and opinion i just felt that SS wasn't varied enough but i still bought it and still enjoy it, it just reminds me of what i'm missing is all, which is why i thin i get so critical with it, i know Nintendo have better ideas than what SS gave us.

 

[ALinkToSTI]

Sorry for the huge paragraph guys lol..

 

[Kare]

I didnt like that you could carry so few items, 70% of my items were sitting in the item check..

 

[Rupayan]

I'm not going to respond to all of your thoughts... Because frankly, I don't really have any response... It's all been said already.

Instead, I'll just say what I think could've been better about the game ....

Starting off, I had 2 large problems with the game. Later, it didn't matter to me that much, but I think it is something I should definitely mention.

I know you guys are going to hate on me for saying this, but when I started playing the game, I didn't really like the graphics... Yes, yes, I know, Zelda is not about the graphics, but still. After playing TP alot, and getting anticipated for SS, I just think they could've enhanced certain things. One thing that really annoyed me were "jagged edges". Now, as far as I know, there weren't jagged edges in TP, but if there were, I didn't notice them as much as I did playing SS. The thing that I didn't really like was that TP was originally a GCN game, and if Nintendo could pull good graphics off like that, then I don't see why they didn't have the clarity like that in SS. Now don't get me wrong, I'm not talking about the style. SS has a completely different style of graphics than TP, but I'm just talking about the clarity... Look at the curves (no homo) of Link's body... They are little jagged edges... His arm? No curve.. Just jagged lines. Now were there these in TP? Yes there probably were. But I don't know, IMO they were much more profound in SS. So like I said, this was a problem when I first started playing... Soon, I just got used to it, and I found it fine.

The second aspect I thought was a little off at the beginning of SS was... the story... Now I'm not one of those story haters of Zelda, but I just think that there was something wrong this time. It seemed... bland. TP, I loved the story. It was interesting, and fluid. But SS? The entire beginning was... Hey. Zelda fell. Gotta go get her. (up till this part, It's fine.) First temple. Hey Zelda's there. Oh she leaves again instead of coming back to you. Hmmm she seems fine, but lets just go after her again. Second temple. Hey Zelda wasn't fine, but Impa came along and saved her. So it seems that she's still fine. Nonetheless, lets just continue to follow her, even though she has someone (Impa) who was selected by the gods to do this task to protect her... What I'm trying to get at is that there isn't a motive to continue after Zelda. She seems to be in great hands with Impa, I see no reason to follow her... Only later as the story develops, do we have a purpose. Even then, there are some linear parts that seem unnecessary.


Don't get me wrong, I loved this game, and I think that it deserved its 10/10, especially when a game like Super Mario Galaxy 2 got a 10/10. I mean seriously, I know Super Mario Galaxy 2 is fun. Does it really have all the components necessary for a 10/10?

I leave that question to you guys.

 

[Mozzy]

I actually loved the combat quite a bit and is one of my favorite features of the game. Here is what I would have done differently.

Instead of losing your shield if it breaks just have it become unusable with the option to fix it for money.
More side quests
Broader use of items such as the whip
Text Scrolling option
Get rid of reintroduction of collectibles, once is enough
Have more pouches

 

[MW7]

there are some linear parts that seem unnecessary.

I like that you say this because my least favorite aspect of the game was that some parts were unnecessarily linear. Not quite the same as unnecessary linear parts but similar.

Don't get me wrong, I loved this game, and I think that it deserved its 10/10, especially when a game like Super Mario Galaxy 2 got a 10/10. I mean seriously, I know Super Mario Galaxy 2 is fun. Does it really have all the components necessary for a 10/10?

I leave that question to you guys.

This is wise I think. Game reviews are relative and not absolute. Skyward Sword can be a 10/10 despite obvious flaws. Calling the game perfect in every sense of the word perfect is inherently wrong (unless you mean just from your own perspective) because clearly there are people that feel otherwise.

Also I think people who are defending Skyward Sword against claims that it falls short of other Zelda game need to realize that virtually no one is calling the game bad. This is a Zelda fansite, and people have different tastes within the series.

 

[Majora's Cat]

People who defend the game say we nitpick but a flaw is a flaw no matter how small.

Larger, more noticeable flaws can detract from a video game. These are detrimental to a person's enjoyment of the game and severely cripple the gameplay. Smaller flaws take a keen eye to find, and they may not directly impact how much you enjoy a game. We play video games for the combat, puzzles - for the in-game content. A gamer's outlook on a game shouldn't be affected by these minor flaws because, well, they pale in comparison to all the aspects of a game that are done right.

@ Majora's Cat- I really didn't want to sit back and watch the show. I'd watch tv or a movie for that- I bought the game for gameplay. Not that enjoying cutscenes is wrong if you enjoy them can't Nintendo give an option to skip cutscenes for those that don't care for them.

Good thought, but it really depends on what type of gamer you are. Some prefer more cinematic approaches to games, and some like getting right to the point and enjoying the gameplay. It's really up to the gamer, and it is unfair that you are not given the option to skip cutscenes in the first playthrough. Perhaps the developer wants the player to truly experience the game, rather than killing enemies and solving puzzles. Certain gamers enjoy this, certain gamers do not, so you are definitely entitled to your opinion.

I didn't really like the graphics... Yes, yes, I know, Zelda is not about the graphics, but still.

No, Zelda isn't about the graphics. However, Skyward Sword's art style will appeal to a lot of people, but there will be those who dislike it. You say that there were lots of jagged edges in Skyward Sword, and also that TP didn't have any. The beautiful scenery, great use of bloom lighting and much more distract players from the obvious shortcomings of Twilight Princess' visuals. In fact, they are more jagged than SS', but due to the new Zelda game's watercolor art style, rough polygonal surfaces will probably be more noticeable. Nintendo did a great clean-up act with Skyward Sword after the lack of crisp, clean textures in Twilight Princess.

The second aspect I thought was a little off at the beginning of SS was... the story... Now I'm not one of those story haters of Zelda, but I just think that there was something wrong this time. It seemed... bland. TP, I loved the story.

Zelda isn't about the story either. Ever. But as far as stories go, Skyward Sword's is rather impressive. It's unfair to compare SS' story to TP's, as the latter's plot revolves around Midna. This was a smart direction to turn and makes the storyline much more engrossing. SS approaches its story in a very different way - it is more lighthearted and seems to center more around the childhood bond between Link and Zelda and what it could possibly evolve into in the future. Both games have fantastic stories as far as Zelda games go, it's just a matter of preference of either a darker story focused around helped Midna regain her throne or saving Zelda from being used as a pawn in reviving the Demon King Demise.

The connection between Ghirahim and Demise is sewn together very nicely compared to Ganondorf and Zant. Ghirahim is Demise's sword and lives to revive him, but Ganondorf only grants Zant fake powers. Ganondorf is using Zant and doesn't appear until very late in the game, while Ghirahim speaks of Demise and his intentions to release him from the beginning. In that sense, Skyward Sword's villains weld nicely with the plot of the game while Ganondorf seems to have been thrown in last-minute.

These two problems don't just plague Skyward Sword, but the entire franchise as well. In fact, these two so-called "problems" are the two elements of Zelda that matter least to its fans and to gamers in general. Why make a big deal out of them?