What Did You Think of the Shield Deteriorating in Skyward Sword?

[Tearbender]

What did you guys think of the shield deteriorating or getting destroyed in SS? I personally thought it was pretty good, it added a bit of challenge to the series and a bit of strategy. Your thoughts?

 

[Ventus]

I honestly think it was more of a great thing in SS than anything; I played shieldless the entire game simply because there was no reason TO use a shield thanks to the sword-based enemy AI. Having the enemies break my shield was part of my strategy! I could go on and on and on, but let's keep it simple: the shield meter was largely ineffective in SS because the shield didn't do much for the player anyway. Yeah, shield bashing is OP as hell, but you can perform just as well shieldless as you can WITH a shield! xD

But, I do want to see the meter return (alongside the Magic Meter), as I know Nintendo could make the sheild especially useful in a future Zelda.

 

[Sydney]

I really didn't care for it, but I guess it added somewhat of a challenge to the game. It only happened to me a few times, so it's not like it was a big deal for me. Besides, using a shield takes strategy. If you're not careful, then shield deterioration will become a much larger factor during gameplay. Carefully timed shield bashes will prevent such a thing from happening, and it took some time for me to learn that.

 

[Tearbender]

I honestly think it was more of a great thing in SS than anything; I played shieldless the entire game simply because there was no reason TO use a shield thanks to the sword-based enemy AI. Having the enemies break my shield was part of my strategy! I could go on and on and on, but let's keep it simple: the shield meter was largely ineffective in SS because the shield didn't do much for the player anyway. Yeah, shield bashing is OP as hell, but you can perform just as well shieldless as you can WITH a shield! xD

But, I do want to see the meter return (alongside the Magic Meter), as I know Nintendo could make the sheild especially useful in a future Zelda.

I'll agree with you there. Though overall in Zelda games, I never really found any use for shields. I just hack and slash the enemy until they die. This is a good addition, one I do hope they flesh out in Zelda U(along with the magic meter).

 

[Azure Sage]

I didn't mind it. Actually, when I first started the game, I didn't want to carry a shield, so I did what I do in any other Zelda game--I purposefully lost my shield. Of course, that was before I found out that you could un-equip your shield. ;P

I thought that the shields having the potential to break was okay. It added a sense of realism that didn't really help but also didn't hurt. I never lose my shields though, because I don't use them. The only shield I actually bother to use is the Hylian Shield. So it doesn't really matter to me whether they can break or not.

 

[Beauts]

I didn't like it. I like shielding. I don't think I would've disliked this feature per se though, if it wasn't just a massive inconvenience.

 

[Kirino]

It kept people from overusing the shield, and made the game slightly more difficult, so I liked it. My shield rarely broke though.

 

[Zorth]

First of all there was really no point to it since you could beat the game without using a shield, second of all I can imagine how annoying it must've been for those that used a shield the entire time. SS's resource sinks are really primitive just like it's upgrading system when compared to other games within the genre. It was definitely a step in the right direction with having to keep repairing stuff and upgrading it but they should've made it more forced upon the player instead of just being a thing one can do if they feel for it or not. Another thing is that I hope ZU will expand upon this system even more, making rupees actually matter for the first time in Zelda history and raising the series on par with other games within the series by adding a little bit more advanced upgrading system.

tl;dr

It was a step in the right direction but needs to be worked on.

 

[A Link In Time]

I enjoyed the added sense of realism the shield meter added. Skyward Sword cast Link in a more vulnerable light with enemies dealing an entire heart of damage, more evasive foes, the stamina meter preventing strenuous activity, and the shield meter affirming that defense mechanisms have their limits.

The sidequest to collect the Hylian Shield is rewarding and the iconic item is righteously unbreakable.

The next logical progression is for Nintendo to implement similarly destructible weapons for enemies and show the deterioration of enemy armor as well as Link's tunic during battle.

 

[JuicieJ]

I liked it. It was a relatively simple addition, but it made using the shield actually have some purpose other than just blocking. Using shields had no real consequence in the past, while in Skyward Sword, some effort actually has to to be applied to keep your shield around. It was one of the many things that provided such a great amount of resource management in the game, and that's always something I'm game for in Zelda.

First of all there was really no point to it since you could beat the game without using a shield

In that case, what's the point of anything optional?

second of all I can imagine how annoying it must've been for those that used a shield the entire time.

That's why shields didn't take damage if you used the Shield Bash.

SS's resource sinks are really primitive just like it's upgrading system when compared to other games within the genre. Another thing is that I hope ZU will expand upon this system even more, making rupees actually matter for the first time in Zelda history and raising the series on par with other games within the series by adding a little bit more advanced upgrading system.

Rupees mattered a lot in Skyward Sword. Reason being its resource sinks actually made a difference as to whether or not you got everything, unlike in past games (I seriously have no idea what you mean by "primitive when compared to other games within the genre", it never mattered before). It was one of the biggest refinements the game had to offer for the series, as it was the first Zelda game to not have a broken/useless economy system.

 

[Zorth]

In that case, what's the point of anything optional?

I don't think everything optional is pointless, I just think that putting a resource sink on something that's optional is. For me personally the cons for using a shield outweigh the pros, this would be a different story if the shield was actually as important to have in combat as the sword. So to me it would've made more sense to put a durability gauge on the sword instead.

That's why shields didn't take damage if you used the Shield Bash.

But blocking any attack will deplete it, so if you are skilled enough to dodge every attack you see you might as well not use a shield at all?

Rupees mattered a lot in Skyward Sword. Reason being its resource sinks actually made a difference as to whether or not you got everything, unlike in past games (I seriously have no idea what you mean by "primitive when compared to other games within the genre", it never mattered before).

I'm just calling the resource sinks bad, IMO Nintendo could've added a few more different ways of spending our rupees. Professions, equipment (other than shield), different birds we can fly around with, land based vehicles etc.

It was one of the biggest refinements the game had to offer for the series, as it was the first Zelda game to not have a broken/useless economy system.

Yeah this I can agree with, was a little dizzy I guess when I wrote my previous post. SS was a step in the right direction for resource sinks and upgrading, better than other games within the series. I hope Nintendo works a little harder to expand it even more.

 

[Spirit]

I didn't care for it, i played a little bit with the shield but by the time i got to the first temple I'd long since given it up. As Ventus said there was no reason to use the shield because the enemies were so sword based, the shield felt better in TP and its a shame SS couldn't realise the shield as well as the sword because then the shield deterioration would have been more of a factor in combat as it is though it was a pretty pointless feature, i never broke a shield because i hated using it that much.

 

[Heroine of Time]

I don't know. I used my shield more often in Skyward Sword than in any other Zelda game, but it never broke. I guess by the time I actually realized how incredibly useful Shield Bashes were, I already had the Goddess Shield and I just got good enough from there that I didn't miss.

Therefore, it has never affected me. But I do think it was an interesting concept. If I'd been using shielding earlier in the game, I probably would have hated that thing -- in a good way. If motion controls are implemented again with a similar way of shielding, then yes, I think we should keep it.

 

[Ventus]

then the shield deterioration would have been more of a factor in combat as it is though it was a pretty pointless feature, i never broke a shield because i hated using it that much.

Well, I wouldn't say that the shield breaking was a pointless feature on its own. See, part of the problem is that enemies in SS are so craptastically slow (they might seem fast but when you're under the heat of battle, it's really slow). If the enemies dealt more damage to the shield meter, and more damage quicker, I think the breaking of the shield would be seen as much more of a drastic thing. The other part of the problem is that enemies really aren't tuned to the shield; where Link can fight all 1:1 against enemies, the enemies themselves cannot do the same so they're given the same, monotonous attacks that are so very much telegraphed, which I must say is a bit harsh. :I

 

[JuicieJ]

I don't think everything optional is pointless, I just think that putting a resource sink on something that's optional is. For me personally the cons for using a shield outweigh the pros, this would be a different story if the shield was actually as important to have in combat as the sword. So to me it would've made more sense to put a durability gauge on the sword instead.

I don't see how something being optional or not makes a difference whether or not it should have a resource sink. What specific detail about game design makes that a factor?

The shield was also given a much larger role in the combat in Skyward Sword. It wasn't mandatory, but is that really a bad thing?

But blocking any attack will deplete it, so if you are skilled enough to dodge every attack you see you might as well not use a shield at all?

Because not everyone is skilled enough?

I'm just calling the resource sinks bad, IMO Nintendo could've added a few more different ways of spending our rupees. Professions, equipment (other than shield), different birds we can fly around with, land based vehicles etc.

Just because there could have been more doesn't mean what's already there is bad.

Yeah this I can agree with, was a little dizzy I guess when I wrote my previous post. SS was a step in the right direction for resource sinks and upgrading, better than other games within the series. I hope Nintendo works a little harder to expand it even more.

As do I.