Am I the Only One Who Truly Hated Skyward Sword?

[zadeer101]

I'm sorry because I tried sooooo hard to like SS, but I just COULD NOT enjoy anything from the controls, to the story, and even the entire art direction. It truly makes me sad because I am a huge fan, and have played every one of the games (favorites being WW and OOT), but SS really disappointed me as a zelda game, and even as a game in general. I cant imagine why it received such amazing reviews... will people either let me know if they hated it too, or tell me why so many people enjoyed SS so much? This is NOT a post simply to hate on SS, and I even made a forum account just to ask this question..

 

[Sydney]

Inb4 Ventus

Obviously, you're not alone. Several people were unsatisfied, and even flat out hated Skyward Sword. I have several gripes with the games, but I still liked it somewhat. It's perfectly okay to dislike a game, or even hate it. Just know you're not alone. Why people like it so much? I don't know, ask JuicieJ, I'm positive he'll give you an excellent response to why he believes the game was utterly successful. What do I think? I personally believe it was the motion controls/1-on-1 gameplay and the well-driven storyline.

 

[Ventus]

^You can't inb4 me, it's impossible.

Don't worry, you're not the only one who almost totally hated Skyward Sword. I myself detest the game, and I truly see it as the butt of the Zelda series. Nothing it does is particularly interesting to me. It might be a solid game, but it is no Zelda game in my mind. It's good for one playthrough then all the pixie dust that clouded my eyes is completely gone and I see a game bereft of anything relatively decent within a video game, let alone a Zelda game. Nintendo was lazy with this game, or perhaps they just put their effort in the wrong areas. SS indeed was a failure in my mind, but literally speaking the game made a lot of money. I just hope Nintendo wakes up and doesn't go the SS route again.

 

[JuicieJ]

Why people like it so much? I don't know, ask JuicieJ, I'm positive he'll give you an excellent response to why he believes the game was utterly successful.

I'm pretty sure Axle could give a better explanation than I could. Just sayin'.

 

[A Link In Time]

You are not alone in believing this, my friend. In fact fan reception for the game was mixed and Skyward Sword ranks lower than its 3D console predecessors on aggregate sites such as Metacritic and Gamerankings.

SS felt very mundane in comparison to previous franchise entries. Nintendo crafted a desolate world prior to industrialization too well for I felt there was a general lack of tasks to do especially when trekking the three overworld landmasses. It didn't help either that these areas were the same forest, volcano, and desert ones butchered since Ocarina of Time. The only truly believable area was Skyloft. There the times of day at least altered unlike down below. This was a puzzling transition seeing as how regular day changes have been a part of the series for years.

The art direction was alright, it never particularly grew on me but at least SS looked better than most SD games. Eldin Volcano particularly stands out as a very vivid province given the color palette. I can't speak much for your distrust for the narrative for I thoroughly enjoyed the cinematic experience especially during Ghirahim cutscenes and the final sequence unfolding at the Sealed Grounds.

 

[JuicieJ]

SS felt very mundane in comparison to previous franchise entries. Nintendo crafted a desolate world prior to industrialization too well for I felt there was a general lack of tasks to do especially when trekking the three overworld landmasses.

Maybe because the sidequests were mainly up in the Sky. The surface was meant to be the dangerous portion.

It didn't help either that these areas were the same forest, volcano, and desert ones butchered since Ocarina of Time.

Exactly what is wrong with re-using terrain? Did these areas look the same as they did in the past?

 

[Mr Reaper]

Good game, not a good Zelda game, think I've said it before, IMO it disembowels the very fundamentals of the Zelda series and leaves you with an empty skin, it just doesn't hold up to the standards of the rest of the series, but all the long lasting hype really doesn't help, I mean the motion controls were great but as a game, I think it would have nearly no fans if it weren't for the motion controls, I like them but as a game itself it just sucks compared to other Zelda games, but just this once I can forgive Nintendo, it's more like a test run for 1:1 motion controls which I will admit they pulled off pretty well, but it just doesn't hold up as a game, it makes me sick when people say it's better than OoT, motion controls alone can't make it a great Zelda game.

 

[A Link In Time]

Maybe because the sidequests were mainly up in the Sky. The surface was meant to be the dangerous portion.

I recall a time when the entire overworld was equally dangerous and equally central to sidequests. I'm not a fan of the partitioning Nintendo pursued in SS. It's as though there was some invisible wall between the sky and the surface and this was represented with the brilliant beams of light leading to the overworld down below. I'd go so far as to argue the civilians of Skyloft reveled in the statement, "Ignorance is bliss". While Skyloft and more specifically Sky Keep was created as a sanctuary to prevent Ghirahim's forces from obtaining the Triforce and reviving Demise, city propaganda never informed residents of the true purpose of their area of residence and they failed to notice the devastation around them until game's end.

Exactly what is wrong with re-using terrain? Did these areas look the same as they did in the past?

There is nothing inherently wrong with reusing terrain but SS's design felt lazy. Every previous game since OoT featured some area that helped it stand out whether it was the entire juxtaposed parallel world of Majora's Mask, the igneous volcanoes and island paradises of TWW provided a refreshing mix, TP injected variety into what would be mundane areas with its Twilight Realm twist. SS failed to convey an aura of mysteriousness during exploration and the sole redemption that could be found in Silent Realms had already been done before and better.

 

[JuicieJ]

I'd go so far as to argue the civilians of Skyloft reveled in the statement, "Ignorance is bliss".

Nearly every Zelda game has this going on with the general public. Complaining about it in Skyward Sword doesn't hold a lot of merit as a result.

There is nothing inherently wrong with reusing terrain but SS's design felt lazy. Every previous game since OoT featured some area that helped it stand out whether it was the entire juxtaposed parallel world of Majora's Mask, the igneous volcanoes and island paradises of TWW provided a refreshing mix, TP injected variety into what would be mundane areas with its Twilight Realm twist. SS failed to convey an aura of mysteriousness during exploration and the sole redemption that could be found in Silent Realms had already been done before and better.

I'm sorry, but that's just incorrect. The Sealed Grounds and Lanayru Desert were very mysterious thanks to their music. The Faron Woods were relaxing, yet adventurous. Eldin Volcano was begging to be climbed. The Sand Sea was filled with wonder and beauty with the timeshift stone revealing the water that was there 1000 years ago, but also had a constant reminder that it was the past and that it suffered a terrible fate. It was all a grand mix of different vibes, and each area was remarkably designed to make you think about how you were going to be able to advance due to its dungeon-like design. This also helped transitions from overworld to dungeon feel seamless. SS's overworld isn't perfect, no, but it's still extremely well-designed overall and has many ideas that should be continued in the future.

And exactly what was done better than the Silent Realms? The Twilight? If that's so, I beg to differ. The Twilight wasn't exactly bad, but all the bugs were blatantly shown on the map, so there wasn't any legitimate feeling of having to hunt the bugs down, whereas the Silent Realm had us tracking them down on our own and forced us to use our wits to get from tear to tear before the 90 seconds between each one was up. It was much more thrilling and enjoyable due to how fast-paced and creepy it was (Guardians waking up). The Twilight? Not so much.

 

[Ronin]

There were quite a few sequences that I developed a distaste for. Not because they were inherently bad, but because they were repetitive and irksome to me. The Imprisoned battles took the worst out of me. I hated chasing him up the ramp three times, with the exact same objective in mind. Despite the little idiosyncrasies that were added on to the latterly fights—although the Groosenator was an epic addition—it felt cyclical to me; unnecessary filler. My interest was simply not maintained in this case.

However that one area should not put a complete damper on my impression of this game. It's amazing as a whole and introduced a lot of new aspects that I anticipate will return. Some of it is a little hard to put into words, because they seemed lacking, as in they could have been implemented better. The Sky is the most noticeable deficiency that I'll be using as an analogy; it was almost a remake of the Great Sea in Wind Waker. Travel was most certainly faster, and that is something I'm thankful for. My only complaint is that it felt empty—nearly devoid of things to do with a lot of unused space in between. Had they put aerial enemies in the Sky, I think it would have been much better.

Outside of the repetitions of the story and gameplay, nonetheless, it boasted a melange of fresh features. Gathering bugs and specific objects opened up the possibility of optionally upgrading gear for the first time. This was utterly amazing, because it gave the player incentive to explore the lands for these collectibles. Another is the Stamina Gauge, which I believe actually complemented the motion controls rather well. It limited how much movement they could do while at the same time urging them to play it smart. Lastly we have the reintroduction of the Skyward Strike, a beam of energy that charges on the blade when pointed heavenward and revolves toward a target once it's released. All of these, in my opinion, drove the game toward greatness, and made up for certain areas where it fell somewhat short.

Overall, I am prone to agree that Skyward Sword is a solid game. It has a few patches that should have been made, but the outright size of it makes some things tough to call. For some people it was the right thing, and others felt that it was wrong. Therefore, I think it's purely subjective, purely based on opinion. If you dislike Skyward Sword as a whole, then no one should judge you. After all, it's just a game—a unique and widely diverse one, but a game nonetheless.

 

[Random Person]

No. You are most certainly not alone. SS is the only Zelda game I hate. I dislike AoL, but I appreciate what it tried to do for the seriesd. I hate SS. Alot of people already said some of the things I feel, so I'm just going to point out the one that hasn't been said yet, and its something that I always say when talking about SS. This game was supposed to be the prequel to the series, a game we all waited for, and it failed heavily in that attempt. Both WW and TP did a, what I believe, excellent job in keeping the literature of Zelda together. There were holes in their stories to be sure (particularly in WW's), but they were still great. In WW, you knew this was a new world with new concepts to be explored. That's why the graphics were new, there were different races, but they kept telling you of the hero of time who saved the land long ago. In TP, this Hyrule was the same Hyrule from OoT, however it grew up. The graphics were more serious, the same locations looked aged and some parts decreped (can't spell), the familiar enemies and allies were back but with a much more realistic biology. SS does not bring about the feel of that you are in the prequel of Zelda games. You are in a completely new world, the graphics while trying to relate to all games in actuality relate to none, and many important species were simply eliminated which if this was a prequel, you would want to keep certain species. The worst part though is the story. As a prequel, this game should have tried to do something about the history of the game, but not only did it fail to do that, it created a completely new and personal story. SS tried to be a new game and that really urks me because when you make a prequel, especially one that we've been waiting 25 years for, you don't do what SS did.

Like I said, I have my other qualms, but that is my main objection to the game.

 

[Ugea]

For me. i try to get in to SS for a replay but i keep getting sidetracked ( by playing other Zelda games ) for me its not the motion controls, they worked fine to me. But its the Padding, the backtracking, FI was annoying and the Horrible Mini games. But their was some things i do like from SS. so to me its not a Bad game but could use some improvements

 

[Spirit]

SS had to happen, an uninspiring game with some odd design choices that made the game less enjoyable for a lot of people. Its a shame that SS turned out to be the way it was, with its seemingly lazy and lackluster design both in terrain and enemies considering that SS is the closest Zelda will get to another OoT style revolution if you take the motionplus controls into account.

I don't know what it was for me with SS. I geeked out when I heard that there was a new 3D Zelda game coming, then i saw the trailer... It didn't excite me at all. I didn't care for any of the footage shown, it all felt too familiar and presented in a way that didn't compel me at all. The game wasn't all bad, what was there was mostly decent enough but for me there felt to be too much missing from the game itself. I spent the game waiting to come across some hidden skills, some hidden provinces and not just the three we are given, perhaps a province exclusive to the past? A dungeon in the sky, more sky to explore, more islands, a dungeon where you could use your Loftwing, i also thought that the Loftwing would learn new moves such as barrel rolls etc but we got nothing. The upgrading felt like a waste of time too, i didn't like scrapper, i didn't like the plot of the game that not only felt like a fanfiction but a desperate one that kept adding clumsy plot points just to make itself longer.

This and so much more after playing and loving Zelda for so long just wholly disappointed me from beginning to end of SS, i'm not sure if i hate it but i had no compulsion to complete it during my first play through and the only reason i did it a second time was because my completed file was erased for Hero Mode (something Zelda has never done before, erasing profiles) ad then I played Hero Mode and still wasn't impressed. I wanted to like it, i didn't want there to be a 3D Zelda game that i disliked, but it had to happen at some point, thankfully it happened now which leaves a huge gap for Zelda WiiU to pick up the pace again.

 

[surferguy7]

Yes, you are the only one and you should feel awful.

 

[Cfrock]

It didn't help either that these areas were the same forest, volcano, and desert ones butchered since Ocarina of Time.

I'm sorry but I can't agree here at all.

You swam through the forest in Skyward Sword, you sailed across the desert and you had to evade a prison camp on the volcano. Yes, it was the same terrain when you simply say 'desert, forest, mountain' but when you consider what happened in those places, how you traversed them and how the game made you see them in a new light, I don't think it's correct to say they were "the same".

I've never seen an entire forest submerged under water. I've never had to swim among the tree branches and evade angry fish 100 feet up from the forest floor.

I've never been captured and had all of my items taken away from me, being forced to sneak about and avoid enemy defenses while I try to steal back my equipment (well, not in a Zelda game at least). That sequence alone made me appreciate that my enemies were an organised army and not just the group of feral monsters that its felt like in every single Zelda game before hand.

I've never found a boat stuck in an ancient desert, started up its engine only to find that the boat exists in its own little pocket of time when the desert was an ocean. I've never sailed over sand, seen ancient towers in the distance that transformed back to their original splendor as I approached.

Skyward Sword captured my imagination in ways no other Zelda game ever has. There is some real creativity and magic at work in the game and I hardly think you can just write the Surface off as "the same" as the places in Ocarina of Time. Ocarina of Time did nothing interesting with any of its locations. Skyward Sword turned each otherwise mundane environment into a wonderland of mystery and discovery.