Decision: Is Skyward Sword the Best Zelda Game on the Market?

[Link and Cuccos]

Oh yes I agree it's strange, but I do the same thing just to a much lesser extent. I think I've read Vanitas saying how the gameplay of Skyward Sword was amazing, and that this was why he still considered it a great video game. Personally this rationale makes sense to me because gameplay is such a ridiculously important part of video games. It's virtually the only element that's essential for a game to be a game. I know I'm different in that I care very little about story, graphics, music, etc., but from my perspective it's very possible for a person to complain about the things Vanitas is complaining about and still consider the game good overall.

For instance I'm starting to think that if I ever reviewed a game that I would weigh its gameplay at least 90% leaving 10% for everything else. So if a game nailed the gameplay it could still be great even if it whiffed on everything else. I don't think Skyward Sword had a bad story, graphics, or characters (among the many things said) like Vanitas does though. Almost all of my complaints are somehow gameplay related.




Both you guys make excellent points. I would agree that there were several aspects in which Skyward Sword was promising. I loved the upgrade system and characters specifically a lot out of what you two mentioned. Another thing that Skyward Sword returned to that was almost entirely absent in Twlight Princess was the returning to parts of the world. I liked going to the provinces again to discover something new. I shouldn't have made it an all or nothing proposition of disagreeing with the game designers on pretty much everything because there were a ton of things that I either agreed with or had no problem with. It's just that there were tons of missed opportunities (Axle had an article a while back just about this), lacked options (can only skip cutscenes in one mode- why?; have to see a notification for treasures/bugs everytime you reset the game-why?; have to use motion controls for virtually everything including swimming; etc.), and for me most importantly they flushed away so much potential replay value by making the game more linear than necessary. IMO Skyward Sword is good for one amazing playthrough, and then it loses a ton of its value. I have been trying to pinpoint why I felt like my first playthrough of Skyward Sword was up there with any of the games, and then for instance why my sixth playthrough of ALTTP or my twentieth playthrough of OOT or even my second playthrough of Adventure of Link absolutely blew away my second playthrough of Skyward Sword.

vanitas did say the gameplay was topnotch, but then he said that they failed nearly in every department. He also said SS is a "subpar Zelda" just like TP, that it lacked elements to be a good Zelda game, and that Nintendo really messed up with this game. So I don't think he feels the game is good at all. Or maybe he's exaggerating how much he actually hates the game.


As for replay value, OoT has the least replay value for me. I played the game once (felt more obligated to finish it just because it was OoT. It wasn't as fun as the other 3D Zeldas BUT it is still a great game). Still, I bought the game on 3DS as well. Played the first 5 mins and haven't touched it. I'm going to finish it because I feel an obligation to play the updated version, and I do like the graphics upgrade, but it doesn't give me as much of a motivation to go through like SS, which i'm playing on Hero Mode. I didn't like OoT's gameplay as much as it felt pretty cut and dry (but I loved the instrument), and there were flaws that bothered me. Linearity doesn't effect replay value. If a game is linear then I look at how well it's done. If it's nonlinear, I also look at how well it's done. Nonlinearity didn't benefit me or interest me in OoT. The only times I probably care about nonlinearity is if doing stuff a different order will give me like a different ending. SS's gameplay impressed me so much and made the game the most fun for me.

I do agree that ALttP has a lot of replay value (played it so much as a kid, but that was a long time ago).

 

[MW7]

vanitas did say the gameplay was topnotch, but then he said that they failed nearly in every department. He also said SS is a "subpar Zelda" just like TP, that it lacked elements to be a good Zelda game, and that Nintendo really messed up with this game. So I don't think he feels the game is good at all. Or maybe he's exaggerating how much he actually hates the game.

Maybe, I don't know him real well so either of those might be true.

As for replay value, OoT has the least replay value for me. I played the game once (felt more obligated to finish it just because it was OoT. It wasn't as fun as the other 3D Zeldas BUT it is still a great game). Still, I bought the game on 3DS as well. Played the first 5 mins and haven't touched it. I'm going to finish it because I feel an obligation to play the updated version, and I do like the graphics upgrade, but it doesn't give me as much of a motivation to go through like SS, which i'm playing on Hero Mode. I didn't like OoT's gameplay as much as it felt pretty cut and dry (but I loved the instrument), and there were flaws that bothered me. Linearity doesn't effect replay value. If a game is linear then I look at how well it's done. If it's nonlinear, I also look at how well it's done. Nonlinearity didn't benefit me or interest me in OoT. The only times I probably care about nonlinearity is if doing stuff a different order will give me like a different ending. SS's gameplay impressed me so much and made the game the most fun for me.

I do agree that ALttP has a lot of replay value (played it so much as a kid, but that was a long time ago).

Well I guess we're just different then. What I get out of nonlinearity is being able to do things differently so that the game feels fresh. The best case scenario is when doing dungeons in a different order can actually lead to an altered path through a different dungeon. The best game for this was definitely A Link to the Past because there are crazy things I've found like how to get through the Ice Palace without the hookshot (best example I have). That's why I want nonlinearity so badly. My main reason for playing Zelda games is to analyze them and that's how I get most of my enjoyment out of them. I constantly find challenges to do that rely heavily on the nonlinear nature of the games. For instance I once spent a week just trying to figure out how early you can get the ice arrows in Ocarina of Time.

In Skyward Sword and Twilight Princess much of the game must be completed in a set order so that took away a ton of potential fun for me. For instance my first instinct upon finishing Skyward Sword was to replay the game to figure out how many things I could do out of order, and on my first playthrough I noticed that the fireshield earrings were basically useless because a guardian potion plus grants invincibility. So I tried using the guardian potion plus and heading off to the Fire Sanctuary early, and the game prevents you by having Fi stop you and say "you won't survive if you continue" or something like that while you're invincible. I just want more freedom- to do things out of order, to skip items, and basically to go on my own adventure and not the one the game dictates to me. I don't think this is too much to ask because games like A Link to the Past and Ocarina of Time had freedom in abundance. Sorry for ranting; I just have a lot to say about this.

I really like how you said you'd be interested in different endings though. Many people shoot down my ideas on the basis that the story will suffer from being nonlinear. I don't see why they couldn't have branches in the story, and I actually think that would make the stories much better. For instance imagine in Wind Waker (spoilers for the beginning of the game follow)

Spoiler

if there was a branch in the story after getting the first pearl. The game forces you to go after the one in the forest next but what if you could choose. Whichever pearl you go after next could have a huge impact on the story and game. In the actual game Greatfish Isle is destroyed because you don't get there soon enough, but what if you could have gone there before the Forest Haven. Then the Forest Haven could have been destroyed rather than Greatfish Isle which completely changes the game. Something that dynamic within the game would add tremendous replay value. They could have set it up so that a whole new dungeon would be playable and replace the Forbidden Woods in this alternate story. That would be pretty awesome at least IMO.

This was an example of branches in the story in the middle of a game, but the opportunities for different endings would be much easier to implement.

 

[Link and Cuccos]

Maybe, I don't know him real well so either of those might be true.


Well I guess we're just different then. What I get out of nonlinearity is being able to do things differently so that the game feels fresh. The best case scenario is when doing dungeons in a different order can actually lead to an altered path through a different dungeon. The best game for this was definitely A Link to the Past because there are crazy things I've found like how to get through the Ice Palace without the hookshot (best example I have). That's why I want nonlinearity so badly. My main reason for playing Zelda games is to analyze them and that's how I get most of my enjoyment out of them. I constantly find challenges to do that rely heavily on the nonlinear nature of the games. For instance I once spent a week just trying to figure out how early you can get the ice arrows in Ocarina of Time.

In Skyward Sword and Twilight Princess much of the game must be completed in a set order so that took away a ton of potential fun for me. For instance my first instinct upon finishing Skyward Sword was to replay the game to figure out how many things I could do out of order, and on my first playthrough I noticed that the fireshield earrings were basically useless because a guardian potion plus grants invincibility. So I tried using the guardian potion plus and heading off to the Fire Sanctuary early, and the game prevents you by having Fi stop you and say "you won't survive if you continue" or something like that while you're invincible. I just want more freedom- to do things out of order, to skip items, and basically to go on my own adventure and not the one the game dictates to me. I don't think this is too much to ask because games like A Link to the Past and Ocarina of Time had freedom in abundance. Sorry for ranting; I just have a lot to say about this.

I really like how you said you'd be interested in different endings though. Many people shoot down my ideas on the basis that the story will suffer from being nonlinear. I don't see why they couldn't have branches in the story, and I actually think that would make the stories much better. For instance imagine in Wind Waker (spoilers for the beginning of the game follow)

Spoiler

if there was a branch in the story after getting the first pearl. The game forces you to go after the one in the forest next but what if you could choose. Whichever pearl you go after next could have a huge impact on the story and game. In the actual game Greatfish Isle is destroyed because you don't get there soon enough, but what if you could have gone there before the Forest Haven. Then the Forest Haven could have been destroyed rather than Greatfish Isle which completely changes the game. Something that dynamic within the game would add tremendous replay value. They could have set it up so that a whole new dungeon would be playable and replace the Forbidden Woods in this alternate story. That would be pretty awesome at least IMO.

This was an example of branches in the story in the middle of a game, but the opportunities for different endings would be much easier to implement.

I agree that we are different (which we knew before, LOL) since we have different preferences and wants in a game. I really don't care about doing things out of order since I'm still going to get the same result. Doing Temple A first versus Temple B makes no difference if it doesn't really change anything major. It doesn't add value to my experience, and I find it kinda' pointless.

However, I love your idea with the WW example. This is where I would enjoy nonlinearity because there's a reason for it. I think doing something like that would be great for the Zelda franchise. I don't want it to be though like Catherine where you have so many different endings, but a few interesting variations that would impact the story would suffice. It would be something new to add to the franchise as well. Again, it doesn't have to be to the extent of Catherine (and I'm using that as an example since it's fresh on my mind, lol), because of timeline issues. So, main ending stays the same (like Link wins and defeats villain), but there's some variation that isn't enough to create more timeline issues. I would like to also see how your actions can effect the outcome of even certain characters. For instance, SS did this with gratitude crystals, but that was only in the sidequest (which had some very memorable and funny moments, like screwing over Cawlin), but also implementing that in the main plot? I'm up for that idea. Your alternate dungeon/Pearl example is pretty awesome. It would be really exciting to find out that there is a new alternate dungeon to play because you did something different in the game.

 

[Sir Duke]

I'm going to say yes. I loved the 1:1 controls, the story, the graphics, the sound..... everything!

 

[LegendOfTwili]

I'm going to have to say no. The story was decent but there's been better ones, the characters were fun but they were neither hilariously funny or strangely mysterious. The gameplay was fun but I do prefer the traditional method. Now, this is coming across as I really dislike the game, I don't, in fact it is my Top 5 Zelda games I'm just being overly-critical at the moment.

 

[JuLeDoS]

Well, if we're talking strictly about games on the market, the only ones available would be Spirit Tracks, Twilight Princess, Ocarina of Time 3D and Skyward Sword. The rest are out of print. I think all of them are pretty good, but Skyward Sword is my favorite because of inclusions such as the stamina meter and the ability to dash. Finally we can stop rolling the whole time!

 

[Terreckien]

This is definitly a matter of opinion but I do really think it is. OoT3D is close behind to me because of the nostalgia it has as well as how they did a complete overhaul with the graphics and made everything look amazing.

 

[link'sneighbor]

it was highly anticipated but i don't know if it is the best game in the market

 

[pit0010]

well personally i think it's the best because all the shops are finally in one. You don't have to waste time traveling around to go buy other stuff like potions, item refills and etc.
This whole new idea is quite brilliant.

 

[Toki-no-ocarina]

Skyward sword was great.

But you can't possibly beat ocarina of time. (In my opinion)

I loved the music, especially ballad of the goddess, and the gameplay was exceptionnal! The story wasn't bad, although it was a little bit disappointing. The graphics were beutiful but they could have been better, since it was made 5 years after twilight princess, I was expecting something better. But in overral, skyward sword was majestic and one of my favourite games of all time!

 

[Rethromil]

I think that there are a lot more zelda game that are better than skyward sword i didnt like the motion coltrols and i really didnt like the repetitiveness of the areas i would have rather had a few new areas rather than the song of the hero quest in terms of pacing and story.

 

[NinLink]

Skyward Sword is a good game, but it did not live up the the hype it was being given by Nintendo. I was kind of hoping for a mixture of OoT and MM, a wonderful game with lots of dungeons and side quests that were difficult, but still fun.

 

[Lucas]

I think SS is the best Zelda game on the market. My personal favorite are WW, MM, and SS. And out of all of those I think SS is the most user friendly so SS has my pick.

 

[lotrfanatic]

I thought the button mashing combat was great on the N64 classics, it was normal, but the enemies were hard enough to keep it fun and i occasionaly would die from enemies, but when WW and TP (i played this on the wii, but the combat still resembled button mashing) came around the enemies rarely dealt damage! you would just run up and hack away! How is that fun! SS, however, made the enemies movements more unexpected and pattern based so if you didn't time your shield bash right you would get hit. I loved how timing was a big part in this game, it puts u on the edge of your seat!