Did Skyward Sword Disappoint in Its Delivery?

[The Wanderer]

Skyward Sword was claimed by Nintendo to be their biggest effort to date, the end-all-be-all of Zelda, and if SS wasn't widely viewed as surpassing OoT, Shigeru Miyamoto would stop working on the Zelda series. These were awfully lofty ambitions, and I naturally want to know if most players, especially those who kept up with game details before release, felt Nintendo fulfilled their promise or were disappointing in it.

My answer is that they did not deliver on their promise of making this the greatest Zelda, especially since this was supposed to be Nintendo's ultimate product after years of hard work. However, I did enjoy it immensely despite feeling it did not live up to expectations. You can still enjoy something even if you admit it disappointed in its promises.

Really, I just want to see more solidly how many people think Skyward Sword carried its promise to the end apart from guesses and observation. It would also help to post why it was or was not disappointing, so feel free to whittle away at the keyboard.

 

[Kupsacker]

In my opinion, it is the best LoZ game to date. I think it has the best story, and think that it's a masterpiece. Some might argue that it didn't feel like a Zelda game, that too many typical Zelda elements weren't included. I just see it as Nintendo adding more variety, daring to be different from the norm. And I like it.

 

[Spirit]

No. Plainly and simply, SS didn't deliver and there are so many reasons as to why.

In regards to the claims of SS being a master work and the culmination of 25 years of legend, SS was nothing more than a deformed amalgamation of nearly every element that had been seen in every previous Zelda both in narrative and gameplay, and as an added bonus every gameplay element was given a somewhat forced push into motion control.

I'm a firm believer that video game sequels should build upon what was already established, and thus far every Zelda game has done just that until, in my opinion, we got to Skyward Sword. For me, there are too many core elements missing that should have been there from day one; a complete and sizable overworld being the first point of call. Flying on the Loftwing should have been more engaging, the sky should have been fuller, if motion control was such a focal point then why is gameplay so limited on numerous occasions such as flying; during flight there is no way to use your sword or any of the other items, there are no additional moves for the Loftwing like barrel rolls or quick turns, there are no hidden techniques for Link to find and use like those featured in TP (being a sequel and a well received inclusion to TP i expected SS to have this) ... all of this, which shouldn't need saying has to be said when discussing SS.

That being said it also took Nintendo 5 years to get SS out and the sky itself was only added a year before the game's release, and during this inclusion of the sky, the hub, which originally connected the overworld was torn out and never replaced. This begs the question of what was in place before the sky and just how much did nintendo had of the game before the idea of the sky was finalised and included? We may never know but SS in the end, after the longest gap between 3D installments, could have been a rushed job.

The story didn't wash right with me, it was nice to see a bit of emotion within the narrative but the pacing and plot holes really distracted me. I didn't care for many of the characters either and the art style wasn't something that excited me. this, coupled with the almost insulting repetition during the game itself really disillusioned me towards a game that i was trying so hard to like. The repetition that i'm alluding to here is that of fighting the Imprisoned three times, Fighting Girahim twice, revisiting the same provinces three times before game's end (yes there were more areas within those provinces to explore but a desert is still a desert and a volcano is still a volcano, and none of the later opened areas gave me the sense of exciting exploration or the sense of achievement or progression. There were regions sorely missing too like a snow/ice province and water province, perhaps a war torn province exclusive to past could have been included but alas...) and the constant use of the same enemies... among other things.

The assault-course-like overworld merged with the dungeons too much and in the end made the overall experience feel boring to me. Again, after 25 years you wouldnt expect a game which takes elements from tried and tested formulas to screw up on the basics..

What is worse is that i could go on, but i shan't. At its core SS deeply disappointed me when i wanted so much to love it. Too much was missing from the beginning for anything to make any new elements that it brought to the table seem appealing. To me Twilight Princess was the last Zelda game, because now, Zelda is made with function in mind, and is catered to gimmicks like motion controls which makes the world itself feel unnatural and out of sorts with itself in order to make the desired tools and motions required for them to work. Zelda no longer builds upon itself like WW and TP did with OoT and ALttP did with LA etc, Zelda now reworks itself and caters to its function rather than its form, an approach which does not give me the desired Zelda experience i have come to love. Following PH and ST, SS is an unhappy continuation of a trend i find unfulfilling.

 

[Ventus]

No offense to anyone in this thread, these are simply my views on the game. I apologize if my views insult you in anyway as that is not my intention. Please don't attack and/or question me, thank you.

I really wanted SS to be that end all be all amazing Zelda experience. I wanted to like it on at least its first playthrough. I really did. I was so hyped for Zelda Wii (y'know, because that concept art was all we had to go by and it looked like they would be revisiting some form of the TP art style). What did they do? They released that trailer at E3. Art style disappointed slightly. More trailers came in. More hype was subsequently generated and I eventually got over my disdain for the art style being used -- this is a Zelda release, it's gonna be awesome regardless of how much botox Link may have injected

Then comes the launch. In its very essence, the game just disappointed me. What I wanted was an improved and expanded upon Ocarina of Time or Majora's Mask gameplay experience; one that is completely mind blowing in its presentation, feel, experience to the point where you just play and replay the game because you get that feeling (let's call it a "high" because it is euphoric in a sense). What did I get? Drag, boredom, hatred, tedium. I call many things tedious in many games, even that illustrious Ocarina of Time, but with Skyward Sword, there was no way for me to get around that tedium.

I wanted the game to capture a simplistic story that, while it is technically lacking in comparison to even the most minor of epics, still manages to capture a few elements where its glaring areas aren't so glaring because the scope of the game isn't meant to capture all too much. Unfortunately, SS is a prequel, but playing off of that, Nintendo emphasized that it was a sequel. Naturally, I have come to expect many things to be answered. Few if anything questions previously raised were answered, and even more questions were raised than answered. The game is both a bad story (imo) and a terrible prequel (again imo).

I wanted the music to be catchy and memorable. None of it is, really, except the Skyloft Silent Realm unlocked music thingy (I don't know what it is called, but anyway, scrap Fi's vocals) and the Romance theme.

In short, Skyward Sword is the only Zelda game where I actually had expectations for it before its release. Overtime, I realized that I shouldn't grab at scraps but I should expect a full dinner meal at the table. It was those very expectations that ruined the game for me, and in those expectations the game just failed to deliver. If I were a consumer who likes anything that a company ships out, maybe I'd enjoy Skyward Sword. But, as I'm not, the entirety of the release was a disgusting plague to the series I fear Nintendo will repeat in the very close future. :/

Again, I apologize if my views on the game insult you in anyway, that is not my intention. Thank you.

 

[r2d93]

Yes. It did disappoint for me in a few ways, but pretty substantial ways.

After watching the gameplay released I thought "holy poop this is gonna rock itl be sooper fun!" yet then i get it, and the overworld sucks (IMO). That ruined the entire experience of the game for me. Not that I don't like the game because I of course do. The overworld just isn't fun at all or even interesting to look at (faron woods was pretty good looking however). The dungeon/puzzle-like design reeeally discouraged me and made me not want to press on.

The fricken sky. When revealed, i was under the impression it would be like the great sea. and i was psyched as hell. A big open sky i can fly around and discover islands in the distance like WW NO WAY! No way indeed. it was not like ww great sea, it was very small, and the majority of the "islands" were just big chunks of rock will very little to no value. it made me sad

And lastly, the way it was presented. SS was hyped up to be an origin story which got me pumped. Find out where Ganondorf comes from? Hylian shield? Master Sword? sweet. Nintendo made all of these connections to Zelda aspects that we know and love..... and then gave us something totally different. To me, it did not feel like a Zelda game. It just felt like Skyward Sword. I had to constantly remind myself i was playing a Zelda game. completely new(ish) areas, completely unfamiliar npcs, completeyly brand new species. It just felt too off to me

 

[The Wanderer]

No. Plainly and simply, SS didn't deliver and there are so many reasons as to why.

You know, I kind of wish I was one of those guys who could jump up and say, "You're wrong, Spirit! Everything you said is factually untrue, and I can prove it! You're in the minority!" Alas, I cannot. Despite me liking the game (and giving it a rather high mark, actually), I agree with everything you said. It's not just that Skyward Sword was not the ultimate Nintendo creation, it could not be the ultimate creation. It was far too experimental for that, and first-time experiments are almost impossible to make right the first time. Everything from motion controls to the sky to the overworld to the graphics to the story were experimental, and considering they all basically sum up the game, it's hard to ignore how unpolished it feels with a second look. I thought the game did live up to its expectations the first time around. Three more playthroughs later, including one on Hero Mode, I have no choice but to accept where Skyward Sword falls short of its promises and hype. I still enjoy the game as a whole, but I see a lot of missed potential.

And it's not merely my opinion that Skyward Sword didn't deliver; as of now, 60% of the voters (including me) agree that SS fell short. One cannot say the motion controls have no flaws when so many people find problems with them. If an aspect of a game is not adaptable to its audience (even if it caters to a particular group), it is flawed. More than one aspect of Skyward Sword has been controversial, meaning it has numerous chips in its armor.

As I've said numerous times before, Nintendo is focusing too much on new gimmicks and experiments and not enough on the classic Zelda formula. Experiments should only come when there is a need to move forward; otherwise, it feels forced and unnecessary. It should be noted that Ocarina of Time had no real gimmicks outside of being 3D, and it's one of the best-selling games of all time and something future Zelda games have always been compared to. I would love for the developers of Zelda Wii U to sit back and think, "We've gone pretty far off the meaning of Zelda. It's time to go back to basics." Now, if Nintendo did this for every game, the series would grow stale because it wouldn't evolve. Considering the openness and wanderlust of Zelda has not been properly executed in at least over a decade, it wouldn't feel old and stale to go back to the roots for the next game.

People play a certain gaming franchise because of traits unique to it. Therefore, people play Zelda because they expect a certain attribute from it. That attribute has always been meant to be exploration. All games in the series should focus on how they can evolve that concept and make it better, but recent games seem to have dulled it down to combat and puzzles. Many fans even start debates over whether puzzles or combat are more important in Zelda. In truth, they are both side-effects of the much bigger picture: exploration. They're meant to assist, not lead.

Here's hoping Zelda Wii U realizes a return to the series' roots and slows down on the gimmicks and experiments which have started to get out of hand.

 

[Random Person]

Do I feel SS denied me what it promised? Yes. Why? Well, despite being promised all the awesome things with hype, that's not really what I care about. Practically every major Zelda game that came out was hyped up to be the best Zelda game of its time, but a good number of us Zelda players are able to recognize by now that hype isn't always true. So in the back of my mind, I was hoping SS would be the greatest Zelda game ever, but I wasn't expecting it to be. I was expecting it to be a great prequel and a great Zelda game and all the things that come with those expectations. I feel that it failed in both those departments. Not only not being "great," but being just plain bad.

Many points of how I feel were brought up in Ventus's posts, as well as MANY other threads, so I won't get too into detail like I usually do. I will simply say that I feel SS alienated itself from the Zelda series by taking out core aspects all the while producing a bad prequel. Looking at SS as what it is, the prequel to a series of great adventure, exploration games, the game doesn't hold up. Like Spirit of Rutela said, I have certain expectations from the Zelda series and this didn't seem to build on the greatness its past has had. And I've seen enough prequels in my life to where I feel SS doesn't even come close to meeting the standards. What SS seemed to do was take cliche antics of general games today and mush them together while stamping the title " Prequel to the Legend of Zelda" on it. But even if you take SS away from the Zelda series and look at it, it only stacks up as an "okay game." All the new elements that it is said to brought to the series have been done so much better in other games series. Thus, we are left with a game that took out core Zelda elements, and added new elements but didn't go all the way with those new elements. I've heard the arguments of people who disagree with me and I'm still not convinced.

I expected a Zelda prequel. I feel like I simply did not get it, but got... a game. Yes SS disappointed in its promised delivery.

 

[JuicieJ]

First off, I would just like to say that I think people are looking into things that aren't really there when they say Nintendo promised us the best Zelda game with Skyward Sword. Nintendo tries to make the best Zelda title with every release, so it's not like SS was alone in this goal. It's also not like they were constantly telling us that this was going to be the best. No, that was the fans and some of the critics saying these things. The only time Nintendo ever said anything close to this was when Miyamoto jokingly said that SS would be the new best Zelda or that they would stop making Zelda games. That's it. Nothing about "Hey, guys, we're promising you the best Zelda with this game" or anything along those lines. Any and all hype surrounding the game was on us, not them.

Moving on, Skyward Sword fell short in SOME areas -- such as the Sky, despite it being the best transportation overworld Zelda's produced so far -- but overall it absolutely did not fail to deliver in the quality department. It's definitely debatable whether or not it's the best Zelda yet, but that's not really what matters. What matters is that this is a stellar title and without a doubt one of the best the franchise has to offer. I'd say it's easily the best title since Majora's Mask. It has all the core elements needed to make a great Zelda game and then some: flawless controls, incredible combat (especially in the bosses category), remarkable surface portions (save Lake Floria), top-notch puzzle-solving, very well-hidden secrets, numerous great new additions (dashing, stamina, Adventure Pouch, etc.), noticeably improved storytelling, jaw-dropping scenery, and one of the best soundtracks in gaming, not to mention the best in the series bar none. It DOES have flaws, yes, but these are very minuscule in comparison to how much greatness there is in the game. It's been a very long time since I've been this impressed with a Zelda game, and that's something I gladly welcome with open arms. I can understand someone not thinking this is the best Zelda game -- I myself consider it to only be on par with ALttP, OoT, and MM -- but I cannot and will never understand how anyone can call this a bad game. That's just not true.

So, in short, do I think Skyward Sword fell short of its overall promise? As the voting option said, no, though I can see how others might think so.

 

[Garo]

This is a difficult question to answer primarily because "promised delivery" is so vaguely defined. Did Skyward Sword disappoint me? Absolutely, and I'd even say it's far from one of the best titles in the series - but it didn't really promise anything other than a solid, enjoyable experience. And despite my disappointment, it did deliver exactly that. My own expectations for the game proved to be far too high, but the game's own "promises"? No, it delivered on those perfectly. It was a fun game, just not one I care to revisit often, or one that was particularly exceptional or revelatory.

Since there's not really an option that resembles that, I'm not going to vote in the poll.

 

[A Link In Time]

Skyward Sword was a great Zelda game but it did not live up to my level of hype. One aspect of the game I found to be particularly disappointing was the lack of unique areas to visit. There was a forest, a fire mountain, a lake, and a desert. Personally, Nintendo should take a note from Majora's Mask. That game mirrored Ocarina of Time in terms of the places you could explore. Ocarina of Time boasted a forest, mountain, lake, and desert. Majora's Mask featured a swamp, snow mountain, lake, and canyon. This was a breath of fresh air for the franchise. By refusing to set Skyward Sword off from the pack, Nintendo did fans a great disservice from a package that was near flawless overall.

Continuing with the overworld, lack of variety in the land below was a relatively minor problem when compared to what the sky could have been. Numerous times I've complained that the sky is too barren and I continue to defend that notion. Most islands featured one or two chests with little challenge. Essentially you hop on and off in a matter of three minutes or less. Across all its islands, the Wind Waker offered a greater challenge as well as meaningful rewards and character interaction. This is what Skyward Sword should have been.

One redundancy which ground my gears was battling the Imprisoned multiple times. The first and second battles differentiated themselves enough but the third was useless repetition. The only salvation to be found was in the form of the Groosenator. The Ghirahim battles stood in stark juxtaposition to those of his master in beast form. Each fight spiced things up a bit and actually made excellent use of the motion controls with the jump form the second to third skirmishes being the largest.

Skyward Sword's peaks are a lot more obvious but they are important to mention nevertheless. The game featured a more cohesive narrative than many previous installments held together by characters the player actually cared for. No longer was it a simple chase quest after a damsel in distress but it was a childhood friends of Link's who was in danger. Ghirahim's new spin on evil was also interesting as he transformed from a lax persona content with beating Link within an inch of his life to one hellbent on murder. This logically and symbolically corresponded to a change in his tone of skin. Demise was easily the most poetic and eloquent topping even Ganondorf from The Wind Waker. This stood in stark juxtaposition to his beastly blows during the final battle. Overall, Nintendo did a great job of layering future foes through this villain.

Another aspect of Skyward Sword that may seem obvious at first glance but easily gets tramped is the motion control. Skyward Sword's controls may not have been perfect, however, they are definitely the best thing on the market thus fully justifying the purchase of a Wii. The only real problems I had were with the thrust and rolling maneuvers and although I never truly perfected them, they were gradually seamed out over time.

The boss battles in Skyward Sword were a consummate triumph. Few followed the stun, hack-and-slash pattern, spanning multiple phases, and requiring careful thought in order to avoid being hit first. Also ditched were the traditional conventions of using the dungeon item to defeat the boss with your sword being the preferred weapon of choice in most combat. Moreover, overworld bosses were a welcome change in pace.

How was Skyward Sword as a prequel? Skyward Sword was a good prequel not only for Ocarina of Time but the entire franchise. Nintendo did an excellent job of answering more question than it asked for once.

It appears to me as though most people were expecting too much from the game. The game effectively explained the origins of the Master Sword and Triforce. That's all it had to do. Nintendo, however, was more ambitious. Through Demise the developers crafted an excellent origin story for Ganondorf and the three dragons-Faron, Eldin, and Lanayru provided some backstory for the three goddesses that had created the land of Hyrule. This connected to Twilight Princess and in turn Ocarina of Time. While the title certainly could have focused more on Hylia and Demise from the point of explaining more why the humans lived in the sky as well as why the Triforce was kept away from Demise, it chose instead to center on Fi and Ghirahim, the legendary blades of good and evil and it did so in a very powerful and moving way. In this respect, I found it very fitting that the Hyrule Historia timeline was revealed immediately following the release of Skyward Sword.

SS isn't the best Zelda game but it's a damn fine one even if it didn't live up to Miyamoto's ambitions of being the one to top them all. Zelda fans should stop comparing new releases to previous ones and enter new realms with an open mind. The grass is greener on the other side! SS's upgrade system, stamina gauge, shield meter, and adventure pouch stay true to the series' fundamental tenets but they're the single greatest advancements the series has seen since Ocarina of Time.

 

[JuicieJ]

Skyward Sword was a great Zelda game but it did not live up to my level of hype. One aspect of the game I found to be particularly disappointing was the lack of unique areas to visit. There was a forest, a fire mountain, a lake, and a desert. Personally, Nintendo should take a note from Majora's Mask. That game mirrored Ocarina of Time in terms of the places you could explore. Ocarina of Time boasted a forest, mountain, lake, and desert. Majora's Mask featured a swamp, snow mountain, lake, and canyon. This was a breath of fresh air for the franchise. By refusing to set Skyward Sword off from the pack, Nintendo did fans a great disservice from a package that was near flawless overall.

This is one complaint in general gaming that I find annoying. So what if SS reused terrain? It's not about the terrain itself. It's about what's done with it, and personally, I'd say SS did some of the most unique things imaginable with its terrain. Key example being the timeshift stones. You ever seen anything like that in Zelda? I haven't.

 

[Batman]

Well, it certainly didn't let me down at all. Is it a better game than Ocarina of Time? Well, that's highly subjective, but in my opinion, the game successfully surpassed it's singular predecessor. I think the game could have been better in ways, but no game is perfect. All in all, I had a wonderful experience with the game; I loved the story, I loved the gameplay, I loved the graphics, and I loved the characters. Skyward Sword definitely let a few people down, and a good case could me made against its claims of being "better" than Ocarina of Time, but for me, that's not so. It was everything I expected and wanted; it delivered. I enjoyed it very much and consider it to be the best Zelda game yet.

 

[A Link In Time]

This is one complaint in general gaming that I find annoying. So what if SS reused terrain? It's not about the terrain itself. It's about what's done with it, and personally, I'd say SS did some of the most unique things imaginable with its terrain. Key example being the timeshift stones. You ever seen anything like that in Zelda? I haven't.

The timeshift stones were an exception to the rule. Faron Woods and Eldin Volcano played it very safe with you're traditional vines and rocky environment, respectively. The problem, however, was further compounded through the lack of realism in these areas. Why were traditional night and day cycles not present in the landmasses below the clouds? Skyloft, at the very least, was a more believable realm because dawn turned to dusk and back again. Considering SS's innovation in other departments, the mundane areas are acceptable but the game certainly would have been more interesting had it explored unique themes like in Majora's Mask.

 

[JuicieJ]

The timeshift stones were an exception to the rule. Faron Woods and Eldin Volcano played it very safe with you're traditional vines and rocky environment, respectively. The problem, however, was further compounded through the lack of realism in these areas. Why were traditional night and day cycles not present in the landmasses below the clouds? Skyloft, at the very least, was a more believable realm because dawn turned to dusk and back again. Considering SS's innovation in other departments, the mundane areas are acceptable but the game certainly would have been more interesting had it explored unique themes like in Majora's Mask.

Played it safe? I don't see how. Faron had many clever puzzles and Eldin was littered with hazards, not to mention the hills that had to be dashed up.

As far as the day/night thing goes, I do wish the game had taken advantage of the sleeping system and had specific events of the game be force to take place at night on the surface. Other than that, I can't agree with this post. Only Floria was a mundane place.

 

[Cfrock]

The timeshift stones were an exception to the rule. Faron Woods and Eldin Volcano played it very safe with you're traditional vines and rocky environment, respectively.

I've said this before and I am going to say it again; you swam through Faron Woods and you evaded searchlights and guards in an encampment on Eldin Volcano, not to mention sailing across a desert.

I think that saying Skyward Sword's environments were a negative point because we have seen a forest, mountain and desert before is just not a good argument at all because, as JJ said, it's what was done with those environments that was spectacular.

If reusing terrain was a bad thing then Ocarina of Time and A Link To Past are guilty because they reused The Lost Woods from the original game. Doesn't matter that they were three completely different forests, gameplay wise. Oracle of... I forget which one but one of them had a desert like Ocarina of Time. But unlike crossing an empty desert where nothing at all happens you find a pirate ship half sunk in the sand. But that didn't matter because we'd seen a desert before. Seasons! It was Oracle of Seasons.

My point is, reusing a type of terrain is only bad if they do the exact same thing as they did previously (like volcanic rocks falling from the sky in Twilight Princess) or if they do nothing with it (like almost everywhere in Ocarina of Time). There are only a handful of unique terrain types for developers to choose and in Skyward Sword Nintendo got really creative with them and used them to great effect.