Do You Think Skyward Sword Lived Up to the Hype, the Reviews, and Your Expectations?

[TrueChaos]

i don't play a lot of games so it would be my GOTY seeing as it's the only game released that year i got to play. as for the hype? not quite. as much as i love the game, i don't think it's the best Zelda game ever nor does it deserve 10/10 but 7/10, as that person gave it, is a too harsh. i though Navi was great but Fi was really annoying

 

[JuicieJ]

i though Navi was great but Fi was really annoying

I honestly can't understand why people call Fi annoying. She's not. Sure, she states the obvious quite a bit, but at least she doesn't randomly shout something in the middle of the oveworld to tell you about where you should go next when you're already headed to that destination.

 

[unknown]

I think that skyward sword made my expectations easily. I was thinking GotY and I was pleasantly surprised at how great this game was. I never thought that I would cry during it, but I did. My sister came in the room at the ending and said, are you really crying? then everyone else in the house came to see this super rare spectacle. Besides, it won G4's video game deathmatch for GotY going head to head against skyrim so that helps prove how amazing this game is.

 

[MW7]

I honestly can't understand why people call Fi annoying. She's not. Sure, she states the obvious quite a bit, but at least she doesn't randomly shout something in the middle of the oveworld to tell you about where you should go next when you're already headed to that destination.

I feel like that's more of an argument that she could have been way more annoying than she was which is definitely true. Stating the obvious as much as she does was enough for me to want to punch her in the face during even the first playthrough though. Sure it doesn't bother everyone, but a decent amount of people would say it detracted from the game.

 

[Azure Sage]

I honestly feel like it didn't live up to the hype. First of all, the game was Twilight Princess 2.0, which cost it a lot of points in my book. Throughout the game I came across many puzzles that made me think "Hey, that reminds me of... *insert Zelda game here*". As such, many puzzles were not a challenge to figure out. Both Ghirahim and the Imprisoned were very repetitive bosses; there was hardly anything new each time you fight them. Other bosses like Moldarach were so pathetic, they didn't deserve to be bosses. The Earth Temple was too short, the Lanayru Mining Facility was too tedious, and the Skyview Temple was too easy. There were also too many fetch quests getting in the way of story progression. I also didn't like how the overworld was sectioned. It bothered me that each region was cut off from the others, and I also don't like how you had to keep returning to each region throughout the game instead of going to new ones. All in all there were a lot of disappointments in Skyward Sword.

On the plus side, however, the gameplay, especially the swordplay, was absolutely exceptional. Skyward Sword has the best swordplay I've ever seen in any video game, and also has the best-looking (in my opinion) Link and Zelda. I loved characters like Ghirahim and Groose and Scrapper; they were so colorful and entertaining. I also thought Fi was a really cool partner character. I really get bugged when I see people hate on Fi; she is not that bad. I also really liked Dowsing. I thought that feature was really cool and helpful. I found the upgrade system a lot of fun. I liked having to work for better items; it made them all the more worthwhile. And the story, although it sadly had a lot of plot mechanics borrowed from other games, was absolutely incredible. I loved Skyward Sword's story.

There were a lot of positives, but there were also a lot of negatives. While Skyward Sword was a great game, I can not say in good faith that it lived up to my expectations.

 

[JuicieJ]

First of all, the game was Twilight Princess 2.0...

I'm confused. How was it TP 2.0? SS was anything but a copypasta of TP.

 

[Azure Sage]

I'm confused. How was it TP 2.0? SS was anything but a copypasta of TP.

You have played it, right? And finished it? Okay, let's go over this...

The villain Link meets at the beginning of the game gets hijacked later on. Zant and Ghirahim are a lot alike, in that they are each trying to free their imprisoned master and both are a bit "unstable". The games were both far too linear, and there were a lot of barricades to exploration. The Silent Realm is like the Twilight Realm, and the set-up of dungeons is similar. The first three dungeons are spent trying to find something; in Skyward Sword's case it's Zelda, and in Twilight Princess's case it was the fused shadows. Then the next string of three dungeons is spent trying find something else in order to gain access to a new area. In Skyward Sword it was where Zelda is, and in Twilight Princess it's where Zant is. The final battle against Demise looks and feels a lot like the final battle against Ganondorf in Twilight Princess. There's a sidequest where Link has to collect a large quantity of a specific items in order to change someone into a human in both games. And the final boss in both games can be distracted by an item for an easy win. In Twilight Princess, it's the fishing rod and in Skyward Sword it's the bug net.

That enough "copy/paste" for you?

 

[A Link In Time]

Throughout the game I came across many puzzles that made me think "Hey, that reminds me of... *insert Zelda game here*".

What's wrong about taking some pages out of previous brilliant entries into the series. Also there were many fresh and innovative puzzles involving the beetle throughout.

As such, many puzzles were not a challenge to figure out. Both Ghirahim and the Imprisoned were very repetitive bosses; there was hardly anything new each time you fight them. Other bosses like Moldarach were so pathetic, they didn't deserve to be bosses. The Earth Temple was too short, the Lanayru Mining Facility was too tedious, and the Skyview Temple was too easy.

You mention Moldarach being so easy and make a generalization without listing other bosses you thought easy. Also, while the Imprisoned battles may have seemed tedious and repetitive, the Ghirahim battles were anything but. I too found these battles to be rather tedious but the second is a true sword fight unlike the first, which in retrospect seemed like a mere tutorial. And the third battle was completely different with Ghirahim relying on a variety of physical attacks. Also, Ghirahim was not a simple stun boss and always kept you on your toes.

There were also too many fetch quests getting in the way of story progression. I also didn't like how the overworld was sectioned. It bothered me that each region was cut off from the others, and I also don't like how you had to keep returning to each region throughout the game instead of going to new ones. All in all there were a lot of disappointments in Skyward Sword.

I agree with this view. But at the very least you've got to admit that the Gratitude Crystal Quest was rather rewarding.

On the plus side, however, the gameplay, especially the swordplay, was absolutely exceptional. Skyward Sword has the best swordplay I've ever seen in any video game, and also has the best-looking (in my opinion) Link and Zelda. I loved characters like Ghirahim and Groose and Scrapper; they were so colorful and entertaining. I also thought Fi was a really cool partner character. I really get bugged when I see people hate on Fi; she is not that bad. I also really liked Dowsing. I thought that feature was really cool and helpful. I found the upgrade system a lot of fun. I liked having to work for better items; it made them all the more worthwhile. And the story, although it sadly had a lot of plot mechanics borrowed from other games, was absolutely incredible. I loved Skyward Sword's story.

There were a lot of positives, but there were also a lot of negatives. While Skyward Sword was a great game, I can not say in good faith that it lived up to my expectations.

And here out views radically diverge. Dowsing made the game too easy and trailers put severely too little emphasis on this feature. Why was it utilized so much?! Also, Fi is just plain annoying though I'll admit she appeals to scientific and mathematical minds. :yes:

Zant and Ghirahim are a lot alike, in that they are each trying to free their imprisoned master and both are a bit "unstable". The games were both far too linear, and there were a lot of barricades to exploration. The Silent Realm is like the Twilight Realm, and the set-up of dungeons is similar. The first three dungeons are spent trying to find something; in Skyward Sword's case it's Zelda, and in Twilight Princess's case it was the fused shadows. Then the next string of three dungeons is spent trying find something else in order to gain access to a new area. In Skyward Sword it was where Zelda is, and in Twilight Princess it's where Zant is. The final battle against Demise looks and feels a lot like the final battle against Ganondorf in Twilight Princess. There's a sidequest where Link has to collect a large quantity of a specific items in order to change someone into a human in both games. And the final boss in both games can be distracted by an item for an easy win. In Twilight Princess, it's the fishing rod and in Skyward Sword it's the bug net.

I'll start with your last point. Nets are the most powerful items in Zelda. Deal with it.

Ghirahim was a significantly better character than Zant. Whereas the latter went from a dark and mysterious figure to a crazed lunatic, Ghirahim evolved into a demon with an appetite for blood thirst hellbent on reviving his master. Ghirahim thus effectively was Nintendo's answer to fan complaints regarding Twilight Princess. And Demise was certainly a link to the past and a bridge to the future. His character gave Ganondorf a proper origin story and the animations used during the battle showed just how much Nintendo spent perfecting Skyward Sword's craftsmanship over the many development years.

 

[JuicieJ]

I see what you mean, but you're inaccurate.

The villain Link meets at the beginning of the game gets hijacked later on. Zant and Ghirahim are a lot alike, in that they are each trying to free their imprisoned master and both are a bit "unstable".

Ghirahim wasn't carelessly thrown away like Zant was, though. He was actually important to his master's revival. If it weren't for Ghirahim, Demise would never have returned. He was also "unstable" the entire time. Zant had his character ruined by becoming that way, as he was calm and effortless beforehand. To add to that, Demise had a presence throughout the entire game, unlike Ganondorf in TP.

The games were both far too linear, and there were a lot of barricades to exploration.

Skyward Sword's story was linear, yes, but the gracious amount of side-content allowed for open exploration throughout the entire second half of the game, which is one thing TP failed at. In all honesty, though, he whole "linearity" thing doesn't really matter. It's about if the game is good or not, not if it's linear or non-linear. That's really one of the silliest arguments in Zelda (and gaming) imo.

The Silent Realm is like the Twilight Realm, and the set-up of dungeons is similar.

The Silent Realms are absolutely nothing like the Twilight Realm save in eeriness. Of course, unless you mean the Twilight that blanketed Hyrule. If that's the case, then yes, but they weren't boring and tedious. They were thrilling and enjoyable to go through.

The first three dungeons are spent trying to find something; in Skyward Sword's case it's Zelda, and in Twilight Princess's case it was the fused shadows.

Looking for Zelda and collecting three items aren't comparable by any means. Searching for a friend provides a legitimate drive to keep going in the game. It was about wanting to catch up to her rather than just finding something to defeat the evil of the game. In addition to that, the second half of the game wasn't a copypasta of the first half of the game, unlike TP, and it added an extra element to the game instead of taking one away (the Silent Realms). Now, if the whole first half of the game was about finding those tablets to unlock the next area (which would have been quite silly and pointless), that would be a different story. But that wasn't the case, so it doesn't matter.

[T]he next string of three dungeons is spent trying find something else in order to gain access to a new area. In Skyward Sword it was where Zelda is, and in Twilight Princess it's where Zant is. In Skyward Sword it was where Zelda is, and in Twilight Princess it's where Zant is.

Searching for the three flames was just having to take the long way around to find Zelda. The whole point of the game up until Zelda was found was aimed at finding her. The forging of the Master Sword just came along with it. It wasn't like TP, which had a major plot twist and an obvious second half to the game. SS's transition into the second half of the game was seamless, and it didn't have a major twist in the plot. The major twist was saved for when Link found Zelda, which is about 85% into the game. That's quite a bit different from what TP did.

And the final boss in both games can be distracted by an item for an easy win. In Twilight Princess, it's the fishing rod and in Skyward Sword it's the bug net.

Demise's fight felt nothing like Ganondorf's fight. One, the buildup to it was constructed throughout the entire game, unlike in TP where the buildup to Ganondorf was basically right before he was fought. Two, Demise was the final part of the final sequence of battles, whereas it was Ganondorf the entire time in TP. The Fishing Rod and Bug Net things are also just easter eggs. They're not designed to make the fight easier, and it's actually quite difficult to use them properly to gain an advantage.

There's a sidequest where Link has to collect a large quantity of a specific items in order to change someone into a human in both games.

That's not a legitimate point at all. And the whole "turning someone to human" thing has been around since OoT, so it's not like TP was the first to do it and SS stole it from TP.


All that said, I guess in some ways SS is a TP 2.0, but in many other ways, it's a redemption status of where they failed in TP and a way of saying, "We did these things wrong before, but we're showing we can do them right," which gives them major respect (and, in some ways, style) points. If it were a TP 2.0, it would have failed everywhere TP did. But it didn't. That's why it's not a copy/paste of TP. It took all the good aspects of all the games in the series and blended them together to flow with each other in harmony, as well as added a few new things to the series (dashing, true motion controls, stamina gauge, etc.), which shows that they weren't taking things only from TP and recycling them. I respect opinion, but you couldn't be any farther from the truth by calling SS what you have.

 

[MW7]

I see what you mean, but you're inaccurate.

I'd say Azure Sage is exaggerating by saying that SS is TP 2.0, but your arguments were fairly exaggerated as well. Most of what you said was just pointing out differences between the two games instead of countering what Azure Sage pointed out. There is at least some truth to every point you countered.

The Silent Realms are absolutely nothing like the Twilight Realm save in eeriness. Of course, unless you mean the Twilight that blanketed Hyrule. If that's the case, then yes, but they weren't boring and tedious. They were thrilling and enjoyable to go through.

This is the one point that just completely lost me. Do you not see how the Silent Realm is the Twilight Realm with a stealth aspect added in? You are given a vessel and go get tears. Skyward Sword took the gameplay element and modified it. It's definitely different, but the similarities are very striking. They didn't bother even replacing tears with something else between the two games, and clearly the Silent Realm is based on the Twilight Realm.

That's not a legitimate point at all. And the whole "turning someone to human" thing has been around since OoT, so it's not like TP was the first to do it and SS stole it from TP.

It's a parallel between the games and it's true. How is it not legitimate? It did happen in other games before but it's something that's in both games.

All that said, I guess in some ways SS is a TP 2.0, but in many other ways, it's a redemption status of where they failed in TP and a way of saying, "We did these things wrong before, but we're showing we can do them right," which gives them major respect (and, in some ways, style) points. If it were a TP 2.0, it would have failed everywhere TP did. But it didn't.

If it were TP 2.0 it would have failed in some respects but corrected others- that's what an update does. For instance it took the gameplay element of collecting tears from Twilight Princess and improved upon it greatly. One way it failed from my perspective is that it carried on a linear progression from Twilight Princess. I don't agree with the statement SS is TP 2.0 but there definitely are some striking similarities between the two. Many of Azure Sages points are valid, but most of the things Skyward Sword carried on from Twilight Princess were in other Zelda games as well.

I respect opinion, but you couldn't be any farther from the truth by calling SS what you have.

You literally just said in some ways SS is a TP 2.0 in the very same paragraph. You acknowledged that there is some truth to the statement, but now a few sentences later you say he couldn't be further from the truth. What are you talking about?

These things are arguably not even criticisms anyway. Being similar isn't necessarily a bad thing. From Azure Sage's perspective they might be bad because they are evident of some borrowing of elements between the games, but some of the things pointed out I was glad were in the game. For instance I loved how they managed to make collecting tears fun after it was my least favorite part of Twilight Princess. I was really impressed by that turnaround.