Skyward Sword SS. Why So Much Hate?

[Salem]

The game should have not been sky based at all, they can keep the loftwings but only for warping purposes, otherwise make the game land based.

Replace the goddess cubes with their respective chests.

Replace some of the overworld puzzles and so-called "fetch quests" with a few more dungeons.

Cut the intro.

---

Lately, I've noticed a pattern with modern Zelda, and that's that as soon as a new game comes out, everyone rips it to pieces and nitpicks on every little thing. It was like that for WW, TP, and the 3D DS games. SS had it the worst and I'm willing to bet the same will happen when Zelda WiiU comes out.

There will always exist some criticism of games.

 

[Mercedes]

Too linear? Yes
Annoying Fi? Yes
Sucky Motion Controls? No
Too Much Motion Controls? Yes
Fanfic-ish story? Yes
Horrible graphics? No
Too easy? Yes
Horribly done origin stories? Yes
Minimum exploration? Yes
Non-memorable music? Yes

QFT. Good points.

I disliked the motion controls a lot, I'd love nothing more than to see them not rear their heads again until we're more advanced, but even if I take my disdain for those out of the equation I still don't see Skyward Sword as a good entry into the franchise, nor a particularly good game overall when compared to it's contemporaries. One of the weakest entries into the franchise to date as far as I'm concerned. I hope the Wii U Zelda game doesn't make so many design flaws, and is the Zelda game I'm waiting for!

 

[ProtagonistJake]

Too linear? Yes
Annoying Fi? Yes
Sucky Motion Controls? No
Too Much Motion Controls? Yes
Fanfic-ish story? Yes
Horrible graphics? No
Too easy? Yes
Horribly done origin stories? Yes
Minimum exploration? Yes
Non-memorable music? Yes

Wow

This guy just summed up the game

The only thing I can add now is

"Motion-Controls with Swordplay still not as accurate as an actual controller? Yes"

Spoiler

(SS's controls work 98% of the time, which is impressive, but still not as responsive as the 100% of the time I get with a controller. I hate missing a slice because I moved the remote too fast for the remote to recognize it as anything other than a slash)

Other than that

This post just... wins.

 

[Ventus]

The game should have not been sky based at all, they can keep the loftwings but only for warping purposes, otherwise make the game land based.

See this is where SS fails: the game WASN'T sky based at all. The sky existed for the good exposition of the game, and was thrown off for all other purposes. It was there to say "hey guys this game is somewhat advanced yadig, also look at the Clock Town-like SKyloft! ^^". All of the good action takes place where? The surface, of course. So really there are two ways to go about improving SS: either make it a ground game (which it mostly was), or make the sky actually significant both gameplay-wise but more importantly storywise.

 

[ProtagonistJake]

See this is where SS fails: the game WASN'T sky based at all. The sky existed for the good exposition of the game, and was thrown off for all other purposes. It was there to say "hey guys this game is somewhat advanced yadig, also look at the Clock Town-like SKyloft! ^^". All of the good action takes place where? The surface, of course. So really there are two ways to go about improving SS: either make it a ground game (which it mostly was), or make the sky actually significant both gameplay-wise but more importantly storywise.

Thats why, where I'm somewhat suspicious the Wolf form in TP was thought of as a Story element first and a gameplay one second, I'm utterly convinced that was the case with the sky.
It was there for the sake of their "backstory" but they clearly had no idea what to do with it and said "screw it, rocks and chests".

 

[DarkestLink]

Well it depends on how you look at it.

If you're wondering why the fanbase is hating on it, it's because it's an unpleasable group of complainers...it's like working at customer service. Once they are satisfied, they usually leave and make room for a new wave of complainers who joined the internet fandom just so they could complain about the newer release(s) and reminisce over the "Glory Days", which varies between factions.

As for the general public...it's just too different and feels "Un-Zelda" to them.

 

[ProtagonistJake]

Well it depends on how you look at it.

If you're wondering why the fanbase is hating on it, it's because it's an unpleasable group of complainers...it's like working at customer service. Once they are satisfied, they usually leave and make room for a new wave of complainers who joined the internet fandom just so they could complain about the newer release(s) and reminisce over the "Glory Days", which varies between factions.

As for the general public...it's just too different and feels "Un-Zelda" to them.

 

[Salem]

I think the mistake is thinking all of the criticism of this game as "hate".

The truth is, ALL Zelda games get their fair share of criticism. The reason why the newest one get criticised the most is because since it's new, it's fresh, there's a lot to talk about it in general, not just criticism. All that criticism and complainers come out at once or during a very short period of time so to the onlooker, it seems to be an extremely hated game, it's not.

So why does this game seems to get a lot of complaining? Because all of the old games have been talked to death, there isn't much new to talk about.

So complaining about the "complainers/whiners" isn't gonna get you any good. Denying that criticism ether means you're implying the game is "perfect", which is wrong, no game is "perfect"

What I'm trying to say is, there will always be complaining, you can ether agree or disagree, saying people are "whiners" or implying they should stop criticising just won't help anyone.

 

[Random Person]

I think the mistake is thinking all of the criticism of this game as "hate".

The truth is, ALL Zelda games get there fair share if criticism. The reason why the newest one get criticised the most is because since it's new, it's fresh there's a lot to talk about it in general, not just criticism. All that criticism and complainers come out at once or during a very short period of time so to the onlooker, it seems to be an extremely hated game, it's not.

So why does this game seems to get a lot of complaining? Because all of the all games have been talked to death, there isn't much new to talk about.

So complaining about the comparers isn't gonna get you any good. Denying that criticism ether means you're implying the game is "perfect", which is wrong, no game is "perfect"

What I'm trying to say is, there will always be com paining, you can ether agree or disagree, saying people are "whiners" or implying should stop criticising just won't help anyone.

^ This right here. Although I don't know how I feel about that "no game is perfect" line, the rest of this post is exactly how I feel.

 

[Awesomehylian]

As far as I can tell SS wasn't bad. If you can get over Navi, you can get over Fi. The controls and how Link interacts with his environment were completely revamped, giving the player a whole new type of game. Sure, the Wii motion sensor isn't THE BEST, but it works well enough, and the enemies are designed so you can utilize the Wii-mote attacks to the fullest. There are so many new ideas in SS that to me, it really doesn't matter that some parts were easy or that Fi could be badgering. After all, she is there to help when you may have a question, and her obligatory statements are for when the developers thought players would need it the most. If you didn't need her, fine, good for you. But between your cool mechanical bug, the time travel in the mines and all the other nuances that we see in no other Zelda game, SS hit the mark. All the complaints I've heard have been petty annoyances that incite such anger because they are constant throughout the game, i.e. the treasure chime, Fi, the imprisoned fights, not enough flying, too much flying, not enough activity in Skyloft and the surrounding floating islands. It's called syward sword because you point your sword skyward. . .not because most of the game is supposed to happen in the sky. You have races and a giant whale to conquer in the sky! I like it a lot and a lot of people I know say it's their favorite Zelda game.

 

[Salem]

^ This right here. Although I don't know how I feel about that "no game is perfect" line, the rest of this post is exactly how I feel.

The no game is perfect thing means that maybe the game is "perfect" to YOU but other people might see major flaws that you think are simply minor things, everyone else have the right to talk about them, for example alttp is my favourite Zelda game, but others think it's horrible, yeah, can ya believe that?

If you can get over Navi, you can get over Fi.

It's the other way round, ya see, Fi is worst than Navi, if you get over Fi, than NAVI is a piece of cake.

 

[ihateghirahim]

It's the other way round, ya see, Fi is worst than Navi, if you get over Fi, than NAVI is a piece of cake.

amen

 

[Justac00lguy]

Regardless, my negative opinions of the game stem less from the game doing what it did wrong, and more from the things it could have done but didn't.

Yes, just yes.

 

[Rohan]

When I think of a 'Zelda' game, Skyward Sword doesn't come to mind.

The problem for me is that it's too linear. The overworlds of the preceding four 3D Zelda titles felt expansive, even if most of their connecting areas were inaccessible for good portions of the games. Revisiting certain locations after getting new items felt like you accomplished something, and had progressed the story (or your inventory!) forward.

Most of this can't be said for SS unfortunately, as it hardly even has an overworld to begin with! The sky portions of the game felt more like a menu than anything else, with isolated and mostly boring islands scattered throughout.
This being said, Skyloft was awesome, the characters were awesome, the dungeon designs were awesome, the soundtrack was awesome, and the game was overall... awesome.
The point I'm trying to get across is that Skyward Sword is a really fun, emotionally-driven game, but I found it to stray too far off from what I've personally come to love from the Zelda series.

It's a fantastic game, but an out of place Zelda game.

 

[JuicieJ]

When I think of a 'Zelda' game, Skyward Sword doesn't come to mind.

The problem for me is that it's too linear. The overworlds of the preceding four 3D Zelda titles felt expansive, even if most of their connecting areas were inaccessible for good portions of the games. Revisiting certain locations after getting new items felt like you accomplished something, and had progressed the story (or your inventory!) forward.

"Expansive" doesn't really mean anything if the amount of content doesn't justify the overworld's size, and quite frankly, the only 3D Zelda game to offer that properly is Majora's Mask. Ocarina of Time had the empty Hyrule Field, The Wind Waker had the (dramatically) empty Great Sea, Twilight Princess had the empty... everything, and Skyward Sword had the empty Sky. Honestly, though, Skyward Sword's provinces were larger than Twilight Princess's. They're a lot denser, so it may not be apparent at first, but they most definitely are. All it takes is a glance at their overworld maps to see why.

I also fail to see how revisiting locations in SS wasn't fulfilling. It was very similar to how Metroid approaches it, and Metroid is pretty much the pinnacle of how to go about backtracking.