This Game's a Joke, Right?

[Kooloo]

I also haven't really been enjoying SS as much as other Zelda titles I've played. I feel like the game is aimed at a much broader audience than previous Zelda titles. As a child I've always felt like Zelda was this "underground" franchise for connoisseurs, very few of my friends actually ever played a Zelda game.

I actually do think OoT looked better than SS. Graphics is not all about polygon count, textures and whatnot, it's about how well you feel immersed in the world you're playing in. Nevertheless, even if you don't agree with what I am saying, there is always OoT 3D which I can definitely say looks much better than SS and I would have been very happy if SS boasted the same graphics. Clear, sharp graphics, without any of the unnecessary blooming or bleached out textures.

I remember reading an issue of NP that said that the world in SS was massive. I'm not sure what they were on about, it feels much smaller than other Zelda titles. It's too linear, there are almost no NPCs anywhere and very few monsters. It's like Nintendo didn't want people to "waste" time looking around and instead just go from A to B while occasionally encountering a few puzzles (which seems stupid because any ways you will end up "wasting" time running back to town to upgrade your gear and whatnot.)

I definitely don't think this is the best Zelda game ever, that statement feels like an insult to previous games in the franchise to me.

Very good points. I especially agree about the graphics. It definitely feels offensive to call this game better than OoT. Sad to say, but I don't know if tLoZ will ever wow me like OoT and MM did; two best games of all time.

 

[Skullkid96]

The dungeons aren't short getting to them and looking for what you have to do is also a part of the dungeon (I think) link to get to the Mines in Lanayru desert you have to activate three generators and find time stones to help progress. Also the land slowly builds though out the game. Lanayru and eldin ( I think thats how you spell it) are the biggest areas of the game and the sky. The Game is awesome because of how you play it.

 

[gamerguy20097]

Shame you can't see the beauty of SS. It was made with the art style of impressionism in mind rather then grey/brown realism of other modern games. I'd even say that it looks better then most ps3 games from an artistic standpoint. I'd also say that Okami and Limbo are also some of the most beautiful games made compared to modern AAA games including Skyrim. SS is leaps and bounds better looking then Oot. I only wish the character models looked like they were painted instead of cell shaded.

 

[Kirino]

There are tons of sidequests. It's just that most of them become gradually avaliable as the game goes on. If you finish a dungeon, and go to Skyloft again you'll see more sidequests avaliable. And sometimes you'll have to do a sidequest to open up another sidequest. If you compare the amount of sidequests in the beginning of the game, and the amount of sidequests available at the end of the game, you'll notice a big difference. There's also godess cubes and tons of minigames. And when a woman asks you to find her missing child, do it. It opens up a big series of sidequests with things called gratitude crystals. Just some advice I thought you might find useful if you want to do sidequests. And you should keep playing. It gets better.

 

[Ordonary Guy]

@raykay How dare you commit the sacriligious crime of criticizing the Skyward Sword..!

[/irony off]

Well, this post is already relatively old (1 month lol) but I think this is relevant, since raykay posted this apparantly after playing just 5 hours and I agree, after that short time it was very hard for me, too, to appreciate anything of SS but the motion controls. I also agree that the areas are way too simple and linear, with the exception of the forest maybe. For me Skyward Sword is defenitely not the best Zelda game out there and I still think it was overhyped and hardly could fulfill all the expectations.

And finally, I think you have already noticed by now (if you haven't stopped playing after this post) that you do NOT use bugs and butterflies to improve your sword or any non-potion item. I would have appreciated some more sense in the items you use to improve things, as well. I was totally expecting an improvement of the whip which would have included a lizards tail (though there was none) and I still don't get why you need desertgrass to improve a metal shield.

 

[ZeldaPokemon25]

@raykay How dare you commit the sacriligious crime of criticizing the Skyward Sword..!

[/irony off]

Ah your point in defending a troll with his obvious flame bait from a month ago?

Well, this post is already relatively old (1 month lol) but I think this is relevant, since raykay posted this apparantly after playing just 5 hours and I agree, after that short time it was very hard for me, too, to appreciate anything of SS but the motion controls. I also agree that the areas are way too simple and linear, with the exception of the forest maybe. For me Skyward Sword is defenitely not the best Zelda game out there and I still think it was overhyped and hardly could fulfill all the expectations.

Really that's not how I was feeling when I played SS and this is a perfect example of your taste simply changing towards Zelda in general (which essentially shouldn't be mixed as a flaw). LOL you just discovered that Zelda being linear and simple in its areas because that's been like that since ALTTP from 1992. It took you this long to realized that? The reason the over worlds was designed like that in SS was to give them actual PURPOSE which literary the previous game just lacked. I take it you were expecting an Elder Scrolls format from the series? Turning them into levels in many different ways (first adventure through, silent realm, ECT) instead of a vast empty and barren overworld with nothing in it but caves, enemies, and heart pieces is something the series actually needed. I completely disagree that SS doesn't fill the need when it exceeded my expectations of what a Zelda game should be like. I honestly will cling when Zelda starts copy Elder Scrolls and using realism with a mature theme because that's when Zelda will stop being Zelda.

I would have appreciated some more sense in the items you use to improve things, as well. I was totally expecting an improvement of the whip which would have included a lizards tail (though there was none) and I still don't get why you need desertgrass to improve a metal shield.

What? So you totally ignored that fact that each tool was needed through the game whether it was dealing with enemies, solving a puzzle in a different level (both overworld and dungeon/temple), or getting across terrain. This essentially was improvement from TP where most weapons/tools would become useless after using them once or twice (Sling Shot, Domino Rod, Spinner, ECT). Okay that last part was nitpicking and does it matter whether or not a iron shield needs tumble weed to improve strength of a shield in a GAME. By this logic a big egg being on top of a big island and the Wind Fish (basically a flying space whale) that moves through the sky in LA shouldn't make any sense either.

 

[Ventus]

Ah your point in defending a troll with his obvious flame bait from a month ago?

Really that's not how I was feeling when I played SS and this is a perfect example of your taste simply changing towards Zelda in general (which essentially shouldn't be mixed as a flaw). LOL you just discovered that Zelda being linear and simple in its areas because that's been like that since ALTTP from 1992. It took you this long to realized that? The reason the over worlds was designed like that in SS was to give them actual PURPOSE which literary the previous game just lacked. I take it you were expecting an Elder Scrolls format from the series? Turning them into levels in many different ways (first adventure through, silent realm, ECT) instead of a vast empty and barren overworld with nothing in it but caves, enemies, and heart pieces is something the series actually needed. I completely disagree that SS doesn't fill the need when it exceeded my expectations of what a Zelda game should be like. I honestly will cling when Zelda starts copy Elder Scrolls and using realism with a mature theme because that's when Zelda will stop being Zelda.

What? So you totally ignored that fact that each tool was needed through the game whether it was dealing with enemies, solving a puzzle in a different level (both overworld and dungeon/temple), or getting across terrain. This essentially was improvement from TP where most weapons/tools would become useless after using them once or twice (Sling Shot, Domino Rod, Spinner, ECT). Okay that last part was nitpicking and does it matter whether or not a iron shield needs tumble weed to improve strength of a shield in a GAME. By this logic a big egg being on top of a big island and the Wind Fish (basically a flying whale) that moves through the sky in LA shouldn't make any sense either.

Raykay isn't a troll; you'd best watch what you call people 'round here. No need to get stuff started, ESPECIALLY from "a month ago"-type comments.

ALttP, linear and simple? Please, go PM user MW7 about ALttP being linear. Besides LoZ and Ocarina of Time, A Link to the Past is one of the best Zeldas out there as far as nonlinearity goes – you can complete almost any dungeon OUT of order and you aren't bound by story events (except you have to get all 7 crystals before you can get to Ganon, likewise you have to get all three pendants before you can get to Agahnim). The "individual levels" you talk about is nothing but rehashing the same environments over and over. We have literally three different overworld areas to explore, nothing more. With each return, we 'open up' a little more each time, but what difference does it make to have two square feet of lava and four square feet? It's all lava, still burns things. SS lacked environment, it lacked things to do, and it definitely lacked difficulty for me.

Yes, each "tool (item" was used to get through terrain. Look at the Clawshots. We do nothing at all with them besides go from roof to roof, getting friends free cable, except it is the complete OPPOSITE of "badass" because all we really do is jump from roof to roof (go from target to target, there is no other application. Heck, we can't even pick up stray rupees with the Clawshots in SS. Double Clawshots from TP, at least we had to time things in City in the Sky and to get hard to reach heart pieces. The whip was used for nothing more than simple switch puzzles – here, I'll just link you to Axle's article. Granted, item upgrades don't make sense in this game, but that's a given for a series like Zelda.

All I can really say is that you were defending SS a little too much on the basis of "it's new, it's Zelda, so it's awesome".

 

[ZeldaPokemon25]

Raykay isn't a troll; you'd best watch what you call people 'round here. No need to get stuff started, ESPECIALLY from "a month ago"-type comments.

Fair enough and you have a point.

ALttP, linear and simple? Please, go PM user MW7 about ALttP being linear. Besides LoZ and Ocarina of Time, A Link to the Past is one of the best Zeldas out there as far as nonlinearity goes – you can complete almost any dungeon OUT of order and you aren't bound by story events (except you have to get all 7 crystals before you can get to Ganon, likewise you have to get all three pendants before you can get to Agahnim). The "individual levels" you talk about is nothing but rehashing the same environments over and over. We have literally three different overworld areas to explore, nothing more. With each return, we 'open up' a little more each time, but what difference does it make to have two square feet of lava and four square feet? It's all lava, still burns things. SS lacked environment, it lacked things to do, and it definitely lacked difficulty for me.

Sequence breaking is not what I call a form on nonlinear and the only game in the series to have this was LOZ (going to any level when you wanted). I have talked to MW7 about this already in a different forum on this site and basically he agrees with me on the aspects of ALTTP or any Zelda game after not being close to the original in terms of nonlinear. I think sequence breaking was never intended for ALTTP and I can tell because today's Zelda don't have it completely. It's like the developers realized this and took out after I think MM (a little confused at which one where they stop doing it). Well much like I disagreed with him SS didn't lack environments when really I was drawn into more. Was it brand new form of environments? Differently not but the way I had to progress in different ways is what the made it a unique experience. That isn't what I call a "rehash" because then I will be doing the same exact thing over and over again with the same challenge as before. I honestly have to disagree and the over worlds had more purpose then any other Zelda game I have played and its the closes to what ALTTP and LA felt like.

Yes, each "tool (item" was used to get through terrain. Look at the Clawshots. We do nothing at all with them besides go from roof to roof, getting friends free cable, except it is the complete OPPOSITE of "badass" because all we really do is jump from roof to roof (go from target to target, there is no other application. Heck, we can't even pick up stray rupees with the Clawshots in SS. Double Clawshots from TP, at least we had to time things in City in the Sky and to get hard to reach heart pieces. The whip was used for nothing more than simple switch puzzles – here, I'll just link you to Axle's article. Granted, item upgrades don't make sense in this game, but that's a given for a series like Zelda.

So essentially your agreeing that the weapons and tools being useless after once or twice in use in TP? When I said weapons/tools I was talking about that in general when talking about SS and essentially I wasn't just talking about the whip (it should have been blatantly obvious). I find it weird how you don't mention any thing about the whip also being used to swing across another platform and not just in the Ancient Cistern which was used more often then I thought. As I have said this was an improvement from TP when using weapons/tools in SS. Hey at least we agree on something because most of the series themes, enemies, or weapons/tools kind of don't make sense but that's given for Zelda as you have said and I personally have no problem with that.

All I can really say is that you were defending SS a little too much on the basis of "it's new, it's Zelda, so it's awesome".

Yes I was defending SS but not like a fan girl like you are implying. Maybe you have noticed but I actually gave valid reasons to defend SS. What you call "it's new, it's Zelda, so it's awesome" is no where did I even come close to implying that. Did you assume I was a fan girl even when I gave valid reasons to defend it? Maybe there just a misunderstand on both sides as this is the internet after all.

 

[Ventus]

Sequence breaking is not what I call a form on nonlinear and the only game in the series to have this was LOZ (going to any level when you wanted). I have talked to MW7 about this already in a different forum on this site and basically he agree with me on the aspects of ALTTP or any Zelda not being close to the original in terms of nonlinear. I think sequence breaking was never intended for ALTTP and I can tell because today's Zelda don't have it completely. It like the developers realized and took out. Well much like I disagreed with him SS didn't lacked environment when really I was drawn into more. Was it a brand new form of environment differently not but the way I had to progress in different ways is what the made it a unique experience. That isn't what I call a "rehash" because then I will be doing the same exact thing over and over again with the same challenge as before. I honestly have to disagree and the over worlds had more purpose then any other Zelda I have and close to what ALTTP and LA felt like.

OoT had it (in a much minor form than ALttP). I wouldn't even call it sequence breaking, as there are next to no scripted events in ALttP, besides Ganon's Tower, Hyrule Castle and a couple other spots that I cannot recall. In OoT, sequence breaking exists as you generally have to view the Sheik cutscene in Kakariko before you can gain entry into Shadow Temple [you can Chu Hover, and you could also megaflip/clip into certain spots]. Same goes for MM if I recall correctly (Nintendo almost fixed the Megaflip though ISG still exists). Point is, Zelda games were great back then but recent ones (TP and SS in particular) just fell short of the greatness in my honest opinion that previous Zeldas featured in the limelight.

Fair enough, I see your reasoning. It's almost like uncovering a map – you almost already know what's going to be there but the sheer ability to do any uncovering at all excites you. That's sort of how the Great Sea was for me in TWW to be honest.

 

[MW7]

Sequence breaking is not what I call a form on nonlinear and the only game in the series to have this was LOZ (going to any level when you wanted). I have talked to MW7 about this already in a different forum on this site and basically he agree with me on the aspects of ALTTP or any Zelda not being close to the original in terms of nonlinear. I think sequence breaking was never intended for ALTTP and I can tell because today's Zelda don't have it completely. It like the developers realized and took out.

Yep I remember telling you that no Zelda is really as nonlinear as LoZ. "Basically agrees" is fair to say as well, but ALTTP and OOT are closer than the last few console releases. Also LoZ isn't quite like "go to any dungeon whenever you want" but it's close. I think it just comes down to semantics. I'd say a lot of the nonlinearity of ALTTP and OOT is "sequence-breaking" as much as the nonlinearity of LoZ is. That is to say that the only thing I consider sequence breaking is using glitches to do things out of order. LoZ is more nonlinear than ALTTP or OOT but those two games are definitely more nonlinear than the rest of the series (with exceptions). Also there's the distinction between the main quest and the sidequests. Every Zelda can be considered nonlinear (I'm pretty sure) if you are talking about doing sidequests whenever you want, but just talking about the main quest limits it to about half of the series. It's a graded membership on a continuum as well. You have LoZ next to ALTTP and OOT (I'd have MM way over on this side as well), then PH on the nonlinear side. The linear side would have Twilight Princess and Link's Awakening all the way at the "completely linear" description. Skyward Sword and Wind Waker would be near them but not as linear (more near the middle on the continuum). I'm not that sure on some of the rest of the games but some are more linear I think like the Oracles and MC or nonlinear like AOL.

I doubt that the designers intended the players to only play through ALTTP in the "intended order" though. It's not hard at all to figure out that you can do things out of order and entirely possible to prevent players from doing so. Even the original LoZ numbered the dungeons, and there is absolutely no questioning that the designers wanted to make it nonlinear in contrast to Super Mario Brothers- I think somewhere there are even quotes about this from them. The designers wouldn't be dumb and not realize that ALTTP allowed for significant deviation from the numbered order in the Dark World. They only took it out in later games by choice, not because they realized a "mistake" from the early nineties. If that were true, then you wouldn't be able to complete OOT in 274 different orders without glitches. The designers would have "fixed" it then. They had seven years between those games (making a completely linear game Link's Awakening in between) to prevent OOT from being nonlinear. It makes me mad that they made a choice to restrict the player's choice. This is my perspective though. You say you can tell that ALTTP wasn't intended to be nonlinear whereas I say it's as clear as day that they did. The same goes for the other nonlinear games as well- I can't imagine that hundreds of designers and testers could play OOT without realizing that you could do the Fire Temple before the Forest Temple amongst dozens of other instances of nonlinearity.

Also to relate my post to the forum topic, I'd like to add that the biggest joke of Skyward Sword was probably that the only part of the main quest of the game that the designers intended to be nonlinear (the song of the hero) was plagued by a game-ending glitch. So the designers probably wanted to encourage nonlinearity, but due to this oversight, in the end strongly encouraged people to play through this part in the same order every time.

 

[Kare]

Im not gonna counter every statement like many others, but please play through the game before you slaughter it on the forums with false facts.

 

[Ventus]

Also to relate my post to the forum topic, I'd like to add that the biggest joke of Skyward Sword was probably that the only part of the main quest of the game that the designers intended to be nonlinear (the song of the hero) was plagued by a game-ending glitch. So the designers probably wanted to encourage nonlinearity, but due to this oversight, in the end strongly encouraged people to play through this part in the same order every time.

Something tells me that the game breaking glitch was intentionally put into the game, so as to pay homage to Twilight Princess. Near everyone knows about the Cannon Room glitch, which was quite near the end of the game in its own right. People who experienced the glitch called Nintendo up, sent their disc (or sometimes their Wii) in for repair, and then got back to playing. The same exact thing is happening with SS with the SotH portion of the quest. I mean, I don't think that Nintendo would intentionally brick their game just to do something so easy as pay tribute as part of the 25th Zelda Anniversary, but it's still possible. I don't think they wanted SS to be nonlinear in any way, shape or form.

Im not gonna counter every statement like many others, but please play through the game before you slaughter it on the forums with false facts.

False facts? Where are these located?

 

[Fig]

Hi all,
i've just registered to tell you my feelings about this.
I am/was a huge Zelda fan, have played all the games in the 90s for gameboy, SNES and of course Ocarina of time for N64. I loved Ocarina of time, due to its adventurous feeling, lovely graphics and gameplay. I also played Wind waker on Gamecube which was slightly more boring than ocarina because of the long distances and less content in the game. Since then i havened owned a nintendo system so i couldnt really play the other games (apart from some weekend sessions at friends/family).

well but i never really forgot how beautiful ocarina of time was (and partly wind waker) and about the great time i had with this game. Then i heard from the anniversary of Zelda, and read that probably the "best Zelda ever" is going to be released soon and i decided to give it a try and bought a wii and the game on release date.

Since then ive played around 5 hours and just yesterday finished the first temple (which was very short somehow).

And i am asking you this: What the hell is this sh**?? Is that really zelda?? it hasnt made any progress in tha last 20 years?

_The graphics is worse then in Ocarina of time?! really?! Why?
_The areas i have explored are a total joke, in the sky there is like 3 or 4 islands so small you can barely land on them..
_The "sky city" itself has like, dont know 20 NPCs? What kind of life is that when they are living just in that town for centuries havent seen anything of the earth land and still are just 20 people?
_The areas on the earth (have just finished wood area and a bit of vulcano) are really small and very straight forward, i mean even the "worlds" in Super Mario 64 (where you have to jump through a painting) had more freedom of exploring and were almost as big as one of the (only!) three areas in this game?! Furthermore there is like no life on the earth, there are occasionally some enemies (who hold up their swords very awkwardly by the way, just to have a reason for the annoying motion playing?) but nothing else? No cities, no villages nothing? are there even quests down there, except going to the temple? Why is this damn whole in the sky then not directly above the temple?
_Quests? Are there any? Have done exactly... one! since ive started the game. Wont spoiler here, because that might be the only quest in the game( something about a girl).. Main story line is more like a long manga or comic book for me rather than a quest line, there are no real quests in it just go here and there. Im playing skyrim too since 2 weeks and its like the complete opposite you can go to talk to anyone in the vast amount of towns and villages and almost everyone has something to say or do.


I think the most annoying thing is really that you have nothing to explore, the sky world has really so few content it feels like it was orginally planned to be a screen saver in the nintendo offices. And the earth areas are just bad. just really bad. you never have the option to go either this way or that.. i hope this gets better during the game, though.

Last thing im really confused of, since when do you repair shield and upgrade swords with butterflies and bugs? Wth?!

So what do you think?!

P.s. sorry for my bad english, german guy

This is were you are wrong. First of all, how are Skyward Sword's graphics worse than Ocarina of Time? True, Ocarina of Time was the first 3D Zelda game with 3D graphics, but it was a pioneer. There were going to be some flaws to its graphics. Skyward Sword's are a lot more smoother and sharper than Ocarina of Time's. I hate to say this, but you don't deserve to call yourself a gamer. You're not. A real gamer doesn't look at a game's graphics and judge by its graphics. Your next mistake was comparing it to Skyrim. Yes, Skyrim is a good game with awesome graphics, but that doesn't mean that its graphics are better than Skyward Sword. You first have to look into the console's engine. Nintendo is always low on graphics compared to Microsoft and Sony, but that's why Nintendo games leave a legacy. Ocarina of Time is still the most rated game of all time, because of its gameplay elements, such as Z-targeting(L-targeting in other games), its storyline, and its epic jump into 3D. Microsoft's and Sony's engines are bigger and are equipped with cords(or whatever, since I don't own any of their consoles) that enhance the graphics in their games. Nintendo's Wii has a smaller engine and that's why you say that Skyward Sword's graphics are terrible when compared to Skyrim.

Next, Skyward Sword is an origin story, thus the lack of people and citizens. The world is still forming in the surface below. Also there are multiple quests besides the quest you described. If you didn't the news from Nintendo, they said that they wanted to create a surface world were it could more simple to explore than Twilight Princess's overworld, for it was too dense and wide and to explore would take a very long time. Skyward Sword has more content to do than Ocarina of Time, for there are many challenges that the player can take on.

Lastly, Skyward Sword is an incredible Zelda game, end of discussion. Even IGN gave Skyward Sword a perfect score, even though they are not into Nintendo games that much. You are either person who asking Nintendo to do more to their games, though it would be too much for them to handle, or you're a person who can't see a great game with your own eyes.

 

[NekoTamer]

Sorry to say but you are the most overactive nit picker I have ever seen. Most of your complaints are things that don't matter to the gameplay. You've only been playing a few hours and you think that's all that the game has to offer? This is also the most unfair review I've seen for a game. You clearly didn't give the game a chance. I think you need to have your eyes checked if you think the graphics are worse. Are you aware that the art style is supposed to be like a water color painting. This is why the distant background is blurry but still beautiful. Did you play the game just to talk to NPCs? Zelda is about puzzles and exploration, not chatting with computers the whole day. Why were you expecting large villages on the surface when the last surviving humans were sent to the sky? Yes, there are only three areas but they are big and have a lot to explore. The forest and desert are actually two areas each. In total, SS actually has 5 areas. Lastly, you don't upgrade the sword and shields with bugs. You upgrade shields and other items with materials you find on the surface and potions with bugs. Next time, get your facts straight before you give such an unfair beating.

 

[TheMasterSword]

I have to say, you are by far are the most shocking man and a hypocrite at that! You said you were a Zelda fan, and you played about 5 hours and decided it was crap? First of all, if you haven't learned this already, dont judge a book by is cover. Also, you obviously haven't read up on it or you would know that there's much more too it then just a small town.
Also, wind waker was double what ocarina of time was, content wise.
Also, I'm sorry if this offends there, but I am honestly getting sick and tired if all these people comparing games to OoT and blowing it out if proportion.
I loved the game, but shooting another game down because it didn't have the same feel OoT did all those years ago is like saying you don't like Legos now as a 27 year old as much as you did when you were 5.
You like OoT more because it was your CHILDHOOD!

Also, are you kidding me! OoT has better graphics! Not even close. The Nintendo 64 was the first 3d graphics Nintendo ever did, so they were so good. Nintendo has been perfecting the graphics since then. In OoT you could see pixels, nt as much as in present games.

3 or 4 islands? Seriously? Try pressing the plus sign when your flying for a change and see how many islands there really are, and useful ones at that.

Once again, do your homework. More then 3 places just saying.

Also, I liked repairing shields etc. makes t more realisitic and challenging!