Was Skyward Sword too Long?

[THEM]

I think they could have left some stuff out *cough* tadtones *cough* and maybe a few other fetch quests, but I thought it was a pretty good length overall.

 

[SinkingBadges]

Well, I don't know if I'm being nitpicky here but I thought that just about the Song of the Hero segment. I thought the plot's rythm was pretty good until that quest, which I felt was drawn out and didn't really add much beyond artificial lenght to the game. I'm thinking especially of the tadtone mission, which I actually found pretty tedious. The game overall, not really too long, just a bit drawn out at parts like the afforementioned one. I agree with the idea that a game being longer isn't exactly a bad thing, but I also think that a line must be drawn somewhere when it comes to squeezing gameplay out of certain areas to keep the freshness and have care about the game not over-staying its welcome. But that's pretty tricky anyway, since people have different opinions of how long a came could/should be.

Keep in mind, though, that this is coming from a guy who enjoyed the triforce search in Wind Waker.

 

[Danigo92498]

In my opinion, I didn't find Skyward Sword to be too long, maybe the beginning seemed a little slow but it was a great game besides that.

 

[Majora's Cat]

SS didn't have unnecessary fetch quests or lack luster segments? The first 4 hours of the game are lack luster and acquiring the Song of the Hero is the epitome of an unnecessary fetch quest.

Compare Skyward Sword's main quest to Ocarina of Time's or Twilight Princess'. The latter two are plagued by hours of trudging through empty fields, while Skyward Sword feels like one huge dungeon throughout. Even the Song of the Hero segment had dungeon-like aspects. So before you say that, please try comparing Skyward Sword to other Zelda games - there is clearly no comparison.

 

[Dio]

There were parts of the game that really should not have been there such as the fetching of the song of the hero. Instead there should have been dungeons or something of more interest. Without this section I would have called the game too short though.

 

[Burgh86]

Compare Skyward Sword's main quest to Ocarina of Time's or Twilight Princess'. The latter two are plagued by hours of trudging through empty fields, while Skyward Sword feels like one huge dungeon throughout. Even the Song of the Hero segment had dungeon-like aspects. So before you say that, please try comparing Skyward Sword to other Zelda games - there is clearly no comparison.

LOL, did you really just say that you spent hours trudging through Hyrule Field in OoT's main quest? If you actually did then you clearly like to take your time with these games, because I doubt if anyone spent more than 20-30 seconds at a time in Hyrule field while they were playing the game (not doing any side quests).

 

[Majora's Cat]

LOL, did you really just say that you spent hours trudging through Hyrule Field in OoT's main quest? If you actually did then you clearly like to take your time with these games, because I doubt if anyone spent more than 20-30 seconds at a time in Hyrule field while they were playing the game (not doing any side quests).

That's already too much time, as running through an empty Hyrule Field isn't in the least bit exhilarating. As many critics have remarked, Skyward Sword is jam-packed with content and hardly ever wastes the player's time. Ocarina of Time and Twilight Princess filled the void between dungeons with boring fetch quests and tiresome running from Point A to Point B. Although these segments between dungeons in previous Zelda games weren't ridiculously lengthy, they were enough, as a whole, to make me yawn.

SS is an adventure that holds 40 hours or so in store for a non-completionist, and I don't see how SS has as many filler quests as games before it. Nintendo did its best to address this issue, and SS feels mostly like a completely new sort of Zelda title. Ocarina of Time and Twilight Princess had much less interesting openings than Skyward Sword did. What Zelda game hasn't gotten off to a slow start? It's almost become a tradition for 3D Zelda games.

I'm not sure if you and I experienced Skyward Sword the same way, but what is clear is that most people felt that SS is a more straightforward game. Like I said before, there is hardly any time to breathe, and I invested a good 30 hours into it without completing it 100%. I have spent 27 hours on Twilight Princess completed 100%, and Skyward Sword certainly has more gameplay and puzzles to enjoy than TP.

 

[Fullmetal]

I thought that Skyward Sword was just the right length. I could have done without searching for the portions of the song of the hero, though... Seemed kind of pointless...

 

[Ventus]

[...]Ocarina of Time and Twilight Princess filled the void between dungeons with boring fetch quests and tiresome running from Point A to Point B.

SS is an adventure that holds 40 hours or so in store for a non-completionist, and I don't see how SS has as many filler quests as games before it. Nintendo did its best to address this issue, and SS feels mostly like a completely new sort of Zelda title. Ocarina of Time and Twilight Princess had much less interesting openings than Skyward Sword did. What Zelda game hasn't gotten off to a slow start? It's almost become a tradition for 3D Zelda games. .

Skyward Sword doesn't? Look beyond the beautiful, artistic graphical display and tell me that SS didn't have tiresome fields and boring fetch quests. The biggest difference perhaps is that while we roll from ptA to ptB in older games, we sprint in SS. That's about it.

40 hours? Nowhere near, at least not for a first playthrough. I mean, the standard Zelda player could possibly take this long or even more, but that isn't true ingame time. Taking in the sights isn't gameplay time. Constantly replaying minigames is not gameplay time. Reading every bit of text is not gameplay time. Those are the three things that most (new) Zelda players do and that constitutes the bulk of their time as seen on the File Select screen.

Let's see...every bit of dowsing is filler [though optional]. Searching for Zelda is filler. Helping out the little races is filler. Scapper was filler [though he appeared necessary to advance the storyline – that's forced filler a la SotH]. Song of the Hero is the mainstay filler quest. The Sky as a whole and the G Cubes were filler; I could go on. That's true, to a certain extent. SS' opening definitely had a lot more going on, we had interesting character development and particularly amazing scenery. OoT really doesn't have that slow of a start – you get RIGHT to the action within 20 minutes or less. You're practically thrown a dungeon (Inside the Deku Tree) into your face, whereas with SS...fetch quest, fetch quest, tutorials and moar fetch quest, then we FINALLY reach Skyview.

 

[Ventus]

Artificial length is objective, and the things it is applied to are usually artificially lengthened to the point of the brand being applied. Tedious isn't opinion, it's fact. Some people like the tedium, so they try to apply a different word to make it seem pleasing. That's understandable and more power to them.

 

[Burgh86]

That's already too much time, as running through an empty Hyrule Field isn't in the least bit exhilarating. As many critics have remarked, Skyward Sword is jam-packed with content and hardly ever wastes the player's time. Ocarina of Time and Twilight Princess filled the void between dungeons with boring fetch quests and tiresome running from Point A to Point B. Although these segments between dungeons in previous Zelda games weren't ridiculously lengthy, they were enough, as a whole, to make me yawn.

SS is an adventure that holds 40 hours or so in store for a non-completionist, and I don't see how SS has as many filler quests as games before it. Nintendo did its best to address this issue, and SS feels mostly like a completely new sort of Zelda title. Ocarina of Time and Twilight Princess had much less interesting openings than Skyward Sword did. What Zelda game hasn't gotten off to a slow start? It's almost become a tradition for 3D Zelda games.

I'm not sure if you and I experienced Skyward Sword the same way, but what is clear is that most people felt that SS is a more straightforward game. Like I said before, there is hardly any time to breathe, and I invested a good 30 hours into it without completing it 100%. I have spent 27 hours on Twilight Princess completed 100%, and Skyward Sword certainly has more gameplay and puzzles to enjoy than TP.

You're right. The sky was jam packed with content and was absolutely exhilarating (end sarcasm).

 

[Majora's Cat]

You're right. The sky was jam packed with content and was absolutely exhilarating (end sarcasm).

At least it's a change of pace from the usual. The sky is definitely less tedious than sailing the Great Sea in the Wind Waker. All Zelda games have relatively empty fields - the sky was just a form of transportation from place to place in the overworld below the clouds - think of it almost like warping.

Anyone that thinks Skyward Sword has less content than previous Zelda titles needs to take a closer look at the game or at least play it again without being biased against it, because I assure you that you will find it to be much more action-packed than another other title. If you're still not sold, here:

[video=youtube;vRd5hd2BlC0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vRd5hd2BlC0[/video]

[video=youtube;tzr3WLoHims]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tzr3WLoHims[/video]

Now, in the G4 X-Play review, skip to around the 2:00 mark. They voice their complaints about the empty sky, but think about it this way: since when is a sky supposed to be crammed with content? Otherwise, it'd be more like a flying fortress than a wide-open sky, and the point was for it to be a good getaway from the constant action that goes on in Skyward Sword.

Oh, and they call the overworld small. They say that some of the length is "padding", but not for the reasons everyone here complains about. Now, the game is linear and gameplay is condensed into smaller areas, forcing Link is retread ground like in the Metroid series. So what was that you all said about artificial length? I rather like revisiting old areas and discovering that there's much more to these areas than can be seen by the naked eye. Would you really prefer larger, less-interesting areas that likely won't be seen again in the main quest?

40 hours? Nowhere near, at least not for a first playthrough. I mean, the standard Zelda player could possibly take this long or even more, but that isn't true ingame time. Taking in the sights isn't gameplay time. Constantly replaying minigames is not gameplay time. Reading every bit of text is not gameplay time. Those are the three things that most (new) Zelda players do and that constitutes the bulk of their time as seen on the File Select screen.

So you're implying that every other Zelda game doesn't have lots of text to read and unskippable cutscenes the first time around? It contributes to Twilight Princess' play time, too.

Several reviewers see it as a weakness, but its proves my point. Skyward Sword fits lot of content into a small space, and through the whole game, the only time you're allowed to breathe in any air is when you're exploring the sky and Skyloft. So before you criticize any more aspects of the game, please take into consideration why these elements are present and how they contribute positively to the game.

 

[Kare]

I have to agree, the first segment of the game was REALLY booring. I liked the way it was in OoT better, pick up the sword and start the game! Skyward Sword had to much Link and Zelda crap in the beginning.

 

[SinkingBadges]

Despite hearing this phrase a lot, even in the context of WW and TP, I still don't see how it means a thing. Artificial length? Huh?
I'll ignore the fact that it doesn't make any sense at all given it's use in this context. But I really cannot determine what this actually means. The only meaning I can gather is a section or sections of the game that dragged on a bit or were a bit tedious. In which case you're taking something subjective and giving it a needlessly deceiving objective title. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong there.

I personally found the Song of the Hero to be a well needed break from the usual find dungeon, beat boss, get one piece of an item formula we normally would have encountered. Sure they could have made it so Levias taught him the whole song in one go, but then people would likely be complaining about the game being too short (in content at least. The whole thing probably only took me around two hours).

Well, I did state it as an opinion, or at least that was my original intention. Let me see, is this part of my post the one you quoted?

I thought the plot's rythm was pretty good until that quest, which I felt was drawn out and didn't really add much beyond artificial lenght to the game.

By putting "I felt..." and "I thought..." at the start of my statements, I thought I wouls be highlighting that they were opinions. That said, I did say something along the lines of what you said in my post:

I agree with the idea that a game being longer isn't exactly a bad thing, but I also think that a line must be drawn somewhere when it comes to squeezing gameplay out of certain areas to keep the freshness and have care about the game not over-staying its welcome. But that's pretty tricky anyway, since people have different opinions of how long a came could/should be.

That said, my reasons for thinking that the Song of the Hero was kind of over-lenghtened (I'm actually thinking mostly of the tadtone search in that) is that it kinda broke the plot rythm for me. Am I being to sensible? Probably, but I thought it dragged the story down a little but because the parts that interested me about the story weren't really in my interest after the quest was over. I'm aware that this is pretty subjective, since I can see how you consider it a break from the quest. So were the collectibles, and optional sidequests, though, so the game had those to spare, unless I'm missing something on your definition of "breaks". Then again, I'm mainly explaining my reasoning to you (and how I stated it as an opinion, because you quoted me as using an objective term for a subjective situation).

Artificial length is objective, and the things it is applied to are usually artificially lengthened to the point of the brand being applied. Tedious isn't opinion, it's fact. Some people like the tedium, so they try to apply a different word to make it seem pleasing. That's understandable and more power to them.

Now, if I had to go about this, I'd say wether "artificial lenght" is subjective or objective depends a lot on the case. I'm not sure if the term is really negative or if that's just the kind of stigma that's attached to it. Some games come to mind when Vanitas says it's objective, because there are many games in which I could say the developers clearly tried to squeeze as much playtime out of a game as possible with the intent of lenghtening it decently. Like Sonic Unleashed, where I remember you had to go through the same stages several times but with a set challenge or particular condition. That's a pretty different kind of game design, but I'd say it most likely fits as "artificial lenghtening", and I'm not really using the term in a necessarily bad way. I'd say Skyward Sword did a lot of it by trying to squeeze as much playtime as possible from its areas, but then again, I never found the whole Song of the hero quest tedious, just the tadtone part. The rest, while also trying to squeeze as much as possible, weren't really tedious to me. I guess you could also attribute that to the "condensed" design Nintendo said they were aiming for with SS, in which case, I guess it's up to how you see it.

 

[Ventus]

Tedious is fact? Since when? What I may find tedious you may find exciting and vice versa.

Take this as an example, it could be a real life job or something totally different:

There are 100 cans that you are scanning for rust, because you want to recycle them. You have to take each can individually, take off their barcode, scan it, then take the can itself to a machine. You can't take multiple cans in at once. Given that you have 100 cans, would you not say the process is tedious? It can be exciting, but exciting and tedious are not antonyms.