Breath of the Wild ZI Says Zelda U Will Drop Motion Controls!

[DarkestLink]

It didn't, it just didn't. Less successful than others maybe, but bombed? No.

In terms of fan reception, SS scores closer to Zelda II and the FS games than it does to its fellow 3D titles. I consider that bombing.

 

[Salem]

In terms of fan reception, SS scores closer to Zelda II and the FS games than it does to its fellow 3D titles. I consider that bombing.

What?

 

[DarkestLink]

What?

I go by metacritics user score because I know the site and it's a sizable number of votes, but if you want to suggest others go ahead.

OoT: 9.3

MM: 9.1

tWW: 8.8

TP: 9.3

AoL: 7.2

FS: 7.3

FSA: 7.4

Finally SS...which scores 7.8.

 

[Salem]

^So you're NOT counting the critic scores, okay.

 

[JuicieJ]

You know what's funny, DarkestLink? Skyward Sword won pretty much every GOTY poll, including G4's Death Match, ScrewAttack's Top 10, and IGN's People's Choice. What's even better is that it beat out Skyrim on all of these, a game that sold twice as many copies and that was much more highly anticipated.

 

[DarkestLink]

^So you're NOT counting the critic scores, okay.

Well in that case I was talking about fan reception. In terms of critical reception, Skyward Sword is still on the lower end of the 3D titles, but the difference isn't as bad.

You know what's funny, DarkestLink? Skyward Sword won pretty much every GOTY poll, including G4's Death Match, ScrewAttack's Top 10, and IGN's People's Choice. What's even better is that it beat out Skyrim on all of these, a game that sold twice as many copies and that was much more highly anticipated.

Whoop dee doo. Problem is, you are comparing apples to oranges. You can't compare a Zelda game's success to another series like Mario...or worse, a non-Nintendo series like Elder Scrolls.

Game of the year? Cool...it and just about every other Zelda.

aLttP: Edge, IGN, GameRankings and Moby Games,

LA: GameRankings

OoT: Edge, Game Informer, Games magazine, IGN, GameRankings, GameSpot, Metacritic, Moby Games, Academy of Interactive Arts & Sciences, CESA Awards, GameFAQs and VSDA Awards

MM: GameFAQs and IGN

Wind Waker: Games magazine, GamesTM, GameFAQs, GameRankings, GamesRadar, GameSpot, IGN, Metacritic, and E3

TP: Game Informer, GameFAQs, GameRankings, GamesRadar, GameSpy, GameTrailers, IGN, Metacritic, Moby Games, X-Play, and E3

Phantom Hourglass: E3

Skyward Sword: Edge, IGN, MMGN, Screw Attack, G4, and The Washington Examiner

Not that significant, especially when compared to the other 3D titles. In fact, if it means anything to you, if you count the Game of the Year awards these titles have received, it ranks 2nd to last when compared with it's 3D predecessors.

 

[JuicieJ]

The hole in your argument, DL, is that you were originally basing your statements on fan reception, but then when faced with the GOTY situation involving polls voted on by gamers, you went to major publications' verdicts. If you're gonna try to claim something, you gotta remain consistent with your starting point, otherwise you'll pretty much lose all credibility... like you have now.

 

[DarkestLink]

The hole in your argument, DL, is that you were originally basing your statements on fan reception, but then when faced with the GOTY situation involving polls voted on by gamers, you went to major publications' verdicts. If you're gonna try to claim something, you gotta remain consistent with your starting point, otherwise you'll pretty much lose all credibility... like you have now.

Except this is your argument. I don't think GOTY means jack to be honest. But if it's so important to you, then so be it, I'm willing to humor it.

Why do I think GOTY doesn't mean anything? Because it's comparing apples to oranges. It's a single Zelda game competing against completely unrelated titles. The only time I'd bother comparing Zelda to another series' success is to judge how good or badly it'd had to perform for Nintendo to promote it further or drop it, but even then I'd stick to Nintendo franchises.

The worst part about using GOTY as an argument is that in 2011 you are comparing apples to oranges, but if you step back to 2003 when Wind Waker won these same awards, you are now comparing apples to grapes. The competing franchises and big titles among those franchises change every year and some years have tougher competitors than others. And no, we're not going to get into an argument over that because it's just ludicrous and there's no way we'd ever reach a definite answer.

Another problem with GOTY is the fanboys. It's not just about the game to them. It's about the series. People will vote for a Zelda game or an Elder Scrolls game just because they want the series to win. There are people who will only play one or neither game and just vote for their favorite series to win. Whether these fanboys are a significant factor or not can't be debated because there's no way of knowing.

Lastly, even if we ignore all the flaws of using your GOTY argument as fair measurement of a game's success, Skyward Sword still has less GOTY awards than the majority of its fellow 3D Zelda titles. So not only is your argument illogical, but if we accept it, it still turns against you.

 

[Cfrock]

The hole in your argument, DL, is that you were originally basing your statements on fan reception, but then when faced with the GOTY situation involving polls voted on by gamers, you went to major publications' verdicts. If you're gonna try to claim something, you gotta remain consistent with your starting point, otherwise you'll pretty much lose all credibility... like you have now.

DarkestLink demonstrated that Skyward Sword has a lower reception amongst fans than all the other 3D Zeldas (which were the main focus of his argument) by using the user ratings from Metacritic as evidence and then demonstrated that Skyward Sword also won fewer Game of the Year Awards than the other 3D Zeldas as well. Fewer GOTY awards is completely consistent with the assertion that Skyward Sword has received a worse reception than previous 3D Zelda games. There is no hole in his argument at all; Skyward Sword was simply not as well-received amongst fans as previous 3D installments, a point backed up by the Metacritic user rating and the fewer GOTY awards compared to past titles.

 

[JuicieJ]

Actually, there is a hole, and I don't see how you've missed it -- it's clear as crystal. Again, the discussion was of fan reception; DarkestLink brought up the metascore, I brought up the awards it won from polls voted on by gamers, then he brought in "official" awards, which have NOTHING to do with the gaming community. He used something that wasn't relative to the core topic in his rebuttal. That's a faulty argument no matter how you slice it. In a discussion purely about GOTY awards, it would be relevant, but that wasn't what the topic was about. So, there.

Honestly, though, I also don't think GOTY or metascores mean much of anything. I only brought up the (gamer-decided) GOTY thing because, as I just said, DarkestLink brought up the fan reception thing. As far as Metacritic's user scores go, those can be very inconsistent when being used as a basis for an argument just by nature. For example, Twilight Princess was an even more divisive Zelda game than Skyward Sword was -- TP is literally a 50/50 deal, as compared to SS's 70/30-ish -- yet its user score is higher. The DS Zeldas received pretty wide criticism, yet they have good user scores. Halo 4 was a fantastic game, one of the finest in the franchise, yet it has a 6.9 userscore. And what's probably the big daddy of them all, Other M was notoriously hated among the Metroid fanbase, yet it also has a 6.9 user score (showcasing the opposite scenario of that number).

Pray tell, why should I trust the user scores on Metacritic when they generally don't give a very accurate representation of what is actually thought?

 

[DarkestLink]

@JuicieJ

1) You mentioned GOTY awards and mentioned nothing about GOTY community based awards being an important factor.


2) Your argument over metascores being argument is incredibly ludicrous. It's asinine actually.

Pray tell, why should I trust the user scores on Metacritic when they generally don't give a very accurate representation of what is actually thought by me?

I fixed that for you because that's what your argument ultimately leads up to.

. For example, Twilight Princess was an even more divisive Zelda game than Skyward Sword was -- TP is literally a 50/50 deal, as compared to SS's 70/30-ish -- yet its user score is higher. The DS Zeldas received pretty wide criticism, yet they have good user scores. Halo 4 was a fantastic game, one of the finest in the franchise, yet it has a 6.9 userscore. And what's probably the big daddy of them all, Other M was notoriously hated among the Metroid fanbase, yet it also has a 6.9 user score (showcasing the opposite scenario of that number).

You offer...nothing...at all. Nothing to back up these statements. You go by your gut or what you want to believe is true and nothing else.

Imagine, for a moment, if I said "Well Wind Waker is clearly the most hated game in the franchise because 99% of the fans hated it." and offered NO source for this. No facts. No references. No reasoning except "Idk, it felt that way when I used to post on the IGN boards back in 2003."

And I must emphasis this because I think it's incredible that your reasoning to shoot down the metascores as a source is solely because they don't match your beliefs. And then you state these beliefs with nothing to back them up. Not even a simple poll. Sure, it wouldn't be significant seeing as we rarely get an audience over 50 in these polls, but again I must express how appalling your argument is to me.

 

[Cfrock]

Actually, there is a hole, and I don't see how you've missed it -- it's clear as crystal. Again, the discussion was of fan reception; DarkestLink brought up the metascore, I brought up the awards it won from polls voted on by gamers, then he brought in "official" awards, which have NOTHING to do with the gaming community.

You were the one who introduced the Game of the Year awards and DarkestLink showed that Skyward Sword won fewer of them. Whether they were community polls or just straight out publication choices doesn't change the fact that the game received fewer of them than previous Zelda games. The fact that it received fewer means that the gaming community and the critical press had a lower opinion of Skyward Sword than they did previous games. If the community liked it just as much as other games then it would have won more. Who decided the specific awards really makes no difference because, in the end, the fact remains that the game received fewer of them and that shows that it wasn't as well received as previous games in series. The fact remains, either way, that the Game of the Year awards back up DarkestLink's argument.

As far as Metacritic's user scores go, those can be very inconsistent when being used as a basis for an argument just by nature. For example, Twilight Princess was an even more divisive Zelda game than Skyward Sword was -- TP is literally a 50/50 deal, as compared to SS's 70/30-ish -- yet its user score is higher.

DarkestLink's argument was based off numbers and information which any one of us can go and double-check and that comes from a trusted source (a source publishers actually use to determine the success of a game) and that information was presented in a way that made clear the point he was arguing. Your argument is based entirely off random speculation and the incorrect use of the word "literally", with numbers you made up off the top of your head that have no basis in fact. I don't see how you expect anyone to trust your personal opinion against researchable fact. You say he has no credibility when he is using credible sources for his information and you are using nothing.

Halo 4 was a fantastic game, one of the finest in the franchise, yet it has a 6.9 userscore. And what's probably the big daddy of them all, Other M was notoriously hated among the Metroid fanbase, yet it also has a 6.9 user score (showcasing the opposite scenario of that number).

The Halo 4 comment is, again, your personal opinion on the matter. Just because you thought Halo 4 was excellent and various publications reviewed it well does not mean the gaming community liked it as much as you did. To suggest that Halo 4's score of 6.9 proves that Metacritic is unreliable is a fallacy, because it's an assertion based on a personal disagreement. You may have even read a lot of forum posts or comments from people saying how much they loved the game but even then you won't have heard the view of everyone who played it and so saying that 6.9 is not representative of the community's general response is an assumption, not a fact.

The same holds true for Other M. You even narrowed it down yourself, that the majority of the hate towards the game comes from the series' fanbase. But what about the people who aren't as fanatic about Metroid, or even the people who had never played Metroid before Other M? What about the people who just genuinely enjoyed the game? You won't have seen the opinion of everyone who played it and so to say that 6.9 is too high a score is another assumption.

If you want to argue that Skyward Sword was a well recieved game then you're missing DarkestLink's point. If you want to argue that it was as well received as earlier games then you have to use facts to disprove the evidence that DarkestLink has provided to support his point. Just saying "Oh, but were those Game of the Year awards voted for by gamers or the website staff?" or, "Metacritic isn't even that reliable anyway because it's scores don't match my opinions," isn't going to convince anyone because he gave us numbers and information while you have so far given assumptions and a childish attitude.

So, there.

See? When you say things like that and just dismiss someone's argument off-hand with nothing substantial it weakens your position because it gives people no reason to listen to what you have to say. I'm going to avoid the cliché of saying your opposition to this point is based purely off your love for Skyward Sword and how you are often seen to blind yourself to criticism of it because I honestly don't care about that at all. But if you're going to argue that Skyward Sword wasn't received more poorly than its predecessors then present facts. Find the information that backs up your claim and present that instead of just giving us some rough numbers (like 50/50 and 70/30) you cooked up based off how you perceive the response from a small margin of the fanbase. Give your argument some actual substance and try to be less condescending to other people and maybe you'll find more members here take you seriously.

 

[Salem]

Well in that case I was talking about fan reception. In terms of critical reception, Skyward Sword is still on the lower end of the 3D titles, but the difference isn't as bad.

I see, but the thing with Metacritic is that it aggregates scores from ALL voters, it doesn't distinguish if that vote came from a Zelda fan or not, so while it may true that SS is the lowest received 3D Zelda game, that information comes from the general gaming audience, we don't know if the fans feel the same.

 

[DarkestLink]

I see, but the thing with Metacritic is that it aggregates scores from ALL voters, it doesn't distinguish if that vote came from a Zelda fan or not, so while it may true that SS is the lowest received 3D Zelda game, that information comes from the general gaming audience, we don't know if the fans feel the same.

Poor wording on my part, but I don't really think it makes a difference. I used the term "fan" way too broadly to describe anyone who played the game and was willing to give it a score. Regardless, it's the general public and not just the hardcore fans that make the difference...let's face it, many of us are going to buy these next two Zelda titles blindly.

 

[Salem]

Poor wording on my part, but I don't really think it makes a difference. I used the term "fan" way too broadly to describe anyone who played the game and was willing to give it a score. Regardless, it's the general public and not just the hardcore fans that make the difference

Right.....

let's face it, many of us are going to buy these next two Zelda titles blindly.

Of course we will, I think that says more about the general quality of the series than the "blindness" of the fans imho.