Legend of Zelda Skyward Sword v.s. Ocarina of Time

[etecoon]

Characterization is much more than backstory and origin exposition. Personally, Ghirahim tells me much more about his character with his aesthetic design, his mannerisms and style of dialogue than Gannondorf does telling me a monologue about how sad he was for his people and that's why he's a bad guy. Ghirahim might not be more complex, but he's certainly more interesting than the over-trodden ground of "sympathetic antagonist". To me, anyhow.

over-trodden ground but flamboyantly insane androgynous villains are soooo uncommon in japanese media :D

 

[Holder of the Heel]

Well, Demise is basically gone. He's destroyed. The problem we have with Ganon is that he's able to be revived. The reason for that is because what's being revived is Demise's hatred, not Ganon himself. With Demise, he isn't made of something that can be revived like that. When he was destroyed in battle, he was destroyed.

Yes but didn't they say that there were two Links before the Skyward Sword one? I find it interesting that they gave us a number such as that. Demise can reappear, most certainly.

over-trodden ground but flamboyantly insane androgynous villains are soooo uncommon in japanese media :D

And yet, it is far more uncommon than what Ganondorf is, which is a common universal type villain. And yet, we aren't in Japan.

And yet, there is more to him than that. He is the blade of Demise that allowed for Ganondorf and exists to revive him and be wielded by him. He has a calm demeanor hiding his insatiable bloodlust and insufferable impatience.

Ganondorf is... well, he is greedy and likes power. Yeah, Ghirahim is too boring, give me back my Ganon PLEEEEAAASE.

 

[Luigitoilet]

over-trodden ground but flamboyantly insane androgynous villains are soooo uncommon in japanese media :D

Maybe. I honestly couldn't tell you if this was the case. I don't watch a lot of anime. The japanese media I watch (live-action films mostly) doesn't really have many characters like Ghirahim. You could be right though, I don't know. Maybe that's why it was fresher to me.

@Jam: Ghirahim seemed to be motivated solely out of predestined servitude to his master. Just like Fi is to Link, and just as Link and Zelda are to "prophecy" and "destiny" in general.

 

[GwJ]

@Holder - I think it was just 1 Link, but yeah. And I was mainly referring to the future; I'm already convinced there's gonna be a prequel to SS sometime in the future.

 

[Holder of the Heel]

@Holder - I think it was just 1 Link, but yeah. And I was mainly referring to the future; I'm already convinced there's gonna be a prequel to SS sometime in the future.

Oh, my bad Jumpman.

 

[etecoon]

And yet, it is far more uncommon than what Ganondorf is, which is a common universal type villain. And yet, we aren't in Japan.

And yet, there is more to him than that. He is the blade of Demise that allowed for Ganondorf and exists to revive him and be wielded by him. He has a calm demeanor hiding his insatiable bloodlust and insufferable impatience.

Ganondorf is a more common villain type here, I didn't say Ganondorf was better, but still

The second paragraph literally sounds like a shonen plot

Maybe. I honestly couldn't tell you if this was the case. I don't watch a lot of anime. The japanese media I watch (live-action films mostly) doesn't really have many characters like Ghirahim. You could be right though, I don't know. Maybe that's why it was fresher to me.

I'm not saying Ghirahim isn't a good villain, just that the same criticism that applies to Ganondorf also applies to Ghirahim, neither are adventurous concepts at all

 

[Holder of the Heel]

The second paragraph literally sounds like a shonen plot

True, but I can't really see the problem with that. In fact, it is a bit hard to make a villain that hasn't been done before in some shape or form.

And I'd totally watch a shonen like that. ^^;

I'm not saying Ghirahim isn't a good villain, just that the same criticism that applies to Ganondorf also applies to Ghirahim, neither are adventurous concepts at all

I see where you're coming from, I just think it is a bit harsh on Ghirahim since he is a step up in just about every area, whether you like what he is or not, which some definitely don't.

 

[Aaven]

Skyward Sword is better.

I'm pretty sure people will continue to jump on the retro bandwagon to seem more like a hardcore fan of the franchise than the rest, similar to how a Final Fantasy fanboy always jumps on the 2D installments or Final Fantasy 7. Being a Final Fantasy fanboy myself that's all I can really say about it.

I'm probably going to get a lot of **** for this but it needed to be said, people need to move on and realize Skyward Sword is a better game in most all of it's aspects, OoT is incredible but now it's just classic in the series moreso than an actual contender to Skyward.

 

[GwJ]

While I said SS is better, I don't think it's as clear cut as you make it sound Aaven. The game has its problems. The motion controls are kinda clunky and unneeded for example.

In fact, I prefer TP's motion controls over SS's any day. At least in TP, most of the stuff was still done by button pressing and the stuff that did require motion didn't require precision (swordplay) or dealing with motionplus (bow/slingshot).

 

[etecoon]

Skyward Sword is better.

I'm pretty sure people will continue to jump on the retro bandwagon to seem more like a hardcore fan of the franchise than the rest, similar to how a Final Fantasy fanboy always jumps on the 2D installments or Final Fantasy 7. Being a Final Fantasy fanboy myself that's all I can really say about it.

I'm probably going to get a lot of **** for this but it needed to be said, people need to move on and realize Skyward Sword is a better game in most all of it's aspects, OoT is incredible but now it's just classic in the series moreso than an actual contender to Skyward.

the earlier FF's are better because TSW happened, sakaguchi got the boot, the marketing department became shadow directors from that point on and made matsuno rage quit, and they've lost a lot of other talent as well. completely different situation, much more stable situation at nintendo

I also like how you didn't actually list a single thing that SS does better, how can you claim that people who like OoT are being superficial when your own argument is so badly supported?

 

[Jam Stunna]

the earlier FF's are better because TSW happened, sakaguchi got the boot, the marketing department became shadow directors from that point on and made matsuno rage quit, and they've lost a lot of other talent as well.

Quoting for posterity

 

[Matador]

While I said SS is better, I don't think it's as clear cut as you make it sound Aaven. The game has its problems. The motion controls are kinda clunky and unneeded for example.

In fact, I prefer TP's motion controls over SS's any day. At least in TP, most of the stuff was still done by button pressing and the stuff that did require motion didn't require precision (swordplay) or dealing with motionplus (bow/slingshot).

I forgot to address this. I never saw the problem with the motion controls. I thought it added a little freshness to classic weapons like the bow and arrow. They were more responsive (again, imo) than the TP controls and much more intuitive.

It definitely felt a lot better than running up to bosses and pressing the B button over and over.

 

[GwJ]

Don't get me wrong, I liked the motion controls. I just think they were unnecessary. And since Motion+ still felt like it was a prototype, I think it needed to be worked on more.

 

[etecoon]

I think the sword controls worked well, everything else was suspect, flying/swimming and harp controls were outright awful. Maybe the technology with WM+ makes it technically feasible but the development difficulty for motion controls is still clearly much higher, they just couldn't refine the controls enough for those things even after 5 years

 

[GwJ]

I actually liked the swimming controls. It was just the damned jumps that messed with me. >:[

 

[Matador]

I do agree that there's room for improvement, but they're far from bad, to me. The flying/swimming was more sluggish than I'd like, but it was still pretty usable. Flying felt like the wing cap on Mario 64.

While I liked the motion controls though, I can understand where posts like this:

SS comes out. Now I feel that this thread has way more appreciation for SS than it should, which puts me in a bad place, but honestly I feel that SS just took a big **** on the combat system. Every goddamn enemy is built around the one fact that they made the sword direction sensitive. It's like nintendo was just trying to justify buying the wii-motion plus. MAYBE if the controls were about three times more accurate, would I not have a problem with this extremely gimmicky design. On top of that, there is literally NOTHING challeging about SS except for the fact that you'll get punished by making the wrong sword swipe (which, most of the time was NOT the way I swiped it). My god, the gossip stone if a freaking guidebook. The poor controls are the only reason this game is even remotely difficult, which in my opinion, it still isn't.

are coming from. They could've added a little more depth to the enemies than simply swiping in the right direction the majority of the time. I still believe WW had the best combat to date (same as this poster). SS is a step in the right direction for surpassing that though...they just need to build on it. Some of the boss battles like the Kraken were pretty incredible due in part to the motion controls.

 

[Aaven]

I apologize etecoon, my point was indeed badly supported, so I will list some things I believe Skyward has achieved or perfected over OoT.

Graphics - This is the obviously the most notable upgrade, the longer a game is out the worst the graphics appear, just a fact of gaming as a majority.

Storyline - Obviously an improvement over OoT, it was more elaborate and not as linear as OoT, the characters engaged a lot more and overall it had more depth to it. It also added a lot of diverse personality and likability to it's characters, like Groose, Ghirahim or hell, even Zelda was a lot deeper as far as character development goes.

Gameplay - I admit the motion controls weren't perfect, but they were definitely a step in the right direction for Skyward. It was certainly more open-world friendly than OoT's landscapes were, and a lot more populated with side-quests, items to find to upgrade your equipment(which by the way, was also an incredible addition to Skyward) and it just had more depth to the gameplay in general, it basically capitalized on all OoT's positive aspects and improved them.

Music - I'm not really sure what to say, they both had an incredible soundtrack, Skyward's sounds cleaner though because of course, technology and quality for Zelda has improved over OoT's time.


The only thing I believe OoT has going for it is nostalgia, but that is something natural that is gained over age, which Skyward will also attain as the years go by, possibly even more than OoT did. It also proved a lot more difficult than Skyward, I'll give it that.
Again, this is just my opinion.

 

[Matador]

I think a lot of OoT's difficulty comes from the majority of Zelda players playing it for the first time more than 10 years ago. As a kid, it'd probably be reverse if I had played Skyward Sword first, then Ocarina of Time.

I think one of the posters here played OoT for the first time around the same time that he played SS, so they'd probably have a better view as far as the difficulty stands.

 

[GwJ]

I do agree that there's room for improvement, but they're far from bad, to me. The flying/swimming was more sluggish than I'd like, but it was still pretty usable. Flying felt like the wing cap on Mario 64.

While I liked the motion controls though, I can understand where posts like this:

are coming from. They could've added a little more depth to the enemies than simply swiping in the right direction the majority of the time. I still believe WW had the best combat to date (same as this poster). SS is a step in the right direction for surpassing that though...they just need to build on it. Some of the boss battles like the Kraken were pretty incredible due in part to the motion controls.

Oh god the flying. I spent like a half hour during that dumb contest with Groose and his cronies in the beginning because I didn't understand how to maintain speed.

 

[etecoon]

It was certainly more open-world friendly than OoT's landscapes were

lolwut, SS is the polar opposite of open world. in OoT you can actually walk from one area of the map to another, in SS you have to go through an obtuse hub

Music - I'm not really sure what to say, they both had an incredible soundtrack, Skyward's sounds cleaner though because of course, technology and quality for Zelda has improved over OoT's time.

cleaner isn't objectively better, some people like it dirty

I think OoT had a better sense of what moments to emphasize, namely having a great title screen and end credits(really a lot of things at the end), first and last impressions are very important to how people remember things

The only thing I believe OoT has going for it is nostalgia, but that is something natural that is gained over age, which Skyward will also attain as the years go by, possibly even more than OoT did. It also proved a lot more difficult than Skyward, I'll give it that.
Again, this is just my opinion.

I'd give gameplay to OoT, SS does beat it in other aspects, but again, that's the frosting, the cake needs to be good. I don't think either game was at all difficult, MM is the closest any of the 3D games have been to being hard and even then I don't think I ever died or really had that much trouble, outside of the NES games zelda isn't a series built around challenge(aside from self imposed ones like OoT speed runs)

I also don't understand how it's just nostalgia when OoT is right around the midway point for the series, if things were better simply for being older, surely the original zelda would be most loved? I think I was like 3 when I first played the NES zeldas...the game is literally a month older than I am, how is it that MM is my favorite game in the series?

I'd also say LTTP is the zelda I'm most nostalgic of, it also happens to be like...my fourth or fifth favorite game in the series maybe

 

[Matador]

OoT title screen >>>

They got sooooo much right with that game.

Oh god the flying. I spent like a half hour during that dumb contest with Groose and his cronies in the beginning because I didn't understand how to maintain speed.

Lol, I'm sure everyone had at least some trouble there. There very vaguely explained how the flying worked before tossing you out there. Once I got used to it, it just ended up being sluggish rather than confusing. If I had to choose between flying and Epona, I'd honestly have to go with Epona...especially since you only really fly over clouds. That gets kinda dry after awhile.

Edit: One thing I actually just remembered about SS is the new shield system as well. I loved it. Certainly a system I'd stick with for future games.

 

[Aaven]

@Etecoon:

Skyward has a hub, yes, but the aspects of open-world were more clear in Skyward. OoT has a more accessible world but it feels three times emptier, there isn't nearly as much purpose or secrets in OoT as there are in Skyward.

Also I did not claim Skyward had a better soundtrack, I simply stated it was cleaner due tp an advance in technology. Again, I only said I was neutral when comparing soundtracks.

Regardless, OoT has the nostalgia factor due it being the most notable and memorable Zelda installment of all time. Even though it's not the oldest it's certainly the most treasured installment, hence why this topic is "SS vs. OoT" and not, "SS vs. The original Legend Of Zelda".

 

[etecoon]

did you consider that it may be the most memorable for a reason other than "it's old"?

like I said, I think the shiny new coat of paint is as blinding as nostalgia, a lot of the reasoning for SS being better is that it has the tech edge. though even in this age the aesthetic of older games is still considered desireable in some cases, still games like cave story or mega man 10....

 

[Aaven]

That's pretty sarcastic and insulting to my intelligence on this discussion. Yes I'm aware that it's held at such high esteem because it's one of the greatest installments to the Zelda franchise ever.

I can agree with you to that end, new paint and old nostalgia do have a very similar effect on how people can perceive and compare games. Still, I believe Skyward has improved on so many more things than they've missed for the series, when it gets down to the core of each category game versus game Skyward has OoT beat.

OoT is an incredible game though and everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Just the fact that OoT can even contend or be compared to a current generation and great game like Skyward, from the same series as well, speaks for itself.

 

[theeboredone]

I still don't understand why we're comparing graphics to games that came out in two different eras. If anything, the better argument would be if the N64 pushed the graphics for its time to a whole new level (like Uncharted 2 did for PS3), or was it just considered "good" compared to the other games around it.

SS's graphics...pretty from a distance, but man...when you get closer to objects and textures...they are ugly. At the same time, I'm curious how the game's graphics stand up to other Wii games. I would say Xenoblade has some pretty graphics, though at some points it gets ugly as well.

 

[etecoon]

isn't it just as insulting to impute OoT's high respect level purely with nostalgia? I don't think OoT is the best game in the series myself but I wouldn't dismiss peoples opinions like that, old games can actually be good

 

[Aaven]

Once again, I am not saying OoT's high level of respect in it's franchise came from nostalgia alone, I am well aware that is an incredible game overall that pushed the envelope on the N64's capacity and really set the standard for quality gaming of it's time.

If that is what you took away from my statement, I apologize but that wasn't my intention whatsoever.

 

[etecoon]

Once again, I am not saying OoT's high level of respect in it's franchise came from nostalgia alone, I am well aware that is an incredible game overall that pushed the envelope on the N64's capacity and really set the standard for quality gaming of it's time.

If that is what you took away from my statement, I apologize but that wasn't my intention whatsoever.

just an issue of not being consistent with wording then, this implies exactly that

The only thing I believe OoT has going for it is nostalgia.

but likewise I'm sure I've come off as overly harsh towards SS, I did find it enjoyable, I just don't think it's one of the best games in the series. it certainly had the upside to be that, I just see more flaws in addition to the things it does well

 

[Holder of the Heel]

I myself only REALLY played Ocarina of Time until it came out of the 3DS.

So, my opinion > everyone else's.

 

[Эикельманн [РУС]]

What the minority claimed to happen when they tried to control Link...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4DeHTo6hUI

LOOOOOOOOOOOL that ending omg.

seriously, though, legend of zelda games are so good that it's too hard for me to ever pick "one" to be the best, in any situation.

they're just that consistent.

 

[MuraRengan]

I always have trouble putting these kinds of things into words, but basically I think that OoT was an overall better experience than SS. SS didn't feel special, and I thought it was because maybe I'm to old to feel any special connection to new games anymore, but recently I played Chrono Trigger and Portal 2 and felt that same kind of amazing experience that I get from OoT. I don't really understand what it is, but I feel like a lot more love was put into OoT and it shows just in the way the entire thing unfolds (which is also the reason why MM is my favorite.)

 

[Grodion]

well, if people are saying that the age difference is too great and what not, then compare it to oot for 3ds. the time span in between the dates those two came out is really short. and even with the new graphics and other stuff for the 3ds, i still think skyward sword is the better game. and before you people say its because of the new shiny paint coat, its not, because i played ocarina back on the 64 when it came out

 

[Problem2]

Ocarina of Time is probably a little bit better to me, but not by much. Considering that OoT is the base for pretty much every 3D Zelda after it, I'll write the details of why Skyward Sword is better or worse than OoT.

First of all, I really do feel more connected with the characters of Skyward Sword. There was just more story and more cinema in the game, and this is partially due to limitations they had on the N64 at the time. They couldn't just fit scene after scene into OoT, though they did do a lot for it's time.

Skyward Sword has sadly "meh" graphics ate times that look only on par with Twilight Princess in polygon count, which btw is actually a GAMECUBE GAME!! I mean, Super Mario Galaxy 1 & 2 run on the Wii's engine just beautifully. I don't understand why Skyward Sword has such a problem with curves. Like seriously, too many pointy doors and rugs 'n' stuff. The impressionist graphics kind of made it worse too. The only time things would have probably looked great was from a distance, but then there is that blur filter that prevents that, so there you go. On the other hand, the design that they go with some of the dungeons is really appealing to me. i really loved viewing the technological futuristic past of Lanaryu and I also loved exploring the beautiful Ancient Cistern.

The combat is amazing. I know a lot of people feel like it was forced, and Nintendo definitely put a lot of emphasis on it, but it's really better than mashing the b button over and over. (don't forget to occasionally dodge!) I enjoy having more interaction options against the enemies, and I enjoy that the interactions with different types of enemies is slightly different. The lizardfos are just funny and bring a smile to my face everytime I see them mock me foolishly. You have the basic bokoblins that block in somewhat strategical directions, but then there were enemies that required specific swings to beat like the Beemos (that's the name for the laser shooting tower right?). Being able to shoot beams from your sword again was also a really fun feature to return to the Zelda franchise and was built in a way that wasn't overpowered at all. In fact, the decision to make it more powerful in Hero Mode was a great choice as that mode makes you realize how valuable it is when you are worried about health. The items were also amazing!! I really loved the items!! It's great to see some items we have never quit seen brefore like the whip, but also see the Gust Below for the first time in a 3D Zelda game. That was definitely one of my favorite items. What's better is that the items were given more than a "one time use" like the Megaton Hammer in Ocarina of Time or the Spinny Top from Twilight Princess. Lastly, I want to say that the difficulty for Skyward Sword was decent for a modern video game. The puzzles were a little too easy at times, but the combat and fighting fit into a range of difficulty that I find good for a game.

The beginning is too long. Skyward Sword shares this problem with Twilight Princess which scares me because I want this trend to stop right here. There are just too many mandatory tutorials. I can understand what they are trying to do by incorporating the tutorials into the story. This is nice for brand new players, but even they will be annoyed by this on their 2nd and 3rd play once they have mastered the controls. I shouldn't be resorting to making a save file that starts immediately after the tutorial stuff so that I can copy it over ever time I want to have a new run through of Zelda. Ocarina Time did this perfectly. There are plenty of opportunities to go learn and practice game mechanics, but you can choose to ignore it and instead suit up and head to the Deku Tree in like 5 minutes.

Skyward Sword music is great. I really like it a lot better than Ocarina of Time, even though OoT has more "memerable" melodies. To me, memorable does not equal better.

Fi is super annoying and comes close to ruining the game. I don't mind that she plays a role in the story. In fact I liked that. Having Midna play an important part in Twilight Princess worked out wonderfully. What bothers me is that Fi bugs you too often. She is by far worse than Navi. She'll remind you about things you did not need reminding of. She'll repeat objectives that another NPC JUST FREAKING told you!!! She'll spell out the answer with her obvious hints at times to really difficult puzzles. She also reminds you that your batteries are low on the remote. Isn't the low battery icon in the corner enough? I guess not. I mean just remember this example. The puzzle on the sandship where you shoot the timestone from below the deck would have been a great puzzle, but it is ruined for all players when Fi can't keep her trap shut and just spoils the puzzle for you. How about the time you get the sling shot. You remember that? Yeah, when you get the slingshot, Link holds it up and the game tells you how to use it. Ok fair enough. Next, the elder Kikwii also tells you how to use it. Kind of not necessary, but ok. Then after THAT, Fi appears and tells you how to use it AGAIN. THANK YOU NINTENDO!! I was worried I would not figure out how to use the Sling Shot!!

The traveling and questing in Skyward Sword is a bit more rigid. I would say just a tiny bit too much for what I would say is acceptable for a Zelda game. I wouldn't have mind if they pushed the linearity of the game a little bit, but at times, they really pushed it hard. The Sky World doesn't have a lot to do, and revisiting those 3 areas kind of gets repetitive. When working on the Song of the Hero Quest, i was definitely tired of seeing the time stone puzzles and I wasn't too happy collecting magical fish notes, which was more time consuming then it should have been. While solving puzzles to find or enter a dungeon was indeed still a part of the game, it was the traveling that was longer compared to past games such as OoT. I did appreciate all the landscape and baddies that I had to fight. It was really fun, but if you try to recollect what you had to do, it is hard to remember that you did more than just go from Point A to Point B. Finally, a big part of the reason that Skyward Sword felt linear is because almost all of the side quests were just dousing missions. Adds more to repetition and reinforces, "hey go from Point A to Point B".

 

[etecoon]

I liked the combat, the flying, swimming, and harp are where the motion controls feel 'forced'(though it makes perfect sense for the harp, it's just executed terribly). It feels like they focused all of their efforts refining the swordplay to an acceptable level and everything else involving the motion controls was left to remain at the same level as so much shovelware that the wii has

I feel like the soundtracks are pretty close if taken in a vacuum, but I think OoT's matches the dynamics of its game better, the highlights of the game generally have great music to go with them where with SS you may have great songs playing at completely inconsequential crossroads and something very average playing during important moments. Particularly at the end nothing in SS really stood out to me where OoT has the great LTTP throwback upon entering Ganon's castle, (both have a fun breaking the fourth wall with the villains doing their own theme song), probably the best end boss theme in the series, and a great credits...I'm listening to Demise battle themes right now because I didn't really remember it and I have to say it's doing nothing for me, it doesn't portray the gravity of the situation at all. The credits roll I've already mentioned didn't work for me at all, LTTP, OoT, WW, and TP all did way better IMO. SS just drops the ball musically at the most critical moment, but it does have a lot of great stuff if you aren't judging context

Agree with everything about Fi, not bad as a story character, I WANT TO MURDER THINGS is what I feel about her when she repeatedly tells you things you already know in slow, unskippable text. The camera zooming in on an objective the moment you walk into a room is also a problem, all in all I just feel like this game treats you like a child that can't possibly reason through things yourself...LTTP and LoZ didn't treat me so ineptly when I WAS a child! Not only is this excessive even for actual children, but it's a sign that Nintendo doesn't know their demographic, I'd wager more Zelda fans are in their twenties now than are younger than that, it doesn't seem to have a high rate of adoption amongst kids these days. Is nintendo just running from this? I don't think cramming the game with text tutorials is going to attract the kids either come to think of it, what were they thinking, who exactly was Fi supposed to benefit?

 

[weon - X]

I really disliked SS for multiple reasons:

- Fi acts like an awkward robot. I hated the character's personality.
- There are only 3 areas and they are completely disjointed from each other. They felt kind of uninspired as well.
- The entire overworld part of the game is just "dowse" for this 'n that. It got old super quickly.
- Too many enemies make the game basically be like "hey remember we put motion controls in this game?" They move like ******* to remind you of this fact. This is something that just in general seems to plague Wii games.
- The sky just felt hollow compared to the sea in WW. You have Skyloft, a few really small places, and then everything else is just empty floating rocks, most of which you can't even land on.
- The game just feels small in general. There were 24 heart pieces total and most of them were obtained in really mundane ways. TP had 45 and even OoT had 36. This is just one indicator among many that the game really is small.
- Gratitude crystals ironically provide very little gratitude to the player. In other Zelda games there's always that suspenseful moment where you wonder what you will get for helping someone. Replacing all of that with a catch-all collectible that doesn't even give you good prizes takes away that factor entirely.
- The music is kind of "meh" at best.

Those were my biggest complaints. Needlessly to say I think that OoT is the far superior game. I also think that SS was by far the worst 3D Zelda game (but still a good game, nonetheless).

this. Plus that stupid song u had to make near the end of the game where u had to collect notes under water was pretty annoying since swimming sucks.

I kinda went through the game semi quicky. cant remember how many hours it took me. prolly in 5 sittings i was done. so i had to listen to phi all the ****ing time.

it was really annoying how they made everything so simple. well i got stuck at 1 part for like 10 mins but that was about it.

OOT is the better game. (IMHO) I've been used to speed run it and the amount of stuff you can do with the game is amazing and very challenging. just watch any of cosmo's videos and you'll understand what im talking about

 

[SSBMLahti]

Ocarina of Time is superior to Skyward Sword, and for many reasons.

Semi-long post upcoming when I get home.

 

[-LzR-]

I found Skyward Sword kinda cool, but I would consider it the 2nd worst 3d Zelda after Wind Waker. It just lacked something. The story was kinda cool, if you consider how all the pieces fit for other games now, but other than that it was just an ok game.

 

[Ecks]

SS thinks I stopped playing for a year or something whenever I come back to it. It's incredibly annoying to find an amber, have the game explain what it is in slow, slow text and then watch the menu open and see my amber count go up from 40 to 41. I had forty! I know what these things are already, stop wasting my time!

And why is Fi so persistent about the damn battery!? having the sword's hilt flash for a while is ok, but she just doesn't get the message and keeps doing it until you finally hear her out. My rechargeable batteries are wacky and they spend most of their life at one bar (it can last days like that), so I got this message every single time I played the game. It was torture.

What annoys me the most is that these are a bunch (a huge amount, actually) of dumb, minor things that could easily be disabled by an options menu or something. Hell, there should have been a "disable Fi" option too. Y'know how there are games that allow you to adjust text speed, and disable/skip tutorials and meaningless things? That's what you should do Nintendo! It's not too hard.

Complains aside, I don't think SS was that horrible. I liked the game's aesthetics and I liked the story and gameplay better than OoT's. OoT is the better game though.

 

[etecoon]

This isn't just true of SS but has been true of past Zelda games too, but I'd really like an option to adjust music/SFX balance, it's horribly out of whack in most of the 3D games, dunno why Nintendo is anti-giving-you-options

 

[Jam Stunna]

Nintendo's stance in general seems to be "We know what's good for you." Sometimes that works out terrifically, and sometimes it makes you hate their guts.