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

[Wizzrobe]

Perhaps SS was overhyped? I thought it was an amazing game but a lot of people didn't apparently.

 

[Luigitoilet]

Any console Zelda game is going to have that problem. I really don't know what it is about Zelda that has me so entrenched...even after five disappointing Zelda games in a row you'd think I wouldn't be so fervent about the series...yet here I am, just not being able to wait to buy a Wii-U as soon as whatever Zelda game comes out for it. And every time I'm like "oh my god this is going to be the best Zelda of all ****ing time."

 

[Wizzrobe]

Any console Zelda game is going to have that problem. I really don't know what it is about Zelda that has me so entrenched...even after five disappointing Zelda games in a row you'd think I wouldn't be so fervent about the series...yet here I am, just not being able to wait to buy a Wii-U as soon as whatever Zelda game comes out for it. And every time I'm like "oh my god this is going to be the best Zelda of all ****ing time."

5 dissapointing Zelda games in a row? LOLwhat

 

[MuraRengan]

Uh, Spirit Tracks and SS are the only Zelda games I've ever been outright disappointed in. And even in disappointment, I found SS to be an overall great game. It wasn't everything I wanted, but it was still damn good.

 

[Wizzrobe]

Uh, Spirit Tracks and SS are the only Zelda games I've ever been outright disappointed in. And even in disappointment, I found SS to be an overall great game. It wasn't everything I wanted, but it was still damn good.

Well if it's a great game then you shouldn't be dissapointed in it even if it wasn't everything you wanted.

 

[Ecks]

SS was definitively overhyped (Didn't Miyamoto claim it was going to be the best Zelda yet?). I thought it was amazing at first because I was seeing it through fanboy-goggles, but the more I played, the more those goggles fell, until I began to realize that the game wasn't really as good as I had been giving it credit for.

 

[Wizzrobe]

SS was definitively overhyped (Didn't Miyamoto claim it was going to be the best Zelda yet?). I thought it was amazing at first because I was seeing it through fanboy-goggles, but the more I played, the more those goggles fell, until I began to realize that the game wasn't really as good as I had been giving it credit for.

I still think it's amazing and of course Miyamoto would say" the best Zelda yet" so people will think it's going to be the best and totally worth buying.

 

[etecoon]

yeah it's called salesmanship, like when reggie said that phantom hourglass was his favorite zelda game. no one's favorite zelda is actually PH, it's probably the most commonly picked "worst game in the series", but of course someone from nintendo is going to say the latest game is the best

 

[Ecks]

Good point. I just thought it weird that Miyamoto would say that. I don't think I've ever heard him pick favorites on anything.

 

[theeboredone]

Any console Zelda game is going to have that problem. I really don't know what it is about Zelda that has me so entrenched...even after five disappointing Zelda games in a row you'd think I wouldn't be so fervent about the series...yet here I am, just not being able to wait to buy a Wii-U as soon as whatever Zelda game comes out for it. And every time I'm like "oh my god this is going to be the best Zelda of all ****ing time."

It's a glaring problem you speak of that can be attributed to anything. From, "I'm done buying CoD" to "Reality TV shows are stupid...but I can't wait for the next Jersey Shore!"

That's the point I was trying to get across when SS first came out, but whether it was on Gfaqs or here, it's just hard for my voice to come out when the rose tinted goggles come with filtered headphones.

Not saying I'm 100% free from making the same mistake...I still plan on seeing the Dark Knight Rises opening weekend (which will be a first for me since Toy Story 3) so long as it doesn't get killed by critics and fans, but as far as gaming goes...I've definitely come to understand what I attribute too..."how much is it worth" given what the game is/does. SS was a 30 dollar buy for me, tops. Just like Uncharted 3, which is growing to be a top favorite series.

But when you have so many blind and loyal fans...Nintendo especially doesn't have to worry about the true quality of their games. Just look at the New Super Mario Bross Wii U...does not look impressive at all, but people will flock too it, because of the brand name.

 

[Wizzrobe]

You all seem to act like SS was such a bad game. It was amazing, maybe just not as good as some other Zelda games but definitely in my top 5.

 

[theeboredone]

Top 5 of all time, or just top 5 Zelda game? Either way, it doesn't speak much volume imo. People like to discredit other publishers in general when comparing to Mario and Zelda due to their prestige.

 

[Ecks]

I'm not saying the game is bad, I'm saying it has many annoying flaws that keep it from being better than OoT. I still very much enjoyed the game and am looking forward to finally playing Hero mode soon.

 

[Jam Stunna]

I'll go out on a limb and say the game was actually bad. Contrary to what some have said, I think having the Zelda name has spared this game from alot of (rightly deserved) criticism.

 

[theeboredone]

I don't think it's bad, but it's not good either. It's just average or below average.

 

[Pink Reaper]

I'll go out on a limb and say the game was actually bad. Contrary to what some have said, I think having the Zelda name has spared this game from alot of (rightly deserved) criticism.

I don't think it's bad, but it's not good either. It's just average or below average.

I'd go so far as to say these posts are bad. Like have you actually played bad games? Do you know what makes a game bad? "Not living up to your own personal expectations" is not one of those things lol. It's fine if you dont think it's as good as whatever game you hold on some unreasonable pedestal but you're pretty ****ing out there if you're going to call it a bad game.

This is a bad game

 

[theeboredone]

I'd go so far as to say these posts are bad. Like have you actually played bad games? Do you know what makes a game bad? "Not living up to your own personal expectations" is not one of those things lol. It's fine if you dont think it's as good as whatever game you hold on some unreasonable pedestal but you're pretty ****ing out there if you're going to call it a bad game.

This is a bad game

^ That was a TERRIBLE game. Big difference between the words "bad" and "terrible." Again, I said at worst it was below average. What's below average? Well if by today's standards, a "7/10" is considered good/average, then below that would be below average.

Given the fact Nintendo refuses to address some of the many flaws people have complained about going back to OoT (slow text, for example), one's refusal to correct said flaws would be deserved to be more penalized for starters.

I forgot who made the post earlier, but it was a good chunk of "flaws" this game has, and those flaws are the reason this game becomes average.

 

[Holder of the Heel]

SS is definitely not average, it is leagues better than what is "average" that is put on the Wii. This is true even if you aren't crazy about the game. Average games aren't remarkable, that is why you call it average. Skyward Sword, better or worse than your expectations, is obviously remarkable, and not just because of the title. You guys know this, like I've said, even if you were disappointed.

The thing is, yeah, being remarkable isn't what the Zelda games have to worry about. What would fix all of the issues is if it was geared more towards other RPG type games and more hardcore players. Zelda could get away with it without losing their casual fanbase. It is a no brainer.

But Nintendo does what it wants, so I doubt we'll be getting any titles like that. Ever.

 

[theeboredone]

SS is definitely not average, it is leagues better than what is "average" that is put on the Wii. This is true even if you aren't crazy about the game. Average games aren't remarkable, that is why you call it average. Skyward Sword, better or worse than your expectations, is obviously remarkable, and not just because of the title. You guys know this, like I've said, even if you were disappointed.

What is "average"? In today's gaming society, where every triple A game is inflated to high scores, I would argue THAT is the average for a game with expectations and budgets like that. Or we can do a turn around from the basis of how scores are inflated, and say that things need to be scored in a more strict and objective manner, making scores become lower and lower, thus saving the high scores for games that are truly a "masterpiece".

So sure, by today's gaming standards...based on what every gaming magazine scores like...this is an excellent game. In my book, and some others...I've come to understand that flaws should not be turned to a blind eye, and these "masterpieces" should be subjected to fair criticism. When you gather all the points, SS is at best, above average.

 

[MuraRengan]

What exactly are the flaws in this game? I've got some in mind, but they don't identify with what I've been hearing most people say so far. Can we come to a consensus on what the real problems with this game are? And I mean agreements, not personal dislikes.

Also, I REALLY dislike today's gaming standards. The only concept a game maker needs to abide by to make a great game now is grittiness. All the games that are considered "the best", all the ones we'd actually be comparing Zelda to, are games that pick a gritty main character with gritty themes and gritty gameplay. People can like what they want, but that's really not my style. I feel like I would enjoy Zelda less if they took the more modern approach to gaming, and I like that SS had (or at least attempted to have) some imagination. It's also why few games impress me anymore. Not enough game devs have had the imagination to do something new, Nintendo included.

 

[Holder of the Heel]

Zelda keeps a lot of its Zelda charm by being stagnant as it is, and the games work, but it can learn from the new while keeping intact what is so great about the old. With the new we can add a lot of dimension and depth to the things we get in Zelda games that aren't very explained or added on. To think having a more modern approach with Zelda is like saying you don't want more of what we do like. Keeping so stagnant is what is keeping what is amazing about Zelda small and not developing, there is no evolution. It is all very episodic and unintelligible.

Being a little more like an actual RPG would do nothing but give real life to the characters, races, places, and items of the Zelda unviverse that we love. We love them now because they are beautiful, unique, but it is very shallow. Little definition. There is some though, but it leaves me wanting. You don't come across a universe like the Zelda universe often, and despite that we don't get as much of it fleshed out as most universe's that pale in comparison to this. It is disappointing, very disappointing. If we were to get this, those 10/10 reviews (and the like) wouldn't be overhyped nonsense, it'd be legitimate scoring. Actual masterpieces.

Though, it could be argued that it'd either take a significant amount of time or it'd take around the same to produce these kinds of games and they'd perhaps lose some of their touch. That is all theory though I guess, but what I'm saying I think has a lot of truth in it regardless.

I probably misunderstood what you mean, but what you have said either way got me thinking more on the idea of Zelda evolving a little bit.

 

[Luigitoilet]

5 dissapointing Zelda games in a row? LOLwhat

I was mildly disappointed with Wind Waker, extremely disappointed with Twilight Princess, didn't like Phantom Hourglass and completely hated Spirit Tracks. Skyward Sword was nice, but not anything like I hyped it up to be.

 

[Jam Stunna]

Why is Skyward Sword a bad game? One word: Fi.

I think everyone agrees that Fi was a problem in the game, even if we disagree about the extent to which she was. But no one in their right mind would defend crap like this, where she stops you to tell you a boss is behind the door. Or just a minute earlier in that same video where she doesn't allow you to experiment with the tentacles or figure it out or, you know, be a gamer. Nope- "Master, here's the answer!" Or that she gives you a warning when your wallet is full. A full wallet needs your immediate attention, because apparently you can't tell when the numbers turn green or when the number stops rising.

Obviously, Fi really bothered me, maybe more than other people. But let's imagine that Fi (or a character/game device like her) existed in any other game. What would be the response to that game? I think alot of people, while disliking Fi, still give her a pass because Nintendo has conditioned us with partner characters since OoT. But like I said, try to imagine any other AAA game, or any game period, with a Fi in it. That game would be savaged, and rightfully so. Fi is such a burden on the gameplay that I think she alone knocks SS into bad game territory.

But since I'm on this train of thought, I might as well continue, because I think there are alot of design elements in SS that, were they in any other game, would be torn apart. Re-used bosses is another thing I keep seeing people justify, mainly because Ghirahim is such a great character that they don't mind fighting him three times. Fine; I disagree, but I'll concede that point. How does that justify the Imprisoned? Or Moldarach? Also, since I'm talking about bosses, I know the "big glowing eye" weak point is basically a Zelda institution at this point, but SS was egregious in its overuse.

And not just re-used bosses, but reused areas. I don't mean how the game sends you back to the same areas as more is unlocked, that's okay. I mean literally re-used areas. "Let's send you up the mountain again, except this time with no equipment! How about a trip back to the forest, but now it's flooded! Hey, want to go through the entire first dungeon again just to get some magic water?" Sure, the game will send you to complete those mind-numbing tasks, but it can't be bothered to let you explore the world at night.

I could really go on and on, but for the sake of my blood pressure I'll stop here. For the tl;dr crowd, I'll reiterate: if any of the issues I've addressed above (or any issue that anyone has mentioned in this thread) were to be found in any game not named Zelda, gamers would be burning their discs in the streets. This stuff is bad, and it all adds up to a bad game. The Zelda Magic is there, in small amounts, but not nearly enough to overcome glaring, dumbfounding flaws.

 

[etecoon]

Fi is a problem but as I said, she's part of the bigger problem. The game uses other methods like suggestive camera zooms to ensure that you never have to figure anything out even when Fi doesn't say anything, the whole game just babies you...which again makes no sense to me to begin with because I was probably about 3 when I played the first LoZ and all that game did was mercilessly beat my ***, why are kids these days being given a free pass?

 

[Pink Reaper]

It's Zelda. With the exception of maybe a few instances in Wind Waker I cant think of a single 3D Zelda game that didnt make the answer to any given puzzle either extremely obvious, or if you had a fairy helper, outright tell you what you needed to do. OoT, MM, TP and SS all let you lock on to any puzzle and have the helper just tell you exactly what to do and WW just made all the answers as obvious as possible without outright telling you(until you took too long in which case The King of Red Lions or Tetra would just outright tell you)

Also Jam all of your personal problems with SS are just that, personal problems. I personally liked all 3 areas of the game and seeing what they did with them when I went back to them. I enjoyed the Girahim fights because they were actually interesting and engaging to me. Disagreeing with me about that doesnt make you right and me enjoying it doesnt make me right. Personal opinions dont make a game bad. Being a bad game makes a game bad. I brought up Sonic 06 because it's a bad game. It's poorly made. The camera is broken, glitches are everywhere, it's slow as balls for a sonic game, a lot of things just dont work when they should. No matter how much any given person enjoy's Sonic 06, it's still objectively bad.

 

[Jam Stunna]

Well, if we can simply dismiss anything anyone has to say as a personal opinion, what's the point of discussing topics like this?

Also,

It's Zelda. With the exception of maybe a few instances in Wind Waker I cant think of a single 3D Zelda game that didnt make the answer to any given puzzle either extremely obvious, or if you had a fairy helper, outright tell you what you needed to do. OoT, MM, TP and SS all let you lock on to any puzzle and have the helper just tell you exactly what to do and WW just made all the answers as obvious as possible without outright telling you(until you took too long in which case The King of Red Lions or Tetra would just outright tell you)

is my point exactly. "It's Zelda" is used to justify all kinds of poor decisions across the series, and I think that mentality is especially at play with SS.

 

[Wizzrobe]

I didn't find Fi that annoying, and that most definitely wouldn't stop me from loving SS as a game. Everybody complains about Navi in OOT yet you guys consider it SO much more better than SS.

 

[etecoon]

Navi isn't half the annoyance that Fi is, it's easier to write it off as "kind of obnoxious but not game breaking"

I probably wouldn't be even close to as harsh on it if the new game+ actually fixed this, it's a nuisance but I can kind of understand doing this once and it isn't so bad on the first playthrough anyway, it's on replay that it really becomes a huge issue. Constant interruptions for things you already know, no way to disable it

 

[Pink Reaper]

Well, if we can simply dismiss anything anyone has to say as a personal opinion, what's the point of discussing topics like this?

Also,


is my point exactly. "It's Zelda" is used to justify all kinds of poor decisions across the series, and I think that mentality is especially at play with SS.

Who said im justifying anything in Zelda. Im outright telling you "This is how zelda games have always been" not "This is a good thing because it's zelda." You can get mad at nintendo for not changing it, you can get angry at yourself i guess for not just ignoring the fairy like most people do, but you cant get mad at Zelda for being Zelda. It's not a game design flaw, it doesnt detract from the game, it's just a tool for people who are bad at games. Which believe it or not, there's a lot of. I dont get angry when I find out there's super guides in Nintendo Guides because I dont use them.

Honestly if we're talking actual flaws of the game and of Fi specifically the focus should be on how she's frequently used to re-state things you JUST HEARD. It would be one thing to throw up a reminder a few hours later but just saying it again right at the end of the same cutscene is pretty pointless. Also SS continues TP's weird decision to remind you of what the thing you picked up is every time you restart the game. Yes TP I know what a ****ing blue rupee is and I've picked up ****loads of Amber Relics before SS, please refrain from telling me again.

Edit:

Navi isn't half the annoyance that Fi is, it's easier to write it off as "kind of obnoxious but not game breaking"

I probably wouldn't be even close to as harsh on it if the new game+ actually fixed this, it's a nuisance but I can kind of understand doing this once and it isn't so bad on the first playthrough anyway, it's on replay that it really becomes a huge issue. Constant interruptions for things you already know, no way to disable it

This is a big problem with Nintendo games as a whole, as well as most games that use unvoiced text cutscenes. Idk if it's actually because everything is text based, but the inability to skip cutscenes is really annoying. The weird thing is, you can do it in Twilight Princess, so why cant you do it in EVERYTHING ELSE!

 

[Holder of the Heel]

I suppose the reason why I took Fi's obvious messages so passively as I simply viewed it as her character. She passes information and gives percentages for all things, sometimes humorously so, and a lot of the time not needed. Nothing Fi ever said spoiled a puzzle for me really, the game never took too much of a complicated turn.

To say Fi ruined the game is very quaint, even without that mindset. I think what I've said is basically the problem. The Zelda games need to grow. A lot of the rest of what Jam says would dissipate if Zelda would just grow up a bit.

Though I repeat, it isn't going to really happen, and I'll still get all of the games and enjoy them nonetheless.

 

[Wizzrobe]

I agree with what Holder said, and I think its dumb if any of you guys think SS is ruined just cause of her. And like Holder said it is part of her character to pass information and stuff.

 

[MuraRengan]

I also agree with Holder, and I think his point is related to a lot of what Jam said. All the things Jam said, except for Fi, were things I didn't like. Recycled bosses and areas really got on my nerves; however, I don't agree that they took away from the game. I those parts of the game in particular are areas where the Nintendo should've taken an opportunity to make the game grow. How? Well maybe instead of revisiting all the areas, make some new areas with new characters etc. Or maybe make the imprisoned fight a long, epic, one-time fight. There's a number of things that Nintendo could've done to keep the experience fresh, but they just didn't really try. That doesn't make the game any worse, but it prevents it from being as good as it could've been.

Jam, I really think you're putting too much emphasis on the bad parts of the game. Honestly, Fi doesn't even come close to running the game. The game still has the awesome combat system, great boss fights, (some) unique dungeons, good characters, good story, imaginative new items and item uses, upgrades, and some other stuff. The only reason I'm disappointed in it is because it didn't reach its full potential.

 

[Wizzrobe]

I also agree with Holder, and I think his point is related to a lot of what Jam said. All the things Jam said, except for Fi, were things I didn't like. Recycled bosses and areas really got on my nerves; however, I don't agree that they took away from the game. I those parts of the game in particular are areas where the Nintendo should've taken an opportunity to make the game grow. How? Well maybe instead of revisiting all the areas, make some new areas with new characters etc. Or maybe make the imprisoned fight a long, epic, one-time fight. There's a number of things that Nintendo could've done to keep the experience fresh, but they just didn't really try. That doesn't make the game any worse, but it prevents it from being as good as it could've been.

Jam, I really think you're putting too much emphasis on the bad parts of the game. Honestly, Fi doesn't even come close to running the game. The game still has the awesome combat system, great boss fights, (some) unique dungeons, good characters, good story, imaginative new items and item uses, upgrades, and some other stuff. The only reason I'm disappointed in it is because it didn't reach its full potential.

Miyamoto said that he purposely wanted you to keep revisiting the same areas so you can truly explore the whole area instead of continuously exploring new areas. He wanted to make the areas you have already visited more in-depth and for you to explore them more rather than just finish the dungeon their and do some stuff there then move on to the next area. Thats how he wanted it.

 

[MuraRengan]

That sounds like a clever way of saying "We ran out of ideas so we just added a little to what we already had." I mean, sure it sounds like an alright idea, but did it work? How much better is the experience for having a little bit expanded on things we've already seen? In OoT, would you take a bigger Kokiri Forest, Goron City, and/or Zora's domain at the cost of having no Gerudo's Fortress at all? I'm not sure how I'd like that, and I know for sure that the extended areas in SS didn't make me like the game any more (except for the Sand Sea). Did you enjoy Miyamoto's new approach?

 

[Pink Reaper]

Im not sure that's a good example Mura, Gerudo's Fortress was almost completely pointless in OoT lol.

 

[MuraRengan]

Im not sure that's a good example Mura, Gerudo's Fortress was almost completely pointless in OoT lol.

I disagree entirely. Gerudo's fortress adds:

New race of people
A more expansive overworld
Background information for Ganondorf
A different atmosphere from other areas.
One of the sages
An entire temple
2 sidequests

Gerudo's fortress definitely expanded the OoT experience significantly.

 

[Pink Reaper]

I dont consider the Spirit Temple Gerudo Fortress. I consider Gerudo Fortress. And if your argument for Gerudo Fortress is that it "Adds more land" then the same thing could have really been achieved by just sticking an entire lake there cus honestly Gerudo Fortress is pointless lol. If i wasnt forced to go there to get to the Spirit Temple I'd have no reason to go there in the first place.

 

[MuraRengan]

The point is, it's better to add something new, with a new, fresh experience like Gerudo Fortress than to add more on to something we've already seen.

Regardless of whether or not the Spirit Temple is a part of Gerudo Fortress, the temple is clearly affiliated with Gerudos. And all of the experience with the Gerudos is centered around the fortress. The Spirit Temple and Nabooru make no sense if you take the fortress out. I could explain in more detail why Gerudo's Fortress is important, but I don't want to get off track.

And no, the main argument is not that it adds more land. Arbitrarily adding more land is pretty much where SS went wrong. It's about what you do with that land.

 

[Pink Reaper]

Idk, I liked seeing what they did with the areas in SS. I legitimately enjoyed seeing Eldin flooded with water and interacting with it. I will say though that that entire part of SS was bull****. I had already completed that water dragon *****'s trial and proved myself the hero, she should have just given me my damn song.

And yes Nabooru makes no sense without gerudo fortress obviously, but in the same way the Shadow Temple was just sort of there(they tacked on a bit of back story but lets be honest, it was just THERE) I could have done without gerudo fortress. Explain away though, I enjoy talking about Zelda.

 

[MuraRengan]

Nope, the Shadow Temple is pretty obviously tied to the Shiekah. It's not explicitly stated, but if you pay attention to game details it's pretty obvious.

1. It's in Kakariko Village, which was the original home of the Sheikah.
2. It's affiliated with the Lens of Truth, which is hinted to be one of 3 Sheikah artifacts and is even designed to look like the Sheikah Eye.
3. There's a big Sheikah Eye on the stone slab that seals the temple.
4.The Sheikah are known as the Shadow Folk
5. Impa, a Sheikah, is the sage

Furthermore, the temple that's really just kinda "there" is the water temple. Although we know it's affiliated with the Zoras, it's the only temple that really has nothing to do with the race its affiliated with, both historically and geographically. The water temple isn't important to the Zoras at all. Lake Hylia is effectively the Lost Woods or Death Mountain that the Zoras are missing, so adding more to that instead of having Gerudo's Fortress makes even less sense when you think about it that way.

As for SS, I absolutely hated when Faron flooded. Sure it added a new experience, but it was only temporary. It would've been much better if they had just created a new area that was all about that experience. Unfortunately for you, if you want to experience the flooded Faron Woods again, you have to play the whole game again, which is pretty lame. And if you're like me and you hated the swimming controls, then you're faced with the game making you have to play through an uncomfortable experience in a place where if doesn't even belong. Obviously, this is all subject to personal preference, but I don't see how flooding Faron Woods was the best possible gameplay decision.