Skyward Sword review thread [Newest Reviews - Cubed3 10/10, GC: A, AusGamers: 7/10]

Nirolak said:
This is also a large part of why this happens.

1UP is weighted quite highly.

oh, individual sites are weighted differently?

Has any gaffer broken the system down yet? First time I've ever been curious about metacritic ;)
 
Nirolak said:
There are also like 4-5 mods watching the thread, so it would have been especially brutal. :lol

I think most of it has to do with Uncharted 3, but this thread has actually been really tame and well structured. I'm surprised/pleased.
 
chickdigger802 said:
oh, individual sites are weighted differently?

Has any gaffer broken the system down yet? First time I've ever been curious about metacritic ;)
I don't think we have ever figured it out exactly.

ivysaur12 said:
I think most of it has to do with Uncharted 3, but this thread has actually been really tame and well structured. I'm surprised/pleased.
Yeah, I am as well.
 
Feep said:
Why wouldn't you count the last one? It's totally legitimate.

Most Zelda games have really short final dungeons. Does this one break the mold? I really want a balls-hard last dungeon like LttP
 
ShockingAlberto said:
The GOTY stuff absolutely doesn't matter now.

Super Mario Galaxy 2 was the highest rated game of the year and totally and willfully ignored during GOTY deliberations.
This still upsets me to this day.
 
ShockingAlberto said:
The GOTY stuff absolutely doesn't matter now.

Super Mario Galaxy 2 was the highest rated game of the year and totally and willfully ignored during GOTY deliberations. A Zelda that people aren't creaming themselves over will be pushed to the side, as well.

Again, to reference Patrick's review, that first paragraph is why. No reviewer wants to play games on the Wii. Doing so is a chore. The time when a Wii game could be considered the best game of the year is several years past.

That said, who gives a shit. If the game is amazing, review scores won't matter. Don't just get lost in the hype of what accolades it has won or will win. I think people running around going "THIS IS GOING TO BE THE BEST ZELDA EVER. FACT." (and will probably be among the first to backlash against it) created unreasonable expectations. No game is going to match up to the hype in your mind unless you've already decided that there's no way it can fail.

And at that point you're no longer playing video games to enjoy them, you're playing video games to enjoy talking about video games on the internet.
While I agree with everything that was said in this post, I do find it hard to swallow that people in the press are going to be so shallow and obvious about looking down on great software despite the platform.

As said this isn't the first case but when it infects reviews as greatly and bluntly as it has I don't feel right just turning the other cheek and acting like it's cool.

Great software is great software damn it.
 
Socreges said:
Gamespot's a bit better at using the 1-10 scale so expect some drama.
They gave UC3 a 9.0, Skyrim 9.0, and Dark Souls 9.5. I believe in them more than I do IGN who apparently gives 10s to freaking everyone.
 
chickdigger802 said:
oh, individual sites are weighted differently?

Has any gaffer broken the system down yet? First time I've ever been curious about metacritic ;)

You should keep it that way, the way they break down letter scores is just stupid.
 
"Co je Zelda?Mizerném hromádka tajemství. 3.8/10"

- EatChildren.cz
 
Truth101 said:
Exactly you don't like Motion Controls. That doesn't mean the controls themselves are bad, your bias just makes them bad for you.
Just because they chose an inferior control scheme, but did it in the best way possible, doesn't give them a pass.
 
TheChaos said:
Most Zelda games have really short final dungeons. Does this one break the mold? I really want a balls-hard last dungeon like LttP
It's not balls-hard, but it's of significant length and solid design.
 
walking fiend said:
The point is, why not like it if it is implemented well? Sword fighting is a HUGE improvement over previous game, over almost any game with sword fighting. And so is bow control.

I don't get why someone would hate the overall implementation of the motion control when you mimic the wing flapping by waggle in like 0.001% of the total length of the game.

It is not as if we haven't played other M+ games, like RS2 or Resort to know how responsive the game can be; I myself has played the demo build (beside the re-centering which is apparently fixed in the final build), I found this motion controls being 'poor' to be a objectively wrong.
I don't like sports games.

I do like JRPGs.

I don't like Inazuma Eleven.

Someone who does like these things will like the game. Someone who, for example, hates JRPGs, will hate this game.

If someone hates motion controls, they hate motion controls. This includes a large amount of the enthusiast audience.
 
Feep said:
What do you mean without spoiling anything? These are serious spoilers.
I mean, I don't want to know the actual locations. I just want to know if the game has a large geographical scope and takes you to many different themed locations. A yes/no answer will do. I ask this because judging from what I've seen of the world map, there doesn't seem to be as many areas as previous Zelda games. So I'm worried the game finds it's length from backtracking rather than going to new areas. I'm finding it hard to word myself, so hopefully this makes sense haha.

Feep said:
Not only do you suck at spoiler tags, you aren't even right.
How many are there then?
7, including last?
 
TSA said:
Backtracking in General
Most of you hated the Temple of the Ocean King. Revisiting the same dungeon, having to go through the same areas you already completed, only to get to the new stuff. Well, that's what Skyward Sword's overworld is. You go to these zones, complete your objectives, move on, only to come back later - at least two more times each. And most of the time, you have to cross the same areas again just to get to the new parts. You see, in previous Zelda games, you went to new zone, and you usually didn't leave it until you had made your way through the entire thing. Sure, sometimes it meant going back somewhere to get an item before you go go ahead, but you weren't going to new areas until you completed that zone. This ties into that density argument, too.

Sounds like the Zelda team was influenced a bit too much by Monster Hunter. :/
 
cajunator said:
This pretty much sums it up.
To some people, this game will be the greatest Zelda ever. to some, it will be one of the worst. To some they wont even bother playing it because it has motion controls. It would have been this way whether the game scored perfect tens or not.
Right.

What I got out of the last hour was:

- some typical GAF entertainment
- some shock at the lack of hysteria
- some disappointment about certain criticisms that I read
- some more certainty that I'm going to love this game
 
i can't believe that i enjoy the game so much and i'm still a bit let down by those reviews, i wanted it to win GOTY for some reasons.

:firstworldproblems:
 
hyduK said:
Just because they chose an inferior control scheme, but did it in the best way possible, doesn't give them a pass.
Inferior in your opinion. In a technical sense, they allow for many things that analog sticks simply can't do.
 
UltimateIke said:
The Uncharted 3 fiasco has saved us a lot of heartache. Imagine what the reaction to all of these 8's could have been...

i think that a collection of 8s actually tempered a lot of people's expectations. with uncharted 3 it was like hyperbole central hitting a fever pitch and then eurogamer came in with some criticism and shut down the party.

here it was quite a few of them out of the gate.
 
Mistle said:
I mean, I don't want to know the actual locations. I just want to know if the game has a large geographical scope and takes you to many different themed locations. A yes/no answer will do. I ask this because judging from what I've seen of the world map, there doesn't seem to be as many areas as previous Zelda games. I'm finding it hard to word myself, so hopefully this makes sense haha.

How many are there then?
7, including last?
Answer 1:
Not really. There are three main areas, not including Skyloft. That's it
.
Answer 2:
7
.
 
TruePrime said:
While I agree with everything that was said in this post, I do find it hard to swallow that people in the press are going to be so shallow and obvious about looking down on great software despite the platform.

As said this isn't the first case but when it infects reviews as greatly and bluntly as it has I don't feel right just turning the other cheek and acting like it's cool.

Great software is great software damn it.

The gaming press is a fairly new phenomena. Even television criticism, a medium that's been around in a scripted form for over 50 years, is just reaching a more intellectual level of discourse.
 
ivysaur12 said:
I think most of it has to do with Uncharted 3, but this thread has actually been really tame and well structured. I'm surprised/pleased.

Zelda really doesn't have much to "prove" unlike uncharted, which is still a fairly young franchise. Saying "uncharted is good!" requires elaboration. Saying "zelda is good!" is usually met with "duh."

I did expect more outbursts from hardcore nintendo fanatics, but really most people in this thread already knew whether or not they were going to buy it.
 
walking fiend said:
That doesn't make it poor.

By this line of reasoning, no fps game on a console should be given a score over 9, because fps control without mouse sucks...

I'll disagree there. When making a fps for consoles the developers have no choice but to use the controller. Nintendo is actively choosing to use motion controls over a classic control scheme, when they have both at there disposal. It's a design choice, so it should affect the review...regardless of which way.
 
ShockingAlberto said:
The GOTY stuff absolutely doesn't matter now.

Super Mario Galaxy 2 was the highest rated game of the year and totally and willfully ignored during GOTY deliberations. A Zelda that people aren't creaming themselves over will be pushed to the side, as well.

Again, to reference Patrick's review, that first paragraph is why. No reviewer wants to play games on the Wii. Doing so is a chore. The time when a Wii game could be considered the best game of the year is several years past.

That said, who gives a shit. If the game is amazing, review scores won't matter. Don't just get lost in the hype of what accolades it has won or will win. I think people running around going "THIS IS GOING TO BE THE BEST ZELDA EVER. FACT." (and will probably be among the first to backlash against it) created unreasonable expectations. No game is going to match up to the hype in your mind unless you've already decided that there's no way it can fail.

And at that point you're no longer playing video games to enjoy them, you're playing video games to enjoy talking about video games on the internet.

You're a smart cookie.

I stopped caring about reviews (averages especially) outside of the handful of sources I trust. Games TM (9), Edge (10) and Retro Gamer (not reviewed yet). The fact the first two gave it good reviews is enough for me.

I'm also going to state right now that I doubt any game will ever achieve the status Ocarina did. It came out when review aggregators weren't the be-all and end-all, and it has become something of a legend (read the Edge article in issue 200 for reference).

I think the fact that every big hyped game these days is expected to come close to a metacritic "99" is what is poisoning the well. It will never happen, and it doesnt matter if it does or not.
 
brandonh83 said:
which is just fucking sad and stupid but I digress, and bluntly put, another reason why I'm not really getting up in arms over some of these reviews. I understand the current gaming climate enough to know that I shouldn't be bothered about any of this.

well on the plus side I think reviewers are being more picky and genuine with this game than with the other super hyped games.

When the dust settles and time passes scores and hype wont matter at all. Look at what happened with MGS4 and GTA4.

Dascu said:
I wonder if I'll end up liking Xenoblade Chronicles better.

I really wish I could even make the comparison. FU NOA. FU
 
I'm really loving the way that the world design sounds. Even if some reviewers are saying it makes the game feel lesser in scope compared to Twilight Princess. Whatever. A big complaint about that game, and Ocarina's Hyrule Field for that matter, is that they're simply these massive areas with nothing in them.

Like I just said in another post, the older Zelda games, which had absolutely no trouble being called epic back in their day, were a series of interconnected, themed areas. There were never any gigantic, massive worlds like Skyrim. Zelda was always its own thing. Modern reviewers are going to complain that it's not big and open like Skyrim because that's the in-thing right now, but my argument is that Zelda doesn't have to be, or even need to be like that.
 
Feep said:
Answer 1:
Not really. There are three main areas, not including Skyloft. That's it
That's disappointing, I was really hoping for a sense of scope. Unless I underestimate these areas, 3 main ones sounds really lacking. Are there 2 dungeons per area, or how does it work? Does the game mainly finds it's length from backtracking to previous areas?
 
guek said:
I did expect more outbursts from hardcore nintendo fanatics, but really most people in this thread already knew whether or not they were going to buy it.
I guess some of the more hardcore fanatics are already banned or asleep? When you take away those few fanatics, the thread won't melt down.
 
hyduK said:
I'll disagree there. When making a fps for consoles the developers have no choice but to use the controller. Nintendo is actively choosing to use motion controls over a classic control scheme, when they have both at there disposal. It's a design choice, so it should affect the review...regardless of which way.
Except one isn't compatible with what the game mechanics they chose to use.
 
Top Bottom