Segnit said:Obviously it is very likely that you're at least partly right.
Problem is somebody said something and you objected and said:
"That all was from fan and other developer feedback."
See what I'm saying?
Well you can't actually see the gameplay due to the blurry non HD mess on screen so i'm not too sure how one answers this question effectively, only those with the eye of truth can play this game.Neoriceisgood said:I heard from reliable sources that this is no true HD next gen Zelda, is this true? And if it is how does it affect gameplay?
Mistle said:
Cygnus X-1 said:I do think that these people who are giving these scores also want to give a signal to Nintendo. A signal they failed to deliver while rating Twilight Princess.
In the end, many interviews pointed out that Aonuma read comments, reviews and boards and since Twilight Princess was highly overrated, Skyward Sword was built up on the same mistakes.
In other words, what I'm trying to say is that Skyward Sword outcome is partly responsibility of the failures of reviewers to say the plain truth about Twilight Princess's faults, which in turn kept Nintendo make small changes in the franchise. It was obvious that sooner or later some "bad" result would have emerged.
So, I'm of course pissed off that Skyward Sword has some serious weaknesses, but this will force Nintendo to act and make big changes.
AceBandage said:when have they EVER said anything about taking reviews into consideration?
Grecco said:If reviewers are taking off points because its not "HD Zelda" does that mean they will give Zelda Wii U extra points for being HD Zelda?
If he threw out the previous Zelda formula and tried to reinvent what is logically necessary for a Zelda game to be, then he would probably arrive at a game that is very similar to Skyward Sword. So tinkering is probably the right approach. Aonuma can effectuate large changes simply by playing with the overworld design or controls. If you want to change certain things wholesale, such as dungeon exploration or item accumulation, then they might as well just scrap the entire series, because it will cease to be Zelda. I also think that you give Mario Galaxy too much credit. It's still using the same fundamental lessons of Mario 64 but with the gravity element as a unique feature. Majora's Mask, a game that Aonuma was certainly behind, was probably a much bolder change to the "Zelda formula" than Mario Galaxy was to the "Mario formula".Cygnus X-1 said:The point is that Aonuma is acting on a wrong basis: he's trying to reproduce Ocarina of Time greatness while adding and removing things from the old formula. He pretends to modify something already existing to make it even better. This is almost impossible and mostly ruins instead of adjusting. This is just common sense!
Better would be to start from scratch again. Aonuma should ask himself what a Zelda game is, what was till not what could be in the future. "Is there to make a Zelda game from a different point of view?"
Since I judge people based on facts, I can say that after all these years he fails to understand this point. I'm less willingly to say that it's Miyamoto's fault, because Galaxy 1 and 2 were a revolution and at the same time under the supervision of Miyamoto. Thus I suppose he's willingly to make big changes among franchises.
Aonuma just wants to surpass Ocarina of Time. He's so obsessed with that he can't see out of the limits he put around him. I pity him somehow, because it's going to be frustrating, but I really do think a fresh breath of air now is necessary.
I'm off now. I'm back in some hours.
Whether or not it's the best ever Zelda game is open to debate, but it's certainly up there. However, nobody could argue that it's anything less than a masterclass in the art of crafting video games.
marc^o^ said:New review from the Guardian with lots of love.
Why doesn't the video load?Mistle said:
Mgoblue201 said:If he threw out the previous Zelda formula and tried to reinvent what is logically necessary for a Zelda game to be, then he would probably arrive at a game that is very similar to Skyward Sword. So tinkering is probably the right approach. Aonuma can effectuate large changes simply by playing with the overworld design or controls. If you want to change certain things wholesale, such as dungeon exploration or item accumulation, then they might as well just scrap the entire series, because it will cease to be Zelda. I also think that you give Mario Galaxy too much credit. It's still using the same fundamental lessons of Mario 64 but with the gravity element as a unique feature. Majora's Mask, a game that Aonuma was certainly behind, was probably a much bolder change to the "Zelda formula" than Mario Galaxy was to the "Mario formula".
BramVD said:oh snap, the game just leaked out on the internet...
damnit Nintendo, release your games earlier
Spiffy_1st said:Got another 9 from Gamesrader.
http://www.gamesradar.com/legend-zelda-skyward-sword-review/?page=2
=/
The Legend of Zelda: Wind Waker? No
Smellycat said:Wow, I didn't expect the game to get so many 8s. Based on the average of the reviews in the OP, the game is at 88.6%.
edit: 88.9 including the review above me haha
linko9 said:Well it's sitting at 95 on metacritic. I hate to be the person posting about metacritic but... yeah. I get caught up in the hype, what can I say.
Seriously?Giant Bomb said:Zelda doesnt need to become something else to maintain relevance, but at a certain point, when a brand-new great Zelda game isnt enough, theres reason to pause.
I've read that sentence over and over. Still stumped as to what it's supposed to mean.BertramCooper said:This is pretty much what I expected.
As much as we say, "An 8/10 or a 4/5 is a perfectly good score," we all know that today's 7.5-10 review scale means that these reviewers didn't really care for the game.
But I definitely laugh when I read comments like this:
Seriously?
Ithil said:I've read that sentence over and over. Still stumped as to what it's supposed to mean.
othersteve said:All,
http://digitalchumps.com/game-reviews/36-wii/8575-the-legend-of-zelda-skyward-sword.html
I hope you enjoy my full review. As always, as spoiler-free as possible. And LONG, at that!
RPGCrazied, we still can't talk about anything that happens at the end of the game... :-\
othersteve said:RPGCrazied, we still can't talk about anything that happens at the end of the game... :-\
Ithil said:I've read that sentence over and over. Still stumped as to what it's supposed to mean.
Can't read it on my iphoneothersteve said:All,
http://digitalchumps.com/game-reviews/36-wii/8575-the-legend-of-zelda-skyward-sword.html
I hope you enjoy my full review. As always, as spoiler-free as possible. And LONG, at that!
RPGCrazied, we still can't talk about anything that happens at the end of the game... :-\
RPGCrazied said:Then where did Hero mode even come from? And its not even story related. No biggie, I can save it for myself, but was just highly curious is all.
Because reviewers are never wrong.King of the Potato People said:It seems like this game has serious problems and not worth the ridiculous wait of 5 years, despite what should be an impressive Metascore of 95. Of course next week will tell.
Apologies. This is a known problem with our site and we're working to get it corrected.rhino4evr said:Can't read it on my iphone
BertramCooper said:This is pretty much what I expected.
As much as we say, "An 8/10 or a 4/5 is a perfectly good score," we all know that today's 7.5-10 review scale means that these reviewers didn't really care for the game.
But I definitely laugh when I read comments like this:
Seriously?
I can't even tell if this is a joke, or not.BertramCooper said:.
As much as we say, "An 8/10 or a 4/5 is a perfectly good score," we all know that today's 7.5-10 review scale means that these reviewers didn't really care for the game.
lol. Y'know, there was some praise in the reviews too. Just a bit.King of the Potato People said:So I gathered this from the reviews so far.
- It starts off too slow, formulaic and it takes too long until there's freedom to explore the main areas.
- This is one of the most linear 3D Zelda games and this will be divisive with fans (sigh at this generation)
- Too much filler.
- Some sections are a cross between the Ocean King Temple/Twilight Realm, and these were unpopular fetch and stealth levels from previous games.
- Under-use of the music instrument.
- Fi isn't as good as Midna.
It seems like this game has serious problems and not worth the ridiculous wait of 5 years, despite what should be an impressive Metascore of 95. Of course next week will tell.
Mpl90 said:Really. The heck should it mean?
So, it hasn't to be something else because it's Zelda, but it HAS to be still revelant?
Did they wanted some online multiplayer or what?![]()