Skyward Sword review thread [Newest Reviews - Cubed3 10/10, GC: A, AusGamers: 7/10]
- Thread starter EatChildren
- Start date
TheGreatMightyPoo
Banned
dc89 said:
The sad thing is they aren't even airing their grievances or sending a message to the company as obviously, Nintendo IS going HD next year.
This is very difficult, but I think going full HD will finally allow them to achieve this. Zelda is currently limited by technology of an SD console. It is what it is, but HD will allow gigantic worlds, and you'd better believe nintendo will think of going that direction with the newfound power and storage capacity.GrotesqueBeauty said:I'd be happy if Nintendo could just make a LttP caliber Zelda game on a modern system.
Couple points here:
-Graphics make up ~25% of any review score. And yes, SD vs. HD definitely factors into the graphics equation.
-Nintendo itself has acknowledged the importance of HD by putting HD into their next system.
Don't really see what's hard to understand here....
-Graphics make up ~25% of any review score. And yes, SD vs. HD definitely factors into the graphics equation.
-Nintendo itself has acknowledged the importance of HD by putting HD into their next system.
Don't really see what's hard to understand here....
ops. got confused too. I was talking about the 2d stuff.The only problem with this is that Zelda SS is on an SD console. It is on the WII and that being so it should be scored RELATIVE TO OTHER GAMES ON THE SAME SYSTEM. Its not an HD console and so graphically it should be judged by the quality of its graphics ON THE SAME CONSOLE IT IS ON. In which case I'd still say it plays second fiddle to both Mario Galaxy and Xenoblade, but nothing else really.AstroLad said:
outunderthestars
Banned
cajunator said:
I don't see what resolution has to do with world size.
TheGreatMightyPoo
Banned
AstroLad said:
It's very simple.
You don't punish a GAME in a GAME review for something that is impossible to achieve in that GAME.
outunderthestars
Banned
TheGreatMightyPoo said:
The game got a 9.1 I would hardly say that GT punished it.
TheGreatMightyPoo
Banned
outunderthestars said:
No, I am not talking in this case, just his general statement.
No one but they know if they docked it for such nonsense.
Regulus Tera
Romanes Eunt Domus
Because that worked very well for Square.cajunator said:
Screen resolution has nothing to do with how a developer chooses to construct a gameworld. Final Fantasy XII and Dragon Quest VIII did vast over worlds with myriads of secrets in 2000 hardware.
Regulus Tera
Romanes Eunt Domus
The GT review would be more respectable had it been rated lower. The script tone doesn't match the score line. Review outlets should not be ashamed of voicing a controversial opinion just because it could alienate some of the potential readership.outunderthestars said:
TheGreatMightyPoo
Banned
Regulus Tera said:
I think they wanted their cake and to eat it too.
Slam the game while fanning the flames with its numerical rating.
That's some weak ass shit.
outunderthestars
Banned
Regulus Tera said:
Agreed. The reviewer seemed to have quite a few issues with the game, yet gave it a really good score.
For some reason, Zelda is just one of those titles that a ton of people go completely out of their way to make sure you know that what their opinion on Zelda is better than yours so you should deal with it, and even though they recognize that all the games in the series are decent, you need to know that their opinion matters the most, so suck it.
The GT review felt like that.
The GT review felt like that.
This is Nintendo though. Miyamoto will flip his shit if they don't make it the best they can, and if that man frowns, the world will suffer the consequences. I don't think comparing them to SE is good, because SE changes what Final Fantasy means with iteration. Nintendo innovates and evolves what they've already put into place. There are things that are distinct of each of their franchises and it's shown in the core gameplay (this isn't to say that SE doesn't do the same to some extent, but I think they do it extremely less/differently than Nintendo and instead changed what their game means with every new entry).Regulus Tera said:
Risk Breaker
Member
walking fiend said:
What? 14 Elder Scrolls games? Which?
Risk Breaker said:
1994 The Elder Scrolls: Arena
1996 The Elder Scrolls II: Daggerfall
1997 An Elder Scrolls Legend: Battlespire
1998 The Elder Scrolls Adventures: Redguard
2002 The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind
2002 The Elder Scrolls III: Tribunal
2003 The Elder Scrolls III: Bloodmoon
2003 The Elder Scrolls Travels: Stormhold
2004 The Elder Scrolls Travels: Shadowkey
2004 The Elder Scrolls Travels: Dawnstar
2006 The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion
2006 The Elder Scrolls IV: Knights of the Nine
2007 The Elder Scrolls IV: Shivering Isles
2011 The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim
D
Deleted member 30609
Unconfirmed Member
l o lwalking fiend said:
Like, seriously, lol
Risk Breaker
Member
cajunator said:
So I guess there've been 3 GTA's this generation already, right? Weird way to count titles, guys. Is Master Quest an entirely new/different Zelda title?
Wow, the score gametrailers give it is so at odd with their review, so much bitching and they still give it a 9.1
Gametrailer trying to have their cake and eat it, if they dont like the game man the fuck up and give it the score they think it deserves or make the review match the score.
Gametrailer trying to have their cake and eat it, if they dont like the game man the fuck up and give it the score they think it deserves or make the review match the score.
Raitosaito
Member
Regulus Tera said:
I agree. Zelda-GAF doesn't even realize that Shane/GT gushed over how Mario Galaxy 2 looked, and the complaint wasn't about HD, but how it was trying to do things that are beyond the technical limitations of the hardware and just came out ugly.(That's why he reference the style of graphics) It's his opinion, and is not wrong. I don't even like Shane's opinion most of the time, especially with Call of Duty and even the Battlefield franchise.(hell especially his Demon Souls rant) I would never call their opinion stupid though. Disagree with him all you want, just don't make it a bigger deal than it is.
The only thing wrong with the review was the score and his need to end it sounding like Nintendo has only just now revolutionize the Wii motion controls with Skyward Sword. It just sounded a bit off topic, while at the same time summing it up on a positive note when the review just wasn't tone that way.
GrotesqueBeauty
Banned
Imo it's a matter of vision, not tech. Honestly, I am skeptical about whether Nintendo will ever make another Zelda game as good as I find LttP or OoT/MM, not because the hardware lacks raw horsepower or Nintendo doesn't have the talent, but because the development process has become more formal and rigid. Every little decision seems to be made by committee now, with various team members toiling on some highly specialized aspect of the game without as much room for deviation. Reading though various Iwata Asks interviews about Mario or Zelda I was struck by a recurring theme where my favorite iterations appeared to be result of a sort of natural synergy, stemming from an atmosphere where duties weren't so strictly delegated, but rather arose out of the necessity of the moment. The result was a natural synergy- one that for all their craft I think the bulk of modern Nintendo games generally lack, especially in the Zelda series.TheGreatMightyPoo said:
Again, imo.
Again, I don't think sheer horsepower is at the crux of the issue. Good design trumps technical fidelity. In fact, by virtue of their sheer scale I think many modern development projects become bloated and unweildy. So much energy is focused on the refinement of each little individual element that overarching structure and balance tend to play a secondary role.cajunator said:
Agreed. Also, PS3/360 games should be judged by bleeding edge PC standards, and not within the context of what the systems they are on are actually capable of.AstroLad said:
Cygnus X-1
Member
AstroLad said:
A review must be based on how hard a system is pushed. Not comparing it to other systems. It doesn't make any sense. One could thus argue that PC gaming is way better than console gaming and conclude that all X360 and PS3 graphics is outdated.
Further, DS had shitty graphics compared to PSP. Genesis looked worse than SNES. PS2 looked worse than Xbox. So what? It's not sufficient as a reason.
It could make sense saying for example that Skyward Sword looks worse than Super Mario Galaxy 2. Yes, this would make sense.
Regulus Tera
Romanes Eunt Domus
What ever happened to games being criticised on how much fun they are?Cygnus X-1 said:
I hate this generation.
That is a part of the review too...but not all of it. Graphics, sound, gameplay, fun factor: if you ignore one or favor some, then you aren't doing a fair and comprehensive review.Regulus Tera said:What ever happened to games being criticised on how much fun they are?
I hate this generation.
GrotesqueBeauty
Banned
Only if it's padded with pointless rhetorical questions.weeaboo said:
Refreshment.01
Member
This is the best review so far from the big sites. Also they never used the word "HD"Cygnus X-1 said:
Can't understand why some people can't bring themselves to admit the game presentation is behind the times in many aspects independent of screen resolution. Nintendo can't mask this shortcomings with that art style, no matter how creative or clever it is.
You know at one time when consoles usually were in the same realm of horsepower you could advocate that review process, nowadays the gap between a Wii and the other consoles is so big, you just can't. Plus the Wii is the console with the weakest line up so compare Zelda to a huge amount of shovelware wouldn't be fair.cajunator said:
Slaming the game, where? Most of it was praising, specially the controls which are what set it apart the most from other entries. It is a fair and well written review attached to a very high score or are you being sarcastic in some way?TheGreatMightyPoo said:
TheGreatMightyPoo
Banned
Refreshment.01 said:
I didn't say the review was well done.
GrotesqueBeauty said:
There's truth to your point. For games in general, I can understand the formal way decisions are made because time is money and it is important to have feed back from multiple participants to ensure an idea can be implemented in the best way possible.
For Zelda, I think the problem stems from the ideas now have to go through Aonuma and Miyamoto who have created a very pretty solid foundation for Zelda games that can't be denied. They hold the vision and everyone just helps materialize it. Has there been anyone else with a lot creative input in the series other them that was shown in those interviews? Honestly, at this point I don't see anything that could be changed drastically other than the story. They seem to have got the controls right, giving us a new experience, so it's all good.
Anyways, I also agree Nintendo is lacking in the creative department if something works they stick to it. I guess that's how they have survived this long.
walking fiend
Member
Refreshment.01 said:
You know what, I think GoW, Shadow of the Colossus, RE4, etc, all looked like shit and not even one deserved to be praised for how good it looked and all should have received criticism and lower score because how bad they looked, after all, they all paled miserably in comparison with Doom 3 and FarCry, I mean miserably
MadraptorMan
Member
GamerSoul said:
Come on, there are way worse offenders than Nintendo in this case. Every developer and publisher is guilty of relying on tried-and-true game mechanics.
TheGreatMightyPoo
Banned
GamerSoul said:
They made Steel Diver.
It sold 5 copies.
Refreshment.01
Member
This just goes to show that you can't reason with a fanatic, independant of the game he centers it's devotion.
The GT review was far more indepth than usual. Did extensive comments in the weak qualities of the game aswell as the strong ones. Confirmed some of the counter points we saw in other critical minded reviews, like the TSA one, in points like: fetch quests, backtracking, save system and overworld for example.
Only criticism i can make to GT is that they really are inconsistent. They some times give free passes to games that commint the same sin as the one that gets critisized. But does it matter when we get a good Zelda review?
And people 9.1 is a high score.
The GT review was far more indepth than usual. Did extensive comments in the weak qualities of the game aswell as the strong ones. Confirmed some of the counter points we saw in other critical minded reviews, like the TSA one, in points like: fetch quests, backtracking, save system and overworld for example.
Only criticism i can make to GT is that they really are inconsistent. They some times give free passes to games that commint the same sin as the one that gets critisized. But does it matter when we get a good Zelda review?
And people 9.1 is a high score.
Graphic standards in 2011 are higher than what the game achieves for whatever reason. Nobody forced Nintendo's hand to release so uncompetitive system in processing/graphic terms.zoukka said:
TheGreatMightyPoo
Banned
He conveniently slipped by the PS3/Xbox 360 to PC analogy.
I guess companies should build their gaming machines due to reviewers' criteria.
I guess companies should build their gaming machines due to reviewers' criteria.
TheGreatMightyPoo said:
That's that submarine game right? Idk whose bright idea was it to create such a game. lulz.
MadraptorMan said:
I'll agree with this and it's true. Madden 20XX is a prime example, but I just expected a little more from Nintendo. Giving the fans Mario Karts and Parties is all good and is very smart, but I think they should also invest in newer IPs or better yet create fresh IPs with the charaters they already have so there is atleast some familiarity and a better chance of success. Let other studios experiment a bit. We were able to get stuff like Smash Bros and Metroid Prime with those experiements.
TheGreatMightyPoo
Banned
GamerSoul said:
I laughed, you're fucking cruel, hahahaha.
Refreshment.01 said:
All of this is irrelevant to me though, as SS will likely be the game I enjoy most of the games being released lately, and that includes Uncharted 3 and Sonic Generations.
For the system it is on, it looks good. One thing I notice in HD games is that there are horrendously ugly jagged shadows. That definitely detracts from the look of games. There is also that overly shiny freshly mopped floor look of things like rocks and floor tiles. Neither method seems to have perfected everything yet. but as a fan of artistic styles, I like the look of the new Zelda a lot.
Gametrailers:
Skyward Sword - 9.1
BioShock - 9.5
"you reviewed it lower than the original bioshock!"
PD: I Know that no the same that 8.5 but it's still fun
Skyward Sword - 9.1
BioShock - 9.5
"you reviewed it lower than the original bioshock!"
PD: I Know that no the same that 8.5 but it's still fun
TheGreatMightyPoo
Banned
cajunator said:
I think Nintendo is an easy target to bully because people don't like their vision.
There are big games just released that have many a graphical flaw(not to mention even more important issues) and they seem to get a pass from most for some unexplainable reason.
It's actually hypocrisy.
Just wait, Nintendo will release some titles for their next system with the imperfections you mentioned and they will all say "THIS is what their games last generation should have looked like".
It's going to be a fun "next-generation"(only in quotes because of course there has to be an asterisk next to Nintendo).
I don't really give a shit. I have all the consoles so all this talk of what looks better is wholly irrelevant to me. I buy consoles to play games not stare at the pretty pictures.
Except maybe Muramasa. I pretty much bought that one to stare at.
Next gen, Nintendo will go HD, but they had better stay true to the art styles that we know and love. I'm kind of nervous about how this will affect the look of beloved franchises actually, but I trust Nintendo will put art over tech as they always do.
Again, that might set off all the review sensors in the graphics department, but again, who gives a fuck if the other consoles look a bit better?
To begin with, I'm not impressed by visuals this gen. I know the power behind these consoles and what they should be able to do, so why should I be at all impressed or even surprised by it? I expect them to look incredible. It is the standard HD consoles have to reach by default. Some of the set pieces where everything is moving are technically impressive but still not mind blowing. On the same note, I expect Zelda games to look a certain way and this game does not disappoint me. It looks as good as I expected it to.
Except maybe Muramasa. I pretty much bought that one to stare at.
Next gen, Nintendo will go HD, but they had better stay true to the art styles that we know and love. I'm kind of nervous about how this will affect the look of beloved franchises actually, but I trust Nintendo will put art over tech as they always do.
Again, that might set off all the review sensors in the graphics department, but again, who gives a fuck if the other consoles look a bit better?
To begin with, I'm not impressed by visuals this gen. I know the power behind these consoles and what they should be able to do, so why should I be at all impressed or even surprised by it? I expect them to look incredible. It is the standard HD consoles have to reach by default. Some of the set pieces where everything is moving are technically impressive but still not mind blowing. On the same note, I expect Zelda games to look a certain way and this game does not disappoint me. It looks as good as I expected it to.
TheGreatMightyPoo
Banned
"All High Definition television does is provide sharper images of the garbage"
~~~~George Carlin
I'm not anti-HD by no means(love it for sports and it really helps with some games) but the content has to be strong or it's absolutely meaningless.
The "polishing" a turd deal.
I don't think Nintendo will let all the expanded memory and resolution and effects cloud their vision.
Less can be more with regards to focus.
Unless they take Zelda into a whole different territory.
I can't see the scope changing that much personally.
~~~~George Carlin
I'm not anti-HD by no means(love it for sports and it really helps with some games) but the content has to be strong or it's absolutely meaningless.
The "polishing" a turd deal.
I don't think Nintendo will let all the expanded memory and resolution and effects cloud their vision.
Less can be more with regards to focus.
Unless they take Zelda into a whole different territory.
I can't see the scope changing that much personally.
vodka-bull
Member
Easily, if not by itself, I'm just gonna start a timeline discussion.weeaboo said: