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

BertramCooper said:
One thing I don't understand is how Zelda's critical reception has started to noticeably decrease while the console Mario games have not.

Both Galaxy games are awesome, to be sure, but I'm surprised that they're immune from much of the backlash that Zelda seems to get.

I love both series, but I've always found Zelda games to be far more ambitious and satisfying. I don't get why critics have started to sour on Zelda but not Mario.
Click to expand...

If I had to hazard a guess, it's because many of them either moved onto other genres (RPGs or character action games or whatnot) and expected Zelda was going to change with them, like they thought there was some deterministic evolution of the series in progress where Zelda would eventually become something else new and therefore shinier and better by default.
 
JaseC said:
Is this a serious question? It's impossible to please everybody. Some reviewers are fond of the game and others not so much. There will never be a perfect consensus among a variety of people on anything - Zelda is no different.
Click to expand...

The problem is not that, it's when reviewers are blatantly inaccurate.
 
EGG said:
Tom McShea also gave SMG2 a 10, but let's watch fanboys get all bent out of shape and say he hates on the Wii.

popcorn_yes.gif
Click to expand...

Thing is, he's really off at times.

I really don't get his review for something like LostWinds, that game was by no means worthy of a 5.5 - and if IIRC he also said something about Ratchet and Clank lacking variety?

He just says very ... odd things that I would've never thought about in a game until he mentioned it - and then when I play the game it's a non-issue.
 
Rez said:
The Galaxy games were a major step up from Sunshine. They were a distillation of all the good parts of the previous two 3D games and none of the filler. Zelda hasn't had that game yet.
Click to expand...
Zelda hasn't had a Sunshine either.
 
walking fiend said:
They gave the GC version 8.9 though. It didn't have waggle, or speaker implementation... They gave MGS3 8.7 or something. It's good to be tough or opinionated, but there should be some kind of overall consistency. They can give 9.0 to CoD BOps Wii .
Click to expand...

well that means no pointer aiming is a good trade off for no waggle + no speaker, which is not unreasonable.

as good as pointer aiming is, waggle needs to die in a fire. so many games ruined by waggle this gen thanks to TP :/

As good as the M+ controls are, they are never going to be perfect. Some ppl will find them frustrating.

BertramCooper said:
The Galaxy games are absolutely a step up from Sunshine, I agree.

But the control scheme for Mario games has changed very little since Mario 64 - far less than the evolution from Ocarina of Time to Skyward Sword.

So why does Mario escape the "more of the same" criticism while Zelda doesn't?
Click to expand...

Because controls are not the issue.
Nintendo insists on changing controls in Zelda and calling it change. Throwing a boomerang with the stylus was cool, but you were still throwing a boomerang to hit a switch in PH. Zelda's controls don't need to change. The entire progression and structure needs to be rethought and streamlined.

That is exactly what happened with the galaxy games. 3D mario was deconstructed and rebuilt to resemble more of a platformer. There is still room to go though, but SMG2 was a definite step in the right direction.
 
BertramCooper said:
The Galaxy games are absolutely a step up from Sunshine, I agree.

But the control scheme for Mario games has changed very little since Mario 64 - far less than the evolution from Ocarina of Time to Skyward Sword.

So why does Mario escape the "more of the same" criticism while Zelda doesn't?
Click to expand...
If I were to hazard a guess, i would say because there were far more 3D Zelda games than there have been 3D Mario games. Throw in Phantom Hourglass and Spirit Tracks as well and you can have people burning out on certain portions of the game.
 
TheGreatMightyPoo said:
The problem is not that, it's when reviewers are blatantly inaccurate.
Click to expand...

Did you read the post I was responding to? He's clearly not referring to misinformation on the part of reviewers.
 
Gamefaqs said:
I don't know how much the rest of you know about game reviews (I'm an expert), but honor and shame are huge parts of it. It's not like it is in movie reviews where you can still become successful by blowing **** up in summer blockbusters. If you score anything under a 9.0, you bring shame to yourself, and the only way to get rid of that shame is repentance.

What this means is gamers, after hearing about this, is not going to want to purchase Skyward Sword for Wii, nor will they purchase any of Nintendo's games. This is HUGE. You can laugh all you want, but Nintendo has alienated an entire market with this score.

Nintendo, publicly apologize and cancel Skyward Sword or you can kiss your business goodbye.
Click to expand...

... Wasn't that originally from GAF?
 
VOOK said:
Because I haven't played the final version, we're able to still confirm that there is 100% no IR controls on it?

I'm pretty sure that's the case.
Click to expand...
I can confirm it. IR is only used for calibration at the very start of the game, or when you turn off the Wiimote. Which is stupid, by the way. I much preferred gyro assisted IR aiming as used in Reginleiv (and Red Steel 2 I believe), where the IR is also used to constantly reset the gyro to a neutral state.
 
amtentori said:
well that means no pointer aiming is a good trade off for no waggle + no speaker, which is not unreasonable.

as good as pointer aiming is, waggle needs to die in a fire. so many games ruined by waggle this gen thanks to TP :/

As good as the M+ controls are, they are never going to be perfect. Some ppl will find them frustrating.
Click to expand...
That only means they gave TP an 8.9 because reasons other than annoying wiiremote implementation.
 
JaseC said:
He's clearly not referring to misinformation on the part of reviewers.
Click to expand...

Well, your credibility has an uphill climb when you lie about one part of a game.

Yeah, maybe that isn't directly related to his post but they should at least get simple facts right.
 
wsippel said:
I can confirm it. IR is only used for calibration at the very start of the game, or when you turn off the Wiimote. Which is stupid, by the way. I much preferred gyro assisted IR aiming as used in Reginleiv (and Red Steel 2 I believe), where the IR is also used to constantly reset the gyro to a neutral state.
Click to expand...
I wonder if the E3 2010 fiasco had something to do with it. Jeremy Parish apparently heard on the showfloor that the IR had caused the screwup because of the stage lighting, and had been turned off in the demo on the floor to stop it from happening again, but would be in the final game like WSR. Maybe it was causing problems and they just never put it back in?
 
I wish we could cross-reference those who lauded the UC3 Eurogamer 8/10 and the ones who will wield pitchforks at this 7.5

will Mama Robotnik dedicate countless hours of his life to pick out everyone critical of this review?
 
AniHawk said:
tp was an excellent game. round that score up to the nearest full point and that's what i'd give it.

it's kinda hard for me to imagine ss would be better given the dumb things with the motion controls nintendo's bound to do, the repetition mentioned in the review, and especially the quest for tears and whatnot. guess it'll come down to the dungeons and how much a fanboy the story can make of me.

also, the reason for the lateness of the review (spoilers: wasn't trolling for hits)
Click to expand...
Without spoiling too much I'll address these issues specifically. This post will contain gameplay spoilers so be warned.

There are dumb things Nintendo did with the motion controls. Specifically the controls of
rope-walking
really do intrude on the gameplay experience. There's also a few moments where you have to waggle such as
when an enemy grabs you ala the scorpion boss
or
when you flap to fly the bird.
However none of these elements are particularly used a lot except for the last one, and the actual combat controls feels very natural and fantastic. The Gamespot review notes that the controls don't work, but that's most likely a hardware issue cause I honestly never ran into a problem and I'm currently clocked around 42 hours in the game just doing random sidequests. Neither did anyone on GAF.

The game isn't repetitive either. The review says that the entire game's basis is fetch quests, but there's actually only
3
in the entire game and only one is truly abysmal crap (the second one is actually extremely well designed, challenging, and fun). Returning to old areas isn't similar to Phantom Hourglass and is more similar to the level design of Super Mario Galaxy in which you'll return to a past level, only to discover that there's a completely new path for you to take with an item upgrade. It also helps that unlike Phantom Hourglass, the levels are a delight to actually traverse upon nor are you repeating puzzles.

The
Silent Realm
stuff isn't really quest, there is only
4
of them in the entire game and all of them are ridiculously fun and challenging. They aren't even remotely similar to the tear hunts in Twilight Princess, nor is it really a fetch quest. If it's a fetch quest it's one of the best designed fetch quests I've ever experienced in gaming cause I honestly couldn't tell. Some of the best parts of the game's level design is highlighted in these sections.

Even when you really are traversing through old areas, which you will if you want to do certain sidequests and collect everything, I'm really not sure how anyone can view it was repeatative or boring. Every area is ridiculously accessible to run around it, and everytime an area changes by some means it becomes practically a completely different level
looking at what happens to Eldin Volcano here.

As for the dungeons I'm really not sure how anyone could possibly think these aren't the best dungeon designs in the entirety of 3D Zelda. The first two dungeons, like TSA notes, are pretty weak (but still better than the first two dungeons of Twilight Princess imo). The only real problem is that thematically, there is a lack of variety in not only the dungeons but the levels itself. However to make up for it, each of the three major levels will end up providing you with one of the most unique experiences of a traditional fire or desert level in Zelda, and will introduce you to brand new puzzles that aren't featured in the usual Zelda game which makes the game more challenging than it should be on one's initial playthrough.
 
Watched the video review, and it's horrible.

The complaints are, the controls are not responsive all the time and take resetting and the some of the enemies are stunned easily and do not take special gestures to dispatch them (as if pressing a button is any different anyway, but nevertheless..)

And the other major complain is that it's a retread and doesn't break from the problems of old Zelda's, which the most he described those problems as, are "Fetch quest, dungeon, fetch quest dungeon."

Uh, ok? This is the point I've made before about stupid ass reviews and stupid ass reviewers. Saying it's the same formula is NOT A COMPLAINT. The same thing could be said for other high profile games like Skyrim, Saints Row, Call of Duty, etc. What formula is changed there from the last game in the series?

Just saying "oh its the same and its the same problems" WITHOUT addressing what exactly that is or why it is bad is not a good justification for a review. How do these people get off having jobs doing this when they can't even properly explain why they give what they give? Hell, the early games of a series shouldn't even have to be mentioned, the problems with the game should be addressed on its own merits if they're antiquated and explained why they are.

Why is a succinct, well explained review difficult to come by anymore? I don't care if a game gets a 5.0 or a 10.0, you better be able to explain why the fuck it was given that score though, which is something these video game "journalists" fail to do.
 
TheGreatMightyPoo said:
Well, your credibility has an uphill climb when you lie about one part of a game.

Yeah, maybe that isn't directly related to his post but they should at least get simple facts right.
Click to expand...

There's no denying that, but it has nothing to do with either his post or my response. He seems offended by the lack of an unwavering consensus on the game, not the reliability of reporting.
 
BertramCooper said:
One thing I don't understand is how Zelda's critical reception has started to noticeably decrease while the reception for the console Mario games has not.

Both Galaxy games are awesome, to be sure, but I'm surprised that they're immune from much of the backlash that Zelda seems to get.

I love both series, but I've always found Zelda games to be far more ambitious and satisfying. I don't get why critics have started to sour on Zelda but not Mario.
Click to expand...

Maybe it's because no one else really does that style of platformer at such a high quality, so it's easier to hold the interest of someone who plays a lot of games. While there are very few Zelda equivalents, there a ton of games that are tangentially similar, so it's much more difficult to stand out. Because of these similarities, it inherently invites comparisons to games that may be better in some sort of specialized way that Zelda isn't. As a jack of all trades, Zelda is a master of none. It's a tough battle to win when your combat is being compared to Bayonetta, the scope of your world to Elder Scrolls, and your narrative to a game with a good story that I can't think of right now. Those are terrible examples, but I think you get what I mean. Well, that's my theory, and it's probably wrong, but there you go.
 
hauton said:
I wish we could cross-reference those who lauded the UC3 Eurogamer 8/10 and the ones who will wield pitchforks at this 7.5

will Mama Robotnik dedicate countless hours of his life to pick out everyone critical of this review?
Click to expand...

Who lauded the 8? I think it was mostly people laughing at the blow up. Sane people didnt laud or hate the 8.
 
amtentori said:
yup. not enough streamlining and not enough change either.
Click to expand...
it's weird that they're trumping this dense explorable world. it's something they've wanted to do since ocarina, but haven't been able to pull it off for one reason or another. with oot, i think it was just a thing of being too ambitious for what the hardware would allow (and the 64dd falling through). with tww, they got what they wanted, but at the expense of a large, mostly empty overworld. they tried to do the huge land overworld thing again with twilight princess, and there are hints of it in the earliest footage of the game, but it's nowhere to be seen in the final product. and finally there's skyward sword, which is a return to the tww way of thinking.

with the wii u being what it is, i can see nintendo finally trying to realize that ambition they had with oot, as well as bring some of the knowledge they had gained during ss's development about blending dungeons and overworld.

i think part of it is that the crew has worked on the franchise too long. aonuma still wants to work on it, but when they start including elements in the game design because their kids wanted it (like trains and flying), then it's time to take a step back. aonuma's crew should hand the series over to koizumi, and work on something new for once.

or maybe a good exercise would be to have the entire zelda team go camping with little supplies for survival for a week or so.
 
hauton said:
I wish we could cross-reference those who lauded the UC3 Eurogamer 8/10 and the ones who will wield pitchforks at this 7.5

will Mama Robotnik dedicate countless hours of his life to pick out everyone critical of this review?
Click to expand...
Mama Robotnik didn't just target people who were critical of the review and tried to have legitmate conversation over it, it was people who were saying stupid shit and others who brought up the IGN guys personal life.

Thus far we have a few people saying they were looking for hit, and talking about real stuff like him talking about IR use which isn't in the game.
 
BertramCooper said:
One thing I don't understand is how Zelda's critical reception has started to noticeably decrease while the reception for the console Mario games has not.

Both Galaxy games are awesome, to be sure, but I'm surprised that they're immune from much of the backlash that Zelda seems to get.

I love both series, but I've always found Zelda games to be far more ambitious and satisfying. I don't get why critics have started to sour on Zelda but not Mario.
Click to expand...
The difference I think is that Zelda has a lot of different reasons why people like it so if one aspect is lacking than the game is automatically poorly received with one group of Zelda fans. With Mario one typically knows what to expect. You're not playing Mario for story, atmosphere, sidequests, etc. You're playing Mario for the great gameplay and unadultered fun as well as it usually having catchy tunes and great graphics for the platform it is on. With Zelda one person looks forward to the overworld structure(ALttP), the sidequests(MM), the atmosphere and story(TWW), the dungeons(TP), and unfortunately most of the games listed(other than ALttP really) excell greatly in some areas but fall a little flat in other areas. OoT I think has the best balance between all these different aspects which is why it is placed on it's pedestal. For example I think almost all aspects of OoT have been exceeded(MM exceeded it in sidequests, ALttP in overworld design, TP in dungeon design, TWW in Atmosphere and story, SS sounds like it has exceeded it musically) but there has yet to be one game that has exceeded it in all of it's categories.
 
This probably isn't what people want to hear but I really feel like websites like Gamespot are at least trying to introduce a bit more scale for their grading. The 8-10 scale is becoming way too commonplace.

A 7.5 on their scale is "good". Its a good game.
 
so they broke their 8-10 blockbuster game review metric with zelda?

ballsy.

on the other hand the review might be a fair and just but i seriously doubt it. click bait.
 
I honestly thought this game would be more polarizing. I knew that we'd get "low" scores, but I expected more. This is just a game that does some "relatively" weird and different things in an established franchise.

But to see more of the reviews skewing to the 10/9 side, that's very promising.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Silent Hill f Review Embargo Broken - Dualshockers 9.5/10 (Review summary inside)
2 3
144
1K
PlayStaytion replied
TOTK is easily a 10/10 with the Switch 2 upgrade
2 3 4
156
4K
Jack Videogames replied
Hades 2 | Review Thread
Review  2 3 4
178
658
HYDE replied
Infinity Nikki Review - IGN (9/10) > Stellar blade: IGN 7/10
NSFW  2 3
123
11K
tTHANOSs replied
Ghost of Yotei | Review Thread
Analysis Review  12 13 14 15 16
755
756
Tiago Rodrigues replied
Top Bottom