All Channels
Popular
170°

Why Skyward Sword Let Me Down

Let me first start by saying Skyward Sword is a good game. I would even say it is a great game, but there are some things about Skyward Sword that just didn’t click with me at all.

scrambles5229d ago

we may never know why he was disappointed.

Also throwing my 2 cents in.
CUZ its another zelda game where only the story changes and everything else has stayed the same. Sure sometimes your a dog and it differs in some items but zelda as a franchise has been stuck in the ground with steel rivets for the past 15 yrs. I do like em but they are kinda samey.

Khordchange5229d ago

screw that,
i didn't like like skyward sword as much because it wasn't like other zelda titles.

wingman32x5229d ago

The gameplay to me is pretty darn different. I felt awkward throughout the first half of Skyview temple because it was so different. Yes, the general format is the same, but the way you get from A to B is completely redone IMO. Right from the getgo the game throws a lot of gameplay elements that are completely new to the series. Also, some of the tired and true mechanics have gotten retooled as well.

If you were to look at SS in a general, broad sense, then yes it would look much like every Zelda game you've played. I concede that. But if you look at the many things they did to the gameplay, you'll see something that hasn't done in the series before IMO.

scrambles5229d ago

Well as far as i can see it, its almost like a sundae, you have ALL the basics there but they swap something out or add something ontop to it. I dont really hate on Zelda but i would loooooove to see them try out some really new things, revamp weapons, game mechanics, temples.

wingman32x5229d ago (Edited 5229d ago )

I agree.. in concept. However I question weather a complete revamp would be good for the series. A quick 180 would just alienate the fanbase IMO.

To me, Zelda has a unique identity. I'm against modernization because it would Jepordize that. Zelda is starting to need change, but I don't know if adapting to what's popular today is the change it needs.

Overhauling a series like Zelda is going to be an extremely risky process. They have to find a way to modernize the series without falling into the trap of looking like everything else out there. Either way, the series is at a potential turning point. The changes introduced in SS may have been a brief glimpse into what their overall vision is. I'm ready for a different Zelda product, I'm just afraid they're going to leave behind its charm and character.

Gr815228d ago

You need to do is play the original Zelda and then play SS and you will see the disconnect. Zelda used to be about combat, reflexes, and exploration. SS is about Fi telling you your batteries are low.

Pozzle5228d ago

NGL, I did feel like the game thought I was a moron at times. Telling me my hearts were low, telling me my batteries were low, telling me how to complete a puzzle, telling me an important plot point...that was already told to me only a minute ago.

Goddamit Fi! Stop treating me like I'm three years old. D:

Xander-RKoS5228d ago

Urgh, every thing this author didn't like about Skyward Sword I love. The more complex sword mechanics made the game feel less repetitive and honestly made you think about combat. I hate games where the A button is basically the win button if you spam it hard enough. It also wasn't that hard to figure out how to outsmart the pretty (intentionally) dumb AI.

Having a shield that breaks never ever discouraged me from blocking, instead it made me more aware that of dodging and shield bashing to counter enemies. Even then, I never used the shield that regenerated because by the time it was available I had upgraded my iron shield and always carried around the potion that restored heart and shield stamina.

Speaking of stamina, there were plenty of puzzles and challenges that required the stamina bar to make them challenging. Saying it was pointless because you would fail those challenges is basically whining that the game is too hard or something. Also, it another added challenge when you realized you couldn't spam the spin attacks in the game.

Basically the entire game kept you engaged and not paying attention to what was on screen was a good way to die really quickly.

Gr815228d ago

Agree with you on those points. The gameplay was not the problem with ss, it was the content and how the content wasn't on par with the rest of the game. The stamina meter was a great addition the shield vulnerability was great too.

But come on, the over abundance of text tad tones, Fi, constant handholding, basically 0 exploration. Not my idea of a good time. There is good elements to this game. Don't get me wrong, but it is buried under a lot of irrelevant tasks that really break the flow of the game.

Xander-RKoS5228d ago

The flow of the game was fine. While tad tones may have been a bit much, why let their swimming mechanic go to waste? Honestly, it was a nice change of pace and the flow of the game would have been rather rapid if it was just go to point A and just get the thing you need.

One of the key things that makes Skyward Sword different than other Zelda games is that the surface world was designed like mini-dungeons. If anything, it felt like a constant challenge just to directly follow the main quest as opposed to having a bunch of padding filled up with traveling. Remember Wind Waker (although I personally loved that game).

I personally never felt like the game was hand holding me. I think this might have been the first Zelda game where I didn't get stuck for a long time anywhere, so I don't get the Fi is annoying thing. I honestly used her to figure out info on enemies and bosses and I actually mean that I call on her. I think Fi was a great addition to the game, but like Navi, I knew when to ignore her when I knew what she was going to say.

Gr815228d ago

Wasn't too fond of the swimming mechanic in the first place. They didn't let it go to waste, if you take away the tadtone crap, you still had swimming to do in that water like temple. The flow of the game was constantly interrupted by having you always have to go to the isle of songs in the thunder cloud which was unnecessary, again with the over abundance of campy dialogue with uninteresting NPC's, and let's not forget possibly the lamest intro to a Zelda game ever.

The surface world being like a dungeon is very limiting, and feels like you are constrained, not free. And honestly, most of the 'overworld' is as barren as the sky. Please don't remind me of WW lol. I was EXTREMELY let down with that game.

Navi didn't bother me at all actually. But Fi was too much, way too much. For example, during the sacred realm areas, she explains to you how it works the first time. By the next trial you understand what you have to do, she explains it AGAIN, and AGAIN, and AGAIN! Telling you how to dowse..speaking of that, what a waste of time. You are right Navi you could ignore, Fi won't let you ignore her.

You are not permitted to take your own path or choose not to talk to anyone, you MUST speak to the bozo Groose, or Fi, or this one or that one, its quite ridiculous. Especially when in the Original game they basically gave you a sword and said 'survive', 'explore', 'grow'. With Skyward Sword it feels like they are holding you hostage. Talk to this person or we won't let you progress.

ChickeyCantor5228d ago (Edited 5228d ago )

Exploration?

OOT wasn't exactly an exploration game.
You could do one or the other in a different order but you still needed object A to get to point X.

Twilight princess was just an empty space.
Windwaker is actually the only one that did the exploration right. It was just not my cup of tea ( even though I love the game ).

SS is more compact and that's what they improved over the previous games. You might have had the idea you were "exploring" in the previous games but you were still getting your items to progress.

Finding those little secrets within the areas were the "exploration" high-lights.

I'm not saying the game is perfect, Fi was a complete mess even though she was likable in the end scene. That was the only moment.
But she is by far the best "help" system when it comes to asking for details. It's just the fact that they made her captain obvious, which was totally redundant.

And you always had to talk to NPCs to progress.
I'm really not understanding what your problem is with this.
SS kept it's tradition for a large part. And that is why all these flaws are quite visible.

Gr815228d ago

Was crap. That game didn't get anything right from my perspective. How many times must I say what my problem is with SS? Too restricting, too much fluff, to much text.

The only NPC you talked to in the older games was some troll telling you to "buy something will ya?" "Or master using it and its yours" Or the potion woman. Or "it's dangerous to go alone". In Skyward Sword the text is outrageously long with no way skip it if you don't want to hear it. You say compact, I say limiting.

The only thing improved in SS was the Controls. Other than that, the game falls flat on its face. It is unrecognizable from Zelda's of the past. It has the worst mode of transportation, literally has NO overworld. It is tedious and monotnous in its tasks, and insists on breaking and interrupting action at every opportunity.

Fi is the worst 'sidekick' I've ever encountered in a Zelda game (if ever) But to be fair I have never played the DS games, and had no desire too, they look to be worst than SS.

But hey to each is own. All I am saying is SS illustrates exactly where the split between the classics (OoT is caught in between) And the modern Zelda's. And as someone who grew up with the series since its birth I am beginning to see why after every game post OoT, has been met with lukewarm sales and fabricated review scores and praise.

They are not the same game. Zelda now is completely removed from its origins.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 5228d ago
50°

U.S. patent examiner rejects Nintendo’s summoning characters patent as obvious: non-final ruling

The rejection is non-final (and even when such rejections are labeled as “final”, the process is far from over, given that there can be, at minimum, an appeal to the Federal Circuit).

Read Full Story >>
gamesfray.com
Relientk7744d ago (Edited 44d ago )

Good, as they should! A game mechanic like that shouldn't be locked behind a patent, and Nintendo didn't invent it either.

PRIMORDUS43d ago (Edited 43d ago )

Nintendo wants to keep wasting money on bullshit lawsuits, real smart in this economy. They should put that money aside for other game projects. On the other hand, I don't care if they waste it all either, and they are screwed in the future maybe that will teach them a lesson.

40°

Nintendo Completes Share Repurchase and Sets Price for Secondary Offering

Nintendo completed its share repurchase and set its secondary offering price at 8,347 yen ahead of March 16 delivery.

Read Full Story >>
4scarrsgaming.com
60°

Nintendo Suing U.S. Government Over Tariffs

Nintendo filed a lawsuit in the United States Court of International Trade.

Nintendo of America is suing the United States government over the sweeping tariffs President Donald Trump put in place last year, according to a complaint filed Friday in the U.S. Court of International Trade and obtained by Aftermath.

Read Full Story >>
aftermath.site
Deathdeliverer69d ago

Well dayum lol. Old agent orange pissing off every industry and nation.

0hMyGandhi68d ago

The fact that you have ANY disagrees will forever baffle me. And to the (apparent) MAGA contingent that exists on this website, enjoy your 8-9 dollar gas.

AuraAbjure67d ago (Edited 67d ago )

Yes, they had better be pissed after Trump told them the way they rip off the USA is over.

EveryPlatformGamer69d ago

LOL I read this on gaff, will they refund the money back to the gamers? highly unlikely. Didn't they just raise prices and pass it onto the gamers? Only Nintendo would send out the Ninjas to the US government.

-Foxtrot68d ago

That’s what I was thinking, imagine them winning hypothetically, getting a s**t load of money back which they would have lost if they hadn’t raised their prices and it’s business as normal.

It would just mean people paid more for no reason since they got the money back anyway.

Outside_ofthe_Box68d ago (Edited 68d ago )

A lot of companies partially passed the cost to consumers instead of all of it. They would still have to at least pay that back to gamers, but we know that won't happen. What's also sad is that prices won't come back down after the initial hike caused by tariffs.

People didn't understand the full repercussions of tariffs. That alone should have cost him the presidency if people knew it was a permanent price hike for consumers

Inverno68d ago

The people should sue these companies for having to over pay cause of these tariffs.

Eonjay68d ago

Naw they should sue the government for forcing the tax to begin with. No one reasonably expects these companies to absorb the taxes. Many smaller companies tried and were shut down or faced to increase prices to try to maintain their business. The tariffs effect everyone.

Inverno67d ago

I meant it mostly as a joke cause we all know the costs of these tariffs were passed onto the consumer. But it's seems no matter how vocal we are here in the states our "representatives" don't seem to care enough to represent us. And things are about to get worse.

Killer2020UK67d ago

The companies were doing what the law required then to do, the tariffs however were illegally implemented. Usually it's criminals we punish, you seem to have different ideas 🤷‍♂️

Show all comments (18)