Gametrailers review, the major points I picked up on--Done my best to avoid spoilers, there's nothing plot or item specific in here, just the general statements they make about the game.

1) They mention the story is largely the same every other Zelda, when numerous other reviews say that the main story has been shook up and refreshed.

2) They then admit it's the most radical departure from the formula, and is quite challenging.

3) Fi gives you too much help and states the obvious--other reviewers mention she is one of the better helpers, never gives advice in boss fights unless you die, and is a well conceived character.

4) Great level design, but don't like frequent save points--again, other reviewers have praised this inclusion.

5) Now mentions the great length and amount of content--including side quests??

6) "uninteresting and confusing dungeon design"--in early dungeons. Despite earlier saying great level design??

7) Hardly any minigames--again, other reviews have said the Sky is an area with new and unusual mini-games to play.

8) "You either make your way through one mind bending room after another, or turn the machine off"--because of the lack of mini-games. Sounds like they don't like the fact the game continually challenges you, rather than lets you saunter through fields unchallenged or go fishing. Loses charm because of this.

9) Mix of old and new gadgets, all fresh and fun thanks to motion plus--favourite is beetle, very versatile. Finally, something in common with other critics!! Motion plus impressive but not perfect. Doesn't like new bombs control. Bosses are memorable.

10) Feels "creaky" when it comes to long-distance traversal--not sure why, explains important quest points are marked out and that there are numerous warp points to help you return to areas. Complains dowsing is a vague and too frequent part of the gameplay--again, something I haven't heard in any other review. They say "sprint should help alleviate slow travel" but then claim it's "muted" by the stamina meter--again, another element of the game almost universally praised.

11) "overall variety lacking" compared to other Zeldas, despite featuring inspiration from Galaxy, Mario Sunshine, Metroid and Sports Resort. Again, most reviewers I put any faith in (Edge, GamesTM, Metro, Eurogamer) praise the variety of the quest and set-pieces. Says the reward are the most challenging and inventive dungeons of the Zelda series--despite earlier on heavily criticising the early dungeons. They display "creativity few games can match". Apparently.

12) Completely utilises the Wii's potential--but no stronger than Twilight Princess (a GC game) from a techinical perspective. Water-colour graphics "gorgeous one moment, garish the next". Environments and Skyloft town "barren"--again, the game has been praised for its density, for Skyloft being an excellent, characterful hub in the vein of Clock Town. "It looks like an old game". Again, not heard this anywhere else.

13) Here's something--the musical instrument segments are praised as "sparkling". Most reviews that praise every element of the game have disliked or stated these segments aren't that great when compared to the rest of the game--Eurogamer in particular where unimpressed.

14) Most cinematic Zelda, but behind the curve--orchestrated music is great apart from some "ear-stabbers", lack of voice acting and "flappy animations" make the game feel like a "throwback".

15) Represents Zelda's first grey hairs, not moved on as much as other games in the last half-decade--but then says it proves tight level design, strong foundations and excellent gameplay trumps all: Apparently not the massive amounts of complaints you have about the game... Says there's a lack of whimsy and calls the game "business-like", which will frustrate or excite people.


Not one of the best reviews I've listened too--I need to shower so will return to this later with my thoughts and points from other reviews, but it seems like Skyward Sword could be a divisive game. It's also interesting to note how the European/UK reviewers are praising the game for shaking Zelda up and making genuine changes, while Gametrailers are criticising the game for not doing enough to change or for making changes in the wrong places.

And what about it? It would make sense if they gave it an 8 but they still gave it an 9.1 so your words doesn't really make any sense;..  MW3 got away with and Zelda aswell that is how I see it. 

The big issue is that they mentioned it and factored it in, whilst they didn't with MW3 or any other games like it. And calling it 'stale' when it's by far the most radical departure from the series is insulting for some.

@Asriel- Epic analysis and I agree with everything you said. Thanks for the summary!

I hope frequent save points does not mean those annoying auto saves,otherwise I am happy that more are available. These days I don't have lots of time spare a day to play longer sessions.

Comment 1:

now guys, if you listened to Invisible Walls, you'd know mick damiani reviewed this game. and if you've viewed the show for a long time, you'd know that he's the "Zelda Fanboy" of GT. with that in mind, the problems he had in the review seem legitimate.

now, you'll notice that he didn't bash the motion controls at all, (and who would, Nintendo and bad gameplay dont go in the same sentence)

but if any of you payed attention, he had problems with the games pacing at the first three dungeons, which he said was very slow in IW. not many games have saved points anymore, you just save your game on the spot. even ocarina of time on the 3ds had you save on the spot.

he also said that the first three dungeons were not all that good, because the design didnt make good use of the items. and after that he said that the game really opens up and the dungeons get REALLY good after that initial hump.

and last, he didnt like the fact that there wasnt voice acting, just grunts and gasps. now weather or not you want voice acting in a zelda game is debatable, but it seems he wanted voice acting, the epic cutscenes were a step in the right direction.

oh and 9.1 isnt a bad score at all, in fact its a high score.

comment 2:

Reviews plus gamers in general = idiotic comments generator

Let's see some of the positive points presented:
- Sharply written text/dialogue
- Environments every bit as challenging as the dungeons themselves
- Plentiful weapons and items
- Massive game; 40 hours
- Quick enemy reactions keeps every battle interesting
- Even classic weapons feel fresh with MotionPlus
- Surprisingly realistic physics
- Fun just chopping things to bits
- Boss-fights act as memorable midterm exams for mastery of items
- Some of the best dungeons in series history, with creativity a few games can match
- Learning songs with Fie is absolutely sparkling
- Live orchestrated music, huge step up in quality
- Strong foundations; clever level design and tight gameplay

Why do people correlate the amount of criticism with how it actually affects the overall experience? The core that has made previous games great is still present, and (apart from the positive points mentioned) this most likely easily outweighs the issues presented. It's not about numbers, it's about the impact of each point made. If you are a fan of the Zelda-series, this review shows that gameplay still is great, but that the series is getting old in terms of for instance presentation where it's been overtaken by other games and franchises (something which Nintendo should address in the next installment).

these are two good comment on the review for people who fail to actully listen to it.

Thanks--I suppose for anyone undecided about Zelda and who generally agrees with GT's reviews it's worth watching, but in my opinion it seems to be one of the poorer reviews out there in terms of content and its analysis of Skyward Sword. The score is definitely a very good one, but so much of what they say seems at odds with all the reviews I've read so far, as well as all the previews, interviews and features on the game in the months leading up to release. 

I guess Skyward Sword is going to be a victim of the myth that Zelda as a series never changes--I'd argue the opposite is true, that no serie has evolved or changed as much from iteration to iteration. Of course, Twilight Princess and Spirit Tracks did nothing to help and everything to perpetuate this notion--Twilight Princess was the most 'traditional' Zelda since Ocarina and Spirit Tracks was a refined version of what was done in Phantom Hourglass. Despite following the Zelda template very strongly, Twilight Princess did include the forced wolf sections in the earlier part of the game, but it's fair to say it echoed Ocarina closely.

(Be aware there may be minor, generic spoilers--I've blanked out the only bit I'm certain some people won't want to read)

Now we have a Zelda unafraid to step apart from Ocarina, a game that solves the barren overworld problem, removes the horse, fixes the problems of an island based overworld as seen in Wind Waker with the smaller, denser Skyloft and SkyWing, makes Link play differently not just through motion plus but through the stamina meter and dowsing, and a story that moves completely away from Ganon as the great evil. POSSIBLE SPOILERS IN THE NEXT SENTENCE:

From what I've heard, it's not so much about rescuing Zelda because she's been kidnapped (she isn't kidnapped so much as stranded after her early disappearance), but more about following her through the game because she's your friend and you're worried about her. That's a very different dynamic to Ocarina, Twilight Princess, or even Wind Waker, in some ways. 

The overworld is designed completely different--three seperate areas of the surface world designed like extended dungeons, a sky-world hub that acts as a retreat from the main quest and a base of operations, and dungeons that blur the line between overworld and dungeons as seperate entities--I've heard this become particularly pronounced as the game goes on. One reviewer even mentioned there are points where you'll wonder whether or not you've even entered a dungeon, or if you're simply still exploring the overworld or in part of a set-piece event. There's even item upgrades you can dig into if you want, treasure hunting and potion brewing--massive amounts of item collection available, character based sidequests, the hub changes as the game progresses, the surface changes as the game progresses. It isn't just a Metroid style "new items means new ways of heading through areas previously explored", but areas physically change at certain points in the narrative. The save system has been over-hauled--you can save at various specific points in dungeons, with later dungeons increasing the amount of save points to almost one a room, another step-up and refinement from what Zelda normally does. It might not be in keeping with the frequent auto-saves of other games, but is that really a bad thing? The game might constantly force you to think about your environment, think about the enemies you fight, make you utilise all your tools instead of a select few,  but is that really a bad thing?

In fact, it seems to fix every major complaint that has been levelled at the Zelda series. The boomerang is gone completely!! The surface world is packed full of things to do, is eventful, surprising and challenging rather than mostly empty fields or space to simply be walked, sailed or galloped through. The dungeons are no longer reliant on item-specific gimmicks that appear nowhere else in the game, torch puzzles are gone, block puzzles reduced to a minimum. Bosses are more reliant on quick reflexes and observation rather than "hit with item found in dungeon times 3". Normal enemies require thinking and strategy to beat thanks to the emphasis on swordplay. Dungeons are no longer completely seperate to the overworld, and the traditional structure of field/dungeon/new item/boss/repeat 8 times has been altered massively. The town in the game is a hub full of real characters, with lives, problems stories and quests for you. Sure, you might still play as Link from a third-person perspective, you might still z-target your enemies, you might still be on a quest to save the world and the people in it, and yes, destiny and Goddesses might be in there too, and some ancient evil... But if all that went out the window, where would we be?? Not in The Legend of Zelda, that's for sure.

Obviously I've not played the game yet--but this is what I've picked up by reading every review source, every preview, feature or interview I could get my hands on, and by being a Zelda fanatic, having completed all modern 3D Zelda games multiple times. Maybe that's why it's easier for me to identify where Skyward Sword changes things, because I'm informed as to what Zelda has been, and because I don't fall to the illusion that Zelda never changes from iteration to iteration, whilst simultaenously being able to see the need for more substantial change. Maybe that's why Skyward Sword will recieve more reviews that can't perceive the changes--because you need to really know Zelda to know the differences. But then, if AREN'T that aware of Zelda as a series, who are you to say it hasn't changed?? Who are you to claim it's the same as it ever was?? I don't think you can make that claim, and then you simply have to judge Skyward Sword in isolation to the rest of the series--and it's clear Gametrailers don't do that. It's clear to me others won't be able to do that, and it'll recieve more comments of "it's the same so it isn't amazing", even though Zelda has rarely (Majora's Mask?) been this different.

I can't really conclude this rant, so I'll borrow from the end of Eurogamer's review: "Maybe you've played enough Zelda games by now that even that won't be enough to cleanse your palate. That would be a fair response, but if it's so, this game wasn't made for you. Like a tale told from one generation to the next, the point is to keep the tradition alive for others - and for them, Skyward Sword will surely be the greatest adventure money can buy."

Zelda is an ever changing beast--but it doesn't or shouldn't evolve to appease the ones who played Link to the Past, or Ocarina, as it tried to do with Twilight Princess. It should always try to be the defining adventure of its time, as Ocarina was, as Link to the Past was, as the original was. Hopefully more reviewers (like Edge, Eurogamer, Games TM, Metro) will pick up on this--that doesn't mean perfect scores to me, it simply means a thorough, well thought analysis of the game that recognises what this Zelda does differently, and makes it an adventure worthy of the 25th anniversary.

I'm going to shut up now, I've ranted long enough. One final point--the Gametrailers review is worth listening to because it provides sample of some of Skyward Sword's soundtrack. Even the snippets I heard sound utterly glorious.

EDIT: Having read the post above, I understand it may seem like I'm ranting at Gametrailers here, but this is a more general rant. I didn't find the Gametrailers review that informative, though I did try to point out the positives he mentioned. Apologies if I've given it a negative spin--note that I did mention the score was still an excellent one, it's just that I personally didn't find the review itself to be the type of review I find useful as a critique of the game. Reviews for me rarely affect my purchase of a game, I suppose because I've been doing a old-type, critically/academically minded literature degree and am in the post-graduate stage of it, I'm consistently wanting to engage with game reviews as forms of meaningful critique, rather than a simple "do or don't buy it", or "not as good as X game in the series". GamesTM gave the game a similar score for example, but I found the review much more useful, informative and well-thought out. I'm not trying to bash Gametrailers--if I were doing that, I'd be acting like fanboys I so often criticise. I'm just a passionate Zelda fan with a mountain of work I'm putting off, and am also in desperate need of a shower to clear my head.

Dunno, I never ever fished in Zelda, so to me, it doesn't matter at all.

Also, I really hope the game settles at 95, anyway, why are there so few reviews?

The only game I never did that in was Twilight Princess, because I CBA to collect 5 heart pieces for each one. That, and of course the fact that it was so damn easy as well...

Also, I'm glad they've left out the fishing. I never really liked it. Collecting the Hylian Loach is so overrated

I don't really like the way gamerankings aggretates reviews. Metacritic stops adding reviews for a game after a certain period whilst gamerankings keeps on adding them. I find Metacritic's way more accurate as it gives a better idea of how the game was received when it came out.

For example someone gave the game 6/10 in 2009 and it was added on gamerankings but not on metacritic. I don't think someone from 2009 can judge the game as accurately.

@Rol:
Well, I did it in Twilight Princess, Zelda 1, AlttP and TWW.
Twilight Princess had like... 1 that you had to fish?

Collecting them in Ocariverrated wasn't worth my time. Dunno why I never did it in MM.