Excellent. Twilight Princess was a pretty good game, Skyward Sword was not. Terrible, terrible game.
Excellent. Twilight Princess was a pretty good game, Skyward Sword was not. Terrible, terrible game.
Badassbab said:
I have a diehard Nintendo fanboy friend who disagrees with you on SS. He think's it's one of the more disappointing ones and will create a thread for it to vent his spleen soon so look out for it if you want to defend it. Also I wouldn't compare UC3 to SS, they are different games. I think you have a very unfair view of it but of course you're entitled to your opinion as am I. |
Well, I was going to start a thread but as I've only just signed up I can't so I'll say it here.
TP was an excellent game, SS, imo is not an awful game but is a bitter disappointment considering how long we've waited for it.
I have been playing Skyward Sword on Wii for quite some time now and while I haven't completed it, I'm about two thirds/45 hours in (estimated).
After having been a Nintendo fan since the NES and enjoying most of the Zelda games, I can't help but feel let down with the latest offering. I know a couple of people IRL who agree with me on this but it seems everyone else in the world think it's "the best thing ever".
I've given this game A LOT more chance/time than I would have if it did not carry the Zelda name.
My complaints are as follows:
1. Steps backward - being able to save anywhere was a positive step forward, why go backwards? Being able to run and leap without worrying about a stamina bar was great - now Link gets knackered and it's a pain in the arse. He gets out of breath after running for aprox 8 seconds - for a young man his fitness levels are extremely questionable.
2. REPETITION - All Zelda games have a certain amount of going back to previously visited environments, but in this one I'm sick of backtracking - this seems to happen far too often "Now go back to Faron woods/desert area" AAARGH!, it's as if they couldn't be bothered to create more varied environments. As a personal aside I tend to hate both desert and water levels generally, how wonderful to be sent back there on a regular basis!
3. Motion controls 1:1 - This is heralded as a great thing and it's alright I suppose - for minigames/casual multiplayer; however if we're really honest it's a pain in the arse. I want to relax and play the game, now every time an enemy comes up I have to flail about and it's 50/50 as to whether the wii mote angles have inexplicably gone wrong - leading to loss of life etc. There are so many moments in this game where you can mess up, knowing deep down that with the accuracy of a conventional controller, you would not have messed up.
4. Style Issues - This game does not have the dark and mysterious charm of Twighlight Princess, nor does it have the fresh vibrancy of Wind Waker. It's not as innovative as Oot was. It just hangs around in the middle somewhere, like a bland, pastel-coloured blob - neither one thing nor the other - like a collection of the mediocre bits from previous games in the series.
The environments do not feel as alive and lively as they did in Twighlight, Skyloft feels more like a bland hub than ever, despite all the little secrets. Personally, I do not find the characters as engaging this time around. The only one that makes me smile is our old friend the Goron. Nowadays you have rpgs where it feels truly alive, people say different things and the same thing rarely happens twice. It would have been nice if, despite tech limitations, Nintendo had attempted something to prevent the feeling of running around talking to shop dummies.
Flying between locations is designed to give a sense of travelling a great distance, but fails. Being able to gallop a long distance on the horse or as the wolf to discover far off and varied locations made the world seem massive. Riding on the Loftwings is quite tedious and makes the world seem smaller to me.
Above all, Skyward Sword seems to me like a LONG HARD SLOG without much reward. I'm not saying it's awful but amongst the other Zeldas I'd honestly rate it as one of the weaker ones.
Do any other lifelong Nintendo fans feel the same about this one? Or is everyone screaming best thing ever and thinking I'm insane?
Too much planning, and you'll never get anything done.
Karl Pilkington.
winston000smith said:
TP was an excellent game, SS, imo is not an awful game but is a bitter disappointment considering how long we've waited for it. I have been playing Skyward Sword on Wii for quite some time now and while I haven't completed it, I'm about two thirds/45 hours in (estimated).
|
You are pretty much on point with this. The ending of SS was arguably the best of any Zelda, I will say that. Matches OOT in the epic department.
However the 40 hours beforehand it took to get there could not compare to Twilight Princess. SS had better boss fights in general but the overworld was not nearly as engaging as TP or OOT. Despite trying its best to have depth,the game still felt empty.
Part of this might have been due to a lack of species in each level. The desert had no Gorons...the forest had no elves or people. The water related levels had fish and stuff, but there were no Zoras, and the seahorses definitely were not a better substitute, neither were the Kikiwis in the forest. Music was a nonfactor, which was REALLY disappointing. Nothing tops OOTs limited themes yet.
Also, SS had no intro sequence! It was just press start to begin the game and pick your file. The backtracking was a lot like Phantom Hourglass...I definitely expected more than expansions of the initial 3 worlds after initially clearing them all.
The game was also way too brightly colored...literally all the time. You could not take the peril seriously when everything is in "Build-a-bear" tellytubby mode. There were no burning homes...shoot you couldn't even fly at night.
SS was an 8/10 for me. It had a better ending than TP, but not a better middle. Best boss fights of the series, but worst environments (of the 3D era). Puzzle subtleties were good though, better than TP.
Leatherhat on July 6th, 2012 3pm. Vita sales:"3 mil for COD 2 mil for AC. Maybe more. " thehusbo on July 6th, 2012 5pm. Vita sales:"5 mil for COD 2.2 mil for AC."
TP is a lot cheaper, and was recently re-released. There's also offers and bundles ATM
Sure, SS is newer, but it's far more expensive. So people may be getting TP to see if they like it before plunging in head-first.
Metrium said:
And for UC3, yes the multiplayer was a improvment, but no one bought the game thinking ''oh, I cant wait to play this online... as soon as I get home, ima take that disc out of the box, put it in my ps3 and go straight to the multiplayer'' because ppl buy and want to play UC for the campaign. I played a little multiplayer and then stopped playing it, personaly I dont think UC would have deserved less sales if it didnt have multiplayer, its just a bonus. Kind of metroid prime2 and ME3, couldnt care less if it had multiplayer or not, imma buy the game anyway... play the campaign... and THEN when I have time I will TRY the multiplayer, have fun with it for few hours then move on. But that is just me and my opinion but im pretty sure tho that it IS a fact that MOST ppl who bought UC3 would have bought it if it didnt have multiplayer anyway. |
Am I the only one incredibly impressed with Twilight Princess' sales? It just re-entered the charts in its 277th week. It's the third oldest charting title, the only older are New Super Mario Bros. DS and Mario Kart DS.
The bloody game has been selling more and more in USA every year since 2009 now.
2009: 197,000
2010: 215,000
2011: 313,000
2012: 50,000 so far, in a period in which ~ 18% of total software is sold, meaning it's tracking to sell nearly 300,000 this year too.
Selling more in your 7th year on the market than you did in your 4th and 5th (and possibly 6th) is just ridiculously good, and virtually unheard of. Can you name a single console game that has done that? I can't!
Worldwide, it's passed 8 million, and slowly heading on to 8.5 million now. This game has had a longevity most games could never dare dream of. It's not bundled, it's not advertised, yet somehow it pulls of great numbers year after year.
zero129 said:
Like NintendoPie said before, your sig really does suit everything you type lol. |
People who don’t like M+ are really not open to new things. SS opened up a whole new world with possibilities not possible with traditional controls. The bosses were amazing! I was surprised when the tentacles of the squid boss attacked me. It was the first time ever that I had to fight off something like that and I had to swing left and right fast so they wouldn’t get through.
TP is a very good game but too easy for my taste. SS had a great difficulty level and if you are bad with the sword then you won’t go past some of the more advanced enemies.
R.I.P Mr Iwata :'( | ||
I'm on Twitter @DanneSandin!
Furthermore, I think VGChartz should add a "Like"-button.
Wow, I just disagree with most people on this thread that SS is better than TP or that it's the best Zelda. I thought it was way too short, and I thought there was WAY too much padding.
I think for a game that was lauded as taking five years to make, there is precious little to show for it. It's filled with padding. Revisiting the same areas three or four times with slight changes in layout, fetch quests, and those horrible tear-collecting segments. Also, they re-use the same enemies over and over again. My list of grievances for SS far outweighs my list of positives. I never thought I'd say this...but Twilight Princess is no longer the worst game in the series.