Yep. SS is the best Zelda since OoT.

No, I didn't miss that...I just don't particularly care. The fact is that it doesn't really hold up very well today, and without the nostalgia of it being "the first of its kind", it wouldn't be as well regarded.

Skyward Sword on the other hand, did quite a few things that were new and interesting, many of which tied into the control scheme and central design philosophy. The graphics looked very pleasant, and while it may have been in dreaded SD, it still managed to wow me on multiple occasions. The fact that it was a prequel gave the game new plot threads to run with and caused the story to go places other games didn't go (most notably the brand new villains). 

As I said, there were some tweaks that could be made to make the game better (I feel like just tying the ground level together at a few points would iron out a lot of complaints), but the same can be said about any game...

You shouldn' care about what people think

Wind Waker.  Where to begin?

-Pathetically easy.  In battle you just wait for A to flash and you win.  Bosses are also terribly easy.  Granted the same can be said for Twilight Princess, though not to the degree of WW.

-Boring. Boring dungeons especially Earth and Wind temples.  Play song, move to spot, move, play song again, move to spot.  BORING.  I'd go into the tedious Triforce questing and constant half hour sailing but that'd be redundant in this thread.

-Terrible plot device.  Plot spoiler ->  Zelda changes from plucky, likeable Tetra to boring, uninteresting Zelda.  I haven't met a fan of WW yet that said they liked this.

The game has great music, can give it that.  The fight with Ganon is sweet as well.  Other than those two points it's rubbish.

I have not been captivated by SS, and I've never said that about a Zelda game. I probably should give it another chance I guess..

I know I'm sounding harsh (I really did enjoy skyward sword) but their is a legitimate reason why fans generally don't like SS.

"The greatest aspect of Zelda was the open world aspect, and being able to do dungeons in any order.  This had (for the most part) been taken out after OOT.  SS also had the most hand holding of any zelda, and the controls were unreliable."

Well as you said, this was really only applicable before the 3D zelda games and no 3D Zelda game has really had a good open world...SS just felt like they replaced Hyrule Field with the sky, so I don't think it is a major downgrade in practice (although it may be in perception). Also, SS did have a lot of handholding, and that is certainly a flaw, but I don't think it is as big of a deal as many people make it out to be. Finally, the controls were spot on 99% of the time for me...I think most of the complaints come from people who tried to get by with waggle...

"They spent too many resources on the motion controls, which the motion controls were copied from wii sports resort, in fact most of the gameplay was copied from other games."

Hmmm, I'm not sure I agree with you there...the technology was the same (obviously), but the implementation was very different. The way they made everything into a puzzle was very smart and very enjoyable (to me), and made combat more interesting than it had ever been before. Also, many of the items felt much better than they did in previous Zelda games due to the motion...

I feel like SS put more effort into some aspects that some people don't care as much about (combat and puzzles) and less effort into some things that people expected more out of (overworld). Because of that, it made a lot of people feel like it wasn't the game they wanted, despite it doing what it did very well. I think the people who like SS are the ones who don't care as much about the aspects that were given less attention or are better able to adapt to changes in the formula...

Wait, I said I wasn't going to get into a serious discussion :P Oh well

Skyward Sword, and not for the motion controls. I really couldn't stand Fi, or any of the other constant tutorials and dialogue you would have to sit through telling you what to do or where to go. I got tired of it and moved to other games, which is a shame because otherwise its really not a bad game.

Sorry, I had to organize what you said, it was hurting me eyes:/  Ok, I actually have good experience with the controls, when the game came out I had a 480p tv, and the controls worked quite well (except the jabbing motion which made the 3rd boss a nightmare).  Then midway through I got a 55 inch 1080p tv, which I could immediately notice the quality of the controls go down.  Before they worked around 90% of the time, then they started working about 75% of the time at best.  And I tried everything to make them more accurate, but ultimately the tv that you used mattered and this was likely a flaw that nintendo didn't realize because the wii was not hd.

The puzzles were by far the best puzzles of any zelda game imho, the bosses were probably the worst.  Their was a lot of repetition, but the parts at the end where you try to get orbs by hiding from guards was copied from the DS zelda games(That and the combat was what I was mostly referring too). 

Sorry, I enjoy talking about zelda, idk why, maybe it's because my fondest video game memories are from zelda games lol.

I think the bosses were fairly hit or miss (with the misses not being bad...just average). Koloktos was one of my favorite bosses in all of Zelda, and all of the battles against Girahim were a lot of fun, the minibosses were the best in the series and the battle with the Imprisoned was great (once, it got repetitive) and the battle against Demise was great too (second to only WW's final boss section). Actually, looking back, the bosses were pretty darn great for me...

The light orb section was meh, but I'd say it was better than the triforce shard hunt in WW, and it was only like 30 minutes of a 30 hour game...