Your perspective on Skyward Sword?

I have been playing this game for 2 days, and I think it is agreat game. There are many things put into the game that take Zelda in the right direction like multiple decisions for dialogue, upgradable weapons and shields, and the game give a real reason to use rupees.

Overall it is a awesome game, but there is one flaw that make it seem less of a Zelda game IMO. The game became linear. The surface is very linear. And the sky world is kind of empty. Exploration in this Zelda is kind of dull.

I agree with everything you said. It was a good game, but it didn't feel like Zelda to me. You basically fly from the only town in the whole game to the location you have to be, which I didn't like. In Ocarina of Time, for example getting to the Goron village, you had to go through Hyrule field, Kakariko village, and then Death Mountain. In Skyward sword you basically fly to a spot and that's it... kinda like a Kirby game. Which is not what it should be. Just felt choppy, lazy, and didn't transition well for me.

I loved it.

The new gameplay is for the best.

Link being able to run,the awesome pacing of the game,and the motion controls.

Perfect.

I'm about five or six hours in and I'm finding it very hard to continue - after Twilight Princess I thought it would be hard to one up it in babying, but Nintendo has managed to release a more patronizing game. Skyward Sword treats the player like an idiot, and it's really insulting, from the neverending (and repeating) tutorial stuff to the painfully slow dialogue crawl, and Fi. God, Fi.DJ_Lae

Difficulty isn't always supposed to affect the experience.

It's definitely easier than past games like OoT,TP,and TWW.

So what?

It's super fun.

The exploration aspect is really lacking and the game is probably the most linear of the series. That being said, it is still a fantastic game. The level design is top notch and the difficulty (imo) is tuned just right. I absoultely hated twilight princess but I really enjoyed this entry.

Difficulty isn't always supposed to affect the experience.

It's definitely easier than past games like OoT,TP,and TWW.

So what?

It's super fun.

GreekGameManiac

I loved it.

The new gameplay is for the best.

Link being able to run,the awesome pacing of the game,and the motion controls.

Perfect.

GreekGameManiac

100% agree. Sapewrath is going to come i hear though and deny this :P. Honestly as good as the game is, this really hurts it given that this is a key element to Zelda IMO. It is my only big issue with the game, although i do really wish the harp didnt suck.

[QUOTE="NaveedLife"]

100% agree. Sapewrath is going to come i hear though and deny this :P. Honestly as good as the game is, this really hurts it given that this is a key element to Zelda IMO. It is my only big issue with the game, although i do really wish the harp didnt suck.

ristactionjakso

It's just this Zelda lacks exploration. Linear surface, and a void sky with nothing to do....O wait I delivered pumpkin juice once.....cool......

Like in OoT you had those skelutas to find, masks to get, so on and so forth. Those big blocks are dumb. Just ridiculous. I'd much rather spend my time hunting down giant spiders, killing them, and collecting skelutas.

Skyward Sword is awesome. Love the game. But think about how much better it would have been to have the same open world, exploration, and finding different things as past Zeldas had. It would have been the best game ever made.

You sound like you feel the exact same way about the game as I do. I enjoyed it a lot and it had me hooked. That said some things irked me throughout, exploration being a big one. I completely agree abotu the cubes and such. Skulltulas were very well hidden sometimes and the prizes were far more interesting. Plus there was so many ways to find them, from putting ants down the sandy hole, finding them on a wall, or blowing something up to get to them. I loved that. IDK, this aspect lacks in SS, which is huge for me. I never really felt the sense of adventure I got from the others. But again SS is a great game and it does some stuff the best. There are some fights in the latter half of the game that are epic indeed.

meh, TP and OoT were both linear...just masked by a flat overworld. i originally thought i'd dislike the world design, but i thoroughly enjoy it...infact i prefer it. It feels something more similar to LTTP (in terms of world sections) than the last few Zelda titles.

meh, TP and OoT were both linear...just masked by a flat overworld. i originally thought i'd dislike the world design, but i thoroughly enjoy it...infact i prefer it. It feels something more similar to LTTP (in terms of world sections) than the last few Zelda titles.

chex81

Huh. Too each their own, but I honestly have NO idea how you think it feels more like ALTTP since ALTTP has a very connected world. It has SO many more secrets in it too, just like OoT or MM does. SS lacks this.

Its linear, the dialogue choices add nothing to the game, the crafting system was an utter disappointment and I dont like what it did to Zelda lore.

However, the dungeons, the boss fights, enemy design, combat which is very Mount & Bladeish, importance of rupees and the inventory system (Skyward Sword has a better inventory system than most RPGs!) made it yet another excellent entry in the series. I would give it 8.5.

Yeah I agree the only thing keeping it from being the greatest zelda game ever is the fact that the game is linear and the spaces are too small, other than that the game is amazing and I like the way link looks too.

The only other thing that I think the game needs is more variety in enemies, you pretty much fight bokoblins the whole way through, so many zelda enemies are missing like tektites, LikeLikes and where the hell are the Darknuts?!!For a zelda game so focused on swordplay you would think they would include a darknut or two to fight!

I had a nice post lined up but then my router decided to quit before I submitted. In a nut shell... Tom was right. JustPlainLucas

meh, TP and OoT were both linear...just masked by a flat overworld. i originally thought i'd dislike the world design, but i thoroughly enjoy it...infact i prefer it. It feels something more similar to LTTP (in terms of world sections) than the last few Zelda titles.

chex81

If the surface was connected it would have felt more like a Zelda game. There arent to many secrets for exploration. The sky is empty.

Like I said, I like the game. Loved everything about it, except the fact that it uses the demons souls formula of exploration.

I'm loving the game and its easily up there as one of my favourite Zelda titles but the game doesn't go without complaints. Though I don't share the common one of wishing the surface was all connected, that doesn't really bother me. Still though for a 2011 Zelda title I can't help but be a little underwhelmed in the fact that the series really hasn't come far past OoT-I feel theres alot more they could be doing.

Everything about the game is awesome......other than that, it became linear. The surface is very linear, and the sky is void of exploration. Awesome game, it is very much like Zelda and then some on everything....just not the open world like past Zeldas which is the wrong way Zelda should be made.ristactionjakso

EVERY Zelda game since Link to the Past has been linear. The only one with a truly open world was the original game. They've all been just as linear, but that line has become more and more visible with each game (i.e. the game tells you more explicitly where the line is). And honestly, without dousing, Skyward Sword would basically feel like Ocarina of Time or Link to the Past... and people would complain that they got lost too much. But I guess you could play without using dousing at all if you prefer that.

So when people say they're disappointed because Skyward Sword doesn't have a more open world, I don't know why that would be expected in the first place. I would love another open world Zelda game too, but we shouldn't expect it when we haven't seen an open world Zelda game for 25 years.

[QUOTE="ristactionjakso"]Everything about the game is awesome......other than that, it became linear. The surface is very linear, and the sky is void of exploration. Awesome game, it is very much like Zelda and then some on everything....just not the open world like past Zeldas which is the wrong way Zelda should be made.JordanElek

EVERY Zelda game since Link to the Past has been linear. The only one with a truly open world was the original game. They've all been just as linear, but that line has become more and more visible with each game (i.e. the game tells you more explicitly where the line is). And honestly, without dousing, Skyward Sword would basically feel like Ocarina of Time or Link to the Past... and people would complain that they got lost too much. But I guess you could play without using dousing at all if you prefer that.

So when people say they're disappointed because Skyward Sword doesn't have a more open world, I don't know why that would be expected in the first place. I would love another open world Zelda game too, but we shouldn't expect it when we haven't seen an open world Zelda game for 25 years.

It's just that the surface isnt connected, and the sky just feels like wasted space. To travel anywhere you have to go to the sky, slowly fly to a spot, then drop down to a path....it's very similar to demons souls in that aspect. And when we say open world, it means that there are ample exploration. And compared to OoT, you had skellutas to find, masks to get, biggoron sword quest and other things to do besides the actual story. In Skyward Sword you have little petty sidequests and find easy big blocks.....in this aspect it isnt similar to what makes Zelda games a cut above the rest.

ristactionjakso

There are a few linear spots that don't have much exploration (the Deep Woods that leads to the temple, the waterway leading to the water dragon, etc.), but the larger areas are totally open for exploration (the Faron Woods area with the giant tree in the center, the Lanayru Desert area with the half sunken structure in the middle, and pretty much all of Eldin Volcano). Again, in this sense, it's no different from any other Zelda game besides the original.

[QUOTE="chex81"]

meh, TP and OoT were both linear...just masked by a flat overworld. i originally thought i'd dislike the world design, but i thoroughly enjoy it...infact i prefer it. It feels something more similar to LTTP (in terms of world sections) than the last few Zelda titles.

ristactionjakso

If the surface was connected it would have felt more like a Zelda game. There arent to many secrets for exploration. The sky is empty.

Like I said, I like the game. Loved everything about it, except the fact that it uses the demons souls formula of exploration.

Haha yeah you made a connection I never really saw until now. Demons SOuls (SOOO overrated) is a lot like SS in terms of level linearity with little open, but SS had a much better hub world IMO. It at least had some stuff to do in it.

PS - if the goal is to make the game so easy to traverse areas and get to where you need to be, why in the heck did you have to go to the sky again then turn around and fly back down to go to another spot on the map. I wish there was a more open feel with a couple less statue waypoints.

I like it alot, but it's not without flaws.

[QUOTE="chex81"]

meh, TP and OoT were both linear...just masked by a flat overworld. i originally thought i'd dislike the world design, but i thoroughly enjoy it...infact i prefer it. It feels something more similar to LTTP (in terms of world sections) than the last few Zelda titles.

ristactionjakso

If the surface was connected it would have felt more like a Zelda game. There arent to many secrets for exploration. The sky is empty.

Like I said, I like the game. Loved everything about it, except the fact that it uses the demons souls formula of exploration.

[QUOTE="ristactionjakso"]

[QUOTE="chex81"]

meh, TP and OoT were both linear...just masked by a flat overworld. i originally thought i'd dislike the world design, but i thoroughly enjoy it...infact i prefer it. It feels something more similar to LTTP (in terms of world sections) than the last few Zelda titles.

GunSmith1_basic

If the surface was connected it would have felt more like a Zelda game. There arent to many secrets for exploration. The sky is empty.

Like I said, I like the game. Loved everything about it, except the fact that it uses the demons souls formula of exploration.

It has the best combat of any Zelda game, best designed overworld, though I wish it had been more open and less segmented, and some of the best dungeons. Sure it doesn't match the sidequests of MM, the exploration of WW, or the [color=red]story [/color]of TP.meetroid8

Really? I just got to a point in SS where the story just blew my mind. I didn't think TP had a bad story by any means but I thought it was kinda weak in comparison. Though the fact that I was aware and awaiting the little twist of the game might have attributed some.

[QUOTE="meetroid8"]It has the best combat of any Zelda game, best designed overworld, though I wish it had been more open and less segmented, and some of the best dungeons. Sure it doesn't match the sidequests of MM, the exploration of WW, or the [color=red]story [/color]of TP.knuckl3head

Really? I just got to a point in SS where the story just blew my mind. I didn't think TP had a bad story by any means but I thought it was kinda weak in comparison. Though the fact that I was aware and awaiting the little twist of the game might have attributed some.

[QUOTE="knuckl3head"]

[QUOTE="meetroid8"]It has the best combat of any Zelda game, best designed overworld, though I wish it had been more open and less segmented, and some of the best dungeons. Sure it doesn't match the sidequests of MM, the exploration of WW, or the [color=red]story [/color]of TP.meetroid8

Really? I just got to a point in SS where the story just blew my mind. I didn't think TP had a bad story by any means but I thought it was kinda weak in comparison. Though the fact that I was aware and awaiting the little twist of the game might have attributed some.

i wrote a review to sum up my perspective. shorter version: i liked it a lot.

i didnt find it any more linear than any of the 3D zeldas. if anything, there is more room for different playsty|es than any zelda since at least OoT. theres also this false notion that open environments are what constitute nonlinearity, but id really have to disagree there (dragon age: origins has very narrow environments but is not a linear game at all). however, SS does have a really open sky overworld. the problem (and my only notable problem with the game) is that there isnt much to do there. the islands are mostly just rocks with treasure chests that will pop up on the map when they are unlocked. its a far cry from WW's great sea where you might find anything from a mini dungeon to nothing at all on any island you spot. however, the surface world was great with lots of traversal puzzles and enemies to use the exceptional combat system on.

[QUOTE="DJ_Lae"]I'm about five or six hours in and I'm finding it very hard to continue - after Twilight Princess I thought it would be hard to one up it in babying, but Nintendo has managed to release a more patronizing game. Skyward Sword treats the player like an idiot, and it's really insulting, from the neverending (and repeating) tutorial stuff to the painfully slow dialogue crawl, and Fi. God, Fi.GreekGameManiac

Difficulty isn't always supposed to affect the experience.

It's definitely easier than past games like OoT,TP,and TWW.

So what?

It's super fun.

this game is absolutly brilliant. its pushing zelda in the right direction. BUT it has some flaws that keep it away from the perfect zelda game. things like an empty sky world, a dissconnected hyrule, lack of enemy variety are problems in the game. otherwise the game has a great story, amazing gameplay, very interesting game components like the stamina bar, the items, etc, you get the point lol.

All right, here's something that annoyed me. [spoilers] After Sand Ship there weren't really any new themes / areas. The next temple felt like an extension of the Earth Temple and then you need to collect the pieces of the songs. Then the final temple was located in Skyloft and actually reused all the themes of previous dungeons ... but it was still one of the better dungeons in the game.

Then after this they reuse the sealed grounds and for Demise all you get is a simple, flat area with nothing particularly interesting to look at.

So, while the gameplay was great through the very end I just got sort of starved for new sights to see and the game didn't deliver.

Meinhard1

the fire sanctuary ironically did a lot with water. i remember a relatively similar dungeon puzzle in windwaker where you throw pots of water onto lava to make a platform, but nintendo did a lot more with it in SS. but yeah, the claw upgrade did make it feel like a progression of the earth temple.

anyway, a lot of the later areas were about developing previously established themes. so much of the story, art direction, and gameplay was about the changes of time. it just fit to go back to previous areas and have them be a little different (or in some cases, completely different). thats the big motif of the sky. the clouds are always shifting, even by minutia, and one seconds gaze wont be the same as the last. thats what made the final strike on demise so memorable for me. any way you look at it, lightning striking link's sword just in time is near impossible, but its further emphasized by all the little details over the course of the game. its fate.

this game is absolutly brilliant. its pushing zelda in the right direction. BUT it has some flaws that keep it away from the perfect zelda game. things like an empty sky world, a dissconnected hyrule, lack of enemy variety are problems in the game. otherwise the game has a great story, amazing gameplay, very interesting game components like the stamina bar, the items, etc, you get the point lol.

almossbb

See, I agree with you, but IMO you should be saying, "this game is pushing half of Zelda in the right direction, and taking a step back in the other". You seem to like some of the mechanics and the controls. I agree! But you wish the sky was more like Wind Waker, and the surface more like OoT. If this was the case, the game would probably be a 10 for me. Oh and the frikkin harp needs to be better.

[QUOTE="almossbb"]

this game is absolutly brilliant. its pushing zelda in the right direction. BUT it has some flaws that keep it away from the perfect zelda game. things like an empty sky world, a dissconnected hyrule, lack of enemy variety are problems in the game. otherwise the game has a great story, amazing gameplay, very interesting game components like the stamina bar, the items, etc, you get the point lol.

NaveedLife

See, I agree with you, but IMO you should be saying, "this game is pushing half of Zelda in the right direction, and taking a step back in the other". You seem to like some of the mechanics and the controls. I agree! But you wish the sky was more like Wind Waker, and the surface more like OoT. If this was the case, the game would probably be a 10 for me. Oh and the frikkin harp needs to be better.

[QUOTE="NaveedLife"]

[QUOTE="almossbb"]

this game is absolutly brilliant. its pushing zelda in the right direction. BUT it has some flaws that keep it away from the perfect zelda game. things like an empty sky world, a dissconnected hyrule, lack of enemy variety are problems in the game. otherwise the game has a great story, amazing gameplay, very interesting game components like the stamina bar, the items, etc, you get the point lol.

BrunoBRS

See, I agree with you, but IMO you should be saying, "this game is pushing half of Zelda in the right direction, and taking a step back in the other". You seem to like some of the mechanics and the controls. I agree! But you wish the sky was more like Wind Waker, and the surface more like OoT. If this was the case, the game would probably be a 10 for me. Oh and the frikkin harp needs to be better.

I can understand what you are saying (although I love OoT's world and dont find it bland), and yeah they could be great. But here is the thing. I feel like so much of Skyward Sword's open areas are not actually open. There are very few places you are allowed to walk, cause of quicksand or lava. Which is fine in areas! But not everywhere. I wish they had the Skyward Sword like environments, but with more to it and more open in areas. So basically just add stuff that connects it all, with a town or two and some interesting things, and have some of those parts be less dungeony, but still dangerous. This and/or have far more sky exploration. I think if they had made the sky awesome I wouldnt have much of a problem with the surface, but the sky sucks :P.

Sure both the surface and sky could be bigger and better but I don't have any major complaints about that.

My bigggest concern is the characters. I wish there was more interaction, communication, and relationship building between them. One example would be the Headmaster. Doesn't he want any reports on what's going on with his missing for days daughter? They should have shown his pain of loss/ made him have any along with a bonding of Link over the whole circumstance. Yet I havn't spooken to him since the beggining of the game-the characters are emotionless and disconected.

i like the sky ._. not as impressive as WW's sea, but i still like it.BrunoBRS

Really? What is there to like about it? You can see everything so nothing is a mystery, its not that big, and theres almost nothing to do in it. The sky is a massively wasted opportunity, as the flight (or falling really) was awesome.

[QUOTE="BrunoBRS"]i like the sky ._. not as impressive as WW's sea, but i still like it.NaveedLife

Really? What is there to like about it? You can see everything so nothing is a mystery, its not that big, and theres almost nothing to do in it. The sky is a massively wasted opportunity, as the flight (or falling really) was awesome.

[QUOTE="NaveedLife"]

[QUOTE="BrunoBRS"]i like the sky ._. not as impressive as WW's sea, but i still like it.meetroid8

Really? What is there to like about it? You can see everything so nothing is a mystery, its not that big, and theres almost nothing to do in it. The sky is a massively wasted opportunity, as the flight (or falling really) was awesome.

[QUOTE="NaveedLife"]

[QUOTE="BrunoBRS"]i like the sky ._. not as impressive as WW's sea, but i still like it.meetroid8

Really? What is there to like about it? You can see everything so nothing is a mystery, its not that big, and theres almost nothing to do in it. The sky is a massively wasted opportunity, as the flight (or falling really) was awesome.

meh whatever lol. You guys will continue to feel how you feel and I will feel how I feel. I thought everyone agreed about the sky being super boring and barren, but I guess you guys like it :P.

[QUOTE="meetroid8"][QUOTE="NaveedLife"]

Really? What is there to like about it? You can see everything so nothing is a mystery, its not that big, and theres almost nothing to do in it. The sky is a massively wasted opportunity, as the flight (or falling really) was awesome.

NaveedLife

meh whatever lol. You guys will continue to feel how you feel and I will feel how I feel. I thought everyone agreed about the sky being super boring and barren, but I guess you guys like it :P.

[QUOTE="almossbb"]

this game is absolutly brilliant. its pushing zelda in the right direction. BUT it has some flaws that keep it away from the perfect zelda game. things like an empty sky world, a dissconnected hyrule, lack of enemy variety are problems in the game. otherwise the game has a great story, amazing gameplay, very interesting game components like the stamina bar, the items, etc, you get the point lol.

NaveedLife

See, I agree with you, but IMO you should be saying, "this game is pushing half of Zelda in the right direction, and taking a step back in the other". You seem to like some of the mechanics and the controls. I agree! But you wish the sky was more like Wind Waker, and the surface more like OoT. If this was the case, the game would probably be a 10 for me. Oh and the frikkin harp needs to be better.

you are right lol. my bad. it pushed many things forward, but at the same time it took a step back with what we both mentioned.

[QUOTE="meetroid8"][QUOTE="NaveedLife"]

Really? What is there to like about it? You can see everything so nothing is a mystery, its not that big, and theres almost nothing to do in it. The sky is a massively wasted opportunity, as the flight (or falling really) was awesome.

NaveedLife

meh whatever lol. You guys will continue to feel how you feel and I will feel how I feel. I thought everyone agreed about the sky being super boring and barren, but I guess you guys like it :P.

whats good about the sky is the space you have to fly around, i love the flying its awesome. what i hate was that there is nothing to explore in the sky. if they had some more towns, or bigger islands to explore and put on your map, then the sky would have been so awesome.