Why do people feel that Skyward Sword looks disappointing?

There are noticeable differences and similarities which is a good thing.

[QUOTE="Nintendo_Ownes7"]

[QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"] Sort of my sentiment. I loved Oot and MM immensely, but the franchise just needs to rest. Nothing about SS interests me in the least, especially after that turd called TP. goblaa

I know nintendo has been talking about change, I just don't trust them to know what needs changing. I'm really worried were going to be forced to, once again, do the whole game in order, enter dungeons themed around fire, water, ice, sky, desert, and dark, find the same old itmes in each dungeon and use them to defeate a boss. After we collect one "thing" from each boss and travel back and forth between two worlds (time, dark world, skyworld, tiny world, under the sea...whatever) we will fight Ganon and Ganon will have four forms.

We'll get great motion controls and a look that finally actually fits zelda...but what else?

that beef is with many games it has a formula i dont think its smart of nintendo to switch an acclaimed series too much for the sake of 3% of the fanbase

[QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"][QUOTE="Nintendo_Ownes7"]Did you see this video It says the changes Nintendo is implementing.Timstuff

The whole demonstration at E3 was meh to me. Yeah, I know the controls aren't really that bad and it was just a lot of interference, but even when it worked something felt lacking to me. Do I really want to wave my arm around to confuse an eyeball to open a door? That looked beyond dumb. The animations looked extremely jerky. Yes I know Ninty will polish it up, but it indicated to me that this game is still a long ways off. No way this game releases in the first few months of 2011. It will be delayed. It doesn't really matter because I'm not that hyped for it anymore. When compared to all the other stuff at Nintendo's E3, Skyward Sword was probably the most disappointing.

AvIdGaMeR444

I agree. I was very impressed with Donkey Kong Country Returns, Metroid Other M, and especially the 3DS and its lineup. Nintendo was clearly #1 at this year's show all around, however for me it was not because of Zelda. Zelda was actually fairly disappointing for me. It did not make me fee like "gosh darnit I want this game NOW!", but rather "this is the first original Zelda game on Wii, and this is the best they could come up with?" 4 years into the Wii's lifecycle with no Zelda game except for a port of a Gamecube one, and this is what we get. This is not the grand epic Zelda that people were hyping, but rather a low-production value game that is basically just evolving the controls Nintendo made for the Wii port of Twilight Princess and giving us a weird, simplified art style.

So you give up on the series just because of one disappointment? ..,wow... :|

And I love how people are calling TP a turd(as if the actual game was poor) . Keep that hate bandwagon rollin' guys.Shinobishyguy

It was not just the disappointments I had with Twilight Princess. If Skyward Swords had amazed me, it would have been enough to win me back. There is nothing epic or grand looking about Skyward Swords, though, and being epic and grand is what usually gets me excited about a new Zelda game. Even the cartoony Wind Waker managed to get me excited with its massive ocean and high seas action. Skyward Swords however appears to be getting made on a much tighter production budget that Twilight Princess since it's trying to keep the designs simple, and the music in the trailer was straight up cheese. After being spoiled by the orchestrated music in the TP trailer, as well as the much higher production value music of many other games at the time, TP's soundtrack was just plain disappointing and dated sounding.

SS isn't even trying to wow us with music in trailer, so I don't imagine Nintendo will be shelling out for high quality music in the game, let alone voice acting for the in-game dialogue. Expect lots more boring text boxes to be our primary narrative tool yet again, and expect Nintendo to justify it as "an artistic choice. That is, an "artistic choice" that happens to save Nintendo a bunch of money, and it happens to be an inferior and archaic way to convey in-game narrative (cheap SOB). After 10 years of Nintendo being too cheap and lazy to comission a voice acting studio for voice overs, Nintendo is probably still probably stuck in their penny pinching ways.

[QUOTE="AvIdGaMeR444"]

The whole demonstration at E3 was meh to me. Yeah, I know the controls aren't really that bad and it was just a lot of interference, but even when it worked something felt lacking to me. Do I really want to wave my arm around to confuse an eyeball to open a door? That looked beyond dumb. The animations looked extremely jerky. Yes I know Ninty will polish it up, but it indicated to me that this game is still a long ways off. No way this game releases in the first few months of 2011. It will be delayed. It doesn't really matter because I'm not that hyped for it anymore. When compared to all the other stuff at Nintendo's E3, Skyward Sword was probably the most disappointing.

I agree. I was very impressed with Donkey Kong Country Returns, Metroid Other M, and especially the 3DS and its lineup. Nintendo was clearly #1 at this year's show all around, however for me it was not because of Zelda. Zelda was actually fairly disappointing for me. It did not make me fee like "gosh darnit I want this game NOW!", but rather "this is the first original Zelda game on Wii, and this is the best they could come up with?" 4 years into the Wii's lifecycle with no Zelda game except for a port of a Gamecube one, and this is what we get. This is not the grand epic Zelda that people were hyping, but rather a low-production value game that is basically just evolving the controls Nintendo made for the Wii port of Twilight Princess and giving us a weird, simplified art style.

[QUOTE="Shinobishyguy"]So you give up on the series just because of one disappointment? ..,wow... :|

And I love how people are calling TP a turd(as if the actual game was poor) . Keep that hate bandwagon rollin' guys.

It was not just the disappointments I had with Twilight Princess. If Skyward Swords had amazed me, it would have been enough to win me back. There is nothing epic or grand looking about Skyward Swords, though, and being epic and grand is what usually gets me excited about a new Zelda game. Even the cartoony Wind Waker managed to get me excited with its massive ocean and high seas action. Skyward Swords however appears to be getting made on a much tighter production budget that Twilight Princess since it's trying to keep the designs simple, and the music in the trailer was straight up cheese. After being spoiled by the orchestrated music in the TP trailer, as well as the much higher production value music of many other games at the time, TP's soundtrack was just plain disappointing and dated sounding.

SS isn't even trying to wow us with music in trailer, so I don't imagine Nintendo will be shelling out for high quality music in the game, let alone voice acting for the in-game dialogue. Expect lots more boring text boxes to be our primary narrative tool yet again. After 10 years of Nintendo being too cheap and lazy to comission a voice acting studio for voice overs, Nintendo is probably still probably stuck in their penny pinching ways.

[QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"][QUOTE="Nintendo_Ownes7"]Did you see this video interview? It says the changes Nintendo is implementing.

Timstuff

yeah..,cause It's not like SMG2 had an orcestral score or anythi-...oh wait! Shinobishyguy

The thing is, Mario has the casuals, and always has. Nintendo is OK with giving Mario the lion's share when it comes to production values. Zelda was once Nintendo's darling, but the fanbase has been in decline since the Gamecube days. Smaller fanbase = less potential market = cutting corners and trying to broaden the casual appeal. It's a darned shame, because if only Nintendo hadn't botched up Twilight Princess with the lame extra dungeons, stupid trendy brown camera filter, late release date, and lack of voice overs, it could have been the game that really put Zelda back on the map. Instead, it further divided the base, and now Nintendo is trying to make the most risk-free Zelda game they can by cutting even more corners and pushing it at casuals even harder than any Zelda game in the past.

[QUOTE="DillonShwing"]

To answer the original question, people feel Skyward Sword looks disappointing because Nintendo has been rehashing the same exact game for more than 10 years.

2-10-08

I have played all console Zelda titles AND a couple of the handheld versions. I fully side with those who say Zelda is tired out because it is rehashing the same game over and over.

I mean, why should I care about saving Zelda YET AGAIN? There is no character development, no stakes real stakes in the battles, the characters and enemies always seem to be the same, etc. At least with all the new Mario games, they went back to 2D and introduced something NEW with Mario Galaxy. All they could come up with for this new Zelda, after seemingly YEARS of development time (remember TP was actually a GC game), was some motion controlled weapons? I assume there will be the same dungeons with the same types of puzzles and

I have no doubt that gameplay-wise, this will be another winner. But I feel like if I'm going to keep buying and supporting Zelda games, they need to up the stakes. I want story. I want three dimensional characters. I want a feeling like if/when I beat this game the impact will continue through future games. But it won't. This will be the same story, characters, adventure we've seen over and over again.

[QUOTE="goblaa"]

[QUOTE="Nintendo_Ownes7"]Did you see this video interview? It says the changes Nintendo is implementing.

Mario1331

I know nintendo has been talking about change, I just don't trust them to know what needs changing. I'm really worried were going to be forced to, once again, do the whole game in order, enter dungeons themed around fire, water, ice, sky, desert, and dark, find the same old itmes in each dungeon and use them to defeate a boss. After we collect one "thing" from each boss and travel back and forth between two worlds (time, dark world, skyworld, tiny world, under the sea...whatever) we will fight Ganon and Ganon will have four forms.

We'll get great motion controls and a look that finally actually fits zelda...but what else?

that beef is with many games it has a formula i dont think its smart of nintendo to switch an acclaimed series too much for the sake of 3% of the fanbase

I don't know where you're getting 3% from, I don't know where you could get ANY % from unless you did a massive survey.

And zelda being stae i a little more different than other games feeling stale. GoW3 flet a little rehased, but that's a mere three games. Zelda has been rehashing since the SNES. Sequels in most games may feel and play the same, but they don'tuse the exact same stages, bosses, and items every game like zedla does.

I don't think zelda should play like an RPG or oblivion. Anyone who does is insane. But every single zelda game has had the same items, the same dungeons, the same story struture, the same pacing, the same bosses, the same characters...everything. How many times can you go to a mountain and explore a lava-based dungeon? How many times can you blow up that same crack in the wall with bombs? How many times can you use a boomerang to target 4 switches in a specific order? How many times can you deflect ganon's shots with the master sword? how many times can you explore the same hyrule castle surrounded by the zora lake, the desert, the forest, and the mountain? How many times can you go through the temple of time? How many times can you go to the bottom of a lake to enter a water dungeon? How many times can you be told the same story about the same three people blessed by the gods? How many times can you fight a boss that's defeated by the very item you just found? How many times can you go to a shop with EXACTLY three items that you will prolly never buy? How many times can you recieve a magical instrament to cast spells?

Zelda is too predictable. Why not let us do the dungeons in any order we want? Why not do a story totally unexpected? Why not a new map? Either expand it to add new nations; or contract it and give it lots of detail. Why not change the items? Sure keep the basics like bombs and boomerangs, but why not make everything else new? Why not new enemies? Why not make the world worth exploring for more than just heart pieces and ruppes you don't need? I would love to find a mini dungeon that had a hidden item in it.

[QUOTE="2-10-08"][QUOTE="DillonShwing"]

To answer the original question, people feel Skyward Sword looks disappointing because Nintendo has been rehashing the same exact game for more than 10 years.

ZIMdoom

I have played all console Zelda titles AND a couple of the handheld versions. I fully side with those who say Zelda is tired out because it is rehashing the same game over and over.

I mean, why should I care about saving Zelda YET AGAIN? There is no character development, no stakes real stakes in the battles, the characters and enemies always seem to be the same, etc. At least with all the new Mario games, they went back to 2D and introduced something NEW with Mario Galaxy. All they could come up with for this new Zelda, after seemingly YEARS of development time (remember TP was actually a GC game), was some motion controlled weapons? I assume there will be the same dungeons with the same types of puzzles and

I have no doubt that gameplay-wise, this will be another winner. But I feel like if I'm going to keep buying and supporting Zelda games, they need to up the stakes. I want story. I want three dimensional characters. I want a feeling like if/when I beat this game the impact will continue through future games. But it won't. This will be the same story, characters, adventure we've seen over and over again.

[QUOTE="jubino"]

I think it looks just fine. It's the best looking game so far in terms of graphics and colors, and I see no issues with the art style.

Mario1331

wth is in you sig?

That, good sir, would be a bradypodidae, more commonly referred to as...

a three-toed sloth

People here are hammering this game for all the wrong reasons. Zelda doesn't need a good story. It has perfect gameplay and that's timeless. Zelda can't change because it can't get any better. That same gameplay is what got Oot solidified in its #1 position.

And the developers are even trying their hardest to make things different; motion controls and a new art style. That's great. I'm confident that Shigeru Miyamoto, creator of mother****ing mario and zelda, is going to deliver another timeless classic, and surely an AAA. Forget Halo, forget Killzone 3, Zelda SS is where it's at.

[QUOTE="Shinobishyguy"]yeah..,cause It's not like SMG2 had an orcestral score or anythi-...oh wait! Timstuff

The thing is, Mario has the casuals, and always has. Nintendo is OK with giving Mario the lion's share when it comes to production values. Zelda was once Nintendo's darling, but the fanbase has been in decline since the Gamecube days. Smaller fanbase = less potential market = cutting corners and trying to broaden the casual appeal. It's a darned shame, because if only Nintendo hadn't botched up Twilight Princess with the lame extra dungeons, stupid trendy brown camera filter, late release date, and lack of voice overs, it could have been the game that really put Zelda back on the map. Instead, it further divided the base, and now Nintendo is trying to make the most risk-free Zelda game they can by cutting even more corners and pushing it at casuals even harder than any Zelda game in the past.

lol omg proof. do you know how many copies TP sold?

[QUOTE="Mario1331"]

[QUOTE="jubino"]

I think it looks just fine. It's the best looking game so far in terms of graphics and colors, and I see no issues with the art style.

jubino

wth is in you sig?

That, good sir, would be a bradypodidae, more commonly referred to as...

a three-toed sloth

thats so badass

[QUOTE="ZIMdoom"]

[QUOTE="2-10-08"] Someone's obviously never played all the zelda games.Timstuff

I have played all console Zelda titles AND a couple of the handheld versions. I fully side with those who say Zelda is tired out because it is rehashing the same game over and over.

I mean, why should I care about saving Zelda YET AGAIN? There is no character development, no stakes real stakes in the battles, the characters and enemies always seem to be the same, etc. At least with all the new Mario games, they went back to 2D and introduced something NEW with Mario Galaxy. All they could come up with for this new Zelda, after seemingly YEARS of development time (remember TP was actually a GC game), was some motion controlled weapons? I assume there will be the same dungeons with the same types of puzzles and

I have no doubt that gameplay-wise, this will be another winner. But I feel like if I'm going to keep buying and supporting Zelda games, they need to up the stakes. I want story. I want three dimensional characters. I want a feeling like if/when I beat this game the impact will continue through future games. But it won't. This will be the same story, characters, adventure we've seen over and over again.

[QUOTE="Timstuff"]

[QUOTE="Shinobishyguy"]yeah..,cause It's not like SMG2 had an orcestral score or anythi-...oh wait! Mario1331

The thing is, Mario has the casuals, and always has. Nintendo is OK with giving Mario the lion's share when it comes to production values. Zelda was once Nintendo's darling, but the fanbase has been in decline since the Gamecube days. Smaller fanbase = less potential market = cutting corners and trying to broaden the casual appeal. It's a darned shame, because if only Nintendo hadn't botched up Twilight Princess with the lame extra dungeons, stupid trendy brown camera filter, late release date, and lack of voice overs, it could have been the game that really put Zelda back on the map. Instead, it further divided the base, and now Nintendo is trying to make the most risk-free Zelda game they can by cutting even more corners and pushing it at casuals even harder than any Zelda game in the past.

lol omg proof. do you know how many copies TP sold?

Ocarina of Time- 99 (ya unbeatable so anything is a decline)

Majora's Mask- 95

Wind Waker- 96

Twilight Princess- 96 (GC), 95 (Wii)

Ya extreme decline there. Looks like two of the three highest scoring Zeldas were in the last two gens. Why would the fanbase decline if the quality hasn't? Answer: it hasn't. Combine the sales of TP on GC and Wii, you get over 7 million copies sold, about 7.1. Compare that to Ocarina of Time... 7.6 million. Hmmm so it declined 500,000 copies and is still over 7 million.

Looks awesome to be and sure as hell no waggle fest.

Some more examples of how a Zelda game could look in terms of art direction:

Some more examples of how a Zelda game could look in terms of art direction:

Timstuff

Those still feel completly out of place to me.

[QUOTE="Timstuff"]

Some more examples of how a Zelda game could look in terms of art direction:

goblaa

Those still feel completly out of place to me.

Actually, the only one that looks dumb is number 3.

[QUOTE="Timstuff"][QUOTE="ZIMdoom"]

I have played all console Zelda titles AND a couple of the handheld versions. I fully side with those who say Zelda is tired out because it is rehashing the same game over and over.

I mean, why should I care about saving Zelda YET AGAIN? There is no character development, no stakes real stakes in the battles, the characters and enemies always seem to be the same, etc. At least with all the new Mario games, they went back to 2D and introduced something NEW with Mario Galaxy. All they could come up with for this new Zelda, after seemingly YEARS of development time (remember TP was actually a GC game), was some motion controlled weapons? I assume there will be the same dungeons with the same types of puzzles and

I have no doubt that gameplay-wise, this will be another winner. But I feel like if I'm going to keep buying and supporting Zelda games, they need to up the stakes. I want story. I want three dimensional characters. I want a feeling like if/when I beat this game the impact will continue through future games. But it won't. This will be the same story, characters, adventure we've seen over and over again.

2-10-08

[QUOTE="Timstuff"]

Some more examples of how a Zelda game could look in terms of art direction:

goblaa

Those still feel completly out of place to me.

why is everybody trying to turn link into some dark pioneer?the legend of zeld is more mysterious then dark and zelda in the last picture looks emo at best its creepy.........however i would love to play a zelda game with the art concept of the last picture

[QUOTE="2-10-08"][QUOTE="Timstuff"] The problem is that pretty much every other Zelda game is a reboot. It's the same story with slight variations and sometimes new story elements. And whenever we DO get a true sequel, it's usually an aftershot that does not develop the characters or raise the stakes. It's just a new adventure with some of the same characters. The story would probably feel like there's a lot more investment if the could effectively build a story arc across several games.Timstuff

[QUOTE="2-10-08"][QUOTE="Timstuff"] The problem is that pretty much every other Zelda game is a reboot. It's the same story with slight variations and sometimes new story elements. And whenever we DO get a true sequel, it's usually an aftershot that does not develop the characters or raise the stakes. It's just a new adventure with some of the same characters. The story would probably feel like there's a lot more investment if the could effectively build a story arc across several games.Timstuff

[QUOTE="Timstuff"]

[QUOTE="2-10-08"] Zelda's story is that you're supposed to save the princess. Link is like Master Chief, a character who doesn't talk much but reveals himself through his actions. A bad voice actor for Link would absolutely shatter the Zelda image.oldkingallant

I thought Oblivion had really good voice acting. The only problem was that there were only a handful of voice actors to do the voices of a seemingly endless amount of NPC's.

[QUOTE="Timstuff"]

Some more examples of how a Zelda game could look in terms of art direction:

goblaa

Those still feel completly out of place to me.

Then I guess we simply want different things out of the franchise. There's not really anything I can do that will change your mind, but I still know what I want out of the series. I want a believable yet fantastical world, and an epic story that lets us explore it. IMO Nintendo got a lot right with Twilight Princess, and I wish they had further explored the possibilities that going in that direction could offer. One foot in reality, the other in the imagination is my general attitude towards fantasy, and Nintendo was pretty close to that in TP. They just needed to lay off the stupid brown filter and make the world have more fun stuff to do in it, and maybe hold back a bit more on the whimsical aspects (but at least Tingle wasn't in the game).

[QUOTE="Timstuff"]

[QUOTE="2-10-08"] Zelda's story is that you're supposed to save the princess. Link is like Master Chief, a character who doesn't talk much but reveals himself through his actions. A bad voice actor for Link would absolutely shatter the Zelda image.oldkingallant

[QUOTE="goblaa"]

[QUOTE="Timstuff"]

Some more examples of how a Zelda game could look in terms of art direction:

Timstuff

Those still feel completly out of place to me.

Then I guess we simply want different things out of the franchise. There's not really anything I can do that will change your mind, but I still know what I want out of the series. I want a believable yet fantastical world, and an epic story that lets us explore it. IMO Nintendo got a lot right with Twilight Princess, and I wish they had further explored the possibilities that going in that direction could offer. One foot in reality, the other in the imagination is my general attitude towards fantasy, and Nintendo was pretty close to that in TP. They just needed to lay off the stupid brown filter and make the world have more fun stuff to do in it, and maybe hold back a bit more on the whimsical aspects (but at least Tingle wasn't in the game).

How do you know Skyward Sword won't do any of that? Like everyone else, you saw a control demo featuring an area not even in the game. You made up most of your criticisms, and they don't have any basis in the final game.

[QUOTE="2-10-08"][QUOTE="Timstuff"] The problem is that pretty much every other Zelda game is a reboot. It's the same story with slight variations and sometimes new story elements. And whenever we DO get a true sequel, it's usually an aftershot that does not develop the characters or raise the stakes. It's just a new adventure with some of the same characters. The story would probably feel like there's a lot more investment if the could effectively build a story arc across several games.Timstuff

Seriously? Almost ever video game has terrible voice acting. I can't remember the last AAA game I played with GOOD voice acting...

[QUOTE="oldkingallant"][QUOTE="Timstuff"]What was the last AAA game you played that had bad voice acting? This isn't the 90's. Voice acting standards have come a long way, to the point where saying "but the voice actors might not be good!" makes it sound like you are stuck in the past.

Timstuff

How do you know Skyward Sword won't do any of that? Like everyone else, you saw a control demo featuring an area not even in the game. You made up most of your criticisms, and they don't have any basis in the final game.

789shadow

We have the official trailer from Skyward Sword and it looks very similar to the demo in terms of direction. They have chosen a decidedly whimsical art style, and whimsy is something that I sometimes tolerate but do not like in overabundance. Everything looks extremely saturated, simple, and detached from reality, like they heard the criticisms of Twilight Princess being too brown and went too far in the opposite direction. Even Link's character design is noticeably simpler than in TP, with all the little flourishes to sell him as being a real person now being gone. IMO in terms of design, Skyward Swords is a great big step backwards for Zelda. It is not cartoony enough to look as charming as Wind Waker, and it's too wacky looking to be as believable as Twilight Princess. It's just plain "meh," an "meh" is not something I like to associate with Zelda.

[QUOTE="789shadow"]

How do you know Skyward Sword won't do any of that? Like everyone else, you saw a control demo featuring an area not even in the game. You made up most of your criticisms, and they don't have any basis in the final game.

Timstuff

We have the official trailer from Skyward Sword and it looks very similar to the demo in terms of direction. They have chosen a decidedly whimsical art style, and whimsy is something that I sometimes tolerate but do not like in overabundance. Everything looks extremely saturated, simple, and detached from reality, like they heard the criticisms of Twilight Princess being too brown and went too far in the opposite direction. Even Link's character design is noticeably simpler than in TP, with all the little flourishes to sell him as being a real person now being gone. IMO in terms of design, Skyward Swords is a great big step backwards for Zelda. It is not cartoony enough to look as charming as Wind Waker, and it's too wacky looking to be as believable as Twilight Princess. It's just plain "meh," an "meh" is not something I like to associate with Zelda.

So basically, you admit that any criticisms outside of artstyle (which I thought we were done with after WW, for crying out loud) have no basis.

It's just plain "meh," an "meh" is not something I like to associate with Zelda.

Timstuff

Except the entire zelda series looking like that since the NES (I mean in it's concept art, not grpahics...because obvioulsy zelda is not 8bit anymore). You're complaining that zelda looks like zelda.

[QUOTE="Timstuff"]

[QUOTE="2-10-08"] Zelda's story is that you're supposed to save the princess. Link is like Master Chief, a character who doesn't talk much but reveals himself through his actions. A bad voice actor for Link would absolutely shatter the Zelda image.goblaa

Seriously? Almost ever video game has terrible voice acting. I can't remember the last AAA game I played with GOOD voice acting...

[QUOTE="Timstuff"]

It's just plain "meh," an "meh" is not something I like to associate with Zelda.

goblaa

Except the entire zelda series looking like that since the NES (I mean in it's concept art, not grpahics...because obvioulsy zelda is not 8bit anymore). You're complaining that zelda looks like zelda.

[QUOTE="goblaa"]

[QUOTE="Timstuff"]

It's just plain "meh," an "meh" is not something I like to associate with Zelda.

Timstuff

Except the entire zelda series looking like that since the NES (I mean in it's concept art, not grpahics...because obvioulsy zelda is not 8bit anymore). You're complaining that zelda looks like zelda.

And in terms of what the final game looks like, Twilight Princess is the exception to the rule.

[QUOTE="goblaa"]

[QUOTE="Timstuff"]What was the last AAA game you played that had bad voice acting? This isn't the 90's. Voice acting standards have come a long way, to the point where saying "but the voice actors might not be good!" makes it sound like you are stuck in the past.

Timstuff

Seriously? Almost ever video game has terrible voice acting. I can't remember the last AAA game I played with GOOD voice acting...

I played almost all the games you listed (didn't play uncharted 1, killzone 2, and bad compnay 2) and the only ones I would consider to have decent voice acting are uncharted 2 (which is often very sketchy) maybe ME 1&2...maybe, and Monkey Island. Everything else is pretty low quality compared to any other medium. Both MGS and Heavy Rain were some of the worst.

I swear, gamers have such low standards when it comes to voice acting that they'll think anything is good. They're as bad as anime fans.

[QUOTE="Timstuff"]

[QUOTE="789shadow"]

How do you know Skyward Sword won't do any of that? Like everyone else, you saw a control demo featuring an area not even in the game. You made up most of your criticisms, and they don't have any basis in the final game.

789shadow

We have the official trailer from Skyward Sword and it looks very similar to the demo in terms of direction. They have chosen a decidedly whimsical art style, and whimsy is something that I sometimes tolerate but do not like in overabundance. Everything looks extremely saturated, simple, and detached from reality, like they heard the criticisms of Twilight Princess being too brown and went too far in the opposite direction. Even Link's character design is noticeably simpler than in TP, with all the little flourishes to sell him as being a real person now being gone. IMO in terms of design, Skyward Swords is a great big step backwards for Zelda. It is not cartoony enough to look as charming as Wind Waker, and it's too wacky looking to be as believable as Twilight Princess. It's just plain "meh," an "meh" is not something I like to associate with Zelda.

So basically, you admit that any criticisms outside of artstyle (which I thought we were done with after WW, for crying out loud) have no basis.

[QUOTE="Timstuff"][QUOTE="goblaa"]

Seriously? Almost ever video game has terrible voice acting. I can't remember the last AAA game I played with GOOD voice acting...

goblaa

I played almost all the games you listed (didn't play uncharted 1, killzone 2, and bad compnay 2) and the only ones I would consider to have decent voice acting are uncharted 2 (which is often very sketchy) maybe ME 1&2...maybe, and Monkey Island. Everything else is pretty low quality compared to any other medium. Both MGS and Heavy Rain were some of the worst.

I swear, gamers have such low standards when it comes to voice acting that they'll think anything is good. They're as bad as anime fans.

[QUOTE="789shadow"]

[QUOTE="Timstuff"]

We have the official trailer from Skyward Sword and it looks very similar to the demo in terms of direction. They have chosen a decidedly whimsical art style, and whimsy is something that I sometimes tolerate but do not like in overabundance. Everything looks extremely saturated, simple, and detached from reality, like they heard the criticisms of Twilight Princess being too brown and went too far in the opposite direction. Even Link's character design is noticeably simpler than in TP, with all the little flourishes to sell him as being a real person now being gone. IMO in terms of design, Skyward Swords is a great big step backwards for Zelda. It is not cartoony enough to look as charming as Wind Waker, and it's too wacky looking to be as believable as Twilight Princess. It's just plain "meh," an "meh" is not something I like to associate with Zelda.

Timstuff

So basically, you admit that any criticisms outside of artstyle (which I thought we were done with after WW, for crying out loud) have no basis.

The music in the trailer was also used for a Twilight Princess trailer. Also, yes you could just open a door by pressing the A button. In fact, why can't I just win the game by pressing the A button? More on point, are you honestly assuming that you'll have to do that on every door in the game?

Also, I just explained the environment in the demo is not part of the game and was created solely for the demo.

[QUOTE="goblaa"]

[QUOTE="Timstuff"]

It's just plain "meh," an "meh" is not something I like to associate with Zelda.

Timstuff

Except the entire zelda series looking like that since the NES (I mean in it's concept art, not grpahics...because obvioulsy zelda is not 8bit anymore). You're complaining that zelda looks like zelda.

TP is the one that's out of place in the series. These images all feel right together:

Oot:

LttP:

Zelda 2:

SS:

.

What doesn't fit any of those is TP:

[QUOTE="goblaa"]

[QUOTE="Timstuff"]You must be playing the wrong ones then. I can't think of the last high-profile game I played that had bad voice acting unless it was made by Capcom (and even then, they're starting to get better). Uncharted 1 and 2, Killzone 2, Fallout 3, Dragon Age, Mass Effect 1 and 2, Grand Theft Auto 4, Metal Gear Solid IV, Brutal Legend, the Call of Duty games, Red Dead Redemption, Bad Company 1 and 2, Tales of Monkey Island, Sam & Max, Heavy Rain, etc. Timstuff

I played almost all the games you listed (didn't play uncharted 1, killzone 2, and bad compnay 2) and the only ones I would consider to have decent voice acting are uncharted 2 (which is often very sketchy) maybe ME 1&2...maybe, and Monkey Island. Everything else is pretty low quality compared to any other medium. Both MGS and Heavy Rain were some of the worst.

I swear, gamers have such low standards when it comes to voice acting that they'll think anything is good. They're as bad as anime fans.

I have no problem with a game looking dark and having realstic tones...just not zelda because that changes it's identity.

As for voice acting, so many other mediums have better production vaules in VA than games. No game sounds as well voice acted as a movie. No game is as well voice acted as a pixar film, or has the quality of acting seen in any dramtic film. We should be encouraging game developers to do better, not thanking them for finding low-budget nobodies to butcher the game's already crappy script.

[QUOTE="789shadow"]

[QUOTE="Timstuff"]

We have the official trailer from Skyward Sword and it looks very similar to the demo in terms of direction. They have chosen a decidedly whimsical art style, and whimsy is something that I sometimes tolerate but do not like in overabundance. Everything looks extremely saturated, simple, and detached from reality, like they heard the criticisms of Twilight Princess being too brown and went too far in the opposite direction. Even Link's character design is noticeably simpler than in TP, with all the little flourishes to sell him as being a real person now being gone. IMO in terms of design, Skyward Swords is a great big step backwards for Zelda. It is not cartoony enough to look as charming as Wind Waker, and it's too wacky looking to be as believable as Twilight Princess. It's just plain "meh," an "meh" is not something I like to associate with Zelda.

Timstuff

So basically, you admit that any criticisms outside of artstyle (which I thought we were done with after WW, for crying out loud) have no basis.

The game looks like it has low production values because of the graphics and the music? From what Nintendo said, SS is finished besides a few dungeons and graphics. You don't see the production values for it yet because Nintendo isn't finished with the graphics. The graphics were literally the last thing they did with SS. They still have over 6 months to work on it. As for the music, Nintendo said they are making orchestrated music for the new Zelda. It isn't finished yet. Just like SMG2, they probably won't start the music until the end of development. I'm pretty sure you will see doors where you press A to open them. The demo was just for controls.

[QUOTE="Timstuff"][QUOTE="goblaa"]

Except the entire zelda series looking like that since the NES (I mean in it's concept art, not grpahics...because obvioulsy zelda is not 8bit anymore). You're complaining that zelda looks like zelda.

789shadow

And in terms of what the final game looks like, Twilight Princess is the exception to the rule.

Really, Skyward Swords' production art has more in common with Twilight Princess than it does any other game in the series. However, Skyward Swords is a major deviant from the rest of the games in that Link is not even left handed anymore!

EVERY Zelda game has had different looking art from the last one, with the only exception being games that are within the same "series" (like Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask). Acting like they all looked the same but until Twilight Princess decided to be a meanie and break the rules only makes you look like you know nothing about art.

[QUOTE="789shadow"]

[QUOTE="Timstuff"] WTF are you talking about? That concept art has always been changing. You must not know much about art and style.Timstuff

And in terms of what the final game looks like, Twilight Princess is the exception to the rule.

Really, Skyward Swords' production art has more in common with Twilight Princess than it does any other game in the series. However, Skyward Swords is a major deviant from the rest of the games in that Link is not even left handed anymore!

EVERY Zelda game has had different looking art from the last one, with the only exception being games that are within the same "series" (like Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask). Acting like they all looked the same but until Twilight Princess decided to be a meanie and break the rules only makes you look like you know nothing about art.

Are you honestly telling me Twilight Princess looks more similar to that Legend of Zelda art than Windwaker? Seriously? And what the hell was the point of the left-handed comment? To point out that you are a nitpicker whose criticisms still have no basis in reality?

Whats with you guys. You say TP doesn't look like Zelda, yet what is Zelda supposed to look like? WW? SS? OOT? TP has the realistic style OOT had, but with a bigger emphasis of a fantasy look. Going by other games in the series WW doesn't look like Zelda. The Cell Shading, and cartoon-like artystyIe looks nothing like other Zelda games. But that isn't a bad thing at all.