-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Anyone else not really stoked on Skyward Sword?
- Thread starter Oblivion
- Start date
thomasmahler
Moon Studios
To me, Zelda works through a clear, logical formula that has also been used in various other games like Metroid, etc.
I always felt like A Link to the Past was as close to perfection as anything I've seen regarding being the game that it should be. Ocarina of Time was hailed for being a great game, yet I never thought that the actual, simple structure of A Link to the Past was properly ported over to 3d.
Wind Waker was a little bit too different and kind of fell apart at the end. It's just very obvious that they had more content in mind, but needed to wrap shit up and ship it earlier than it should have.
Twilight Princess is a different story. They probably added a ton of the stuff they couldn't do in Wind Waker and the game became much too long. Every year I re-play A Link to the Past at least once or twice, but I can't possibly do that with Twilight Princess. You spend hours in that first town and it takes forever to get Link to wear his tunic to get to the meat of the game. And even then the whole wolf stuff was a failed experiment. Zelda is about sticking to the formula and only committing to the very best ideas that pop up within those rules - less is definitely more here.
The thing that got me excited about Skyward Sword was Aonuma stating that Twilight Princess was indeed too vast, diverged too much from the Zelda formula. There's still plenty that you could do with that formula without ever making it feel boring. Sometimes you hear people worrying about the Zelda formula getting boring, yet they just don't see how much stuff can still be done with it.
The big fear I have with Skyward Sword is that they probably had a handful of good ideas for the motion control stuff and the rest of the game will suffer from it. There's almost no game that really, _really_ improved its gameplay thanks to motion controls. The whole sword-fighting thing will be fun for 1-2 hours, but I'm sure at that point you'd wish to just sit down in your couch and press the damn button instead. Then there will be some neat ideas in the dungeons where you have to twist 'n waggle, but I really hope it's the standard, basic formula that is being honed to perfection again. Then I'm excited.
Oh, and I'm also not a big fan of the art direction either. To me, Zelda = A Link to the Past / Wind Waker. That kinda thing. Realistic Zelda or realistic Zelda mixed with a somewhat CelShade / Watercolor look doesn't really get me excited.
I always felt like A Link to the Past was as close to perfection as anything I've seen regarding being the game that it should be. Ocarina of Time was hailed for being a great game, yet I never thought that the actual, simple structure of A Link to the Past was properly ported over to 3d.
Wind Waker was a little bit too different and kind of fell apart at the end. It's just very obvious that they had more content in mind, but needed to wrap shit up and ship it earlier than it should have.
Twilight Princess is a different story. They probably added a ton of the stuff they couldn't do in Wind Waker and the game became much too long. Every year I re-play A Link to the Past at least once or twice, but I can't possibly do that with Twilight Princess. You spend hours in that first town and it takes forever to get Link to wear his tunic to get to the meat of the game. And even then the whole wolf stuff was a failed experiment. Zelda is about sticking to the formula and only committing to the very best ideas that pop up within those rules - less is definitely more here.
The thing that got me excited about Skyward Sword was Aonuma stating that Twilight Princess was indeed too vast, diverged too much from the Zelda formula. There's still plenty that you could do with that formula without ever making it feel boring. Sometimes you hear people worrying about the Zelda formula getting boring, yet they just don't see how much stuff can still be done with it.
The big fear I have with Skyward Sword is that they probably had a handful of good ideas for the motion control stuff and the rest of the game will suffer from it. There's almost no game that really, _really_ improved its gameplay thanks to motion controls. The whole sword-fighting thing will be fun for 1-2 hours, but I'm sure at that point you'd wish to just sit down in your couch and press the damn button instead. Then there will be some neat ideas in the dungeons where you have to twist 'n waggle, but I really hope it's the standard, basic formula that is being honed to perfection again. Then I'm excited.
Oh, and I'm also not a big fan of the art direction either. To me, Zelda = A Link to the Past / Wind Waker. That kinda thing. Realistic Zelda or realistic Zelda mixed with a somewhat CelShade / Watercolor look doesn't really get me excited.
It's not trolling. It's a bit of hyperbole, but my point stands. The core audience is actually two groups, the first being core gamers that are actually very critical of the product, and the second being the masses that they have the largest influence and are likely to keep buying those games because they're likely unaware of the nitty gritty regarding changes. They just want another fun game to play, and they usually get it because they're not as stingy as some of us gaming forum nerds.Sennorin said:
AceBandage
Banned
enzo_gt said:
I can guarantee you that if the next Mario game was the worst piece of software ever made, neither "hardcore" nor "casual" players would buy it.
Mortrialus
Banned
Truthfully I'm also kind of "Eh. A new Zelda." I felt the same way about Twilight Princess as well. However once I played Twilight Princess I was like "Oh my god this is awesome!"
lostinblue
Banned
Hmm, point taken. I agree with you.enzo_gt said:
My point was that 3D gaming and the concept of "free movement" in 3D were attempted before but Mario 64 got the credit when it did it right. Hence being impactful.
I can see how saying that to JSR is diminishing it though, because it wasn't "badly done" it was just on new IP and not something with the scale or budget of Zelda.
It was Zelda that changed the Paradigm IMO though. I'd also include Ico in that front but it took Shadow of the Colossus for Ico to get to be recognized (and reprinted)
I get that but I still can't credit Halo 3 for that.enzo_gt said:
I thought of saying that it was basically Halo 2 HD which is how I feel about it; it uses the same blueprint and it just tried that proven formula in a new console along with it's established name (very important for community numbers). But I was afraid saying that could be taken in an offensive way in case you were a fan, but I really failed to understand what made Halo 3 that impactful. I think Halo 1 and 2 are certainly had more impact in a general way of seeing stuff.
Didn't realize you were reffering to Unreal Engine as influencial and not just the game in itself.enzo_gt said:
Yes, for sure the whole development scene changed this gen with lots of developers not being able to maintain their own technology anymore. I'm still a little reluctant to name Gears of War as the reason though, I think it was much bigger than that.
Gears of War call to fame for me was mainstreaming the whole third person shooter context, the regular consumer won't even know what the Unreal Engine is, it doesn't need to. But I agree, deep down. (I also don't think it was as impactful, for the consumer as the aforementioned "casual game" poster child's)
Okami kinda did it.enzo_gt said:
I don't think not doing so is a dealbreaker, I'm content with what I usually get and tbh, most consumers expectations fall within what they know, not the unknown (it's the whole story about henry ford saying that if he has asked people what they wanted they would have said "a faster horse"), so if anything something being a bit too different can leave them more unsatisfied than a genre being stale (which I don't believe is the case, but if it was)
I just find it positive to have a few unattainable ones that they keep trying to make work. The moment they lack those Well they need new aspirations. The woods example conveyed that nicely, I don't know if they will ever get it right or if it's attainable even, but I think it would be a shame for them to stop trying stuff when they don't know if it works for sure.
That would be being stale and effectively loosing "something".
I agree.enzo_gt said:
I already said it, if they pop out something like Zelda E3 2004 I'll be over the moon and perfectly content with a installment like TP, that doesn't try to change everything yet again but focuses on being epic instead.enzo_gt said:
Seeing it's their first venture into the HD realm I think they could/should focus on that Scale (in the form of: epic battles on the sunset and a major war between countries going on)
MushroomSamba
Member
AceBandage said:
I don't know about that. You're assuming people largely read reviews or gauge consumer impressions before making purchase decisions. I believe there's a good chunk that'd buy Mario simply because of the title (and rightly so, given its track record).
AceBandage
Banned
Anth0ny said:
There were people that actually enjoyed StH, though. It was no where near the worst game ever made, despite being awful in and of itself.
And 1 million for a mainline Mario game would be a horrible number. That's worse than Wii Music.
MushroomSamba said:
Word of mouth would spread pretty quickly if it was truly a horrible game.
Saying people will buy it simply on name is completely disingenuous.
If that was true, then NSMBWii would have sold the same as SMG. Instead there was an over 10 million unit difference.
People don't just buy it because it's Mario. They buy it because it's fun and because it's good.
If it wasn't fun and wasn't good, people would not buy it.
QueenOfThorns
Member
I don't like the art style at all (I wish they could have tried to make it more like WW) but I'm still looking forward to the game. The new villain is great, and it's worth it for the orchestrated music alone.
FreeMufasa
Junior Member
Great posts lostinblue. Really enjoyed reading the last page.
thomasmahler said:
I can play WRS siting down so I don't see why Skyward Sword would be any different. To me sports games were made better with motion controls. That goes for dance and fitness games too since both existed before the Wii. I even like a few fighting games bettter with them. Some people like racing games better.
An adventure game with motion controls is what a lot of Wii owners wanted years ago. I would bet that Move and Kinect owners would like one too. Fans of the control method don't want it stuck in mini game, fitness, and sports only.
WrenchNinja
Member
I was under the impression that the main reason it sold more is that 2D Mario is an easier sell on people than 3D, with it playing on the nostalgia of the older games.AceBandage said:
I have no problem with change, although it must not be unnecessary. And Zelda needs it, but the mechanical foundation is there. So they need to change it enough to make old school fans pleased they're not just grinding in place, and appeal to new fans that feel the series left them behind. They are changing so much of everything else about the formula and flow of the Zelda 3D series with Skyward Sword that I'm not sure what else I could ask for without it being a completely different franchise. Whether or not Nintendo is doing a great job of communicating just how differently Skyward Sword plays out from past entries, I'm not sure, but I'd say it's a bit of a sham as a Zelda fan to claim Skyward Sword isn't a radical departure.
Note I'm not necessarily endorsing all of these approaches (specifically, you know what I feel on motion combat), but it is there if they haven't been just misleading us:
1. Fundamental re-imagining of the core combat system. It's more methodical and the ability to individually target directionally is a massive shift in approach to combat scenarios. In multiple situations we have seen the dramatic ways that plays out in Skyward Sword demos.
2. The flow is no longer dungeon -> overworld -> dungeon, at least for the underworld. The world is far more interconnected and feels more like one huge dungeon with Metroid-like progression. You will find areas you can't enter yet and will need to return to parts of various locations to access it with items you find later. Such, items will retain usefulness throughout the entire game rather than just in short bursts.
3. Integration of Orchestrated Music.
4. Far less linearity in dungeon traversal. I read an article that said that he found no less than five ways to go through the demo dungeon, several of which included skipping over entire sections if you know what you're doing. This is a critical part of game approach that will make replay value expand and provide an individuality of experience that far surpasses past Zelda 3D titles.
5. There is an actual upgrade system that will allow a level of customization to Link's tools and abilities that have almost never been seen in the series.
6. Wii+ will be fully integrated into the puzzle design. This is a big one. Zelda dungeons have always flaunted their puzzle designs, and they've always had a wide range of quality. Anyone who has played Zack&Wiki knows the potentials that opened up when you add the lateral possibilities of motion controllers to the mix. It's one of the few fucking good ideas for motion controllers. And here is a Zelda game that is going to take full advantage of it.
7. A complete new radical art direction that mixes the cartoonish nature of a Wind Waker with the adult influences of Twilight Princess, directly inspired by the French Impressionist movement and artists such as Paul Cézanne.
The list goes on and on. As a Zelda fan, I don't just accept anything Nintendo throws at me. Spirit Tracks and Phantom Hourglass offended me in many ways. But I also have been wanting the 3D series to change to be less constricting and inhibiting on gameplay possibilities and more return to series roots re: exploration. In all ways, it is seeming like Skyward Sword is changing in ALL the right ways.
Frankly, Skyward Sword is such a massive departure that it's a shame it's being said Nintendo isn't changing as much as some other developers. Most other developers would cry before having to implement so much new shit into their franchises. Imagine if the Gears developer implemented FPS gameplay instead of third person gameplay, changed the game to open world progression and went with a cel-shaded Crackdown-style aesthetic. THAT is the size and scale of changes Skyward Sword contains.
Note I'm not necessarily endorsing all of these approaches (specifically, you know what I feel on motion combat), but it is there if they haven't been just misleading us:
1. Fundamental re-imagining of the core combat system. It's more methodical and the ability to individually target directionally is a massive shift in approach to combat scenarios. In multiple situations we have seen the dramatic ways that plays out in Skyward Sword demos.
2. The flow is no longer dungeon -> overworld -> dungeon, at least for the underworld. The world is far more interconnected and feels more like one huge dungeon with Metroid-like progression. You will find areas you can't enter yet and will need to return to parts of various locations to access it with items you find later. Such, items will retain usefulness throughout the entire game rather than just in short bursts.
3. Integration of Orchestrated Music.
4. Far less linearity in dungeon traversal. I read an article that said that he found no less than five ways to go through the demo dungeon, several of which included skipping over entire sections if you know what you're doing. This is a critical part of game approach that will make replay value expand and provide an individuality of experience that far surpasses past Zelda 3D titles.
5. There is an actual upgrade system that will allow a level of customization to Link's tools and abilities that have almost never been seen in the series.
6. Wii+ will be fully integrated into the puzzle design. This is a big one. Zelda dungeons have always flaunted their puzzle designs, and they've always had a wide range of quality. Anyone who has played Zack&Wiki knows the potentials that opened up when you add the lateral possibilities of motion controllers to the mix. It's one of the few fucking good ideas for motion controllers. And here is a Zelda game that is going to take full advantage of it.
7. A complete new radical art direction that mixes the cartoonish nature of a Wind Waker with the adult influences of Twilight Princess, directly inspired by the French Impressionist movement and artists such as Paul Cézanne.
The list goes on and on. As a Zelda fan, I don't just accept anything Nintendo throws at me. Spirit Tracks and Phantom Hourglass offended me in many ways. But I also have been wanting the 3D series to change to be less constricting and inhibiting on gameplay possibilities and more return to series roots re: exploration. In all ways, it is seeming like Skyward Sword is changing in ALL the right ways.
Frankly, Skyward Sword is such a massive departure that it's a shame it's being said Nintendo isn't changing as much as some other developers. Most other developers would cry before having to implement so much new shit into their franchises. Imagine if the Gears developer implemented FPS gameplay instead of third person gameplay, changed the game to open world progression and went with a cel-shaded Crackdown-style aesthetic. THAT is the size and scale of changes Skyward Sword contains.
But then what would it be..? Your essentially describing a game that isn't catered to anyone, just a blank product put out that you have described as simply being bad. All games are catered to a specific audience. The Mario series in particular, is increasingly catered to casuals, and still minimally catered to the hardcore (MK7 having the largest ratio of hardcore to casual catering). The Mario brand can sell on the name alone. The masses do not read reviews, nor do parents buying their children games. They buy by name and popularity.AceBandage said:
I would have to respectfully disagree here. So much was changed since Halo 2 that it led to the initial backlash for Halo 3, which was felt everywhere. I don't take anything personally, you are indeed correct, Halo 1 has had about 100x the influence of any other Halo game, I'm just saying that the community integration bit has set standards in the industry that others are trying to replicate. That aspect, isolated from what people may individually think about all the other parts of Halo 3, was indeed impactful to the industry. It was an evolution of sorts from Halo 2, but I think it really caught on once Bungie.net updated for Halo 3. Probably more specifically, the Bungie.net integration in Halo 3 was impactful to the industry.lostinblue said:
Yeah, it was bigger than just the game, but were it not for Gears' success, devs would not have converted to UE3 with the same degree. For the consumer perhaps it isn't as impactful, but it did breed the wave of UE games (not confined to shooters) that we got across so many platforms. Gears is that game I get hyped for only very close to release, then buy it and enjoy greatly the first or second run through, and then I never want to be associated with it ever again. But that's another topic.lostinblue said:
I think this is a very good perspective at game development, continually trying to put stuff out there to see what sticks, and continually trying to refine what they have in front of them to perfect their vision. Unfortunately, many devs do not have the resources to risk these controversial or "half-baked" ideas, as sometimes the entire studio is at risk. For instance, Blur from Bizarre Creations tried so many things and did so many things right trying to make "the Call of Duty" of racing games, but there was no opportunity to refine or right their wrongs, and now my favourite video game developers are gone as a result, because a series of games they made tried something radically different from what they do best, PGR.lostinblue said:
Amir0x said:
I will add to that the NPC interaction/relation a-la Majora's Mask making a return.
http://www.1up.com/news/eiji-aonuma-wraps-zelda-skyward
lostinblue
Banned
I'll go by what you're saying instead of my previous point and I'll explain; I'm not an online person nor a FPS guy, I tend to play 2/3 FPS's per gen and rarely if ever touch the community and multiplayer side of things, so I actually played the single player campaign, finished it and said "heh, Halo 2 HD" and I'm sure I didn't go online with it because my X360 is downstairs and my wireless router is upstairs, so I never managed to link it to the internet (and since I'm not an "online" person, I never felt the need to)enzo_gt said:
I feel my weird habits have come to hunt me but it's like it is. From the moment you say it's not Halo 2 online and it went so much further I'll have to take your word for it. But I'm still glad I asked and you explained. Thanks.
Yes, from the beginning of the discussion that I was more focused on real impact on the way costumer sees things, that in time makes developers to have to adapt.enzo_gt said:
But I realized, when you made that point about having mentioned Gears because of UE3 that you looked more for the "inception" point of stuff. Just like in that sense the game that sprouted the seed for cel shading certainly wasn't Wind Waker but Jet Set Radio, no doubt.
Somewhat different vision, but very interesting nonetheless. I see where you're coming from.
Hmmm, I think above else there's a leadership problem in this industry.enzo_gt said:
When I was a trainee at some big publicity company branch I remember one of the things that the big honcho told me and sticked with me was that designers were bad at managing stuff, because they were all for spending a little more time and money on something than it was worth and loosing sight of the big picture (thus missing deadlines and seeing they were going under, if they were managing this company), so they really needed some "boss-figure" to boss them around whilst looking at the finish line, not disregard the process of creation but looking at an idea and knowing wether it would be feasible given the conditions.
I believe that is very true to videogames, everything that doesn't work and isn't possible to work accordingly in the time given should be stripped to the basics, and speaking of basics, never lose sight of them they have to be the most polished part of the games for they're their sole foundation.
Of course, that brings other problems as "bosses" not always see the value or extra time and money being worth investing on something to make it better "will it sell better that way?" but still, I think "directors" and "producers" (the team's boss figures) are often the one's that can't stop having ideas and stuff that they want to integrate bringing the overall quality of something down.
Regarding Blur I fear Activision had something to do with it, they greenlit it (a bad idea) after all; I suspect they already had a lot of pressure on their backs, sadly.
I wish someone had bought them too.
AceBandage
Banned
Brera said:
Holy shit...
It's 2006 all over again!
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
That's why I'm scared....its too good to be true...Amir0x said:
Then again, Mario Galaxy turned out as good as we hoped.
nincompoop
Banned
Xbox 360 will save us all!MYE said:
*RRODs*
Fuck.
bluedeviltron
Member
Most anticipated game of 2011.
AceBandage
Banned
BY2K said:
I'm more interested in how the "gameplay looks ancient" considering what the majority of games are these days are based on Doom...
Smiles and Cries
Member
not sure... Zelda has become a habit buy for me
can't say I'm hyped as I was a few months ago
can't say I'm hyped as I was a few months ago
AceBandage
Banned
BurntPork said:
Just since the OP.
Dice
Pokémon Parentage Conspiracy Theorist
Since when is anyone ever talking about cutscenes when they mention bad animation? Not that the animation in those cutscenes is particularly amazing. I guess it's okay for the limitations of the system? I don't quite know how much that relates to animation quality but I'd say MGS games on PS2 had it beat.BY2K said:
It's more a matter of flow and refinement. Once you are used to something more natural, going back to something clunky feels archaic. Watching this game is like watching Halo 1 multiplayer or GTA3.Orayn said:
AceBandage
Banned
Dice said:
In what way?
It has the deepest combat system and the best item system of any Zelda before it...
AceBandage
Banned
Dice said:
The genre...
And what genre is that?
You mean games like Oblivion that share basically no similarities to Zelda?
Or to Okami or Darksiders that are similar in some ways, but are basically just poor copies that have unique styles?
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
Oh how I wish Zeldalike was a genre that could actually be compared against. That would be a world I would like to live in.Dice said:
Dice said:
Its okay for the limitations of the Wii but the PS2 has it beaten? lol
And what the hell does animation have to do with the Wii's power?
Reminds me of kids back in the day saying that nintendo's chip's couldnt render realistic graphics.
Dice said:
Holy shit the trolling is really flowing hard in here.
Someone please post the Homergoingincircles.gif
It perfectly sumarizes this thread
How so? Action-adventure has been pretty dormant if you ask me. I mean, you've got Shadow of the Colossus, Okami, Batman, and Darksiders for close-ish comparisons, and Assassin's Creed, Devil May Cry and God of War less directly. Who's really leaps and bounds ahead of Zelda in the genre?Dice said:
Thread asking people about their most anticipated games got answers based on hype and expectations. Thread about the new Zelda game looking like poop gets grumpy cynics and mature gamers who like mature games and hate motion control.BY2K said:
TheExplodingHead
Banned
Amir0x said:
Again, the core problem to this optimism is if the motion controls function absolutely flawlessly. So far I haven't seen one Wii game yet that does it, specific in extremely precise timing scenarios...and I'm referring to motion rather than pointer which SS will rely heavily on. If they don't function properly than the foundation is tainted from the start, I hope I'm wrong but I'm seeing it being a slight-to-significant issue. The only way around it is to dilute the actual precision timing, make windows of opportunity easier and otherwise create a reasonable buffer for the controls to delay/lag/be less overall responsive.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
You know how Mass Effect 2 got voted GOTY even though every thread about the franchise is filled with people complaining? Same principle.BY2K said: