Defend It!

[JuicieJ]

I never questioned the legitimacy of Skyward Sword's quests. In your original post, you singled out the Gratitude Crystal side-quest claiming that discovering them were difficult and completing them took actual thought. This statement is wrong, as the population of Skyward Sword is relatively small compared to other games (meaning it won't take that long to talk to everyone, and consequently find all the side-quests) and the dowsing capabilities renders thought useless.

No, it's not wrong. Finding people in Skyloft is not, say, the toughest thing imaginable, but finding the correct people and figuring out the proper solutions requires a fair bit of thought to do. Dowsing doesn't change this. All that does is point you in the right direction. It doesn't tell you exactly where what you're looking for is. The fact that dowsing is also completely optional renders that argument useless.

There's no incentive to roam around because all of the secrets in this game are shoved down your throat as you progress through the game. Sure, you could roam around and explore Eldin Volcano all you want, but you won't find anything different until the story permits you to progress further up the volcano. This is different from previous games (i.e. The Wind Waker or Ocarina of Time) where you could explore a completely different area at whim and discover a cool secret.

I didn't mean there was absolutely no sense of adventure, but it was drastically decreased compared to other installments.

Compared to the classic installments, most definitely, but compared to almost all of the recent titles? Absolutely not. The Minish Cap is the only modern title to have more exploration than Skyward Sword. Honestly, Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask don't have an incredible amount more of exploration in their areas. The only difference is the second half of OoT is somewhat non-linear and you can sequence break in MM (which does not equate to non-linearity).

Stuff is also not forced down your throat. It's well-hidden, and even when it's in plain sight, it's often out of reach and a challenge to get to. There are things literally along the way, yes, but every Zelda title has these things. People heavily overexaggerate how easy it is to find the secrets in this game. It's going to be easy for a long-time veteran, yes, but for a newcomer, it's not going to be that easy. I'm not saying Skyward Sword has an incredible amount of exploration. It doesn't. I'm a bit disappointed that there wasn't more. But the fact of the matter is there is most definitely more exploration in it than in all other modern titles bar TMC. It really irritates me that people constantly ignore this.

You're arguing that difficulty is largely subjective, yet you called out Random Person on "ignoring the overall step-up in difficulty in, well, everything." Perhaps Random Person didn't find Skyward Sword all-to-difficult, I know I certainly didn't.

Difficulty as a whole is subjective, but there are games that are just plain harder than others. Skyward Sword definitely fits this bill compared to nearly every other recent title. With the exception of Spirit Tracks, Zelda has been pathetically easy as of late. (Although The Minish Cap had a pretty decent difficulty level.) It's almost as if Nintendo wasn't trying anymore. SS bumped the difficulty back up. Not everyone is going to find it to have the exact same level of difficulty, but I honestly cannot comprehend how someone could not see how much easier other recent installments are compared to SS.

I immediately recognized the length and detail of your post. I think posts like that deserve respect and a response so I decided to reply to yours. My girlfriend is over (she doesn't like me on the computer when she's over :\) so I didn't have time to respond to multiple people. I guess I'll think twice before responding to you again?

It's not that you shouldn't respond to me. It just seemed kind of odd that I was the only one you called out.

 

[Kirino]

You're also forgetting that Skyloft didn't have too much of a population, leading to less exploration and effort to find side-quests. And the Goddess Cubes were cool I guess, but the fact that you could dowse for them was pretty lame. It would have been advantageous for Nintendo to make it a little more difficult to find the Goddess Cubes. I'm not just talking about liberating the player's ability to dowse for them, but to hide them behind a wall, in a mini-dungeon, etc. That would have really made them interesting.

There were still many places that were hard to find. I remember searching all over Eldin Volcano for a way to find a certain goddess cube. Many of them were still in out of reach places and required exploration to find a way to get to it. Sidequests also required some exploration. In one sidequest, you had to find a baby's rattle. It didn't tell you were it was. You couldn't dowse for it. You had to explore al of Skyloft to find it. It was difficult to find, and it took me alot of exploring.

Anyways, this is a pretty good argument for proponents of linearity in Zelda games. I enjoy a good story in a video game myself, and that -- really -- can only be accomplished if a video game is linear (at least more linear then Zelda veterans would like it). Now there needs to be a blend of sorts between linearity and non-linearity in Zelda Wii U to satisfy across the board (obviously), but I don't think Skyward Sword is a good example of this. Sure, it has a phenomenal story, but the amount of shoving-in-one-direction it did to the player was overwhelming. For example: I should have had the option to complete the Ancient Cistern, Sandship, and Fire Sanctuary in any order I wanted to. The fact that I couldn't was simply a flaw in the game's design.

Fair enough, but it didn't shove you completely in one direction. You could still do the Hero's Song portions in any order, and that was a big part of the game. You could also pick many different diolouge options.

- The fact that you can complete Ocarina of Time's dungeons in different orders makes it more re-playable.
- The fact that you can complete Ocarina of Time's dungeons in different ways makes it more re-playable.
- The fact that Ocarina of Time has a Master Quest (that's actually difficult) makes it more re-playable.
- The Wind Waker's after-game (the photos) makes it more re-playable.
- The fact that you can re-wind time in Majora's Mask makes it more re-playable

I'll stop there. These are facts that make these games objectively more re-playable than Skyward Sword. You could argue that you simply enjoy Skyward Sword more and that makes it more re-playable to you (which is completely fine), but saying Skyward Sword's replayability is no different from other Zelda games is false.

Ocarina of Time didn't come with Master Quest, so that argument makes no sense. I also don't know of any ways to do it's dungeons in different ways. Could you elaborate on that? How does rewinding time in MM make it more replayable? It's just a gameplay mechanic. Hero mode is SS adds more replay value than all of these, and you seem to be completely ignoring it. Also, being able to do the Hero's song portions in any order you want adds replayability. The Thunder Dragon's challenge also adds quite a bit of replayability. Sayng Skyward Sword's replayability is no different from other Zelda games is true.

 

[Koosholts]

Ocarina of Time didn't come with Master Quest, so that argument makes no sense.

I think it does.

I also don't know of any ways to do it's dungeons in different ways. Could you elaborate on that?

I know for a fact you can complete the Water Temple multiple different ways. I suggest talking to MW7 on more details because that dude is a guru on Ocarina of Time.

Hero mode is SS adds more replay value than all of these, and you seem to be completely ignoring it.

I did not completely ignore it. As far as I'm concerned, Hero Mode doesn't change anything other then the damage monsters do and the availability of hearts. How does that add re-playability, you're not doing anything different.

Also, being able to do the Hero's song portions in any order you want adds replayability.

It was pretty depressing that the only non-linear structure in this game ended up in a game breaking glitch, but I guess you're right.

Sayng Skyward Sword's replayability is no different from other Zelda games is true.

I disagree.

 

[Kirino]

I think it does.

No, it doesn't. It wasn't included in the original version of OoT. It was given as a pre order bonus for WW. It didn't come with OoT, so I don't see how that can be used as a valid argument.

I did not completely ignore it. As far as I'm concerned, Hero Mode doesn't change anything other then the damage monsters do and the availability of hearts. How does that add re-playability, you're not doing anything different.

The diolouge is changed slightly as well. It does change alot. You have to be careful, you have to look out for enemies. You have to play the whole game differently . It's a whole new difficulty mode, and provides a real challenge. It's a difficult new mode, and the big increase in difficulty offers alot, and makes the game more replayable.

Also, why did you only respond to part of my comment? You didn't adress many of the points I made.

 

[Koosholts]

No, it doesn't. It wasn't included in the original version of OoT. It was given as a pre order bonus for WW. It didn't come with OoT, so I don't see how that can be used as a valid argument.

To me, it doesn't matter if it was released with the original game or not. It's released now and it's meant to add Ocarina of Time veterans with an increased challenge (which it does. I'm not so sure about Skyward Sword's Hero Mode, but dare I question its difficulty again...). DLC's are not released with the original game, does that make them not part of the game as well?

The diolouge is changed slightly as well. It does change alot. You have to be careful, you have to look out for enemies. You have to play the whole game differently . It's a whole new difficulty mode, and provides a real challenge. It's a difficult new mode, and the big increase in difficulty offers alot, and makes the game more replayable.

Oh, so you just have more difficult enemies, not different enemies? And the difficulty is nulled by the ability to shield bash. They should have at least changed/added some puzzles or something to make it a different experience.

Again, I'm not going to question the difficulty. I personally don't see it as that big of a change, but perhaps you do. Cool :yes:

Also, why did you only respond to part of my comment? You didn't adress many of the points I made.

There was no point to.

 

[JuicieJ]

I did not completely ignore it. As far as I'm concerned, Hero Mode doesn't change anything other then the damage monsters do and the availability of hearts. How does that add re-playability, you're not doing anything different.

I'd call that better than having nothing different at all (i.e. almost every other Zelda game).

It was pretty depressing that the only non-linear structure in this game ended up in a game breaking glitch, but I guess you're right.

Not that this really matters, but you literally have to go out of your way to activate that glitch. You have to go talk to the Goron that was searching for the Thunder Dragon before obtaining all three portions of the song.

 

[Ventus]

I'm not gonna post much in this thread because I'm sort of anti-SS, but allow me to interject a bit.

The dialogue is changed slightly as well. It does change a lot. You have to be careful, you have to look out for enemies. You have to play the whole game differently . It's a whole new difficulty mode, and provides a real challenge. It's a difficult new mode, and the big increase in difficulty offers a lot, and makes the game more replayable.

Erm, just to say here that Hero Mode adds more damage to the enemies, it doesn't change enemy placements or enemy behavior. So if you know Skyward Sword first playthrough, you know Hero Mode. Now, if the player isn't particularly bound to the Wiimote, HM will truly be a new difficulty mode. But to someone who has "mastered" or at least gotten close to mastering SS first playthrough, Hero Mode is absolutely nothing new; every playthrough is the same thing for the most part because, guess what, the enemies do not change in the slightest of ways. Master Quest may have been sloppy to some, but it wasn't barebones like HM.

 

[JuicieJ]

I'm not gonna post much in this thread because I'm sort of anti-SS, but allow me to interject a bit.


Erm, just to say here that Hero Mode adds more damage to the enemies, it doesn't change enemy placements or enemy behavior. So if you know Skyward Sword first playthrough, you know Hero Mode. Now, if the player isn't particularly bound to the Wiimote, HM will truly be a new difficulty mode. But to someone who has "mastered" or at least gotten close to mastering SS first playthrough, Hero Mode is absolutely nothing new; every playthrough is the same thing for the most part because, guess what, the enemies do not change in the slightest of ways. Master Quest may have been sloppy to some, but it wasn't barebones like HM.

Again, I'd say Hero Mode is better than nothing. It's not the best second quest in existence, but I'd rather play a second runthrough with something different rather than nothing.

 

[Cfrock]

As far as I'm concerned, Hero Mode doesn't change anything other then the damage monsters do and the availability of hearts. How does that add re-playability, you're not doing anything different.

It increases the difficulty of the game. Higher difficulty levels are a very easy way of adding replayability to a game. This is why so many people do 3-Heart runs, because they make the game more difficult and give an incentive to play the game again and challenge yourself a bit more.

 

[Random Person]

Read the posts so far, (and reread some). Here's a quick update.

Lack of Exploration
No change since my last post

Prequel
Did not agree with any argument thus far

Difficulty
No change since my last post.

Replayability
Did not agree with any argument thus far.

Changing the Series
The statement someone made about Ghirahim changing the course of predestined events is valid, but its not nearly enough to sway my opinion.

Thanks again for your input guys. I appreciate it.

 

[surferguy7]

Prequel
Did not agree with any argument thus far.

Yeah, ok, I'll respect your opinion for every category except this.

 

[Kirino]

Yeah, ok, I'll respect your opinion for every category except this.

Agreed. It's like he was suspecting SS to be the ultimate prequel to Zelda that explained it completly. It was just another game in the timeline. Even if you do think it was supposed to be a big prequel, it did answer alot of questions, and everything in the story tied in to the main Zelda timeline(except for the Hylia story), while at the same time maintaining an identity of it's own. Skyward Sword was a great prequel. I don't get the argument your trying to make.

 

[JuicieJ]

Agreed. It's like he was suspecting SS to be the ultimate prequel to Zelda that explained it completly. It was just another game in the timeline. Even if you do think it was supposed to be a big prequel, it did answer alot of questions, and everything in the story tied in to the main Zelda timeline(except for the Hylia story), while at the same time maintaining an identity of it's own. Skyward Sword was a great prequel. I don't get the argument your trying to make.

It wasn't a great prequel. RP is right about it not explaining much. But that's not the issue. What you said in the second sentence is.

 

[Random Person]

Update, none of my opinions have changed since the last post. It appears this thread may be on its last legs.

 

[JuicieJ]

Update, none of my opinions have changed since the last post. It appears this thread may be on its last legs.

Just gonna say this, then. You've often criticized people for defending this game by claiming they don't have well thought-out arguments. I'm here to say that's exactly how your OP is.