Something went wrong. Try again later

Giant Bomb Review

470 Comments

The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword Review

4
  • Wii

For mostly better and only a little bit worse, Skyward Sword is the best Zelda game in years, and makes a strong case for motion controls when done right.

An early boss brutally teaches you to avoid telegraphing attacks.
An early boss brutally teaches you to avoid telegraphing attacks.

The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword is Nintendo’s closing argument on motion controls with Wii, especially as it relates to traditional games. It seems fitting that saving the world alongside Link will, for many of us, act as the first and last time we spend dozens of hours with a game inside our Wiis.

And boy, how far we’ve come. It takes only minutes with Twilight Princess again to understand how tacked on those motion mechanics were, and Skyward Sword’s evolutionary leaps only compound the idea that we should have played Link’s last adventure with a GameCube controller in both hands. How you come into Skyward Sword partially depends on how you took to Link the last time. Top to bottom, I found Twilight Princess painfully boring, which is, perhaps, a fate worse than bad. My reaction was fueled by a combined indifference to the game’s uninspiring world, characters, and gadgets, and the tepid, half-hearted implementation of motion to make the mechanics more physical.

Especially as it relates to the last point, Skyward Sword could not be more different. It’s not just the added fidelity from Motion Plus that makes the difference, it’s that your physical actions are truly meaningful when it comes to engaging in just about every combat scenario in Skyward Sword. The very first enemies in the game will beat your ass to the ground if you’re not reading their moves, and Skyward Sword quickly teaches players that “waggle” will not work here--period. To be successful in combat, reacting to the placement of each enemy’s hands is of utmost importance, and while one becomes extremely adept at taking out the early combatants after a few hours, from start to finish, Skyward Sword asks much of your wrist. When the credits rolled, my hand ached, and it felt great.

Combat never becomes difficult, but remains challenging, as you’re constantly tasked with reacting to enemy actions (i.e. placing their sword to the left) with your own (i.e. slashing your sword to the right). Early on, the enemies are very blatant about showing weaknesses. That's less true later, forcing you to spend several failed encounters sussing out various “tells." In one case, a lizard appears to be hiding its weak arm on the left, when in reality you must swing around from the right--a sleight of hand. Furthermore, for him to even show off that weak point, you must swing away a few times and force him into a defensive posture. The most satisfying encounters are when enemies swap tells over and over, asking players to be extraordinarily quick with a response, and this becomes more demanding over time. The game is always reading your sword in relation to the enemy, and if you telegraph an attack, enemies will smack back.

Get to know your sword well, as it's basically a living companion.
Get to know your sword well, as it's basically a living companion.

Link’s sword is front and center here, with only a few of the gadgets playing into combat. Mastery of the sword is of utmost importance. It’s strange to spend so much time talking on and on about combat in a Zelda game, but it’s no longer about smashing on the attack button anymore. Quite literally, you are part of combat, and motion controls, done well, provides a satisfaction that wouldn’t be possible any other way. This is the finest example yet.

One facet of modern games Nintendo’s dodged is overcomplicated design, focusing on a simplicity that appeals to a larger audience. The Zelda series has always been described as an “action RPG,” but in light of what the RPG has become with games of immense depth like The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim, Zelda has become more RPG lite. And that’s fine! Nintendo can contently stay in its corner, while Bethesda tackles another. But Skyward Sword takes steps to address the gap and falls short. The game includes a forgettable element of potion-crafting and item-upgrading, a case of good ideas that don’t go far enough. Providing such a tiny amount of customization that’s also built upon the same grinding mechanics of other crafting systems (prepare to catch lots of bugs, and read descriptions of what those bugs are every single time!) meant I only ended up upgrading when I just happened to have the right materials, and never bothered the rest of the game. It doesn’t help that Skyward Sword’s isn’t particularly tough, which isn’t outright a bad thing, but in the context of creating upgrade desire, not dying more than once or twice didn’t create much motivation.

Some depth would have gone a long way here, especially if players could have any customization of Link's sword, the weapon he spends the most time with in the game. The sword's path is all story-driven, and that makes it difficult to forge a unique identity through upgrades. It ends up feeling like you’re working way harder for upgrades that would have been found naturally in a dungeon in any other Zelda game.

It’s hard to overlook other areas where Skyward Sword doesn’t play catch up, too. It’s unacceptable now that Link doesn’t have access to any catch-all quest log. Sure, the replacement for Navi, the robotic Fi, will provide you hints on where to go next, but that only relates to the primary goal, and she does not keep a database of side quests stumbled upon while exploring Skyloft. Characters have conversation icons above their heads if they have anything to say, but it’s contingent upon you to either resolve a side quest when you encounter it, or make a note of and come back. Mostly, I just never came back.

There’s plenty to keep you busy, however. Even if you don’t touch anything but the main storyline, Skyward Sword will take you well over 30 hours to complete, and if you want to see everything, that number could easily double. It’s a packed journey, and while it’s one that plays with some of the same tropes the series has become known for--Link, Zelda, evil, Triforce, forest, desert, volcano--the world of Skyloft, situated in the clouds, feels genuinely refreshing. What’s old feels mostly new again, thanks largely to some truly devious, changing dungeon design. None of the dungeons are particularly long, there’s not a single “bad” one, and the more active combat provides a welcomed contrast to puzzle barrage.

When in doubt, take a deep breath and look around for clues.
When in doubt, take a deep breath and look around for clues.

An early puzzle asks you to recreate a specific motion that wouldn’t be possible without Motion Plus, and it took me over 20 minutes to come up with the solution, purely because I’d never encountered something like it before. You’re constantly doing new everything here, and it’s the moments when the designers most daringly break from the past (ironic, given the game’s “birth of a legend” branding) that Skyward Sword makes the game worth playing, even if you’ve grown tired of Zelda at this point. My favorite dungeons involved playing with time, where Link will move from room to room, switching between the past and the present to solve puzzles and avoid enemies. Creatures spawn in and out of reality in real-time, so rather than having to fight them, you can move time objects out of their vicinity--and poof! You’re forced to think about the environment in entirely new ways, and ways that often don’t feel very Zelda-like.

And that’s one of the weird things about playing a Zelda game, as it’s impossible to play a Zelda game without acknowledging it exists in a large vacuum of other Zelda games. It’s not unlike what has happened to Call of Duty, in which many devoted players are simply looking for more Call of Duty, rather than a complete reinvention. Coming to terms with the latest game becomes a nostalgic balancing act of understanding the latest game in relation to itself, where it's come from and everything surrounding it.

Skyward Sword doesn’t do itself any favors in taking its sweet time getting started, and longer before introducing you to some of its most creative highlights. Designer Shigeru Miyamoto once said “the first 30 minutes of a game is the most important,” and Skyward Sword fails to pass that test. It takes several hours before you’re given any sense of real freedom, which is too bad, as the game manages to merge the sublime openness of the sea from Wind Waker (without the Triforce madness!) with the directed fun of most other games, as it's easy to just keep moving forward without much fuss. And by the time you start seeing what the designers really have in store for you (wait until you get to the pirate section, where your boat is able to...well, you’ll see), you actually don’t want it to stop, even if you’re able to constantly, cynically predict when the game will ask you to find just One More Thing before it's all over.

Good luck skydiving, one of the game's most frustrating bits.
Good luck skydiving, one of the game's most frustrating bits.

Perhaps the most surprising disappointment is how little control players have over the game’s central instrument, a harp. If you’re going to call back to one of Ocarina of Time’s most memorable features within a game that makes such exquisite use of the new options afforded by Motion Plus, you’d think the designers would come prepared with something altogether unique. That’s not the case. Though Link learns several songs for the harp over the course of the game, you have no choice over which one to play, and playing anything involves haphazardly waving the Wii remote back and forth.

Even in Skyward Sword’s lowest of lows (don’t get me started on a late sequence involving swimming underwater and collecting musical notes for 30 minutes), the game benefits from the prettiest art direction since Wind Waker. The game seamlessly transitions between various degrees of an impressionistic painting, based on where objects are in the foreground and background. And while I detest the meme “it’s good for a Wii game,” at the point where we’re beginning to gripe about the limitations of our high-definition consoles, it’s a testament to the art direction that I immediately forgot the hardware's aging technology after a few minutes of play. Skyloft is an extraordinarily pretty place to explore.

Skyward Sword is simultaneously a very good Zelda game and a rather great adventure game. It has some of the most inventive dungeons the series has ever known, sports the most impactful changes to the combat since Z-targeting, introduces wrinkles to the Zelda mythology that will force fans to rethink the entire series, and will have you gawking at it constantly, 480p 'n all. But the series finds itself facing an identity crisis, as it flirts with expanding what has defined the series without abandoning its charming but waning simplicity. Zelda doesn’t need to become something else to maintain relevance, but at a certain point, when “a brand-new great Zelda game” isn’t enough, there’s reason to pause.

Patrick Klepek on Google+

470 Comments

Avatar image for ben99
Ben99

1199

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Edited By Ben99

those Japanese with their feminine boy characters. I don't get it. What are they pedos?

Avatar image for superkenon
Superkenon

1730

Forum Posts

1141

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 8

Edited By Superkenon

It's really dumb that there exists this obligation to cater to Metacritic, so I'm glad Giant Bomb just does it its own way. Even if you want to believe 80% is a bad score, here in the world of Giant Bomb 4/5 stars does not equal that. I don't care if Metacritic thinks it does.

I was able to tell that Patrick enjoyed his time with Skyward Sword, and I'm not sure how it reads to anyone as anything but a recommendation. Maybe his musings threw people off the scent? I don't even agree with him on every point, but I enjoyed hearing his thoughts.

Most importantly, when done reading his impressions I found myself wanting Skyward Sword more than ever. I can hardly call that a bad review!

Avatar image for boiglenoight
Boiglenoight

605

Forum Posts

154

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 3

Edited By Boiglenoight

@Phenwah said:

@keef said:

Check out Giant Bomb's page on Metacritic.

http://www.metacritic.com/publication/giant-bomb?filter=games

Giant Bomb rates on a 5-star scale. What GB calls 2/5, IGN would call 70%.

Not only that. It's interesting to see what games GB gives a "100," vs. an "80". Mortal Kombat vs. D.C. got 5 stars, for example. Bad Company 1 received 5 stars, but Bad Company 2 received 4. I think people should read reviews in order to make informed purchases, but in the realm of coffee talk, no one who's played both would rate Bad Company 1 over Bad Company 2 on purely a graded score.

Avatar image for mnzy
mnzy

3047

Forum Posts

147

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By mnzy

@thehowlingman said:

I still ca'nt fucking believe this... 4 goddamn stars? You're saying that the newest LEGEND OF ZELDA game, that the nintendo community has been waiting for for HALF A DECADE, is only 4 FUCKING STARS? According to you this game is as bad as CALL OF DUTY MODERN WARFARE FUCKING 3... i'm so fucking pissed off right now, fuck you

Are you really serious? And you are a premium member here. That makes me sad, GB was free of BS like this for a long time.

Avatar image for originalgman
originalgman

306

Forum Posts

557

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By originalgman

After playing two and a half hours of Skyward Sword from the beginning last night, through the setup and up to the first dungeon-y area, I can say definitively that anyone who enjoys the Legend of Zelda will enjoy this game. This is still one of those games, no two ways about it. The weirdest things to get used to are Link's ability to sprint, vault up walls, and shimmy, as well as shield durability. The combat has been described ad nauseam, and yeah, it's pretty cool. So all those reviews out there are pretty much just gauges for how much each critic still enjoys the Zelda formula. If for some reason the ITEM GET chest-opening music makes you sigh instead of grin (the version in this game is great!), then I can only assume the reasons you felt this game was too similar to its predecessors were mundane, surface-level things like bomb bags and a talking companion. Characters have never been more expressive, lively, and interesting in any other Zelda game. The world is colorful, the controls are tighter than they've ever been, blah blah Zelda.

If you wanted another Batman or Nathan Drake after 2 years, get those games. If you've been patiently waiting 5 years for that game that sends a shiver down your spine when the title screen music starts playing, then you've probably been waiting for Skyward Sword, and it's worth the wait. Trust me. Otherwise you probably want to wander around a barren mountainside for hours on end skinning wolves, in which case you're probably playing Skyrim instead of reading this. Enjoy.

Avatar image for flappy
Flappy

2415

Forum Posts

20

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Edited By Flappy

Like many others before me, I'm almost a bit scared for Mr. Klepek...Oh well! You can do it, Patrick! Fend off the haters with your awesome hair!

Avatar image for strikealight
StrikeALight

1275

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By StrikeALight

@Gamer_152 said:

@Pr1mus said:

@GaspoweR said:

@Gamer_152 said:

I don't mind people disliking Patrick's review or disagreeing with him but some of the comments here are delusional and ridiculously hyperbolic. I thought the Giant Bomb community was free of this sort of nonsense but I guess not. Still, it's good to see that what is probably the majority of people are trying to be sensible about this. Good review Patrick.

Ridiculously hyperbolic sounds about right. Thank you, sir.

There's a lot of account in these comments that were created yesterday and lots of others that are barely ever active and just happened to come and spit their crap most likely courtesy of metacritic. The people of GB are mostly just fine.

Yeah, I agree. I guess I just hadn't seen this stuff creeping in so much before and thought that even the less active members of the community would be more sensible than this. It looks like there's even a little more of this rubbish since the last time I was here.

I hope Patrick is having a good laugh at all of the idiots in this thread. Though because of the shitty way metacritic calculates reviews, Giant Bomb currently sits at the very bottom on the list.

Avatar image for depth
Depth

363

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Depth

@thehowlingman: HAHAHAHA

Avatar image for gamer_152
gamer_152

15033

Forum Posts

74588

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 71

User Lists: 6

Edited By gamer_152  Moderator
@Pr1mus said:

@GaspoweR said:

@Gamer_152 said:

I don't mind people disliking Patrick's review or disagreeing with him but some of the comments here are delusional and ridiculously hyperbolic. I thought the Giant Bomb community was free of this sort of nonsense but I guess not. Still, it's good to see that what is probably the majority of people are trying to be sensible about this. Good review Patrick.

Ridiculously hyperbolic sounds about right. Thank you, sir.

There's a lot of account in these comments that were created yesterday and lots of others that are barely ever active and just happened to come and spit their crap most likely courtesy of metacritic. The people of GB are mostly just fine.

Yeah, I agree. I guess I just hadn't seen this stuff creeping in so much before and thought that even the less active members of the community would be more sensible than this. It looks like there's even a little more of this rubbish since the last time I was here.
Avatar image for ballblaster
ballblaster

89

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By ballblaster

@masterpaperlink: Fans don't need reviews, they should buy the game without reservation. You are confusing fan with fanboy.

Avatar image for deactivated-590b7522e5236
deactivated-590b7522e5236

1918

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

@Pr1mus said:

@GaspoweR: Because people are shit!

I can't wait for the day game reviews will reach the same status as movie reviews. Where movie reviewer proceeds to destroy the transformers movies and where people then proceed to make these movies some of the biggest blockbuster success of all time because EXPLOSIONS MAN!!! And where only the people that actually need real purchasing advice will read reviews and keep it classy.

I'll never understand the fanboy who wants a review made by a fan for a fan... how useless is that!

To be fair... (the way i see it is) the most relevant opinion to a fan is that of another fan (how they receive the game will be closest to a person of a similar mindset), so i can understand the value of a review by a fan... Sort of.

Having said that, those type of reviews belong on system specific/ fan sites (gonintendo etc..) where that is the audience there catering to. People who love Zelda who are demanding a fan of Zelda to review the game (on a site like giantbomb) are idiots. They aren't the ones this review is aimed at, people who have ambiguous/ general taste who may or may not have played a previous Zelda WILL find this review useful. To the guy who played every Zelda and loves every single one, theres nothing for you here, points of contention like a slow opening are par for the course, hell you're probably willing to accept 20 hours of filler because your patience for the series has reached absurd amounts. If people are such a huge fan of something then they should seek the place where they fit, instead of crying because they're the minority and aren't catered to.

Avatar image for thehowlingman
thehowlingman

62

Forum Posts

21

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

Edited By thehowlingman

I still ca'nt fucking believe this... 4 goddamn stars? You're saying that the newest LEGEND OF ZELDA game, that the nintendo community has been waiting for for HALF A DECADE, is only 4 FUCKING STARS? According to you this game is as bad as CALL OF DUTY MODERN WARFARE FUCKING 3... i'm so fucking pissed off right now, fuck you

Avatar image for kollay
kollay

2170

Forum Posts

49

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 6

Edited By kollay

Played a little up to the point where Link finally embarks on his main mission, and y'know, it's another Zelda game. Flying controls were a little blegh, though...

Avatar image for ballblaster
ballblaster

89

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By ballblaster

Look, everyone is thinking it so lets just cut to the chase: Skyward Sword is the corn kernel atop a huge steaming turd. If Wii games were on an absolute scale, 5 stars being the best current gen offerings, this game would score 4/5th's of a star.

Nintendo fanboys need to take their 30 year-old onesies off and put on a pair of f---ing pants for chrissakes.

Avatar image for tehflan
TehFlan

1954

Forum Posts

693

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 11

Edited By TehFlan
@dudeglove said:

Just so you know, Zelda games are never actually as good as you remember them to be.

I played through Ocarina of Time a couple months ago, and I assure you that you're wrong.
Avatar image for bog
BoG

5390

Forum Posts

42127

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 5

Edited By BoG

Attention y'all who be hatin': 
This is a SUBJECTIVE review. It's his opinion, and every point he makes is completely valid. I've played the game as much as the rest of you, but all the flaws sound... expected, given it's a Zelda game. Based on this very positive review, I'm still really excited to jump back into Hyrule. 
Thanks, good Patrick.

Avatar image for gaspower
GaspoweR

4904

Forum Posts

272

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 2

Edited By GaspoweR

@Pr1mus said:

@GaspoweR said:

@Gamer_152 said:

I don't mind people disliking Patrick's review or disagreeing with him but some of the comments here are delusional and ridiculously hyperbolic. I thought the Giant Bomb community was free of this sort of nonsense but I guess not. Still, it's good to see that what is probably the majority of people are trying to be sensible about this. Good review Patrick.

Ridiculously hyperbolic sounds about right. Thank you, sir.

There's a lot of account in these comments that were created yesterday and lots of others that are barely ever active and just happened to come and spit their crap most likely courtesy of metacritic. The people of GB are mostly just fine.

Let me guess...most of these new people probably came from looking at the Metacritic score and then proceeded to create an account just to make their point known. I just find it incredibly moronic why they would start bashing on the review when it was something they themselves haven't even played yet. In addition, I don't get why they would be hating on the review when Patrick said and I quote that "it is a very good Zelda game and rather a great adventure game?" Are they just so caught up with nitpicking on certain things not being mentioned and most probably the score even though they would not admit it if asked?

Avatar image for pr1mus
pr1mus

4158

Forum Posts

1018

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 4

Edited By pr1mus

@GaspoweR said:

@Gamer_152 said:

I don't mind people disliking Patrick's review or disagreeing with him but some of the comments here are delusional and ridiculously hyperbolic. I thought the Giant Bomb community was free of this sort of nonsense but I guess not. Still, it's good to see that what is probably the majority of people are trying to be sensible about this. Good review Patrick.

Ridiculously hyperbolic sounds about right. Thank you, sir.

There's a lot of account in these comments that were created yesterday and lots of others that are barely ever active and just happened to come and spit their crap most likely courtesy of metacritic. The people of GB are mostly just fine.

Avatar image for gaspower
GaspoweR

4904

Forum Posts

272

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 2

Edited By GaspoweR

@Gamer_152 said:

I don't mind people disliking Patrick's review or disagreeing with him but some of the comments here are delusional and ridiculously hyperbolic. I thought the Giant Bomb community was free of this sort of nonsense but I guess not. Still, it's good to see that what is probably the majority of people are trying to be sensible about this. Good review Patrick.

Ridiculously hyperbolic sounds about right. Thank you, sir.

Avatar image for gaspower
GaspoweR

4904

Forum Posts

272

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 2

Edited By GaspoweR

@TheHBK said:

@Blaz3 said:

I'm still unsure as to why a full star came off due to the lack of speech, occasionally repetitive side missions and the inclusion of a rather dramatic, but not genre changing system. This system sounds to be very well done, keeping Skyward Sword a Zelda game, but easing it into a new style of gameplay.

Taking skyrim for example, I've run into numerous ai bugs and glitches which hugely detract from the experience, the combat system is just as repetitive as it always was, enemies are more or less the same, texture pop-ins galore, tediously boring side quests which all end up feeling pointless at the end and a general feeling that this is really oblivion 1.5 with far superior graphics, a few ai improvements, bugfixes and a new story and off you go.

To take another stellar example, Uncharted 3, which is also a spectacular game, manages to retain a 5/5 stars, which the review is basically just praise to Uncharted 2 and basically just says that nothing much has changed apart from story and a few multiplayer enhancements.

If these 2 can score a 5/5, I fail to see how the minor gripes in Skyward Sword warrant a 4/5, I'm disappointed Patrick, rethink your review, it's bad.

I don't know, you kinda convinced me that Skyrim and Uncharted may be deserving of 4 stars. But the thing is that you play the game, you add up all those things and you can give it a mathematical score. Or just play, step back and say, "this game felt like x number of stars." I mean, I have been playing Skyrim and Uncharted and they felt like 5. From what i read, while zelda may have the similar issues of just a few things wrong with it, the overall experience may not leave you feeling as great as those first two games do. Maybe you can form your own opinion when the game is out.

Also the people who reviewed the games were all different people.

Avatar image for gaspower
GaspoweR

4904

Forum Posts

272

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 2

Edited By GaspoweR

Man...So much fan hatred coming through in these comments. Where the hell are the Skyrim comparisons that are APPARENTLY being mentioned in the review?

Oh yeah I also read that IGN review and it read like propaganda from the first paragraph. So many superlatives being used right out of the gate...it almost sounded like a "Metorid Prime is the Citizen Kane of video games" review more than anything...goodness.

I get it the game is great and I'm going to pick it up soon...but please Mr. George of IGN, you didn't have to convince Mr. Joe Gamer and his grand mother that IT IS A GREAT GAME by calling it the GREATEST GAME OF THIS GAME FRANCHISE ON THIS GAME SYSTEM EVER. That guy just went over-the-fucking-board with his review. Goodness gracious. He could have left that part out in the beginning and just stayed with the other parts of his review.

Avatar image for thehbk
TheHBK

5674

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 6

Edited By TheHBK

@Blaz3 said:

I'm still unsure as to why a full star came off due to the lack of speech, occasionally repetitive side missions and the inclusion of a rather dramatic, but not genre changing system. This system sounds to be very well done, keeping Skyward Sword a Zelda game, but easing it into a new style of gameplay.

Taking skyrim for example, I've run into numerous ai bugs and glitches which hugely detract from the experience, the combat system is just as repetitive as it always was, enemies are more or less the same, texture pop-ins galore, tediously boring side quests which all end up feeling pointless at the end and a general feeling that this is really oblivion 1.5 with far superior graphics, a few ai improvements, bugfixes and a new story and off you go.

To take another stellar example, Uncharted 3, which is also a spectacular game, manages to retain a 5/5 stars, which the review is basically just praise to Uncharted 2 and basically just says that nothing much has changed apart from story and a few multiplayer enhancements.

If these 2 can score a 5/5, I fail to see how the minor gripes in Skyward Sword warrant a 4/5, I'm disappointed Patrick, rethink your review, it's bad.

I don't know, you kinda convinced me that Skyrim and Uncharted may be deserving of 4 stars. But the thing is that you play the game, you add up all those things and you can give it a mathematical score. Or just play, step back and say, "this game felt like x number of stars." I mean, I have been playing Skyrim and Uncharted and they felt like 5. From what i read, while zelda may have the similar issues of just a few things wrong with it, the overall experience may not leave you feeling as great as those first two games do. Maybe you can form your own opinion when the game is out.

Avatar image for edsone
edsone

307

Forum Posts

131

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 19

Edited By edsone

@Knives said:

"Top to bottom, I found Twilight Princess painfully boring, which is, perhaps, a fate worse than bad." So like, what am I to do as a reader after reading a comment like that? Answer: Stop reading. This review is not for me or you. There, now wasn't that simple? We can all stop commenting on the score now.

There you have it!

Avatar image for benny
Benny

2009

Forum Posts

315

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By Benny

I fucking love these comments. You people don't get it AT ALL.

Avatar image for gaspower
GaspoweR

4904

Forum Posts

272

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 2

Edited By GaspoweR

@iBear said:

I was fine with gerstmann's 8.8 fo real.

But patrick, it seems to me that you were looking for another epic RPG experience. I mean, you spent two paragraphs on the crafting system, which is way too much detail for such a little aspect of the game. And at the same time, you wrote a couple sentences about the story and atmosphere. Seems to me that you were directly comparing this to skyrim in a way, and no reviewer should ever do that. You're absolutely getting shit on right now, minus the GB nuthugging losers that bow at your guys feet, so I won't make it rain too hard.

You're a pretty quality writer, but I'm curious as to why GB gave you such a high profile review. The in-depth combat aspect is really the only thing I gained from this review. After that you cover the upgrade system for two fuckin paragraphs, and then argue with yourself about how zelda improved, but should it really have? I was too preoccupied with getting this review over with so I could go back to skyrim, so I didn't have time to complete the side-quests or check the extra content. It's probably good, who the fuck knows, check IGN if you wanna find that out.

Literally, this whole review could be summed up as...

It's a zelda game, eh, I'm gonna go back to playing skyrim now.

Overall too, it sounds like you're just flatout not a zelda fan. Why would GB send their inexperienced reviewer who dislikes zelda to review it, I don't know. Maybe you could switch places with navarro for a little bit untill you get more experience in specifically writing reviews. You can take over the XBLA releases and navarro can get back to kickin ass.

SIDE NOTE: remember when patrick putup that article commending that guy at eurogamer for giving uncharted an 8. Totally and completely related. Patrick admires the guy with stones, and he's comin out with his imitation pebbles aw yea.

Patrick was't commending the guy, he was just making an editorial about how review scores for certain games affect certain people (Uncharted 3 getting an 8 sent certain people over the edge). Additionally, Patrick never said he wasn't a fan of Zelda, but he did say he wasn't a fan of Twilight Princess. He said in the Bombcast that he loved Windwaker and wished that he was playing that after going through Twilight Princess, which was a sentiment he shared with Ryan Davis. Why would that make him a Zelda hater if he loved Windwaker?

He wasn't even comparing Skyrim and this game throughout the entire review. He was just making the comparison of what RPGs are these days and what genre Zelda belongs to. Lastly, it seemed that you were the one who was too focused on those two aforementioned paragraphs about the crafting system and being nit-picky about it than the reviewer was. He was just highlighting the fact it wasn't done very well it could have been left out of the game altogether. Just wanted to clarify that. It read like a good review to me.

Avatar image for awadnin
awadnin

295

Forum Posts

202

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By awadnin

@jasondesante said:

Dear Giantbomb:

Nintendo was the first to make a game series that evolved over to a new "generation" of consoles, so I would appreciate not reading a review that the writer thinks his opinions are more valid than the designers, and they are somehow, in his eyes, not delivering, on an evolutionary design concept they pioneered (simple ex. platforming [mario kirby etc], difficult ex. essence of adventure [zelda metroid etc])

I can't recommend this site to any kids that I teach music if I want to tell them where to learn about games and stop asking me about them, this review is a good example why. They won't be able to filter through Patrick to understand the actual meaning of the review. It will be misleading. I understand that was the point of Giantbomb, to have the personalities that you grow to learn, but in this case you simply can't have it. You can't if you want to have some sort of balance, and you can't if you want someone who's never read anything else to actually understand it.

It frustrates me those things aren't taken into consideration, but only because I actually like this site, and would like to recommend it to people that would benefit from having a more informed opinion, but how could they get started if you're writing reviews with the young uninformed gamer completely taken out of consideration. Those people can be easily influenced by someone's personal bias when they had no influence to begin with.

Is Giantbomb an elitist website only for people that already know it all? A site designed to be read by adults who can filter out the types of subtle things that could be easily taken the wrong way. Looking at the way this was compared to Skyrim, and then looking at the changes in gameplay from the previous zelda and elder scrolls, it is easy to see that Patrick has no idea what he is talking about when separating an editorial from a review of a game, which are normally about gameplay, because I'm pretty sure one game is still about pressing attack, and another game has umm...changed a bit..

+ 1

Avatar image for rcath
rcath

677

Forum Posts

82

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By rcath

@Figyg: Spent 40 hours at least with that game. Boring.

Avatar image for rcath
rcath

677

Forum Posts

82

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By rcath

@tourgen: Nail on the head my friend. TP should not have gotten such a high score and this seems like it should have gotten at most 3 stars.

Avatar image for marchismo
marchismo

87

Forum Posts

5413

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 3

Edited By marchismo

8.8

Avatar image for lawlerballer
lawlerballer

204

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By lawlerballer

As soon as I saw 4/5 stars I knew the Ninty Fanboys would be a ragin' lol, really if you want your 5/5 go to places like IGN or any of the other mainstream review sites that easily overrate games just to please the fanboys.

Avatar image for superfunhappygun
superfunhappygun

90

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By superfunhappygun

Console Zelda's haven't been great since Majora's Mask. Wind Waker was charming and fun to play but easy with rather weak dungeons and a tiring endgame, and Twilight Princess had fantastic dungeons and items but the wolf-bits in the opening bored me to tears and the world just wasn't that much fun to explore.

Don't know what to think of Skyward Sword yet, all I got from this review is that it has good motion controls and that it isn't Skyrim. That it instead is more Zelda which is a good thing but also not a good thing because it introduces some big changes but also not enough changes? Did I get that right? (How is this different from Skyrim compared to Oblivion anyway?)

I think I got to the point in the review where Patrick spent an entire paragraph complaining about the lack of quest log and how unacceptable that is, when I felt like he was really just clutching at straws. I'm not even a Nintendo-fan (don't own a Wii) or Zelda apologist because I agree the series has been going downhill and a 4/5 is what I would've given both Wind Waker and Twilight Princess. I haven't played Skyward Sword yet either so I can't comment on that but some parts of the review feel very jarring and nitpicky, and I feel like the review just isn't up to Patrick's article quality.

Avatar image for kanerobot
KaneRobot

2802

Forum Posts

2656

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 9

Edited By KaneRobot

@jasondesante said:

Dear Giantbomb:

Nintendo was the first to make a game series that evolved over to a new "generation" of consoles, so I would appreciate not reading a review that the writer thinks his opinions are more valid than the designers,

...then what the hell are you reading reviews for in the first place?

"I can't recommend this site to any kids that I teach music if I want to tell them where to learn about games and stop asking me about them, this review is a good example why. They won't be able to filter through Patrick to understand the actual meaning of the review."

I don't know how long you've been coming here, but if you're just now realizing this and are any kind of long-term visitor I can't really do much to help you. This is clearly an enthusiast site and the people reading a review about a f'ing LEGEND OF ZELDA GAME are prrrrobably going to have at least a smidgen of experience with the past titles in the series and don't need to have their hand held while reading the review for the zillionth game in one of the most popular franchises of all time. More on "filtering through the reviewer" in a minute.

Is Giantbomb an elitist website only for people that already know it all?

That is kind of a prick way to put it, but in many ways yes, it is. You can like it, or you can stop reading it. Gaming easily has a large enough "hardcore" crowd to make a site like this more than worthwhile.

it is easy to see that Patrick has no idea what he is talking about when separating an editorial from a review of a game,

This isn't some stupid template IGN (for example) review where the name on the byline has no meaning. This site's reviews are meant to have a certain kind of voice depending on the reviewer is. If you're reading a Mortal Kombat review done by Jeff, you should KNOW by now he's a fan of the series so that should be taken into consideration. If Brad is reviewing a game helmed by Carmack, you should KNOW by now he's a huge fan of him and that should be taken into consideration. They do not apologize for this and they shouldn't - it's what separates GB from many of the other sites that post reviews. Who reviews the game actually matters. Novel concept, huh?

If you're looking for editorial voice to be omitted from a review on this site, you're asking a pencil sharpener to clean your toilet. You have no clue.

Then again, maybe you're just pissed it only got 4 stars instead of 5.

Avatar image for contro
Contro

2346

Forum Posts

-1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Contro

@jasondesante said:

Dear Giantbomb:

Nintendo was the first to make a game series that evolved over to a new "generation" of consoles, so I would appreciate not reading a review that the writer thinks his opinions are more valid than the designers, and they are somehow, in his eyes, not delivering, on an evolutionary design concept they pioneered (simple ex. platforming [mario kirby etc], difficult ex. essence of adventure [zelda metroid etc])

I can't recommend this site to any kids that I teach music if I want to tell them where to learn about games and stop asking me about them, this review is a good example why. They won't be able to filter through Patrick to understand the actual meaning of the review. It will be misleading. I understand that was the point of Giantbomb, to have the personalities that you grow to learn, but in this case you simply can't have it. You can't if you want to have some sort of balance, and you can't if you want someone who's never read anything else to actually understand it.

It frustrates me those things aren't taken into consideration, but only because I actually like this site, and would like to recommend it to people that would benefit from having a more informed opinion, but how could they get started if you're writing reviews with the young uninformed gamer completely taken out of consideration. Those people can be easily influenced by someone's personal bias when they had no influence to begin with.

Is Giantbomb an elitist website only for people that already know it all? A site designed to be read by adults who can filter out the types of subtle things that could be easily taken the wrong way. Looking at the way this was compared to Skyrim, and then looking at the changes in gameplay from the previous zelda and elder scrolls, it is easy to see that Patrick has no idea what he is talking about when separating an editorial from a review of a game, which are normally about gameplay, because I'm pretty sure one game is still about pressing attack, and another game has umm...changed a bit..

Here, here. My mind was slow clapping this post. +1

Avatar image for roadcrewworkerer
RoadCrewWorkerer

64

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By RoadCrewWorkerer

@me3639 said:

I hate to say this but people who whine and cry over a review score are losers.

Why would you hate to say such an obvious fact? 99% of humanity are in complete agreement with you.

Avatar image for awadnin
awadnin

295

Forum Posts

202

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By awadnin

8.8 again

Avatar image for jambot
jamBOT

70

Forum Posts

6

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 4

Edited By jamBOT

Guys -- You cannot have a Zelda fan review a Zelda game. That's not possible. If you are a "fan" of something, that means you won't be objective in reviewing the material. And…let's be honest here, for Zelda fans, that rule applies twice.

I can tell you for a fact. That the Zelda franchise isn't just a "game" to me any more. When something has been apart of your life for so long, the characters become real (in a sense). They live in your head, they live in your heart. When I'm upset about shit that's going on in my life -- I turn on Zelda. Link is there to help me not have to worry about my own problems for a while. After 20 - 50 hours, I've usually come up with a solution to my problem. Link saves the fucking day again.

So, If I was to review a Zelda game, It would automatically get a 10 out of 10. For the simple fact of being a Zelda game. And there wouldn't be any argument about it because….shut up. I would have given Spirit Tracks 4 out of 5 stars, because I didn't love it, but it still Zelda so… that means it gets 4 stars. Yeah, that's being just a tad bit bias, in favor of Zelda, don't you think?. But that's not what a good reviewer is supposed to do. A good review has to stay frosty, write his honest opinion, even if we don't want to hear it.

Avatar image for jasondesante
jasondesante

615

Forum Posts

2

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

Edited By jasondesante

Dear Giantbomb:

Nintendo was the first to make a game series that evolved over to a new "generation" of consoles, so I would appreciate not reading a review that the writer thinks his opinions are more valid than the designers, and they are somehow, in his eyes, not delivering, on an evolutionary design concept they pioneered (simple ex. platforming [mario kirby etc], difficult ex. essence of adventure [zelda metroid etc])

I can't recommend this site to any kids that I teach music if I want to tell them where to learn about games and stop asking me about them, this review is a good example why. They won't be able to filter through Patrick to understand the actual meaning of the review. It will be misleading. I understand that was the point of Giantbomb, to have the personalities that you grow to learn, but in this case you simply can't have it. You can't if you want to have some sort of balance, and you can't if you want someone who's never read anything else to actually understand it.

It frustrates me those things aren't taken into consideration, but only because I actually like this site, and would like to recommend it to people that would benefit from having a more informed opinion, but how could they get started if you're writing reviews with the young uninformed gamer completely taken out of consideration. Those people can be easily influenced by someone's personal bias when they had no influence to begin with.

Is Giantbomb an elitist website only for people that already know it all? A site designed to be read by adults who can filter out the types of subtle things that could be easily taken the wrong way. Looking at the way this was compared to Skyrim, and then looking at the changes in gameplay from the previous zelda and elder scrolls, it is easy to see that Patrick has no idea what he is talking about when separating an editorial from a review of a game, which are normally about gameplay, because I'm pretty sure one game is still about pressing attack, and another game has umm...changed a bit..

Avatar image for jambot
jamBOT

70

Forum Posts

6

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 4

Edited By jamBOT

There is no reason to get pissed at Patrick for this review. If that's what he thought…what are you going to do, shoot the man for having an opinion? I'm buying this game no matter what he says. (Yahtzee doesn't like Zelda either, am I going to fly down to Australia and kick his ass? No, I'm going to get in line and buy Zelda)

A long 3 hours game opening….big whoop. That is nothing. I love RPG's, I eat that time for breakfast. I played Twilight Princess for 144 hours, on my 4th play through. I love Zelda and anything Zelda-esque. 4 out of 5 stars, or 8.0 out of 10 --- changes nothing. If you're a true Zelda fan, you just roll with the punches. Nothing to get mad about. Bid Patrick a good day and get started rescuing the Princess.

Avatar image for gamer_152
gamer_152

15033

Forum Posts

74588

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 71

User Lists: 6

Edited By gamer_152  Moderator

I don't mind people disliking Patrick's review or disagreeing with him but some of the comments here are delusional and ridiculously hyperbolic. I thought the Giant Bomb community was free of this sort of nonsense but I guess not. Still, it's good to see that what is probably the majority of people are trying to be sensible about this. Good review Patrick.

Avatar image for mexican_brownie
Mexican_Brownie

257

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By Mexican_Brownie

Good review, Patrick. I think you could have elaborated some more on some points but whatever. I really wish you would have talked about the music, medals, and the SPOILER though.

Hero Mode thing unlocked after beating the game
Avatar image for forsakenwicked
forsakenwicked

4

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By forsakenwicked

Great review. I was thinking of skipping this title but the review made me interested in the game again. Might pick it up sometime next year.

Avatar image for actraiser
Actraiser

2

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Actraiser

He didn't even mention the soundtrack? That's kind of a blunder on his part, honestly. What about the characters, the towns/villages, or just the story in general? Pretty damn lazy. And most of his actual criticisms aren't elaborated and/or end up being contradicted by his own logic anyways.

Probably the worst part of the review was his blatant Skyrim bias. Like complaining that you can't customize Link's sword? Complaining that the game takes several hours to open up? Hmm.. I wonder what inspired those complaints.

Avatar image for phenwah
Phenwah

58

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By Phenwah
Avatar image for me3639
me3639

2006

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 4

Edited By me3639

I hate to say this but people who whine and cry over a review score are losers.

Avatar image for phenwah
Phenwah

58

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By Phenwah

Sure are a lot of Skyward Sword opinions from people who've never played Skyward Sword in these comments.

Avatar image for giantstalker
Giantstalker

2401

Forum Posts

5787

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 2

Edited By Giantstalker

Wind Waker sucks. Sound like I'll love this game though.

Avatar image for shadowdogg
ShadowDoGG

152

Forum Posts

299

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

Edited By ShadowDoGG

Sorry but the only person who should have reserved this is Jeff. He gave 10/10 to Ocarina of time on Gamespot and that's what Skyward Sword should be compared too. Patrick who? Don't care if it was St. Patrick himself.

Avatar image for haha_dead
haha_dead

17

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By haha_dead

@Pr1mus: My point is that maybe neither a rabid fanboy nor someone totally unmoved by Zelda - who hated the last one, even - should review it.

Avatar image for blaz3
Blaz3

2

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Blaz3

I'm still unsure as to why a full star came off due to the lack of speech, occasionally repetitive side missions and the inclusion of a rather dramatic, but not genre changing system. This system sounds to be very well done, keeping Skyward Sword a Zelda game, but easing it into a new style of gameplay.

Taking skyrim for example, I've run into numerous ai bugs and glitches which hugely detract from the experience, the combat system is just as repetitive as it always was, enemies are more or less the same, texture pop-ins galore, tediously boring side quests which all end up feeling pointless at the end and a general feeling that this is really oblivion 1.5 with far superior graphics, a few ai improvements, bugfixes and a new story and off you go.

To take another stellar example, Uncharted 3, which is also a spectacular game, manages to retain a 5/5 stars, which the review is basically just praise to Uncharted 2 and basically just says that nothing much has changed apart from story and a few multiplayer enhancements.

If these 2 can score a 5/5, I fail to see how the minor gripes in Skyward Sword warrant a 4/5, I'm disappointed Patrick, rethink your review, it's bad.