The legend of zelda: skyward sword

Magill

Helix wrote: »

review finally up

http://clickonline.com/games/review--the-legend-of-zelda-skyward-sword/4400/

its perfect. its just perfect.

Bejabus !!! Hope its as good as you think it is... really looking forward to getting some free time for this over christmas ! Shame the wii looks like ****e on my TV.. good thing we still have a old 28 inch down stairs tho !!

super_furry

First Zelda game I haven't bought at launch since Ocarina of Time.

Skyrim really has taken over.

Pseudorandom

I'm really enjoying it so far. Finished the first temple & really enjoying the puzzles. I didn't really like Twilight Princess but loved OoT & Majora's Mask and this game seems to have gone back to the same sort of dungeon style. The motion control is good too, it's difficult in a good way, not frustrating but you do have to get your swings and your timing right.

jaykhunter

super_furry wrote: »

First Zelda game I haven't bought at launch since Ocarina of Time. Skyrim really has taken over.

Game developers should really be more considerate! massive RPGs should at least be a month apart!!

Retr0gamer

Zelda's not an RPG though :P

Azure_sky

Some moron from Game Spot gave it 7.5. Not enough guns and guts I guess. So far it's by far the best game I've played this year.

http://uk.gamespot.com/the-legend-of-zelda-skyward-sword/platform/wii

Azure_sky

Interesting. Let's hope they get someone who can actually play a video game to re-review it next time.:rolleyes:

"Editor's note: This review originally stated that aiming was handled through the Wii Remote's infrared sensor, which is incorrect. The review has been amended accordingly. GameSpot regrets the error."

Optimalprimerib

Azure_sky wrote: »

Some moron from Game Spot gave it 7.5. Not enough guns and guts I guess. So far it's by far the best game I've played this year.

http://uk.gamespot.com/the-legend-of-zelda-skyward-sword/platform/wii

I wish more reviewers were like this tbh. Games with big names find it all to easy to get 90+ when they barely deserve it (FIFA12, MW3, gow3, deus ex, LA Noire I'm looking at you). That said I love Zelda and as a Christmas present from me to me I will feel like a child again Christmas morning

Azure_sky

Optimalprimerib wrote: »

I wish more reviewers were like this tbh. Games with big names find it all to easy to get 90+ when they barely deserve it (FIFA12, MW3, gow3, deus ex, LA Noire I'm looking at you). That said I love Zelda and as a Christmas present from me to me I will feel like a child again Christmas morning

I totally agree that a game shouldn't get a 90+ rating because of a good brand name and hype but Skyward Sword really is worth a 90+ rating. Even highly critical reviewers, such as Edge, gave it top marks. Game Spot are notorious for giving high scores to above average FPS games and average scores to quality RPGs.

Rating a hyped game highly and going with the sheep is bad, but so is rating a great game with an average score to stir up controversy and gain attention, or simply because the review doesn't like the genre.

Helix

Most troubling of all is how the aiming works. There are certain items that require you to aim at the screen. However, the calibration is frequently wrong, forcing you to tap down on the D-pad to recenter. This happens with alarming frequency, and when you find yourself in a heated battle looking directly at the ground, you'll curse the game for damning you with such a cumbersome control scheme.

this never once happened me :?

There are times when you square off against giant foes but your view is almost completely blocked, placing you in a frustrating situation that could have been avoided

nor this. has this guy never heard of camera tapping as you go to keep the view solid?

It's a shame that you spend so much time fighting the controls in Skyward

stopped reading here. has the guy never used a wiimote before or something?

johnny_ultimate

Optimalprimerib wrote: »

I wish more reviewers were like this tbh. Games with big names find it all to easy to get 90+ when they barely deserve it (FIFA12, MW3, gow3, deus ex, LA Noire I'm looking at you). That said I love Zelda and as a Christmas present from me to me I will feel like a child again Christmas morning

Yup, this year has been particularly notable for all manner of games receiving ludicrously hyperbolic review scores. Dissenting voices are only to be encouraged, especially when any no-name Dutch blog can get top billing on metacritic. Genuine criticism as opposed to nitpicking should be preferable in any case.

That said, Gamespot are about as trustworthy as the 'based on a true story' tag at the beginning of Fargo. And I'm not just saying that as a Zelda fan :P IGN and GS can usually be outright ignored.

bada_bing

am playing this game now, there's just one thing bugging me and i don't know if it's a glitch or not but i can't seem to equip the shield at all. In fact i've got two wooden shields in my pouch but i can't do anything with it.
i've been to the sparring academy and the instructor tells me to shake the nunchuk to get the shield out but that doesn't work for me. i know the nunchuk is working cos i can bump into trees and do the sword spin with it.

is there some step i missed that allows you use/equip the shield?

** Never mind i figured it out, everytime i pressed the minus button i kept getting the heart potion. But this time i held it for longer and then the shield came up as a option to select!!

Helix

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Yup, this year has been particularly notable for all manner of games receiving ludicrously hyperbolic review scores. Dissenting voices are only to be encouraged, especially when any no-name Dutch blog can get top billing on metacritic.

To get onto meta critic you need 300 or more reviews and monthly traffic of 500k uniques. Not something a no name ditch blog can manage for the most part

Retr0gamer

I get 1000 unique views a month on my no name blog, the vast majority of which is people stealing my photos from google images. I'm pretty sure if I worked on naming my pictures properly and was more diligent in reviewing games I could reach those targets.

Helix

Retr0gamer wrote: »

I get 1000 unique views a month on my no name blog, the vast majority of which is people stealing my photos from google images. I'm pretty sure if I worked on naming my pictures properly and was more diligent in reviewing games I could reach those targets.

Hotlinked images don't count. It needs to be totally verifiable. 500k a month, consistently isn't as easy as you think. In fact it's bloody difficult

Retr0gamer

Some of those no name site must have got on metacritic early then when it wasn't so stringent.

johnny_ultimate

No-name may have been the wrong choice of words, granted.

But glancing at some of the reviewers on metacritics, there are some reviewers who can be constantly relied on to provide bland, characterless reviews in the name of cheap page views. Cheat Code Central? NintendoWorldReport?

There's definitely a need to approach review aggregation sites with a note of cynicism, IMO. It has changed the focus of criticism to an obsession with numbers. And, alas, many people buy right into it and rebel when someone has the guts to give a game - heaven forbid! - a 7/10.

It's why on rottentomatoes the 'top critics' option tends to at least focus on the more reliable, consistent critics. Anyone can start a blog or review site. Only a tiny few are interesting enough to listen to.

Helix

Possibly, but meta critic don't just accept new ones who meet the criteria, they also drop ones who fall too far short. We've been hammering away at them for for 3 years now and are probably looking at 2013 before we get on

jaykhunter

lemme know if i missed out on the bug-catching net; a little annoyed seeing bugs about but not being able to catch em!

Helix

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

No-name may have been the wrong choice of words, granted.

But glancing at some of the reviewers on metacritics, there are some reviewers who can be constantly relied on to provide bland, characterless reviews in the name of cheap page views. Cheat Code Central? NintendoWorldReport?

There's definitely a need to approach review aggregation sites with a note of cynicism, IMO. It has changed the focus of criticism to an obsession with numbers. And, alas, many people buy right into it and rebel when someone has the guts to give a game - heaven forbid! - a 7/10.

It's why on rottentomatoes the 'top critics' option tends to at least focus on the more reliable, consistent critics. Anyone can start a blog or review site. Only a tiny few are interesting enough to listen to.

The problem with aggregating sites isn't the reviewers or the websites, it's the gamers who think that a game getting below 88% is rubbish

johnny_ultimate

Helix wrote: »

The problem with aggregating sites isn't the reviewers or the websites, it's the gamers who think that a game getting below 88% is rubbish

That I fully agree with. Reading the idiotic comments under articulate critiques of games is one of the most depressing things about being a gamer.

The low quality of reviewers is somewhat of a side-effect of this, though. I can find plenty of places for in-depth, intelligent analysis of film. Only a small amount of game reviewers - if any, actually - achieve this. I'm afraid to see we really don't have the gamer's Roger Ebert yet (and he's certainly not a game critic :P) - a smart, passionate film fan who is always worth reading even when I don't agree.

Game reviews often read more like 'product' reviews rather than a piece of art (or whatever you want to call it). Edge, GamesTM, Gamecentral, Eurogamer (to a lesser degree, but at least their reviews are 'different' if only rarely successful) - a small few who actually seem to engage with games rather than just blindly ticking off the 'graphics, gameplay, soundtrack, voice acting' school of games journalism. And the main reason I'd buy Edge is for the columnists - actual intelligent opinion!

Helix

games are so very different from movies when it comes to reviews though. you need to cover all the technical stuff, because they so often dictate how playable a game is. i cant stand reviews that go to the extremes of telling you what button does what though. unless it fits with your angle, or helps make a point about a problem or a plus point, i dont want to know.

the problem, as a reviewer myself, is that it's very difficult to find any kind of way to reasonably give a solid idea about the game without spoilering. in a movie, you have 90-120 minutes worth of linear, a to b action to talk about.

in a game, your plot is almost always at least 5 times that long, getting into the finer points about things can only be done through spoiling in a lot of cases.

i think most reviewers will agree that there's a formula waiting there to be found, and most will continually adapt their styles until they find it. but for now, the technical stuff NEEDS to be in there right off the bat, and the other stuff needs to almost be skirted around lest you be lambasted by a publisher, developer or gamer for talking about things you should be

johnny_ultimate

Yes, the technical stuff needs to be there to a degree, but it doesn't need to dominate. The new 'postscript' feature in Edge is glorious - away from all that stuff, it takes the time to analyse the experience of the game or a certain element of the game in a more in-depth way. Whether it's the flaws / strengths of the desert sequence in Uncharted as a piece of interactive storytelling, or the soul-crushing joys of curse in Dark Souls - looking at something more than mere gameplay or graphics. It's the way film reviews work, no reason games should be different IMO.

Helix wrote: »

and the other stuff needs to almost be skirted around lest you be lambasted by a publisher, developer or gamer for talking about things you should be

Now that's a far bigger problem. These things should never factor into criticism. I know it's a job, and you have every right to protect that. But for games journalism to reach a level of maturity, there should never be stress on a reviewer to give a bad or mould-breaking review just because the publisher will be annoyed. **** the publisher, frankly. It doesn't work in reality, that I know. But screw it, idealism ftw. It's why I choose to ignore IGN or Gamespot - because you just know they're actively avoiding pissing anyone off, and fired the guy who had the guts to do it. You can tell Harry Knowles will give a film a good review because The Man paid for his flight to LA to see it. And it's why I ignore him and listen to Ebert or Sight & Sound instead.

Helix

im not talking about giving a bad review

im talking about signing an NDA forbidding you from mentioning something later on in the game because it's a spoiler. it's nothing to do with favouritism, being bought, or having stuff given to you. it's about non disclosure of information that is deemed to spoil

bought reviews dont, for the most part, happen all that often. publishers' pr companies rarely care what scores their games are getting from reviewers once they're getting column inches

ricero

bada_bing wrote: »

am playing this game now, there's just one thing bugging me and i don't know if it's a glitch or not but i can't seem to equip the shield at all. In fact i've got two wooden shields in my pouch but i can't do anything with it.
i've been to the sparring academy and the instructor tells me to shake the nunchuk to get the shield out but that doesn't work for me. i know the nunchuk is working cos i can bump into trees and do the sword spin with it.

is there some step i missed that allows you use/equip the shield?

** Never mind i figured it out, everytime i pressed the minus button i kept getting the heart potion. But this time i held it for longer and then the shield came up as a option to select!!

had the same problem. go to your pouch your shield should be there

johnny_ultimate

Helix wrote: »

im not talking about giving a bad review

im talking about signing an NDA forbidding you from mentioning something later on in the game because it's a spoiler. it's nothing to do with favouritism, being bought, or having stuff given to you. it's about non disclosure of information that is deemed to spoil

bought reviews dont, for the most part, happen all that often. publishers' pr companies rarely care what scores their games are getting from reviewers once they're getting column inches

NDAs are a part of the system, no doubt about it. I don't think that's any reason not to explore things in-depth, though. Sure, I don't like spoilers, but I can safely avoid them if they're flagged in advance. I think a good writer can be ambiguous enough about something to get their point across without resorting to specifics, anyway. It's a shame that you can't mention something because a publisher decrees it. It's, alas, necessary to compete with the big boys commercially, and I can't begrudge anyone for that. At the same time, analysis of Fight Club can't be held back by ignoring the question of who Tyler Durden is. Or how can we discuss Bioshock without reference to 'Will you kindly...'? After a game has been released, its important for discourse to switch gears somewhat.

But then we get back to what is the point of games journalism in the first place. Is it merely to answer the question 'to buy or not to buy?'. It is for many. But for a minority, it's more. I prefer to glance reviews before playing, and then actively engage in discussion or reading when I'm finished (or when I'm playing). A good review is more insightful than merely 'this is good / bad, (don't) buy it'. It's one you can read after you've played and decide whether you agree or not, or the best are the ones that may even provide fresh insight into why you liked / hated the game in question.

Publishers and developers should be entirely removed from that level of criticism. There'll always be a place for the more basic journalism (Kotaku are handling it well at the moment by having a brief 'should I buy it' article before the main review is published). But there needs to be more, and its something the vast majority of sites and blogs fail to recognise, and are extremely dull as a result.

Helix

i agree for the most part, absolutely. when i review games i try to get as much information about the basics across as possible, then i give my own opinion as to why it did, or didnt, work so well. theres plenty of room for improvement in the industry however, and i think most journos will accept that

Kirby

I don't get the obsession gamers have with reviews and scores. You are unique, your tastes are unique. Only you will know how much you like something by doing it yourself.

Reviews are mostly somebody elses opinion. Why should you base your decision to get a game on that? One persons 'operatic masterpiece' is another persons 'mindless drivel'. One persons 'tight controls' is anothers 'jittery mess'. One persons 'Impossibly hard' is anothers 'refreshingly challenging'. etc. etc.

I love Mass effect. Most reviewers loved it too. But alot of them complained about the Mako....and people took it as gospel. I liked the Mako. Most reviewers hated GTA's friend missions like bowling. I hated them. But I know a guy who enjoyed them and did them all.

The only actual helpful information I find in reviews is genre-type information such as, "It's an RPG. It has elements which make it kind of a cross between Mass effect and Dark souls." You can safely assume that if you enjoyed them, you will enjoy the new game. But you can see that in an ad, or on the back of a box. You don't need a review for that.

Tbh I only read or watch reviews on stuff I've already played. It's interesting to know how your take on something differed to the reviewer. But deciding to play a game or not based on some average or mean score is..........retarded.

jaykhunter

I do agree with what you're saying, but

Kirby wrote: »

deciding to play a game or not based on some average or mean score is..........retarded.

Are you suggesting I rent every game that comes out to decide if it's worth playing? I'm sure you mean, weigh up different reviewer's words and make your own choice.

I agree that reviews are subjective; I do think people get used to someone's tastes and take that into account. That said, I think every review should come with that reviewer's particular mindset; what's his favourite genres, games etc so we know where he's coming from.

I think reviews of games should compare/contrast with other popular games of the genre or previous iterations; because that's who's most likely to be watching the review, to see if it's good enough check out.

...Maybe that's why GT review (eg) Zelda games so critically (ie give out for 10 minutes then give it a 9.3) - they're constantly critiquing because everyone knows it's a AAA title.

nitromaster

10 hours in. Going good so far, coming up to the 2nd dungeon. Reminds me a lot of the wind waker which was my favourite zelda title...let's see if it cane be toppled