So I've been playing this guy for about two weeks, and it's starting to get a wee bit old.
It's fun in short bursts, but because I'm somewhat of a collectable whore, I find myself spending 30-45 minutes on a single level to get it perfect. Then I'm so frustrated that I want to quit playing. That's not to say the game is flawed in it's design - in fact I think it's a really refreshing take on 2D platforming - the problem is in what I call "stickiness"
Don't be bummed. It's not you, it's me.
Stickiness is what Resident Evil 4, the God of War series, and Uncharted have - there's just something about them that urges you to keep playing. Even casual games like Bejeweled or Angry Birds have the stickiness. "One more checkpoint", "I can get to a million points, one more try" - whatever the motivation, you are reluctant to tear yourself away from the game. And Rayman Origins lacks that crucial, indefinable stickiness ingredient.
Also, I thought I had reached the end when four more whole worlds opened up. So I guess I'm at the 50% mark.
Perhaps the most overlooked game released from a major studio in 2011: Rayman Origins. It was released in the holiday season among some of the biggest games of the year, contending for customer mindshare with the likes of Skyrim, Modern Warfare/Battlefield, Zelda, Arkham City, Uncharted 3 and so on. And here's little Rayman Origins sittin' there on the shelf, bein' all 2D and hand drawn - no one's gonna want that stupid game.
Well, I did. I have a soft spot for the aesthetically beautiful, market-risky and poorly marketed, and Rayman Origins is exactly all of those things.
In game.
The aesthetics are the first thing that hit you when playing this game. This is as close as we've ever been to playing an actual cartoon. And a well developed cartoon no less. Characters are bright and interesting, animations are liquid smooth and everything pops with charm.
Switch to 720p and go full screen. Trust.
Gameplay is pretty standard 2D fare, but with an interesting take on the difficulty. It's fairly easy to jump and slap your way through the levels, but more advanced players are challenged with finding just-out-of-reach collectibles. You're given infinite lives, but the game practically begs for you to get a perfect run on each level. So it can get frustrating if you're OCD about it.
Overall I'm really enjoying it so far. I'll let you know how this plays out.
This is the opening paragraph of IGN's review of Skyward Sword:
The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword
is the greatest Zelda game ever created. It's the best game for Wii and
one of the finest video game accomplishments of the past 10 years. The
game has once again raised the bar and forged new territory for an
iconic and innovative franchise. It's not enough that it finally
establishes a powerful, stirring origin story or that it features
near-perfect pacing. What puts Skyward Sword over the top is its
layered, dense, absolutely perfect gameplay that manages to not only
nail motion-controlled combat but remarkably offers a stunning level of
diversity.
Nearly every sentence in that paragraph is a lie.
STORY
The overarching Zelda storyline is arguably among the oldest and deepest in gaming. While Mario has gone from land to space and back again, Link's adventures through the various iterations of Hyrule remain grounded in relative gravitas. Skyward Sword is no different and in this instance, we're given an origin story for the series.
Zelda the first.
And the story - which is comprised of maybe ten cutscenes over the course of 45 hours - is pretty good. You as the player are given rich details about the history of nearly every major aspect of the franchise. The overall problem is motivation - on both sides of the morality coin. Your motivation as Link to save a princess who doesn't appear to want to be saved makes for a confusing objective. Then when you realize why she doesn't want to be rescued, all motivation flies out the window. For real, if you're playing for the story, the mid point will make you want to quit.
The villain's motivations are weak as well. You want to rule the world? Really? What is this an 80's cartoon super villain? So as the hero, you have little reason to keep fighting, and even less of a reason in the face of the bad guy's MO. Everyone could have just stayed home and I could have avoided looking for musical notes at the bottom of an ocean.
The very end of the game gives some firm, canonical details that gives the entire Zelda series a structure and purpose, which is a definitive high note to conclude the game. It's just the tedium of getting there was almost too much to handle.
Must hurry! To do...absolutely nothing.
GAMEPLAY
Almost six years into the life of the Wii, motion controls have finally realized their full potential in Skyward Sword. At least that's what Nintendo would have you believe.
The big hook in this game is the 1:1 sword control. So if you swing your Wiimote from left to right with a slight diagonal slant, so will Link. This plays very heavily into the combat as nearly every enemy in the game has some sort of blocking or defense pattern that forces you to swing the sword in a specific direction. This, admittedly is fairly cool. It makes you use one or two extra brain cells in fights. So rather than just spamming an attack button, or wildly swinging the remote around, you have to be tactical and precise with your attacks. The inherent problem is that it's still motion control, and motion controls will never be as precise as buttons. So randomly you'll swing your remote the way the game wants you to, only to have Link take off his hat and order a pizza instead. To be fair, it's rare that this happens, but when it does it can be infuriating in the heat of battle when you have to be spot on.
How would you swing at these guys?
So while the motion control "works", I would still prefer the old button and analog stick. In fact, I just picked up Ocarina of Time 3D, which is now fourteen years old, and it felt like a more modern game than Skyward Sword. There was no single element from Skyward Sword that I missed when going back to play the one-and-half-decade-old game.
But in the end, the thing that everyone wants to know about is the temples. Every Zelda game's score is influenced HEAVILY by how good or bad the temples are. And the answer is - it's a mixed bag. Skyward Sword is home to some of the worst temples in the series, as well as the absolute best. Fans going in expecting a fire, water, and desert temple...well, you'll get them, but there's also an Ancient Cistern, a Pirate Ship and a few other ones I won't spoil here. The final temple is by far one of the best levels in gaming, ever. Not only is it well designed and a blast to play through, it also serves as a makeshift "final exam" as it tasks you with performing all the maneuvers and tricks from past temples.
Wait a minute! A temple that's not based around fire or water? BLASPHEMY!
The one thing I will agree with from the IGN review is that it does "offer a stunning level of diversity" in its gameplay. Each area and temple has you doing things so differently and each item has such a unique effect to your abilities that it's hard to get bored from an actual, macro level game perspective. From a pacing perspective, you will get bored and frustrated almost immediately.
The name of the game in Skyward Sword is "Stall for Time". There are certain points where you're riding a wave of nostalgia, modern game design and story all at once, and you want nothing more in this world to continue the quest you're on whenFETCH QUEST!
Momentum screeches to a halt. Oh right! I'm on an epic journey to get the TrifoESCORT MISSION!!
Ughhhhhh. Maybe I'll come back later.
OK - I'm ready - let's save ZelFIGHT THE SAME BOSS FOR THE FIFTH TIME!!!!
BUHHH!
This was the biggest overall problem with Skyward Sword. The pacing. Nintendo has no idea how to build momentum, and while I would have hated Zelda to become an Uncharted clone, they could have at least studied the series and taken some ideas. It's like every exciting task became five boring ones.
"Link, I love you. And I want to make out, big time. But oh NO! I lost fifteen of my favorite clothespins! Can you help me find them? Then we'll totally make out. For realzies."
PRESENTATION
There's no doubt that Skyward Sword is fueled by aging technology. Nintendo made a conscious decision to not go HD with the Wii, and it paid off for them initially. But six years into the lifecycle and the game they hang their hats on looks like a GameCube 1.5 release. It's not necessarily a fair criticism because they did the best they could within the capabilities of the hardware, but realistically, or ideally anyway, a Zelda game released in 2011 should look like this:
They did manage to upgrade the sound department significantly. Specifically the music, which is now fully orchestrated by an actual orchestra, with actual instruments. Here's a little comparison video to help you grasp what a huge improvement this actually is.
Nintendo is in a tough position. By the fans' demands, every major Zelda game release must be two things simultaneously:
A) Exactly the same as other games in the franchise
B) Completely unique
If they stray too far from the formula fanboys will cry foul, and if they stick too closely to the formula, the media eats it alive for not innovating. That being said, the developers did a great job trying to ride that line. There's enough new here to make it feel unique, while conservatively sticking to major series formulas. The problem is that while the newness is unique among the franchise, against gaming as a whole, it feels like an old game.
In the past five years since Twilight Princess, the world of video games has seen some incredible innovations. From the magnificent atmosphere and character development of Portal to the Uncharted series' unparalleled pacing to Bioshock's rich and deep universe and storyline. Games have a new standard in the face of these innovations, and yet Nintendo seems to operate completely oblivious to what the gaming world around them is doing. There is nothing in Skyward Sword that shows a "lessons learned" from other series. The pacing is awful, the character development is shallow and the storyline, while solid, is sadly predictable.
It's still a good game, worthy of a AAA ranking. But let's take another look at IGN's opening paragraph once more, with my edits.
The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword is probably the worst Zelda game ever created. It's still a good game and among the best on the Wii, but ultimately doesn't reflect the countless innovations made by the industry from the past five years. The game has done some things really well, but most of it feels like it was awkwardly shoved out of the gate. While Skyward Sword establishes a powerful, stirring origin story, it's delivered over possibly the most poorly paced game of this generation. The gameplay is layered, dense, and diverse; but backtracking, "passable" motion control, and tedious quests ruin the experience.
Review in Ten Words or Less:
A valiant attempt that falls just short of glory.
I gave Skyward Sword a pretty hard time during my playthrough. And for good reason - there are parts that are unnecessarily long and stupid. But I feel like I would only write an entry when something bugged me - there were full weeks when I was really enjoying what I was playing.
I'll go against IGN's ridiculous perfect score for this game and declare that it is in fact probably the worst Zelda game in the franchise, but that's like saying it was Michael Jordan's worst season - it's still better than 90% of the shlubs out there.
