[Spoiler-Free] Zelda: Skyward Sword

[darkjak]

I find SS's art style makes the TP visuals even more fugly. So muddy, generic and bland.

I just started playing and I can say the following:

For some reason, the characters are more... "realistic" looking in Skyward Sword than in Twilight Princess. In Twilight Princess, some characters had very toony and exaggerated proportions, which made them stick out a lot. They just didn't belong in the dark atmosphere that the game tried to acheive. Also, in Twilight Princess, the surroundings felt more generic than in Skyward Sword.

 

However, I don't think that Nintendo have acheived the painting-effect they talked so much about.

If they'd have normal textures, and then applied some kind of paint-filter, then it'd be fine. Just imagine if Skyward Sword would have a painting effect that actually made the game look like a painting:

 

 

But what they've done has been to make the textures look hand painted. An effect that you don't even think about in some situations, except for certain object sort of sticking out like sore thumbs. Where Nintendo made the graphics look really good, making people not believe that Twilight Princess was possible on the Gamecube, Skyward Sword at times just looks like certain props have really low-rez textures. I'm sorry, but this is the last hoorah of the Wii. It's the game I essentially bought a Wii for (plus Mario Galaxy and a bunch of games that never were, even though they obviously should) and it's been a really long wait. Skyward Sword came too late to show developers how Wii games should look and it wasn't pretty enough to be the pinacle of what you can do with the Wii hardware. The Wii is more powerful than any last-gen console.

Yet, the last gen consoles last hoorahs looked like this:

 

 

HOWEVER, my first impressions are that this game is really good. I like how the pre-dungeons sort of flow in to the actual dungeons, I like the controls, I like the combat. Although I think the controls could've been even more precise and Nintendo should've kept the shortcuts for selecting items.

[Burny]

If they'd have normal textures, and then applied some kind of paint-filter, then it'd be fine. Just imagine if Skyward Sword would have a painting effect that actually made the game look like a painting:

 

 

But what they've done has been to make the textures look hand painted. An effect that you don't even think about in some situations, except for certain object sort of sticking out like sore thumbs.

 

I agree that they haven't consistently achieved the painting effect. But they have applied that paint filter.

 

The issue is that it is only applied to geometry at a certain distance from the camera and even then not consistently, as non-static objects, characters and water don't seem to be included. Neither seems the distance itself to be consistent. In general I rather like the "impressionistic" styled textures and assume they're a way to counter the dependence on distance of the filter. But they're not applied consistently either. These are dolphin shots, but they show off the used filter well, although it seems dolphin kind of "breaks" it due to the high resolution.

Edited January 19, 2012 by Burny
Automerged Doublepost

[Grazza]

You make some powerful points, @darkjak, but from many moments in the game it is clear that Skyward Sword does push the Wii to its limits, whether it looks like it or not.

[Dog-amoto]

Satoru Iwata, 2005: When you turn on Revolution and see the graphics, you will say, "Wow"

 

I've never seen anything on Wii that made me say "wow"

[Magnus]

To be fair, he could have meant that you'd say, "wow, that's ugly".

[Ville]

I've never seen anything on Wii that made me say "wow"

 

Have you played Xenoblade? Even with the limited graphical power of the Wii, the genius of the art direction and the massiveness of the worlds made me wow constantly...

[Fused King]

You make some powerful points, @darkjak, but from many moments in the game it is clear that Skyward Sword does push the Wii to its limits, whether it looks like it or not.

 

I'd beg to differ when lookin' at the trees in, say, Skyloft:laughing:

I was like: 'Wow! That's an N64 style tree.'

 

Full impressions coming from the King later this week, when I finally finish this game.

[Diageo]

I said wow plenty of times playing Skyward Sword... in regards to the graphics... in a positive sense.

[Grazza]

I'd beg to differ when lookin' at the trees in, say, Skyloft:laughing:

I was like: 'Wow! That's an N64 style tree.'

 

I think this all comes back to the fact the Wii is working hard, even if you can't tell by the graphics. If you compare Skyloft to previous Zelda towns, there are more buildings (all of which you can enter), more NPCs, various tunnels/passageways and no loading times between sections. It's also set on quite a few vertical levels and is probably the best-ever Zelda town, technically (even though I think Windfall Island is better-designed).

 

Skyloft gets a massive thumbs-up from me, it really does.

[Dog-amoto]

Skyloft (and most areas in SS) were not as enjoyable for me for one small reason.

 

There was no mini map in the HUD. Even after 50+ hours of playing, I still got disorientated around Skyloft and some other areas and had to open the map to see which way to go which took me out of the game. Great design means nothing if it can be spoiled this much by such a small omission.

[Eightbit]

Just beat the game, fourty three hours it took me, all side quests completed and items upgraded.

 

Regarding the visuals, there was one scene in the final cutscene of the game which really stood out for me, i thought i had my 360 hooked up to the TV it was that stunning.

[LostOverThere]

I would easily be saying "Wow", in regards to the visuals, if they weren't so jaggy. It's a shame, too, because seeing the game on Dolphin shows just how pretty the art style can make it. Jaggies completely destroy whatever intention of a painted look they ever had.

[Burny]

Jaggies completely destroy whatever intention of a painted look they ever had.

 

Are you playing on a HD flat screen? If so, have you turned down image "enhancement" effects like sharpness?

 

I know, it doesn't make the jagged edges go away, but it also doesn't pronounce them further.

[Ronnie]

Was playing on a 50" flat screen, turned sharpness down a tad and didn't notice any jaggies at all.

[Fierce_LiNk]

If there's one area of the game that doesn't really need any criticism, it's the graphics and art style.

 

Everytime I walk into Faron Woods and see the birds flutter away, I can't help but smile.

[LostOverThere]

Are you playing on a HD flat screen? If so, have you turned down image "enhancement" effects like sharpness?

 

I know, it doesn't make the jagged edges go away, but it also doesn't pronounce them further.

I am indeed playing on a HDTV, however I don't have any image enhancements like sharpness enabled.

[Fierce_LiNk]

I've played some more of this, and have just finished the 6th dungeon.

 

 

The trial is excellent, really find that aspect of the game fun and heart-pounding. Quite intense, heh.

 

The bit before the dungeon was ok, but the dungeon itself was a bit of a let down really. Also, the boss fight is just...terrible. It's almost identical to the other fight with Ghirahim. They could've just kept the cut-scene but then had Ghirahim reviving an enemy or something and then fight that. This was just a let down.

 

The imprisoned seems quite good when you initially see its face (again), but then it loses all of its "terror" when you see its feet and toes. It's a shame as the music is pretty decent for the encounter/s, but the design for the beast is awful.

 

The scene where you go through the Gate and see Zelda again is lovely. It's nice to finally have some story in this game.

 

[Grazza]

I agree with most of your post, @Fierce_LiNk. I just don't think swordfighting is a very good mechanic for boss fights.

[Fierce_LiNk]

I agree with most of your post, @Fierce_LiNk. I just don't think swordfighting is a very good mechanic for boss fights.

 

Hmm, it's not that. If anything, the controls are a triumph and really do add something to the game for me. However, the boss fights themselves have been a bit of a let down. Apart from the 2nd and 4th dungeon boss, who were both awesome, the rest have been a bit cack.

 

But, the game has moments where it just promises something but doesn't quite deliver. Like the dungeon I just mentioned, fairly cool, but then it finishes in an un-exciting way. The bosses in Twilight Princess trounce these by quite some distance. I don't see how anyone can disagree with that.

 

It's evident though that the story mechanics of this game need to change. For all its criticism, Metroid Other M shows that a story can add a lot to a game. Eternal Darkness for the GameCube is one of my top ever games, purely for the story telling. Nintendo need to address this issue as it's a very big one in this game for me.

 

A shame really as the graphics, controls, general gameplay are excellent.

 

[Grazza]

The 4th dungeon boss has all the mechanics of an outstanding boss fight. It's like I was saying in the Super Metroid thread about the bosses in Metroid Fusion. I don't think it's spoiling anything to say that the reason it's so good (and Metroid bosses are so good) is down to this formula:

 

1) The boss is very dangerous. If he hits you, you'll take a lot of damage. Hence ingredient one: suspense.

 

2) He has quite a long reach. Ingredient two: distance.

 

3) You have to wait for your moment. Ingredient three: timing.

 

4) Finally, you get the chance to attack, which in this case doesn't require too much precision. Ingredient four: release.

 

(There is also another ingredient: the sheer fun of using his swords. I'll call this play.)

 

Really, it's just like the spider boss in Metroid Fusion. It's the reason I loved that one and didn't like the swordfighting ones.

 

[Fierce_LiNk]

The 4th dungeon boss has all the mechanics of an outstanding boss fight. It's like I was saying in the Super Metroid thread about the bosses in Metroid Fusion. I don't think it's spoiling anything to say that the reason it's so good (and Metroid bosses are so good) is down to this formula:

 

1) The boss is very dangerous. If he hits you, you'll take a lot of damage. Hence ingredient one: suspense.

 

2) He has quite a long reach. Ingredient two: distance.

 

3) You have to wait for your moment. Ingredient three: timing.

 

4) Finally, you get the chance to attack, which in this case doesn't require too much precision. Ingredient four: release.

 

(There is also another ingredient: the sheer fun of using his swords. I'll call this play.)

 

Really, it's just like the spider boss in Metroid Fusion. It's the reason I loved that one and didn't like the swordfighting ones.

 

Yeah, have to agree with that.

 

But, what also makes a good boss has to be down to the design of it. It has to seem interesting and menacing. Like Mother Brain in her "second phase." That's fucking terrifying. If it's not menacing, then it has to have a "cool" factor, like "wow, this fight is incredible."

 

Skyward Sword teased me with that at one point:

 

Where the ship was getting broken apart. I thought the build up to the boss was amazing. The ship was getting filled with water. Very intense, great suspense, and it was different. Then, when you get onto the deck...you see the boss...and it's a complete fucking letdown, as it looks like custard with a face.

 

If they had went with a better design, it could've been one of the best Zelda boss fights ever. Phantoon from Other M has a similar design to this boss and is amaaaziiing.

 

[Grazza]

...Probably better than the 5th dungeon boss. I can totally see why you made the comparison, although I still liked it

 

 

Anyway, I have to disagree with you about one thing, @Fierce_LiNk - story. I'm less and less convinced that games even need stories. Well, they do a bit, but not much. The more I play 2D Metroid, the more I'm convinced that games should be built around a fun game mechanic, and not story.

 

Whilst Zelda has had some absolute gems since it went 3D (OOT, MM and WW for me), it hasn't had that direct sense of reward since Link to the Past. More and more, I think the next game should start with Link in a field. From the beginning he has to find his way, fight enemies and just generally find out where the heck he is and what's going on. Atmosphere is more important than story. Yeah, there could be some subtle, in-game storytelling, but ideally even by the end of the game it should be up to the player to decide what it was about.

 

I can dream.

[Fierce_LiNk]

...Probably better than the 5th dungeon boss. I can totally see why you made the comparison, although I still liked it

 

 

Anyway, I have to disagree with you about one thing, @Fierce_LiNk - story. I'm less and less convinced that games even need stories. Well, they do a bit, but not much. The more I play 2D Metroid, the more I'm convinced that games should be built around a fun game mechanic, and not story.

 

Whilst Zelda has had some absolute gems since it went 3D (OOT, MM and WW for me), it hasn't had that direct sense of reward since Link to the Past. More and more, I think the next game should start with Link in a field. From the beginning he has to find his way, fight enemies and just generally find out where the heck he is and what's going on. Atmosphere is more important than story. Yeah, there could be some subtle, in-game storytelling, but ideally even by the end of the game it should be up to the player to decide what it was about.

 

I can dream.

 

If the game doesn't revolve around the story, then yes, I agree with you, it should be totally about exploration or game mechanics. The first thing that sprang to mind, funny enough, was Super Metroid.

 

But, we don't have that with Zelda. Because the majority of the games (3D at least) start off with about 2 hours or so of nothing but wandering around a place and then being given a story. Not necessarily a bad thing, but if the game doesn't revolve around a story, then it has to start off differently. If it does revolve around a story, then the story needs to be stronger.

 

Nintendo seem to be giving out mixed messages to me at the moment. One the one hand, they're saying this stuff about timelines with Zelda. On the other, they're not really developing their Zelda stories all that well in the actual games themselves...like somebody else posted earlier in this thread, the story telling is actually poor at times in comparison to many other games. I've recently played Hotel Dusk and the story is incredibly well told.

 

Definitely something Nintendo need to work on. Or, if they don't want to, get somebody else to do it for them. Say, Retro.

[Dog-amoto]

Has anyone else noticed that this thread has nearly overtaken the other SS one in number of posts?

 

In your face, spoiler thread!!

[EEVILMURRAY]

Flink, can you please stop trying to associate that piece of crap Other M with this sublime gaming experience?!