I endured the game for two hours and quit because I couldn't take it anymore. The point that I stopped, for reference, was when I was being given a tutorial on how to mark a map, by a priest with a really tall hat. That's when I cashed out, even though I figured my first dungeon was nearby and that the game would get better. That tutorial was the straw that broke the camel's back. Let's break down why this tutorial in particular is EXTRA dumb:
• Clear up to that moment, the game was very VERY linear. Sure, some exploration happens in Skyloft but it's a small village to explore and not much to do in it (that early in the game).
• Previously, if you encountered a dungeon that presented you with multiple paths to take, the tried-and-true method was to just design the levels in such a way that the correct path leads to the item/power up you need to make progress in the other path, so backtrack back to the other path. If you chose the incorrect path, you would come up against a wall and use YOUR OWN JUDGMENT to come back to the path later and try the other paths.
• Also previously, if a Zelda game ever had a reason for you to have a marker on your map, it would just give it to you automatically. Zelda LTTP for the SNES, for example, would have you talk to Saharalahsa or whatever his name was. He'd say where you're supposed to go, but in case that wasn't enough, you'd see a marker on your map. It's just there, automatically. It's all the help you need and not an ounce more.
Finally, I'd like to address the systemic problems with the game. These are things I knew I'd have to constantly wrestle with even if the dungeons were any good:
• Waggle. Nintendo went way, WAY overboard on this one. Let me get something straight: there are times when waggle or motion control is okay, and I will do my best to illustrate when. In Kirby's Epic Yarn, all of your critical controls are mapped to buttons. You can walk, dash, jump, and attack all with direct input. Sometimes, Kirby meets a power up that transforms him and this may include motion controls. Early on, one of these power ups transforms Kirby into a huge tank. His attack and jump buttons are still the same. However, he can aim/pivot the turret by tilting the wii remote. Because he's a tank, the pivot animates slowly--but it responds to player input quickly. The enemies during this section are slow enough that a player can get accustomed to the controls and pick them off as they come.
In Zelda, that game replaces ALL direct sword button input for waggle. Now, swinging your sword is delayed because the game has to register that you're flicking your sword. This means that when enemies approach, I basically have to "spam" the waggle repeatedly until the enemy AI is dumb enough to walk into my slash... the delay makes timing finesse all but impossible. Spamming this action in a normal-button input game would be annoying at best, but spamming it in motion is downright tiresome. What does this loss of fidelity add? Eight way slicing. After the first sword tutorial in the academy, I was wondering how the game would make good on this new control gameplay. Bats and slimes certainly weren't it. I finally encountered Deku Venus fly trap enemies and boy... those were not fun to fight and they are one of the most basic enemies of the game. Basically, I had to look at how the head was subdivided, wait until they attack, dodge backwards, and then swipe in the direction of their subdivision. This was frustrating because the window of time where the plant had its guard down was too small for my swipe to register a swing. By the time my swing would register, they would guard and deflect the attack. Not because I didn't understand the enemy or how to defeat it, but because the controls failed to respond in time. THAT'S dumb game design. Arbitrarily tying the core functionality to gameplay to motion controls JUST for the sake of having motion controls is dumb.
• Early on, there is a bird race sequence. Again, this is another motion-control heavy moment in the game. I have a nunchuck plugged in. I could be controlling this bird just fine with that. Instead, I have to extend and contort my arm in ridiculously exaggerated ways because I'm not 100% sure my input is being received, and even then because there's so much "noise" in my human gesture input the controls are imperfect and I have to overcompensate all the time. Yet there's a perfectly good joystick, right there unused. On top of that, this sequence required you to catch a bird not once, but like TWO OR THREE times! C'mon! The stakes are so contrived because you just KNOW the bad guys aren't going to beat you but instead sort of "rubber band" so that it SEEMS they are always about to win but never take it. It's actually patronizing. But if the game actually had a game over condition during that sequence then that would be extra-fucked because the controls are so bad that everyone would lose over and over. It would be Superman 64 all over again. Seriously think back to that section of the game and asked yourself if it was any better than racing on Epona or sailing in the boat. It's not.
• Exposition and story. This has been one of the more common criticisms of the game. I'm running out of time so I'll try to wrap this up: this game takes longer to get a sword than any other Zelda game. You are wading through backstory and needless discovery-killing exposition (and tutorials) for at least a half hour. Contrast this with Zelda LTTP or Super Metroid. None of the controls in those games are explained to you because they're self-evident. The best example might be the first fucking level of Megaman X. See egoraptor's "sequelitis" video on Megaman X for details, but basically the level design itself naturally leads the player to try and learn the controls as needed, organically. Without text or cutscene.
Also, and of course this is just my opinion, but Zelda herself is not a character. Not an inherently interesting one, at least. She's just a goal. In the same sense that Jessica is just a goal for Micheal J Fox in Back To The Future. Those movies have great stories but it's laughable how they write her character out in part 2.
The most *potentially* interesting character in Zelda games is actually Ganon. Villains are always, and should be, the most rewarding investment in character development. They define the contrast in your hero. They challenge moral conflict; what if Ganondorf did what he did in Zelda64 because otherwise his entire garudo race would die out?(not really, but just supposing)
• Link looks dumb. He looks like Disney's Peter Pan. I hate his lips. The art direction in general is bland.
Seriously, it seems as if they've been chasing Zelda64's playbook of game design. It worked in 1998 because WHOA, ZELDA IN 3D! Doesn't work in 2011. I'm glad that the 3DS game is basically saying "fuck that" to those tropes and is hopefully selling as well as it's reviewed.
Okay I'm done. Have to get back to work
Log in to comment