For a game that is as beautiful and amazing as Skyward Sword, you'd have to have something seriously wrong with you to let motion controls be your excuse to not play. Fucking suck it up, you whiners. Learn a new control scheme, move your arms once in your lives, and enjoy the perfect game. Your life will improve as a result. You have absolutely nothing to lose by getting this game and playing it.
The motion controls in Skyward Sword involve a learning curve. Beyond that, they work excellently and really add to the experience. And I've been gaming since Sonic 2 on the Genesis. Not as long as other people, surely not as long as Holmes, but I've still gone my whole life with buttons. I love buttons. I hate bad motion controls. Skyward Sword does not have bad motion controls. They're FUN.
None of this is to say that Skyward Sword deserved that extra half point. I don't know if it did or did not. Just debating a minor point.
I wrote this earlier but it fits well here because we did not own any "Motion Plus" garbage and my GF could not play the game when we got home.
I have not been paying attention to this game at all.
I really don't like the Wii Zelda games, though my GF loves them, I prefer the non Wii system ones as I don't want motion controls stuffed down my throat. I saw the date it came out and bought it and I have not touched a Wii controller in a good 5 months.
So yeah if this was a controller based game I would enjoy it much more than waggle enabled, I loved the Gamecube Zelda and stopped loving them once they hit the Wii.
SS only required you to attack enemies once or twice to defeat them, providing you attack them using the proper angle. Didn't really have trouble with the controls when it came to combat, you just have to be really patient and time your attacks properly.
When you got the equivalent of a liberal arts major trying to build a bridge it shouldn't come as a shock that the bridge is a faulty and slipshod piece of crap.
I'm sure the motion controls work great, and I'm sure I'm gonna love the game, but there are still times that I want to just sit and not use motion controls.
also @EggmaniMN that's silly, you're being silly.
I don't care about the scores and certainly don't care about metacritic nonsense. I just don't want to see you walk on eggshells and feel like you need to paint an imaginary blemish on a game just because you think somebody else might not agree with you.
This only makes me more afraid for the WiiU. Once again, I'm saying that I don't want to play ninja gaiden 3 with that giant bulky controller, with the little analogue nubs, and the battery draining screen. This is the part where people call me stupid because the wii u will be able to use the classic controller, but whether the game themselves use the classic controller is up to the developer. Wii games could use gamecube and classic controllers, but barely any gave the option because developers wanted to justify their games being in the wii, so the map some essential actions to motion controls, and as soon as that happens, the option to use a classic controller disappears. I can totally see rocksteady adding some stupid touch screen minigame or some bat gadget that uses the wiiu's tablet controller just to justify the port, and as soon as they add those things, the tablet becomes mandatory.
Also getting a little off topic, but how many ds games ACTUALLY make full use of both screens? Sure a lot of games make good use of the touch screen, but pretty much EVERY SINGLE one of my games (except TWEWY) just uses the second screen as a map or something that could easily be in a start menu, which sounds like a muh better option than increasing the costs of millions of dses and significantly draining the battery life of the system by sticking a second screen in the system. It's especially bad when once again, nintendo themselves have barely justified having two screens in their first party games as all of their games I can think of just use the second screen as a map. Nintendo needs to stop forcing these cumbersome innovations on us if they themselves can't even make good use of them outside of minigame compilations
To Holmes' point about alienation, I really felt halfway between solid, familiar controller methods and outstanding motion controls. The moves in SS just didn't help. If I'm not having fun playing a game then what the hell am I doing playing it?
Development barely started before the decision to use MotionPlus was made, though. And "slipshod piece of crap"? Maybe if you play the way the guy at GameSpot did, sure.
The other half is people thinking technology doesn't change and think that swinging a sword will be like the baseball bat from Wii Sports. Have an open mind people, the controls are new. You haven't actually used them before, you don't know how they feel.
Nintendo didn't add an option because they were confident in their tech, as they should be. Try it, you'll like it.
I am willing to Skyward Sword complete attention, despite not seeing any intrinsic benefits of motion controls; every experience with motion controls has lead me to form the opinion that it's actually worse, and the commands could be more precisely entered with standard controls. I am in the group that would physically intuit with buttons, though...
I'm willing to see if Zelda SS's implementation changes my mind.
*slow clap*
You nailed it on the head!
They should allow motion controls to be optional, like inverting. Not everyone plays the same way.
Yeah, but the motion controls were far more basic than Twilight Princess. The swordplay is way, way more complex in this game, as you (Holmes) must know. Having an option to revert to standard controls would likely inevitably take away from the overall motion controlled experience, as combat is dependent on both the angle of the sword strikes and many other things, and as far as I can tell there is no way they could've replicated that without a full motion controller.
It's not that hard to get used to, anyway.
Occasionally controls are so bad that they become widely discussed, like the sluggish controls in Killzone 2, but I'd appreciate if these sorts of discussions became a regular part of a review like graphics or gameplay. Controls are really important and bad controls sink a game.
Whenever the occasional poster comes forth to report that keys cannot be re-binded or an axis cannot be inverted, they always get hammered down by the trolls saying it is easy to get used to, or whatever.
I have more gripes with motion-control in general than the publishers utilizing it. However, the fact remains that it is the only reason I don't play Zelda anymore (or Wii for that matter) D:
1) Whether or not a game alienates people has nothing to do with the quality of the game. That's a rather arbitrary line you're drawing there. Would a game with a story that some people found offensive lose points for that, for instance? If you say that's different because it is narrative and not game play-oriented, you're only strengthening my point that you are drawing an arbitrary line.
2) You'll notice that almost everybody who reviews the game mentions, that at least for a while, the controls did not click for them. The reality of the situation is that most of those people would have switched to classic controls.
3) You mention that it would not be impossible to translate the game to standard controls. This is true. It would not be up to Nintendo's standards of qualities though. It would be unusually clunky for a Zelda game.
4) Back to number two, this is a game that Nintendo believes would be worse if people played it with standard controls. So by that logic, wouldn't reviews for this game be worse if they had given people that option? Perhaps sales as well? Certainly the legacy of the game would suffer.
Basically, Nintendo made the right call on this one. This is coming from someone who is usually in favor of as many control styles as possible.
oh please. does anyone (possibly over the age of 18) actually feel like this when they play video games? cause i for 1 am self aware and know i am playing a video game and not pretending i am the person in the game. do people really fantasize like this when playing video games?
its just a game.
What I mean is that Aonuma has openly admitted that he couldn't play the original Zelda. The original game was a twitch-based action-RPG that focused heavily on exploration and combat. The combat should have felt more fluid. Instead because of his background, the combat is said to be "like a puzzle". The enemies have a pattern and you have to hit them "just so" to hurt/kill them. That's not exciting. It just makes combat boring. Likewise it allows the developers to half-ass the motion controls so as to not be nearly natural as they could be. In the older Zeldas it wasn't like this at all (maybe the bosses). Regular enemies would swarm you and you'd have to Johnny-Be-Quick to not get killed. Now the enemies just stand back while they fight you one at a time.
What I'm saying is that Aonuma is the worst thing to happen to Zelda since...well, the CD-i games, and honestly at this point that's actually almost being cruel to the CD-i Zeldas. He got hired by Miyamoto because he made wooden dolls in college. I want someone with actual game development skills, because the only thing that Aonuma made outside of Zelda was some crap PC adventure game that utterly bombed. All Aonuma has done is turned Zelda into a lame PC-point-and-click adventure game with half-hearted combat tacked on as an afterthought as though that is going to appease the very old-school fans of the originals, when it doesn't.
At this point Skyrim has more in common with classic Zelda than the Zelda of today does. Fire Aonuma and put the series back in the hands of people that grew up with and understand what the original games were. Preferably Retro.
To see how ridiculous the whole argument is, try reversing it: "Skyrim should have motion controls. Both the 360 and the PS3 have controllers that would support it, therefore not having them is a major problem with the game."
No, actually, it shouldn't. A game's controls are chosen to support the gameplay of that game.
But the motion plus and 1:1 swordfighting is just too much of a gamechanger for me. Though they might technically could have, I feel that trying to make those things work on a classic controller would have made the game a lot less interesting and engaging for me and actively less fun as a result.
But I totally respect your opinion! I also understand now that you as a game reviewer feel that you have a responsibility to look beyond just yourself and try to write and review for as many people as possible, which is very respectable and admirable.
I do have a little bit of a problem with the following statement though: "To get a 10/10, the game has to give all players everything they could possible want or expect out of a title.". If this were true, no game could ever possibly score a 10. Take a game like RE4 for example, which I remember you saying was a 10/10 game in your RE4 HD review. There are tons of people out there who think RE4 is disappointing compared to RE1-3 because the focus is much more on action instead of survival horror for example. Going by your logic RE4 should then not be a 10/10 game. Maybe you can elaborate this statement a bit?
I'm actually more ok with forcing motion+ on the new Zelda. This is a complete integration of the concept, not some tacked on BS. Yes it would be possible with a controller, but I'm sure one of the endless ports to a future Nintendo console with implement standard controls so I'm not too worried. Alternatively, you could emulate motion+ onto standard controllers in Dolphin and play in HD today if you have a super computer.
After all, Sony has marginalized PSMove, and look how that turned out for them.
normal controls is like using your normal hand.
its easier when you have your normal controls cause you know what each button does. and its fast and more accurate.
but when you try to use motion control it just doesnt seem right. your all over the place and its nothing but waggling till you get it right. and by that time you just dont care anymore.
That's why Sony has no hardcore Move games. ;)
But in all honesty, I was wildly excited for the potential that motion controls could bring to a game, and I'm pretty upset that it took five years for a game to finally deliver on the initial promise. The game is amazing though, and I can safely say that I do not wanna play Skyward Sword with a regular controller. No More Heroes 2 lets you do it, but trust me, removing motion controls from NMH2 makes the gameplay pretty mediocre in comparison to what Bayonetta and even God of War lets you do. That being said, most video games force me to use a controller with two analog sticks and 10 buttons, and nobody complains about that. What if (hypothetically) I wanted to play Street Fighter with a motion controller. I can't. Capcom is forcing me to use a regular controller! :P
But what if the critics are right though? What if motion controls, by design, are inherently broken? Recalibration is something I occasionally have to do in Skyward Sword, but it's not a game breaker for me by any means. Learning how to accurately place my sword strikes gives me a level of immersion no other game (save the NMH games... kinda) has really given me before.
If you don't like motion controls, that's fine. It's okay. I'll be playing Skyward Sword with my sword held high up in the air, yelling my battle cry, Skyward Strike all charged up. :D
On the motion controls, I think they work well, not as good as I expected though.... but we'll see.... I'm going to kee an open mind and hopefully master it.... my arm got tired after about 5 hrs. Of play... I'm thinking I just need t get used to a wii mote, again.
WHOA! Bringing up the CD-i games! Let's... let's no go there! I've played the CD-i games. Comparing Aonuma's involvement with the franchise to the CD-i games is a huge, huge, HUGE exaggeration.
And maybe combat is boring for you, but it isn't for me and the other people enjoying the game. The whole point of this game is that being "Johnny B. Quick" can get you killed. You need to approach each battle with focus and an eye for your opponents' weaknesses. You know, like actual combat. Ever sparred against someone who knows what he's doing? Connecting blows isn't as easy as "swing like a windmill." It requires looking for openings and misdirection. It's like a dance.
That is, unless you picture a "fight" as two drunken bar patrons just wildly flailing on each other. Neither one usually comes out unscathed.
That being said, if it gets SS gets "downed" for lack of button control alienating gamers, then how come games like skyrim don't get "downed" for a lack of inviting motion (or other simpler methods of) control that alienate "casual" players?
The Zelda series has long used the standard controller that many of us are used to and like very much. This is what we grew up with and prefer, we also grew up with Zelda.
It's simple, motion control for some is just awkward. No two ways about it. When the controls are awkward for someone, it takes away from the possible great experience they could have with the game.
Of course, I'm sure someone will reply to this, unable to accept that not everyone likes to play the way they do. Calling it now, and to that person I have one question. What DOES Nintendo's dick taste like?

surf dtoid with 

Rising (10+)
People you follow































follow












