I don't think this is the solution.
My post wasn't really a "take", just an observation that there seem to be more people lukewarm on the game than I would have expected, given the unanimous critical praise. Of course, the general consensus is still positive. And I do agree that this discrepancy between critical and fan feedback is much more pronounced with Skyward Sword.
SS was "another Zelda", this time with limited exploration.
Most criticisms on the game (weapon degradation, story, progression) are direct consequences to the open nature of the game.
SS is better than TP. Shame about all the shit they could have cut, like make fi optional, less filler bosses, and a bit more boss variety (3 ghirahims ? come on)
SS is a fantastic game with really good dungeons and one of the better re-uses of scenarios I've ever seen.
I actually really like open-world games with open ended gameplay. I think one of my issues with BOTW may be that I don't find the core gameplay to be as engaging as some other open-ended games. I feel the combat is very stilted and relatively shallow, as I mentioned before, so I don't get pure pleasure from just the act of playing the game, like I do with, say MGSV or Mario Odyssey. I can spend hours running the same mission on MGSV, testing out different weapons and approaches. And in Odyssey, I can spend time in the Metro or Seaside Kingdoms just bouncing and jumping around, coming up with locomotion challenges for myself (Balloon World has been a godsend). And you are right, I actually played the game for over 120 hours, so I'm sure if you distilled my playthrough down to the best moments, you could find 40 hours of magic haha.
I don't think that at all! I appreciate the open exchange of views.. something that seems to be endangered around here sometimes lol.
In fact I found the repetition in Odyssey worse than in BotW, mostly because the kingdoms are small and there's no sense of discovery at the same level as BotW.
I think I read that over 2/3 of the moons in the game fall into this category, which sounds about right to me. This is why it's the only 3D Mario game in which I haven't felt compelled to go for full completion.
I'm fine with weapon degradation in general but the rate at which even higher level weapons break feels like a bug that never got fixed.
Fully agreed. Despite lacking in some areas where Zelda games used to excel I could find enjoyment in the game, until my weapons broke yet again, and again, and again, and again. It made the combat loop (attack enemy -> weapon breaks -> pause -> select weapon -> ad infinitum ) so tedious that it felt like the game was trying its best to make me avoid combat. And it succeeded in that part, I quit the game.
SS gets so much hate and so much of it has to do with the Wii's motion controls. It was and is a genuinely incredible game. It's not perfect. Maybe it's a little too linear for my liking and maybe they added just a bit too much filler content. But it's still a truly great game IMO. When you raise your arm upright for the first time in the real world and Link reciprocates in the virtual one, you need to appreciate that surely? Such an incredible moment in video games.
I personally love OOT. It's one of my favorite games ever. But it's not flawless was all I'm saying. Otherwise I agree with everything you said.
I never actually played SS but didn't Red Steel 2 come out before it and have much more accurate and complex sword motion controls?
I don't know about more accurate, but I certainly preferred the combat in Red Steel 2. Just felt more fun and dynamic to me. Plus it helps that Red Steel 2 is only like 7 hours long.
