Zelda Topic

[Indigo Rush]

It might not be wise to have Zelda's first starring role in a game also be the game where everything goes pretty much to shit specifically because Link isn't around.

Eh, I suppose. Either way, as long as Zelda gets a game. I still think it'd be a neat idea, though.

[Diogenes]

No one's saying that they have to know that Ganon will rise again. From their perspective, it would be a necessary evil. Really, isn't it the same as any other Zelda game?

No, it really isn't! In every other Zelda I can think of, when you win, you win. You may not get there unscathed but you protect what's left. Hell in OoT you go back in time to prevent all the suffering from happening in the first place (even though they pulled the split timeline deal and had it still happen anyway). Flooding Hyrule was basically the nuclear option. It's not saving the world, it's burning it to the ground and hoping it kills the bad guy too.

Isn't that one of the main reasons we make sequels to great games? How can we do something new and different?

That doesn't mean anything that's different is good. I want to see the themes of this series explored in different ways, not beaten into the ground.

[Indigo Rush]

I guess as per usual, we'll have to agree to disagree.  I really think Zelda could benefit from a darker ending every once and a while, but maybe that's just me.

[Sami]

So I caused a bit of a stir over this in the statuses today, and figured I might as well make a post in here to see if there's a single person on the forum who agrees with me!

 

I'm probably going to get eaten alive if I don't word this carefully, so I'm going to start with some clarification - until recently, I was a huge fan of 3D Zelda. I cared enough about Twilight Princess to write a review about it, and despite having quite a few flaws, I still thought the game was incredibly solid and worth checking out. I'd still say the same, honestly. Same with Skyward Sword, Wind Waker, and Ocarina of Time. There's very little the game's do wrong, and as a result they're all extremely polished and fun to play.

 

So... I'm not saying the games are bad, okay? That clear? They're not. They're cool.

 

Something that's really been bothering me with the series as of late is how safe it's been, however. How it never really does anything groundbreaking anymore, and how it's no longer the industry leader in any aspect. That makes me sad, honestly. Before I get into the meat of this, I'll just reference something Wraith told me in the statuses - "You played two of the greatest games of all time and now your standards for Zelda are too damn high". ... Why? Was Zelda not an industry leader back in the early 2000's and all the time before that? Did the original NES Legend of Zelda not change the way games were played at the time? It could be said it was the forerunner for RPGs as a genre. Not just one, but several of the games are very often considered the greatest of all time, and are without doubt extremely influential to gaming as an art medium throughout the years. I desperately want to care about what the current direction of the series; to see it as one a frontrunner for gaming as a whole, or as an example of being the best at anything, but I just can't anymore.

 

Looking at the latest entry - what exactly did Skyward Sword do that broke boundaries? Ocarina of Time was stunning for its intuitive combat, having invented lock-on as we know it now. It was revolutionary for its incredible sense of scale (look at how many people reminisce about how magical it was to see Hyrule Field, in all its vastness, for the first time), its cinematics, and of course its silky smooth 3D controls and camera. I'm not asking Skyward Sword to revolutionize gaming, but what did it do that was even exceptional? The scale of the game is no longer as impressive as OoT was at its time because other games, like Xenoblade, are on a whole other level. Going into this expansive, explorable overworld is no longer as impressive as it used to be because games like Dark Souls or Elder Scrolls make it look tiny in comparison. I will admit the combat is one of the better examples of swordplay with motion controls, but even the value of that can be argued. Are motion controls any more than a gimmick that took years to be realized? Does it hold artistic merit that can be looked back upon years from now and still be captivating? 

 

I see infinite potential in the Zelda series, and I see it underutilized and played safe each time. Disappointing is putting it lightly. Why can't we have another Majora's Mask? Another game that wasn't afraid to shake the foundation? That really offered an engrossing world with captivating characters and extremely strong toning and atmosphere? Why can't we have a well-written, emotional story that can be remembered for years to come? I played Skyward Sword and Shadow of the Colossus around the same time - SotC blew my mind when I played it, and I still remember it vividly. Solving the puzzles necessary to kill each colossus was fun and immensely satisfying, and the puzzle elements were so well implemented that I never felt like the gameplay was being slowed down or less fluid in order for it to take the focus of the fight. I won't venture off on why Shadow of the Colossus is such a beautiful work of art in its own right, but one thing I really appreciated is that it excelled in several different aspects, something Zelda used to do as well. The puzzles are fun to solve, and the focus of the game is absolutely solving the puzzle each colossus presents. That being said, that focus does not detract from the rest of the game. The combat is built entirely around the core mechanics of the game, and never, ever feel limiting. It plays with a very unique control scheme and utilizes it perfectly. The story is fantastic, and the atmosphere and tone are stunning. The world is enormous, and evokes the same isolation one gets from Metroid. Really, I could go on, but I feel like I've ventured off topic enough by now. 

 

Skyward Sword, in comparison, felt forgettable. The plot didn't leave much of an impact on me at all. I really liked Zelda herself, but apart from her, I didn't really feel any emotional attachment to the world I was exploring, or the characters I was being introduced to. I thought Fi was likable enough, but the tearful goodbye with her didn't really stir much emotion, nor did Impa's. It was a very pretty game, aesthetically, but beyond that nothing really "wowed" me. I didn't stop and just stare in awe at the environments like I do with other games that offer far more interesting worlds and characters. I'd love to be engrossed by tension and an overwhelming sense of courage and fear, like I was with Shadow of the Colossus. I'd love to learn more about the world and be left awestruck by the depth and detail with which the mythos was so carefully constructed, like I was with Dark Souls. I'd love to see a new area and just stare at it with child-like wonder like I did with Journey. I'd love to learn about each and every one of the characters and watch them grow and progress as people like I did with Persona. I'd love to be so entrenched in the story that I don't want to put the game down just so I can find out what happens next, like I currently am with Xenoblade.

 

I guess what I'm trying to say is, I want to say "wow" again, and judging from the direction the series has been going in for what's almost been a decade, I just don't see it happening. And more than anything else, it makes me sad. I have Zelda posters hanging up in my room for a reason. I fondly remember first being introduced to the series through Phantom Hourglass, and loving it. I remember being blown away by Wind Waker's beautiful aesthetic, and by it's amazing climax. But different games have come out since then, and I've started playing a much wider variety of them. Games that have surpassed Zelda in many aspects. More than anything else, it saddens me to see it, really.

 

I wish Zelda could consistently rank among the best of the best for being a master of its trade. For providing the most engrossing worlds to explore, the most well-written characters, the most captivating story... something. But for now, it's just got some really good dungeon design. And that's fine - the game's are still great. I'm just seeing tons of potential that isn't being utilized, and it's disappointing.

 

Or hell, maybe my tastes have just changed too much. Maybe I'm just not supposed to expect anything of Nintendo anymore, because they're never going to deliver what I want. I don't mean that snarkily, either. I'm more saddened by it than anything else. I desperately want to love these games, and to feel the excitement and hype that so many other people here do, but I guess I should just give up at this point.

 

Feel free to tear me apart now.

[Patticus]

I don't think a darker ending would sit well with Miyamoto or Aonuma, but they would probably be quite happy to explore darker themes over the course of the game, so long as they could mingle with the series' humor and lighter tones.

 

Also, I felt Skyward Sword's plot was more impactful than that of any other 3D Zelda game. To me, it is literally and figuratively the series' high point to date.

[Solkia]

Other than the vast open Hyrule field in OoT being a good thing, I agree.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

Well a bittersweet one could be a good alternative instead of a downer ending. You gain something of value while losing something else important. Allows more tension if you ask me, and really leaves people wanting to know what happens next. Of course, with this being Zelda, that's usually all over the place.

 

As far as Discoid's thesis goes, can't see anything to tear Discoid over for. A lot of what he said is also a reason I hate one-shot characters; so much potential and use beyond their one appearance and it feels wasted when we don't explore more. For example, Midna of Twilight Princess. I got a glimpse of the Twilight Realm kingdom and I really wanted to explore more of it than that (provided that one floating region wasn't the only part of the realm), more of it's history, people, culture, and so forth than what was given while we were storming it.

 

Given how high this franchise is regarded, I don't think it would hurt them at this point to try and shake things up more in an attemot to deliver something far more gripping than what they've done. Last time I really got gripped into a Zelda game was Majora's Mask, where everything was a drastic shift from what we normally get in the series. We're usually trying to save the princess most of the time, but in Majora's Mask we were actively trying to fight Armageddon itself in the form of the titular mask on a mischievous Skull Kid.

 

Then with Twilight Princess, Midna was what I felt was very much worth trodding through the game multiple times for. I just loved her character that much, and to say nothing of seeing her True Form (rawr). Now granted, I have yet to play Skyward Sword so I won't say anything about it, but I will say that I really want to feel gripped into the series again.

[Soniman]

Okay here we go, let's do this, lets get ready to rumble, lets rock, lets party, lets roll, lest...just go through this darn thing.

 

Starting with this statement

 

 

 

 I'm not asking Skyward Sword to revolutionize gaming, but what did it do that was even exceptional? 

 

​Swordplay, most definitely.

 

Ever since the motion controls were introduced developers tried and failed to implement swordplay into the Wii, and they failed each and every time because NO ONE could get it right, be it Red Steel 1 (and to an extent 2), Sonic and the Black Knight (ughghghgh) or even Twilight Princess where it was the definition of tacked on, didn't add anything to the game (and in fact made it WORSE imo) and wasn't needed.

 

And then Skyward Sword came along, building on the sword play mechanics that were finally implemented well in Wii Sports Resort, and it changed quite a fair bit of how a Zelda game played, and it did what no game before did with swordplay + motion controls, made it fun, unique, (mostly) easy to perform and not a waggle fest. Enemy AI had to be completely be built from the ground up, forming more complex enemy attacks/defenses and making each encounter feel like a legit test of skill, when you fail at hitting an enemy and they counter with a strike of their own, it feels like genuine failure on your end. It's a legit expansion on what WW/TP, and what earlier OoT/MM laid down. So yes, I do believe it goes above and beyond being a mere "gimmick" and does add genuine evolution to an established aspect of the series.

 

 

 

Going into this expansive, explorable overworld is no longer as impressive as it used to be because games like Dark Souls or Elder Scrolls make it look tiny in comparison. 

 

SS is a smaller game in scale compared to earlier titles, but I think it helped it considerably, and helped the overall theme of the game. TP had a big overworld, but was it fun? No. Was it epic and grand? No, because it was separated into "subsections" so it got rid of any feeling of scale it had but still kept the boring trekking through large empty areas. There's little reason to explore because there's almost nothing worth finding. Wind Waker is the EXACT OPPOSITE of TP's, having a large overworld but having a TON of things to find and discover, it felt great, it felt like you were actually on an adventure, uncovering islands and shit, it was the best. This is why I thought Skyward Sword opted for a much smaller over world, having most of it take place in Skyloft and little elsewhere in The Sky. The point im getting as it that bigger doesn't mean better, if you're going to have an obnoxiously large over world that has no point existing, don't do it, and if you ARE going to do it, make it worthwhile (WW) and not feel like it's totally disconnected from the rest of the game (TP).

 

 

 

Disappointing is putting it lightly. Why can't we have another Majora's Mask? Another game that wasn't afraid to shake the foundation? That really offered an engrossing world with captivating characters and extremely strong toning and atmosphere? Why can't we have a well-written, emotional story that can be remembered for years to come?

 

Wind Waker is on the same level of Majora's Mask in terms of all of this. Wind Waker had a completely different art style, a completely different way of traversing through the vastly different overworld, a completely different Hyrule (hell it wasn't Hyrule at all technically), not to mention tons of characters with side stories and charming personalities and the general theme of letting go of the past and moving towards the brighter future. Hell it actually made the villain out to be a sympathetic character who longed for the beautiful land that he had lost centuries ago and pines for it again and will do anything to obtain it, it's an overall fantastic tale and it's why it evokes such fond memories in a ton of Zelda fans and general gamers. Though I don't like TP all that much, it does indeed have a very definite tone to it's story, very sombre and somewhat dark (tho not the extent of MM) with very dull colors and a very....downcast type of art style, especially the character design and how it looks when compared to WW. With Skyward Sword it's up in the air at this point to me, id give it another few years before we see if it was just as influential.

 

 

 

Skyward Sword + Shadow of the Colossus Comparison

 

Okay believe it or not, I think I did the same thing, or at least I played these games within the same couple of months (3 at max). SotC is a very nice game but I never saw it as a super amazing experience, just a very good/great one. The Overworld isn't a great one from a gameplay perspective, it is there strictly for to set the theme and do give the game a more "adventuring feel" to validate the use of Argo and such, there's very little combat to be had, very little puzzles to go through, it only exist for you to go to one Colossus to the next. This isn't a bad thing, it works for the game, but it's not very FUN to go though. Story-wise there's very little in this game, a lot of it is implication and the player just assuming what happens/why is Wander doing what he's doing. Stuff like this, and Journey are nice, but again I would prefer my story be told to me upfront/throughout the story rather then just do guesswork, and does Dark Souls even HAVE a story? Because I don't know and I don't want to be wrong, lol. I guess this is based on taste, I had more fun conquering a temple/dungeon than a Colossus though both are satisfying at the end of the day. Sotc to me is a very artsy type of game, its something to experience once, but after that you really have no reason to play it again, doesn't help there's little to no extra content and literally no other characters to interact with, but I can't fault it because that's what the game was going for. unlike SS which has a good amount of content other than the main quest, tons of interesting characters if you look hard enough (Groose on his own is fantastic, then there's stuff like the Pipit/Karane/Cawlin love triangle, not to mention Batreaux), there's just a ton of stuff that had me coming back to SS than Sotc. Though Sotc does it better, I did have some tension during the Imprisoned battles and some genuine fear when he got closer and closer to the temples.

 

And finally the wow moments, I guess once again I have to disagree with your views. I was wow'd during my fight with Levais because it was the only dedicated Sky fight and it took place in the middle of a thunderstorm and it was such a great climactic fight, I was wow'd with the last Imprisoned fight because I felt a true sense of urgency of having to stop it before it got the the temple, I was wow'd by Koloktos because it was such a fantastic boss battle and just constantly cutting that fucker up with large fucking schimitars and then WAIL on him, and finally I was wow'd went Girahim was about to sacrifice Zelda and I had to get to him by cutting through a army's worth of Boboklin's just to get to him. All of these were great moments in the game that seriously had me on the edge, not to mention the little things like the roller coaster segment, I could give more examples but I think I made my point.

 

 

 

I wish Zelda could consistently rank among the best of the best for being a master of its trade. For providing the most engrossing worlds to explore, the most well-written characters, the most captivating story...g. But for now, it's just got some really good dungeon design. And that's fine - the game's are still great. I'm just seeing tons of potential that isn't being utilized, and it's disappointing.

 

 

Xenoblade is a fantastic game, but I can use the same logic you're using. The combat system is fine, but there's a lot of RPGS that do it better, the story is great, but again you could probably find something better or on par with it in quality, the characters are developed enough but you can most certainly find a more well rounded cast elsewhere. And then theres things like graphics (which I can garuntee you could find better alternatives) and voice acting. Individually these different aspects don't excel incredibly well on their own, but the whole is greater than the sum of the parts, Individually they may not be fantastic but when they come together they cohesively form a fantastic experience that many find unique and interesting, which why Xenoblade is seen as a fantastic game, and it's why there's such huge love for Wind Waker, Majora's Mask, and to an extent Twilight Princess and Skyward Sword.

 

Don't get me wrong, I don't think these games are perfect (except Majora's Mask <33333) and there are areas that need improvement, heck SS has a fair amount of flaws that and I don't completely disagree with the idea that the series needs to evolve in certain aspects, but I do think they can still hold their own with most well regarded games today.

Edited June 19, 2013 by Soniman

[EuroMIX]

My only real gripe with SS was the Silent Realms. They looked interesting, but the second and third were just horrible minor gameplay changes for me which I did not enjoy. They were gates to fun, and that's not fun. The sword controls were amazing and exactly what the series needed to make most enemies less of a cakewalk.

 

TP, I feel, needed to stop trying to live in OoT's shadow and just be its own thing. The concept of the Twilight was great, and I wish that the big twist halfway through had been visiting a full, mirrored and twisted Twilight version of Hyrule with new dungeons and mechanics.

[Jolt_TH]

The thing with the SS swordplay is that it's unlikely to return. Didn't miyamoto or someone say that they wanted to do something different this tone to made the use of the gamepad

[Sami]

I was in the middle of writing a long response, but then my phone erased it all. Cool.

I'll reply fully during lunch, since I'm at work at the moment. But I'll quickly address one thing that stuck out to me -

I completely disagree about the depth you say the motion controls provide. They're not creative, intuitive, or unique. Rather, they function, which alone is impressive considering the standards the Wii has gotten us used to. I don't see every enemy as a test of skill, I personally felt it to be a glorified game of Simon Says - "enemy holds his shield left, swipe your hand from the right! Now it's over his head, so do an uppercut!" I didn't feel skilled, nor did I feel smart. I just felt I was capable of reacting to extremely obvious cues. Compare this to a more traditional combat system like Dark Souls, where you as the player have to learn the enemies patterns and act accordingly. For instance - "This giant has a large halberd to hit you with, so try and stay either far away or extremely close! He has a shield in his left hand, so stay on his left side so he won't be able to hit you! He swipes in an arc, so make sure you roll while he's swiping so you can get some hit in on his side while he's recovering!" This is not something that is blatantly obvious - the first time you see that particular enemy, they'll likely intimidate the hell out of you. Long range, lots of health, and only two hits needed to kill you. Figuring out the method to killing them efficiently is immensely satisfying, and I think that kind of depth would be neat.

That being said, Zelda is more about puzzle-solving than fighting (though is it so wrong to wish for more?), so I can live without it. I'm just saying the motion didn't do it for me at all. It was most likely a one time thing to capitalize on a trend - the best example of motion controls, but I never cared about motion controls in the first place.

[Diogenes]

So I caused a bit of a stir over this in the statuses today, and figured I might as well make a post in here to see if there's a single person on the forum who agrees with me!

Well, I can definitely see where you're coming from with a lot of this. I think the two main reasons they don't take many risks are that, one, AAA games have become more expensive and complicated to make as time's gone on, and two, they pretty much "perfected" both 2D and 3D Zelda. They don't want to risk funneling a whole lot of money into a game that'll end up pissing off the fans.

Majora's Mask was a great and spectacularly unique game, but from what I've heard it's a game that very nearly didn't happen, a weird little side experiment that was able to piggyback off of OoT to give it a head start. I figure it's only gotten harder since then to justify trying something risky. I'm not sure if we're going to see something that ballsy from the series any time soon.

But hey, who knows. Last we heard they were talking about shaking up the series a bit with the next game, so maybe it'll catch your interest when they finally show it off.

​Swordplay, most definitely.

Can I just say that I don't really get the praise for SS's swordplay? It seemed fiddly and inconsistent, and it didn't really add much to the combat. I liked the way Wind Waker and TP were going a lot more, giving you a range of moves to use in different circumstances, dodge-rolling behind a guy to hit his exposed back, stunning him with a shield bash, etc. It felt a lot more proactive and dynamic than waiting around for an opening or for things to line up.

[Candescence]

Dark Souls is an interesting example to use. Yes, Soniman, it does have a clear story, but much of the details are hidden away either in item flavour text, or you have to go out your way to avoid Frampt and kill the Four Kings first to access Darkstalker Kaathe, who claims that Frampt is feeding you bullshit, and tells you what he claims to be the truth. Of course, the whole two endings thing is ambiguous as to which ending is actually best for everyone, but a lot about Dark Souls is intentional vague, really. Is Solarie really Gwyn's firstborn? What's up with Priscilla? Is Frampt really talking out of his ass? (Probably.) WHO FUCKING KNOWS.

 

The actual combat, while it is strategic in nature, I find a bit cumbersome due to the control scheme. It's mostly a matter of knowing your enemy's attacks, when to block, dodge or parry, and when to actually strike back. Which is, honestly, fundamentally not that different from what Skyward Sword does, except without the whole 'puzzle' aspect to the swordplay, which I actually thought was kinda neat and was very much different from the norm.

 

Though, really, at least Skyward Sword doesn't chuck a luck-based boss straight at you early in the game like Dark Souls does. ARGH, THAT FUCKING BRIDGE WYVREN.

Edited June 19, 2013 by Shirou Emiya

[Soniman]

Can I just say that I don't really get the praise for SS's swordplay? It seemed fiddly and inconsistent, and it didn't really add much to the combat. I liked the way Wind Waker and TP were going a lot more, giving you a range of moves to use in different circumstances, dodge-rolling behind a guy to hit his exposed back, stunning him with a shield bash, etc. It felt a lot more proactive and dynamic than waiting around for an opening or for things to line up.

 

I can understand this, I guess it's all based on your tolerance for the motion controls. The some of the array of moves from older games like the dodge roll though seem to be pretty circumstantial and is a thing that can be used when the game allows you to (well in WW, not TP iirc). I think the best example of a dynamic fight I can think of is the Lizard fights, they're fast, you have to dodge constantly as well wait for the weak point to expose and then wail on it by lining up your sword swings (and if you don't you get punished for it), basically how Shirou explained it in comparison to Darku Souls. I think it's a genuine improvement over the past swordplay that was generally wailing on the enemy, block/dodge + counter, or hitting on the obvious weak spot .

Edited June 19, 2013 by Soniman

[Sami]

Dark Souls is an interesting example to use. Yes, Soniman, it does have a clear story, but much of the details are hidden away either in item flavour text, or you have to go out your way to avoid Frampt and kill the Four Kings first to access Darkstalker Kaathe, who claims that Frampt is feeding you bullshit, and tells you what he claims to be the truth. Of course, the whole two endings thing is ambiguous as to which ending is actually best for everyone, but a lot about Dark Souls is intentional vague, really. Is Solarie really Gwyn's firstborn? What's up with Priscilla? Is Frampt really talking out of his ass? (Probably.) WHO FUCKING KNOWS.

The actual combat, while it is strategic in nature, I find a bit cumbersome due to the control scheme. It's mostly a matter of knowing your enemy's attacks, when to block, dodge or parry, and when to actually strike back. Which is, honestly, fundamentally not that different from what Skyward Sword does, except without the whole 'puzzle' aspect to the swordplay, which I actually thought was kinda neat and was very much different from the norm.

Though, really, at least Skyward Sword doesn't chuck a luck-based boss straight at you early in the game like Dark Souls does. ARGH, THAT FUCKING BRIDGE WYVREN.

That ambiguity is something I absolutely adore about Dark Souls. Everything about it feels painstakingly crafted, so rich and full of detail that catching on to hints you may not have noticed at first is fascinating and satisfying. It's a far cry from Zelda's comparatively straightforward and painfully simple approach to its lore. The Dark Souls approach isn't something I want for the plot, per se - just the mythology of the world. I want the world to be just as fascinating as the main plot, and for the history of the places I'm traveling to be interesting and unique. As far as the plot itself, I'd prefer something like Xenoblade. Great writing, great characters, beautiful music, and fantastic cinematic cutscenes, all culminating to create a fantastic narrative with some very emotional moments.

In regards to combat, while you are correct in saying they are fundamentally the same, the degree of depth and control Dark Souls provides puts them on completely different levels. I'm not necessarily asking for the complexities of Dark Souls' stat system (worrying about poise and weight in Zelda would be odd), but I'd like the combat to be customizable and varied enough for PvP to be possible. Parrying, rolling, different weapon types, one-handing, two-handing, stamina, guarding, and so forth. Compared to stuff like this, combat in Zelda feels very clunky and limiting to me - like I'm being forced to play a very specific kind of way and should not be able to experiment and form my own playstyle.

Edit: And honestly, I thought the bridge dragon was fine, haha. All you have to do is run and roll at the right time. I wouldn't really call it luck-based, and he's completely optional as a boss.

Edited June 19, 2013 by Discoid

[Marcello]

I think it's a genuine improvement over the past swordplay that was generally wailing on the enemy, block/dodge + counter, or hitting on the obvious weak spot .

That's how I played SS for the most part.

[Soniman]

That's how I played SS for the most part.

 

The difference for me is the fact that you have to work more for the weak spot, which I only ever thought was a thing in past Zeldas with the armored enemies in past Zeldas and having to chip away at them until they're exposed.

[Marcello]

I just slashed and slashed until I hit a weak spot.

 

 

Either way, I don't think  it fits the series. It's not about combat and having such a big focus on it was annoying.

[Diogenes]

I can understand this, I guess it's all based on your tolerance for the motion controls.

I'm more than willing to "tolerate" motion controls, in fact I think there's a lot of interesting potential applications of them. But SS's swordplay just isn't one of them.

I think the best example of a dynamic fight I can think of is the Lizard fights, they're fast, you have to dodge constantly as well wait for the weak point to expose and then wail on it by lining up your sword swings (and if you don't you get punished for it), basically how Shirou explained it in comparison to Darku Souls. I think it's a genuine improvement over the past swordplay that was generally wailing on the enemy, block/dodge + counter, or hitting on the obvious weak spot .

The lizards are one of the better enemies in SS, but they're still not that interesting to fight. Wait around until they show an obvious weak point, slash in the obvious direction, hack away at them until they recover, repeat.

Compare to something like the Darknuts in Wind Waker. They've got heavy armor, meaning you can't damage them immediately. You can cut off their breastplates by attacking their backs (either catch them by surprise, roll-parry, or just manage to run behind them) and expose their soft fleshy bits. You can also knock off their helmets with a jump-parry, which lets you use the boomerang to stun them (giving you an easy opportunity to take off the rest of their armor and letting you effectively stunlock them) or arrows (ice arrow+hammer is an instant kill, good for speedrunners). And if you knock away their sword they'll bust out martial arts until they have a chance to get it back. That's an interesting enemy, one that you can interact with in a number of ways.

[Soniman]

I guess if there's one thing SS needed it was more damage inducing items and aside from the classic arrow and bomb weapons, though since there was a larger emphasis on swordplay there wasn't much of a need for it.

[Wraith]

I think the Zelda combat would be fine if the enemies weren't such pussies. We don't really need systems that encourage PvP. I think Link should have more free movement when fighting and more options for swords, yeah, but I wouldn't want to overcomplicate things. 

 

 

The combat  would be MUCH better if the enemies FOUGHT BACK. I loved fighting the Darknuts in TP for this reason. Skyward Sword was better about this, but they were still a bit too easy. 

[Jolt_TH]

I liked the swordplay in SS and in WW/TP.

I liked the immersive feel of SS swordplay, and how it wasn't just button pushing, but finding the weakness like a real sword fight, although I did miss doing the rolling dodge jump thing and the helm splitter and did find myself trying to do them at times. If they added those to SS swordplay it'd be good for me, not saying it would be fixed completely, bit it would be a step closer

[Diogenes]

Honestly I find gameplay more immersive when I don't even have to worry about what my hands are doing, when it's simple and responsive enough that it may as well be wired right into my brain. Waving the wiimote to slash doesn't do that.

[EuroMIX]

I would agree Dio, if SS's sword controls had been as shaky as they were in TP, but they were not. SS wasn't perfect, as stabbing felt a little loose sometimes, but I found the rest of it more or less on point. I can't help but wonder if this is just more "waggle" hate because gamers seem to despise motion-based controls as a whole down to the very concept. I have personally been playing motion-based games since around 1999, so perhaps I've been given more time to adjust to the concept whereas other gamers see it as encroaching upon their comfort zone even when it's a well-designed component designed to improve gameplay.

 

Again, I would agree in any case where the controls were broken and didn't work, but as far as what I dreamed about when the Wii was announced, SS was about as good as it could ever get.

[Diogenes]

I've defended motion controls in the past. I just don't think this particular application is doing much beyond replacing a functional system with a clumsier one.

 

Honestly TP's waggle bothered me less because the game never really asked you for accuracy with it.