Nintendo: Skyward Sword is Our Biggest Videogame Project Ever

[Logan Westbrook]

Nintendo: Skyward Sword is Our Biggest Videogame Project Ever

Not only is Skyward Sword big, it's also the most immersive Zelda game ever made, says Nintendo.

Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword [http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B002BSC54I/ref=s9_simh_gw_p63_d1_g63_i4?pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_s=center-2&pf_rd_r=1HAZ86EMFQRN7H8A598K&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=470938631&pf_rd_i=507846] is Nintendo's biggest videogame project. That's according to Nintendo of America PR man David Young, in a video demonstration of some of the game's combat and equipment.

"The great thing about Legend Of Zelda: Skyward Sword," he explained, "is that it's filled with content so as you're going through exploring dungeons from place to place you're going to find tons of different things to explore, see and collect." This isn't the first time that Nintendo has suggested that Skyward Sword is bursting at the seams with content either; Shigeru Miyamoto said [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/112971-Skyward-Sword-Will-Take-Dozens-of-Hours-to-Finish-Says-Nintendo] that there was between 50 and 100 hours of gameplay in the game. Young also said that Skyward Sword would be the most immersive Zelda game to date, thanks in no small part to the Motion Plus-powered controls.

As I said when the news that Skyward Sword would have a full orchestral soundtrack [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/113448-Skyward-Sword-Scores-Full-Orchestral-Soundtrack], it seems like Nintendo is really pushing the boat out for this one. Of course, with the Wii U coming out next year, Skyward Sword could very well be the last high-profile first party release the Wii gets, almost making Skyward Sword the console's swan song.

Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword comes out for Wii on November 20th.

Source: Game Trailers [http://www.gametrailers.com/video/tools-and-zelda-skyward/721738] via Official Nintendo Magazine [http://www.officialnintendomagazine.co.uk/31101/nintendo-zelda-skyward-sword-is-our-biggest-project-ever/]


Permalink

 

[chstens]

Looks like they want to compete with Skyrim. Legend of Zelda: Skyrim Sword. Huh, maybe someone makes a Legend of Zelda mod for Skyrim some time down the line.

 

[ZeroMachine]

Looks like they want to compete with Skyrim. Legend of Zelda: Skyrim Sword. Huh, maybe someone makes a Legend of Zelda mod for Skyrim some time down the line.

They exist for Oblivion, they'll exist for Skyrim.

More to the topic, I'm more and more looking forward to this game. I mean, I was before, but 50-100 hours and a full orchestra? I hope this isn't another Twilight Princess fiasco where they promise more than they give (it looks like it isn't) because I've wanted a big, epic Zelda game for quite some time.

This is a must buy for me.

 

[TJC]

Why do people think that longer gameplay means more fun?
Why should I care about 100 hours of playing a game if 88 of them will be stupid grinding to upgrade my friggin shield (only to be then eaten by a like like)?

Somehow, I'm not exactly excited for this game :/

 

[Delock]

Despite how promising this game is, I still feel it's a bit late, kinda like how Twilight Princess was for the Gamecube. Don't get me wrong, I'm not someone who says the Wii was horrible, but like its predecessor, it just didn't get enough support.

I might end up splitting the cost with one of two people I know who own Wiis, but this isn't enough to make me have one of my own.

Also, when is Capcom going to make another 2D Zelda? I loved their stuff more than the 3D Zeldas (yes I know that's probably a gaming sin, but I really don't care).

 

[Atmos Duality]

Looks like the absolute last gasp of air for the Wii before it chokes for good, just as Twilight Princess was for the Gamecube.

The wake will be held sometime in January, with the Funeral the following Saturday...
But I think with this we can finally mark an end to the Motion Control Gimmick Era, and Good Riddance to that (yeah, you're next Kinect, Move).

 

[Beautiful End]

Why do people think that longer gameplay means more fun?
Why should I care about 100 hours of playing a game if 88 of them will be stupid grinding to upgrade my friggin shield (only to be then eaten by a like like)?

Somehow, I'm not exactly excited for this game :/

Honestly, that's exactly why people get excited. I would prefer to have a game that lasts around 80 hours, sidequests and all, than to have a good game like, let's say, Killzone, that you can finish during lunch. If Killzone was more lengthy, I would buy it in a flash. But to spend 40 or 50 bucks on a game that lasts only a couple of hours (Multiplayer doesn't count; if I wanted that, I'd buy MAG) is just a big no-no for me. Good game, too short. It's like waiting hours and hours to get on a roller coaster ride and once it's your turn, the ride lasts 10 seconds. You don't even have the chance to savor the moment; it's over. Off you go. But if the ride lasts at least 10 minutes (Bear with me), then you'll be satisfied and the wait will be worth. Who knows? You might get in line again.

Grinding and sidequests and all are optional. But if you're tired of the main story and you wanna take a break from that but you still wanna keep playing the game, this is awesome.

 

[Sonic Doctor]

I've kind of lost interest in the Wii, if I had the money to keep up both my 360 and Wii with games, then I would, but I don't have the money.

I think my problem is that achievement style gaming has partly spoiled the joy of playing games without achievements. Though now I am in a gaming dry-spell, I've been entertaining the thought of playing some of my gamecube games on my Wii, I have a ton of gamecube games.

Looks like the absolute last gasp of air for the Wii before it chokes for good, just as Twilight Princess was for the Gamecube.

The wake will be held sometime in January, with the Funeral the following Saturday...
But I think with this we can finally mark an end to the Motion Control Gimmick Era, and Good Riddance to that (yeah, you're next Kinect, Move).

Sorry for you I guess, since I highly doubt that motion controls are going away as you think. I think they are here to stay until the next level of gaming, possibly some form of virtual visor thingy that actually works without giving headache, than holodecks after that.

I wouldn't wish the death of motion controls because I know sometime in the future holodecks will be possible, but in order for that to happen, motion controls have be worked on and get better. Microsoft, to me, made the major jump with no controller motion controls, but still I don't see motion controls being amazing for another 8 to 10 years.

As much as you seem to despise it, motion controls die, there will be no more evolution and change in the area of controls, ever. You will always be stuck with a piece of plastic that will make it so that reaction time is slow because the data will always have to travel from the plastic to the system.

Motion controls are here to stay.

 

[Frostbite3789]

Why do people think that longer gameplay means more fun?
Why should I care about 100 hours of playing a game if 88 of them will be stupid grinding to upgrade my friggin shield (only to be then eaten by a like like)?

Somehow, I'm not exactly excited for this game :/

I've been feeling the same. Nintendo has been hyping this up themselves way too much. It hasn't been other people hyping it up, it's just them. And whenever a company is hyping their game up this much with little to no support it makes me suspicious.

 

[Frostbite3789]

Honestly, that's exactly why people get excited. I would prefer to have a game that lasts around 80 hours, sidequests and all, than to have a good game like, let's say, Killzone, that you can finish during lunch. If Killzone was more lengthy, I would buy it in a flash. But to spend 40 or 50 bucks on a game that lasts only a couple of hours (Multiplayer doesn't count; if I wanted that, I'd buy MAG) is just a big no-no for me. Good game, too short. It's like waiting hours and hours to get on a roller coaster ride and once it's your turn, the ride lasts 10 seconds. You don't even have the chance to savor the moment; it's over. Off you go. But if the ride lasts at least 10 minutes (Bear with me), then you'll be satisfied and the wait will be worth. Who knows? You might get in line again.

Grinding and sidequests and all are optional. But if you're tired of the main story and you wanna take a break from that but you still wanna keep playing the game, this is awesome.

Well that's making a pretty huge leap to the content being good. If the rollercoaster is 10 minutes of jolting you around and back pain, what does that do for you?

I'm not a huge fan of super short games, but when in time did quantity suddenly become indicative of quality?

And to count out multiplayer is foolish. Especially considering how lacking MAG was in that category even. And I wanted so badly for that game to be good.

 

[Sonic Doctor]

I'll add to what I said before, if it is as good as Wind Waker, I will think about getting it. Because in my eyes, Wind Waker is the best Zelda game to date.

Why do people think that longer gameplay means more fun?
Why should I care about 100 hours of playing a game if 88 of them will be stupid grinding to upgrade my friggin shield (only to be then eaten by a like like)?

Somehow, I'm not exactly excited for this game :/

I'm guessing that you are the type of person that when you play an RPG, you just do the main quests and beat the game in 20 hours, while everybody else plays the whole game and get done in 60 or more hours.

If I made a game, I would find some way to penalize players for not doing side quests, it really makes no sense to pay 60 dollars for a game and then play just a third of it. It's like reading a book where it is split up into sections that follow the main character and then sections that follow side characters, but then you only read the parts about the main character and skip the rest. Of course you aren't going to enjoy the book in the end, because you didn't get the full experience, same goes for video games.

I found it astonishing playing Dragon Age 2, when people complained that it was too short, and some people mention how they beat it in 17 hours. When I heard that I was still playing it and had 40 hours logged in. I finished it in 50+ hours because I did everything the game had to offer. It makes me wonder if the people that complained about the so called "confusing disjointed story" actually did all the quests in the game, because I remember some of the side quests clearing up questions I had.

 

[RandV80]

Why do people think that longer gameplay means more fun?
Why should I care about 100 hours of playing a game if 88 of them will be stupid grinding to upgrade my friggin shield (only to be then eaten by a like like)?

Somehow, I'm not exactly excited for this game :/

I've been feeling the same. Nintendo has been hyping this up themselves way too much. It hasn't been other people hyping it up, it's just them. And whenever a company is hyping their game up this much with little to no support it makes me suspicious.

I'm not saying you're wrong but don't forget that Nintendo is a Japanese company where when 3DS sales fell well below projection their CEO took a voluntary 50% paycut. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt counter to what you say because first, Nintendo has been around a long time and has never abused the 'over-hype for marketing' card, and second, Nintendo has never shared early builds with reviewers. Mario Galaxy 1 & 2 came out with critical acclaim with no prior 'support', as you put it.

 

[Beautiful End]

Honestly, that's exactly why people get excited. I would prefer to have a game that lasts around 80 hours, sidequests and all, than to have a good game like, let's say, Killzone, that you can finish during lunch. If Killzone was more lengthy, I would buy it in a flash. But to spend 40 or 50 bucks on a game that lasts only a couple of hours (Multiplayer doesn't count; if I wanted that, I'd buy MAG) is just a big no-no for me. Good game, too short. It's like waiting hours and hours to get on a roller coaster ride and once it's your turn, the ride lasts 10 seconds. You don't even have the chance to savor the moment; it's over. Off you go. But if the ride lasts at least 10 minutes (Bear with me), then you'll be satisfied and the wait will be worth. Who knows? You might get in line again.

Grinding and sidequests and all are optional. But if you're tired of the main story and you wanna take a break from that but you still wanna keep playing the game, this is awesome.

Well that's making a pretty huge leap to the content being good. If the rollercoaster is 10 minutes of jolting you around and back pain, what does that do for you?

I'm not a huge fan of super short games, but when in time did quantity suddenly become indicative of quality?

And to count out multiplayer is foolish. Especially considering how lacking MAG was in that category even. And I wanted so badly for that game to be good.

Well, the fact that it's a Zelda game should be a good enough guarantee for fans that the game WILL be good anyway. Zelda hasn't been around for this long for no reason at all.

I guess this goes more towards all Zelda fans. Say what you might about Twilight Princess but it was still a good game, right? I mean, if you had to compare TP and Duke Nukem, which one would you choose? TP is good; maybe it didn't live up to expectations to some but it was still good, the same way that some Mario games are better than others. Bottom line: They're still fun.

You're right, a long game doesn't mean it's a good game. But in this case, Zelda is already shaping out to be good, just like its predecessors. So, more of that = fans are happy.

 

[Frostbite3789]

Snip

Twilight Princess was decidedly better on GameCube. We haven't seen a good Zelda game on the Wii, the only one that's been on the Wii was better on another console. That doesn't really inspire a ton of confidence.

I mean, I could be wrong. I hope I am, I like Zelda. Not a huge fan of Nintendo as a whole, but the Zelda series will always hold a special place in my gaming history.

 

[mjc0961]

Looks like they want to compete with Skyrim. Legend of Zelda: Skyrim Sword. Huh, maybe someone makes a Legend of Zelda mod for Skyrim some time down the line.

Well if that's the case, Skyward Sword wins by default because Skyrim is a buggy mess. It's a Bethesda game after all.

 

[GeorgW]

It's be weird if it wasn't the biggest one. Zelda's always been their content richest series and it's been a while since a high profile release from Nintendo. I really hope it lives up to expectations.

 

[Citizen Snips]

It's bigger than ever! You now will go through the water temple... Three times! I see all of this trumpeting as kind of pointless. There are four dungeons, you find a sword, find some triangles, get doo Dads that are only helpful where you found them, and then beat Gannon by fighting him in a couple different ways. It's the formula. The only way you can expand it is making hearts and rupee bags harder to find.

 

[Atmos Duality]

Sorry for you I guess, since I highly doubt that motion controls are going away as you think.

Probably not, but at least the FAD part is over with, and we can actually move onto using the tech for purposes not related to selling mountains of kiddie-shit shovelware.

And really, I mostly despise my Wii; FAR moreso than the Move or Kinect.

 

[walrusaurus]

I honestly don't understand why they're pushing so hard to get this out on the Wii, rather than making it a launch title for WiiU.

I don't own a wii and i'm not about to go out and buy one and the motion plus just to play this one game, and thats not even considering the fact that said console will be obsolete in less than 6 months. On the other hand i do have interest in the WiiU, and have been thinking about taking hte plunge on one. If Skyward sword was a launch title for the WiiU I'd probably buy one, new console with new toys, i get to play all my favorite franchises again and a kick ass Zelda game on top of it all.

Why nintendo, why......