Zero Punctuation: The Legend of Zelda: Skyward Sword

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 NEXT
 

the "I FOUND A PLOTHOLE NURSE" had me pissing myself XD
it's the panic at the end that really made it work :P

Price0331:
I've been a Zelda fan for years, but I'll be damned to say that this formula is getting waaaaaaay past its prime. I mean, Nintendo still doesn't even want to voice act these things.

But that might actually be a good thing, because it means we don't have to listen to horrible actors butcher the delivery of the lines as they always do.

In any case, I don't have a Wii, so I can't play this one, but it doesn't feel like I've missed anything. Personally, my favorite remains A Link to the Past. Best dungeon designs, best boss fights, solid gameplay. Really light on the story, perhaps, but the fun factor makes up for that with me.
Although, Twilight Princess came close to knocking Link to the Past from its slot as my favorite in the series. The combat system was the best I've seen it (not perfect, but still good), the story and characters worked really well (mostly) and the world was huge and fun to explore. If only the dungeon designs and boss fights had been better, it would have been my new fave.
I think the Zelda Franchise really needs to branch out into sandbox territory. Letting us explore more of Hyrule for the fun of it instead of just when we need to in order to find the next dungeon would really kick ass.

"If I where Link I'd throw down the master sword and say Look you want this mother f-er dead or not?" ROFLMAO Best line of the year! XD

Sean951:

Ariseishirou:

Sean951:

Except Zelda wrote a whole new story and created many puzzles to go along with the new items, as well as creating a new final boss as well as new dungeon bosses. Oh, and introduced a play style focused completely around the Wii-mote instead of tacking it on like an afterthought. Then you have MW which just updated maps... maybe tweaked some stats on the guns finished out the single player I guess, because that's totally why people play it...

New story? New puzzles? New items? New final boss?

Yep, MW3 had all of those too. New single player campaign with 15 all new levels, plus 32 spec ops maps between survival (an all-new game mode) and missions, new weapons, new perks, new streaks, and a graphical upgrade. Not to mention everything that comes with Elite.

So, yeah... it's precisely as innovative as the new Zelda at this point. Heck, you could make a strong argument for it being more innovative. I'm not getting buttmad about the "derp herp MW2.5 (ad nauseum)" thing - if that's your opinion you're welcome to it, but it's pretty hypocritical, really - so why are you flipping out when someone says the same of Zelda?

I'm gonna ignore the first part of that, because it's a debate for a different time. I'm not mad that he doesn't like Zelda, I'm annoyed that he ignores so many positives to give a completely negative review. He typically finds at least 1 backhanded compliment for any game, but I didn't even see that.

Oh hi there, you must be new here at Zero Punctuation. Here: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/926-Batman-Arkham-Asylum That should get you nice and caught up on things.

LilithSlave:

Zachary Amaranth:
And yet, it's worth attacking him. That just seems odd to me.

My voicing my disappointment in giving such a vile man another go.

Makes me feel better wasting the time viewing his filth.

Zachary Amaranth:
How dare someone disagree with you....

Oh yes, disagreeing with someone is the same as saying "how dare they".

But it's certainly sad that someone gets money out of spewing consistently putrid and ridiculous wrong opinions about video games. Yahztee is wrong. Yahztee is almost always wrong. Yahtzhee makes the most petty, inane "criticisms" of video games since his inception as a review, and people take this person serious and give him money for his reviews.

Yahztee is one of the worst reviewers and critics I have ever come across in the video game industry. Possibly even worse than Adam Sessler. And Adam Sessler is a pathetically horrible part of the video game industry and community. They're like Bill o' Reilly, but about video games.

And funny how you, sadly, find this person worth writing a gigantic tl;dr post defending him on his continued inanity. How dare someone disagree with Yahtzee...

Zachary Amaranth:
However, I like the flat "No they're not rehashed, and anyone who says otherwise is a...." argument.

You know, there's only so many times you half to repeat the rebuttal to the often ridiculous claim that Zelda is rehashed, since Zelda haters do it all the time. I don't even know why I'm giving you a response. Look at the several other arguments online that tear this argument to shreds. Search for the topic on these forums, google it.

It's like being asked to prove why evolution exists every single time some creationist comes in.

How about you explain how there's a problem with the motion control, eh? Lag problem with the motion control? What on earth?

I'll just put aside the fact that it's really hard to tell if you're kidding, and the questions of why you're bothering to drag politics or debates about religion ect into this, so instead I'll just say this: Why have a Pinkie Pie avatar if you're going to spew the same hate and bile you're condemning? That's like... the exact OPPOSITE of what Pinkie does! The worst thing she did to someone she didn't like was throw them a party for goodness sake! It's really kinda depressing.

Hal10k:

Lordofthesuplex:

Well, of course he would point out the game's flaws. He's a critic. If you don't point out flaws, you're a salesman, not a critic.

I've said before, I'll say it again. Yahtzee is not a critic, he's an elitist. And this is not simply "pointing out flaws", this is just hatred and bias. It stops being an honest review the moment he starts complaining about trivial bullcrap like it actually changing some things around for once.

And do I have to mention that he cannot work a Wiimote for shit again so he has to complain about non-existent reaction delays instead?

Critic (plural critics), Noun:

1.A person who appraises the works of others.
2.A specialist in judging works of art.
3.One who criticizes; a person who finds fault.
4.An opponent.

Going by all four definitions off of the ol' wiktionary, Yahtzee is a critic. He appraises video games made by other people. This serves as his primary source of income, and he's been doing it for years now, so I would think that he qualifies as a specialist (disregarding the whole "games as art" flamewar). Pretty much all he does is criticize or find faults with things. And lastly, one could make the argument that he serves as an opponent to the developers of games he dislikes, though that one is admittedly a stretch.

Whether or not you agree with his criticisms is subjective, of course. But don't disregard him just because he's biased. We're all biased in one way or another; that's one of the downsides of actually possessing a long-term memory in conjunction with the capacity for logical reasoning. Yahtzee's opinion is biased because he dislikes the Wii. The argument you made is biased because you disliked Yahtzee's review. The argument I'm making right now is biased because I'm really uptight about semantics for some reason. If you want a genuinely unbiased review of a game, I'd suggest rolling a ten-sided die.

And there's no such thing as a trivial complaint in a professional review. If it's there, and you don't like it, it's your duty to complain about it.

Actually if you ask a statistic-inclined person (statistician? whatever) rolling a dice will NOT result in a completely random outcome cuz of chaos theory and physics and blahdy blahdy blah. So you can't even get objectivity from completely inanimate objects!

Never the less, I am so stealing this argument for whenever I get into a "why cant people be objective, wah wah wah" debate from now on. Thanks for that!

itsmeyouidiot:
Look guys, I'm sorry for causing a huge flame war, okay?

But seeing so many people disliking a game series that I've always cherished and likely always will upsets me on some very basic level.

I can't be comfortable knowing that there are people who dislike this game. I have to change their mind, and if I can't, then it will usually get violent pretty quickly.

This is especially true if the person doing the disliking is a prominent critic, because then other people will act under the delusion that being a critic makes your opinion more valid, and they'll be quick to follow with cries of "me too!" and "I agree!" and I want to stop that from happening. Violently, if necessary.

So, yeah, I'm sorry. I guess I'll go hang out somewhere else.

One wonders how full of yourself you have to be to think you "caused a flame war." And if you have a problem with people having different opinions then you, I'd recommend leaving planet earth, cuz that's just sorta how things work around here. The Borg might be a little more accepting of the idea that "everyone must agree with you or else violence" thing though!

42:
*sigh* So is Nintendo releasing anything new that is a re-tread of their current franchises?
i mean seriously I'm over playing Zelda, Mario and the likes. give us something new please.

As for the video, i can completely agree, personally for me it's just another zelda set in the sky, and its the same journey Link does in every game. It's mediocre, and I'm not saying that for wanting to troll, i honestly just don't believe it's that good as everyone thinks.

and as for Nintendo, 2011 was a really crap year for the wii wasn't it? i mean seriously the Nintendo Wii is stagnate, this game was it's only compelling release, and if this sounds familiar it's because J sterling said it himself. i mean what other game has been released on the Nintendo wii that anyone can mention? if it took you more than 10 seconds then it proves the point.

xenoblade took 3secs.
Also if you are going to complain about anything being the same you should complain about shooter season 2011

Draconalis:
Still hating this new layout.... this was so hard to find...

Obligatory: Great as usual...

Can we fix the layout now?

Edit:

/sigh

Yes, yes, yes. It's on the front page now. Try being here hours ago though, it was not.

Just highlight videos option with your mouse and click zero punctuation.

Averant:

KimberlyGoreHound:
[quote="mjc0961" post="6.335439.13544114"][quote="Indignator" post="6.335439.13544072"]
Isn't it weird that he shit on the game for using that boss where you swordfight, instead of using the dungeon item against the boss? I'm quite sure if they had made it so you used the Beetle to cut a line and hurt the boss, he's complain that the game was too predictable.

That wasn't really shitting on it as much as making fun of it. His next line was "THAT'S BREAKING THE ZELDA RULE!" And his character was making an OMG face.

If that's not Yahtzee sarcasm, I don't know what is.

So? Mocking something and insulting something are close enough, he wasn't gently poking fun at it with a statement before or after to indicate sarcasm, he said (and I quote, for those who don't feel like opening the video and fast forwarding to this bit):

"Skyward Sword is the worst Zelda game I have ever played, I mean, two of the dungeons just end with a generic boss fight with a recurring baddie, and you don't even defeat him with an item you found in the same dungeon, that's breaking a Zelda rule!"

Was he being sarcastic with his 'that's breaking a Zelda rule'? Almost certainly. Did it seem (I'm not going to insist on this in case I am wrong, and if Yahtzee himself comes down to correct me I'm not going to argue, but I'm quite sure this is what he meant) that he did not like the changeup in the boss fight, and that he did not find any redeemable quality in the boss fight with Ghirahim (or whatever the fuck his name was)? Certainly seems that way to me. I thought it was refreshingly different to actually have to use your sword in a way other than 'wait for enemy to telegraph attack, attack enemy, repeat'.

Revolutionaryloser:

itsmeyouidiot:

Revolutionaryloser:

No. No it isn't

OK now seriously. It's funny. The way you word your argument it sounds as if you are saying that if they had put exactly the same dungeons in, it would be sort of a dick move. The fact that they put the effort into creating a whole new dungeon is like fucking charity. No one actually expected them to actually design a different game. We were actually expecting Zelda: Ocarina of Time HD.

I really can't tell if you are serious anymore but if you are, you are a bad influence on gaming. It is because of people like you that mediocrity in gaming is acceptable. You probably think that giving a game a review score of 10 is perfectly acceptable. You don't seem to understand that developers are supposed to think of ways to make games better and more entertaining. Not by adding one new feature and changing a few things around but by actually using the tools that are being created and perfected with technology every day to cross new frontiers in gaming and interactivity. I've probably lost you at this point, so whatever. Go play every "new" game they throw at you and pay 60 bucks every time. It's not my money anyway.

And why does "using the tools that are being created and perfected with technology every day to cross new frontiers in gaming and interactivity" not include Skyward Sword's revolutionary motion-control scheme?

OK now I know you are trolling me. This is my last reply. 6/10

I laughed. I'm not even involved in this argument, and I can see you're obviously beat, and resorted to calling the person who bested you in an argument a troll. If you don't like the game, fine. If you think it's too close to being the same as the other Zelda games, fine (unless you also think MW3, Skyrim, Assassin's Creed Revelations, SR3 are revolutionary), but don't just throw the 'troll' card out there when someone brings up a point you're not able to refute.

Ariseishirou:

Sean951:

Ariseishirou:

My sentiments exactly. This whole thread just about proves that while Nintendo fanboys can dish it out, they sure can't take it. Depressing, really. If I had a nickel every time I saw someone whinge about "Modern Warfare 2.5" I'd be very rich indeed, yet the moment someone levels the same accusation another franchise that settles with a few new graphical tweaks, new weapons (and maybe not even that), and new maps (that happens to be produced by Nintendo) they fly into a frothing rage.

Except Zelda wrote a whole new story and created many puzzles to go along with the new items, as well as creating a new final boss as well as new dungeon bosses. Oh, and introduced a play style focused completely around the Wii-mote instead of tacking it on like an afterthought. Then you have MW which just updated maps... maybe tweaked some stats on the guns finished out the single player I guess, because that's totally why people play it...

New story? New puzzles? New items? New final boss?

Yep, MW3 had all of those too. New single player campaign with 15 all new levels, plus 32 spec ops maps between survival (an all-new game mode) and missions, new weapons, new perks, new streaks, and a graphical upgrade. Not to mention everything that comes with Elite.

So, yeah... it's precisely as innovative as the new Zelda at this point. Heck, you could make a strong argument for it being more innovative. I'm not getting buttmad about the "derp herp MW2.5 (ad nauseum)" thing - if that's your opinion you're welcome to it, but it's pretty hypocritical, really - so why are you flipping out when someone says the same of Zelda?

You missed the most important point: completely different controls. MW1, 2 and 3 all have essentially the same controls from what I've seen and played (haven't played #3 yet). Walking, aiming and shooting work the same, maybe it's a bit tighter from sequel to sequel, but you can pretty much pick up any FPS and guess that right trigger is shoot, up on the left thumbstick is walk forward, the right thumbstick is for aiming, etc. Skyward Sword has a totally different way of control than its predecessors. Also, CoD's different levels are certainly not as innovative (let alone more so) than Legend of Zelda's. Compare Twilight Princess to Skyward Sword. Twilight Princess was dark, moody, had a light world/dark world thing going on and you turned into a wolf. Skyward Sword is bright, slightly cartoonish, takes place on land and in the sky and you ride a big bird. MW1, you run around urban and industial areas and shoot people. MW2, you run around different urban areas, and shoot people. MW3, you run around different places, and I haven't played the game, so this is just a guess, but I think you shoot people. The graphics look nicer, but there's not a huge difference like in the Zelda games.

Don't get me wrong, you are allowed to like what I don't like, if you don't like Skyward Sword, that's fine. If you just couldn't get into it, couldn't enjoy it, whatever, that's fine. The only time I have a problem is when someone says something intrinsically incorrect, like "MW3 is MORE different from MW2 than Skyward Sword is to Twilight Princess". That's just wrong, no two ways about it, and if you argue, you're wrong too. To say you ENJOYED MW3 more, is fine. To say you think MW3 is BETTER is fine, although I disagree, you're welcome to your opinion. To say that MW3 is more different from its predecessors than Skyward Sword, is just wrong.

Oh, and as a little note, I do enjoy the CoD games, as well as other random FPS's here and there. Even if they all control almost the same, and the environments don't change immensely, they're fun, MW1 was very well designed and was a great game. I'm not going to whine that MW1, 2 and 3 were all pretty much the same, because if they had massive changes, they would lose the realism for which they were aiming, and unlike with Zelda, where the tutorial introduces the story, characters both new and familiar, new control scemes and different environments, most people who play CoD games wouldn't want to spend 2 hours learning the finer nuances of how to shoot at the beginning of the game, they would rather just be able to pick it up and know how to play it already.

The MW series' similarities to each other are forgivable, but it's just silly to say they're more substantial than the differences in the Zelda series from game to game.

BiH-Kira:
[Here is a video of those "worst" motion controls ever made.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=p_aGjL1bwN0

Anyone who hates the motion controls on Skyward Sword, especially those who haven't played it and are just trusting the hate, should watch this video. I have had absolutely no trouble with the motion controls on SS. I found the enemies who hold their swords specifically to block your readied attack to be a refreshing change from just slapping the B button until you land enough hits to kill them, specifically the enemies with electric swords, which punish you for fucking up and just waggling your wrist. Maybe some of the people held their Wiimote in their hand while it was calibrating instead of placing it on a flat surface like the message told them to, that could explain their failure, but to say the motion controls don't work when there's obvious evidence that the layman CAN easily get them to work, is, just like saying it's unoriginal, just plain incorrect.

Revolutionaryloser:
Gamers realized Virtual Reality technology was pretty lame when the Powerglove was invented.

Right. And people realized air travel would never be a big deal because the Wright Brothers' first airplane didn't take them across the Atlantic. Feel free to criticize the beta, I will agree that the Powerglove was a piece of shit, but to say something will never go anywhere just because the beta didn't work is just silly. It's decades later, and things have come a long way since the Powerglove. The Wiimote works.

Revolutionaryloser:

BiH-Kira:
-snip-

Now go away and stop acting like a psychopath on the Internet. It isn't even threatening because we're countries apart.

Did I miss something here, like was part of a comment deleted (if so, please describe what was said, because I would like to know), or do you really not know what a psychopath is? I suggest you look up your (attempts at) insults in the dictionary before you spew them. Silly man.

In short, I won't complain if someone doesn't like Skyward Sword, they are entitled to their opinion. If they didn't enjoy it, couldn't get into it, didn't like the artwork, the characters (especially Fi), that's okay. But if they say it's less original than MW3, they're wrong, if they say the motion control doesn't work, they're either doing something wrong, or they're wrong.

KimberlyGoreHound:
-snip-

Could you please stop trying to spark up a flame war that ended a week ago. It's not very nice of you and it's already been clearly established that Nintendo fanboys are not capable of rational argument or listening to either facts or opinions. If you want to go and play with motion controls, go ahead, no one cares. Just don't expect everybody to join in your love for swatting a stick in your living room, just like I don't expect everybody to join in my love for being tied, gagged and whipped; it just isn't everybody's thing.

Revolutionaryloser:

KimberlyGoreHound:
-snip-

Could you please stop trying to spark up a flame war that ended a week ago. It's not very nice of you and it's already been clearly established that Nintendo fanboys are not capable of rational argument or listening to either facts or opinions. If you want to go and play with motion controls, go ahead, no one cares. Just don't expect everybody to join in your love for swatting a stick in your living room, just like I don't expect everybody to join in my love for being tied, gagged and whipped; it just isn't everybody's thing.

This.

Instead of taking on board what they've been told, they'll proceed to type you an essay on why everything Nintendo does is solid gold. I actually used to enjoy Nintendo products back in the day, but this current generation for them as just been one long stagnant mess and if they keep up the way they appear to be with the Wii-U then I hope it breaks them as a company.

(P.s. S&M for the win!)

Gainrrom:
We're not defending him, he can do it himself if he feels like it. We're just using the quote to underscore how distressed fanboys get when a guy reviews a game. We quote this and laugh at you, that's all.

Your post is especially amusing because, at the time of my original post, I hadn't even played Skyward Sword.

Distressed fanboy indeed. Hard to be a fan of a game I haven't played yet, isn't it?

Sounds to me like your post is actually saying "I don't know what I'm talking about, so I'll slap the fanboy label on you in a pathetic attempt to invalidate your differing opinion".

Yahtzee is factually incorrect on several points, as those who have played the game (and those like myself, who have not but are at least INFORMED about the game and how it plays), and when people point this out, they're immediately dismissed as fanboys by people whose only knowledge of the title is that it's a Zelda game. The only ones who should be laughing are us, not you. Unless you're laughing at your own lack of experience and knowledge of the game. In which case, please continue.

ACman:
How is not liking something due to a personal reasoning being misinformed?

If I say I dislike chocolate because it sticks to my tongue too much I would be at odds with the opinion of the vast majority of humanity; but it doesn't make me misinformed. It just means I don't like chocolate.

A review is a subjective argument. Your call for objectivity in the review process is ridiculous. It brings to mind the idea of every reviewer checking with every other reviewer to make sure that all their reviews are "correct" or world where game reviews are merely dry summations of the storyline and game mechanics.

Your mistaken and flawed example highlights a clear lack of understanding in what I'm complaining about.

Allow me to explain with more valid examples taken from the review in question.

Yahtzee's review is quoted as saying that every game since the Ocarina of Time is "the same game" with another package. This is not a subjective opinion, it is a statement whose validity can, in fact, be measured and tested....and proven wholly false. Here is a list my friend (who has actually played the game and many other Zelda titles) constructed that provides some clear examples of major mechanical changes to the game. I've added some comments of my own in parentheses.

* The ability to aim attacks by swinging the Wii Remote in different directions and the necessity of doing this even against regular monsters to bypass their guard. (Motion controls were a feature introduced in Twilight Princess, but the implementation of actual strategic requirements to combat is brand new.)

* The capacity to upgrade equipment and potions by collecting various items and having them forged together. Purchaseable upgrades also exist, as well as quest-related upgrades. (This change has radically altered a lot of the game's functionality, including the function of a player's wallet, their inventory items, their potions, and so on. It should also be noted that besides the standard Bow and Slingshot, this game also features a number of items not featured in any other Zelda game.)

* A stamina meter which determines how long you can do strenuous activity. Stamina can be enhanced with potions. (This feature is not a meaningless addition either, as numerous activities in the game require careful management of your movement and stamina in order to succeed).

* The ability to charge up energy in your sword and fire it as a projectile. (Arguably similar to the projectile beams that your sword would fire in some Gameboy Zelda games, though it differs slightly in that the energy blasts must be charged manually rather than it being automatic, and can be fired in a variety of directions and angles based on how you swing your Wii Remote.)

* Dungeon maps now also display relative position and treasure chest locations and the Compass does not exist at all.

* Players possess a pouch with limited inventory spaces for various supplies such as potions and can switch these items in and out of storage. (This is a significant change, in that the adventurer pouch now contains backup items like the slingshot seeds and quiver. You cannot upgrade your normal carrying capacity for items as you did in prior games, instead you must upgrade adventurer pouch items that will allow you to carry as many more as you have inventory space for.)

* Shields now suffer damage and have a meter which, if depleted, will result in the shield breaking and having to be repaired. Potions can restore shield durability. (Previous Zelda games allowed you to essentially rely on the shield for indefinite amounts of defense. This game requires that you learn the proper timing behind enemy attacks, or else you risk breaking your shield, even against normal enemies. This adds a strategic element and forces players to pay attention when using their shields.)

* To properly defend against attacks, player must time a motion to counter the attack. Failing to time this properly can result in the shield taking damage or the attack hitting the player. (As stated above.)

* Special items can increase the odds of finding hearts and treasure, but take up pouch spaces.

* Supplies and equipment are drawn out of the inventory without interruption of gameplay, even while running.

* Player has the ability to attune their sword to certain targets and use it as a form of radar to locate them. (This feature is used abundantly throughout the game.)

* Player is able to go into first person perspective and then move about, albeit not attack.

* Player begins with six hearts and most attacks deplete a full heart. Hearts in the field are more rare.

* The ability to pluck bomb flowers and place them directly into your inventory without having them explode, replenishing your bomb supply. Bombs in the field are much more rare. (This change allows players to essentially avoid running out of bombs in the middle of combat, provided a bomb flower is nearby to restock. A very valuable and welcome change.)

Keep in mind that this is just a list of mechanical changes. It does not delve into the story, which is actually quite radically different from the other games (to the point of being somewhat jarring as it introduces major changes to the pre-existing Zelda canon). It establishes another deity in Hyrule's pre-existing pantheon, as well as introducing new main villains and several previously unknown NPCs that explain a lot of the naming schema behind Hyrule.

With such a vast number of changes, how can one possibly argue that SS is "the same game" as OoT? It's really very obvious that not only is Yahtzee wrong in this sentiment, he's allowing his own subjective hatred of the franchise to cloud his judgment, which results in his fans being completely misinformed about the game. His claims that "well, I liked Wind Waker" are not enough to convince me, or anyone, that he is able to perform an unbiased review of a Zelda title, or even a Nintendo title in general. His recent statements in Extra Punctuation state that he isn't against Nintendo, so much as he is against "games which aren't fun". Except that "fun" is not only an absurdly subjective entity that will vary entirely around the individual, it's also a very weak defense against damning evidence of his very wrong statements that he chooses to willfully ignore. Note that his Extra Punctuation does not, in any way, address WHY he believes that OoT and SS are "the same game". He just dismisses the notion that he's anti-Nintendo (even though in his own reviews, he all but admits this to be the case) and whines about the lack of an open world. That's it. That's his paltry defense against valid criticisms of his review.

This is what I'm talking about. Those posting in favor of this review, I note, tend to be mostly composed of individuals who have no knowledge whatsoever of the game or even the franchise itself. And so, when Yahtzee makes a statement that is clearly false, they do not know better and will presume his statements to be the factual truth, which is part of my call for more accuracy and objectivity. Reviews are indeed subjective, but good reviewers provide not only their opinions but a relative structure to things. For example, one very excellent reviewer from That Guy With The Glasses is Linkara, a comic book reviewer who provides not only his opinion on a subject (which people may or may not agree with) but gives good, rational reasons for that opinion, and provides the viewer with a clear lay of the land. You get more than just an opinion, you get information about what precisely is happening, detailed information about the situation from both an IC and OOC perspective, and clear visual evidence to help confirm both his opinions and statements. In addition, he is quick to correct errors and admit to them.

Yahtzee, by contrast, does absolutely none of these things. His reviews feature no footage from the game to demonstrate the problems he's having so you're expected to assume that what he says is the truth. You get a synopsis that could fit on a milk carton, often leaving out major details. The whole review is riddled with his own subjectivity to the point where he makes clearly and provable false statements that are taken as true by his fans, and when he is called on these statements, he'll either deny them outright or turn them back on the users. This is most evident in his Mailbag Showdown (which so many have quoted on this page) in which he picks out some of the worst written complaint emails from his mailbag as if they're a representative sample of all of the opinions presented against him ever, never bothering to address real valid complaints that come up during discussions of his reviews.

Is it any wonder that I'd make a plea for more objectivity when it's become very obvious that there is absolutely none remaining?

CriticKitten:
This is not a subjective opinion, it is a statement whose validity can, in fact, be measured and tested....and proven wholly false.
Is it any wonder that I'd make a plea for more objectivity when it's become very obvious that there is absolutely none remaining?

He actually states "Despite graphical changes and game play tweaks.... same game." Your list of gameplay tweak does not change the fact that every game since OOT is a slight change from the last one.

And he doesn't hate the Zelda series. He quite likes Wind-Waker and the Gamecube version of Twilight Princess.

And he doesn't hate Nintendo, he hates rereleasing the same IP over and over with minor graphical/gameplay changes. It's a valid opinion. Not an opinion I agree with but a valid opinion. And Motion controls, he hates motion controls.

And you seem to be clinging to the remarkably stupid idea that reviewers should ignore their own opinion. What is he supposed to do? Visit metacritic before writing? Why even review the game.

And You're forgetting that he makes these reviews from a comedy standpoint.

And he shits on 90% of the games he plays. Why would you expect him to stop here.

And I wonder why you would care so much about one particular opinion of a game.

CriticKitten:

Gainrrom:
We're not defending him, he can do it himself if he feels like it. We're just using the quote to underscore how distressed fanboys get when a guy reviews a game. We quote this and laugh at you, that's all.

Your post is especially amusing because, at the time of my original post, I hadn't even played Skyward Sword.

Distressed fanboy indeed. Hard to be a fan of a game I haven't played yet, isn't it?

Sounds to me like your post is actually saying "I don't know what I'm talking about, so I'll slap the fanboy label on you in a pathetic attempt to invalidate your differing opinion".

Yahtzee is factually incorrect on several points, as those who have played the game (and those like myself, who have not but are at least INFORMED about the game and how it plays), and when people point this out, they're immediately dismissed as fanboys by people whose only knowledge of the title is that it's a Zelda game. The only ones who should be laughing are us, not you. Unless you're laughing at your own lack of experience and knowledge of the game. In which case, please continue.

[snip snip snip]

*Yawn*

So you hadn't played the game, yet took sides based on...? And you claimed to be informed, based on? Oh that's right, nothing but other people's claims.

And what do we call people who take sides about a game by basing themselves on nothing but others' claims about said game, especially when those people insist on the importance of having "experience" and "knowledge" of the game?

That's right: we call them fanboys. That's you.

Moving right along... and I'm still laughing at you, because you're wasting your time writing those "novels" of yours. Keep at it.

ACman:
He actually states "Despite graphical changes and game play tweaks.... same game." Your list of gameplay tweak does not change the fact that every game since OOT is a slight change from the last one.

So if significant gameplay changes don't count as "significant changes" to major franchises (which, in and of itself, is a headdeskingly dumb statement), then I submit that NO franchise in the whole of existence has ever provided a significant change from game to game.

Starcraft 2? Same game as SC1.

Diablo 2? Meh, it's just like Diablo 1, right?

Uncharted 3? More like Uncharted 2 with new box art, amirite?

Do you see how ludicrous your argument gets when you start claiming that major changes to story, gameplay, and the mechanics are not significant enough to separate one title from the next?

And he doesn't hate the Zelda series. He quite likes Wind-Waker and the Gamecube version of Twilight Princess.

Yes, he does hate the Zelda franchise. He openly ripped into Twilight Princess quite thoroughly in his review (and also called it identical to OoT), he only looked back on the game with more appeal after playing a game with a similar style but a weaker execution (Darksiders, IIRC).

And he doesn't hate Nintendo, he hates rereleasing the same IP over and over with minor graphical/gameplay changes.

....you haven't even looked at a screenshot of OoT against SS or TP, much less actually looked up a synopsis of any of those three games, have you bro?

It's a valid opinion. Not an opinion I agree with but a valid opinion. And Motion controls, he hates motion controls.

Sort of my point. If he admits openly to a bias against something, then plays a game that heavily features it, and then whines that the game is bad because of said feature, that's no longer a valid opinion. That's just silly. That's like whining that he'd like Battlefield 3 a lot more if it weren't an FPS. The game is designed to heavily integrate motion controls, so why exactly is it "valid" for him to whine that the game might be better if it didn't feature that one major thing it's built around? You're basically saying "this game would be much better if it were a totally different game than it currently is".

Incidentally, Diablo 2 would have been better if it had been a turn-based strategy game taking place on Venus with aliens instead of demons, and your hero rode on a velociraptor.

And you seem to be clinging to the remarkably stupid idea that reviewers should ignore their own opinion. What is he supposed to do? Visit metacritic before writing? Why even review the game.

I never suggested he should ignore his own opinion. Let's try reading what I said again, but correctly this time.

This is what I'm talking about. Those posting in favor of this review, I note, tend to be mostly composed of individuals who have no knowledge whatsoever of the game or even the franchise itself. And so, when Yahtzee makes a statement that is clearly false, they do not know better and will presume his statements to be the factual truth, which is part of my call for more accuracy and objectivity. Reviews are indeed subjective, but good reviewers provide not only their opinions but a relative structure to things.

What I said (and indeed, what I meant) was that a reviewer should do more than give a 15 second synopsis, iron the words "I hated it" onto a poster board and hold it up, then spend the next 4-6 minutes ranting about much smaller aspects of the game that bothered them. That tells the audience precisely nothing about the game, only the individual things that the specific reviewer didn't like.

And You're forgetting that he makes these reviews from a comedy standpoint.

And I wonder why you would care so much about one particular opinion of a game.

I'm beginning to wonder if perhaps making my posts so long is causing people to not read them. I've said at least three times that I fully comprehend that his reviews are intended to be funny and that I only watch them for humor's sake myself. But some people take his word as the word of God, and assume that he's speaking the truth. It's worth my time writing out these long posts if it means convincing even a few people to stop and say "Hey, on second thought, that guy makes a good point. Maybe I should look at this game and decide for myself if it's the sort of thing I'd like, rather than letting Yahtzee pick my games for me".

To repeat: Honestly? *I* don't care about his opinion. But I don't want other people to dumbly watch his review and go "durr, otay, I no buy 'cuz Yahtzee knows all". I expect people to look up games and get an informed opinion about them before dismissing them. Listening to someone else tell you what to buy (especially someone like Yahtzee, who tends to hate a vast majority of what he plays) is a very poor idea, and it's unfortunately not contributing positively to the gaming industry when people blindly listen to one specific opinion over a wave of dissenting opinions. I understand the adorable hipster notion that the mainstream reviewers are "crap" and all, but if 30-40 different review groups are all saying virtually the same thing? Maybe the one dissenting voice saying "IT R CRAP AND WORST GAME EVAR" is the one that should be drowned out for once. Or maybe people should just try to get informed and make their own judgments. Just sayin'.

CriticKitten:
blah blah blah

You clearly care quite a bit as demonstrated by your compulsion to write 1000s of words outlining your opinion.

ITS A GAME. A VERY SUCCESSFUL GAME. YOU HAVE DIFFERING OPINIONS OF SAID GAME. YAHTZEE'S OPINION IS NOT GOING TO HURT ZELDA. GET OVER IT.

You're acting like he's taken the opposing view in the abortion debate.

I laughed so hard at "starved inbred kittens"

ACman:
You clearly care quite a bit as demonstrated by your compulsion to write 1000s of words outlining your opinion.

I apologize, I was not aware that you didn't like to read long posts that politely and maturely dismiss your points.

Allow me to summarize it, then: You're wrong, Yahtzee's wrong, and I hope you have a pleasant day.

CriticKitten:

ACman:
You clearly care quite a bit as demonstrated by your compulsion to write 1000s of words outlining your opinion.

I apologize, I was not aware that you didn't like to read long posts that politely and maturely dismiss your points.

Allow me to summarize it, then: You're wrong, Yahtzee's wrong, and I hope you have a pleasant day.

How can he be wrong? He's played the games in the series; he has an opinion of them informed by that. You have a different opinion.

It also seems strange to say that only people who like Zelda or know the entirety of Zelda Canon can review a Zelda game. Isn't that a demand for bias on your part?

Jennacide:

Except that barring the CDI games, I think he's dead on. Skyward Sword is easily the least inspired of the series, even though the crazy Zelda fanboys will ignore that fact. Especially when he uses the examples of the newer Kirby games, which are constantly doing new and interesting things.

Nintendo has been pumping out the same Zelda game pretty much since Link to the Past, with Wind Waker being enough of an offshoot to not mind. What is grim is my favorite Zelda game isn't even made by Nintendo. (Capcom's Minish Cap, fuck yeah.)

Zelda fan since childhood here.. Skyward Sword is, without question, the worst Zelda game out there. At least 3D one. I really hated the Oracle of Seasons/Ages games. SO BORING.

Also, Minish Cap was probably the best GameBoy Advance game, right next to (in my opinion) Metroid Fusion.

Revolutionaryloser:

KimberlyGoreHound:
-snip-

Could you please stop trying to spark up a flame war that ended a week ago.

mass argumentum ad ignorantiam He's correcting them and is right in doing so. It's important to be educated in all things.

Revolutionaryloser:
It's not very nice of you and it's already been clearly established that Nintendo fanboys are not capable of rational argument or listening to either facts or opinions.

Argumentum ad populum look it up.

Revolutionaryloser:
If you want to go and play with motion controls, go ahead, no one cares. Just don't expect everybody to join in your love for swatting a stick in your living room, just like I don't expect everybody to join in my love for being tied, gagged and whipped; it just isn't everybody's thing.

Red herring and Ad hominem.

GrimHeaper:

Revolutionaryloser:

KimberlyGoreHound:
-snip-

Could you please stop trying to spark up a flame war that ended a week ago.

mass argumentum ad ignorantiam He's correcting them and is right in doing so. It's important to be educated in all things.

Revolutionaryloser:
It's not very nice of you and it's already been clearly established that Nintendo fanboys are not capable of rational argument or listening to either facts or opinions.

Argumentum ad populum look it up.

Revolutionaryloser:
If you want to go and play with motion controls, go ahead, no one cares. Just don't expect everybody to join in your love for swatting a stick in your living room, just like I don't expect everybody to join in my love for being tied, gagged and whipped; it just isn't everybody's thing.

Red herring and Ad hominem.

Wow. Your mastery of Wikipedia has disarmed me. I'm still not willing to argue. What does that tell you? I would try and outwit you using other logical fallacies you are guilty of and pointing out the ones you don't understand but use anyway, however I won't waste anymore of my time to stoop to that level of immaturity.

Revolutionaryloser:

GrimHeaper:

Revolutionaryloser:

Could you please stop trying to spark up a flame war that ended a week ago.

mass argumentum ad ignorantiam He's correcting them and is right in doing so. It's important to be educated in all things.

Revolutionaryloser:
It's not very nice of you and it's already been clearly established that Nintendo fanboys are not capable of rational argument or listening to either facts or opinions.

Argumentum ad populum look it up.

Revolutionaryloser:
If you want to go and play with motion controls, go ahead, no one cares. Just don't expect everybody to join in your love for swatting a stick in your living room, just like I don't expect everybody to join in my love for being tied, gagged and whipped; it just isn't everybody's thing.

Red herring and Ad hominem.

Wow. Your mastery of Wikipedia has disarmed me. I'm still not willing to argue. What does that tell you? I would try and outwit you using other logical fallacies you are guilty of and pointing out the ones you don't understand but use anyway, however I won't waste anymore of my time to stoop to that level of immaturity.

Revolutionaryloser:

GrimHeaper:

Revolutionaryloser:

Could you please stop trying to spark up a flame war that ended a week ago.

mass argumentum ad ignorantiam He's correcting them and is right in doing so. It's important to be educated in all things.

Revolutionaryloser:
It's not very nice of you and it's already been clearly established that Nintendo fanboys are not capable of rational argument or listening to either facts or opinions.

Argumentum ad populum look it up.

Revolutionaryloser:
If you want to go and play with motion controls, go ahead, no one cares. Just don't expect everybody to join in your love for swatting a stick in your living room, just like I don't expect everybody to join in my love for being tied, gagged and whipped; it just isn't everybody's thing.

Red herring and Ad hominem.

Wow. Your mastery of Wikipedia has disarmed me. I'm still not willing to argue. What does that tell you? I would try and outwit you using other logical fallacies you are guilty of and pointing out the ones you don't understand but use anyway, however I won't waste anymore of my time to stoop to that level of immaturity.

I used them all correctly and hardly said enough for there to be any fallacies.
I pointed out she/he was correcting them(their fallacies)and she/he was doing so there is no fallacy in that.

And no it isn't wikipedia this kind of thing is used for fictional or otherwise debates and pointing out faults in logic when in such debates.
http://www.factpile.com/2812-factpile-debating-rules/
All you had to do was look them up to see your own flaws and admit them which is far more mature.

ACman:
How can he be wrong? He's played the games in the series; he has an opinion of them informed by that. You have a different opinion.

I am not saying his opinion is wrong, I'm saying that arguing that Skyward Sword is the "same game" as OoT is wrong. Which it is.

It also seems strange to say that only people who like Zelda or know the entirety of Zelda Canon can review a Zelda game. Isn't that a demand for bias on your part?

If a reviewer references a previous title in the franchise as an example of what they don't like in a game, then yes, I do expect them to know what the hell they're talking about. Otherwise you end up with stuff like this:

"I don't like how Uncharted 4's plot plays out. I much prefer the plot of Uncharted 3, in which Drake is abducted by the aliens from Indiana Jones who take him to the Aperture Science labs to do tests with Chell."

"Diablo 3's new mechanics don't work very well. I prefer Diablo 2's gameplay, in which players would take turns moving their heroes around on a chess board."

And other similarly cringe-worthy statements.

A reviewer who is uninformed of the subject they're talking about should not be given any credence whatsoever. It is a reviewer's job to get informed and to provide an informed opinion of something because that is what they are paid to do. And please, don't use the exhausting excuse of "he's not a reviewer, he's a critic", since we both know that the two are the same thing.

Now why is this such a big deal? Because he has gone on record as saying that he's never played OoT. He has played Phantom Hourglass, Wind Waker, Twilight Princess, and now Skyward Sword. Yet in both his TP and SS reviews, he claims that they are the same as OoT....even though he has never played it before. How can he possibly reference OoT as an example of what SS does wrong when he doesn't know a single thing about the game?

If Yahtzee had not dragged the tired, beaten-to-death excuse that SS is "just like OoT" into the discussion, we wouldn't even be having this conversation. I'd have just enjoyed the review and laughed, disagreed, and went back to playing the game anyways. It's entirely his own fault (and perhaps partially yours) that I'm still here, defending the game against a blatantly false statement. :p

CriticKitten:

Now why is this such a big deal? Because he has gone on record as saying that he's never played OoT.

I think he played the remake.

CriticKitten:

ACman:
How can he be wrong? He's played the games in the series; he has an opinion of them informed by that. You have a different opinion.

I am not saying his opinion is wrong, I'm saying that arguing that Skyward Sword is the "same game" as OoT is wrong. Which it is.

It also seems strange to say that only people who like Zelda or know the entirety of Zelda Canon can review a Zelda game. Isn't that a demand for bias on your part?

If a reviewer references a previous title in the franchise as an example of what they don't like in a game, then yes, I do expect them to know what the hell they're talking about. Otherwise you end up with stuff like this:

"I don't like how Uncharted 4's plot plays out. I much prefer the plot of Uncharted 3, in which Drake is abducted by the aliens from Indiana Jones who take him to the Aperture Science labs to do tests with Chell."

"Diablo 3's new mechanics don't work very well. I prefer Diablo 2's gameplay, in which players would take turns moving their heroes around on a chess board."

And other similarly cringe-worthy statements.

A reviewer who is uninformed of the subject they're talking about should not be given any credence whatsoever. It is a reviewer's job to get informed and to provide an informed opinion of something because that is what they are paid to do. And please, don't use the exhausting excuse of "he's not a reviewer, he's a critic", since we both know that the two are the same thing.

Now why is this such a big deal? Because he has gone on record as saying that he's never played OoT. He has played Phantom Hourglass, Wind Waker, Twilight Princess, and now Skyward Sword. Yet in both his TP and SS reviews, he claims that they are the same as OoT....even though he has never played it before. How can he possibly reference OoT as an example of what SS does wrong when he doesn't know a single thing about the game?

If Yahtzee had not dragged the tired, beaten-to-death excuse that SS is "just like OoT" into the discussion, we wouldn't even be having this conversation. I'd have just enjoyed the review and laughed, disagreed, and went back to playing the game anyways. It's entirely his own fault (and perhaps partially yours) that I'm still here, defending the game against a blatantly false statement. :p

He has played OoT. He's even got a review of it. A review where he first brings up his point that OoT just feels like the blueprint for the following games. To paraphrase yourself - Why don't you get informed on the subject you're talking about?

I think his point is that he'd like to see the Zelda formula applied to something less tired than the Zelda story format. Something say, like, for example, a story about magic wolf who paints spells with a magic brush.

And if you actually watch the review he does more that complain about it being similar to it's predecessors. He complains about there being less exploration and that the dungeon bosses aren't as well designed.

And to define what "review" as if a reviewer were legally required to do anything is stupid. If you want reviews with "credibility" (whatever the fuck that is) there's the reviews page of the escapist, or IGN, or EDGE. And even they have to put up with retarded arguments like "They don't know what they're talking about." or "They didn't review the game properly." Or "They're biased."

ACman:
He has played OoT. He's even got a review of it. A review where he first brings up his point that OoT just feels like the blueprint for the following games. To paraphrase yourself - Why don't you get informed on the subject you're talking about?

Not on this website, he doesn't. I looked before I posted. Perhaps he did years and years ago on Youtube, but if you honestly expected me to go hunting through his YouTube account for all of his old reviews, then I'm not sure if I can take you seriously amy more because it's obvious that you sure as hell don't.

When you look at reviews from your local movie critic, do you dive into the last 20 years of his review history to make sure he can be trusted?

Why the hell would you expect me to know about a review that doesn't appear on this website in any form? Especially when, in his SS review, he does not indicate OoT as one of the games he's played. Look back at the review. When he says the words "Skyward Sword is the worst Zelda I've ever played", he shows box art for all of the Zelda games he's played. And OoT is not among them. Go ahead, look back at the review and tell me I'm wrong, that I just mistakenly misjudged one of the four games on that panel and that it actually reads "Ocarina of Time" instead of "Phantom Hourglass", "Twilight Princess", or "Wind Waker". So I was apparently supposed to figure out, through psychic visions no less, that he actually DID play OoT even though he gave no indication of this fact in his review, and he has no OoT review anywhere on the site. >_>

And you're telling ME to get informed? Telling ME to watch his review more carefully? What a joke. I suggest YOU rewatch it, because it's rather obvious that if you're going to rabidly defend Yahtzee to the bitter end, then at least you should know what his review actually says and shows.

I think his point is that he'd like to see the Zelda formula applied to something less tired than the Zelda story format. Something say, like, for example, a story about magic wolf who paints spells with a magic brush.

That wouldn't be a Zelda game, that would be Okami. If he just wants another Okami then he should go play Okami, and stop bitching and moaning about how Zelda isn't Okami. :p

And if you actually watch the review he does more that complain about it being similar to it's predecessors. He complains about there being less exploration and that the dungeon bosses aren't as well designed.

You trollin', bro? I've said that I saw the damn review. And I already addressed ALL of those points. The only one I take any real issue with is the fact that he claims OoT and SS are "the same game".

I suggest you actually go back and read those large blocks of text that I posted, because a lot of the strawmen arguments you're throwing up right now were dismissed long ago by those big blocks of text you couldn't be bothered to read.

And to define what "review" as if a reviewer were legally required to do anything is stupid. If you want reviews with "credibility" (whatever the fuck that is) there's the reviews page of the escapist, or IGN, or EDGE. And even they have to put up with retarded arguments like "They don't know what they're talking about." or "They didn't review the game properly." Or "They're biased."

I had to read this three times to make sure you were being serious.

You actually think Yahtzee has credibility as compared to major sites like IGN? You do realize that even if "credibility" weren't absurdly questionable from all critics to start with, given the subjectivity of one opinion versus another, that sites like IGN are miles ahead of dudes like Yahtzee as far as "credentials" are concerned, right? And that far more people are going to trust a Metacritic rating over Yahtzee's 5-minute ravings, yes? xD

Yahtzee is a critic like any other, but let's not even try to pretend he ballparks in the same vicinity as major video game critics. It's akin to comparing Roger Ebert to your local newspaper movie critic....and regardless of what you think of Ebert as a person, you have to submit that the man's credentials far exceed any bit-artist from a local newspaper and that he probably has some clue what he's talking about.

Who cares if they're biased or not? All critics are to some degree. Their opinion matters because they provide information on top of their opinions. They back up their opinions with decent opinions, even if they're not always superbly well informed. They, for the most part, TRY to play a game and measure its positive and negative qualities. Yahtzee does not do this. He rips into games for the sake of making people laugh, he doesn't do it for any other reason. I'd sooner take the word of Jim Sterling on a game's value than Yahtzee's, because at least that guy has the sense to defend his points with some valid arguments. Yahtzee throws a tantrum when the "fanbois" get to him, as shown by the recent Extra Punctuation.

But this was never about that. The point from the very start was "Yahtzee really shouldn't make up lies to back his opinion, and then bitch and whine when people correct him", and yet here we still are, with you ferociously defending him and me just trying to be realistic. I don't care about his opinion, I don't care about anyone's opinion. I already made my own decision about the game. I just want Yahtzee to stop lying. SS and OoT are not the same game, and you have to be extremely ignorant to claim such a thing....whether you're a Zelda fanboi to the very end, or you've never played a Zelda in your entire life. As someone who has played a grand total of three Zelda titles (including SS), I can say it's a total load of bollocks.

"When you look at reviews from your local movie critic, do you dive into the last 20 years of his review history"

Page 2...

CriticKitten:

You actually think Yahtzee has credibility as compared to major sites like IGN?

Very rarely does Zero Punctuation provide any consumer advice.

And I think your have fundamentally misunderstood my argument. My suggestion is that if you want dry formal review that you should stick to IGN. Why the fuck would you demand it from a 5 minute comedy video?

If a comedian writes a light, witty, op-ed piece in a newspaper do you get offended because it was irreverent and didn't take the topic seriously?

CriticKitten:
As someone who has played a grand total of three Zelda titles (including SS), I can say it's a total load of bollocks.

If we are counting, Yahtzee's actually played 5 Zelda titles so he's got you beaten there.

Yahtzee throws a tantrum when the "fanbois" get to him, as shown by the recent Extra Punctuation.

And I believe he's actually making fun of your blind adoration of all things Zelda. I know I am.

It's pretty obvious this conversation isn't going anywhere productive so I'm not going to waste any further time.

I've given very thorough explanations of my point of view, and when I did that, you just tl;dr'd at me. It's pretty obvious you're just trying to provoke me and I'm not interested in your pissing match.

Umm....

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/3780-The-Legend-of-Zelda-Ocarina-of-Time-3D

Your round bro.

No need, you win that one. I missed it. *shrug* I actually admit to my mistakes.

If we are counting, Yahtzee's actually played 5 Zelda titles so he's got you beaten there.

Yes, because that's a meaningful statistic.

I was more quoting it to defend myself against the very next post you made, which is thoroughly idiotic given the previous statement you just quoted:

And I believe he's actually making fun of your blind adoration of all things Zelda. I know I am.

I actually hate most Zelda games. I can't stand the handheld stuff, Wind Waker annoys me, and I had no interest whatsoever in MM. Your attempt at pinning me as a fanboi is entirely failed, it failed several pages ago, and it's not going to work now. >_>

Have fun talking to yourself. I tried to explain myself very thoroughly and politely at first, but I'm not going to waste time talking to a wall who isn't willing to do any reading.

CriticKitten:
Yes, because that's a meaningful statistic.

You're the one claiming that he hasn't played the Zelda games and therefore doesn't know what he's talking about.

I actually hate most Zelda games... Wind Waker annoys me, and I had no interest whatsoever in MM.

Huh... So you hate the Zelda games I like. I think Wind Waker is the best Game of the series. And Majora's Mask has an awesome creepiness to it. Points of view that are at odds with most of the Zelda Fan base.

By your definitions of review however, I'd still have to rate them lower than OoT and TP. A ridiculous proposition.

This complaint that Yahtzee doesn't know what he is talking about is false. The point that he hates the Zelda games is false (I doubt he even hates this one, he sounds disappointed more than anything.). The claim that he hasn't played the Zelda games is false. And the idea that reviews must to conform to some undeclared set of standards has no basis.

Reviewers across the internet have to put up with these accusations whenever some block-head thinks that a game automatically deserves universal acclaim. And the truly absurd thing is that people put so much vehemence into their arguments, vehemence which should be reserved for true outrages such as this:

http://www.businessinsider.com/ndaa-is-law-now-heres-what-you-need-to-know-2012-1

Or this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_Online_Piracy_Act

Or this.

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2011/07/01/256823/pregnant-women-criminal-charges/

I tried to explain myself very thoroughly and politely at first, but I'm not going to waste time talking to a wall who isn't willing to do any reading.

I can't find any reference to you hating Zelda Games. I'm sure it's there but unfortunately you're unable to you make your points pithily and concisely. Learn to self edit and maybe this wouldn't occur.

So games need to be judged by comparing them to their predecessor.
Considering Skyrim has predecessors, how come you still praised the shit out of it?

Edit:
He also calls them "reviews" now?
Dear lord...

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here