Author Topic: My personal review: Good but not brilliant (Read 12895 times)

mouse_clicker · « **Reply #25 on:** September 06, 2003, 04:07:29 PM »

The Stone Tower Temple pissed me off so much while I was playing through it because I could never finish it in the 3 days alotted, but when I finally DID beat it, it was incredible. o_O

Grey Ninja · « **Reply #26 on:** September 06, 2003, 05:15:30 PM »

Heh. I only needed like another 10 minutes the first time I played it. I started it near the end of the first day thinking that I would be able to finish it quickly. I got hella lost though, and it took me the rest of the time to get to the end. I was outside the boss chamber when I ran out of time.

GoldShadow1 · « **Reply #27 on:** October 11, 2003, 08:01:50 PM »

The mirror puzzle in WW was okay, but "the best puzzle ever"? I could never consider a rehash of an old idea as a really great puzzle. I agree it was better than in the Spirit Temple, but it wasn't anything revolutionary. Besides, the best puzzle ever was the one in Curse of Monkey Island where you get to sunburn someone and then peel the skin on their back off to get a map written on it. Fun!

Smashman · « **Reply #28 on:** December 11, 2003, 02:01:55 PM »

I am with Grey Ninja on EVERYTHING! People think that this game sucks compared to previous Zelda games. In fact, the only Zelda game that surpasses this is LTTP.

dee kay · « **Reply #29 on:** December 19, 2003, 10:42:51 AM »

i though it was a good game..but i wasnt to happy on how they made it celshaded.. i really wanted to see what the gc could have done.

Grey Ninja · « **Reply #30 on:** December 19, 2003, 01:22:34 PM »

And you did. The cel-shading in Wind Waker was 100% generated by the GCN using many clever tricks to get such beautiful graphics on GameCube.

dee kay · « **Reply #31 on:** December 20, 2003, 01:40:47 PM »

yeh i know, but i wanted to see graphics like metroid and mario sunshine

Grey Ninja · « **Reply #32 on:** December 20, 2003, 07:54:19 PM »

Well, then what's stopping you from playing Mario Sunshine and Metroid Prime?

dus · « **Reply #33 on:** December 21, 2003, 05:23:26 AM »

I think OOT is better than the WW, and MM is worse than both. Although, the story in WW is way better, no?

norebonomis · « **Reply #34 on:** December 22, 2003, 09:00:06 AM »

i think that up untill now, every zelda game has been pretty much the same (virtually) WW and MM brought something completely new, are you people scared of that? do you want to colect three gems, rescue seven sages, find out your are the hero of destiny, and defeat gannon in every game? that will get boring, WW added alot to the story, it will also allow the gamemakers to come up with innovative game mechanics,
in other words, just be happy with what you have, if you have such a problem with what they are doing with the zelda series go buy a sexbox and play shoot um up games till your eyes bleed

Ocarina Blue · « **Reply #35 on:** December 22, 2003, 04:13:32 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: norebonomis
i think that up untill now, every zelda game has been pretty much the same (virtually) WW and MM brought something completely new, are you people scared of that?

I disagree very much. Aside from the GB (and the CDi) Zeldas, every game has brought something new to the series. AoL had sidescrolling and general weirdness. ALttP had new items, the dark world and a more fluent engine. OoT was 3D, had Epona, the ocarina and yet more items. MM, as you said, had heaps of new content. I believe WW was the game that brought the least new content to the series.

Grey Ninja · « **Reply #36 on:** December 22, 2003, 04:22:42 PM »

I think that Wind Waker showed a more darker, deep side to the franchise that had not yet been seen. Never before in a Zelda game had I felt what I did when I played Wind Waker. I was expecting something similar to OoT, with a storyline that is placed there to serve as motive to finish the game, and nothing more. In Wind Waker, the story was a BIG part of the game. It was surprisingly deep, and a WHOLE LOT darker than I had ever expected. I really saw what Miyamamoto meant when he said he needed to lighten the graphics, as if he had kept the OoT style, the game would have gotten a T rating for sure, benefitting nobody. But I REALLY liked the return to the old days of Zelda in terms of graphics, as could be seen in my review.

Hostile Creation · « **Reply #37 on:** December 23, 2003, 05:13:45 AM »

Quote
I disagree very much. Aside from the GB (and the CDi) Zeldas, every game has brought something new to the series. AoL had sidescrolling and general weirdness. ALttP had new items, the dark world and a more fluent engine. OoT was 3D, had Epona, the ocarina and yet more items. MM, as you said, had heaps of new content. I believe WW was the game that brought the least new content to the series.

All the other stuff you said, except for MM, were merely improvements on the previous games (except AoL, which is easily outdone by WW's graphics). You trying to imply that ALttP has a more fluent engine than WW? Not hardly. . . the dark world was part of the plot, which was, in ALttP, mainly just an excuse to play the game, whereas WW's was interesting. I'm not trying to say you're wrong. . . those are actually valid points, however I may attack them. I just disagree. MM and WW were much more innovative than any of the previous games, in my opinion.

Ocarina Blue · « **Reply #38 on:** December 23, 2003, 10:12:05 PM »

Well, perhaps ALttP is more only an improvment of the formula than the other games. But I believe that most of the additions - which generally ultimatley lead to more complex puzzles - change the gameplay quite alot from LoZ, and ceartanly from AoL. It's innovation isn't on a large scale, like MM, but small things like new items and puzzles add up. The puzzles found in ALttP are a big step up from pushing a random block one space in any direction for no aparent reason to open a locked door in LoZ. I was trying to imply that ALttP has a more fluent engine than LoZ, not WW, apoligies for the grammar.

Jale · « **Reply #39 on:** December 24, 2003, 09:11:55 AM »

I think that WW is just a game to introduce you to the new world. It was a bit short and a bit easy but i think that Ninendo will make the next one harder and longer. Plus it did bring quite a few new things to the game:

Cel Shading
Sailing
Rope Swinging
The Grapple Hook
The Deku Leaf
The Parry technique
Collectable Spoils
Darknuts (the only true swordfights in the series apart from the final showdown in WW)
A larger world than before and with no loading times (even OoT had loading times between areas)

And the list goes on...

What more do you want???

Ocarina Blue · « **Reply #40 on:** December 24, 2003, 10:45:39 AM »

I'm happy with the changes and all, and although most of posts towards the game are negitive, I do enjoy WW. I'm not trying to slag off Nintendo about WW or anything, and I really do enjoy the changes they have made. I just wanted to make a point when norebonomis said there wasn't so much change earlier on in the series, which I strongly disagree with.

I haven't slept for way too long, so sorry if my grammars a little off, or if I'm completly incoherent. Happy Christmas everyone

norebonomis · « **Reply #41 on:** December 26, 2003, 11:55:29 AM »

Quote
Originally posted by: Grey Ninja
In Wind Waker, the story was a BIG part of the game. It was surprisingly deep, and a WHOLE LOT darker than I had ever expected.

i totally agree, in most games you notice the story and you judge how it ties in with the gameplay, in zelda:ww it is so deep you don't even notice that line between the two. (gameplay/storyline)

CYBERSTAR · « **Reply #42 on:** January 17, 2004, 03:46:14 AM »

no way did this game deserve a perfect score grey ninja is either working for nintento or is a mega fanboy .
i havnt played a zelda game since the snes and this game seemed way to easy.
the items you collect havent changed since the snes version.
it seemed to me there could have been a lot more in this game .
final score 8.5/10
grey fox you were'nt seriuos about eternal darkness were you ? if you were you must have played a different version to me because that game was ok at best altho i only played some of it

Hostile Creation · « **Reply #43 on:** January 17, 2004, 08:28:54 AM »

yeah I agr33 w/ peepl taht can't uze propre grammer. Sorry. I'm mean, and that wasn't necessary.

But it's a matter of opinion. I also give it a perfect score. EGM rated it as the #1 game of the millenium, over Halo and GTA (though I can't really say I like EGM. Just making a point). Yeah.

rpglover · « **Reply #44 on:** January 19, 2004, 01:21:57 PM »

"grey fox you were'nt seriuos about eternal darkness were you ? if you were you must have played a different version to me because that game was ok at best altho i only played some of it"

eternal darkness is one of the better games to come out this generation of console games- it made a lot of bold moves and changes to the usual survival horror genra- such as making it more action oriented, a deep magic system, very well written and produced storyline, and of course the sanity effects- those are lots of changes to make- and the game came out near perfect in my view- it is still one of my favorite gc games and favorites of all time

Bill Aurion · « **Reply #45 on:** January 19, 2004, 02:00:57 PM »

Quote
Originally posted by: CYBERSTAR
i havnt played a zelda game since the snes and this game seemed way to easy.

That would be the problem...As for diffuculty, I have no problems with an easier game if it's fun, and WW payed it in spades...

WesDawg · « **Reply #46 on:** February 21, 2004, 08:03:44 PM »

This was my favorite Zelda to date. It woulda been nice if they'd added a hard level where enemies caused double or triple damage, but I'll take fun over than any day. 10/10 IMO too.

News:

Author Topic: My personal review: Good but not brilliant (Read 12895 times)