The official "Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess" review thread. First review inside!

[Kipobe]

Because Jeff is the same guy who gave Ocarina of Time one of Gamespot's only perfect 10s, and gave Wind Waker a 9.3. This guy loves Zelda games, so don't act like he has no credibility.

He has no credibility because he's not reviewing the game properly. If I had never played a Zelda game... or even a game before, and I heard this review, I'd be completely lost.

He listed a bunch of things that were wrong, and then said "8.8"



Where was the discussion of the story? Where was the in-depth description of the gameplay in comparison to past Zelda titles? Where did it shine? Why didn't the new tasks work?

And then even the most hard working gamers played the game and admitted to it being a 60-70 hour playthrough. 35 hours? Really? I'm calling BS.

He's clearly not a Wii fan... his judging on the graphical nature and the sound are biased and not in context with the Wii's capabilities. I mean, if he's gonna dock points everytime, then no Wii title has a chance of getting anything higher than Zelda got. He's not rating the game... he's rating the system.

And his judgments on the game as far as "not taking it anywhere new..." the new developments are the story. The gameplay in terms of abilities (I've heard) are the most innovative since the 3D era, which has only ever really recieved one new addition in the parry attack from WW.

Terrible review. It was hurried, and clearly a way to detract from the Wii's biggest fan selling point. GS (or Jeff... not sure who to blame more) are PS3 heavy. They cater to what they think the public wants rather than what each game really deserves.

 

[Spidey-Bat]

Because it's a last gen game in a next gen box.

That still doesn't diminish it's quality. And that argument can be made about a lot of launch games. PS2 had some of the ugliest games at launch. No 360 game really took advantage of the system's capabilities for awhile.

 

[TheGrayGhost]

Interestingly enough, some of the very things TimStuff was talking about is what held TP from getting a perfect score on IGN. And although I may sound touchy when discussing the lack of voice-overs/orchestrated music in LOZ franchise, I can still totally understand where he's coming from. Afterall, the IGN editor, whom I respect above all other critics, voiced these small complaints in his review. But I will not budge. And I think any LOZ fan will agree.

Anyway, here are some excerpts from the review:

On the other hand, we have nothing but praise for the title's new Wii controls, which enhance the experience - not detract from it. The general gameplay mechanics are similar to Wind Waker. Link is able to run through immense environments, target enemies, strafe around them, swipe and slash them with his blade and also use a variety of weapons in battle or to advance through a location. These polished fundamentals have been passed forward from Ocarina of Time to Majora's Mask and then to Wind Waker, and they are again serving as the backbone for Twilight Princess.
The big difference, of course, is that on Wii you use both Nintendo's nunchuk attachment and its innovative new remote to manipulate Link and his weapons/items respectively. Gesturing with the Wii remote, you can easily and effortlessly swing the hero's sword. The gestures don't effect one-to-one movement, as so many had hoped - and yes, it would've been nice if the Big N could have pulled it off. However, they perfectly replace the need for button taps - a requirement in the GameCube version -- and after only a few minutes of familiarization become the preferable way to play. You don't need to flail your arms around like a monkey on fire in order to accurately control Link's blade - you can choose to make minimal movements and you will never run into a single issue. You can, alternatively, exact long, arching gestures and they will work, too. You won't get tired. Our arms weren't aching after more than 50 hours of play time. We weren't out of breath. In contrast, we found ourselves much more immersed in the experience of combat, as simulating a sword swipe is simply more engaging and therein more satisfying than pressing a button.

Furthermore, the advantages of the Wii remote become blindingly clear when Link uses projectile weapons. Whether the hero is armed with the Gale Boomerang, the Slingshot, the Hookshot or a great new staff whose power we won't spoil, targeting with the pointer is so far and away better than using an analog stick that the latter feels archaic and broken by comparison. The Wii remote opens up a level of speed and accuracy never before experienced in a Zelda title and you will within a matter of hours be able to ride Epona through Hyrule Field while delivering fatal bow-and-arrow headshots to ground-based and airborne foes. To the point: this new method of control obliterates the former one and there is no going back.

This in sharp contrast to what was said in the GameSpot review:

The complaint could be made that Twilight Princess is too similar to Ocarina of Time because the basic play style is familiar and because some faces and places return. However, we think such criticisms are unfounded because they seem to suggest that Zelda's masterful control mechanics should be changed simply for the sake of being different. These criticisms also ignore everything about the game that is completely new - there's a lot of it. Consider the Twilight Realm, Link's new wolf mechanics, some of the incredible new weapons and items he amasses, and a few of the several original locations and temples, which are fascinating. The Temple of Time is hidden somewhere in this enormous new game, but so is a dungeon in the sky. This is definitely the Zelda universe and yet it is in many ways a compelling re-imagining of that universe.

The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess is, in my opinion, the greatest Zelda game ever created and one of the best launch titles in the history of launch titles – second only, perhaps, to the at-the-time ground-breaking Super Mario 64. It is also one of the finest games I have ever played.

 

[Kipobe]

"The complaint could be made that Twilight Princess is too similar to Ocarina of Time because the basic play style is familiar and because some faces and places return. However, we think such criticisms are unfounded because they seem to suggest that Zelda's masterful control mechanics should be changed simply for the sake of being different. These criticisms also ignore everything about the game that is completely new - there's a lot of it. Consider the Twilight Realm, Link's new wolf mechanics, some of the incredible new weapons and items he amasses, and a few of the several original locations and temples, which are fascinating

I think this is hilarious.

Which reminds me, did Jeff (which in my mind now stands for "Jelly Eating Fat ****") mention the wolf gameplay at all? That alone is something new... and he brushed over it

He totally missed on all the unique new portions on the game.
Bad review. Screw the score, but just bad, bad review.

 

[Spidey-Bat]

The only thing he mentioned was that you change into the wolf. Never anything about playing it. This review should have been atleast 7 min long.

 

[Kipobe]

[email protected]

feel like e-mailing them... that review was trash. Then again, it had to have been approved by someone, so I guess GS just wanted to do their part in supporting Sony this weekend

 

[Spidey-Bat]

I'm writing an email.

 

[Slim_X]

He has no credibility because he's not reviewing the game properly. If I had never played a Zelda game... or even a game before, and I heard this review, I'd be completely lost.

He listed a bunch of things that were wrong, and then said "8.8"



Where was the discussion of the story? Where was the in-depth description of the gameplay in comparison to past Zelda titles? Where did it shine? Why didn't the new tasks work?

And then even the most hard working gamers played the game and admitted to it being a 60-70 hour playthrough. 35 hours? Really? I'm calling BS.

He's clearly not a Wii fan... his judging on the graphical nature and the sound are biased and not in context with the Wii's capabilities. I mean, if he's gonna dock points everytime, then no Wii title has a chance of getting anything higher than Zelda got. He's not rating the game... he's rating the system.

And his judgments on the game as far as "not taking it anywhere new..." the new developments are the story. The gameplay in terms of abilities (I've heard) are the most innovative since the 3D era, which has only ever really recieved one new addition in the parry attack from WW.

Terrible review. It was hurried, and clearly a way to detract from the Wii's biggest fan selling point. GS (or Jeff... not sure who to blame more) are PS3 heavy. They cater to what they think the public wants rather than what each game really deserves.

I agree.

 

[Timstuff]

So since he didn't walk you through the entire game, he's not allowed to have a professional opinion of it? You're being as bad as the guys at System Wars.

 

[Spidey-Bat]

Watch the review. He talks nothing about the items or playing on Epona or as wolf Link. He just talks about the sound and graphics.

 

[Kipobe]

Or horseback combat... another new huge feature. There's tons and tons of new gameplay features. He said there wasn't anything new.

 

[Spidey-Bat]

He most likely didn't play it long enough to experience it. Probably because he got too exhausted when he moved more than his thumbs while playing.

 

[Axid]

what the **** Kipobe, 23 posts?

 

[Fenrir]

This thread is a standing testament that Nintendophiles are the worst, most pathetic lot in console fanboyism. One "great" instead of a "perfect" score for a Zelda and you guys get your collective panties in a bunch like that. I mean, sure, Gears of War also got an "8" from Eurogamer but you don't see them Xbots throwing up fits of temper tantrums and shaking their fists in rage sitting at their computer screens. Pitiful. :

I mean, it's alright to disagree with Jeff's review and take solace in the fact that everybody else seems to have rated the game higher than him, but nooooooooo, how dare he defile Zelda with an "8.8"?! Oh no no, now it's war. Time to all personal with him in the most juvenile of ways that includes making childish acronyms and digging out his review history in some kind of vain attempt to show he's an "enemy fanboy".

Of course, none of this would have ever happened if only the guy gave the game a higher score and the very ones at his throat right now would have been brandishing his own review with cries of triumph for their favorite gaming franchise.

It's just so unbearably sickening.

 

[Axid]

I really try never mentioning me playing anything Nintendo , like....ever, at school because then all the ****ing psychos come out of the bushes and start ejaculating all over my face while talking about crap like Children of Mana and how Xbox sucks because it's not from Japan

 

[TheGrayGhost]

It's a lot worse on other sites, Fenrir. I agree that Nintendo fans are the most dedicated of the bunch, but I think for good reason. But to be fair, we're really complaining about the sloppy structure and writing of the review, not necessarily the score itself.

And I was anticipating the back lash since I heard Jeff moan and ***** about the game earlier. It's the biggest game of the past 10 years. I think we're allowed to throw a fit.

 

[Fenrir]

It's a lot worse on other sites, Fenrir. I agree that Nintendo fans are the most dedicated of the bunch, but I think for good reason.

"Dedicated"? Try "obsessive". "Hypersensitive". Or even "crybabies".

But to be fair, we're really complaining about the sloppy structure and writing of the review, not necessarily the score itself.

What's funny is that nobody would have given a flying **** about the sloppy structure and review if he had given the game a 9.5 or something. The score was EXACTLY what got Nintendophiles screaming in agony.

And I was anticipating the back lash since I heard Jeff moan and ***** about the game earlier. It's the biggest game of the past 10 years. I think we're allowed to throw a fit.

LOL, no it's not. Just because a couple of overzealous Ninty fanboys hail it as such does not make it so.

 

[Spidey-Bat]

This thread is a standing testament that Nintendophiles are the worst, most pathetic lot in console fanboyism.

Yeah. We're the ones robbing stores and scalping online for massive profits :rolleys:

One "great" instead of a "perfect" score for a Zelda and you guys get your collective panties in a bunch like that. I mean, sure, Gears of War also got an "8" from Eurogamer but you don't see them Xbots throwing up fits of temper tantrums and shaking their fists in rage sitting at their computer screens. Pitiful. :

That is beacuse GoW deserved an 8. Zelda does not deserve an 8.8 for the reasons Jeff gave. If you read the review, he talks more about the game's faults than it's strengths. A good review covers both. Not one. Look at what other reviews for Zelda are getting: 9.9, 10, 95. All exceptionally great.

BTW, just watch the Xbots when Halo 3 gets something like an 8. Do you think they won't be unhappy?

I mean, it's alright to disagree with Jeff's review and take solace in the fact that everybody else seems to have rated the game higher than him, but nooooooooo, how dare he defile Zelda with an "8.8"?! Oh no no, now it's war. Time to all personal with him in the most juvenile of ways that includes making childish acronyms and digging out his review history in some kind of vain attempt to show he's an "enemy fanboy".

Again, it is his petty reasons and obvious fan bias that are the reasons we dislike it.

Of course, none of this would have ever happened if only the guy gave the game a higher score and the very ones at his throat right now would have been brandishing his own review with cries of triumph for their favorite gaming franchise.

It's just so unbearably sickening.

Yeah, if he atleast gave it a 9 people wouldn't be mad. But we are more angry that the most biased reviewer at Gamestop reviewed this and he only pointed out the games flaws. He completely ignored how well the wiimote works, the expansive environment, the new controls for Epona, the wolf mode, massive hours of gameplay (35? More like double that), and of course incredible story.

 

[Fenrir]

Oh and how hard can it be to actually ignore Jeff's review, especially in light of the other, more positive reviews the game has got. By throwing such a hissy fit, Nintendophiles are actually making Jeff's opinion appear more important than it really is. If no one cared about his review because he's a huge Sony/MS/Jaguar/Atari/Sega/whathaveyouthingmajig fanboy, wouldn't it be a lot more easier to instantly dismiss anything he has to say about your precious game instead of *****ing endlessly about his "negative" verdict?

 

[Spidey-Bat]

"Dedicated"? Try "obsessive". "Hypersensitive". Or even "crybabies".

Oh yeah. Like the Nintendo fans are the ONLY ones who are like that. Those qualities can go with any and ALL fans.

What's funny is that nobody would have given a flying **** about the sloppy structure and review if he had given the game a 9.5 or something. The score was EXACTLY what got Nintendophiles screaming in agony.

If he gave it a 9.5, chances are he wouldn't have just slopped a review together. He would have taken more time to review and analyze it.

LOL, no it's not. Just because a couple of overzealous Ninty fanboys hail it as such does not make it so.

Actually, it is one of the biggest games in the past few years. It's not just the fans that believe it is. The whole industry knows it. It's really the Sony and MS ****es who deny it's impact.

Oh and how hard can it be to actually ignore Jeff's review, especially in light of the other, more positive reviews the game has got. By throwing such a hissy fit, Nintendophiles are actually making Jeff's opinion appear more important than it really is. If no one cared about his review because he's a huge Sony/MS/Jaguar/Atari/Sega/whathaveyouthingmajig fanboy, wouldn't it be a lot more easier to instantly dismiss anything he has to say about your precious game instead of *****ing endlessly about his "negative" verdict?

Because people look at GameSpot. It is a popular gaming site for reviews and news. When one site gives it a less than deserving review, it makes the game not look as good and may make people shy away from it.

BTW, are you Phaser? He was the only one who used the term Nintendophiles. It would also explain the Ninja Gaiden avvy and blatant dislike for Nintendo.

 

[TheGrayGhost]

"Dedicated"? Try "obsessive". "Hypersensitive". Or even "crybabies".

Loyal. I think that fits the bill.

LOL, no it's not. Just because a couple of overzealous Ninty fanboys hail it as such does not make it so.

Well, it's more than just a couple, believe me.

But yeah, Fenrir is right. In the grand scheme of things, it's all irrelevant. Let's move on...

 

[Fenrir]

Yeah. We're the ones robbing stores and scalping online for massive profits :rolleys:

If they're doing it for "massive profits", then they aren't exactly fanboys now, are they?

That is beacuse GoW deserved an 8.

Too bad everyone else seem to disagree with that.

Zelda does not deserve an 8.8 for the reasons Jeff gave. If you read the review, he talks more about the game's faults than it's strengths. A good review covers both. Not one. Look at what other reviews for Zelda are getting: 9.9, 10, 95. All exceptionally great.

Then IGNORE his review. Really, you guys making such a big deal out of something so trivial actually makes it seem that you deeply VALUED his opinion to begin with.

BTW, just watch the Xbots when Halo 3 gets something like an 8. Do you think they won't be unhappy?

If everyone else hails the game with 9.8s and 10s, there's no justification nor plausible reason for anyone to throw hissy fits about one reviewer who didn't seem to think so. In fact, it's quite easy to dismiss such an opinion in light of an overwhelming majority.

Again, it is his petty reasons and obvious fan bias that are the reasons we dislike it.

Like I said, nobody would have given a damn about the content of that review had he given the game a higher, more prestigious score like an 9.5 or something. Please don't try to pretend it's not about the score. All this petty bickering has EVERYTHING to do with the score.

Yeah, if he atleast gave it a 9 people wouldn't be mad. But we are more angry that the most biased reviewer at Gamestop reviewed this and he only pointed out the games flaws. He completely ignored how well the wiimote works, the expansive environment, the new controls for Epona, the wolf mode, massive hours of gameplay (35? More like double that), and of course incredible story.

What if I tell you, MY opinion, as a gamer that I do not think highly of Zelda? At least Jeff has been known to give a Zelda game a high score. Me? I'd rate the series nothing more than a 7. It's tired and it's dated - a franchise stuck in the past too scared to change or evolve. You just have to deal with the fact that it doesn't exactly take a "fanboy" to DISLIKE Zelda (collective Nintendophile gasps, I can hear). Just someone with different tastes, that's all.

 

[Fenrir]

But yeah, Fenrir is right. In the grand scheme of things, it's all irrelevant. Let's move on...

*ding ding ding* And we have a winner folks.

 

[Fenrir]

Oh yeah. Like the Nintendo fans are the ONLY ones who are like that. Those qualities can go with any and ALL fans.

But even more so for Nintendo loyalists in this case. Fits like a freakin' glove.

If he gave it a 9.5, chances are he wouldn't have just slopped a review together. He would have taken more time to review and analyze it.

Psheah, there are tons of "perfect" game scores that do a piss-poor job at having the content to justify the high verdict. Want me to dig' em out?

Actually, it is one of the biggest games in the past few years. It's not just the fans that believe it is. The whole industry knows it. It's really the Sony and MS ****es who deny it's impact.

What "impact" did Twilight Princess have on the industry? It's not a technical achievement like Half-Life 2 or Gears of War. It's certainly not as revolutionary as GTAIII. It's not as innovative as the first Sims or Deus Ex. Really, what has Twilight Princess done for the industry?

Because people look at GameSpot. It is a popular gaming site for reviews and news. When one site gives it a less than deserving review, it makes the game not look as good and may make people shy away from it.

8.8 is a damn good score for any game. Heck, I seem to remember MGS3 getting an 8.7 at Gamespot. Didn't stop THAT game from becoming a massive hit.

 

[Kipobe]

Time to all personal with him in the most juvenile of ways that includes making childish acronyms and digging out his review history in some kind of vain attempt to show he's an "enemy fanboy".

I actually thought

Jelly
Eating
Fat
F***

was kinda funny

Besides, I'm attacking HIS fanboy attitude, not defending my own. He clearly gave the review a "brush off" attitude when it's a review most of us have been waiting for, for three years. It's a collective screw up, since he gave it so half-worked, and the site allowed him to do it AND approved it.