Legend of Zelda Skyward Sword HD | NSW | Out now!

Hypes wrote:

Memento Mori wrote:I completed it but I honestly can't remember any of the dungeons apart from the Yeti House thing.

Which was in Twilight Princess

OrangeRKN wrote:

Memento Mori wrote:I completed it but I honestly can't remember any of the dungeons apart from the Yeti House thing. I remember the jar boss with a load of arms and scimitars being good.

The yeti house is in Twilight Princess!

EDIT: Beaten

Guess I'll be buying the Twilight Princess re-release.

OrangeRKN wrote:I mean, I think WWHD looks worse than the original

FWIW I think Skyloft is a really good hub (especially the bazaar as a one-stop-shop to rest-and-restock). Everything on the surface is a dungeon or extension of a dungeon, but there is that distinction between dungeons and the (literal) overworld. Outside of Skyloft itself that overworld is noticeably empty, the one advantage of that being it can't distract you. But yes, Skyloft is one of my favourite Zelda towns. I think the character designs are especially strong.

Oh yeah WWHD is 100% worse looking than the og, my point was that skyword sword specifically could benefit from a remake like it. The reason that TP and SS were remasters as opposed to graphical remakes like the N64 games and WW was probably because WW's facelift didn't go down so well.

Skyloft is the best hub in the franchise probably; it's full of character and sidequests. It also uses the Zelda day/night system better than any other game in the series. The town illustrates one of SS's biggest strengths, which is its story and characters; Groose and Zelda from that game are some of the most memorable characters in the series. It's really just a shame that Skyloft is the only actual town in that game and its surrounded by a largely pointless and empty overworld that you can only traverse with a relatively gimmicky mechanic.

shy guy 64 wrote:Why go to the trouble of seeking out a discussion about something you dislike?

I enjoy talking about things I dislike and elaborating on why I dislike them. I enjoy this as much as I like talking about things I like and why I like them.

VlaSoul wrote:

shy guy 64 wrote:Why go to the trouble of seeking out a discussion about something you dislike?

I enjoy talking about things I dislike and elaborating on why I dislike them. I enjoy this as much as I like talking about things I like and why I like them.

Ya. In both cases I think the act of trying to articulate out loud can help you understand your own ideas better, or at least in translating them into words they can also affix them to a precise and specific concept. Each post I'm writing about SS (largely just written off head and intuitively) is narrowing down the exact things that give it the felt effect I enjoyed so much.

It's a fun process, reverse-engineering a thing!

Also interesting to me: is there also a possibility of reframing an experience to someone in a way that allows them to receive it differently?

Like, if you thought of SS as a tighter, more mario-esque spin off instead of a mainline (like how hyrule warriors is a different kind of Zelda universe expansion) - might people experience differently?

Or if you had a preceding video released by Nintendo (or a fan!) explaining how to get the best out of the controls, light that change things too? Like how watching DMC combo videos or fighting game tutorials helps prime you to play a game at its best, or for what it's aiming for (because seriously, I don't think I ever had inconsistency or issues with the controls though maybe my brand new motion plus helped I don't know).

Like how the Souls games are probably easy to bounce off as too obtuse and requiring investment and so on, until these things are positioned as potentially rewarding things? A flavour of legitimacy you might not have considered before?

Or is a person's instinctive tastes and response to a game more hardwired than that, is SS a You Dig It Or You Don't preference as described in recent Back Page podcast?

I'm not sure!

On WW, how the hell can a game remastered in HD look worse than the original?

This is out just before my birthday so I'll likely get it as a present for that.

Drumstick wrote:On WW, how the hell can a game remastered in HD look worse than the original?

Because they added excessive bloom

I think some people just didn't like the slight gradations and bloom effects they introduced. Personally I think it looks great. The 100% "flatness" of original WW has its appeal but its also perhaps a reflection of some of the look of modern CGI anime/films that are more playful with computer generated effects and gradients, as opposed to gradations, which are slightly different stylistically. I kind of like the flat there's something different about the two games to be honest, it adds value to the GameCube original together with something novel about it's 4:3 aspect ratio .

Unsure if I'm being thick here but what is bloom in this context?

Drumstick wrote:On WW, how the hell can a game remastered in HD look worse than the original?

By making stylistic changes with the lighting, it isn't just a remaster in the strictest sense. I think it is too soft compared to the original.

EDIT:

I think this image shows it well on Link himself:

deathofcows wrote:

VlaSoul wrote:

shy guy 64 wrote:Why go to the trouble of seeking out a discussion about something you dislike?

I enjoy talking about things I dislike and elaborating on why I dislike them. I enjoy this as much as I like talking about things I like and why I like them.

Ya. In both cases I think the act of trying to articulate out loud can help you understand your own ideas better, or at least in translating them into words they can also affix them to a precise and specific concept. Each post I'm writing about SS (largely just written off head and intuitively) is narrowing down the exact things that give it the felt effect I enjoyed so much.

It's a fun process, reverse-engineering a thing!

Also interesting to me: is there also a possibility of reframing an experience to someone in a way that allows them to receive it differently?

Like, if you thought of SS as a tighter, more mario-esque spin off instead of a mainline (like how hyrule warriors is a different kind of Zelda universe expansion) - might people experience differently?

Or if you had a preceding video released by Nintendo (or a fan!) explaining how to get the best out of the controls, light that change things too? Like how watching DMC combo videos or fighting game tutorials helps prime you to play a game at its best, or for what it's aiming for (because seriously, I don't think I ever had inconsistency or issues with the controls though maybe my brand new motion plus helped I don't know).

Like how the Souls games are probably easy to bounce off as too obtuse and requiring investment and so on, until these things are positioned as potentially rewarding things? A flavour of legitimacy you might not have considered before?

Or is a person's instinctive tastes and response to a game more hardwired than that, is SS a You Dig It Or You Don't preference as described in recent Back Page podcast?

I'm not sure!

you neural typicals are an interesting bunch

VlaSoul wrote:Oh yeah WWHD is 100% worse looking than the og, my point was that skyword sword specifically could benefit from a remake like it. The reason that TP and SS were remasters as opposed to graphical remakes like the N64 games and WW was probably because WW's facelift didn't go down so well.

No its because WWHD came out of early experiments for BotW and was handled in house where as they just commissioned other devs to do the others.

Drumstick wrote:Unsure if I'm being thick here but what is bloom in this context?

The lighting/glare you get. For what its worth I dont think it looks worse. The HD version certainly adds something different to it but it looks stunning in its own way. Shame they only spent 6 months on it because it ran pretty badly on Wii U.

I thought WWHD looked great with the lighting when you were sailing between islands, especially when it was dawn or dusk.

OrangeRKN wrote:

Drumstick wrote:On WW, how the hell can a game remastered in HD look worse than the original?

By making stylistic changes with the lighting, it isn't just a remaster in the strictest sense. I think it is too soft compared to the original.

EDIT:

I think this image shows it well on Link himself:

Yeah I see what you mean. I prefer the middle one.

deathofcows wrote:

Ya. In both cases I think the act of trying to articulate out loud can help you understand your own ideas better, or at least in translating them into words they can also affix them to a precise and specific concept. Each post I'm writing about SS (largely just written off head and intuitively) is narrowing down the exact things that give it the felt effect I enjoyed so much.

It's a fun process, reverse-engineering a thing!

Also interesting to me: is there also a possibility of reframing an experience to someone in a way that allows them to receive it differently?

Like, if you thought of SS as a tighter, more mario-esque spin off instead of a mainline (like how hyrule warriors is a different kind of Zelda universe expansion) - might people experience differently?

Or if you had a preceding video released by Nintendo (or a fan!) explaining how to get the best out of the controls, light that change things too? Like how watching DMC combo videos or fighting game tutorials helps prime you to play a game at its best, or for what it's aiming for (because seriously, I don't think I ever had inconsistency or issues with the controls though maybe my brand new motion plus helped I don't know).

Like how the Souls games are probably easy to bounce off as too obtuse and requiring investment and so on, until these things are positioned as potentially rewarding things? A flavour of legitimacy you might not have considered before?

Or is a person's instinctive tastes and response to a game more hardwired than that, is SS a You Dig It Or You Don't preference as described in recent Back Page podcast?

I'm not sure!

Yeah like the other part of it is that my position on things changes over time and as such I wanna talk about my new stances on whatever it is; like the metroidvania comparison with SS was something that only came to me a few weeks ago when a pal of mine starting replaying it. One's views on something are also liable to change or be affirmed, you could say expanded, when it is discussed. If one can excuse the narcisissism I guess I also wouldn't mind convincing people of my own stance.

Drumstick wrote:On WW, how the hell can a game remastered in HD look worse than the original?

This is out just before my birthday so I'll likely get it as a present for that.

WW on release had a timeless graphical style; it was possibly the first 3D game to achieve that. The remake as described earlier in the thread used a gooseberry fool ton of bloom, and if I may add, for whatever reason the updated models also looked kind of...plastic? They looked like toys kinda, it's weird
It's not a bad looking game, but it's not as good as the original art direction wise and imo just wasn't necessary.

shy guy 64 wrote:you neural typicals are an interesting bunch

assuming a lot here lmao

First 3D game to achieve timeless graphics is an interesting claim. Never considered that before.

VlaSoul wrote:

shy guy 64 wrote:you neural typicals are an interesting bunch

assuming a lot here lmao

Oh I’m sorry, I won’t assume you’re interesting again

strawberry floating hell, I think I've just witnessed a murder.

Wow

Rise of the aspies

Saved from the gas chambers hereafter referred to as neurodivergent people

I jest

This post written in stanza

_____

I agree the WW:HD characters kinda look like plastic figurines, perhaps this was a stylistic decision as it reminds me a LOT of the Pictograph / figure colleciton side quest? Who knows.

Disclaimer: I have ASC, I'm not making fun of anyone with an ASC diagnosis