There is no way in the world you can convince me that Windwaker isn't at least as complicated as OoT. And OoT was probably a little less complex than LttP, but it was their first effort to do 3D. They had up, down, and sideways to deal with and had never tried it before. But there is no way you can convince me that doing the quests in Twilight Princess and in Skyward Sword are less complex than the quests in previous Zelda games. No way.

TES games have been getting easier since they began making TES games. Each generation is more linear and involves less brain power than the previous ones. It's to the point now that I can finish Skyrim in a coma, because I don't even have to look at anything but a magic floating arrow in the sky. Keep running towards that arrow and kill anything that gets in your way, and you win.

That concept is much, much simpler than even a handheld Zelda game, which requires you to at least read the text in the game in order to figure out your next move.

No question, no contest. Skyrim may be bigger than Skyward Sword, but in no meaningful way is it more complex. No way.

People don't like Skyrim because it's a TES game. The only thing Skyrim has in common with its predecessors is lore.

Zelda IS epic. Though with less depth, time, dynamic, and so forth...it has always been a fun borderline RPG like game, (with no options). Nearing my thirties I remember countless hours on NES, SNES, N64 playing Zelda and always get a nostalgic feeling...so I can understand why it would be highly favored, though not sure GOTY worthy, it's still refreshing to see something good still around...

For the love of God stop making threads like these. both games are awesome. now shut up and get over it. there is more then one GOTY award.

I'm not talking about which game is easier to beat; I'm just talking about which type of game is easier to develop. Morrowind was a sandbox PC game and was infinitely more complex than any Zelda game will likely ever be technically. The TES games have continued in that fashion and have been consolized to a degree, but they certainly aren't just 3D NES games like pretty much every long running franchise from Nintendo.

It is sad that so few people know enough about game development to appreciate the breadth of what goes into a huge open-world game like Skyrim. Hearing you try to compare the complexity of developing Skyrim to the complexity of developing a Wii game makes me sad.

Short answer? People want new an innovative as long as it's exactly like the last game.

People actually want more of the same hashed out at them over and over again. See; Halo, Gears, Modern Warfare, Battlefield, Assassin's Creed, Zelda, Mario, Madden, Need for Speed.

Skyrim isn't as popular because it isn't Morrowind.

EDIT: A great example is Darksiders. I thought it was a pretty damn good game. I've played through it at least four times. I loved the voice acting, the art/character/level design, I loved the game mechanics. It was a very satisfying game to play. People tore it apart because it was a Zelda clone and was unoriginal. Yet, here we see yet another Zelda game winning a popularity contest, even though it's pretty much the same as the last 3-5 Zelda games.

I'll agree with that. I miss games where you die a million times finding out how to beat an enemy, only to play through again and find the vent in the floor that bi-passed the enemy. Or the secret sword you stumble upon...that was back before comprehensive guides too.

Who remembers holding "select" at the end of one of the Super Mario 3 levels to get behind the scenery??? FTW!!!

What does development time has to do with how fun the game is?

This is Game of the Year award we are talking about, not Hard Working Developers of the Year.



LMAO you act like TES:Skyrim is some niche game. It easily fits into the category you just dissed.

Probably a mix of both.

People voted because they like TES.
People also voted because they like Skyrim.
People voted because they like Zelda.
People also voted because they like Skyward Sword

Let's not forget...
People voted because it was the only game that they played.
People voted because they disliked one of the games, even if they didn't played both to compare.
Most People voted without comparing the two games.

Or most people who play Skyrim were so wrapped up playing Skyrim they didn't vote??? Hmmm....

It doesn't matter how complex or ambitious the coding is. Not even programmers just buy programs to admire how much clever effort went into making it. It's about the results I get when playing the game. In fact, I don't buy anything but art just because I admire the complexity or the effort. It works fine with a painting, because sometimes nonsensical results can have incredible meaning if you think more carefully about what the artist was doing, or was trying to say.

However, I can create the most elaborate machine in the world that has no purpose other than to draw a circle. When you come play with the machine, are you going to have fun because it's incredibly complex, or are you going to get bored because all it does is draw circles? That's what people see in a video game, even those people that do appreciate the coding effort.

People are saying SS should be GOTY because it didn't have bugs while Skyrim did. I said "to be fair" Zelda games are basically just 3D NES games while huge, ambitious, open-world projects like Skyrim are pretty much guaranteed to have bugs.

I couldn't believe it myself too. I always hated [censored] zelda.

I'm addressing all of the people who think Skyrim shouldn't be GOTY because it has bugs, which is A LOT of people. Bugs are normal for ambitious games and are rare in unambitious games.

If you think SS is just more fun that's fine, but thinking it deserves GOTY for being bug-free is just misguided because it's probably the most unambitious release this year; except for other Wii games.

Zelda is the second worst series ever, it's so rubbish, awful storyline, awful gameplay and horrific graphics. Seriously the WORST game I've ever played apart from Black Ops.

That is my opinion, and I am aware that it will cause a lot of controversy if zelda [censored] see it.

"I'm probably making all the nintendorks rage but remember that they're also content with playing as a young boy in a tiny dress. You gonna trust me or some child hungry pedestrians? ". - Mastur Ch33f

On topic, it's because of all the people with nostalgia that enjoyed this stuff 15 years ago.

Not even really much on topic. Sounds like just a flame post. (Saw you changed your post so disregard the very first part if you wish).

Because you know, only badz like Zelda.

Mario svcks too right?

I am a billy goat let me cross your bridge.

If you do not understand the goal of Zelda/Mario then that is too bad for you. The point is to keep it to minimal changes, I do not agree with Skyrim losing to Zelda by any means but people who like Zelda would be upset if they changed much of the game to be something "new/different".

Eh the last 20 years include Ocerina of Time/Majora's Mask, so not really. You could argue that since that high point they have been samey, but I still found them to be fun romps (Nintendo my be forever reinventing the wheel, but don't often reinvent it as something not very fun).

But really - internet poll. People on Skyrim's side said they had made multiple accounts to vote, people on Skyward Sword's side did the same. They were just more rabid about it - seriously, people comment about some of the threads here, but compared to things like console wars and Smash Bros flame wars etc. Nintendo had some of the worst. They were make some popcorn, sit back and watch the epic trainwrecks of opinion, really devoted fan rage and toxic self-entitlement blossem into the most wonderous entertainment imaginable. Then go away and pray for a zombie apocalypse to wash the world clean.

I dont get why everyone likes games that come out and are exactly the same as the last one and the one before and the one before and so on...

never played zelda, but that apparently and definatly COD stick to this forumlae.

If I like the game I will play it untill I'm bored, but then the next game won't last as long unless they change a fair bit of it, otherwise it becomes too familliar too quickly and it gets boring.

Also its disgusting how they use it to print money. COD, again, is a great example. They hardly need to change a thing between MW2 and MW3 and they've broken records and everyones singing about it. When will idiots realise that they just payed $60/￡40 for the exact same experiance as the other game that they would of played without paying that much?

And hearing you confuse "time consuming" with "complexe" is giving me a head-ache....

TES creates a huge world, it requires a lot of time and ressources. NONE of that makes it "complexe". If anything, its quite the opposite: every system in skyrim, from dialogues to combat to questing, is in a bare-bone status. There is no finesse, no systemic depth, nothing. You swing a sword and go on errands for people.

Is the world huge, and are the GRAPHICS complexe? Yes, extremely. But in a game there is way more then just graphics, and skyrim did the mistake of putting all their eggs in the same basket by neglecting everything else in the game, which is quite simple.


No. Bugs are normal for online games that undergo constant updating, as each new patch introduces bugs, meaning there is no way to ever get them all fixed. Bugs are not normal on console games. If you sell your product to a market that may or may not have a working/enabled internet connection attached to the platform, then you cannot rely on patching. Ever. Console games are meant to be finished product, and always were. There are always bugs, but those are usually kept to a strict minimum as there is extensive testing to make sure the product is fully functionning before it hits the shelves. The amount of bugs in skyrim, and the importance of those bugs (stops you from finishing main quest?!?), is completely unacceptable for what the game is: a console product.

Whatever, at least Skyrim didn't lose to MW3 or something...that would be disgusting :sick:
Oh and it's an internet poll, it doesn't mean anything! All that matters is that Skyrim is my GOTY regardless of what a poll says

Quite true, although thinking about it there is a new plot, new textures, new sounds, new models, and new characters.

Just kidding, I'm not a CoD really devoted fan, but to be fair MW3 did have quite a good storyline.

I for one am fine with the outcome.

Both are great games. More people voted for Skyward Sword than Skyrim. That doesn't make Skyrim a terrible game. It doesn't make it a worse game either. Stop caring what other people think. Do you need someone to tell you how you feel about the games you play?

Complex to develop, not play. We're talking about why a remake of Tetris that keeps the same basic formula but adds pretty 3D graphics and uses a Wii-mote might be less buggy than a huge, open-world game.

CoD is an example of the same game play over and over. People will argue with me but Zelda has a good story and game-play (imo) I am a classic gamer and I have been with Zelda/Mario for a long time (since the begging or close to it).

People fail to realize (I hate CoD) but Call of Duty now has to stay within a box or people will get mad. The problem is the minimal effort (they pump out a game every year with minimal changes and some new maps/textures. Maybe a few new perks or weapons).

CoD is more about the multiplayer. I stopped buying CoD after MW2 because I didn't feel like paying 60 bucks all the time to play with my friends who say, "Play CoD with me man~!"

Zelda creates a whole new word and levels but keeps to what it is from. This means they keep it within the style/realm of the legacy. Most people would not want to buy a brand new Zelda game with nothing reminiscent of the old games. If I have to state this 1000x times I guess I will. Also look at Sonic, look at what they tried and the overall flop of the franchise (in general).

A lot of people who do not like Zelda and/or Mario (I have found) have not started growing up with them or have low attention spans. Often they also perfer player competition based games.

Zelda stays true to it's roots while giving us a new game, most of us (IMO) do not want it to be anything less. Their continued sucess is due to the fact they stay true. I also believe that Zelda games are one of the few that do not always pay for a 10/10 like other publishers.

hahaha while skyrim is new, it is not innovative, it does not have a new engine, it has less customization and features than previous tes games. not to mention bugs that make the game unplayable for some people. thats how it lost.