The melee combat is one of the things they should work on for the sequel. But not at the expense of range fighting. I feel it's part of her identity. imo ofcI'll agree on this as well. The combat against the machines in horizon is ridiculously satisfying. My only grip with it is the melee combat is not great and I wish there was a it more variety in weapons.
The melee combat is one of the things they should work on for the sequel. But not at the expense of range fighting. I feel it's part of her identity. imo ofc
In Horizon you have this narrow field of view of whatever's in front of you, and it's peppered with these stupid UI collectible markers, and you can't really interact with the environment much, and barely vertically at all.
Was playing Horizon while playing BoTW. I had to stop playing Zelda in order to finish Horizon because the world was consuming me.
Zelda for me.
but I personally prefer the style of having waypoints that tell you where things are, so I'd give Horizon the edge.
The climbing mechanics are something else. I feel like every open world action rpg should implement some sort of climbing, it does wonders for exploration, and improvisation.Yeah they could balance it out. I also say that Horizon should take notes from the climbing mechanics in BOTW since it will not only be good for crossing/climbing terrain but for going on top of the machines in a Monster Hunter-like style.
The climbing mechanics are something else. I feel like every open world action rpg should implement some sort of climbing, it does wonders for exploration, and improvisation.
I think both games should take some notes from rockstar. Their gta games do a great job at selling a world that's operating on its own, and you're just part of it.
You'll have to elaborate because literally all of this is wrong.
I haven't even played Horizon and find this comparison to be unnecessary.I don't see why they need to be compared, as they both merit acclaim. But hey, dis neogafs bread and butter. Very market researchy type of questions, maybe a touch of circle-j
I mean, I don't think having waypoints or preset markers works the way Zelda is designed, since it's all about exploring and finding things, which is fine. But, personally, while I do enjoy Zelda, it's in spite of that design rather than because of it, and I'd prefer the world be smaller. I wouldn't have minded, for example, if placing your Sheikah Slate into a tower would show shrine locations, but I know that's not how the game is intended to be experienced.If BotW showed me on the map where the korok seeds were I would hate that so much.
In Horizon, I got bored of the side quests and tracking down the collectibles around the 15-20 hour mark. Which honestly is pretty good, but at that point I was hating the game so much and it was becoming a chore. I decided to start focusing on the Story quests and I ended up having a great time with the game as a whole.
In Zelda, I'm about 70 hours in. Still exploring, still doing side quests, upgrading armor, still having fun. But sometimes I do get bored of it and not play for a day or two. Then I pop it on and say I'm only gonna do a couple shrines, and next thing I know it's 2 or 3 hours later and I'm exploring random crap.
I give it to Zelda.
I'm literally playing the game right now with my laptop open, on my way toMeridian.
How is the world interactive? Beyond certain 'Uncharted-esque' climbing points, you don't do anything with the world itself but shoot at stuff and run over UI markers to get wood / medicine / roots etc. There are invisible walls all over the place, and Aloy is not good with ledges at all. Best example is the old stadium area early on where you have to kill the raiding party.
I do not see what the problem is comparing two open world games on a gaming discussion board
Dat mango though! 🤤Horizon. I keep shelfing Zelda to play it. Every corner is a treat, but its world is more my jam.
I also feel these games aren't comparable in a lot of ways. They hit the same bullet points but in such different ways I kind of loathe these type of comparisons.
It's like comparing a mango to an apple, sure, they're both fruits ...
How many people on a pretty "hardcore" gaming forum have played the two most popular games right now? I bet nobody, eh?What percentage of people posting have honestly played both games?
Nerd!How many people on a pretty "hardcore" gaming forum have played the two most popular games right now? I bet nobody, eh?
(I have)
Horizon. I keep shelfing Zelda to play it. Every corner is a treat, but its world is more my jam. But I also haven't immersed myself into Zelda yet (left the plateau startin area and have collected a few shrine things).
I also feel these games aren't comparable in a lot of ways. They hit the same bullet points but in such different ways I kind of loathe these type of comparisons.
It's like comparing a mango to an apple, sure, they're both fruits ...
Horizon. I love the lore, the different cultures, the machines. It's incredible.
Zelda is just Zelda again.
What percentage of people posting have honestly played both games?
I don't see why they need to be compared, as they both merit acclaim. But hey, dis neogafs bread and butter. Very market researchy type of questions, maybe a touch of circle-j
Horizon. I love the lore, the different cultures, the machines. It's incredible.
Zelda is just Zelda again.
Horizon. I love the lore, the different cultures, the machines. It's incredible.
Zelda is just Zelda again.
I don't see why they need to be compared, as they both merit acclaim. But hey, dis neogafs bread and butter.