Support NeoGAF

[calc84maniac]

Lots of people hate rain too, but I like it. It make me reconsider my approach or cut a tree and start a fire. These things what makes the open world feel more real to me.

I just wish rain was tweaked a little bit to increase that realism. I'm climbing normally and I start slipping the moment a few drops start falling. There should be more of a buffer time before the walls get slippery.

 

[Arozay]

Great OP. I thought the game was amazing during the first two days, but then the open-world portions started to hurt it more than help. I'd rank it behind the n64 zelda's now. But you nailed the exact same complaints I had, except for rain and bloodmoon.

Only other gripe I'd add is that 'exploration' often had little reward if you weren't shrine hunting, especially after the initial awe of locating a new area. Other than the

Spoiler

Zora armor and the Hylian shield

, I don't think you ever find anything interesting in a chest that you can't find elsewhere. It's all just rupee's and 'inventory is full' sidegrades, you'll find more interesting things in shops. It's cool to have ruins and all, but most likely the only interesting bit about it will be a copy-paste korok puzzles.

At a certain point I was avoiding enemy camps because I couldn't be bothered breaking weapons on the same enemies for the same rewards.

 

[Gamer79]

Look at the witcher 3. That is how to do open world rpg's

 

[Conezays]

Minor spoilers below:

Overall, I think the game is a success in what it sets out to do. I feel nearly all exploration is rewarded whether it's through large or minute examples. Even just a casual walk in a different direction usually results in koroks, items, materials, enemies, a potential side quest, or shrine, etc. Compared to various other open world games, I feel Breath of the Wild incentivizes the player at a constant and consistent degree throughout the game.

Regarding the size of the world, I think it is very large but an effective use of space. One can definitely feel Monolith Soft's influence on some of its design IMO and can see parallels between its world with Xenoblade X's. The difference being the incentivization to explore; Xenoblade had a big and beautiful alien world but I rarely felt like I was rewarded with meaningful items/quests by exploring every nook and cranny. However, both succeed in offering a strong sense of scale to one's surroundings. As noted, Death Mountain actually feels like a mountain. As you scale the huge climb being bombarded with rocks and difficult enemies, reaching the top actually feels like an accomplishment. This is then furthered by the preamble to the Fire Dungeon in which you ascend the volcano.

My main issue with the game involves the bosses and dungeons feeling a little lacklustre in comparison to the recently re-released Twilight Princess. I know that game has its detractors but the game is filled with various visually and mechanically interesting dungeons. In BOTW, I appreciated being able to see out into the world and the machines being dungeons themselves but the actual puzzles were generally less interesting than some of the shrines. The Rito dungeon was particularly egregious to me as neither the puzzles or boss felt like it offered any legitimate challenge.

With regards to the bosses, thematically I think making all of them similar to a lesser form of Ganon is fine in theory, but less interesting in practice. Additionally, the bosses just felt like damage sponges compared to many past 3D entries where the majority of the bosses are puzzle-like, albeit typically simple in most respects. Regardless, I felt they came off disappointing especially as I think the game generally handles gravitas leading up to the dungeons very well, such as the lead up to the Zora and Goron dungeons. The final boss of the game also suffers from this IMO as I did not think it had any particular interesting patterns or gameplay mechanics. After one gets through their (most likely) longest Zelda playtime (I took 75 hours before attempting the final boss), something with a little more pomp and circumstance seemed earned to me.

In conclusion, I think Breath of the Wild is a fantastic and impressive game with a great and unique soundtrack. The majority of its "side content" just happens to be more interesting than some of the dungeons and bosses. This may bother some players based on what they appreciate most in the series. The game's world, shrine puzzles, atmosphere, and art style are all fantastic but I do feel like Nintendo slightly dropped the ball with the bosses and some aspects of the dungeons.

 

[plank]

Look at the witcher 3. That is how to do open world rpg's

BoTW is not an rpg.

 

[En-ou]

Hi Developer! Another fellow developer here. I love the thoughtfulness of your feedback, as it's well written. I however feel like you are looking at it from the wrong player perspective, which is limiting how you can perceive the game. Please allow me to give you some rebuttal.



First, as a developer, you need to understand there are a LOT of types of players out there. You played the game to completion, which is something for an average game, is usually around 5% of your audience at best. Most players won't do everything in your game. This doesn't mean you need to make that 100% experience any worse, but it does mean you need to make sure the experience works for all player types. I'll get into that a bit more...



So, normally I would agree with you. I also personally HATE open world games. However, it's very important here to note that Nintendo's primary goal here was to make a game like Zelda 1, a game like Miyamoto's old experiences as a child exploring, a game where you are truly on an adventure. Exploring a large vast world. I don't disagree with your philosophy at Moon, but I do think player experience is being ignored if you have a hard and fast rule. In this case, Nintendo is focusing on pacing and separation, where they want the player to look around, choose a goal, journey towards that goal, then experience that goal. Each element of that player journey should be meaningful. If it was too short or dense, then choice paralysis can kick in, as well that part of the journey is no longer meaningful, and instead becomes a chore.


As a developer, I'm sure you understand the concept of limited resources, so the question comes is it worth that artists time, or that engineers time, and for what gain? So a small puzzle will feel a little different? That's probably not the best use of resources, that could instead go somewhere else.

In addition, as I mentioned about player experience, not every player is going to do every shrine. If 95% of your audience will only do half the shrines, is it that detrimental if a few repeat (and let's be fair, they don't actually REPEAT, they are just super similar...no different that certain stars in Mario 64 for example.)



So if I sound harsh, I apologize...but this is where you're missing that Nintendo design mentality. Each shrine was designed in a way that it could be your first. (I know, you're thinking Major ones wouldn't fit that bill.) But the point is if you had such a stark difference in difficulty, you risk ruining a players experience because they happened to stumble onto this particular shrine. Each shrine is meant to be about the same, and could be your very first.

The same is true with Korok seeds. They are meant to be a small thing to reward being observant. That's it. Not some series of challenges to overcome with a difficulty curve. It's clear that's why there are 900 of them...and why you hear most players go "Wow I only have like 40-60!" They are meant to cover a wide range of player experiences, so the likeliness of people finding a few is very high.


Same comments as before. I kind of agree with this one, but everything comes at a cost. When I saw my 3rd skull cave with a lantern hanging though, I wondered if it's a bit much as well. This could just be some small level design of making sure similar structure types feel different enough.


There's a lot in this one so let me try to break it down.
If combat didn't pause, it would likely be to difficult for a large audience. Again, Nintendo's goal is accessibility, and while I know it sort of "dampers the experience" for seasoned gamers, trying to imagine a less skilled gamer running from enemies trying to bring out the next weapon seems less than ideal for that audience.

Shield Surfing is indeed complex. I agree with that. As a developer though, pointing out the problem is 10% of the battle. The other 90% is finding a better solution. Thought?

And lastly I watched that UI video. While it starts off well enough, the solution is sort of specialized. The suggested UI that pops up would ONLY WORK for chest instances. If this UI popped up each time you tried to pick up a weapon, that would pause game play even more, which would be really annoying every time you accidentally picked up a stick. It does improve the chest opening part though for sure! So again, its a question of resources and return.


I haven't done enough to get a full grasp here, but overall I'd likely agree. These always seem like super optional stuff, which is why they never seem that meaningful.


You'd of course be right. Again, resources. Nintendo chose to focus on the WORLD, not the dungeons. I'd barely even call the beasts dungeons.

Anyway, just my 2 cents. Knowing how GAF works, I likely put too much time into a response no one will read anyway. If you have any questions, PM me as I don't read GAF that often anymore.

I read all of it. Great post and more sensible and insightful than the OP.

 

[mishakoz]

Whenever I find myself complaining that the world is too big and too much time is spent going from A to B, I think that this is the first Hyrule that felt even close to real and convincing. I think that's worth it for the most part.

Of course I agree that there could have been a tad more variation. There are literally some swaths of land with nothing of note.

 

[En-ou]

The same is true for the Korok Challenges: Most of these are completely mindless and similar: Find a certain rock in the world that stands out, pick it up, a Korok appears. Put a rock in the right spot in the middle of a ring of rocks, boom, a Korok appears. Jump into a ring of flowers in the water, a Korok appears. Shoot some balloons, a Korok appears... Rinse and Repeat. You'll do these exact same challenges DOZENS of times.

OP, I glanced your post to see if it's worth reading and this part convinced me not to.

You clearly don't get that the concept of the Korok puzzles are about exploration and observation and NOT the simple puzzle itself. There's a reason why I have my 5 yr old complete the puzzles when I find them.

let me rephrase - I don't think anyone who lacks the understanding of a mechanic is qualified to critique said mechanic. that's all.

 

[The Dude]

Ori was a great game BTW. But on topic, I have to disagree as I feel the game adds a sense of adventure like no other. This world is massive but it's interesting, I'm always wanting to see what's over that rock, what's over that mountain, what's across that river, the game keeps me wanting more even tho sure a little more enemy camps could have more variety... Its still a joy.

This game for me in 35 years of gaming, is one of the best in capturing the imagination as well as excitement to simply explore.

The shrines I personally love even tho they have a similar structure, the puzzles are just a fun little divergence from the main game plus its fun to see what's in the chests.

The point for me is the game simply works, it just does.. Maybe for non explorers the world is to big but for me the world is amazing. I hope more games actually make worlds this large and intriguing.

 

[BluePikmin11]

Well-put. I have similar criticisms, but they don't exactly bother me. Bringing up the Koroks and Shrines, I sort of agree to extent, but it never really feels repetitive unless you look into deeply. And the "empty space" for me is something I disagree with entirely. Good work.

 

[WhiskerFrisker]

OP, I glanced your post to see if it's worth reading and this part convinced me not to.

You clearly don't get that the concept of the Korok puzzles are about exploration and observation and NOT the simple puzzle itself. There's a reason why I have my 5 yr old complete the puzzles when I find them.

Seriously. Developer? Maybe. A good one? Hell, naw.

???

 

[RRockman]

OP, I glanced your post to see if it's worth reading and this part convinced me not to.

You clearly don't get that the concept of the Korok puzzles are about exploration and observation and NOT the simple puzzle itself. There's a reason why I have my 5 yr old complete the puzzles when I find them.

Seriously. Developer? Maybe. A good one? Hell, naw.

Hey, it's OK to disagree, (I certainly do) but let's not insult people for having a different opinion, dev or no dev.

 

[Kagoshima_Luke]

Awesome analysis.

I do disadree with your opinion on the size of the world. I like to explore in games. Some of the most memorable times for me from BotW were just reaching new areas or conquering difficult terrain. Traveling was pretty boring in SotC, but it was peaceful, beatiful and stood as an effective counterpoint to the sometimes terrifiying colossus battles.

 

[SuitedforGaming]

I picked up the game and I have yet to play it, but this has been a great read and perspective from a dev. Hopefully criticism is better received by the die-hard fans when it comes from an actual developer.
Good job.

 

[Chaos17]

Look at the witcher 3. That is how to do open world rpg's

Zelda never tried never did it wanted to be an rpg and be story driven like Witcher 3.
If you can't tell the difference between the 2 franchises I suggest you to actualy research on them, read the devs interviews and play both series.

 

[Hero]

OP, I glanced your post to see if it's worth reading and this part convinced me not to.

You clearly don't get that the concept of the Korok puzzles are about exploration and observation and NOT the simple puzzle itself. There's a reason why I have my 5 yr old complete the puzzles when I find them.

Seriously. Developer? Maybe. A good one? Hell, naw.

Hey man, this is not a cool attitude. I pretty much disagree with 95% of what the OP said but don't stoop to this level. It's okay to be polite and civil while disagreeing.

 

[Anth0ny]

Pretty much felt the exact same way playing it, OP. World was too huge and open with not enough stuff to do in it. So many times I found myself running in a straight line, regaining stamina, running in a straight line, regaining stamina... for minutes at a time.

It's sad that bigger = better for so many.

 

[SinCityAssassin]

Pretty much felt the exact same way playing it, OP. World was too huge and open with not enough stuff to do in it. So many times I found myself running in a straight line, regaining stamina, running in a straight line, regaining stamina... for minutes at a time.

You can try a left turn. Spice up your life a bit.

 

[Lucent]

Awesome analysis.

I do disadree with your opinion on the size of the world. I like to explore in games. Some of the most memorable times for me from BotW were just reaching new areas or conquering difficult terrain. Traveling was pretty boring in SotC, but it was peaceful, beatiful and stood as an effective counterpoint to the sometimes terrifiying colossus battles.

Yeah. This is the first open world where I actually enjoy even seemingly empty areas. The world is beautiful and fun to explore.

 

[RRockman]

Pretty much felt the exact same way playing it, OP. World was too huge and open with not enough stuff to do in it. So many times I found myself running in a straight line, regaining stamina, running in a straight line, regaining stamina... for minutes at a time.

It's sad that bigger = better for so many.

dude what? so you didn't think to:

A: grab a horse and ride?
B: Look around for easy to reach high vantage points and glide to your destination?
C: make hasty/stamina potions if the above options weren't available to speed up traversal?
D: get creative with stasis and a tree/rock/box? or even,
E: All of the above?

There's so many options for traversal but it seems like people just aren't using them. Also some of us like the scenery of the world too. I love walking to far off goals and smelling the digital roses for one. I doubt I'm the only one too.

 

[Anth0ny]

dude what? so you didn't think to:

A. grab a horse and ride?
B.Look around for easy to reach high vantage points and glide to your destination?
C. make hasty/stamina potions if the above options weren't available to speed up traversal?
D.get creative with stasis and a tree/rock/box? or even,
E. All of the above?

The'res so many options for traversal but it seems like people just aren't using them. Also some of us like the scenery of the world too. I love walking to far off goals and smelling the digital roses for one. I doubt I'm the only one too.

a. no horses or stables nearby. the way horses work in this game is pretty awful.

b. there were none, it's just an open field with some trees

c. i don't need a stamina potion, it's the same shit. run, drain stamina, let it rebuild, repeat. it's a bit faster but that doesn't solve the issue here.

d. i guess i could have done that but i like being in control of my character in case there WAS something worth going towards and not just flying across the map on a rock or box. i'd also rather not damage my weapons doing that.


sorry i don't like smelling the digital roses, I wanted to get to the top of a mountain so I could use the vantage point to look for shrines or towers. between me and that mountain was a whole lot of nothing and some bokoblins.

 

[Lord of Ostia]

This is an interesting critique, and I agree with a lot of your points, though I did want to point out a few specific things you got wrong or that I don't agree with you on.

1. Shrines being themed for certain areas. This is already implemented in the game. You are right that all Shrines are aesthetically the same, but they are different depending on the region, and have a specific identity for that region outside of combat shrines. For example, the Gerudo desert Shrines all feature puzzles involving electricity and electrical currents. The Eldin region Shrines do have a fire theme, nearly all of the puzzles in that region involved use of fire. The Lanayru Shrines use water and cryonis, the Tabantha Shrines use wind, korok leaves, and updrafts. The woodland Shrines are unique challenges different from the Shrines in all other regions. The Shrines look similar, but they do have an identity based on the region you find them in. Agree with you about combat Shrines though, they could've used more variety.

2. Part of the appeal of the world design is how natural the topography and open space feels, and how they made traversal fun. Getting from point a to point b is an actual journey in BotW, and they are always multiple different routes due to the level of interactivity with the world. You stated that you don't enjoy open world design, but BotW does so much more with its 'empty space' than any other open world game I've played. Climbing, running, gliding, swimming, theyou all require planning and execution from the player. Most open world games don't really think about their open spaces; by contrast, every space in BotW feels like someone had a hand in crafting that space. The spaces feel natural, and they are interesting, just like the real world. BotW really nailed that aspect, of creating a believable natural environment.

 

[TrueBlue]

I honestly think it's great that BOTW is as amazing as it is - but there's still a lot of potential for growth.

Now that Nintendo have got their first try out of the way, developing and refining their new template will hopefully yield some truly special experiences.

 

[DecoReturns]

I think its exciting time to be a Zelda fan.

This team and Anouma are the most open when talking about criticism they've received and trying to fix it. I feel they are keeping with fans to know how to improve BOTW and what to bring back in the next game.

Maybe the DLC will reflect that, probably not tho since I'm sure they got it planned out tho.

 

[BluePikmin11]

Based on what I read in this thread (Great posts on BOTW BTW), I think a lot of the complaints with shrines would be solved if they had been visually themed for each main area. Like maybe for the area mainly populated with Gorons, you could simply change the color to a somewhat reddish themed shrine when you go inside. Or for the main area where

Spoiler

Kakariko Village

is set, the shrines you visit inside will be greenish themed.

Just a small thought.

 

[Fredrik]

I agree with most things you say but I somehow still place BOTW at no.1 of the best games ever made, a spot which Super Metroid has previously held since it's launch for me (Ori was no.2 which might be interesting to you, now no.3 though since BOTW managed to snag the first spot.).

 

[Lanrutcon]

OP, I glanced your post to see if it's worth reading and this part convinced me not to.

You clearly don't get that the concept of the Korok puzzles are about exploration and observation and NOT the simple puzzle itself. There's a reason why I have my 5 yr old complete the puzzles when I find them.

Seriously. Developer? Maybe. A good one? Hell, naw.

Come on, man.

But BOTW isn't an RPG

Yup. It's an adventure game with gear, quests, exploration, dungeons and comb...wait.

 

[TankRizzo]

Look at the witcher 3. That is how to do open world rpg's

But BOTW isn't an RPG

 

[gamerMan]

Pretty much felt the exact same way playing it, OP. World was too huge and open with not enough stuff to do in it. So many times I found myself running in a straight line, regaining stamina, running in a straight line, regaining stamina... for minutes at a time.

It's sad that bigger = better for so many.

Are you going to put a link to your video to show us how you play? You can feel how you feel about something but don't project your opinion on others and say they are wrong. It comes across as trolling.

We get you don't get the "messianic" praise around this game, but why should it be "sad" if many others like a big open world? What's so bad about a game asks you to use your creativity instead of running in straight lines jamming the stamina button for minutes? We all have different preferences. That's okay.

 

[Hero]

Are you going to put a link to your video to show us how you play? You can feel how you feel about something but don't project your opinion on others and say they are wrong. It comes across as trolling.

We get you don't get the "messianic" praise around this game, but why should it be "sad" if many others like a big open world? What's so bad about a game asks you to use your creativity instead of running in straight lines? We all have different preferences. That's okay.

Don't try and bother arguing with Anth0ny about gaming tests. I can't even count how many Smash bros related threads he has ruined/trolled/derailed over the years.

 

[brandonh83]

OP, I glanced your post to see if it's worth reading and this part convinced me not to.

You clearly don't get that the concept of the Korok puzzles are about exploration and observation and NOT the simple puzzle itself. There's a reason why I have my 5 yr old complete the puzzles when I find them.

Seriously. Developer? Maybe. A good one? Hell, naw.

As someone who loves this game I think it's a completely valid criticism and it also has zilch to do with his talents as a developer.

 

[Ansatz]

OP, I glanced your post to see if it's worth reading and this part convinced me not to.

You clearly don't get that the concept of the Korok puzzles are about exploration and observation and NOT the simple puzzle itself. There's a reason why I have my 5 yr old complete the puzzles when I find them.

Seriously. Developer? Maybe. A good one? Hell, naw.

He's right if you view the Korok puzzles in isolation and compare them to puzzles in other games that also feature puzzles. However you need some context. You have to rember what role the Koroks play in this particular game.

He argues (very well) why open world is never the better approach to take, but just for a moment say fuck it, let's design a game that is massive in size. What do you do to make a good game out of it? Game design is all about being pragmatic and solving problems. It's about finding solutions that fulfill the needs of the particular game you set out to make. It's kind of funny (and sad) that OP doesn't talk about Eventide island outside of a small mention as an example of a good quest, because that island is essentially a condensed version of the full BotW experience. That's the game right there, it contains the solution for the open world dilemma and he completely missed it.

 

[Anth0ny]

Are you going to put a link to your video to show us how you play? You can feel how you feel about something but don't project your opinion on others and say they are wrong. It comes across as trolling.

We get you don't get the "messianic" praise around this game, but why should it be "sad" if many others like a big open world? What's so bad about a game asks you to use your creativity instead of running in straight lines jamming the stamina button for minutes? We all have different preferences. That's okay.

because people blindly praise games for being bigger and betterer. this is not a zelda exclusive problem. You see all of these open world games with maps that are 5x bigger than the last huge open world game and people lose their shit... before even playing the game.

rarely do these massive worlds actually deliver when it comes to content, and Zelda is no exception. The OP put it better than I: in games like LTTP, you don't go for minutes doing nothing. You don't go for minutes just running in a direction. You're constantly interacting with the world.

The way I play the game is I see something in the distance, and I want to go there. So I go. If something catches my eye on the way there, of course I'll stop and check it out. Of course this happened in BOTW to me... but not nearly often enough to justify just how massive and empty the world is. I'll stop for a giant bird man playing an accordion, sometimes bokoblins would be attacking random NPCs so I'd go to save them (And get no reward)... damn near everything else is empty or just skippable.

I guess I'm in the minority and people really love to "smell the digital roses" and pick up rocks to get poop from a wooden puppy, or fight another group of bokoblins to get another amber.

I liked it better when I left clock town, went east for about 30 seconds and was at Great Bay, meeting new characters, getting new items and embarking on new quests.

Don't try and bother arguing with Anth0ny about gaming tests. I can't even count how many Smash bros related threads he has ruined/trolled/derailed over the years.

damn people wanting games to be better, why can't they understand that everything Nintendo makes is perfect perfection?

and you probably can't count them because the number is 0. prove me wrong.

 

[phanphare]

It's sad that bigger = better for so many.

this seems like a gross misrepresentation of why people enjoy the game and I think you knew that already

 

[thomasmahler]

It's kind of funny (and sad) that OP doesn't talk about Eventide island outside of a small mention as an example of a good quest, because that island is essentially a condensed version of the full BotW experience. That's the game right there, it contains the solution for the open world dilemma and he completely missed it.

I didn't miss it, I put it right there in the OP, but the OP was already long enough I also thought Eventide Island was a fantastic quest and almost made the game feel a bit like a Survival game. The actual area could've still been a bit denser and varied for my tastes, but I do agree that it was very good content.

 

[MrPhiliasfrog]

Hi Developer! Another fellow developer here. I love the thoughtfulness of your feedback, as it's well written. I however feel like you are looking at it from the wrong player perspective, which is limiting how you can perceive the game. Please allow me to give you some rebuttal.



First, as a developer, you need to understand there are a LOT of types of players out there. You played the game to completion, which is something for an average game, is usually around 5% of your audience at best. Most players won't do everything in your game. This doesn't mean you need to make that 100% experience any worse, but it does mean you need to make sure the experience works for all player types. I'll get into that a bit more...



So, normally I would agree with you. I also personally HATE open world games. However, it's very important here to note that Nintendo's primary goal here was to make a game like Zelda 1, a game like Miyamoto's old experiences as a child exploring, a game where you are truly on an adventure. Exploring a large vast world. I don't disagree with your philosophy at Moon, but I do think player experience is being ignored if you have a hard and fast rule. In this case, Nintendo is focusing on pacing and separation, where they want the player to look around, choose a goal, journey towards that goal, then experience that goal. Each element of that player journey should be meaningful. If it was too short or dense, then choice paralysis can kick in, as well that part of the journey is no longer meaningful, and instead becomes a chore.


As a developer, I'm sure you understand the concept of limited resources, so the question comes is it worth that artists time, or that engineers time, and for what gain? So a small puzzle will feel a little different? That's probably not the best use of resources, that could instead go somewhere else.

In addition, as I mentioned about player experience, not every player is going to do every shrine. If 95% of your audience will only do half the shrines, is it that detrimental if a few repeat (and let's be fair, they don't actually REPEAT, they are just super similar...no different that certain stars in Mario 64 for example.)



So if I sound harsh, I apologize...but this is where you're missing that Nintendo design mentality. Each shrine was designed in a way that it could be your first. (I know, you're thinking Major ones wouldn't fit that bill.) But the point is if you had such a stark difference in difficulty, you risk ruining a players experience because they happened to stumble onto this particular shrine. Each shrine is meant to be about the same, and could be your very first.

The same is true with Korok seeds. They are meant to be a small thing to reward being observant. That's it. Not some series of challenges to overcome with a difficulty curve. It's clear that's why there are 900 of them...and why you hear most players go "Wow I only have like 40-60!" They are meant to cover a wide range of player experiences, so the likeliness of people finding a few is very high.


Same comments as before. I kind of agree with this one, but everything comes at a cost. When I saw my 3rd skull cave with a lantern hanging though, I wondered if it's a bit much as well. This could just be some small level design of making sure similar structure types feel different enough.


There's a lot in this one so let me try to break it down.
If combat didn't pause, it would likely be to difficult for a large audience. Again, Nintendo's goal is accessibility, and while I know it sort of "dampers the experience" for seasoned gamers, trying to imagine a less skilled gamer running from enemies trying to bring out the next weapon seems less than ideal for that audience.

Shield Surfing is indeed complex. I agree with that. As a developer though, pointing out the problem is 10% of the battle. The other 90% is finding a better solution. Thought?

And lastly I watched that UI video. While it starts off well enough, the solution is sort of specialized. The suggested UI that pops up would ONLY WORK for chest instances. If this UI popped up each time you tried to pick up a weapon, that would pause game play even more, which would be really annoying every time you accidentally picked up a stick. It does improve the chest opening part though for sure! So again, its a question of resources and return.


I haven't done enough to get a full grasp here, but overall I'd likely agree. These always seem like super optional stuff, which is why they never seem that meaningful.


You'd of course be right. Again, resources. Nintendo chose to focus on the WORLD, not the dungeons. I'd barely even call the beasts dungeons.

Anyway, just my 2 cents. Knowing how GAF works, I likely put too much time into a response no one will read anyway. If you have any questions, PM me as I don't read GAF that often anymore.

Great post!

 

[thomasmahler]

this seems like a gross misrepresentation of why people enjoy the game and I think you knew that already

While he said it in a somewhat sarcastic way and while Zelda does have a pretty good open world compared to others, isn't there still some truth to his statement?

I mean, that's exactly why the first thing you hear from devs like CD Projekt or Rockstar is how much bigger the world is going to be this time - Cause the marketing guys know that it works and that a statement like that is an easy trigger for excitement among gamers. But bigger isn't better, unless you have the content to match it and barely ever is that the case.

I mean, No Man's Sky was sold purely on the ridiculous '18 quintillion planets' statement - BAM, gamers went nuts, cause they obviously assumed that there'd be more for you to do than to run for hours at a time over empty planets only for you to then explore the empty space.

I am sometimes worried that with the open world craze that's going on right now that actual, proper level design is slowly going to fade out of existence, since players seem to be content with what they're getting out of these games.

 

[plank]

Come on, man.



Yup. It's an adventure game with gear, quests, exploration, dungeons and comb...wait.

So it's a Zelda game good to hear more conformation.

 

[Anth0ny]

While he said it in a somewhat sarcastic way and while Zelda does have a pretty good open world compared to others, isn't there still some truth to his statement?

I mean, that's exactly why the first thing you hear from devs like CD Projekt or Rockstar is how much bigger the world is going to be this time - Cause the marketing guys know that it works and that a statement like that is an easy trigger for excitement among gamers. But bigger isn't better, unless you have the content to match it and barely ever is that the case.

I mean, No Man's Sky was sold purely on the ridiculous '18 quintillion planets' statement - BAM, gamers went nuts, cause they obviously assumed that there'd be more for you to do than to run for hours at a time over empty planets only for you to then explore the empty space.

I am sometimes worried that with the open world craze that's going on right now that actual, proper level design is slowly going to fade out of existence, since players seem to be content with what they're getting out of these games.

Correct. And even with Zelda you had Nintendo bragging at E3 about how the Plateau was only 1% of the map.

It's an easy selling point in a gaming landscape flooded with open world titles.

 

[aBarreras]

Love the OP.

Purports to give a game design critique. Delivers the same generic layman criticism levelled at every open world game ever.

yeah, as i keep reading, it was the same critique of open world and botw ever hahaha

 

[LotusHD]

I am sometimes worried that with the open world craze that's going on right now that actual, proper level design is slowly going to fade out of existence, since players seem to be content with what they're getting out of these games.

Fair point, though I personally wouldn't use BoTW as an example of something that is accelerating the process of "proper level design" fading out.

 

[phanphare]

While he said it in a somewhat sarcastic way and while Zelda does have a pretty good open world compared to others, isn't there still some truth to his statement?

I mean, that's exactly why the first thing you hear from devs like CD Projekt or Rockstar is how much bigger the world is going to be this time - Cause the marketing guys know that it works and that a statement like that is an easy trigger for excitement among gamers. But bigger isn't better, unless you have the content to match it and barely ever is that the case.

I mean, No Man's Sky was sold purely on the ridiculous '18 quintillion planets' statement - BAM, gamers went nuts, cause they obviously assumed that there'd be more for you to do than to run for hours at a time over empty planets only for you to then explore the empty space.

I am sometimes worried that with the open world craze that's going on right now that actual, proper level design is slowly going to fade out of existence, since players seem to be content with what they're getting out of these games.

I just think boiling down people's praise to "bigger = better" is totally off base considering how this game has been received. pre-launch hype and marketing doesn't equate to how people will actually receive the game which should be pretty obvious given the games you're bringing up. contrasting no man's sky with witcher 3 or breath of the wild doesn't aid your point; it contradicts it. bigger obviously isn't better and if it was then this thread would be about no man's sky not breath of the wild. so clearly there's much more to the formula.

to add to that further I soured on open world games long ago so clearly how big a world is isn't going to appeal to me in a vacuum and on the contrary if that's all there was it would be an instant turn off. like I said previously I would have burned out quick had that been the case.

I also don't agree at all with your last bit. that breath of the wild somehow sacrifices actual, proper level design to support its open world. that's actually why I enjoy the game so much, that every single inch of that world feels like it was meticulously crafted. each bit of that world has purpose and comes together to create something exceptional. I feel like you're way off base with that claim. perhaps it's relevant to the genre as a whole but not here.

 

[En-ou]

Hey, it's OK to disagree, (I certainly do) but let's not insult people for having a different opinion, dev or no dev.

def not trying to do that. I changed my post about that.

 

[victreeb3l]

The reason BoTW is successful is because their massive world is very well designed. Like literally every review mentions this. It wasnt some random terrain generator. The land is purposeful and is the reason many people feel theres an invisible hand guiding players from one thing to another.

 

[Hero]

because people blindly praise games for being bigger and betterer. this is not a zelda exclusive problem. You see all of these open world games with maps that are 5x bigger than the last huge open world game and people lose their shit... before even playing the game.

rarely do these massive worlds actually deliver when it comes to content, and Zelda is no exception. The OP put it better than I: in games like LTTP, you don't go for minutes doing nothing. You don't go for minutes just running in a direction. You're constantly interacting with the world.

The way I play the game is I see something in the distance, and I want to go there. So I go. If something catches my eye on the way there, of course I'll stop and check it out. Of course this happened in BOTW to me... but not nearly often enough to justify just how massive and empty the world is. I'll stop for a giant bird man playing an accordion, sometimes bokoblins would be attacking random NPCs so I'd go to save them (And get no reward)... damn near everything else is empty or just skippable.

I guess I'm in the minority and people really love to "smell the digital roses" and pick up rocks to get poop from a wooden puppy, or fight another group of bokoblins to get another amber.

I liked it better when I left clock town, went east for about 30 seconds and was at Great Bay, meeting new characters, getting new items and embarking on new quests.



damn people wanting games to be better, why can't they understand that everything Nintendo makes is perfect perfection?

and you probably can't count them because the number is 0. prove me wrong.

I really have zero interest in wasting my time to dig up old posts of yours in Smash Bros threads which basically just boiled down to 'but it's not my Melee' ad nauseum. I wasted enough time reading through them the first time around but regardless it's not on topic. You seriously have a terrible time understanding that your personal taste in games is not indicative of everyone else or even the majority of the market.

 

[Pifje]

Sure it works work for a 2d game like Ori, or a more controlled, fast paced experience, but it's such a small minded way to approach the medium as a whole.

It's probably why modern open world games feel the need to fill their worlds with crap activities and just cram an "encounter" every other step, forgetting the very nature behind an open world being the sense of inhabiting a real space.

When I'm supposed to be lost in the desert, but I can't walk 20 meters without running into bandits, npc, monster nests, or whatever other little nugget of "fun" the devs think I need, I can't but wonder why they even bothered building and open world in the first place.

Let the space breathe, don't be afraid to leave the player to themselves every once in a while, it's OK to not be hyper stimulated at all times when playing a game.
Look at the larger picture and you'll see value in emptiness and value in silence.


It's really the equivalent of cramming epic climactic music for the whole duration of the song, without ever letting the silence and slower tempo take the wheel for a while.

For a proof of how this can work, just look at Shadow of the Colossus, that game literally has an "empty map", a massive one to boot, and it's one of the most natural, immersive and beautiful open worlds ever created, even with those crappy ps2 graphics.

The same non-content activity cramming can be seen in World of Warcraft as well, back in the day you could wander through the Barrens with nothing happening for one hour because there were no fast traveling options and the quest goal would be on the other end of the map. But you would enjoy it anyway due to the atmosphere and serenity of the area, probably in the same way as in Shadow of the Colossus I'd imagine.

Nowadays the expansions feel very systematically manufactured, it seems that they have a formula or an algorhitm for placing different types of activities or elements to correct places with exact distances from each other. I really dislike that feeling. The world is too perfect, it's like a controlled simulation environment like Westworld, designed just for me. The world stops being immersive anymore, it's like uncanny valley of adventure or exploration. Seems that the new Zelda is having symptoms of that problem to a degree as well.

 

[Kyzer]

And that's also when Fast Travel comes into play, since having to do that once is bad enough and developers know that you want to quickly get to the fun parts, so they allow you to skip large parts of the Open World. But the irony here is... if that's your design process, then maybe your world shouldn't be that large in the first place?

Your critique is nice and I can agree with many of your points but...what?

 

[Phoenix RISING]

The fact that you just wrote an entire essay specifically addressing BotW's faults and yet you still consider it to be one of the best games Nintendo has ever made just shows how special this game truly is.

Most of your criticisms are totally valid too. The game is great, but there's tons of room for improvement moving forward. Can't wait to see how they improve on this formula for the next entry.

The counter to most of those claims is that it is not necessary for players to get every shrine, or collect every swirly poop, or fight every enemy camp.

That stuff is there for people who just want to get lost in the world and goof around.

BotW reached for seminal status and achieved it.

 

[thomasmahler]

I also don't agree at all with your last bit. that breath of the wild somehow sacrifices actual, proper level design to support its open world. that's actually why I enjoy the game so much, that every single inch of that world feels like it was meticulously crafted.

Okay, so here's an example:

https://youtu.be/QyMsF31NdNc?list=WL&t=2147

Here they're talking about cutting down a tree, so that the log drops into the water with the player then jumping on it. That's cool!

BUT: In a traditionally designed game, as a designer, you'd now go ahead and make that log-ride insanely exciting, you'd put little openings into the path where you have to shoot enemies with arrows or activate some mechanism that then opens a dam in the distance and dropping the log in there is the only way to do that - It'd lead to something exciting, cool and it'd make you feel like a rockstar for pulling it off.

Now, with an open world game and the player being able to do that absolutely everywhere, you just cannot design that way. You drop the log into the water and just swim down the lake and all you see is more of the world and at some point you just jump off to get back to what you were doing before.

And yes, sometimes you can come up with funny little things to do, like shooting an explosive barrel in an enemy camp in order to defeat the enemies, but obviously you're not gonna get the same excitement out of some random event that might open up for you than if a designer would actually spend a month of his time to just make sure that this particular section is gaming bliss and oozes fun.

There is a big difference between going to an amusement park where designers have actually designed every inch for you to enjoy your experience and just taking a walk through a park - While the latter can obviously also be nice, if that's all you do all day, it gets boring quick, compared to you going to a theme park where somebody tried to design the place for you to just enjoy the hell out of it with varied experiences and the likes.

All I'm saying is that open world games are usually the latter - Because designing a space that large to actually all work together and that space oozing fun is an impossibility. Trust me, it's already really difficult to make spaces fun if you're making a smaller Metroidvania, but once you're presented with making an open world game that's as large as BotWs, you are absolutely making the decision to give up on careful, handcrafted design.

 

[Anth0ny]

I really have zero interest in wasting my time to dig up old posts of yours in Smash Bros threads which basically just boiled down to 'but it's not my Melee' ad nauseum. I wasted enough time reading through them the first time around but regardless it's not on topic. You seriously have a terrible time understanding that your personal taste in games is not indicative of everyone else or even the majority of the market.

So we've gone from "threads he's trolled/derailed" to me giving my opinion on a game. Okay.


You seem to have a terrible time understanding that people have different taste in games and people expressing those opinions isn't a personal attack. You can still enjoy your game despite people bringing up issues with it on an internet message board. Not every game thread needs to be a complete circlejerk, even if it reviews well.