• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • Hey Guest. Check out the NeoGAF 2.2 Update Thread for details on our new Giphy integration and other new features.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Opinion Trailer 150 Tiny Things That Make Breath of the Wild a Game for the Ages

BlackTron

Member
Jun 30, 2016
1,576
1,786
460
devs, critics and the overall general public all tell how wrong you are. its going to revolutionize the open world games years to come the same way Ocarina of Time did to action adventure games.

Shame on me for not addressing this in my post because I assumed everyone on GAF was above trying to prove quality with sales numbers, reviews and general consensus. You must think EA and Ubisoft are the best companies of all time.

While we're at it, let's look at the numbers behind some mobile games, which will absolutely crush and shatter their console counterparts. Or how about let's not, because it's a waste of everyone's time and we all know better.

With that out of the way -I've talked about this here before ages ago, but to summarize my old take on this game, I acknowledge that it's extremely influential. In fact, I directly compared its influence with that of Ocarina of Time. OOT was so influential not only because it was a damn good game -it pioneered many systems and solutions to 3D game problems, guaranteeing it would inspire developers around the world.

That being said. If Ocarina of Time had an anemic story and no big dungeons, it still would have been extremely influential, based on its other strides in controls, gameplay systems and solutions to 3D issues, such as Z-Targeting. This is what BOTW is -I have acknowledged its advances in key areas. It's very well made, technically impressive and is BRIMMING with brilliant innovations. They just left out the game part, BOTW is like the sad version of OOT I described above. Extremely inspiring to game makers, yet an incomplete game.

If Nintendo designed a brilliantly made next gen Zelda game engine brimming with great gameplay systems and ideas, would you think it wasn't worth borrowing from just because they forgot to put a dungeon in it?

Of course it will revolutionize open-world games, all of which will be better for taking BOTWs ideas and adding them to a game with some content in it. It's a shame, because I love Zelda and want it to be the best action-adventure out there, like it was in 1998. But those days are gone, get over it.

At least I have Link's Awakening remake so Switch is not totally without a Zelda worth replaying.
 

BlackTron

Member
Jun 30, 2016
1,576
1,786
460
Boomer bad take.

Zelda combat was never good but serviceable, shrine rewards can be more than breakable weapons and even are contextual with what it takes to get to the shrine or beat it , for example the highest shrines give you the climbing suit. Breakable weapons are only a balancing act so you never stop looking for loot, the master sword kind of goes against it but it balances it out being kind of weak against regular enemies. BoTW it's the best Zelda since the first one, there is no hand holding and the world it's full of objectives that require for you to find your own solutions and mysteries to discover. Quests don't use markers to tell you what to do, requiring that the player pays attention to the context and solve it by their own. I could go on, it's beautifully designed and the overworld does have music, it's dynamic and changes depending in what is going on and where you are.

Edit: I think the game really divides people, are you task oriented or objective oriented?

Yes, I think it's great that BOTW doesn't hold your hand and you must find your own solutions. It would just be better if they gave you a reason to do this stuff other than for the sake of doing it.

This is a subtle shift in game design that began when games started offering saves. Basically, I noticed that in many games, the reward for good performance was diminishing. For example, in Sonic, seemingly countless pointless items, like rings, you actually really wanted to get for 1-ups, because you had a long game to play out and you would want as many lives as possible. Therefore, exploration in Sonic was rewarded with more rings, or power-ups to help you conserve them, or 1-Ups -the exploration was actually rewarded in such a way to boost your liklihood of getting farther in the game. Now, when Sonic began offering saves in Sonic 3, it saved your place in the game but the same game over/continue systems remained. There was no starting a level over again as many times as you needed to try beating it; you would have to start your save over. There was a reason -it would have broken the game design as exploration would no longer really be rewarded. Imagine if you explored every nook and cranny in a Sonic level just to collect as many things as you can, not because it actually helped you in any meaningful way, because you could always just start over from the same level no matter how many times you died -the exploration would no longer be intrinsically tied to the gameplay. It would be fun to plow through a few times and get boring. Like so many modern games that lost this subtle truth.

This is compared to Super Mario World, where you just got Game Over and reverted to your last save point. Not so much was at stake; therefore, exploration in Mario World was still rewarded, but in different ways than Sonic; you might get a powerup, and feel motivated to play well as not to lose it quickly because they're fun to use, or maybe you need to keep it to complete a task like flying somewhere; you might find a secret leading to a new level, such as a keyhole; you might find a path to the star road, etc. What's important to note is that while these games are very different, they still found ways to reward exploration. Mario, being a large game with an overworld map, save points and no forced start-overs, knew that it needed to do things differently than Sonic or its own predecessors, games which expect you to attempt a play-through and get as far as you can before Game Over. These games knew that just for the sake of exploring wasn't good enough.

BOTW doesn't understand this. Like, at all. It's a game about exploring a giant map for its own sake. Why do you want more korok seeds -to hold more weapons? Why do you want to hold more weapons -to go into a fight with a bigger arsenal? Why do you want to go into a fight -to fight the same enemy type again that will give you another breakable weapon or collectable? Why do you want that collectable, to craft or cook something? Maybe you'll use it to boost your stamina, so you can quickly reach a Shrine you can't get to yet. Congrats, the game just encouraged you to use your head to access yet another mini dungeon that looks exactly the same and may or may not be yet another Test of Strength. You know it won't be the Bottom of the Well or the Royal Family's Tomb from OOT -the game has made it clear all you get is this same copy pasted stuff. And that's your motivation? Basically, BOTW is anemic on content that is rewarding to discover. It's a game that inspires adventure in you to travel to those mountains in the distance. You make your way there brimming with excitement, to find nothing but the same old enemies, yet more brief shrines that all have the same look/music, and what else? Korok seeds? Give me a break. If you guys think this is really quality gaming, I wonder how many of you were even around in the 90s, or played OOT at all in the first place.
 

Fahdis

Member
Nov 30, 2018
352
1,186
420
The Minish Cap is better than this turd.

Since, I finished the first, i'll still finish the second.

The constant excuses its fans gives it over mediocre gaming experiences these days and still spend $60...
 

Keihart

Member
Jun 23, 2013
5,112
3,517
775
Yes, I think it's great that BOTW doesn't hold your hand and you must find your own solutions. It would just be better if they gave you a reason to do this stuff other than for the sake of doing it.

This is a subtle shift in game design that began when games started offering saves. Basically, I noticed that in many games, the reward for good performance was diminishing. For example, in Sonic, seemingly countless pointless items, like rings, you actually really wanted to get for 1-ups, because you had a long game to play out and you would want as many lives as possible. Therefore, exploration in Sonic was rewarded with more rings, or power-ups to help you conserve them, or 1-Ups -the exploration was actually rewarded in such a way to boost your liklihood of getting farther in the game. Now, when Sonic began offering saves in Sonic 3, it saved your place in the game but the same game over/continue systems remained. There was no starting a level over again as many times as you needed to try beating it; you would have to start your save over. There was a reason -it would have broken the game design as exploration would no longer really be rewarded. Imagine if you explored every nook and cranny in a Sonic level just to collect as many things as you can, not because it actually helped you in any meaningful way, because you could always just start over from the same level no matter how many times you died -the exploration would no longer be intrinsically tied to the gameplay. It would be fun to plow through a few times and get boring. Like so many modern games that lost this subtle truth.

This is compared to Super Mario World, where you just got Game Over and reverted to your last save point. Not so much was at stake; therefore, exploration in Mario World was still rewarded, but in different ways than Sonic; you might get a powerup, and feel motivated to play well as not to lose it quickly because they're fun to use, or maybe you need to keep it to complete a task like flying somewhere; you might find a secret leading to a new level, such as a keyhole; you might find a path to the star road, etc. What's important to note is that while these games are very different, they still found ways to reward exploration. Mario, being a large game with an overworld map, save points and no forced start-overs, knew that it needed to do things differently than Sonic or its own predecessors, games which expect you to attempt a play-through and get as far as you can before Game Over. These games knew that just for the sake of exploring wasn't good enough.

BOTW doesn't understand this. Like, at all. It's a game about exploring a giant map for its own sake. Why do you want more korok seeds -to hold more weapons? Why do you want to hold more weapons -to go into a fight with a bigger arsenal? Why do you want to go into a fight -to fight the same enemy type again that will give you another breakable weapon or collectable? Why do you want that collectable, to craft or cook something? Maybe you'll use it to boost your stamina, so you can quickly reach a Shrine you can't get to yet. Congrats, the game just encouraged you to use your head to access yet another mini dungeon that looks exactly the same and may or may not be yet another Test of Strength. You know it won't be the Bottom of the Well or the Royal Family's Tomb from OOT -the game has made it clear all you get is this same copy pasted stuff. And that's your motivation? Basically, BOTW is anemic on content that is rewarding to discover. It's a game that inspires adventure in you to travel to those mountains in the distance. You make your way there brimming with excitement, to find nothing but the same old enemies, yet more brief shrines that all have the same look/music, and what else? Korok seeds? Give me a break. If you guys think this is really quality gaming, I wonder how many of you were even around in the 90s, or played OOT at all in the first place.
which is why i added the point of task vs objective, BoTW is very much a game based on making the task (which is exploring) entertaining, everything serves exploring and exploring for exploring sakes has very cool rewards, just not in the form of loot. The hidden forest and the dragon shrines are probably the most fun I've had exploring in any Zelda. I very much understand the problem for people who play games to min max or need some clear goals (objectives) but BoTW succeeds in something that less games even attempt, giving you a really fun and diverse exploration loop. Game doesn't even attempts to be a diablo loot experience.

They definitely could do with a more steep equipment power curve, but that goes a little against the accessibility that the games trades for with it's design.
I do think that something better than shrines could be added, i personally hope for a cave system in the sequel. Having secret caves and underground ruins would very much solve the needs for deeper exploration while giving a complete new sense of adventure to even the same map.
 

BlackTron

Member
Jun 30, 2016
1,576
1,786
460
which is why i added the point of task vs objective, BoTW is very much a game based on making the task (which is exploring) entertaining, everything serves exploring and exploring for exploring sakes has very cool rewards, just not in the form of loot. The hidden forest and the dragon shrines are probably the most fun I've had exploring in any Zelda. I very much understand the problem for people who play games to min max or need some clear goals (objectives) but BoTW succeeds in something that less games even attempt, giving you a really fun and diverse exploration loop. Game doesn't even attempts to be a diablo loot experience.

They definitely could do with a more steep equipment power curve, but that goes a little against the accessibility that the games trades for with it's design.
I do think that something better than shrines could be added, i personally hope for a cave system in the sequel. Having secret caves and underground ruins would very much solve the needs for deeper exploration while giving a complete new sense of adventure to even the same map.

I don't think BOTW fails because it doesn't give clear goals -I think it fails (partially because) it doesn't properly reward exploration well, which is the crux of the game.

Certainly, you apparently think that exploring in BOTW is entertaining, and that it's rewarding. I just wrote long posts about why I don't think so, so we disagree.

No, it's not because I'm more "oriented" one way or another. I don't think that in order to address its problems Zelda would need to be more like Diablo.

Basically, BOTW's game structure and mechanics are pretty fine, it simply lacks (in my opinion) a point for using them. Changing its structure into objectives, loot or EXP points would not solve this problem.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Soodanim

Keihart

Member
Jun 23, 2013
5,112
3,517
775
I don't think BOTW fails because it doesn't give clear goals -I think it fails (partially because) it doesn't properly reward exploration well, which is the crux of the game.

Certainly, you apparently think that exploring in BOTW is entertaining, and that it's rewarding. I just wrote long posts about why I don't think so, so we disagree.

No, it's not because I'm more "oriented" one way or another. I don't think that in order to address its problems Zelda would need to be more like Diablo.

Basically, BOTW's game structure and mechanics are pretty fine, it simply lacks (in my opinion) a point for using them. Changing its structure into objectives, loot or EXP points would not solve this problem.
Objectives it's solved through rewards with a purpose, so if combats got harder and you increase the perceived value of loot, you would probably feel different about that. Another option would be to let the story took a center stage and adding more story drips as rewards to exploration. I certainly think that it lacks those kinds of rewards, but i think it's designed that way with the intention of making combat more accessible and making story as unobtrusive as possible as well.

But yes, you are right in that i felt that the reward of exploring itself was more often than not, enough for myself. I wanted to see the world because of how mysteriously is constructed and not precisely because i wanted treasures.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kuranghi

BlackTron

Member
Jun 30, 2016
1,576
1,786
460
Objectives it's solved through rewards with a purpose, so if combats got harder and you increase the perceived value of loot, you would probably feel different about that. Another option would be to let the story took a center stage and adding more story drips as rewards to exploration. I certainly think that it lacks those kinds of rewards, but i think it's designed that way with the intention of making combat more accessible and making story as unobtrusive as possible as well.

But yes, you are right in that i felt that the reward of exploring itself was more often than not, enough for myself. I wanted to see the world because of how mysteriously is constructed and not precisely because i wanted treasures.

I think that exploration in BOTW is pretty good, they just didn't need to sacrifice game content for it.

The whole point of deconstructing how Mario World and Sonic handled rewarding the player was to demonstrate how different games can reward players in different ways, but it has to be directly tied to gameplay. I do not think exploring a world just to see it is enough, that's just a walking simulator to me, but the solution is not necessarily loot.

I actually really like how "gamey" BOTW is in that there's no story, lots of recycled stuff reminds me of the basic design of old games, such as shrines having the same "tileset". Can't swim underwater, I could forgive all this as the unique old school "flavor" of the game, a la Zelda 1, had they gone all the way and borrowed more ideas from the game than just its humble means. For example, dungeons (finding them was a critical reward for exploring Zelda 1. And they were sufficiently different to feel like unique things worth finding, not "yet another shrine" etc.) The "go anywhere" part of Zelda 1 was great; they needed to also copy the "to find things worth finding" part. Without it, we'd be better off with a focused, story-driven game. So close to greatness, but alas. They took the lazy way out because they knew people would eat it up anyway, which they did. I also think they knew BOTW was a shell of a game, and that they would first sell the map to great acclaim, then finish the thing later for a sequel.

To be most direct -the path to rewarding exploration in BOTW is not (necessarily) treasures. Definitely not just yet another sword or piece of armor. I mean, it could sometimes, part of it should be that you don't quite know what you are going to find at all! Will it be a sprawling dungeon, or a secret grotto? A cave with some puzzles that will reveal the next song for your instrument, which will affect the game in an unexpected and cool way? This is the magic of Zelda that has been lost. It's reduced to ash in BOTW. It's spiritually defunct of Zelda character, because very early into the game, you've seen almost everything you can do except see more environments. I wasn't excited to go exploring because I knew what was out there: more shrines and few enemy types copied all over. This is in contrast to say OOT which had a comparably tiny map, but it was mega dense with content and I never knew what was coming next, or what I would find if I went off the beaten path for a second.

To me, it's not even a contest. In my opinion, Nintendo has brainwashed everyone to eat their shit and like it, so that they don't have to do as much work. Great for them, bad for me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Terenty and ssringo

Keihart

Member
Jun 23, 2013
5,112
3,517
775
I think that exploration in BOTW is pretty good, they just didn't need to sacrifice game content for it.

The whole point of deconstructing how Mario World and Sonic handled rewarding the player was to demonstrate how different games can reward players in different ways, but it has to be directly tied to gameplay. I do not think exploring a world just to see it is enough, that's just a walking simulator to me, but the solution is not necessarily loot.

I actually really like how "gamey" BOTW is in that there's no story, lots of recycled stuff reminds me of the basic design of old games, such as shrines having the same "tileset". Can't swim underwater, I could forgive all this as the unique old school "flavor" of the game, a la Zelda 1, had they gone all the way and borrowed more ideas from the game than just its humble means. For example, dungeons (finding them was a critical reward for exploring Zelda 1. And they were sufficiently different to feel like unique things worth finding, not "yet another shrine" etc.) The "go anywhere" part of Zelda 1 was great; they needed to also copy the "to find things worth finding" part. Without it, we'd be better off with a focused, story-driven game. So close to greatness, but alas. They took the lazy way out because they knew people would eat it up anyway, which they did. I also think they knew BOTW was a shell of a game, and that they would first sell the map to great acclaim, then finish the thing later for a sequel.

To be most direct -the path to rewarding exploration in BOTW is not (necessarily) treasures. Definitely not just yet another sword or piece of armor. I mean, it could sometimes, part of it should be that you don't quite know what you are going to find at all! Will it be a sprawling dungeon, or a secret grotto? A cave with some puzzles that will reveal the next song for your instrument, which will affect the game in an unexpected and cool way? This is the magic of Zelda that has been lost. It's reduced to ash in BOTW. It's spiritually defunct of Zelda character, because very early into the game, you've seen almost everything you can do except see more environments. I wasn't excited to go exploring because I knew what was out there: more shrines and few enemy types copied all over. This is in contrast to say OOT which had a comparably tiny map, but it was mega dense with content and I never knew what was coming next, or what I would find if I went off the beaten path for a second.

To me, it's not even a contest. In my opinion, Nintendo has brainwashed everyone to eat their shit and like it, so that they don't have to do as much work. Great for them, bad for me.
How long did you play it? in regards to places of interest there are quite a lot even if they aren't "dungeons", the lost forest to find the master sword it's pure exploration and hints on how you get there, the dragon shrines are pretty similar and finding the dragons needed for them. The canyon where you find the monster dealer it's similar too and learning where he might be. I agree that the game would be better with dungeons in the form of caves or ruins, but i think that it's purely a production limitation, the shrines make you go up the dungeons could be an incentive to go down.

And yes, the decision to give every sheika slate function from the get go was pretty much dumbing the game down, those tool where enough replacement for the old Zelda tools buuut, and there is a big but, it would of mean that you can't access certain content upon reaching it thus making the game less accesible. The game very cleary makes sacrificies between no hand holding while not being too hard either. Easy combat and not required tools for example...
 
Last edited:

BlackTron

Member
Jun 30, 2016
1,576
1,786
460
How long did you play it? in regards to places of interest there are quite a lot even if they aren't "dungeons", the lost forest to find the master sword it's pure exploration and hints on how you get there, the dragon shrines are pretty similar and finding the dragons needed for them. The canyon where you find the monster dealer it's similar too and learning where he might be. I agree that the game would be better with dungeons in the form of caves or ruins, but i think that it's purely a production limitation, the shrines make you go up the dungeons could be an incentive to go down.

And yes, the decision to give every sheika slate function from the get go was pretty much dumbing the game down, those tool where enough replacement for the old Zelda tools buuut, and there is a big but, it would of mean that you can't access certain content upon reaching it thus making the game less accesible. The game very cleary makes sacrificies between no hand holding while not being too hard either. Easy combat and not required tools for example...

I got about 80% through the game on Wii U. I gave it a second spin on Switch but got about 30% through before deciding my love of Zelda had really blinded me and I could no longer look past its disappointments.

Now, I already said in this very thread that the game is worth playing. I also never said, that the game doesn't have any good content or anything cool at all in it. But, looking back on the 100 hours of my life playing this game, I could have had a much better experience using that time for other games, which is why BOTW fails. It spreads itself too thin. For example, I remember thinking the Zora boss fight was REALLY cool. I was really impressed with it. But that took about 15 minutes. Most of those 100 hours playing BOTW were not spent doing cool stuff like that. They were spent marveling at how BOTW was such a sharp, realistic piece of software that when it rains, I can't climb. They were spent exploring Hyrule deeper and revealing the map for the sake of revealing it, which as we discussed, is great for that walking sim life but not enough for me who expected a real ass Zelda game, not this fluffy drawn out garbage where they try to dose out a carefully measured drop of Nintendo Magic (tm) hoping it will be enough to cover their biggest title ever. I was impressed with like 10 of OOT's boss fights and I didn't have to spend 50 hours wandering a barren Hyrule to play them. Mind you, I'd love to have all those bosses AND to spend 50 hours in a Hyrule worth exploring...because it's full of unique and interesting gameplay to discover SUCH AS those bosses. But again, if you've played 10 hours, then for the remaining 95% of your play time you'll be seeing the same recycled stuff. So the game starts off great and you think it's a masterpiece, then the bait-n-switch reality sets in.

I have to say, you totally lost me at "production limitation". As a grown-ass man who has purchased Mario Legos for himself (yea, I needed Yoshi) I have to say that is just some N fanboy lunacy. With how long BOTW was in development? For the game that they solely showed for AN ENTIRE E3? For a game meant for Wii U which they (again) delayed to lead the charge of their next console? From a company full of talented designers with coffers brimming with billions of dollars?

And you're telling me that BOTW lacked a feature included in nigh every Zelda since NES due to production limitation?

You guys can make excuses for corporate asshats trying to sell you as little as possible for as much as possible all day, I'm getting too old for this shit. They intentionally held this game back, this is a demo for BOTW sold as a full game, BOTW2 will be the full version...along with yet another hardware, ugh Nintendo lol. When a suit at Nintendo decides to add more content to it, magically the "production limitation" will disappear!
 
Last edited:
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: Soodanim

arkhamguy123

Member
Aug 1, 2020
260
254
305
There's a reason people are so desperate for games to be recognized as art.
They're too embarrased to play them and enjoy them as the toys they really are.
There's nothing more childish than saying you only play M-rated games because I'm an adult and those icky E-for-everyone games are for kids.
You're trying too hard.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Soodanim and Rran

Keihart

Member
Jun 23, 2013
5,112
3,517
775
I got about 80% through the game on Wii U. I gave it a second spin on Switch but got about 30% through before deciding my love of Zelda had really blinded me and I could no longer look past its disappointments.

Now, I already said in this very thread that the game is worth playing. I also never said, that the game doesn't have any good content or anything cool at all in it. But, looking back on the 100 hours of my life playing this game, I could have had a much better experience using that time for other games, which is why BOTW fails. It spreads itself too thin. For example, I remember thinking the Zora boss fight was REALLY cool. I was really impressed with it. But that took about 15 minutes. Most of those 100 hours playing BOTW were not spent doing cool stuff like that. They were spent marveling at how BOTW was such a sharp, realistic piece of software that when it rains, I can't climb. They were spent exploring Hyrule deeper and revealing the map for the sake of revealing it, which as we discussed, is great for that walking sim life but not enough for me who expected a real ass Zelda game, not this fluffy drawn out garbage where they try to dose out a carefully measured drop of Nintendo Magic (tm) hoping it will be enough to cover their biggest title ever. I was impressed with like 10 of OOT's boss fights and I didn't have to spend 50 hours wandering a barren Hyrule to play them. Mind you, I'd love to have all those bosses AND to spend 50 hours in a Hyrule worth exploring...because it's full of unique and interesting gameplay to discover SUCH AS those bosses. But again, if you've played 10 hours, then for the remaining 95% of your play time you'll be seeing the same recycled stuff. So the game starts off great and you think it's a masterpiece, then the bait-n-switch reality sets in.

I have to say, you totally lost me at "production limitation". As a grown-ass man who has purchased Mario Legos for himself (yea, I needed Yoshi) I have to say that is just some N fanboy lunacy. With how long BOTW was in development? For the game that they solely showed for AN ENTIRE E3? For a game meant for Wii U which they (again) delayed to lead the charge of their next console? From a company full of talented designers with coffers brimming with billions of dollars?

And you're telling me that BOTW lacked a feature included in nigh every Zelda since NES due to production limitation?

You guys can make excuses for corporate asshats trying to sell you as little as possible for as much as possible all day, I'm getting too old for this shit. They intentionally held this game back, this is a demo for BOTW sold as a full game, BOTW2 will be the full version...along with yet another hardware, ugh Nintendo lol. When a suit at Nintendo decides to add more content to it, magically the "production limitation" will disappear!
Im the last guy to suck nintendo's cock, but the reality it's that every game, no matter the budget(assuming there is a deadline) needs production management, and BoTW was reworked several times until falling in the team that made the final product, similar to how Twilight was reworked into something completely different before realease. So, before thinking, this game need this feature that probably takes a lot of time and man power i also think about what could have been sacrificed and if would have been worth removing that. In this case, removing shrines for a couple of extra of unique dungeons wouldn't have made the trick for most people nor would have been enough to replace it with something of similar scale. No even games with really big budgets like all those yearly ubi clones can manage it, not even Elder Scrolls can do it.

You went straight to talk about bossfights, but i was clearly referencing places that need to be explored in special ways with the reward of discovery as examples of landmarks that are replacing what you call good content like old temples, i never once referenced bossfights because i find the combat in the game irrelevant almost, it's not hard and it's only fun when you are experimenting but for the franchise, it's not far from previous games, so it keeps being serviceable.

I do understand your gripe with spending the time and then in retrospective finding it diluted, but that's only because you are in retrospective not finding value in the exploration itself that kept you entertained and which is way better than in any game before it in the franchise, but you describe all that as walking sim? i guess you would be as right as saying that Death Stranding is a walking sim, but i would argue that both games have very similar design philosophy in making the roads the game and not the destinations, which i appreciate a lot.

You can read my post history if you think i'm a nintendo fan but i hate joycons, i think bayo 2 it's horrible, mario 3d world it's a bore fest, i find the combat in Xenoblade to be a joke visually in design and pokemon to me it's the same stuff i played in yellow like 20 years ago.
 
Last edited:
  • Strength
Reactions: Kuranghi

BlackTron

Member
Jun 30, 2016
1,576
1,786
460
Im the last guy to suck nintendo's cock, but the reality it's that every game, no matter the budget(assuming there is a deadline) needs production management, and BoTW was reworked several times until falling in the team that made the final product, similar to how Twilight was reworked into something completely different before realease. So, before thinking, this game need this feature that probably takes a lot of time and man power i also think about what could have been sacrificed and if would have been worth removing that. In this case, removing shrines for a couple of extra of unique dungeons wouldn't have made the trick for most people nor would have been enough to replace it with something of similar scale. No even games with really big budgets like all those yearly ubi clones can manage it, not even Elder Scrolls can do it.

You went straight to talk about bossfights, but i was clearly referencing places that need to be explored in special ways with the reward of discovery as examples of landmarks that are replacing what you call good content like old temples, i never once referenced bossfights because i find the combat in the game irrelevant almost, it's not hard and it's only fun when you are experimenting but for the franchise, it's not far from previous games, so it keeps being serviceable.

I do understand your gripe with spending the time and then in retrospective finding it diluted, but that's only because you are in retrospective not finding value in the exploration itself that kept you entertained and which is way better than in any game before it in the franchise, but you describe all that as walking sim? i guess you would be as right as saying that Death Stranding is a walking sim, but i would argue that both games have very similar design philosophy in making the roads the game and not the destinations, which i appreciate a lot.

You can read my post history if you think i'm a nintendo fan but i hate joycons, i think bayo 2 it's horrible, mario 3d world it's a bore fest, i find the combat in Xenoblade to be a joke visually in design and pokemon to me it's the same stuff i played in yellow like 20 years ago.

The only thing that made me refer to you as an N fanboy was making excuses for production limitations. Look, I buy Nintendo hardware to play Nintendo games. I do not play a game in order to buy a hardware. Yes, this was also a problem for Twilight Princess (another poor Zelda). The vast expanse of time that has passed since a genuinely great Zelda game, like, two decades now, you're telling me they can't deliver one complete game in that time?

You might be curious that I just knocked down TP given that it's very strong in the dungeons department. The reason is because it fails in exploration. It has the most dull, bland, overly large, needlessly big overworld. In Zelda you should want to wander aimlessly and see what you find. But in TP, it's so barren you're better off just following the story directly; the overworld became an annoyance to traverse between point A and B.

What we need is a game with both a good flow of exploration AND the content worth finding to reward that exploration -that would be Zelda 1, or what we would have if you took BOTW's overworld and TP's dungeons and put them together.

As it is, both are very flawed Zelda games that fail the series' pedigree established on NES, SNES, N64 and Game Boy, all of which delivered and deserve a true modern-production sequel without excuses about project management.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kuranghi

cireza

Member
Jun 1, 2014
8,161
6,758
700
Apologies Cireza. You get used to seeing the same comments trotted out over and over where anything Nintendo related is concerned. Hard to know when tongues are firmly in cheeks :)
No problem, I come on neogaf first and foremost to laugh a bit.... My attempts at making jokes might by bad though ^^

I also have some things I dislike about current Nintendo and do share the feelings on some topics, but that's only because I would like to see an improvement... I have made the OT for Brigandine, loved this game on Switch by the way. And everybody should play Aleste Collection.
 
Last edited:

Rran

Member
Jan 2, 2013
1,099
901
700
amugsblog.blogspot.com
These articles always read of me like 'my first zelda game'. I get the sneaking suspicion that a lot of people who really love BOTW haven't played many zelda games.
Or maybe there are people who love the original Zelda--the one that let you go out and explore the entire overworld from the get-go--and are happy to see the series finally return to that structure.

BotW was outstanding. It felt like a living, breathing world more than possibly any other game I've played, and I loved the freedom of exploration and various physics systems it was built around.
 

Spukc

Member
Jan 24, 2015
16,976
18,061
920
Did they mention that you get to dress like a girl among those 150 tiny things that makes it game of the ages?



stop calling it dressing as a "girl" you binairy minded biggot pig
 

BlackTron

Member
Jun 30, 2016
1,576
1,786
460
stop calling it dressing as a "girl" you binairy minded biggot pig

Better use "gal" instead like the Gerudo says in the screenshot.

(See what I did there using the word Gerudo, dodging having to find the right pronoun? You learn to be like Neo dodging bullets to leave the house these days lol.)
 
  • LOL
Reactions: Spukc

trikster40

Member
Dec 12, 2008
2,234
2,660
1,345
We get a lot of threads that just copy and paste the article from a site, and boom. No comments or opinion from the OP. This isn’t N4G where you try to be first to link some other sites article and give them clicks.

Side note: there’s about 10-15 BIG things about it that don’t make it a game for the ages. Click my video below (not really a video):

[video]Justmyopinion-iknowyoudisagree-igetit[/video]
 

apotema

Member
Jan 22, 2005
1,060
58
1,515
Truly a masterpiece, incredible that after hours of play I keep discovering marvelous things about it
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kuranghi

NikuNashi

Member
Apr 12, 2013
409
1,244
875
Tokyo
Or maybe there are people who love the original Zelda--the one that let you go out and explore the entire overworld from the get-go--and are happy to see the series finally return to that structure.

BotW was outstanding. It felt like a living, breathing world more than possibly any other game I've played, and I loved the freedom of exploration and various physics systems it was built around.

Original Zelda had dungeon's and unique bosses. This had tiny shrines and the same boss battle 4 or 5 times with different attacks. Let's not even start with the devine beasts, oh my.
 

Rran

Member
Jan 2, 2013
1,099
901
700
amugsblog.blogspot.com
Original Zelda had dungeon's and unique bosses. This had tiny shrines and the same boss battle 4 or 5 times with different attacks. Let's not even start with the devine beasts, oh my.
Actually, I think BotW has more boss fights altogether (four Blights in the dungeons, four boss-type enemies in the field and the final battle), and Zelda 1 was no stranger to reusing boss fights. Granted, I did miss the traditional dungeon approach but I thought the Shrines were a good compromise due to being generally well-designed and numerous. Stumbling upon them was the first game in the series to bring back memories of stumbling upon dungeons in Zelda 1.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kuranghi

Silvawuff

Member
Mar 9, 2012
2,743
709
910
For me personally I dropped it for a while, came back about six months later and loved it. It's one of those things that once it "clicks," I can see why it gets the praise it gets. It's also not a game for everybody, and that's okay!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kuranghi

Bragr

Member
Jun 24, 2020
749
1,417
405
I repeat the sense of exploration in this game is unmatched, like they handed each developer the job of making one item and giving it as many uses as possible :D

Only hope the sequel fixes the many shortcomings and becomes more like an actual Zelda title...
You want them to go back to old dungeon Zelda's? why?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kuranghi

Meesh

Member
Jan 6, 2007
5,522
459
1,365
43
Canada
Honestly I feel BotW was more of a testing ground in the series for new or reworked ideas. It's been labeled a sim by some, praised for some amazing innovations for the series and damned for others.

Moving forward I believe the things that made BotW irksome to many will be ironed out or streamlined, and where it's lacking there will be more to represent what Zelda is all about.

Imo if they decide to return to traditional dungeon themes while introducing new elements it would most certainly feel "more Zelda". Keep shrines perhaps but we still need actual dungeons. Populate the landscape just a bit more... and for God's sake, can we have an actual purpose to side or fetch quests instead of running around for Korok seeds that in the end amount to a shiny turd.
A bit annoying lol.

I'm not against weapon breaking, foraging and collecting, but I wouldn't mind more crafting.
If we're coming up with recipies for food, there's gotta be some new weapon and armor crafting that could be explored.

After BotW, all bets are off, there's no real telling where they'll take us in the sequel.
 

LMJ

Member
Feb 7, 2019
1,048
1,782
550
You want them to go back to old dungeon Zelda's? why?

A legitimate question?
Because they are the pinnacle of brilliant design and challenge and reward when it comes to dungeon crawlers...

I mean Zelda titles are revered for thier brilliant dungeons, for thier layout, to thier puzzles to thier innovation and scale and let's not forget aesthetic each topped with a boss whom was usually a puzzle themselves and required you to think and fight to defeat.

Sans the Elephant mech...titan...thing, the dungeons were a huge letdown and felt short, uninspired, lacking puzzles (shrines is where the puzzles and innovation went) as far as aesthetic... There was one, same as shrines...BORING, and the bosses were letdowns too

You cant even use the "unique item per dungeon wouldn't work in BOTW" narrative as you simply make the bosses and the puzzles using the only powerups... You could very easily make creative bosses that make use of said powerups and offer numerous ways to defeat (thus meeting the ridiculous level of choice BOTW offers)

Even those who praised the game said the dungeons and bosses were letdowns in comparison with past Zelda titles...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Soodanim and Meesh

fart town usa

Member
May 31, 2009
3,059
1,664
1,075
The Minish Cap is better than this turd.

Since, I finished the first, i'll still finish the second.

The constant excuses its fans gives it over mediocre gaming experiences these days and still spend $60...
lol, reading that and seeing your avatar. This is why I come to Gaf.

I like BOTW myself but it's definitely now GOAT or the other things that people regard it with. People said the same thing about Skyward Sword.

I've been revisiting a shit ton of Zelda these past few months and I can say with all confidence that Twilight Princess is my favorite. It's just an absolute beast of a game with it's dungeons and the music, etc. Lots of people don't like it but man, I'm going through OOT also right now and I still love it but I think TP is best based on dungeons and atmosphere. I also played through Minish Cap recently and I was bummed out, I remembered loving that game back when it released but the Kin Stone process this time around wasn't all that fun. Still a solid game though, great music and art direction.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kuranghi

Bragr

Member
Jun 24, 2020
749
1,417
405
A legitimate question?
Because they are the pinnacle of brilliant design and challenge and reward when it comes to dungeon crawlers...

I mean Zelda titles are revered for thier brilliant dungeons, for thier layout, to thier puzzles to thier innovation and scale and let's not forget aesthetic each topped with a boss whom was usually a puzzle themselves and required you to think and fight to defeat.

Sans the Elephant mech...titan...thing, the dungeons were a huge letdown and felt short, uninspired, lacking puzzles (shrines is where the puzzles and innovation went) as far as aesthetic... There was one, same as shrines...BORING, and the bosses were letdowns too

You cant even use the "unique item per dungeon wouldn't work in BOTW" narrative as you simply make the bosses and the puzzles using the only powerups... You could very easily make creative bosses that make use of said powerups and offer numerous ways to defeat (thus meeting the ridiculous level of choice BOTW offers)

Even those who praised the game said the dungeons and bosses were letdowns in comparison with past Zelda titles...
Well, yes, the dungeons weren't great, but the exploration and overworld far outweigh it. This Zelda is 95% about the exploration and 5% about the story and dungeons. Running through the same old Zelda formula was getting extremely stale. I welcome the new direction but of course, some better dungeons would help. And bosses certainly need to be revamped, a big miss.

But I know there is a lot of people who fucking hate the old Zelda dungeons too, it can affect the game negatively and I do think this was something they wanted to fix, hence the short dungeons. Like Ocarina of Time, the first 2 easy dungeons were cool but the fish dungeon was terrible. People stop playing when they come across stuff like that, and almost every Zelda game has some dungeons that suck, and getting stuck in a bad dungeon for hours is hurting the games a lot. Now that they removed that and focused on exploration, they suddenly got tons of new Zelda players, it's the most popular Zelda ever.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kuranghi

LMJ

Member
Feb 7, 2019
1,048
1,782
550
Well, yes, the dungeons weren't great, but the exploration and overworld far outweigh it. This Zelda is 95% about the exploration and 5% about the story and dungeons. Running through the same old Zelda formula was getting extremely stale. I welcome the new direction but of course, some better dungeons would help. And bosses certainly need to be revamped, a big miss.

But I know there is a lot of people who fucking hate the old Zelda dungeons too, it can affect the game negatively and I do think this was something they wanted to fix, hence the short dungeons. Like Ocarina of Time, the first 2 easy dungeons were cool but the fish dungeon was terrible. People stop playing when they come across stuff like that, and almost every Zelda game has some dungeons that suck, and getting stuck in a bad dungeon for hours is hurting the games a lot. Now that they removed that and focused on exploration, they suddenly got tons of new Zelda players, it's the most popular Zelda ever.

Which would be why I said BOTW was a great base to build upon, a jack of all trades, but a master of one...

Take that sense of exploration and expand upon it, add the classic dungeons we know and love, work hard on enemy/dungeons variety, fix the AWFUL side missions and give a sense of reward for exploring besides "simply discovering"

(if I climb the tallest mountain full of life threatening dangers, and fight the behemoth...I don't want to earn another shrine...and likely another balsa wood weapon to boot)
 

Fahdis

Member
Nov 30, 2018
352
1,186
420
lol, reading that and seeing your avatar. This is why I come to Gaf.

I like BOTW myself but it's definitely now GOAT or the other things that people regard it with. People said the same thing about Skyward Sword.

I've been revisiting a shit ton of Zelda these past few months and I can say with all confidence that Twilight Princess is my favorite. It's just an absolute beast of a game with it's dungeons and the music, etc. Lots of people don't like it but man, I'm going through OOT also right now and I still love it but I think TP is best based on dungeons and atmosphere. I also played through Minish Cap recently and I was bummed out, I remembered loving that game back when it released but the Kin Stone process this time around wasn't all that fun. Still a solid game though, great music and art direction.

I mean that username itself isn't so bad either.
 
  • Strength
Reactions: fart town usa

Soodanim

Member
Feb 24, 2012
7,255
2,605
1,005
United Kingdom
The thing I’ve come to realise after the 800th “Look at all the details” video about BotW is that they’re absolutely right. It’s full of wonderful little details that make the game unique.

But that’s all it is. You want something bigger? 15 (I forget the number, didn’t bother doing them all) flashbacks is all you get. That exploration the game loves is empty, because all the game offers is details when you stray from the few locations/towns where something actually happens.

I bought the game off the back of the Dunkey video, because the details sold it. So many options. So much variety. But when I’m at a net loss for taking out that enemy camp, what’s the point? I finished the game, and I don’t regret buying the game, but I didn’t love it like a Zelda game. I’ve tried to return to it, and I have played the game the way it wants me to, but it’s still void of any real substance for the vast majority of the time and that stops me being sucked in for the hundred hours it wants me to be there for.
 

Krizalidx11

Member
Mar 18, 2021
385
562
315
Of course it is, make devs work from 9am to 11pmwithout holidays or sick leaves everyday for 5 years and it'll be a legendary game
 

Renozokii

Gold Member
Nov 4, 2019
366
768
415
A game released 4 years ago that could run on a Rendition Verite. Sad. As far as gameplay, people have low standards these days.
There’s a subjectivity to any form of media obviously but when such a vast number all feel the same type of way, including all sorts of respected developers, respected (and not) critics, players from the age of 10 to 50, and just about every major region, then what is actually sad is you. Loved to such a degree that a Chinese developer reskinned the game into a weebs paradise and put it out free to play and it’s making obscene amounts of money. To come to a post, which holy shit it happens so insanely often on this site for some reason, solely dedicated to people to come and talk about a game they enjoyed and then try and talk down on them is pathetic.

Name some games you enjoy, which funny enough people like you never do, so we can critique it in ridiculous ways too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Krappadizzle

Jeeves

Member
Dec 7, 2008
952
1,091
1,150
Something I've always felt alone in is that dungeons tend to be some of my least favorite parts of Zelda games. I do enjoy them well enough, but every time I set foot in a dungeon I can't wait to finish and get back to the real meat and potatoes of the game: the overworld. Seems like everyone else has the opposite view.

So for me the lack of dungeons in BotW isn't a remotely sore spot. That said, my favorite Zeldas are Majora and Awakening, which I enjoy for the stories (notice how the story all but pauses during dungeons). BotW's lean story ends up making it more of a sandbox game, which is great fun, but comparing it to my favorites feels like apples vs. oranges.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Krappadizzle

Hulk_Smash

Gold Member
Jan 8, 2014
2,183
2,893
870
I haven't played this game actually, so I have some questions about this. I really love a sense of exploration, but only if there's something worthwhile to explore, that feels rewarding.

Is that the case with BOTW? Exploring is great and all, but not just only for the sake of exploring or playing around sandbox style - I need goals, something to strive after and like tasks or a bigger mission to feel like there's a purpose to the exploration.

Is there weight to it? 🙂
Don’t listen to the haters. I don’t know what the hell game he was playing, but yes, there are all kinds of upgrades to get that make each interaction worthwhile.