Yea, the enemies were really the only way you could feasibly interact with the world outside of the general “grass moves as you move through it:”. Which is kinda disappointing as I would love to see more interactivity. The game‘s world just felt a bit too distant for my liking to really immerse myself into it.
But anyways as I said before, i am sure the game will still be great fun. Just two minor nitpicks from the initial release.
Just for the record you can also destroy rocks, trees and plants with the granade slingshot.
I think that other than the game being made with jaguar in mind, horizon is not excactly the type of game where you are gonna see zelda botw type of physics.
In zelda you have a very simple core melee combat so adding physics to the mix to defeat enemies is a way to add variety, but games like horizon or elden ring already have a robust and varied combat system so i personally would never choose to use a giant magnet or some other strange gadget to defeat enemies instead of using the normal combat system that for me is just more fun, i don't know if you get what i mean, it's like putting advanced physics in doom, do you think anyone would kill enemies with physics instead of shooting them?!
Sure, more interactivity with the locations would be great to make the world more alive, but you don't see an rdr2 every year unfortunately, to get that level of realism and interaction you need the usual rockstar 10 years\1000 people\unlimited budget treatment.
And even rdr2 doens't have that much destruction (you can't even destroy rocks or trees), but it has a lot more of micro-interactions\details around the world, and nobody is gonna beat that game before gta6 or rdr3.