• 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.

LTTP LTTP - Zelda: Breath of the Wild more like breath of fresh air

V

Vader1

Unconfirmed Member
Quit BOTW after 22 hours. Played after The Witcher 3, Horizon Zero Dawn and AC Origins. All three games do everything that BOTW does but far better. The only positives I had with BOTW were the visuals/art style/weather effects and the shrines but everything was so meh to me. Bland, empty, dull and boring open world reminded me of MGS 5 which isn't a good thing. Story was average at best (made it up to the water kingdom), minimal voice acting, so sick of Link being a silent protagonist. Give him a fucking voice already. Same concept for 30 years - defeat Ganon, rescue Zelda, save Hyrule. Same shit every time. Gameplay and combat wasn't fun at all and if anything, was so old, outdated and obsolete. If it wasn't for the shrines, I wouldn't have even played for as long as I did.

Link's Awakening Remake on the other hand, im super hyped for.

I have my issues with BotW but have to say it was much more enjoyable to me gameplay wise than what I managed to play of HZD and Witcher 3. And had a much better looking art style imo
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: Business

kiiltz

Member
Apr 23, 2019
687
1,346
475
You are shitting me with this!!? So...if someone enjoys the game you don't personally enjoy makes them have "low standards"!!? What type of idiotic logic is that!!?
It's just a low effort Reddit/Facebook tier post that essentially boils down to "I disagree", I don't really pay them much heed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Raph64 and Danjin44
V

Vader1

Unconfirmed Member
WW as a bottom tier Zelda game is just an awful take.
 

peter42O

Member
Aug 9, 2014
4,119
1,991
580
I have my issues with BotW but have to say it was much more enjoyable to me gameplay wise than what I managed to play of HZD and Witcher 3. And had a much better looking art style imo

Not for me. Visually, both Horizon and The Witcher 3 demolish BOTW. Granted, BOTW's art style is beautiful but like it or not, realistic will always be superior simply because it gives you the ultimate sense of atmosphere and immersion which is something BOTW (and games with similar art styles) can never accomplish.

Gameplay wise, BOTW was basic, dull and boring. Combat wise, the only thing I will give to BOTW over TW3 is the bows and arrows combat but otherwise, not even close. As for Horizon Zero Dawn, the gameplay and combat is by far the most fluid, smooth and responsive this generation. Bows and arrows, melee combat, stealth, bombs and traps are simply excellent.

BOTW is simply dull, boring, not exciting or interesting whatsoever. The shrines are the most entertaining despite minimal combat. To each their own but until Nintendo gives me the realistic Zelda from E3 2011 with full voice acting and more emphasis on story and characters since it's basically an action RPG, I will always see the franchise as simply doing the same exact premise over and over again.
 
V

Vader1

Unconfirmed Member
Not for me. Visually, both Horizon and The Witcher 3 demolish BOTW. Granted, BOTW's art style is beautiful but like it or not, realistic will always be superior simply because it gives you the ultimate sense of atmosphere and immersion which is something BOTW (and games with similar art styles) can never accomplish.

Gameplay wise, BOTW was basic, dull and boring. Combat wise, the only thing I will give to BOTW over TW3 is the bows and arrows combat but otherwise, not even close. As for Horizon Zero Dawn, the gameplay and combat is by far the most fluid, smooth and responsive this generation. Bows and arrows, melee combat, stealth, bombs and traps are simply excellent.

BOTW is simply dull, boring, not exciting or interesting whatsoever. The shrines are the most entertaining despite minimal combat. To each their own but until Nintendo gives me the realistic Zelda from E3 2011 with full voice acting and more emphasis on story and characters since it's basically an action RPG, I will always see the franchise as simply doing the same exact premise over and over again.

Completely disagree with the graphics thing, I think the most interesting looking games are the ones with the unique art styles. Realistic styles tend to be more dull looking for me.

Gameplay wise, BotW is just fun to play which is a lot more than I can say for HZD and Witcher 3. Controls feel more fluid, and I can climb any surface or paraglide off anything. Witcher 3 and HZD feel much more sluggish/stiff, and the world is less interactive.

Ironically I was much more immersed in BotW than more “realistic” games.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: Danjin44

kiiltz

Member
Apr 23, 2019
687
1,346
475
Not for me. Visually, both Horizon and The Witcher 3 demolish BOTW. Granted, BOTW's art style is beautiful but like it or not, realistic will always be superior simply because it gives you the ultimate sense of atmosphere and immersion which is something BOTW (and games with similar art styles) can never accomplish.

Gameplay wise, BOTW was basic, dull and boring. Combat wise, the only thing I will give to BOTW over TW3 is the bows and arrows combat but otherwise, not even close. As for Horizon Zero Dawn, the gameplay and combat is by far the most fluid, smooth and responsive this generation. Bows and arrows, melee combat, stealth, bombs and traps are simply excellent.

BOTW is simply dull, boring, not exciting or interesting whatsoever. The shrines are the most entertaining despite minimal combat. To each their own but until Nintendo gives me the realistic Zelda from E3 2011 with full voice acting and more emphasis on story and characters since it's basically an action RPG, I will always see the franchise as simply doing the same exact premise over and over again.
Realism is not only overrated but an entirely subjective bar of measure and small component regarding atmosophere. There's plenty there in BotW to appreciate from the vibrant wildlife, landscape and desolate ruins to each village and race that has their own unique personality. Then there's the role that the weather, environment and day/night cycle plays to give it more life or how the music shifts depending on what you're doing.

As far as gameplay concerned, it's a Nintendo game so I wasn't expecting much and I came from Sekiro so my barometer was out of wack. Biggest complaint is lock on and horse riding. How they fuck up what the series innovated and is known for is a mystery to me.

Also fuck "muh immersion". That's the same line of thinking that got us unskippable walking scenes. I also don't know why you're so obsessed with Link getting a VA, it's absolutely not a necessity just because other games have had success with them and now for some reason people can't fathom voiceless protagonists. I'd comment on the voice work done by the Champions and Zelda but I played it in Japanese so it was 10/10.

Oh yeah, it's not an RPG as much as it is a hack and slash.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Danjin44

Danjin44

The nicest person on this forum
Mar 22, 2017
16,115
25,657
1,075
Not for me. Visually, both Horizon and The Witcher 3 demolish BOTW. Granted, BOTW's art style is beautiful but like it or not, realistic will always be superior simply because it gives you the ultimate sense of atmosphere and immersion which is something BOTW (and games with similar art styles) can never accomplish.

Gameplay wise, BOTW was basic, dull and boring. Combat wise, the only thing I will give to BOTW over TW3 is the bows and arrows combat but otherwise, not even close. As for Horizon Zero Dawn, the gameplay and combat is by far the most fluid, smooth and responsive this generation. Bows and arrows, melee combat, stealth, bombs and traps are simply excellent.

BOTW is simply dull, boring, not exciting or interesting whatsoever. The shrines are the most entertaining despite minimal combat. To each their own but until Nintendo gives me the realistic Zelda from E3 2011 with full voice acting and more emphasis on story and characters since it's basically an action RPG, I will always see the franchise as simply doing the same exact premise over and over again.
Well if you want hyper realistic graphics with cinematic story telling then Zelda series are not for you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kiiltz

peter42O

Member
Aug 9, 2014
4,119
1,991
580
Completely disagree with the graphics thing, I think the most interesting looking games are the ones with the unique art styles. Realistic styles tend to be more dull looking for me.

Gameplay wise, BotW is just fun to play which is a lot more than I can say for HZD and Witcher 3. Controls feel more fluid, and I can climb any surface or paraglide off anything. Witcher 3 and HZD feel much more sluggish/stiff, and the world is less interactive.

Ironically I was much more immersed in BotW than more “realistic” games.

BOTW art style is beautiful but compared to the other two (and AC Origins/Odyssey), it's just not as immersive to me because I see it as a cartoon - meaning fake. As opposed to the realistic art style which is obviously real and will get more realistic as technology gets better. To each their own though. I simply will always choose realistic over any other art style.

For me, BOTW was more of a bore. Literally, the last two hours or so before I quit, I was just wandering around because I simply wasn't into it. Tried to stay with it but im not the type to force or power my way through any game if im not enjoying it. TW3 is somewhat clunky at times but BOTW's controller configuration is beyond horrible. Three button combination just to do a dodge move? Like really? The odd jump button which was X if I remember correctly. Really wish Nintendo would get up to date with their controller configurations and button layouts because they're simply old, outdated and obsolete.

As for Horizon, it's by far the most smooth, fluid and responsive game that I have played this generation. Controller configuration is perfect and everything that you want to do, your character does precisely. In BOTW, not so much if at all.

As for the climbing, it's meh to me because Link is so damn slow and yeah, I know you can upgrade that and whatnot but it's so damn fake and unrealistic. Link needs climbing equipment to go faster but yet, he can "free climb" at will on almost anything and only falls off when it rains? Like really? Come on. I'll take the climbing in Horizon over BOTW simply because it's faster and I can get to where I want to get too in less time. With AC Origins/Odyssey, the free climbing is even better because it's BOTW but on a far grander scale because you can climb quickly as opposed to climbing at a snail's pace.

Will disagree with the "less interactive" opinion simply because Zelda only comes across that way because there's no waypoints, icons everywhere, etc. but add them and it's exactly the same shit. For TW3 and Horizon though, if you turn off the HUD and all the icons on the world map, it not only becomes more interactive due to there not being anything on screen or the world map whatsoever but it also, in turns makes the game world way more immersive than it originally is and completely crushes BOTW because it takes what BOTW setup was and goes the extra mile by allowing the player to turn off everything.

Gamers can love BOTW but it's funny because I always think to myself, if you subtract the Zelda name, the Nintendo logo and change the primary character's names but keep literally everything the same and call it Oceanhorn 3D or some shit like that, would it really be praised for what it is/does despite it literally being exactly the same game but without the entire 30 year history behind it? My guess is probably not. It's simply the Nintendo/Zelda name and nostalgia that gives the game and franchise the reputation that it has because when you look at it objectively, from visuals to gameplay to audio to story and characters, etc., so many other games simply do what BOTW does but far better in my opinion.

Realism is not only overrated but an entirely subjective bar of measure and small component regarding atmosophere. There's plenty there in BotW to appreciate from the vibrant wildlife, landscape and desolate ruins to each village and race that has their own unique personality. Then there's the role that the weather, environment and day/night cycle plays to give it more life or how the music shifts depending on what you're doing.

As far as gameplay concerned, it's a Nintendo game so I wasn't expecting much and I came from Sekiro so my barometer was out of wack. Biggest complaint is lock on and horse riding. How they fuck up what the series innovated is known for is a mystery to me.

Also fuck "muh immersion". That's the same line of thinking that got us unskippable walking scenes. I also don't know why you're so obsessed with Link getting a VA, it's absolutely not a necessity just because other games have had success with them and now for some reason people can't fathom voiceless protagonists. I'd comment on the voice work done by the Champions and Zelda but I played it in Japanese so it was 10/10.

Oh yeah, it's not an RPG as much as it is a hack and slash.

The visuals and art style in BOTW is one of the few positives I actually had with the game but would I take it over realistic visuals? Hell no. Simply because it's fake. Also, both the last two AC games have way more vibrant wildlife, landscapes and desolate ruins in addition to massive cities and so much more that BOTW can't even match let alone surpass.

Personally, I like getting immersed in games. BOTW simply didn't do that for me. I can guarantee that im definitely not obsessed with Link getting a voice actor as I don't really care since I will never see the franchise as on par or equal to all the other third person action/adventure/RPG's that I have played (and will play) but in order to tell a better story and have better interaction with NPC's and main characters (like Zelda), you need a voice actor because there's literally no interaction between you and the rest of the characters which kills any chance of having a decent story. The only franchise I have seen pull this off is the Metro franchise and after three games, if 4A Games develops a 4th game in the series, the voice actor that plays Arytom and tals in between missions needs to talk for the entire game. No voice acting for top tier games simply pulls me out of the world and makes me less interested in the story and premise unless everything else around is top tier.

Also, it's 2019, six months away from 2020. Silent protagonists fucking suck period because your character doesn't communicate with all the other characters and thus, there's no interaction whatsoever which leads to, how the hell can I believe that my character is the savior or whatever the case may be but yet, can't speak a single word? Just hell no. Stories will always be better with full voice acting. Can't tell a compelling, interesting, exciting story if the main character (which is you, the player) doesn't say a word.

20 years ago. No problem with silent protagonists but now, nope. Shit needs to evolve and get better. Instead of being stuck in the past.

Zelda is an action adventure game with a lot of RPG elements which basically makes it a soft core RPG. It will be even more of an RPG when the sequel gets released. There's simply way too many gameplay and system elements that prevent it from not being called an RPG.

Well if you want hyper realistic graphics with cinematic story telling then Zelda series are not for you.

No argument here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: clyd

Danjin44

The nicest person on this forum
Mar 22, 2017
16,115
25,657
1,075
@ peter42O peter42O : I talk about this before but the biggest reason I enjoy Zelda and Dragon Quest series, they can be very immersive but at same time very gamy but that "gamy" part what makes the game actually really fun to play. I honestly don't need pain in the ass sim mechanics the you see in games like RDR 2 in order to immerse me and as I grow older I'm much more attracted to stylistic visuals over hyper realistic ones.
 
Last edited:
V

Vader1

Unconfirmed Member
BOTW art style is beautiful but compared to the other two (and AC Origins/Odyssey), it's just not as immersive to me because I see it as a cartoon - meaning fake. As opposed to the realistic art style which is obviously real and will get more realistic as technology gets better. To each their own though. I simply will always choose realistic over any other art style.

For me, BOTW was more of a bore. Literally, the last two hours or so before I quit, I was just wandering around because I simply wasn't into it. Tried to stay with it but im not the type to force or power my way through any game if im not enjoying it. TW3 is somewhat clunky at times but BOTW's controller configuration is beyond horrible. Three button combination just to do a dodge move? Like really? The odd jump button which was X if I remember correctly. Really wish Nintendo would get up to date with their controller configurations and button layouts because they're simply old, outdated and obsolete.

As for Horizon, it's by far the most smooth, fluid and responsive game that I have played this generation. Controller configuration is perfect and everything that you want to do, your character does precisely. In BOTW, not so much if at all.

As for the climbing, it's meh to me because Link is so damn slow and yeah, I know you can upgrade that and whatnot but it's so damn fake and unrealistic. Link needs climbing equipment to go faster but yet, he can "free climb" at will on almost anything and only falls off when it rains? Like really? Come on. I'll take the climbing in Horizon over BOTW simply because it's faster and I can get to where I want to get too in less time. With AC Origins/Odyssey, the free climbing is even better because it's BOTW but on a far grander scale because you can climb quickly as opposed to climbing at a snail's pace.

Will disagree with the "less interactive" opinion simply because Zelda only comes across that way because there's no waypoints, icons everywhere, etc. but add them and it's exactly the same shit. For TW3 and Horizon though, if you turn off the HUD and all the icons on the world map, it not only becomes more interactive due to there not being anything on screen or the world map whatsoever but it also, in turns makes the game world way more immersive than it originally is and completely crushes BOTW because it takes what BOTW setup was and goes the extra mile by allowing the player to turn off everything.

Gamers can love BOTW but it's funny because I always think to myself, if you subtract the Zelda name, the Nintendo logo and change the primary character's names but keep literally everything the same and call it Oceanhorn 3D or some shit like that, would it really be praised for what it is/does despite it literally being exactly the same game but without the entire 30 year history behind it? My guess is probably not. It's simply the Nintendo/Zelda name and nostalgia that gives the game and franchise the reputation that it has because when you look at it objectively, from visuals to gameplay to audio to story and characters, etc., so many other games simply do what BOTW does but far better in my opinion.

Meh, a lot of franchises I think are given credit based mainly on their name, like new Naughty Dog, Rockstar and maybe Mario, but I don’t think Zelda is one of them. The environments, gameplay and feeling of adventure always hook me.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

peter42O

Member
Aug 9, 2014
4,119
1,991
580
@ peter42O peter42O : I talk about this before but the biggest reason I enjoy Zelda and Dragon Quest series, they can be very immersive but at same time very gamy but that "gamy" part what makes the game actually really fun to play. I honestly don't need pain in the ass sim mechanics the you see in games RDR 2 in order to immerse me and as I grow older I'm much attracted to stylistic visuals over hyper realistic ones.

At 40 years old, im the opposite. I play games for much more than just fun. Gameplay/combat is first and foremost the most important to me followed by story/characters followed by visuals and then audio. If the first two are lacking, the game isn't going to be fun or enjoyable for me. If one of the top two is lacking but the other is superb, then it will balance and even things out for me to where I'll stay invested with the game.

For BOTW, neither the gameplay/combat or the story/characters pulled me in because I simply see both aspects as being outdone by nearly every other third person open world game that I have played and completed this gen and to be honest, even last gen. If you're not hitting on at least one of those two aspects, there's simply no reason for me to continue playing because for me, there's no fun whatsoever because im not being pulled in or immersed or caring about the characters, etc.

Funny you mention RDR 2. I received that today from GameFly and installed it. Will start it up most likely tomorrow but I also have Judgment which is also installed. I want to play RDR 2 more but Judgment is the far shorter and quicker game since all I care about is the main story and characters. Enjoyed Yakuza Zero, Kiwami and Kiwami 2 but mostly for the main story and characters. Shit was great. Did about 20 side stories in Zero and didn't enjoy any of them plus no voice acting whatsoever simply made me dis-interested so I stopped doing all of that shit and just stuck with the main story which again, was great in all three games.

Back to RDR 2, there's nothing wrong with "sim" elements as long as they're not overdone to where it becomes a chore. My friend who completed RDR 2 back at launch and won't shut up about it said most of the "sim" elements can be ignored for the vast majority of the game. I'll find out for myself if that's true but if it is, then they won't have much affect on my enjoyment of the game since I would ignore most of it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: clyd

peter42O

Member
Aug 9, 2014
4,119
1,991
580
Meh, a lot of franchises I think are given credit based mainly on their name, like new Naughty Dog, Rockstar and maybe Mario, but I don’t think Zelda is one of them. The environments, gameplay and feeling of adventure always hook me.

Personally, despite loving Uncharted for the most part but do believe that Uncharted 4 is overrated and that The Lost Legacy is the far better game simply because it's more of what the series and franchise should be, I do agree that Naughty Dog gets a lot of leeway. Won't say free pass yet because up until Lost legacy, it's only been a decade and the first and last Uncharted games didn't go past the mid-80's overall. With that said, I can see them joining that class eventually.

Including Naughty Dog (Uncharted series to present), I also see Rockstar, Bethesda Game Studios (except for Fallout 76), Zelda franchise, Mario franchise and most of Nintendo's main IP's get a free pass based on the name or developer. Always makes me wonder that if those games were exactly the same but developed by someone else, would the praise still be the same? I personally believe that they wouldn't be.
 

Orenji Neko

Member
Feb 1, 2019
580
788
580
Japan, current location: 不明 !
Love Breath of the Wild; not much else to say about it other than that, but considering how it veers from a trajectory that has been in place since...hmmm, let's say either LttP or OoT, I can understand how it doesn't appeal to everyone. I'm actually hoping the sequel can bring in more of those other elements (multiple larger dungeons, gadgets, etc) without compromising the framework they have in place. To me, they have a fantastic foundation to build on, but I just don't want it to go so far back into how things were because the culmination of that was Skyward Sword and I fucking hate that game. I hate to say that too as it's a Zelda game, but damn, I know what I feel and regrettably I patently dislike SS.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kiiltz

kiiltz

Member
Apr 23, 2019
687
1,346
475
The visuals and art style in BOTW is one of the few positives I actually had with the game but would I take it over realistic visuals? Hell no. Simply because it's fake. Also, both the last two AC games have way more vibrant wildlife, landscapes and desolate ruins in addition to massive cities and so much more that BOTW can't even match let alone surpass.

It's not really a matter of quantity for comparison's sake. The subject we were discussing here is atmosphere and the point was their relation to that. I'm not one to simply put a game's visuals down in favour of another simply because "it's fake". Visuals should be taken with art direction in mind and anything else goes into "apples and oranges" personal opinion territory. There's no point in comparing Borderlands to Far Cry simply because they have different art directions. Realism isn't the highest form of immersion and atmosphere and putting it on a pedestal is both unfair to other games and a disservice to the industry. There's no issue with preferring one or the other though.

Personally, I like getting immersed in games. BOTW simply didn't do that for me.

That's completely fine but my main gripe is arm chair critics having an instaboner on what has pretty much become a buzzword without any thought to it's subjectivity (not directed at you); leading to games having QTE and forced walking scenes which is essentially nothing but shallow eye candy. But "muh immersion".

in order to tell a better story and have better interaction with NPC's and main characters (like Zelda), you need a voice actor because there's literally no interaction between you and the rest of the characters which kills any chance of having a decent story. The only franchise I have seen pull this off is the Metro franchise and after three games, if 4A Games develops a 4th game in the series, the voice actor that plays Arytom and tals in between missions needs to talk for the entire game. No voice acting for top tier games simply pulls me out of the world and makes me less interested in the story and premise unless everything else around is top tier.

I fundamentally disagree. There's an unappreciated beauty here in the things that are unsaid. Each of the Champions hinted at a touching relationship with Link and each of Zelda's memories slowly unveiled her struggle to deal with her role in the prophecy. It's indirect story telling at it's finest which only further adds to the atmosphere BotW supposedly lacks.

Also, it's 2019, six months away from 2020. Silent protagonists fucking suck period because your character doesn't communicate with all the other characters and thus, there's no interaction whatsoever which leads to, how the hell can I believe that my character is the savior or whatever the case may be but yet, can't speak a single word? Just hell no. Stories will always be better with full voice acting. Can't tell a compelling, interesting, exciting story if the main character (which is you, the player) doesn't say a word.

20 years ago. No problem with silent protagonists but now, nope. Shit needs to evolve and get better. Instead of being stuck in the past.

I actually don't give a shit about voice acting. Sure, when it's done well its a great bonus, but if that was needed to protect my suspension of disbelief I'd relegate myself to only playing AAA "movie" games. This notion that "Stories will always be better with full voice acting" is completely shallow and obtuse. This isn't a question of games needing to evolve. It's simply game design choice and your inability to accept it. For the most part your forgetting that story heavy games, especially with VA work, are typically restricted to being done so in a linear fashion. The priority here was clearly the game's open endness (not open world) regarding being able to complete the game in any order you saw fit to so the story being secondary was a given and thus the presence or lack thereof, of full VA work shouldn't be a major factor.

If your suspension of belief is so easily shattered by your character not talking or being unable to then I can only describe that as close minded.

Zelda is an action adventure game with a lot of RPG elements which basically makes it a soft core RPG. It will be even more of an RPG when the sequel gets released. There's simply way too many gameplay and system elements that prevent it from not being called an RPG.
I was mostly being tongue in cheek as I'm not one for arguing over what genre a game is but what "elements"? As far as I'm concerned, if it doesn't have a level or progression system and/or something akin to a skill/ability tree then it's not an RPG. Obviously, in recent times it's become a bit muddled with genres overlapping but I still wouldn't consider BotW an RPG.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DunDunDunpachi

iconmaster

Banned
Jul 18, 2013
7,469
14,084
1,060
The visuals and art style in BOTW is one of the few positives I actually had with the game but would I take it over realistic visuals? Hell no. Simply because it's fake

 

synchronicity

Member
Dec 16, 2011
4,209
4,010
990
Really loved it. Satisfied that itch for wanderlust wonderfully.

I had no issues with weapon breakage. I did think the narrative and voice work were subpar (I am super sensitive to this fwiw), but all things considered it's still an all-time classic imo. Just a joy to roam that world with a sense of unencumbered freedom.
 

JimmyJones

Banned
Mar 19, 2015
1,816
1,967
650
In what way did Skyrim impress you more than BotW did (or what ways did BotW disappoint you by comparison)?

Where do I even begin?

Skyrim has...

Better quests,
Better story,
Better world,
Better weapons,
Better everything.

The only thing BoTW has over Skyrim is the slate abilities and the physics stuff.

There are people out there who claim BoTW is better than the Witcher 3 as well. I am not a fan of TW3 at all but you have to be insanely deluded to say BoTW is better than it. The same goes for Skyrim. I'm no Skyrim fan but the game is miles above BoTW it's not even close.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Inanilmaz

peter42O

Member
Aug 9, 2014
4,119
1,991
580
It's not really a matter of quantity for comparison's sake. The subject we were discussing here is atmosphere and the point was their relation to that. I'm not one to simply put a game's visuals down in favour of another simply because "it's fake". Visuals should be taken with art direction in mind and anything else goes into "apples and oranges" personal opinion territory. There's no point in comparing Borderlands to Far Cry simply because they have different art directions. Realism isn't the highest form of immersion and atmosphere and putting it on a pedestal is both unfair to other games and a disservice to the industry. There's no issue with preferring one or the other though.

That's completely fine but my main gripe is arm chair critics having an instaboner on what has pretty much become a buzzword without any thought to it's subjectivity (not directed at you); leading to games having QTE and forced walking scenes which is essentially nothing but shallow eye candy. But "muh immersion".

I fundamentally disagree. There's an unappreciated beauty here in the things that are unsaid. Each of the Champions hinted at a touching relationship with Link and each of Zelda's memories slowly unveiled her struggle to deal with her role in the prophecy. It's indirect story telling at it's finest which only further adds to the atmosphere BotW supposedly lacks.

I actually don't give a shit about voice acting. Sure, when it's done well its a great bonus, but if that was needed to protect my suspension of disbelief I'd relegate myself to only playing AAA "movie" games. This notion that "Stories will always be better with full voice acting" is completely shallow and obtuse. This isn't a question of games needing to evolve. It's simply game design choice and your inability to accept it. For the most part your forgetting that story heavy games, especially with VA work, are typically restricted to being done so in a linear fashion. The priority here was clearly the game's open endness (not open world) regarding being able to complete the game in any order you saw fit to so the story being secondary was a given and thus the presence or lack thereof, of full VA work shouldn't be a major factor.

If your suspension of belief is so easily shattered by your character not talking or being unable to then I can only describe that as close minded.

I was mostly being tongue in cheek as I'm not one for arguing over what genre a game is but what "elements"? As far as I'm concerned, if it doesn't have a level or progression system and/or something akin to a skill/ability tree then it's not an RPG. Obviously, in recent times it's become a bit muddled with genres overlapping but I still wouldn't consider BotW an RPG.

I wasn't putting BOTW's visuals and art style down. In fact, I do believe that it looked great and the weather effects were amazing but for me personally, I simply get way more immersed with realistic visuals because to me, it's simply far more believable. But it goes beyond that, majority of BOTW is empty and bland. It reminded me of MGS 5. It's too big of an open world to begin with and a lot of it is empty and you must traverse it all when that simply isn't needed. In other world games, there's always something going on or happening. In BOTW, not so much. For Zelda, I simply want to see the game be realistic because it's simply time to evolve the franchise. People talk about all the great things in BOTW but if it was realistic visually, would it still have all those other gameplay mechanics? Probably not because the game wouldn't be built for it. Seeing a demo of Zelda from E3 2011 looks way more impressive to me and way more enticing to play than what BOTW was/is. BOTW's art style is again, great but would I take it over that E3 2011 demo? Nope.

Forced walking scenes is to hide the loading and isn't any different than standing still in BOTW talking to an NPC. It's the same thing. Me personally, I would much rather control my character walking and talking with another character as opposed to just standing still. Of course, that's just my personal preference.

As for the silent protagonist and it being bad for the story, it's definitely how I see it. Only Metro pulled it off and even then, I don't want to see them do that again if they develop a fourth game in the franchise. A perfect example for me is Far Cry. Far Cry 3 had a decent at best protagonist but imagine if he was silent when interacting with Vaas. It simply wouldn't have the same impact. I loved the story in Far Cry 4 and the twists and turns. It was excellent but if I was playing as a silent protagonist, the entire premise falls apart because there's no interaction with you and the characters in the game world. I look at Far Cry 5 and New Dawn as steps backwards because despite there being a great antagonist in Far Cry 5, you're completely silent and it doesn't mean much if anything when the NPC is basically talking to themselves. That's just meh to me and completely pulls me out of the experience.

Lack of voice acting in a franchise that's been around 30 years with the same exact premise and setup needs to evolve in my opinion. To me, it's all nostalgia as opposed to BOTW being an excellent because it's not. It has a lot of issues that majority of fans seem to ignore. There's no story really whatsoever and how can you have one when Link is just nodding or blinking? I don't accept it which is one the reasons why I quit the game. To me, it's a bad design decision because it hurts the game's already non-existent story. Why would I care or get invested in Link when he doesn't say a single word whatsoever? Nintendo could kill him off permanently in the next game and to me, it would make zero difference because I wouldn't be invested into the character or his purpose.

For me, after the gameplay, I want a great story with great characters. Can't get that if the protagonist is silent because there's no interaction between the antagonist(s) and other NPC's the game world. See Far Cry 5. To each their own but after 30 years of gaming, I expect franchises to evolve, become more current and get better by adding in what's been missing for years if not decades. But if you're fine with that, then great for you. I'm simply not, have higher expectations and if they aren't met, I quit the game and move on to another game.

BOTW is an adventure exploration game with RPG elements. It's not a full fledged RPG but it's getting there. I'm expecting there to be a lot more RPG elements in the sequel.
 
V

Vader1

Unconfirmed Member
Where do I even begin?

Skyrim has...

Better quests,
Better story,
Better world,
Better weapons,
Better everything.

The only thing BoTW has over Skyrim is the slate abilities and the physics stuff.

There are people out there who claim BoTW is better than the Witcher 3 as well. I am not a fan of TW3 at all but you have to be insanely deluded to say BoTW is better than it. The same goes for Skyrim. I'm no Skyrim fan but the game is miles above BoTW it's not even close.

I would easily put BotW above both games. I like the art direction/environments much more and think the gameplay is much smoother, and more immersive.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

#Phonepunk#

Banned
Sep 4, 2018
18,552
36,228
885
39
lol Skyrim. you want to talk copy paste design? i was fighting the same monsters in the same dungeon, like literally the exact same dungeon, at hour 150 as i was in hour 1. better quests? yes if you love going to the same dungeons over and over for different reasons. better story? lol yes the civil war that i never noticed was happening outside of cutscenes. the slow build up over dozens of hours from fighting a dragon in a field to... fighting a dragon somewhere else. absolutely incredible story. did you know i was the chosen once? brilliant! never before done /s

my biggest memory during Skyrim was traversing the world and jumping against mountains. getting around was such a pain in the ass and jumping around mountains was pure torture. i spent hours just staring at the side of a mountain trying to jump around it. many open world games mess up mountains but Skyrim was like, this is the worst mountain design ever.

BOTW addressing this head-on was genuine. now climbing the mountains is not the painful thing you hate, it is FUN, it is UPGRADEABLE, it is something you can do the minute you start playing. just this one change makes this world 10x more fun to explore.
 
Last edited:

zcaa0g

Member
Sep 3, 2018
1,249
1,690
405
Completely disagree with the graphics thing, I think the most interesting looking games are the ones with the unique art styles. Realistic styles tend to be more dull looking for me.

Gameplay wise, BotW is just fun to play which is a lot more than I can say for HZD and Witcher 3. Controls feel more fluid, and I can climb any surface or paraglide off anything. Witcher 3 and HZD feel much more sluggish/stiff, and the world is less interactive.

Ironically I was much more immersed in BotW than more “realistic” games.

"Art style" is a nice way of saying "bad graphics". The Zelda HD releases on Wii U looked better which is sad.
 
V

Vader1

Unconfirmed Member
"Art style" is a nice way of saying "bad graphics". The Zelda HD releases on Wii U looked better which is sad.

No, I actually just meant the art style itself, which is more than just how sharp the textures are or how much power the game has. The actual colors and the environments, the visual designs of the enemies and characters, are all really good.
 
D

Deleted member 752119

Unconfirmed Member
It's definitely a divisive game for how beloved and well reviewed it is.

I come down between the two extremes. I didn't like it nearly as much as the other 3D console (fuck those DS turds) Zelda games, but I still enjoyed it. My main love for the series is the dungeons and BOTW was sorely lacking on those. I didn't mind the breaking weapons as much as some, but didn't find it added much as I always had plenty of stuff and it was just mildly annoying to switch mid combat. The openness in huge world to explore and mess around in the sandbox didn't do much for me as I just don't enjoy that and generally prefer linear games.

I'd have liked it more if I'd walked away at 50ish hours after beating the 4 divine beasts and Ganon. I didn't have much else to play on Switch until Mario Odyssey so I powered through and did all 120 shrines (used a guide/map to find the last 20 or so) and played the DLCs and ended up around 150 hours and very, very sick of it. I won't do that with the sequel, and to be fair I've burnt myself out on most any game I've tried to 100% and enjoy gaming more when I see the credits roll and move on.

As for comparison to other games like Horizon and Witcher 3, that's just down to taste. Those type of games are always going to beat out anything Nintendo does for me as cinematic, narrative-driven games with top flight graphics are my main jam and that's just not what Nintendo does. And part of why I like them as they make for nice variety and palette cleansers between playing those types of games.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kiiltz

joe_zazen

Member
May 2, 2017
4,580
7,309
615
Really? What have the naysayers been saying? I'll fight each and every single one of them under the red rising sun.

It is more a case of some folks not thinking it is greatest game ever with serious flaws, or worse yet, questioning the metacritic. I don't see hate, like ever.
 

joe_zazen

Member
May 2, 2017
4,580
7,309
615
I still don't get the "empty" complaints???

It is relative to other open world games, and the restrictions came from the fact that the botw world had to fit into the wiiu ‘s memory. You will notice world density paucity when botw2 comes out and you can compare the two.
 

joe_zazen

Member
May 2, 2017
4,580
7,309
615
lol Skyrim. you want to talk copy paste design? i was fighting the same monsters in the same dungeon, like literally the exact same dungeon, at hour 150 as i was in hour 1. better quests? yes if you love going to the same dungeons over and over for different reasons. better story? lol yes the civil war that i never noticed was happening outside of cutscenes. the slow build up over dozens of hours from fighting a dragon in a field to... fighting a dragon somewhere else. absolutely incredible story. did you know i was the chosen once? brilliant! never before done /s

my biggest memory during Skyrim was traversing the world and jumping against mountains. getting around was such a pain in the ass and jumping around mountains was pure torture. i spent hours just staring at the side of a mountain trying to jump around it. many open world games mess up mountains but Skyrim was like, this is the worst mountain design ever.

BOTW addressing this head-on was genuine. now climbing the mountains is not the painful thing you hate, it is FUN, it is UPGRADEABLE, it is something you can do the minute you start playing. just this one change makes this world 10x more fun to explore.

My biggest memory of skyrim was how it killed my interest in pc gaming. I spent $1000 on 2 gtx680 cards, and put in maybe 40 hours modding that shit only to find the game was still shit, and nicer graphics mean very little to except that i really hate pop-in. Sold my nvidia cards and bought a used 7970 and a ps3. Havent felt the desire to mod anything since.
 
Jun 15, 2019
1,785
3,058
435
Personally...not a fan. I think there are far too many open world games and many that do the formula better than BotW.

Pros:
- Absolutely stunning. It might not be the most technically impressive game but its art style is gorgeous. I played it in Cemu in 1440p and...my god.
- Good diversity of environments, with each coming with their own challenges.
- A wealth of content to consume in the form of shrines, few side quests, seeds, etc.
- Some cool characters. Not necessarily interesting...but cool.
- The Lynel. Best enemy in the game, hands down. Fuckin' love that dood.
- The labyrinths. If you don't like the labyrinths your opinion is bad and you should feel bad.

Cons:
- Weapon degradation is just annoying. It wouldn't be so bad if each weapon weren't made of literal paper but... The Master Sword is especially egregious...like...wat? Why couldn't it just go into a low power state where it's significantly weakened unless I let it recharge? Why is this "Master" sword so damn weak?
- Combat feels...meh. In fairness it's a hard thing to get right but when enemies all have their set weaknesses and fighting them basically amounts to doing the same things over and over in a loop until they die...well...let's just say that personally I don't feel they got it right.
- No dungeons. Yeah...I get it...there's the shrines...but they don't scratch that itch. In stark contrast to the exterior environments there's no diversity here. They all look exactly the same. Same goes for the divine beasts. Atleast the divine beasts have some nice puzzles and exploration. The shrines all incredibly short and past the first handful you do you're not going to encounter many that have sizeable rewards, introduce new mechanics or require you to think outside the box. Once you've done a fair few they just start to feel like filler content. A not insignificant number of them are lazy copy pastes of the same combat challenge where you fight the exact same enemy with such minor variations that they may as well not exist.
- The story is weak. Even having completed all the divine beasts and collected all the memories I still felt very much whelmed by it all.
- Zelda's (English) voice acting. Do yourself a favor and change the VA to Japanese.
- No unique bosses (including Ganon). They're all feel mostly the same to fight...and not that different to the rest of the enemies now that I think about it. See combat con. They're also not that difficult.
 

boutrosinit

Street Fighter IV World Champion
Jun 11, 2004
4,555
132
1,715
42
L.A
I adored it... but at first I was bored. I have a tendency to go way off the main quest in games and see what side quests I can advance to gain an advantage in the main quest.

Problem is, this path in BotW is so broad, you might end up doing nothing but cooking for many hours. I was bored for maybe 5 hours and close to giving up... then I found the island that takes all your stuff away.

That hooked me. It was VERY tough with minimal items, but so very satisfying to beat. Once I passed it, I stuck around and realized that I needed to hit more dungeons. Then the game finally sucked me in.

So if you want to play BotW and haven't yet, prioritize the dungeons for a while if you want to avoid cooking and climber-death fatigue.

Very excited for the sequel. What a beautiful game.
 

Saruhashi

Banned
Oct 2, 2018
2,978
7,062
570
The only thing BoTW has over Skyrim is the slate abilities and the physics stuff.

There are people out there who claim BoTW is better than the Witcher 3 as well. I am not a fan of TW3 at all but you have to be insanely deluded to say BoTW is better than it. The same goes for Skyrim. I'm no Skyrim fan but the game is miles above BoTW it's not even close.

Where to begin with stuff like this.

They aren't the same thing so comparing to see which is objectively "better" is the only deluded behavior here.

BotW wasn't trying to be TW3 and TW3 was never trying to be a Zelda game.
There are plenty of reasons someone would look at TW3 and think "nah, it's not for me" and yet the same person might like BotW.
The same goes for Skyrim or RDR2 or any other "open world" game people want to mention.

The way things are with gaming it's so difficult to make objective comparisons between games. The experience may vary from player to player.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Danjin44

JimmyJones

Banned
Mar 19, 2015
1,816
1,967
650
There are plenty of reasons someone would look at TW3 and think "nah, it's not for me" and yet the same person might like BotW.

Yes there are. But from a game design perspective Skyrim wins hands down.

It's like comparing Citizen Kane to the Lizzie McGuire movie. Some people may prefer the Lizzie McGuire movie, but it doesn't change that fact that Citizen Kane is the better movie.
 
Last edited:

Saruhashi

Banned
Oct 2, 2018
2,978
7,062
570
"Art style" is a nice way of saying "bad graphics". The Zelda HD releases on Wii U looked better which is sad.

Fucksakes. :)

Then proceeds to say the Zelda HD games on Wii U looked better! Hahahaha!

In what way did they "look better"? Did they have better "graphics" or a better "art style"?

Personally not a huge fan of the Twilight Princess art style but please tell me how it has better "graphics".
 

Kenpachii

Member
Mar 23, 2018
7,036
8,474
765
I liked the fact they throw you in a world and let you go through it on your own pace. that's exactly what ocarina of time was and basically made it super chill game without stress.
 

kiiltz

Member
Apr 23, 2019
687
1,346
475
I wasn't putting BOTW's visuals and art style down. In fact, I do believe that it looked great and the weather effects were amazing but for me personally, I simply get way more immersed with realistic visuals because to me, it's simply far more believable. But it goes beyond that, majority of BOTW is empty and bland. It reminded me of MGS 5. It's too big of an open world to begin with and a lot of it is empty and you must traverse it all when that simply isn't needed. In other world games, there's always something going on or happening. In BOTW, not so much. For Zelda, I simply want to see the game be realistic because it's simply time to evolve the franchise. People talk about all the great things in BOTW but if it was realistic visually, would it still have all those other gameplay mechanics? Probably not because the game wouldn't be built for it. Seeing a demo of Zelda from E3 2011 looks way more impressive to me and way more enticing to play than what BOTW was/is. BOTW's art style is again, great but would I take it over that E3 2011 demo? Nope.

Forced walking scenes is to hide the loading and isn't any different than standing still in BOTW talking to an NPC. It's the same thing. Me personally, I would much rather control my character walking and talking with another character as opposed to just standing still. Of course, that's just my personal preference.

As for the silent protagonist and it being bad for the story, it's definitely how I see it. Only Metro pulled it off and even then, I don't want to see them do that again if they develop a fourth game in the franchise. A perfect example for me is Far Cry. Far Cry 3 had a decent at best protagonist but imagine if he was silent when interacting with Vaas. It simply wouldn't have the same impact. I loved the story in Far Cry 4 and the twists and turns. It was excellent but if I was playing as a silent protagonist, the entire premise falls apart because there's no interaction with you and the characters in the game world. I look at Far Cry 5 and New Dawn as steps backwards because despite there being a great antagonist in Far Cry 5, you're completely silent and it doesn't mean much if anything when the NPC is basically talking to themselves. That's just meh to me and completely pulls me out of the experience.

Lack of voice acting in a franchise that's been around 30 years with the same exact premise and setup needs to evolve in my opinion. To me, it's all nostalgia as opposed to BOTW being an excellent because it's not. It has a lot of issues that majority of fans seem to ignore. There's no story really whatsoever and how can you have one when Link is just nodding or blinking? I don't accept it which is one the reasons why I quit the game. To me, it's a bad design decision because it hurts the game's already non-existent story. Why would I care or get invested in Link when he doesn't say a single word whatsoever? Nintendo could kill him off permanently in the next game and to me, it would make zero difference because I wouldn't be invested into the character or his purpose.

For me, after the gameplay, I want a great story with great characters. Can't get that if the protagonist is silent because there's no interaction between the antagonist(s) and other NPC's the game world. See Far Cry 5. To each their own but after 30 years of gaming, I expect franchises to evolve, become more current and get better by adding in what's been missing for years if not decades. But if you're fine with that, then great for you. I'm simply not, have higher expectations and if they aren't met, I quit the game and move on to another game.

BOTW is an adventure exploration game with RPG elements. It's not a full fledged RPG but it's getting there. I'm expecting there to be a lot more RPG elements in the sequel.
Okay, well there's not really much more for me to say here since a lot of it comes to down personal preference rather than any bar of critique so I'll just pull the "agree to disagree" card out. I think you missed my point about realism not being the highest form of immersion/atmosphere though.

Yes there are. But from a game design perspective Skyrim wins hands down.
What game design? Vanilla Skyrim was a half-assed piece of shit that thrived off of memes and mods and it's combat mechanics sucked donkey dick.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vader1

MagnesG

Member
Apr 20, 2019
2,853
2,193
505
Some people just like arguably solid story and fancy graphics more. Shitting other people for liking terrain explorations and emergent gameplay more is another thing.

Also MGSV being boring? Should just go watch a movie or play some walking simulator if you hate the so called dull world that much, I'm hooked all the damn time for the first 150 hours I played on that world. I guess I'm boring.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Danjin44
Jan 9, 2018
1,491
2,587
470
BOTW saved the Zelda franchise from itself and there's no going back from here... and this is coming from someone who has been with the series since the first NES game arrived on shelves, and who even highly enjoyed most of Skyward Sword. But the old series formula for 3D Zelda is finally dead, and deservedly so at this point. More dungeons might be in a future installment, sure, but the new formula is just infinitely more organic and entertaining than anything they've done since the N64.

EDIT: Skyrim is terrible and it would be pure cancer for Zelda to mold its open world design on that kind of thing
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DunDunDunpachi

NikuNashi

Member
Apr 12, 2013
409
1,241
875
Tokyo
Best game I played on the Switch, was mildly disappointed with Odyssey. Just wish they had made some
big dungeons rather than tons of tiny shrines and wish the boss's weren't all Ganon in different forms but were different characters with different personalities.
 

Soodanim

Member
Feb 24, 2012
7,247
2,584
1,005
United Kingdom
I still don't get the "empty" complaints???

You wake up 100 years after a calamatous event; were people expecting bustling metropolises or something???
This assumes the calamity and 100 years are absolutely essential. A smaller, more refined world with an adjusted story to fit if necessary would have been to its benefit (subjective).

My hope for BotW2 is a smaller world, with at least one weapon that doesn't break from the start.
 

TitanNut88

Member
Nov 24, 2016
127
88
450
Barcelona
The day I started this game was special. I didn't feel that since I started OoT/MM or FFX. It has its bad points (story is too short and other already-discussed ones) but the game is just amazing. Game of the decade for me. Once i finish Persona 5, if it ever ends (longest game I've ever player), I'll replay it.
 

stickkidsam

Member
Jan 7, 2018
960
901
505
I still don't get the "empty" complaints???

You wake up 100 years after a calamatous event; were people expecting bustling metropolises or something???
I absolutely love BotW, but it felt pretty empty to me in some respects as well. I don't mean that in a sense that I wanted a bunch of bustling cities (though I would've loved to see the towns expanded a liiiiittle bit), but rather I was hoping there would be more to discover. Secret ruins, hidden tombs, ancient temples and a greater variety of enemies. It was the fact that it is a post apocalyptic world that made me hope for such things too. Imagine getting to find pages of ancient texts which unravel a side story, finding a library with an old monk in which you find an ancient weapon, or even having more memories to find with your Sheika Slate that tell stories about the Hyrule of old.

Breath of the Wild has a LOT of great things going for it but one of the biggest issues I had was that I felt like I had seen most of what it had to offer by the time I beat the second Great Beast (though it did have some nice things to see still). I'm really happy to see that they are making a sequel as the game absolutely deserves it. Fingers crossed they capitalize on the originals strengths and expand.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kiiltz

WildBoy

Member
Jun 13, 2019
237
266
265
If anything the realistic graphics of those games is trumped by strong art direction and a sense that everything "belongs" like everything in botw looks like it belongs in that world... I can't say the same for other open world games... Rdr2 was a massive dissappointment... Tbh most games are now after my 400 hours of botw... Only Nintendo will top it. Even Witcher bored me. I guess I like games where I make the adventure myself and the world doesn't force my to feel things... I cried in botw at one point. I stepped off the plateau, sneaked up on a horse and rode into the horizon with the most beautiful sunset welcoming me to the world... That moment I realised they made the Zelda game of my dreams... I don't get why people don't like it. The positives FAR outweigh the negatives for me. Only Nintendo will top it for me... I have no faith in Bethesda or Ubisoft. Red deads world bored me. The story was what captivated me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DunDunDunpachi

JimiNutz

Banned
Apr 15, 2007
12,469
5,962
1,680
London UK
I finally got around to starting this game on Sunday and really enjoyed the first hour or so that I've played.

I play very few open world games in general and have only ever played through Wind Waker (with a friend) many years ago so this is pretty much my first ever Zelda game.

Is there anything major that I need to know before I start out? I know that cooking is important but so far the game hasn't told me how to do it. Is this something that I need to work out for myself or will the game teach me how to cook once I progress a bit further? Any other tips for a Zelda virgin?
 

WildBoy

Member
Jun 13, 2019
237
266
265
I finally got around to starting this game on Sunday and really enjoyed the first hour or so that I've played.

I play very few open world games in general and have only ever played through Wind Waker (with a friend) many years ago so this is pretty much my first ever Zelda game.

Is there anything major that I need to know before I start out? I know that cooking is important but so far the game hasn't told me how to do it. Is this something that I need to work out for myself or will the game teach me how to cook once I progress a bit further? Any other tips for a Zelda virgin?

The game will teach you organically and if you don't stumble upon it then you will figure it out through sheer logic as the games rules come into play.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: JimiNutz

Bonfires Down

Member
Jul 31, 2007
2,893
3,939
1,430
It’s the perfect podcast/audiobook game for me. Minimal story and lots of travelling through beautiful landscapes. I’d probably have put it down if I didn’t have my podcasts though.