I have not. I was planning to at some point in the future its just that after 200 plus hours I needed to play something else lol.
Is the tide of public opinion turning against BOTW?
- Thread starter ZixlerBavala
- Start date
Yeah! We needed Zelda: The Elder Scrolls Edition 10 years ago!
Honestly can't tell if this is sarcasm or not. ERA opinions on Elder Scrolls are all over the place(especially Oblivion and Skyrim).
On another note, is the DLC for this game considered essential? (a la Witcher, Bloodborne, etc.) Not sure if I want to buy it now or wait on it.
Last edited:
We needed the Zelda games to have actual exploration again and not treat it's audience like they did not even know how to pause the game. The increased linearity and tutorials really go against pretty much everything the original Zelda game was and these problems only got worse with each 3D installment. Breath of the wild mercifully fixed problems that should have been fixed eons ago.
The Elder Scrolls games are nothing like Breath of the Wild. What a ridiculous comparison.
It's fine, and has some of the best content in the game, but not "essential"
The first Zelda games was not the successful formula, A Link to the Past was. Sure the tutorials got way out of hand but we didn't need an open world game to fix that.
Difference is that A Link to the Past is actually a well designed game that did not have numerous severe issues like most 3D Zelda games did. The trade off in exploration for ALTTP was worth it, considering how many massive improvements it made to the series. Sadly every pre BOTW 3D Zelda game was just content with being a inferior Link to the Past clone with way more BS tacked on top. It got so bad that we got a game like Skyward Sword, which i don't think has any redeeming qualities whatsoever. Also the original Zelda game was very successful. So the idea that it's not a successful formula seems like a fallacy.
Zelda, to me, was always the first. A giant world with absolutely nothing but exploration. Botw was the most amazing return to form I have seen in ages.
LTTP was very good. It changed the firmula with "quest markers" of sorts, but travel and individual puzzles we're still great. You could still explore and get lost and find rewards.
It's been steadily down hill since then. Exploration was almost taken out in favor of linear storytelling, puzzles were choreographed to a much higher degree, and the endless tutorials took away all sense of adventure (felt like someone was always watching you).
I had absolutely zero hype for Botw before it came out. Zelda was a series I remembered fondly but had completely lost it's way. But BOTW did what I did not think was possible and really made the original Zelda in full 3d. It's amazing.
LTTP was very good. It changed the firmula with "quest markers" of sorts, but travel and individual puzzles we're still great. You could still explore and get lost and find rewards.
It's been steadily down hill since then. Exploration was almost taken out in favor of linear storytelling, puzzles were choreographed to a much higher degree, and the endless tutorials took away all sense of adventure (felt like someone was always watching you).
I had absolutely zero hype for Botw before it came out. Zelda was a series I remembered fondly but had completely lost it's way. But BOTW did what I did not think was possible and really made the original Zelda in full 3d. It's amazing.
Not sure why fixing that problem required them to have horrible bosses, horrible dungeons, a minimal amount of enemy variety, bad voice acting...etc etc
Botws approach to game design was EXACTLY what Zelda needed.
The bosses were an improvement tho. They actually put up a fight and did not have the repetitive formula of waiting for ages until you can damage them and then repeat two times to win. You can also take them out with more than a single item this time. They are far from perfect but i have no idea how anyone would consider the bosses in BOTW worse.
Enemy variety has been a problem in every Zelda game. Most 3D Zelda game actually have less enemy variety but haters of BOTW conveniently forget this fact. That being said it would be nice if Nintendo really improves on this area in the next game and come up with new enemy types for a change.
The dungeons aside from looking samey are actually pretty great, they are finally not constricted to a linear path and brain dead easy puzzles that are just copied from other Zelda games. They also don't overstay their welcome, which is something of a godsend. In most Zelda games if you happen to hate a dungeon, you really have no choice but to suffer through it and it's especially bad if it happens to be a two hour dungeon. but in BOTW it's all optional and the shrines make up for the dungeon shortage by a mile.
I'm kind of baffled that this is even a debate honestly. I'm not even joking because i have to yet read a single compelling argument form fans of the more linear formula, as to why it's superior to BOTW. Because form where i'm sitting pretty much every change Breath of the Wild made to the series was the right one and it left a ton of room for the series to expand form here on out.
No, as far as the mainstream perception of the game. Those dissident opinions on the game have always been there, but they tend to be drowned out at first just because so many people are sharing that majority opinion at the same time.
Since the poll seems individually focused, I will say that for me, I have always enjoyed the game generally, but I always found it to be significantly flawed and have always objected to the idea that it does much to significantly advance open-world action-adventure games. It was a solid 8/10 when it came out, and it's a solid 8/10 now in my view.
Since the poll seems individually focused, I will say that for me, I have always enjoyed the game generally, but I always found it to be significantly flawed and have always objected to the idea that it does much to significantly advance open-world action-adventure games. It was a solid 8/10 when it came out, and it's a solid 8/10 now in my view.
People have valid reasons for not liking it. However, I think many of us saw that from the beginning and there is definitely no mass change of opinion. Game is still overwhelmingly popular.
The best I can hope for is that the BotW fans on here that would act like old Zelda is dead and they can never never play past games again tone those comments down a bit, lol.
The best I can hope for is that the BotW fans on here that would act like old Zelda is dead and they can never never play past games again tone those comments down a bit, lol.
it's not essential, but if you like/love the game i think it's well worth the price. if you're one of the people who considers the story to be lacking, don't go into the dlc tho expecting it to fix the game's flaws when it comes to story.
imo the shrines in the dlc are the best in the game, the new memories are very charming and i really liked them, and trial of the sword is an amazing quest.
Last edited:
What on earth lol, I just saw this thread.
No.
Dungeons were well designed, but didn't have enough enemy encounters in them, were too short and you had to essentially do the same thing in all of them. Their concepts and mechanics of moving everything were great though.
Fully agreed on enemy variety and bad voice acting. It was alright in German but nothing to write home about.
If you take out weapons breaking as a criticism (because it would break the game's gameplay loop if it was taken out), I can't think of much else that was bad.
No.
There is though. Has been pointed out by press, devs and fans alike often enough by now. What you are doing is denial at this point.
The bosses weren't too bad imo, just poorly balanced. (A lot of people will find the last ones too easy if they spent enough time with the game leveling armor and stuff. In general the game isn't well balanced. Last boss was dreadfull though.)
Dungeons were well designed, but didn't have enough enemy encounters in them, were too short and you had to essentially do the same thing in all of them. Their concepts and mechanics of moving everything were great though.
Fully agreed on enemy variety and bad voice acting. It was alright in German but nothing to write home about.
If you take out weapons breaking as a criticism (because it would break the game's gameplay loop if it was taken out), I can't think of much else that was bad.
Yeah. I replayed OoT recently and it's just a completely different experience. It's overall way more balanced out even, with less weak points one could adress outside of the stuff that has aged a bit.
Last edited:
I'd love to have that debate honestly (note that I absolutely love BotW though, despite it's shortcomings and I wouldn't really call one superior over the other, but there absolutely are shortcomings with BotW's formula).
What I like about the linear approach is the team having more room for balancing things right. As we both mentioned before BotW's bosses are great in their design and ways to approach the fights, but depending on when you encounter them they are some real pushovers. The first one I fought was balls hard while the latter two were absolute snoozefests. And don't get me started on that outdoor Ganon fight. Abysmal (that's a fight they could've made better regardless of whether the game is linear or not though, so forget that one.)
In a linear Zelda where the dev can take into consideration how many hearts you have at a certain encounter (+/- one or two hearts due to heartpieces) and what items are in your posession, they can design the game accordingly. They clearly weren't able to do that in BotW.
The same is the case with the dungeons themselves. You can't cram one of them full with powerful enemies because it might be the one the player visits first. So even when you enter one 60 hours into the game and there's one small guardian waiting, in the entire dungeon (+ those static things you can hardly count as enemies and are just like the eyes you have to shootwith arrows in OoT, which strangely I didn't see a single person complaining about for BotW) it's kind of underwhelming, to say the least.
And the fact you get all your puzzling tools at the beginning of the game in the tutorial area is genius because it's the best way to make sure you're always equipped for the challenge, no matter the shrine (except when you need 20 arrows for some blue fire and only got 10. Then you're fucked. I actually liked that one really much though because it was at least meatier than most shrines)
But at the same time you lack a sense of progression throughout the game. You can upgrade your tools, but only in ways so miniscule they don't make much of a difference. And that's again, by design. They can't make sure when you get those upgrades or if you get them at all, after all.
The sense of progression in terms of equipment is definetly better off in a linear setting.
It also lends itself more to replays imo but maybe that's not a fair point because I already spent 100+ hours in BotW while a normal OoT playthrough takes what, 15 hours? I'll start over OoT many times more than I will BotW though, that's for sure.
Overall I think they managed a more focused experience with OoT. You may find those puzzles braindead (and most of them are) but I didn't have a single Water Temple-like experience in BotW. Or a Forest Temple one.
And then there's the soundtrack. They did all the right things with BotW, an OoT-like soundtrack with themes blasting through the speakers all the time wouldn't have worked. The music they did for the overworld and towns is perfection.
On the other hand OoT's soundtrack is overall still better, imo. The linear structure lends itself to a soundtrack where every track is looped 3 times at maximum, leading to sountracks like the OoT one full of earworms that will stay with you for a long, long time.
That kind of stuff would get obnoxious in BotW real fast though, so they went with a more ambient style for a large swath of gameplay (the one where you are outside), while OoT gives you a new memorable masterpiece every few steps.
That's all from the top of my head. Sorry for the long writeup, but I love this game and like to discuss things thoroughly. :P
Last edited:
It's not just turning against BOTW... it's turning against Nintendo's success with Switch in general, and what better than to take down one of its biggest gaming success' on the system
Every day I see more and more threads saying, oh this major Switch game was not that good, or Switch isn't my preferred handheld, or Switch isn't a powerful console.
Every day I see more and more threads saying, oh this major Switch game was not that good, or Switch isn't my preferred handheld, or Switch isn't a powerful console.
The Switch's popularity is simply stepping on some toes with it being the top selling platform at the moment, but that type of talk was around since its launch.
I was wondering what was up with that too. The thread posts doubled since I last checked, but the poll results are about the same as I remembered.
There isn't a single game in existence I would recommend to every type of player.
This may be a good time to remind you that english is not the only language in the World.
Nintendo ibérica did a pretty good job
Ok..I think you know what I meant...
I'm saying Breath of the Wild isn't a game I'd recommend to a lot of players. Only people that are really into adventure style games will enjoy it. I don't think it has as much world wide appeal as say Super Mario Odyssey or even Call of Duty. Its a game that takes patience and is very subtle. We even had regular Zelda players here complaining about the lack of music in the game which is completely missing the atmosphere it's trying to convey.
I imagine a lot of gamers will find it "boring" because it's not in your face with it's design. I love the game myself but I can't recommend it to most of my non hardcore gaming friends.
I'm sure you can apply that for nearly every game, save for the most mainstream of games, and even those aren't exactly for everybody. Call of Duty is a game if you're really into shooters and playing online. Super Mario Galaxy is a game if you're really into linear focused platformers. The Last of Us is a game if you're looking for a strong narrative. A lot of people will naturally not like these games either. But they're still mainstream titles so plenty of folk will. We're not talking about some niche Japanese title or a SRPG or something, games that maybe appeal to a million or two, at the highest end
My own little sister, for example, loved the game and she's not exactly a hardcore or patient gamer. She just loved exploring to her hearts content and figuring things out on her own
There's really only three types of players I would actively discourage from playing the game:
- Players that hate open world games in general
- Players that require the games they play to feature a strong narrative focus
- Players that have very rigid requirements of what a Zelda game should be
Ya I guess you're right but I'm just trying to explain why certain people wouldnt like Breath of the Wild in particular. Expectations are probably extremely high at this point and I see people being like "this game is boring and it got game of the year?", It's just the subtle design in general and how the game doesn't hold your hand much at all that can make it a tough sell for certain gamers even if you think you're into adventure games like Assassin's Creed which do Hold your hand.
Don't get me wrong I love Breath of the Wild and think it's the best Zelda game ever made but I can also see it from the naysayer's perspective too.
Oh of course, I'm not exactly shocked some are like "So...this is it?" or "Why does everyone like it?". I remember a lot of that with The Witcher 3 at the other place or The Last of Us with some folk. There's always going to be elements of even the biggest games that are gonna turn people off of them. I just found it a bit weird to describe Breath of the Wild as a game that'd be tough to recommend for a lot of people when it's no more of a tough recommendation than any other big game out there
Nope. I thought it was a game with many flaws, but was still a great game when it came out and still feel that way now. Never thought it was the greatest thing since sliced bread like many think. To me it's a game that set the foundation for what could be next, and the potential to create something incredible.
I mean I know I'm in the minority here, but saying dislike is too harsh, I just didn't like it as much as some people do. The game had some flaws for me and the only aspect that I thought was good was climbing things (even if I think the game takes it to the extreme as if link were part Spiderman with no logical reasoning behind him being able to climb vertical cliff faces with no help). I dislike the fandom more than the game to be honest. To me it's just a good enough game.
Yeah i have no idea what the team was thinking with the outdoor Ganon fight. It was so bad that i was confused on whether or not it was even intended to be a real boss fight. It gave me flashbacks to the Mario Galaxy 2 final Bowser "fight" which was over in five seconds.
Agreed with you on the soundtrack.
I'm not sure that i agree with you on the notion that devs took into account how powerful the player was. I mean it's a lovely notion and it makes sense on paper but i just think the Zelda team never really did it properly, in the 3D Zelda games at least. All of them have been ridiculously easy thanks to really basic enemy,combat design and the small amount of damage the enemies did. Basic sword attacks were more than enough to get the job done for 99% of the enemy encounters. That is even without taking into consideration how OP the shield and the dodge move have always been in 3D Zelda. (Botw has these problems too to some degree but everything about the core combat, enemy and difficulty was worse in the previous games) To top it all of if you don't want the games to end up feeling like you activated god mode halfway through then you basically have to avoid looking for the heart pieces. Which have always been a poor reward for the player thanks to the overall low difficulty and challenge of the games and if you chose not to look for them then well that basically throws what little bit of exploration the 3D Zelda games had. The economy is also something that has been completely messed up in Zelda since OOT. The games give you a unhealthy amount of rupees to the point where they lose all sense of purpose and the items that you can get with them are usually pretty inconsequential. I mean when was the last time in a 3D Zelda pre BOTW that you bought a crucial item from the shop?
The sense of progression is kind of a thing that i hate about Pre Botw Zelda. Because it always felt so artificial. When you get down to it all major items that you acquired in the games are rarely ever used outside of their respective dungeons. They mostly serve to padd out the inventory screen. Most items are sadly context sensitive and can't be used in a organic way like the items you get in BOTW. The games never really gave you enough reasons to use them, other than to find a couple of heart pieces in the over world, which as i already said felt nearly pointless.
3D Zelda games rarely required any decision making form the player. It was always about doing the exact thing the game wants you to and the optimal strategies in combat like using basic sword attacks on enemies and constant dodging have no downsides, so why not use them? Other than the fact that you might get bored form the monotony. The dungeons were about nothing other than following a linear path finding keys to find more keys and the items themselves functioned like over glorified keys themselves. There wasn't ever really any decision that you had to make, it's always just do these very obvious and specific things in this exact order and fight a simple as well as formulaic boss and move on to the next dungeon. Because why wouldn't you? There is barely anything meaningful to do in between dungeons. There were a few times where the dungeons were more interesting specifically the nonlinear ones but Nintendo was less keen on designing dungeons like that as the series progressed. They did have some cool atmosphere to them but that is a trait that is not really tied to linear 3D Zelda.
OOT is a shorter game but i would not really say it's a more repayable one. To me it's always been a one and done sort of deal. I really see no reason to replay it because the game will force me to play it in a very specific way. This includes Majora, WW, TP and especially SS. I mean that is what is so tragic to me about most Zelda games. i that had they at least allowed for a few more ways to approach major scenarios. The games would be much more repayable and would not feel if i'm being completely honest here, shallow. Like so much opportunity was wasted in the years because the devs did not want any chance of even the most casual of causal players to end up lost or not being able to see the end credits. It would get so bad that the games would even spoil the solutions to the few decent puzzles the games did have.
I by no means mean any disrespect to Anouma but based on the development for multiple games that i read, he has almost certainly done the series very few favors. He seems to dislike the first Zelda game and was never able to beat it and yet he was somehow put in charge of the series after or during the development of OOT. I still can't believe that he was surprised with how successful BOTW was and he apparently did not know that people wanted less patronizing tutorials and more exploration as well as some challenge in a Zelda game. Like come on seriously? This should have been as obvious as the sky being blue, why did it take him so long to realize that the Zelda series needed these things?
BOTW is far from perfect but it and to some degree Link Between Worlds finally made me optimistic about the series again. contrasted with Skyward Sword where i just assumed the series would soon be dead.
I actually think this has never been true.
Zelda games after the initial 2D ones were always really easy. Wind Waker didn't even require dodging, Ocarina of Time bosses telegraphed their weakness so easily and were taken out with so little thought that even BOTW Lynels make them look like fodder foes.
Zelda just never cared for a tight difficulty curve. I can't remember a single fight in Ocarina or the following games that wasn't a total pushover. My mother, who is not exactly twitchy hardcore gamer, got all of them first try.
Take the butterfly boss in ALTTP. That thing's harder than the hardest 3D Zelda ganon fight. By a lot.
The outdoor ganon fight was a snooze for sure though.
